Proper muzzel flash, visible shockwaves, spalling and fragmentation would be neat.
Can and should be mitigated by attachments and/or ammo choice to soem degree (Sub- /supersonic loads, brakes/compensators, gas setting, yadda yadda yadda).
No, nope on so many levels. If you have that option enabled it should be consistent in both 1st and 3rd person. WHy on earth wouldn’t it be there in 3rd when it is there in 1st person?
Im pretty sure he is suggesting blurring the center of the screen, because he said “when shooting”. I dont see why everything on the side would blur when shooting + some games do make a blur in the middle of the screen only when shooting, like he said.
The third person part is pretty obvious, you cant make a blur in the middle of the screen when shooting, because it wouldnt make sense and would take up a lot more screen because the camera angle has changed, it would blur your entire character.
You misread my part about third person.
And i dont think attachments should help with the blur because it simply makes gunplay bad and a gamble to see if you tracked your target though all the mess when shooting
Okay, what edxactly did you mean with your third person part then?
Do you actually want that “blurr” or shockwave to be vsisble or not?
If it is muzzel devices or different loads should 100% affect it.
Lolno. If you unload a autocannnon maybe, but if you consider normal exchange of reasonbly aimed shots then that is never going to be a problem.
The disruption appears after you have taken the shot and does not perssit for terribly long, so follow up shots really are not going to be a problem. The time it takes for you to realign your sights, compensate for recoil and the action to cycle are probably going to be plenty.
It doesn’t make sense because your argument is based on facts that don’t exist.
Did you forget fully automatic weapons exist? And the attachment part was me saying how it shoudlnt be in the game at all…
If you are going to quote me take the full sentance. He clearly said “when shooting”. In my previous comment i said that it doesnt make sense to me to blur surroundings specifically when setting of the gun.
And I know blurring the center of the screen is bad… thats why im against it
And radial blur isnt only leaving the center untouched… it can be any point in the screen or it can make blur increase or decrease going from said point. So you can also decrease the blur going to the edges
So giving you a huge blur in the middle of the screen when you shoot wouldnt decrease skill level?
Your making assumptions about that this post wants in the game. Just stop.
No, not at the center. When you are shooting, the side of the screen (up, left, right, down) gets distorted, like blur or high fov, like recoil effect
Those are realistic assumptions
I dont really mind that much if it isnt in the center, but still dont really think its needed
Ask me how I know you nerver shot a gun.
Virtually no handheld weapon, autmatic or not, is going ot have any trouble with the shockwave obscuring the targte ofr any substantial amount of time. The worst you’d get is either a substantial fireball or heat radiating from the internals. All of that could an dhsould be mitigaed by the appopiate attachments.
The post is asking for a split second blur when you fire to simulate the shockwave or something . So please for the love of god stop arguing about a post making 3rd person more op when it doesn’t even mention 3rd person
Lol, 8 word post. 800 replies
If you get a blur in the center of the screen (which i was talking about before he replied), every time you shot a bullet, firing a fully automatic rifle will make your entire center of the screen for the duration of the firing untill you stop. I dont know what your theory is all about, but its pretty simple. If you suggest attachments should mitigate it you are advocating for it to be added in the first place, which is bad.
The schokwave would persist for maybe a few frames at most, maybe one third of the time actually spent firing.
That is what you think would happen, which is stupid because it is not how it a) works in real life and b) would make sense to implement.
Your arguemnt boils donw to “lol I think you won’t be able to see anything so it bad” whithout actually consideriung how much your vision would be obstrcuted.
