I recommend having it be that in ads you can move fast too and build systems around it. Edit like for example in a single player you can hipfire and ads by choice but have to do it on certain enemies I’m order to make shots to hit the weak points more or had a unique ability with the scope or a benefit when using it but have it been more zoomed In and make the weapon actually useful when being used closed up unlike most sniper rifles in fps games and have the scope have a unique ability that takes some skill to use and to hit far targets easily.
There are people who said battlefield and cod should become full on arcades(so no ads)on that video...Honestly I believe ppl are just mad cuz they died to m14 acog in cod and any weapon with the hybrid sight in battlefield
one time my team killed this one guy so many times that he blamed it on him being fat like bitch we don't know what u look like so how would we know you're fat
@@Jonathan-A.C. he got butt hurt after bungie add sprinting feature to halo and hes with the side that think it’s bad because it make halo look like cod you can see his many community post memes that he made to make him look like a chad for hating it so after he eco chamber enough with his followers he got confidence enough to make this video which when i read the title my mind pop up “ah shit this gonna be a cod rant isn’t it?” and i wasn’t wrong
Ironically in realistic shooter, like squad, post scriptum, hell let loose or Escape from Tarkov, hip firing (technically point shooting) is still useful and accurate in close quarters
if you think Titanfall movement is negated completely by good players using ads then you haven't been absolutely demolished by a good movement player in Titanfall that also uses ads to delete you the instant they flick arround a corner at mach 5
He’s a massive scrub honestly. His titanfall opinions made me question every other thing he said because he clearly plays it like cod or something similar. Good players don’t even ads most the time unless they’re Kraber demons. The r-99 and r-301 both BEAM from distance with hipfire and so do most weapons. He acts like titanfall has the same hipfire/ads dynamic as cod and it absolutely doesn’t.
You can ADS while in the air or moving in Titanfall. That's how people land such nutty shots with the Kraber, and it helps retain that movement shooter identity for the game.
yeah titanfall 2s use of ADS is genius. it emphasizes wall running and air strafing because those are the only movement techniques that arent slowed down by ADS. so if you want to be accurate AND fast (which you have to be if you want to be good), you have to wall run and air strafe as much as possible so you can ADS without losing speed.
Also fun tidbit of lore, while UNSC weapons connect the "smart scope" to a helmet or other sighting device, the carbine actually hijacks your visual cortex remotely with some kind of brain wave emitter.
@@cm-pr2ys You'd have backup sights because the main sight is not reliable. The AR is known for it's reliability in the lore. It doesn't need them. It already has a "virtual laser sight" which is the crosshair on your screen. Optics are as mentioned, "smart" and you do not need to look directly through them like with a "dumb" optic.
@@doltBmB no it’s not the weapon that’s the unreadable part it’s the user, if your helmet is damaged like at the end of reach, you can no longer aim your weapon accurately
I haven't finished the video yet but my immediate thought is "An entire class of guns across the genre is *BUILT* upon ADS; snipers straight up could not exist as we know them, in game form, without ADS."
snipers can still exist without ads because of weapons similar to DMR or hunting rifles, being typically "one shot one kill" weapons rewarding high dmg and extreme precise shots for low dps and long reloads. the quake rail gun is a good example
halo sniper worked jsut fine without ads. they still could have full movement speed and accuracy while moving full speed with the sniper. makes it much more skill full when you and the enemies can all shoot while at full speed. shooting faster movign targets while yourself is moving is much harder than shooting slow moivng ads'ing targets while you are barely moving and not having to traverse the terrain surrounding you while hsooting.
Titanfall 2 doesn't really make you slow down to focus on aiming, it's quite common for players to go flying across the map while still hitting people.
This, by the time I got good most of my builds were based around going as fast as possible while maintaining accurate hip fire. Could essentially drill down into someone as I sped into them
after watching this video, I still haven't identified any concrete premises to his argument. From what I can tell, his message is simply "I prefer games less focused on ADS gameplay" without any objective reasons for why ADS is bad per se.
Yeah it feels like he's either repeating himself over and over and I'm supposed to hold judgement the entire time because he's making *one* point. I'm hoping the follow up video does better to clarify what he means
I'm getting the impression that your taste in shooters are ultra fast paced classic style shooters like Quake, Unreal, and old Halo. In this very specific context, your stance that movement-debilitating ADS mechanics slows the game down is accurate. But in any other example this is not true. Recent FPS games are still fast paced, especially Titanfall 2, Modern Warfare 2019, and Halo Infinite all include ADS and still see extremely fast gameplay. The takeaway here is either that you wish games were more like arena shooters, or you have a distaste for games where people can take things slow and carefully. ADS provides some essential functionality in games where your character doesn't run at highway speeds. Firstly, the character slowing down and the sensitivity slowing down allows the player to focus on an individual target and acquire their target better. It is easier to use low sensitivity for distant targets, so allowing someone to have a high sensitivity hipfire and low sensitivity aim speed gives players the ability to deal with near and far targets on one control scheme. Increased accuracy while aiming also serves to balance individual weapons in different ways. If every weapon were to be perfectly accurate while hipfiring, a game having many options of conventional firearms would be redundant; and as we've come to know, people really enjoy options. Aiming also splits the player's attention into two modes: aim mode and move mode. In strategic shooter games like Battlefield, large CoD maps, Tarkov and others, it asks the player to be more cautious of acquiring a target and holding their angle. In a slower paced game like this, it's extremely difficult to hold a strategic angle if your player can wizz around the corner at full speed and dome you without question. This is particularly troublesome in games that are attempting to be realistic or at the very least believable.
I think the best example of a slow and strategic use/implementation of ADS has to be Rainbow 6 Seige. You literally spend half the game scoped and the other half crouch walking.
“Ads ruins Titanfall’s gameplay” *makes up an entirely fictional scenario that has never happened in any Titanfall match to prove his point* Like my man Titanfall if anything punishes this fictional “guy on a building with a kraber” by giving the more mobile players an inherent advantage over the guy rooting himself in one place, it feels like you lasered in on the concept of ADS rather than how it actually ties into the gameplay loop, in Titanfall at least, I get your opinion for CoD, it has been a problem there at times, and I firmly believe that Halo 5’s ADS mechanic ruined its weapon sandbox
idk man, removing ADS and encouraging “fast paced gameplay” would completely change the game that COD is. cod is all about gunplay, learning the weapons and what they’re good for. iron sights and optics are a huge part of that. i don’t understand why separating accurate shots and tactical movement is an issue, it’s a war game and thats how guns work lol. no one is sprinting with an AR making accurate hip shots at any long distance. you can still move while ADS, and you can still fire effectively at close range without aiming. you’re basically saying you want call of duty to just be halo. and that’s fine, i guess, but it just wouldn’t be the same kind of gameplay at all, and i don’t know if it would have been successful as it has been if it used a different formula. but that’s just my opinion
i agree what would be the point of a semi aout fo example you would get thrashed by a dude with an mp7 what is the point if the only acurate engament distance is about as far as my nose hairs reach
This is a pretty polarizing take, but I think it's mostly due to the fact that you're not quite taking into account a few fundamental things that ADS *doesn't* do wrong. When you implement a feature into a game, the value of a feature can thusly outweigh the negative impact it may have on your desired gameplay outcome. And in my opinion, the way that ADS is implemented into almost all games that have it, with very little exception, does not make a significant negative impact on the game. For example: •• There isn't typically an excessively heavy and burdening affect that ADS has on your character in most games. I've played a LOT of FPS games, and the majority of them only typically slow your character movement by 20% - 40%. Depending on the game, and the movement mechanics that it features, ADS can usually be very unproblematic for the general gameplay loop. •• More and more games (especially as of recent) are moving away from the extremely cluttered and claustrophobic zoom, restriction of vision, and emphasis on handicapping your visual senses for the sake of added accuracy that you seem to associate with ADS in this video. Even COD- who basically invented obscuring half of your screen just to aim- has a much wider FoV on it's ADS now, across all platforms and weapons. •• Many games have compromises to the issue, such as high movement speed being retained while ADS, perks or upgrades to unrestrict the player further like you mentioned, or just not having a movement penalty at all when doing certain actions- e.g. sliding, jumping, gliding, whatever. This enhances the gameplay fundamental of player empowerment more than almost any other feature, as it is something you will have the choice to learn and execute for your benefit as the player. Overall, I think that what you have isn't a bad opinion, but it's a poorly executed argument where there simply doesn't need to be one. ADS promotes immersion, player improvement, player opportunity and flexibility, and is a core building block of the entire concept of implementing firearms or similar weapons into video games. If it didn't benefit the gameplay loop, developers would not be adding it into their game, or changing the parameters of how it works to better fit their intended experience. Overwatch is a good example of a game that simply would not benefit from having a standardized ADS mechanic, along with other games like Quake and Doom simply finding more restriction in the mechanic; rather than freedom. In your defense, Destiny is perhaps one of the single worst implementations and gameplay clashes I've ever seen caused by such a simple mechanic as ADS. However.. on the other side of the coin, even Destiny, of all games, has features to help you choose how much ADS restricts you. It is in your hands whether you take advantage of those tools or not. *TLDR* -- I think you just have a strong preference for certain FPS gameplay loops. This didn't really need to be an argument against the ADS mechanic as a whole.
Yeah it's a good mechanic, but it fits some games better than others. I wouldn't want to play cod without it, but I also wouldn't want to play halo or cs with it.
@@sk8erbyern Well, yeah. I agree. I don't think player freedom nor ADS as a whole is particularly sacred; my point was that there are plenty of alternative game mechanics that have been innovated and designed specifically for the purpose of getting whatever level of desired 'freedom' for the game. Rainbow Six Siege for example has literally no penalty for ADSing and moving, which was their desired level of player freedom to grant to the player. ...yknow.. as much of an ill decision as that was, at least.
he also seems to ignore that ads limiting the player is by design; its a balancing tool. If you could hit a perfectly accurate sniper headshot instakill while moving at mach 9, there would be no tradeoff for using a sniper rifle at the highest skill level. With ads, sniper rifles can require you to scope to be accurate, and just like that its a huge tradeoff to use a sniper.
I feel like me and this dude played in different universes with different games. Titanfalls best feature was it's amazing and engaging gameplay loop, where skill was decided both on your aim and how well you could use movement, simultaneously. That was what he said was stripped away by ads, but it's what titanfall was best known for... I'm so confused by this video. So many other examples too where the point of the game is to be more focused on cover and ads and they arnt worse for that. If we just had hundreds of games like doom and quake the fps category wouldnt be so diverse and fun.
These are all the same thoughts I had just now. Like.. just admit you hate pvp in fps. Because ADS does nothing but improve that experience. ADS is not a feature, its a core concept of fps that evolved. Just like prone, running, jumping, peaking. I hardly think its for "realism" at this point, its just an evolved concept of the basic abilities a player has in a shooter, it defines the experience. Jumping corners and prefiring is still a thing, take away ADS and thats all youre gonna see. I hated the sperg gameplay in quake pvp.
I think he just dislikes that the feature lowers the skill ceiling. The quake like gameplay has a super high skill ceiling allowing for godlike gameplay. The slower pace I guess is what some people prefer so they can keep up, but ultimately it lowers the skill ceiling.
@@JKSmith-qs2ii If that was the case then wouldnt we would see more people playing those kinds of games competitively though? R6, Counterstrike, COD all the biggest competitive games are extremely strategic and require insane amounts of concentration and communication. You simply dont get that with quakes cracked out gameplay, you cant com in a shoebox map with zero reaction time. There are just less avenues to out manuever your opponent, and by extension require less skill. Just watch a quake tourney, then watch an R6 tourney and tell me R6 has a lower skill ceiling. Edit: And if quake players are that much better, shouldnt they absolutely shred at these other games that require "less" skill but have way bigger prize pools? I dont buy it.
@@benmaisu8042 that’s not my argument, I’m saying that it’s lowering the skill ceiling not anyones preference or strategic gamers. I personally am also not crazy good at quake but I can’t deny the skills of the top level and the hand eye coordination required. I’m saying that limiting movement with ADS is simply lowering the skill ceiling of things that could be possible if humans use like 100% of their brain (hyperboly of course). Lawbreakers I guess tried to do this and failed so I’m not saying that being hands off with ADS completely relying on the movement is a sure fire win, but a lot of people like the movement of Apex for example so why not allow hyper accurate hip fire while using all those movements anyways just food for thought playing devils advocate. I also don’t consider popularity of games as an indication of what quake players can and cannot do, I’m simply talking gameplay.
@@JKSmith-qs2ii So you really trying to make the argument that quake has a higher skill ceiling than R6 simply because R6 has ADS? Thats just objectively false. By your logic, the highest skill possible would be 2 players doing a western style draw to see who can flick their cursor and click the fastest. Thats what your reducing "skill" to. Its all these other variables that RAISE the skill ceiling. When you have more options to engage, it takes skill to choose the best option. Less engagement types just means you know whats coming around the corner, because every engagement follows the exact same sequence, requiring less skill. I guess it comes down to what you consider skill. If you consider positioning, cover, map knowledge, communication and decision making as part of skill. Or if you think skill starts and ends when you're mid air coming around a corner.
I would like to compare Fallout 3 to Fallout New Vegas for this argument. Fallout 3 has no ADS, the screen just zooms in. FNV has ADS, and fans loved it. Why would anyone take a screen zoom over actaul aiming?
Since you're like 0.001% of the people who disagree politely and actually ask, I'll bite: I think absolutely no "fine aim" is most comfortable. Screen zoom is just cheap ADS, but at least then the weapon model isn't taking up a chunk of my view. I'll stick to purely singleplayer games to keep it simple. In reference to a "game" (as opposed to a "simulation") ADS accuracy feels like an arbitrary limit. From the programming perspective it factually *is* too. First you program a player character entity, then attach a camera to it (your eyes), then (typically) you ray-cast a line from the point of the camera to the furthest solid object or entity from the camera at the center of the screen. The programmer has to specifically add lines of code for some form of inaccuracy. Then you'd program methods to counteract that inaccuracy with ADS or something lol. Or not. Whatever. In the case of NV (one of my fav games of all time btw) ADS works alright for me, since I'm mostly using it for sneaky tactical precise shots and stuff. It feels natural to have that step in "preparation" for tactical moves against enemies. Not only that, but NV did ADS different from how games traditionally do it, mechanically speaking. I won't get into that unless you're curious though. However I love New Vegas for the role-playing experience most. Characters feel so natural and grounded and genuinely intelligent. Finally a little background info about me in case there's interesting correlation with fellow ADS-haters lol: 30yo, have played hundreds of games since the 90s, ~8k hours in competitive shooters (namely ~5k in Team Fortress 2). Preference for fantasy over simulation (think nintendo games). Since ADS comes from a positive state (inaccuracy does not exist by default, it has to be specifically created and added as a game element), I think the reverse question is more apt. So since you're one of the rare polite people on youtube I'll ask you, if you don't mind: Why do you like ADS? What's good about it? Is there something about it you find fun? (lol that sounds so sarcastic. I genuinely mean it though, not rhetorical questions.)
Mainly because nobody plays fallout for the combat, the game is already clunky as hell so implementing ADS is more so a QOL feature to make the game less frustrating than it is meaningful gameplay mechanic that tests your skill and mastery. Games that are built around the FPS experience would be held to a much higher standard
@@suico778It adds a layer of complexity. To varying degrees in various games, it adds new layers of shooting mechanics, which one may become more skilled in or which one may learn to identify the usefulness of. There is depth to it. It's also satisfying on the front of interaction; And it should be stressed that a game doesn't need to be a hard attempt at a simulator for ADS to be an important (relatively) quality of aesthetics and of the 'feel' of groundedness. Preferring arcade shooters that stick strictly to the old formula is fine, but it isn't an argument against ADS per se. And all of this aside, the fact that ADS is a mechanic that has to be programmed is almost a non-sequitur. ADS doesn't have to be proven, or some such, because of this. The one attacking it would have to show it to be deleterious somehow still.
his gameplay on titanfall was him trying to show that using ads is not a good playstyle, and doesn't mesh well with the game. Saying his gameplay says a lot should be a compliment, yet using it as a rebuttal shows you didn't even understand that part of the video.
@@godlyvex5543 you do realize that the first dude was literally reffering to "the gameplay" so how vid creator plays with Titanfalls ads in a weird way, not that the ads mechanic in Titanfall is weird, right?
@@LKNear saying the combat is weak but playing it weak on purpose doesn’t prove a point. I ads with the Kramer while flying through the air to quickscope I’ve never seen someone do well camping in titenfall the more mobile yoh are the better and after a while you can be just as accurate ads moving as standing still. He’s basically saying I couldn’t figure out how to ads and move at the same time therefore it’s a bad mechanic. That’s subjective reasoning not objective he is applying his own experience to create a law. I’ve never met anyone who played totenfall for more than an hour or two multiplayer who thought ads was a bad mechanic.
@@godlyvex5543 His gameplay on Titanfall was abysmal and lead to many incorrect assertions, most glaring of all being "You have to stop in order to be accurate." Just look up Titanfall gameplay: that's patently false. You just need to be aware of how to utilize your weapons and the movement mechanics of the game. What he did was play the game like a noob and then pointed to it saying "this is an example of ADS being bad". Unfortunately it's just an example of *him* being bad. I'd be genuinely shocked if Titanfall was the only game he was bad at and went on to complain about.
My biggest disagreement in the video is when you said "what's the point when you still lose to the guy on a building with a kraber" as someone who has actually put in a lot of hours into the game, you learn fast that standing still against someone who is actually good at titanfall, will get you killed 9 times out of 10. Additionally, I feel like the kraber, of all guns, is the worst one to camp with, despite it being a sniper rifle.
@Tensho usually people who main kraber, at least this far down the line, since release, are just insane at it (which would fall under the category of outplayed, but deservedly so)
I agree, the majority of my titanfalk experience the times when someone is crapping on you with the Kraber it's because they've mastered using it while moving at the mach 8 speeds titanfall's movement allow
@@Domthecoverguy typically saying that would be unfounded garbage but I can't disagree here. He tries to use titanfall as a prime example alongside Cod but he doesn't understand titanfall gameplay. The only other video I watched of his was his pro player video and that had several problems as well even if you agreed with his premise (don't listen to pro's) He conflated player rng with enemy rng and predictability, took what pro players wanted, and twisted it by giving a game that only had what they asked for and nothing else, and gave an example of a game made while listening to pro players, only to later admit they didn't actually listen to pro players.
Perks affecting ADS in games that have them are there to facilitate different play styles, not specifically to diminish the negative effects of ADS. It's all about player choice. Another thing that ADS does do is add immersion to a lot of games that have it, which is good for the overall player experience.
I absolutely disagree with the ultimate premise here, and although I agree that different games should have different elements specific to them, I absolutely disagree with this false framing. ADS is not just for immersion, it is an aid to the dynamics and is a mechanic in and of itself. In something like COD, it acts in the way you’ve described with the “speed decrease but aim increase”, but it’s more than just for show. It adds proper balancing to the game and its different equipment and guns (shotguns can be hip fired but don’t reach that far away and aren’t very accurate, and vice versa with snipers), and it adds a skill gap within that dynamic between weapons and dynamics of movement around the map and other objectives. To the point of map and objective awareness, it’s not suddenly hindered by the fact that ADS provides a different dynamic to it, it either works the same as it always has (because you’re still needing to use movement tools and decisions to go places), or it’s even more complex because another factor is introduced into the situation. Really nowhere ever are you just blatantly hindered by having it, you’re just within a different environment than you would be for something more like Doom. You still are rewarded for map awareness, overall gunskill, and knowledge of tactics and awareness (predictions/reactions/equipment and setup knowledge/lines of sight/etc.). All it does is add to what you have already
Basically all of that was a lie. It's a gimmick that was introduced as a gimmick. Literally. A gimmick. Not some hot new feature. A fucking gimmick. It is used 'today' as something else entirely. Snap shooters that rely on pressing button to aim for you and do all the work. People coming from Call of Duty pretending to have a useful opinion on game design is about the most hilarious thing I've seen all week. There isn't a game around that needs it so badly it can't be replaced with something better. The tradeoff, of course, is hipefire being nonsensical across the board. I'll pass on the games that demand I aim down sights to be accurate when the opponent can't be accurate without it. That isn't game design, it's a crutch. It's why Call of Duty is popular to begin with. It holds your hand and makes you feel good.
@@elimgarak1127 It’s not a gimmick inherently because it’s a natural part of most FPS games, a majority of shooters in general, and is also within many other types of games. And it’s not new at all, it’s been around for decades. Games that have auto aim or some variety of that are extremely uncommon, and typically the only thing you’ll see that’s close to that is like one or two weapons or situations in the vast bulk of the game where that is used. How do COD players not have a legitimate opinion? That doesn’t make any sense. How does COD specifically requiring it mean that it’s a bad thing? That again, does not make any sense. Ok cool, play games that you enjoy, that’s not an argument for ADS being a bad thing. It’s literally a part of the game’s design (some of the most basic design, may I add), and it’s across the board in games like COD. As opposed to what game? COD isn’t an easy game to be the best at, although it is an easy game to initially pick up (most of the time), although ADS has jack shit to do with that fact. Sounds like you’re just mad another aspect of the game was added that you need to get good at. Honestly just thinking about it, you’re probably some mad CSGO player who’s angry that every game isn’t like your own
@@elimgarak1127 You're way wrong. Go to a range and try firing at a target more than 30 meters away from you. There's a reason ADS is used in FPS games and in real life. It's more accurate at longer ranges. The idea that it's strictly about immersion is ridiculous.
The zooming animations in Halo Infinite look really good. It's also good that zooming in doesn't reduce the bullet spread so you don't feel like you always have to be zooming.
Honestly its alot easier to forgive halo, its 2550something and youd assume MCs helmet has the capacity to display where his weapon with hit depending on how hes holding it.
@@ZeSgtSchultz in halo lore it's actually canon that sometimes snipers will (Marines or Spartans) will put a cable into their sniper rifles scope that basically makes the scope pop up in their helmets HUD.
Not having ads is detrimental to controller players in many games. Being able to turn fast is very important so you can make flashy, skilled plays and utilize the movement in the game. Ads allows controller players to be more accurate when they decide to aim by having a lower sens. It allows the player to effectively change their sensitivity to the situation
This. Plus, console games are meant to be played farther from a screen, because it's a console duh. That is why FOVs on console popular games is much lower, as the screen functions as a window. ADS helps unite console and PC by allowing different levels of zoom.
12:58. I would kinda disagree here, Titanfall lets you ADS while flying or sliding, part of the skill comes from using the mobility to run AND gun. older shooters just let you run and gun and the skill (among other things) comes from what you do with that ability. Titanfall makes you do some skilled movement to be fast and shoot.
@@ZZ-hb1ho TBH I don't think you understand my comment, I literally say you have to have good movement in older shooters, including quake " skill (among other things) comes from what you do with that ability"
There are other games that allow you to ADS or scope while in the air etc. as well. i think what he was trying to say was that you are still moving while doing so, so you still aren't as accurate as possible. Basically why even have that feature at that point, since its such a movement based game. ADS usually increases accuracy in most games, so if you are doing all this crazy movement, what real need is there for the ADS in that game. Titanfall feels more like it shoulda been quake-like. but it is more immersive though.
Titanfall 2 fell off the map pretty quick and straight up just wasn't as good as the first. The fact that people even bring this up with Titanfall 2 is hilarious, every gun was a laser when you fired from the hip. ADS is a symptom of simping for console players that need aim assists to play shooters. The visual change was for "immersion" at the expense of gameplay on the better platform for shooters.
Listen man, I usually love your content, but not every game can be Halo 3 or Quake. Different games have different aiming mechanics. In Halo and Destiny you don't have to ads because you're a super soldier, and even then you still do when you have the option. In COD and similar games the character isn't inherently a super soldier, so it makes sense to actually have to aim. What makes you super human in those games isn't the character, or the games mechanics, it's your own knowledge of those mechanics and skill that makes you super human. These are all artistic choices that make games different from each other and just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's inherently bad. Sure, ads makes you move slower but it's a trade off just like many things in video games. You have to minimize the negative effects by being faster yourself, not just shit on an almost universally accepted mechanic.
Neat argument. You can't say *why* they need them though. I know why. You don't. Care to explain to me why ADS is necessary and what accomplishes that other games without it can't do? Not a soul here can seem to cite a single example. Strange.
@@elimgarak1127 of course games don't need them. They're games, they don't need anything. You don't even need to move in a video game. Shittiest take I've ever heard
@@elimgarak1127 in games with snipers or really longer engagements you need to ads for longer engagements. if you're in a gun fight and your enemy us around 30+ metres then you should ads to get a better accuracy to hit them. not to mention hip firing at long distance becomes pretty much bad in any gane that I have played with hip fire. not to mention if you're going to shoot someone or something irl and they're far are you going to aim or just hip fire? plus you're leaving out the fact that people have stated why,you're just being willfully ignorant to that.
I find ADS very immersive. There's a reason it's so popular. Also, reducing movement while shooting in a multiplayer game has some benefits because it reduces A-D-A-D spam and the like. A universal, constant movement speed is kind of boring and not immersive either. And it's not a binary thing either. You can have degrees to how much movement is reduced.
true. This video is one of the rants that is a bad take. ADS adds more options and makes a game less boring. Slowing movement speed makes dilemmas between Acuuracy and slower vs fast and less accurate.
@@acethemain7776 then play a diffrent game besides titan fall? Lmao. I own it and am trash. I dont want to make the game more "accessible". Im great at other specific shooters like seige. Nothing like csgo but yet very similar. Both of them should be more accessible as well because skill in one game doesnt translate to all?
metro was a great series and the ADS and no hud option was a very worthy addition. if it was hip fire only i would feel like im playing a slow moody quake
It's not a bad mechanic, it can work in specific circumstances. Problem is modern games just use it without thought. Resulting in games that would play better without such mechanics.
I don't think that ADS and fast-paced gameplay are necessarily mutually exclusive, but for there to be fast-paced decisionmaking as a result of the mechanic, *there needs to be a decision to make.* ADS and hipfire should both be broadly useful tools if there are to be ADS mechanics, or else ADS ceases to be a decision to trade mobility for accuracy and becomes a requirement.
If you play Ground Branch, Insurgency, Ready or Not, Arma, Tarkov, Squad, Hell Let Loose, etc, the bullet comes out the barrel of the gun allowing you to accurately hip fire up close. Like irl there are trade offs and you would be better off with a short barrel gun and ADS, but if you went with a longer gun or just hip firing you can still CQB effectively.
What i hate is when hipfiring in CoD and Apex your bullets just fly out at a 45° angle. Like that's how guns work. Like irl, guns are designed to be as accurate and easy as possible, but games make them exactly the opposite. Lol so dumb
Ah, yes I remember the good ol' times where Marines ran around shooting their guns without getting a proper sight. Or in my tank game where shooting people at precise armored plates is a bad mechanic.
I think you're missing the risk versus reward aspect. Zooming down sites also slows you down! Meaning while you get more accurate, so do your enemies. There's more decisions for the player with sights, as well as more game interaction then simply running and shooting.
yeah, and simply different games fit different mechanics. tf2 works great with simple bullet spread that doesnt change no matter if you sprint, jump or stand still, while something like csgo (which altho doesnt have aim down sights for almost all guns does have bullet spread depend on your movement and stance) fits well with having to trade accuracy for that movement and is a risk vs reward
This risk vs reward was pursued in some games in a similar manner before ADS too, for example in Halo CE you would automatically get knocked out of Zoom if you were hit. The goals of ADS existed in some games before the mechanic was invented or popularized, so this guy just trying to reduce it to "immersion" is stupid and, I think, willfully ignorant so he can have a "controversial" video with a boost in comments.
Man I love just scrolling thru the comments as people form an entirely seperate essay as to why his core argument is flawed. It’s like a whole ‘nother video! Jokes aside, all these comments bring up amazing points so if you’re reading this before the others, go look at them.
The most fun I had in Titanfall 2 was from using the EPG hip-fire to explode people while wall running with a projectile affected by gravity. It's incredibly satisfying.
All the 'best' weapons of titanfall had one main thing in common - you barely needed to ads using them. Even the weapons with comparable time to kill that require a lot of aim down sights were way less fun to use. Imo if they just increased the accuracy of non-meta weapons in hip fire by 33% their usage would go up considerably, that's how much of an impact it had
Apart from the HUD, as someone who actually shoots guns IRL, ADS works pretty much the same way with a real gun. Although some guns like modded glocks these day also have UI elements like smart slides with round counters. Reduced spread because you’re stabilizing the weapon with proper form holding the gun with locked arms instead of hipfire. “Quick scoping” is a real life thing during target shooting and is possible with speed drills for self defense, and certain variable power sights with good eye relief really can quickly zoom in and out with just a quick thumbing. The really good expensive sights have enough eye relief allowing for you to snap the weapon to your cheek without blacking out the scope. And you can also cowitness sights or set up 45-90 degree offset sights. Run and gun drills and solo room clearing are real things too, and even when you run and gun, target acquisition is better if you take the half second to frame your sight picture. Of course, this also slows your real life movement speed because keeping your sight posts aligned takes effort to stabilize your gun while moving. Games with ADS just feel good because it feels like second nature. In any run or gun shooter, everyone has plenty of moments where you aren’t moving as much while shooting because human brain are scientifically proven to be unable to multitask. What we really do is switch between moving and shooting quickly anyway.
@@virtualandroid9 "Rather a game was meant to mimic real life" I can't say I agree with this wholely. Sure, if the aim of the developers is to incorporate realistic elements for immersion then yeah, go for it. But for the games such as Titanfall 2, the removal of ADS (on certain weapons in my opinion) I believe would encourage players to take advantage of the movement system earlier on. Especially when the two weapons that are considered META (Alternator and CAR) are available at the get-go and their hipfire spread in nonexistent.
I played Far Cry 1 recently, and when you "zoom", it lowers the sensitivity and there's no option to change it. Immediately conveys that you should use it to be more accurate. Far Cry 1 will kick your ass for going in guns a blazing regardless of difficulty, so I think it belongs in it.
@@lopanreturns7085 Well I was very excited for far cry 2 back in the day. The fire physics, vehicle damage, supposedly next level AI etc etc. Seemed like such an ambitious game. It failed to capture the magic of far cry one for me though and the final game felt like an unfocused experience on which the developers spent a bit TOO long on fire physics. Disappointment. Far cry 3 was a more complete experience but open world hurts far cry as a game in my opinion. About half way through I stopped caring that much and things started to feel like Assassin's Creed collectible missions. Ironically the more there is to do in a far cry game, the less I feel any of it matters. Far cry was at its best in the first iteration. The illusion of big open levels but in reality, a very tightly designed game closer to half life than grand theft auto. Developers have forgotten that sometimes less is more and more for the sake of more just... Well to put it another way, quantity is not the same as quality. Edit: the only video game my deceased father ever played was Far Cry 1 on PC. He finished it multiple times on veteran difficulty. Anybody who has played far cry 1 knows that's not easy to do. I couldn't ever recommend another far cry game to him because I knew what he loved about the first one simply wasn't there any more.
@@paulpesci1 Have you ever tried an immersive sim? I’ve only played one of the Far Cry but what you’re describing Far Cry 1 as sounds like an immersive sim.
Man’s really thought he had a point. ADS is exactly as you explained, it is used so you can be MORE accurate. So why would you remove it from “unrealistic” games? if it is a core part of using any gun irl why would it make any sense to remove it from video games that built their core mechanics around guns.
@@revimfadli4666 Well that's a stupid argument. They might as well be arguing that autosprint be the only option in games because "if you can be faster why not be faster all the time without having to press a button?" Ok, that one wouldn't be so bad, but it does seem stupid, so I'll give a better example. They might as well be arguing for a feature where guns fire all the time because "if you can shoot why not shoot all the time without having to press a button?" ADS adds a layer of skill that simply wouldn't be present if you were accurate all the time. By removing the HUD it forces you to be more aware of your surroundings, thus rewarding awareness and high accuracy. Plus, it allows players to have a different sensitivity for when they are aiming and when they are running around. This is especially useful for console players, who have less overall control/optimization in terms of accuracy.
@@commander8625 very well said! I suspect the "autosprint all the time" part didn't look as stupid because you do sprint most of the time. Of course, it'd still be better if you can _opt out_ of that sprint. No unnecessarily tiring long button presses, yet still with the same interesting decisions And I think the skill factor only applies if hipfire is a viable alternative at different conditions like you explained, and not the "obligatory ADS" like in some games
Because you're viewing a fake perspective in the first place. The game character is not the same as the player. Your character is aiming, but you're just seeing a different perspective. This is as stupid as saying third person shooters don't make sense "because you're not aiming down sight so how does your character hit anything" Guns shoot where they're pointed. You don't need to be aiming down a sight to be accurate. Cowboys draw and fire without "aiming" ..yet they hit with nearly 100% accuracy. You falsely correlate aiming with aiming down sight. You can aim without sights. Just like a pitcher can throw a ball without sights.
This ENTIRE thing is based on your own bias (basically, you are only looking at the mechanic in terms of CoD and your own personal preference), outright ignoring the exceptions to the rule, and also relying on you conjuring up exceedingly arbitrary definitions for terms. Like, as an example, how you define 'game speed' as 'players having to think about many things at the same time'. No, that's not game speed. Game speed is the rapidity of events and choices. It does not mean they are occurring at the same time, or even being actively thought about, but simply in a quick pace. As an example: Doom Eternal. You aren't thinking about many things at the same time, you are quickly making judgement calls about what to do in response to various stimuli. Once you have developed muscle memory for it's game loop, THEN you start planning steps ahead in order to manage resources more efficiently. Hence it's gamespeed is high. FEAR, on the other hand, has a SLOW gamespeed, mechanically speaking, and is only given the impression of speed by the shortness of engagements (or to be more specific, the TTK of most enemies). You also seem to be using some arbitrary definition for 'real-time strategizing' that just seems to encompass any 'in-the-moment' choice, while for seem reason arbitrarily excluding the CHOICE of when to aim and when not to, from the equation. This is again followed through when you talk about titanfall, treating it as if you HAVE to lock into irons and stare at targets. You don't. The better players don't lock in on irons, they pop in and out of them as needed for short engagements and movements. They are rapidly cycling between 'need to move' and 'need to shoot' (which is itself, a skill-requiring feature, as it needs player judgement on appropriate times for each option), and there are a number of weapons in that series that you never even have to touch ADS with to be effective. ADS can make a game more 'newb-friendly', but it does not come at some inherent cost to skill ceiling. Your ENTIRE PREMISE comes across as 'Because having iron sights makes me feel like I have to stand there and trade fire, that is what it is'. That's not factual, or backed up in ANY way by actual gamers. Your example with Payday 2 is OUTRIGHT offensive, as you are completely and utterly ignoring that those skills aren't about 'player empowerment', and are instead entirely about 'playstyle choice' in service of 'empowerment'. There are skills that increase EVERYTHING your character can do by similar margins. Empowerment via progression is something you seem to have willfully ignored solely because it pokes holes in your assertion, which is NOT a good thing to be doing when trying to present an argument. You CAN be a crack-head sprinting around spraying from the hip. Or you can be a more methodical player, focusing on priority targets and durability. While this DOES fall apart at the highest difficulty levels, that's not to do with core mechanics of moving and shooting, and more to do with AI health and damage bloat tipping over a threshold where durability no longer functions and it becomes all about avoiding taking damage in the first place. Then there is your thing about the throwback event in Destiny, which points directly to you again making totally unfounded assertions (speaking for the community as a whole) and also ignoring other possible reasons those new weapons might have been liked, such as nostalgia, or even FOMO factors. New and different will draw a LOT of attention regardless of other factors. The simple fact that those weapons function differently than typical will draw players to them. You are CONSTANTLY making all the wrong conclusions from the data presented. I mean, just look at your repeated harping of 'ADS reduces skill ceiling and reduces number of factors in consideration'. It doesn't. It CHANGES YOUR APPROACH to those factors. Those factors are all still present.
Thank you! ADS can not be boiled down to _move or aim and shoot._ The benefit of using ADS is improved accuracy with the penalty of decreased agility. This can either get you killed, such as if you try to ADS against enemies in close-quarters, or save your life by allowing you to land shots at a distance you might not have been capable of doing because bloom exists. The claim that ADS limits the skill ceiling is utterly absurd anyways because the ability to use ADS in combat is actually more challenging than simply turning, pressing an input and watching the enemy’s HP tick down. That isn’t even getting into the discussion of when to ADS or hip fire. What is a weapon’s optimum range because of DPS and firerate? All of these are effected by ADS, some weapons are quicker at ADS than others while some slower ones might be more powerful when hip firing. The entire video reads like he just dislikes ADS as an idea.
I swear when I was watching most of the video I was like is it just me or does he not understand the whole point of ADS? Like at all? It seems to me like he’s trying to over complicate a feature that’s pretty well understood by the community. Not only that but he took forever to even get to the point in ‘why ADS is bad’.
"increased accuracy, reduced recoil, blah blah blah" That's literally how aim down sights works in real life compared to hip fire. Shouldering a weapon does wonders for accuracy and weapons handling. No one worth their salt in real life hipfires. Everyone shoulders it, even when you see those rapid fire range montages.
@@Groza_Dallocort Exactly. There's a lot of unrealistic things in video games that you can complain about, but the one thing that makes sense, they device to rant about. Seriously?
Most “hipfiring” in video games have the weapon shouldered anyway. The problem isn’t that the UI shows the gun sights. The problem is that the player has to trade movement for the ability to shoot accurately in an arcade game.
@@deriznohappehquite Well that might be true but if you try to hipfire in S.T.A.L.K.E.R unless the target is within five meters you aint hitting shit. I always aim down either the iron sight, holosight or scope depending on what rifle I got the diffrent sights on
@@deriznohappehquite Just like in real life? If I shoulder a weapon, I'm not going to be as dexterous as when I just have it sort of there, sort of shouldered, but not really. It's a pretty fair trade off. Anyone who knows anything about guns will agree that having it in the perfect position and shouldering it with good form will make or break accuracy, recoil, and everything in between. Hell, shouldering it, but not having it perfect will prevent you from looking through a scope, as it blacks out unless your head is at the perfect position. This is common sense and common knowledge to anyone who owns a gun and perhaps anyone with half a brain. So why is this a problem, again?
"ads belongs into tactical and team based shooters" I feel like csgo and valorant players would disagree. Also if you would play titan fall for more than 2 you would know that you basically don't use ads, at all, just with kraber and you can still be very fast while adsing. And tbh playing destiny or cod without ads would be so fucking stupid, like man, if you don't like ads don't play games with ads but don't cry about something that most people enjoy. It's not like ads is easier, as you said, ads sacrifice speed for accuracy, so knowing when to ads and when not is part of skill.
Bro has not played any ACTUAL tactical shooters. In fast paced ones where there's a dead-on crosshair in the center of the screen even while "hipfiring", ADS basically does nothing to help. In tactical shooters, however, basically all "stats" of the gun remain the same in ads and in hipfire. The only difference is that target acquisition, accuracy, and recoil control gets better as you can reliably see where you're aiming at and drag down efficiently.
After getting in to VR "ADS" is basically mandatory. You will use iron sight or some kind of scope for aiming. With some time you can train/remember gun alignment to your hand and use that in close/mid range combat. With gun stock you can get more steady aiming. Some games has slow time functionality to get empowered feeling.
@@censoredduetowrongthink interesting. I have little issues pointshooting with anything in VR. Except pistols. Pistols i can't pointshoot very well with, despite being able to IRL.
It was so weird coming back to Halo after playing destiny the last 6 or whatever years. Not needing to ADS was a real learning curve and I still catch myself panicking everytime I get de scoped
yeah I think I was using the sniper in halo and I was missing every shot while scoping in. Once I tried only hipfiring with the sniper i started actually hitting people because I wasn't accustomed to the fact that halo doesnt automatically reduce your sensitivity and movement speed when scoped in
Hardest disagree I’ve ever had. Go play MW 2019, make a hip fire MP7 class, get a few friends, and play a match on a normal sized map, not just shipment or a small map, and only hipfire. That is how cod would be like if ads wasn’t a thing. It would be extremely boring and you would hardly get any kills unless your close range. Also, I can not believe you think titanfall 2 has weak gun play. If you ads while moving fast you maintain momentum. If you go on a wall run you don’t slow down, you keep going same speed. Also, hipfire is quite accurate in the game. Some of the best kraber shots and just over all clips on the game are using movement to outplay and outgun opponents. You can use grenades and grapples to speed you up, then you shoot some people while maintaining your speed. Even in cod you can use your jump button yo outplay opponents while aiming. Get better at aiming then try to complain
Ultimately I think that he simply doesn't have enough experience with titanfall. As for COD, he is right, it's a shit game. But then again, it's COD, it's hard to not be right when you call it shitty.
As someone who loves firearms, and was even in the US infantry, I love the ADS feature in games. Although I'm not much of a PvP guy. It just seems to add that extra bit of realism. Especially if they're iron sights.
Wow, I really like the realism of the scope in that old lucasarts game, very cool. And yeah, the fact games are from a chest POV with always be a little odd haha. My main bugs with shooters are that you have this odd perspective and also the fact very few shooters let you swap to left handed
I don't think I have ever seen a game that allows that not just fps, which socks cuz I'm left handed and It'd be nice to represent myself in games other than legend of Zelda lol
@@stephenhughes7062 Jesus Christ bro you sound like a snow flake, “I’m left hand and I want to be represented in video games 😂😂😂 and idk CSGO, valorant, there are cod games that let you switch the side of the weapon calm down bro your “represented” 💀
Maybe a bit too ubiquitous and doesn't need to be in every game, but definitely not a bad feature. One of the reasons aiming (not necessarily down sights) became so ubiquitous is because of how it helps compensate for the shortcomings of a controller. Even without aim assist, it can be a big help. This is especially the case for games that let you change the general sensitivity and aiming sensitivity separately. You can crank up the general sensitivity so you can quickly 180, and then use the left trigger when you need precision.
Don't you guys think that insisting on using an input device which is borderline-impossible to use without game playing itself is kinda dumb? I mean it's great for genres like fighting games and racing games due to the ergonomic placement of all the things you need for perfect gameplay (and analogue input in case of racing games) but with mouse you are feeling the gun in hands of your character much more realistically (in comparison to controller, of course) since in real life when you want to raise your hand, you just raise your hand rather than thinking about how fast you need to move your arm upwards and how long it'll take for it to reach it's final point..
@@professorxxx4142 A controller much more accurately simulates the feeling and difficulty of shooting a gun. And unlike a mouse/kb, no desk is required. You can use it from your couch.
So, I watched the whole video. I heard your comments about "goals for each individual game" and "how it makes sense for realism" so now I can confidently say, you missed one of the biggest and most important parts of ADS, and that is the ability to control your aim on Controller. If you play on PC with a Mouse and Keyboard, of course you wouldn't understand, you would just say "just aim at the person and shoot" which is easier said then done with controller. The benefit of having ADS, especially with controller is that it reduces the looking sensitivity which allows you to more easily make long distance shots. Even if you are playing a power fantasy type game, if you want to be able hit anything at any range, you're gonna need either hefty aim assist or the ability to fine tune your sensitivity to make shots easier at range, unless if you are trying to imply that no fantasy shooters should have any ranged play, which I would think would be a terrible take. Halo was able to get away with not having ADS because it has super hefty Aim Assist and bullet magnetism (meaning if your shots didn't hit, if they were close enough they still counted), but this works because the time to kill in Halo is so long. You can't have a game with a very low time to kill like call of duty with the same gunplay mechanics of Halo because that would make the gameplay a chaotic mess. You would either have everyone walking around at full speed trying simply just ADS'ing around every corner, assuming you have no movement penalty like in Halo, or you would see everyone hipfiring every corner because you have the hipfire spread of Halo. Another important aspect that you never brought up is Time to Kill. For games with a fast time to kill like Call of Duty, ADS is the best way to balance out close and long range combat. If you wanna go in close you have to deal with the random and inaccurate hip fire spread, if you want to go at a distance you have to slow down your movement and make you a standing still target to get the accurate shots and that's the pay off. This puts even more emphasis on your weapon choice and positioning which is why you are able to choose which weapons you start off with. Not having ADS works in arena/arcade shooters because everyone (should) have equal starts, so instead of strategizing what weapon you will bring, you instead think about which weapons to get. This is a pretty big difference because you are a lot less likely to get outgunned by someone with a more powerful weapon while being stuck in a position where you are helpless to do anything about it, especially considering you have a higher jump making it either to dodge bullets and reposition in all axes. That's a thing you'll tend to notice with games that don't have ADS, there's a lot more vertical play then games with it, and that is there to make it feel like you can kind of be out in the open without being at a distinct disadvantage, which wouldn't work in a game with a low time to kill. In COD or Battlefield, if everyone started off with the same set of weapons then it would significantly reduce the decision making with both positioning and movement opportunities. This is a big reason why Halo 4 was such a flop. Being able to bring a weapon of significant power and range to every single gunfight basically meant that the most viable strategy was to just walk around with a BR and pot-shot people from a distance, which was boring and annoying. ESPECIALLY because there was no de-scoping, meaning ranged combat had exactly the same problems that a theoretical call of duty without ADS would have. So no, Call of Duty and Battlefield, with their low jump height, relatively slow movement and low time to kill would not be better without ADS, in fact it would only destroy what semblance of balance the game maintains. So in those cases, they are well "justified to have this feature" Now with all that being said, I do agree that developers should look at ADS as not a required default for all FPSs. In fact, I think some games would benefit from not having ADS, I just don't think you made a very convincing argument as to why, and what the alternatives are and what would happen if the games didn't have it. You basically said "ADS makes you slow and that slows down the pace of the game, and makes you disempowered" which by itself doesn't mean much of anything. Being required to multi-task isn't inherently a good thing, especially if it makes the game hard to follow. The reason why being able to traverse the map even when you can get one tapped from across the map by a Kraber is okay is because there is still a risk-reward element for standing still in Titanfall. It's fairly easy to get rushed with nothing but a sniper and a pistol and have your options get limited, especially when the Kraber has such a low bullet velocity, making it hard to hit moving targets at a distance. The way that you said it implies that as if standing still in the back of spawn with a Kraber is the most viable strategy and best way to get kills when surely you most know that hitting shots with a Kraber is very difficult, especially for controller players, so that just seems like a redundant point. Honestly, I think that Titanfall might actually be a better game without ADS, but unfortunately you don't play with the idea of that and instead talk about the game design of Titanfall as a whole, which is disappointing to say the least. Finally, It's honestly not surprising that you got a lot of comments from people who didn't watch the video and just tell you that you are wrong, when it took you a whole 10:08 to actually address the question in the first place. Having to sit through more than 10 minutes of mostly redundant information just to get to a mediocre actual point that probably could have been summarized in 5 minutes is a bit of a chore, thankfully your presentation, and editing make it more enjoyable to watch for me, but I like watching and listening to video game essays, and not everyone is going to, and had the title been more of questioning the legitimacy of ADS on wider scale, having a long and drawn out documentary style video would have been perfectly suitable, but when you frame the title to ask a simple question and take 10 minutes to get to the question in the first place, no wonder people are going to be impatient. tl:dr, you should have talked about the alternatives to ADS and why games would be better without them, and how you would balance the game around not having them, more so then pointing out flaws in games that do have ADS.
The only actually good comment that criticized the video. My God the rest are a bunch of morons who were infuriated by the title and never even thought about what he was saying. I can see the point of ADS in a game like COD, but I also feel like there could be other ways of balancing it without that. Although would COD really be cod without it? It'd probably feel way different
He'd loose his absolute shit in an average titanfall mp match. The number of times I've had my head deleted by a sniper going Mach Jesus is funny. Or by a dude who knows wtf he's doin. Somthing this guy doesn't.
but you're usually slower, the fov gets closer, the gun take more space on the screen and you cant do much of the other tasks while doing it, like throwing a granade, abilities and other stuff without descoping
tbh bad take. I feel like aiming is empowering because you really have to demonstrate your skill i.e your aim. Also being able to know how to balance moving quickly and when to slow yourself for accurate shots is a good skill. I love aiming in
I like the idea behind this video and it’s obvious you worked hard on it, but I gotta disagree on some points. Aiming adds a 3rd element to learning. Memorizing the mission map, enemy locations, what parts of the map work for ADS and what areas don’t. The feature is bad when done where it doesn’t work but it’s a meta when done in places it is great at
From someone who primarily plays in consoles, it's supposed to help with aiming, by slowing down your sensitivity and focusing your shots. It's why most games have a separate sensitivity, a camera sensitivity for movement, and an aim sensitivity for combat, I don't exactly have precise camera movement with my thumb moving around over an analog stick. It might be somewhat unnecessary on PC, but it definitely helps on consoles, at least in my experience.
90% of the time in call of duty I was running around hipfiring smgs and it worked pretty well. I'm also sure that if you stand still in titanfall, then you'll not live for long
oof, yeah titanfall is a speed shooter. so much fun though (before the hackers ruined it, considering the company gives zero shits about hackers in their games.) tribes was the king of speed though. check out some tribes ascend gameplay at some point, that game was amazing.
@@ryz_vik is that a response to the first, or second half of my comment? cause first half i'd just point out, hackers. legit go search up titanfall 1 hacker issue, it compeltely destroyed the game. 2 isn't "as" bad, but it's still atrocious. and if it's the second half, you obviously haven't seen tribes gameplay.
Let me explain what ADS does for CoD. It slows you down so you can hit shots, but more importantly, it slows you down so enemies can hit you. You mention Doom, so let's start there. How many flying demons are launching hitscan projectiles from half a kilometer away? Pretty few right? So why do you think that snipers should have that luxury? it's hard enough to hit snipers when they're standing still, you honestly expect anybody outside of the pro player base to collect ranged headshots while enemies are strafing like they have SMGs? You see, ADS is more than a "realistic" mechanic, it's a balancing mechanic. That's why SMGs ADS fast and snipers scope in slowly. Snipers aren't meant to snap to ADS in 4 frames, that's what shotguns exist for. By removing ADS from CoD you remove the need for shotguns because there is something that does the job better and still works at longer ranges. That's why LMGs are so slow to aim, the immense sustained firepower they can bring to bear on a target is tempered by the long ADS time. Not every game has to be CS: GO, a game you conveniently "forgot" to mention which is known in the gaming scene specifically for its design not utilizing ADS. This game is proof that you don't have to use iron sights to create a tactical game, but you never mentioned it once. Why is that? It really feels like you're cherry-picking your examples by deciding that CS: GO is too slow so it doesn't count. You make it seem like slow games have to have scopes when fast games shouldn't have them, and that is a contrast that simply doesn't work at all. If I said that Dark Souls was a bad game because it didn't have an intrinsic combo system like Devil May Cry or Bayonetta, I would be wrong because the point of the games is different. Dark Souls isn't about stylish comboes and fancy acrobatics, it's about staying alive in a world where everything can kill you and you have to use every tool in your arsenal if you don't want to lose all your souls and get sent back to a bonfire again. The same thing can be said here. CoD isn't about flying over a Capra demon to hit them with a chainsaw like you're a fucking Trolldier, it's about playing carefully enough not to die but aggro enough to keep the enemies from dominating the map. Perhaps you'd know this if you spent 5 minutes playing the game instead of assuming you know everything from beating the campaign on easy mode. I'll admit I don't know much about Halo, but that seems irrelevant since you don't know jack shit about CoD. But I'm not the one here saying that Halo is a crappy game because it has a different take on shooting, you're the one who started that shit. Seriously, you have better things to nitpick in gaming instead of going after CoD for trying not to portray WW2 fighters as Superman, are you so starved for content that you need these outlandish titles to keep people clicking on your videos or something? I respect the grind dude but you clearly got the unpopular opinion here according to 750 dislikes.
13:41 Modern CoD games also have options to make you not have the need to use ADS. Attachements, perks, weapon perks... You can tune your playstyle by doing that. Is not *required* to ADS in modern CoD games. (Multiplayer/Co-op wise) Also, the "campaign levels are memorized" part could apply to almost any game tbh.
did u even watch the video? he had already addressed the weapon perks, if u really think your argument is special then you really need to rewatch the video lmao
@@heftymagic4814 I did watched the video, he never mentioned perks in modern CoD's he made it seem like CoD always has worse hip-firing which makes ADS essential or something. Also, i never made it seem like my argument is special, i just see the guy has never played a more recent CoD game. So his experience is based on up to CoD4.
@@heftymagic4814 I hate the phrase “did you even watch the video” of course he fucking did it’s called having a different opinion. If somebody tells you to admonish someone because they didn’t initially agree with what they said then that says something about their ego.
ADS is not a bad mechanic, but it shouldn't become industry standard. ADS, despite make the accuracy feels like auto aim, is not beneficial in close range where fast reaction time is needed nor prone position where large FOV is necessary and the differences between hipfiring and ADS become negligable. I've played some COD campaigns in hardest difficulty and this statement is confirmed. The reason why it shouldn't become FPS standard is because it may ruin the pacing of those games. Valve for Left 4 Dead series did a good thing to not implemented ADS features because the player need to quickly react against melee attacks from zombies. It also make the player easier to dodge attacks. Back 4 Blood, while has similar gameplay as L4D series, has gameflow that feels janky due to ADS feature.
Left 4 Dead replaced ADS with crouching, which works better in that game. Horde shooters should always have you choose between standing your ground or moving, otherwise you get a dull kite-fest full of dodge-rolls.
Forgot the to mention the number 1 reason that ads should never be implemented into a multiplayer game, the removal of peekers advantage which forcibly slows down gameplay encourages camping.
I have to disagree with Titanfall. Your view comes from a new player perspective, which is ironic considering how you slam ads for being a new player crutch. While Titanfall has the legacy of cod mechanics and it could’ve been better with ads removed entirely, many of the weapons work extremely accurately and well in hip-fire. All the smgs have 100% accuracy on hipfire and assault rifles are fairly accurate too. Plus your cloak allows you to avoid enemy fire and reposition, keeping that sense of movement instead of being stuck. Titanfall gives you so many more tools compared to cod, and it is unfair to slam the game for being slow when you aren’t utilizing the resources given to you and playing it like cod but fast.
There was saying me and my friends used to say whenever we killed a dude ADSing or running in a straight line down the map, or being insanely easy to kill because he is constantly losing track of his surroundings and becoming slow from ADSing. 'That dude was playing Call Of Duty'.
@@godlyvex5543 No, it does, it can be used in tandem with the movement without hindering your performance, it's implemented, in my mind, perfectly. It has its place, can be used and mastered in its own right, while also allowing hip-fire to be consistently reliable as well, good Kraber players fly around the map while still sniping people. What I was getting at was, bad players make use of good mechanics in poor ways doesn't make the way said mechanic was implemented inherently bad, not infallible, but not so terrible it shouldn't be in the game.
also like he completely slams cod without critically analyzing it? like sure it’s not as mechanically deep as a game like titanfall 2 but it’s clear to anyone with an open mind that ads is a very deliberate design choice to balance weapons, playstyles, and skill gaps. not every game can be quake 3 lol
He failed to talk about the aspect character realism, which then results in the feeling of being a badass. I understand that master chief should be able to jump twenty feet in the air shoot two mags with 99 percent accuracy before hitting the ground, but if I saw captain price do this then I would laugh my ass off. If we were to give call of duty quake physics then the players suspension of disbelief would fall apart and the game would no longer make you feel cool or be as much fun. I know that's not what the video was advocating for, but it is important to realize that there is a spectrum to every first person shooter in terms of their realism and arcade feeling. Doom and Quake being on the arcade side, and Squad and Ready or Not being on the tactical realism side. Call of Duty, in my opinion, falls directly in the middle of this spectrum. This means that it keeps some of its Arcady roots, as well as grounding it in the real world with things like "normal" gravity and ADS. All of these games make you feel like a badass in different ways, and the immersion and gameplay are very important to that. If we were to make Call of Duty into a full on arcade shooter or a full on simulation then the tone and feeling the game attempts to evoke would have to be reworked in order for the player to get the same amount of enjoyment. Captain Price, Master Chief, the Police in Ready or Not, etc. are all are badass character that then make the player feel badass, but that does not mean that they should be interchangeable amongst their respective genres. Overall the Character the player is playing is just as important as the gameplay itself. "a game is designed to be fun and compelling, and developers ought to add a feature to their game if it unanimously improves the experience, no matter how unrealistic." I fundamentally disagree with this statement because, to me, adding something to a game that would improve the fun of it sounds good, but if call of duty were to lean more into their arcade roots (presumably making the game more fun for an audience), then it would no longer be as fun, as a function of decreasing realism, which no longer sits well with the feeling they are trying to evoke. I'll say it again, captain price is cool because he is risking death for a noble cause. He is put up against unimaginable odds, and he succeeds no matter what. The only way the conflict in his story feels at all real is if it is grounded in realism. Quake physics in call of duty would call for an entire rewrite of the franchise, changing the stakes and characters. This is more of the same with master chief, except the comparative odds are up to par with master chiefs capability. He is not fighting in a battle, he is the battle, he is a one man army. If halo were to become a mil-sim, like Tarkov, then I would play the shit out of that, but it would also call for a rewrite and a reworking of the characters. This would change the feeling the player gets when the play as they once were an unstoppable force, but are now a mere, and vulnerable soldier in the heat of battle. These changes do not have to be bad changes, think Halo ODST, but they do change the tone, and may alienate some players as they are not getting what they are looking for in their game. Overall ADS is integral to the tone and feeling of the game, which is just as important as the actual amount of fun the player has while playing it. If a games tone and setting is not captivating to a player, but the gameplay is really fun, then the player will stop coming back after a while, when they have done all they do in the game. Setting and tone are often overlooked aspect of story telling and game design, but are important nonetheless. You cant please everyone, so it is important to have variety. Thanks for reading my structureless word vomit!
Hey man you don't need to be sorry for the long-ish comment that you posted. In fact I think you made a valid point when you're making this comment. I also think that ads would be a necessary mechanic for some video games, like tarkov, cod, rainbow 6 sige, and more. I can't Imagine a call of duty game without ads at all, it would be just jarring to see a game that established a feature that is so expected in franchise that is there for so long. But then again it depends on the game that needed either ads or none at all, just like you said.
I feel like a “badass” in games when my gameplay is godlike and skilled not when I zoom in. Ultimately it lowers the skill ceiling and that’s never a good thing as far as I am concerned.
Pretty sure it’s not about immersion it’s about giving you a pinpoint place to show you where your bullets are going… hipfiring usually means uncertainty and was one of the complaints about the original doom. It’s hard to know if you’re gonna hit something if you can only vaguely aim in their direction and fire, hoping to hit
Tell me you never played Doom, without telling me you never played Doom, the gun is in the center of the screen, like in Wolfenstein and Quake, line up the gun and that's it, the game has a generous vertical autoaim (because moving the camera up or down distorts the image, like in Heretic, Hexen and Strife) and a slight horizontal autoaim
Eh... I dunno if i would agree with that. The guns are centered, precise and they don't really spread for anything other than the auto-aiming correcting your shots. You might get a feel that there is no way to tell where your bullets are going, but that has more to do with the information output through the animations not being on modern levels
You don't need ADS, to get a pinpoint place to show where your bullets are going that's what the static reticle is for. You've never played the original Doom.
A game that does a lot of things right is borderlands, in the pre sequel I believe there was a vault hunter who had an ability to shoot while sprinting, and plenty of class mod perks that boosted movement speed while using certain weapons
Borderlands weapons in general have the luxury of not caring in the slightest about how weapons work irl (and that's a good thing) ADS-ing with Dahl guns literally switches the firing mode, which is absurd, yet it's a genius iteration of a common mechanic
In modern cod games, there are different "movement techs" for gaining an advantage in a gunfight. there are also other modern shooters that have implemented movement techs to gain an advantage, R6, Apex, and even Destiny being some examples. They all have movement mechanics that are integral to winning gunfights while you also had to aim down sights. having to be accurate and the game sense to know when to ads so you don't get assfucked is not a poor mechanic IMO. Also, the Destiny 2 perks you picked to prove your point seem to be pretty weak. hipfiregrip is almost never used outside of shotguns without full choke, it's a pretty bad perk and an uncommon one as its benefits don't really make gunfights easier and usually harder with minimal benefits for most guns, weird to use it as some sorta omission that the older style of gameplay is an upgrade since its really not in D2. Moving target you put in the video because one of its benefits is your ads and strafe faster, which sure I'm sure its -3% ads penalty is beneficial, but that objectively isn't why most D2 players pick it, you glossed over its +10 aim assist perk which is going to win you more gunfights by a significant margin. which is also a weird thing to use.
And he fails to mention Icarus grip which makes you more accurate in air including hipfire. Plus destiny is a really movement heavy game sliding, jumps, abilities. Ads doesn't take away from that because you can do it while in air and sliding which are some of the most important things in pvp. Additionally hipfire is commonly used with smgs hand cannons and shorty's in situations.
@@sugxi I agree Icarus grip is a great counter to his point, and hipfiring with hand cannons are only common in point-blank ranges but you're right smgs and shottys are hipfire for a good amount of engagements.
@@alsonsulos8547 I see cammycakes hipfiring hand cannons a bit especially when he's abusing hunter verticality but I don't know the reasoning behind it or if other people do it cause I don't really keep up with the game anymore.
@@FF-kc7fc I did and I agree. hipfire should be weak since it doesn't change movement and it's fast. This adds to games and make them less boring instead of a click pew pew with nothing else.
@Arthur Brown yeah I agree, adding ads to a game that doesn't have it can be bad since it changes it, but I don't believe that the trend of putting it in new games is bad.
Every kid has used a stick as a gun and part of the imagination is scoping in cuz thats what real guns require. Ill be damned if they dont let me use it in a video game. But solid points in this video.
While I do appreciate your breakdown of ADS and old school shooters there are some holes in your theories. 1. Not all ADS games slow you down or complicate gunplay/movement. Titan Fall for instance had the same walk (jogging) speed as the ADS movement when firing. And that was a huge success. 2. ADS in most games actually has less aim assist than games like Halo. The ADS "snap on" is only toward the target for a brief moment. The control of the weapon and recoil is then solely on the player. Games such as Halo, that snap, is and can be, immediate for a kill. Look at Halo Infinite's multiplayer with PC vs Console. It's way too broken because that aim assist is so heavy. 3. Having to multitask in a game whether campaign or PvP, is essential to gaming. Even as simple as moving and shooting. You mentioned how it's "too much" for the player. How? Unless you have MS, one arm, or are old as hell and never played a game in your life, the only people that would have difficulty with what you mention aside from what I listed would be... well... you suck at modern games. I'll tell you right off the bat, I am good at ADS modern FPS games, but I'm decent at best at Halo. Why? Because I feel that not being able to ADS is a step BACKWARDS in the evolution of gaming. In today's age of shooters, it's archaic at this point. 4. Having a "simplified" static shooter is not fun. We had nearly a decade of these types of shooters and we evolved our games to be more precise with our shooting. Being more deliberate with our shots. Also have recoil truly be felt while we shoot. I loved Counter Strike Source, however, not having the weapon truly feel the recoil led to this weird pull down method while the rounds were sporadically shoot around everywhere.
@@literallyvergil1686 I've played them. And I've had fun doing so. My point being, that those game styles of FPS's are old at this point. They've had 10 years of the same old "static shooter" platform. The new and still evolving play style is ADS.
@@silvershadow001 old doesn't mean bad or stale, tf2 is still played after over 14 years csgo is still player after a decade, and so is quake, can't say the same about any of the "new and improved games" that die within a few years, this doesn't mean ads is good or should be forced down games when it doesn't make them better, doom eternal proved that
I wouldn't say that MMS with ADS mechanics are any worse or better than older ones without that feature. They are different games that use different mechanics to focus on different gameplay. If we take stuff like the railgun in Quake or the sniper rifle in UT, those are perfectly accurate without scoping and landing those headshots feels incredibly satisfying. And modern games rarely have accurate recoil, most just add randomized spread. I would say we have more than a decade of the generic modern military shooter that haven't evolved much since 2007 Oh, and I don't even enjoy Halo. Something just feels off and clunky.
The only reason those people know the campaign maps like the back of their hand and can fly away in a million directions without looking is because they have played them a million times. You cannot just ignore the most popular maps in fps history just because they are multi-player maps that get played a lot. The very fact that they get played a lot and are some of the most memorable maps every is because the ADS game that you hate is so good at what it does.
Bro i can hand draw you couple of doom eternal arenas from my memory and i played it once 6 month ago. I can not draw you any cod world at war map and i replay it every 3 month. Arena shooters are superior to arcade shooters in terms of making you relay on quick decidions, tacktical shooters good at making you ralay on long term planning, cod is game for casuals, you cant argue with that.
when you spoke about map knowledge in the video I think that's truly where you lost me, especially the part where you discounted frequently played maps in games like call of duty. you used quake players as an example, saying they have a "6th sense" for being able to move around the map without looking, but the reason they able to play like that is because they've played on that map a million times before. drop one of those players into a map they've never seen before and they won't be able to play as good for the first few games because they don't know the map yet, the same is true for every shooter ever made. ads isn't bad for map knowledge, and you don't always have to move in the direction you're looking in games with ads, not doing that is better for you anyway since you can sort of provide covering fire for yourself at the cost of slightly slower movement speed.
Tell me you've never played something like Battlefield without telling me you've never played Battlefield. A submachine gun and an assault rifle could have identical ROF and damage profiles and yet they have unique roles thanks to the hipfire/ADS system. SMGs tend to be more accurate when fired from the hip. Plus, it's HARD to aim down the sights at someone who is sprinting 5 feet in front of you. An assault rifle is more accurate down the sights and allows for precise aim at longer ranges when targets are deviating just a few pixels and not half your entire screen. There was a place for both. Hell, even on the same weapon, there are times when you would rather hipfire than ADS and vice versa. A long range x8 scope is useless when your target is 5 meters away in the same room, just as hipfire is useless when the target is 50 meters away.
exactly, I do that in non-PvP games like fallout new vegas where I will sometimes use my AMR as a "shotgun" because they got closer than I was expecting in a timeframe where I couldn't swap weapons efficiently enough to pull out my closer range gun. My complaints with CoD's guns are that for some reason a SMG like the Grease Gun, a historically horrible gun at any range farther than 10ft, is somehow more accurate at the same range when fired from the hip than something like the STG-44 when aiming down the sight, there is no consistency between weapons of of the same types always leading to horrible balance and less player expression through gear and more about who can get better with whatever gun is good in the current meta. this coming from someone who has never really cared about the meta in shooters as I just like to snipe and have a solid full-auto rifle as a back up for the ranges where a sniper wouldn't be that good
Tell me you've never played something like Battlefield without telling me you've never played Battlefield. That's a game where encounters can 5 meters in one second and 500 meters away in the next second. Choosing hipfire or ADS is part of the tactical layer of gameplay. Choosing weapons that excel in hipfire or ADS is part of the strategic layer of gameplay. If you prefer hipfire or ADS, positioning yourself to make use of your playstyle is also part of the strategic layer of gamplay. The last one I played was BF4 so I'll use that as an example. It wasn't like CoD or CSGO. You could *not* use sniper rifles in close range. When I played Recon, I used fully automatic pistols explicitly to deal with opponents at close range. When I played SMG assault, I used powerful revolvers as my sidearm for high-damage precision shots that my bullet hose primary weapon wouldn't be good at. In games with limited mobility where you can't just zoom into knife-fighting range, this is crucial. The biggest difference isn't even tethered to the guns' mechanical stats like damage or accuracy. It's SENSITIVITY. Imagine playing DOOM and using the same sensitivity to hit close up targets that you would use to hit targets 500 meters away.
SMGs having better hipfire is actually pretty standard. Hipfire for use at close range with a highly mobile target is also fairly normal. SMGs probably shouldn't have similar damage output to ARs though considering they're firing tiny pistol bullets while ARs are firing larger rounds with more propellant. Just make them handle better in general if you don't want to go full arcade.
for sure depends on what type of FPS imo, as i play tactical/mil-sims like arma, squad etc ADS is required. i agree with some points in this vid though, good video
Whenever someone mentions speed in an FPS, my mind goes straight to Tribes: Ascend. To this day it has the fastest movement and gameplay I've experienced in the genre.
@@TennoSkoom some people occasionally play it, but you'd have to go on forums to find dedicated groups, cause you won't be finding a match on steam (even though it's still downloadable, and the servers are still up, hilariously). i checked a couple weeks ago lol. sadly in the past year or so, it's dropped almost entirely. last year this month, it had 30 or so players of steam regularly, couple weeks ago it says 0.
I still love playing Quake 3 Arena. The speed of that game blows my mind. Picking off other players with unscoped pixel-perfect railgun shots while flying at 300mph off a bouncepad is incredible.
I think one problem is that immersion and gameplay focus are not necessarily opposites. A game can strive to do both somewhat well. I think that's where Call of Duty falls in this; it aims to make you feel like a real soldier, but the gameplay is that of quick action. That's why the ADS feature doesn't seem to fit the gameplay too well, it's mostly there for the immersion and not so much for the actual gameplay. That said, I do prefer the gameplay of older games like Unreal without ADS, but I think both types of gameplay have their place.
that's also why in cod, basically everyone doesn't use sights, and uses all the attachments that make you move faster while aiming, to mitigate it's effects, but keep the accuracy boost. cod is an arcade shooter, but the makers of it don't seem to realise that, and keep trying to make it more "realistic", and it's suffering for it. it's meant to be the fun, casual shooter, not the competetive, wonky one.
that's why this video doesn't make sense to me. I think his definition of player empowerment is too heavy on the speed aspect. For me I feel most satisfied when i slowly clear a building without taking any injuries. when i play i go slow, and i like realism which is why i like ads. i guess i must be more of an arma iii/tarkov/insurgency guy
I fully disagree. You say that shooters separating movement and shooting simplifies things, yet I think it's the opposite. Requiring the player to choose between mobility and accuracy at any given moment puts weight on them to make the right decision at the right time, rather than just having both for free. In Call of Duty, it puts emphasis on deciding whether you want accuracy for landing shots on the enemy, or movement speed to get out of the way, and the right and wrong decisions are what can often determine your death. Also you mentioned that modern shooters have unmemorable level design, aside from the multiplayer maps you've played thousands of times, but then immediately bring up watching people play on multiplayer maps in older shooters, often professionally. Professional Quake players need to not only know the map layout to a T, they need to be able to memorize the exact timers for every pickup to move on rotation. Overall I don't have a problem with ADS in video games, and I think it's a really subjective opinion due to what kind of games use it. Some games don't bother with it because they put more emphasis on other difficult aspects, while others use the decision between movement and accuracy as a choice for players to make competently.
Agreed, like.. a game like The last of us I would understand not having ADS but COD, Titan Fall or Destiny? That has me scratching my head... I feel as if the argument is flawed and unrealistic in a sense that is only in perspective of a "new player" All I can say is just.. "get good" thats it. Like.. imagine trying to play SQUAD without ADS... it doesnt make any sense Ive been playing FPS games aince 2004 and still have never seen, had or even thought ADS was an issue. Its a benefit more than anything else
So you're saying that having to choose between moving and shooting is more complicated than... having to handle both moving and shooting at the same time? Isn't cutting down on the amount of stuff you have to do at once the definition of simplifying?
It starts with one thing I don't know why It doesn't even matter how hard you try Keep that in mind I designed this rhyme To explain in due time All I know Time is a valuable thing Watch it fly by as the pendulum swings Watch it count down to the end of the day The clock ticks life away It's so unreal Didn't look out below Watch the time go right out the window Trying to hold on, didn't even know I wasted it all just to watch you go I kept everything inside And even though I tried, it all fell apart What it meant to me Will eventually be a memory of a time when I tried so hard And got so far But in the end It doesn't even matter I had to fall To lose it all But in the end It doesn't even matter One thing, I don't know why It doesn't even matter how hard you try Keep that in mind I designed this rhyme To remind myself how I tried so hard In spite of the way you were mocking me Acting like I was part of your property Remembering all the times you fought with me I'm surprised it got so Things aren't the way they were before You wouldn't even recognize me anymore Not that you knew me back then But it all comes back to me in the end You kept everything inside And even though I tried, it all fell apart What it meant to me will eventually be a memory of a time when I tried so hard And got so far But in the end It doesn't even matter I had to fall To lose it all But in the end It doesn't even matter I've put my trust in you Pushed as far as I can go For all this There's only one thing you should know I've put my trust in you Pushed as far as I can go For all this There's only one thing you should know I tried so hard And got so far But in the end It doesn't even matter I had to fall To lose it all But in the end It doesn't even matter
This video comes across as someone who's salty that games like Team Fortress or Counterstrike didn't become industry standard. Hipfire only games blatantly lack core gameplay elements to the degree that there's a reason why even in hipfire focused games they will always offer some kind of weapon with sights or a scope. It adds more player agency to decide whether they want to run and gun at the cost of accuracy, or to aim and sacrifice movement and overall awareness. If you were to truly apply the argument that the mechanic only has a place in games based on realism or mil-sim you'd kill multiple leading shooter franchises simply because ADS is that integral to a game feeling good. People get irritated when a game doesn't let them aim because the game is forcibly preventing that player from utilizing the full range of skill they have and instead are now effectively shooting with one hand behind their back.
I have to heavily disagree, hip fire isn't something done commonly during combat and as most FPS are military based it makes no sense that armed combatants wouldn't use the sights built into their rifles. Even in games where player empowerment is the main point of the game like Titanfall or Destiny Aim down sights in games is a risk/reward mechanic and is not about immersion, you slow yourself down and lower your field of vision so that in return you can fire more stable and accurate shots. This is honestly one of the worst gaming takes I've ever heard ADS has become such a staple in the industry and it's such a small mechanic that it's inclusion hasn't hurt any game it's been placed in.
It actually hurt many games, including f.e.a.r 2, Serious Sam 3,back 4 blood and a few others, you have clearly never played anything outside of generic military shooters
In games like stalker, you don't have a cross hair normally, you go down sights to see where the bullet goes, and to lower your sensitivity It works perfectly fine
I agree with the last argument, that devs shouldn’t include ADS just because it’s ubiquitous nowadays. But whenever it’s needed I think ADS just works as a trade off mechanic
If a game has guns and doesn’t have ads, I’m bothered. The ads is nice but in some games aiming down sights is a commitment. Like in siege and it’s other Clancy counterparts. Ads is a mechanic that was introduced to add realism and more engaging gameplay. Ads should always be there
idk I think making speed a trade off for accuracy isnt inherently bad. making speed have pros and cons instead of just moving your max speed all the time with no downsides adds to total potential complexity. of course, if it becomes so extreme that hipfire is useless then it does become a movement OR shooting scenario rather than movement AND shooting scenario.
It is a very good mechanic that is unanimously loved by a very big percentage of player base. People like acting cool and rebellious about some topics from time to time. This video is merely one such act of rebellion.
Coming from a gamer and a competition shooter, I'd say sights an under utilized (or rather unoptimized) feature for alot of games. Customization of sights are one of my favorite parts of a firearm. A good sight picture can mean the difference between a bullseye at 100 yards or a two foot miss. The same goes for games. Iron sights have disadvantages, especially when with the sun in your eyes. Red dots have advantages and disadvantages. Scopes have theirs. Besides a scope with a high optical zoom, I've yet to really encounter any disadvantages for other types of sights in games. These would make hip fire more relevant in different situations.
You're right. It'd be nice if there was an actual reason to choose irons over red dot or red dot over irons in video games. Be pretty easy to do too with just some small tweaks to the actual mechanic. Red dot could lose accuracy at longer range and have better snap on auto aim while irons actually take longer to line up and have better accuracy at range.
I'll be honest, I'm guilty of the aim-down-sights COD thing you mentioned, but I'm not a COD player, I just functionally usually take a backline slow and cautious approach to shooters. I think the last COD I played was original MW2 and I didn't even play it much, I stuck to Fable 2 usually at that time
Unfortunately, I have to hard disagree on this. You lost me with the whole "I think it's fair to say, ADS isn't a tactical choice" in reference to how it fits into COD. That's... Pretty shortsighted, in my opinion. If you want to play semantics, fine, it's not a 'tactical' choice, coz COD isn't a tac-shooter. That said, I would consider it to be VERY MUCH a tactical choice. It fits in with sprint there, as well. There are trade-offs with both mechanics, which means you MUST choose when to use them and how. Not something to be so easily discounted. Now about that COD and Doom comparison... "In Call Of Duty, you only have to worry about navigating the map quickly in the direction you're facing, aiming, or regular movement, at any given time. In a game like Doom, you have to be concerned with aiming and movement, in any direction, in every gun battle, all simultaneously." That summation of COD gameplay - especially in Multiplayer - is so painfully basic it kind of hurts. In fact, it kind of sounds like a Doom player's view of COD through a heavily biased lens. I sincerely hope you omitted situational awareness, map knowledge of vantage points and sight lines and weapon effectiveness in any given situation by accident. I don't think you did though, purely because a few seconds later you bring up map knowledge and cover, but regarding something like Doom. I can't be the only one who finds that a bit disingenuous considering that's something that's also fairly key to playing pretty much any shooter... One last point. You talk about the vague concept of Player Empowerment, and how that plays into expression of skill, and that ADS is disempowering. Me, as a player who enjoys games that have ADS (like CoD and Destiny 2) as well as games that don't (like Halo and Mechwarrior 5) find that 'feeling of being powerful' differs from game to game. Let me use COD MW3's SpecOps mode for my COD example here. With that, I feel powerful when I quickly and efficiently clear a room. Flashbang, move in, careful, efficiently placed shots with my M4 to each stunned foe. When the stun wears off, I find cover. Assess. Adapt. React. I'm a calculated, efficient killing machine. In D2, that feeling of power comes from blowing stuff up or using my Super to be a badass for a time. In Mechwarrior 5, that sense of power comes dominating a mission through commanding my lance while piloting a walking tank while navigating terrain while fighting other walking tanks. Player Empowerment is vague because at the end of the day it's subjective and it's expression will differ from game to game. Obviously this is an opinion piece, so a lot of personal biases are kind of expected here... I do think that in this case, they worked against your points. It was a good watch, overall. Good job!
Glad I'm not the only one that noticed this guy gave COD the shaft with this, it looks like he's never even been in a Ranked lobby before making a video saying that there's no skill involved. Sounds like one of those morons saying Ferg, Shroud and Ninja are all shitty noobs just because they don't kill every player there with melee weapons. Seriously, he should have talked to someone who has played the fucking game for more than 20 minutes before he determined that it's a game with no skill whatsoever.
developer of repuls io here, was disappointed when I clicked on your channel and saw you didnt have video breaking things down as you did this comment ^ ^ Either way, good read. ADS has been something my community has been begging me to implement, I'm still torn on it so digging for data.. this was a good read.
@@docskiDev Glad you liked it! Also yeah, I have been told that I should do breakdowns and such, that I'd be good at it, etc. Truthfully, as much as I have considered it, enjoying the breakdown is one thing, but putting it to a video is another. I've only got one open project of that nature that I genuinely want to finish, everything else is just a big 'maybe'.
@@HazopGaze Ah, I understand that - especially if you have other things on your plate. Though, maybe all it needs is some footage and some yapping - we tend to overthink things sometimes. Either way, I subbed, for whenever/ifever you do decide ^ ^ Breakdowns are good because often as developers, we can lose sight of whats important.
The reasoning in the video isn't well-constructed, but the hypothesis is correct: ADS is a functionally-limiting mechanic that truncates gameplay. It's a bad mechanic. The purpose of any mechanic is to create interplay opportunities. Interplay is the functional unit of gameplay, and the most critical feature of a deep, high-functioning video game. In other words, interplay is the key ingredient of good gameplay. What novel interplay does ADS create that isn't present in games without an ADS mechanic? Nothing is actually gained by ADS, it's just an arbitrary input that must be made to effectively do the exact same thing you would otherwise do without it. It's a non-choice, the illusion of making a meaningful decision. A mechanic like ADS is symptomatic of bad game design; its implementation is a band-aid to shallow, dynamically-compressing shooting mechanics that attempts to squeeze nuance from a system that is functionally limited. This is true even a "good" implementation of ADS, where it has its own drawbacks that must be weighed against its advantages when deciding whether or not to use it. Reducing FOV and mobility are really the only functional compromises that make logical sense given the form of the mechanic without it being useless or rendering hipfiring (and by extension, ADS itself) completely redundant. Reducing FOV works well enough to reduce the player's access to visual information, but if reducing mobility for the sake of accuracy is a viable option in a game where spacial dynamics play a large role (like with shooters), then something is fundamentally wrong with your game design and the dynamics of space and movement are being under-utilized. Rather than using space and mobility to avoid projectiles, you need to use a physical obstruction. Gameplay typically degenerates into hiding behind cover waiting for your opportunity to shoot back, or running away. The former introduces negative space in place of engaging interplay, and the latter avoids gameplay altogether. In instances where both you and the enemy are caught in the open, then it usually comes down to who shoots first unless there's a wide disparity in the players' ability to aim. This can be mitigated with longer TTK, but most games with ADS also have short TTK because a lengthy gunfight with your mobility compromised while aiming down the sight disrupts the game's pacing when there isn't interplay or spacial dynamics to create emergent states. The most likely outcome of this design approach is a lack of depth and dynamic influence. A recycling of interplay and interactive context that gives the impression of doing the same thing in the same way with the same set of circumstances over and over. This is what prevents games like CoD, Battlefield, etc. from developing the same level of emergence and expression as games like Halo or Doom and make them seem so repetitive and "suffocated" by comparison, because they simply lack the depth and are too dynamically compressed to create a wide array of novel emergent states. Not only that, but ADS also occupies an input that could otherwise be used for a function that actually _does_ contribute something positive to gameplay.
I think that this would have been good to include in your Halo SAVED FPS video, where console friendly mechanics like ADS and sprint trickled down and plagued the entire industry, however Halo never had them from the start and they then they added the mechanics in later Halo games to keep up with industry trends.
Now that everything has settled, I think I'll just answer the question if ADS is a bad mechanic. Is ADS a bad mechanic?: Completely not, I really think it's about what kind of game you're going for and/or how it's implemented. Going for a fast-paced, arcade type game like Ultra-kill, Doom, or Quake? Then having no ADS is fine but if ADS is implemented correctly, it will still be fine. Going for a tactical, realistic, shooter? Add in ADS. However, there are games like Team Fortress Two which is EXTREMELY successful without the use of ADS. Why is that? It's because the devs just implemented it well. So there's really nothing wrong about ADS or no ADS.
One thing Errant Signal recently brought up is that ironsight mechanics seem to be directly descended from the aim mode toggle in Goldeneye - but the thing is that in Goldeneye such a thing was necessary because the controller didn't have a second analog stick. It's a mechanic that mainly makes sense in the context of a game that started development as an on-rails shooter and still plays largely like an expanded Virtua Cop, and with the N64 controller in mind.
The Wolfenstein games by Machinegames feel really empowering. You can ADS with every weapon, but on most cases it's better to just dual wield and run and gun everyone. Movement is a very important aspect of these games, and on most cases it's better to sacrifice precision for speed.
The Follow Ups: ruclips.net/video/CHHnufzTK08/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/qk0CtaYHQlg/видео.html
Yikes take
1 like Lmaooooo
ok
I recommend having it be that in ads you can move fast too and build systems around it. Edit like for example in a single player you can hipfire and ads by choice but have to do it on certain enemies I’m order to make shots to hit the weak points more or had a unique ability with the scope or a benefit when using it but have it been more zoomed
In and make the weapon actually useful when being used closed up unlike most sniper rifles in fps games and have the scope have a unique ability that takes some skill to use and to hit far targets easily.
There are people who said battlefield and cod should become full on arcades(so no ads)on that video...Honestly I believe ppl are just mad cuz they died to m14 acog in cod and any weapon with the hybrid sight in battlefield
One thing I'm sure we all agree on is ads-ing on a shotgun to make the spread/range better is stupid
This is the only real take I agree with
This really is the only good take on why ADS is stupid.
It’s stupid for realism, but it’s necessary for mechanics
Except for like the peacekeeper in apex where it charged in ads, aside from that, most implementations make no sense yeah
Almost everything about shotguns in video games is stupid. Might as well be consistent.
Man gets quickscoped so hard that he rants for 20 minutes about why ads is bad.
🤣🤣🤣
one time my team killed this one guy so many times that he blamed it on him being fat
like bitch we don't know what u look like so how would we know you're fat
this pretty much sum up this video. ''ADS bad because i like hipfire but ADS makes hipfire bad'' lmao.
I mean yeah, funny joke and all, but in reality I wouldn’t exactly say that’s why he said it. I do think his core message is very flawed though
@@Jonathan-A.C. he got butt hurt after bungie add sprinting feature to halo and hes with the side that think it’s bad because it make halo look like cod you can see his many community post memes that he made to make him look like a chad for hating it so after he eco chamber enough with his followers he got confidence enough to make this video which when i read the title my mind pop up “ah shit this gonna be a cod rant isn’t it?” and i wasn’t wrong
I firmly disagree. It's only bad if it makes hipfiring obsolete in games that aren't trying to be millitaristic.
Agreed
Username checks out
Ironically in realistic shooter, like squad, post scriptum, hell let loose or Escape from Tarkov, hip firing (technically point shooting) is still useful and accurate in close quarters
@@apyr1439 i can agree, while it emphasizes ADS for mid to long range shoot outs
I was so offended by this video but I heard it enables aim assist I was like "wait, that's illegal"
And I also agree
if you think Titanfall movement is negated completely by good players using ads then you haven't been absolutely demolished by a good movement player in Titanfall that also uses ads to delete you the instant they flick arround a corner at mach 5
He’s a massive scrub honestly. His titanfall opinions made me question every other thing he said because he clearly plays it like cod or something similar. Good players don’t even ads most the time unless they’re Kraber demons. The r-99 and r-301 both BEAM from distance with hipfire and so do most weapons. He acts like titanfall has the same hipfire/ads dynamic as cod and it absolutely doesn’t.
@Obama doESn’t care #NFT #NFTs #NFTCommmunity interesting point, but you forgot one thing, You're in my walls
CoD2 pam mod, cod4 promod, titanfall, apex legends... all (once) very competitive games that have high skill ceiling on ADS
LOCAL MOZAMBIQUE USER EMPTIES 5 ORPHANAGES, 7 NATIONAL MILITARIES AND 2 LOCAL CORNER SHOPS, ATTEMPTS TO STOP HIM HAVE RESULTED IN MULTIPLE RIFT GIBS.
All of my loadouts in Titanfall have run and gun for this exact reason.
You can ADS while in the air or moving in Titanfall. That's how people land such nutty shots with the Kraber, and it helps retain that movement shooter identity for the game.
yeah titanfall 2s use of ADS is genius. it emphasizes wall running and air strafing because those are the only movement techniques that arent slowed down by ADS. so if you want to be accurate AND fast (which you have to be if you want to be good), you have to wall run and air strafe as much as possible so you can ADS without losing speed.
Makes sense
I still think the game would be better without ads, I’d play it if I didn’t have a sight blocking my screen while I’m flying by at top speeds.
@@ZZ-hb1ho I respect that, but that starts to become somewhat subjective past a certain point.
oh heyo
Also fun tidbit of lore, while UNSC weapons connect the "smart scope" to a helmet or other sighting device, the carbine actually hijacks your visual cortex remotely with some kind of brain wave emitter.
Thats why I luv the carbine
Still, it's 500 years into the future. The weapons should have optics, iron sights, and aiming lasers.
@@cm-pr2ys yea true
@@cm-pr2ys You'd have backup sights because the main sight is not reliable. The AR is known for it's reliability in the lore. It doesn't need them. It already has a "virtual laser sight" which is the crosshair on your screen. Optics are as mentioned, "smart" and you do not need to look directly through them like with a "dumb" optic.
@@doltBmB no it’s not the weapon that’s the unreadable part it’s the user, if your helmet is damaged like at the end of reach, you can no longer aim your weapon accurately
I haven't finished the video yet but my immediate thought is "An entire class of guns across the genre is *BUILT* upon ADS; snipers straight up could not exist as we know them, in game form, without ADS."
snipers can still exist without ads because of weapons similar to DMR or hunting rifles, being typically "one shot one kill" weapons rewarding high dmg and extreme precise shots for low dps and long reloads. the quake rail gun is a good example
@@Nick-db8lw Sniper Elite *cough*
halo sniper worked jsut fine without ads. they still could have full movement speed and accuracy while moving full speed with the sniper. makes it much more skill full when you and the enemies can all shoot while at full speed. shooting faster movign targets while yourself is moving is much harder than shooting slow moivng ads'ing targets while you are barely moving and not having to traverse the terrain surrounding you while hsooting.
Games would be better w/o em hahah
or just do what cs does where only snipers can ads
Titanfall 2 doesn't really make you slow down to focus on aiming, it's quite common for players to go flying across the map while still hitting people.
I usually just run around and kick people in the face anyways, much more fun than any gun.
This, by the time I got good most of my builds were based around going as fast as possible while maintaining accurate hip fire. Could essentially drill down into someone as I sped into them
after watching this video, I still haven't identified any concrete premises to his argument. From what I can tell, his message is simply "I prefer games less focused on ADS gameplay" without any objective reasons for why ADS is bad per se.
per se
Yeah it feels like he's either repeating himself over and over and I'm supposed to hold judgement the entire time because he's making *one* point. I'm hoping the follow up video does better to clarify what he means
The main argument I gathered is ADS lowers the skill ceiling but I still don’t understand why exactly that’s a bad thing.
@@reddragonxxx4749 It doesn't even lower the ceiling. We've all owned a noob who is new and overly relies on ADS for every hit.
@@reddragonxxx4749 I think that's wrong. I think it creates a skill gap instead, but idk why that would be a bad thing.
I'm getting the impression that your taste in shooters are ultra fast paced classic style shooters like Quake, Unreal, and old Halo. In this very specific context, your stance that movement-debilitating ADS mechanics slows the game down is accurate. But in any other example this is not true.
Recent FPS games are still fast paced, especially Titanfall 2, Modern Warfare 2019, and Halo Infinite all include ADS and still see extremely fast gameplay. The takeaway here is either that you wish games were more like arena shooters, or you have a distaste for games where people can take things slow and carefully.
ADS provides some essential functionality in games where your character doesn't run at highway speeds. Firstly, the character slowing down and the sensitivity slowing down allows the player to focus on an individual target and acquire their target better. It is easier to use low sensitivity for distant targets, so allowing someone to have a high sensitivity hipfire and low sensitivity aim speed gives players the ability to deal with near and far targets on one control scheme. Increased accuracy while aiming also serves to balance individual weapons in different ways. If every weapon were to be perfectly accurate while hipfiring, a game having many options of conventional firearms would be redundant; and as we've come to know, people really enjoy options. Aiming also splits the player's attention into two modes: aim mode and move mode. In strategic shooter games like Battlefield, large CoD maps, Tarkov and others, it asks the player to be more cautious of acquiring a target and holding their angle. In a slower paced game like this, it's extremely difficult to hold a strategic angle if your player can wizz around the corner at full speed and dome you without question. This is particularly troublesome in games that are attempting to be realistic or at the very least believable.
Big brain coment
and also how will people hipfire in games like tarkov or RM surely no one is hipfiring hundreds of metres
I think the best example of a slow and strategic use/implementation of ADS has to be Rainbow 6 Seige. You literally spend half the game scoped and the other half crouch walking.
Counter strike is one of the slowest and most careful and clean games, yet it doesn't have ADS as a primary mechanic. Your argument is simply invalid.
@@Sammysapphira how is counterstrike more slow than trakov, RM, squad or R6
“Ads ruins Titanfall’s gameplay” *makes up an entirely fictional scenario that has never happened in any Titanfall match to prove his point*
Like my man
Titanfall if anything punishes this fictional “guy on a building with a kraber” by giving the more mobile players an inherent advantage over the guy rooting himself in one place, it feels like you lasered in on the concept of ADS rather than how it actually ties into the gameplay loop, in Titanfall at least, I get your opinion for CoD, it has been a problem there at times, and I firmly believe that Halo 5’s ADS mechanic ruined its weapon sandbox
*I WAS JUST WONDERING IF YOU COULD HANGOUT WITH ME AND SMOKE WEED AND FILL OUR BELLIES WITH DIET SODA AND PLAY BURNOUT REVENGE FOR THE PS2!?*
idk man, removing ADS and encouraging “fast paced gameplay” would completely change the game that COD is. cod is all about gunplay, learning the weapons and what they’re good for. iron sights and optics are a huge part of that. i don’t understand why separating accurate shots and tactical movement is an issue, it’s a war game and thats how guns work lol. no one is sprinting with an AR making accurate hip shots at any long distance. you can still move while ADS, and you can still fire effectively at close range without aiming. you’re basically saying you want call of duty to just be halo. and that’s fine, i guess, but it just wouldn’t be the same kind of gameplay at all, and i don’t know if it would have been successful as it has been if it used a different formula. but that’s just my opinion
Yeah, I’m getting the same feeling.
The bulk of the video makes sense (at least in some respects), but the ultimate point seems flawed
@@Jonathan-A.C. agreed completely
dude is just mad he got dumpstered on in cod and made this pointless rant.
i agree what would be the point of a semi aout fo example
you would get thrashed by a dude with an mp7
what is the point if the only acurate engament distance is about as far as my nose hairs reach
Csgo??
This is a pretty polarizing take, but I think it's mostly due to the fact that you're not quite taking into account a few fundamental things that ADS *doesn't* do wrong. When you implement a feature into a game, the value of a feature can thusly outweigh the negative impact it may have on your desired gameplay outcome. And in my opinion, the way that ADS is implemented into almost all games that have it, with very little exception, does not make a significant negative impact on the game. For example:
•• There isn't typically an excessively heavy and burdening affect that ADS has on your character in most games. I've played a LOT of FPS games, and the majority of them only typically slow your character movement by 20% - 40%. Depending on the game, and the movement mechanics that it features, ADS can usually be very unproblematic for the general gameplay loop.
•• More and more games (especially as of recent) are moving away from the extremely cluttered and claustrophobic zoom, restriction of vision, and emphasis on handicapping your visual senses for the sake of added accuracy that you seem to associate with ADS in this video. Even COD- who basically invented obscuring half of your screen just to aim- has a much wider FoV on it's ADS now, across all platforms and weapons.
•• Many games have compromises to the issue, such as high movement speed being retained while ADS, perks or upgrades to unrestrict the player further like you mentioned, or just not having a movement penalty at all when doing certain actions- e.g. sliding, jumping, gliding, whatever. This enhances the gameplay fundamental of player empowerment more than almost any other feature, as it is something you will have the choice to learn and execute for your benefit as the player.
Overall, I think that what you have isn't a bad opinion, but it's a poorly executed argument where there simply doesn't need to be one. ADS promotes immersion, player improvement, player opportunity and flexibility, and is a core building block of the entire concept of implementing firearms or similar weapons into video games. If it didn't benefit the gameplay loop, developers would not be adding it into their game, or changing the parameters of how it works to better fit their intended experience. Overwatch is a good example of a game that simply would not benefit from having a standardized ADS mechanic, along with other games like Quake and Doom simply finding more restriction in the mechanic; rather than freedom. In your defense, Destiny is perhaps one of the single worst implementations and gameplay clashes I've ever seen caused by such a simple mechanic as ADS. However.. on the other side of the coin, even Destiny, of all games, has features to help you choose how much ADS restricts you. It is in your hands whether you take advantage of those tools or not.
*TLDR* -- I think you just have a strong preference for certain FPS gameplay loops. This didn't really need to be an argument against the ADS mechanic as a whole.
Yeah it's a good mechanic, but it fits some games better than others. I wouldn't want to play cod without it, but I also wouldn't want to play halo or cs with it.
Player freedom is not that sacred thing you make it out to be. ADS should slow you down unless you want every game to turn into quake.
@@sk8erbyern Well, yeah. I agree. I don't think player freedom nor ADS as a whole is particularly sacred; my point was that there are plenty of alternative game mechanics that have been innovated and designed specifically for the purpose of getting whatever level of desired 'freedom' for the game.
Rainbow Six Siege for example has literally no penalty for ADSing and moving, which was their desired level of player freedom to grant to the player.
...yknow.. as much of an ill decision as that was, at least.
he also seems to ignore that ads limiting the player is by design; its a balancing tool. If you could hit a perfectly accurate sniper headshot instakill while moving at mach 9, there would be no tradeoff for using a sniper rifle at the highest skill level. With ads, sniper rifles can require you to scope to be accurate, and just like that its a huge tradeoff to use a sniper.
"B-but how could I make clickbait titles if I didn't come across as contentious for no reason whatsoever?"
I feel like me and this dude played in different universes with different games. Titanfalls best feature was it's amazing and engaging gameplay loop, where skill was decided both on your aim and how well you could use movement, simultaneously. That was what he said was stripped away by ads, but it's what titanfall was best known for... I'm so confused by this video. So many other examples too where the point of the game is to be more focused on cover and ads and they arnt worse for that. If we just had hundreds of games like doom and quake the fps category wouldnt be so diverse and fun.
These are all the same thoughts I had just now. Like.. just admit you hate pvp in fps. Because ADS does nothing but improve that experience. ADS is not a feature, its a core concept of fps that evolved. Just like prone, running, jumping, peaking. I hardly think its for "realism" at this point, its just an evolved concept of the basic abilities a player has in a shooter, it defines the experience. Jumping corners and prefiring is still a thing, take away ADS and thats all youre gonna see. I hated the sperg gameplay in quake pvp.
I think he just dislikes that the feature lowers the skill ceiling. The quake like gameplay has a super high skill ceiling allowing for godlike gameplay. The slower pace I guess is what some people prefer so they can keep up, but ultimately it lowers the skill ceiling.
@@JKSmith-qs2ii If that was the case then wouldnt we would see more people playing those kinds of games competitively though? R6, Counterstrike, COD all the biggest competitive games are extremely strategic and require insane amounts of concentration and communication. You simply dont get that with quakes cracked out gameplay, you cant com in a shoebox map with zero reaction time. There are just less avenues to out manuever your opponent, and by extension require less skill.
Just watch a quake tourney, then watch an R6 tourney and tell me R6 has a lower skill ceiling.
Edit: And if quake players are that much better, shouldnt they absolutely shred at these other games that require "less" skill but have way bigger prize pools? I dont buy it.
@@benmaisu8042 that’s not my argument, I’m saying that it’s lowering the skill ceiling not anyones preference or strategic gamers. I personally am also not crazy good at quake but I can’t deny the skills of the top level and the hand eye coordination required. I’m saying that limiting movement with ADS is simply lowering the skill ceiling of things that could be possible if humans use like 100% of their brain (hyperboly of course). Lawbreakers I guess tried to do this and failed so I’m not saying that being hands off with ADS completely relying on the movement is a sure fire win, but a lot of people like the movement of Apex for example so why not allow hyper accurate hip fire while using all those movements anyways just food for thought playing devils advocate.
I also don’t consider popularity of games as an indication of what quake players can and cannot do, I’m simply talking gameplay.
@@JKSmith-qs2ii So you really trying to make the argument that quake has a higher skill ceiling than R6 simply because R6 has ADS? Thats just objectively false. By your logic, the highest skill possible would be 2 players doing a western style draw to see who can flick their cursor and click the fastest. Thats what your reducing "skill" to. Its all these other variables that RAISE the skill ceiling. When you have more options to engage, it takes skill to choose the best option. Less engagement types just means you know whats coming around the corner, because every engagement follows the exact same sequence, requiring less skill.
I guess it comes down to what you consider skill. If you consider positioning, cover, map knowledge, communication and decision making as part of skill. Or if you think skill starts and ends when you're mid air coming around a corner.
I would like to compare Fallout 3 to Fallout New Vegas for this argument. Fallout 3 has no ADS, the screen just zooms in. FNV has ADS, and fans loved it. Why would anyone take a screen zoom over actaul aiming?
Since you're like 0.001% of the people who disagree politely and actually ask, I'll bite:
I think absolutely no "fine aim" is most comfortable. Screen zoom is just cheap ADS, but at least then the weapon model isn't taking up a chunk of my view.
I'll stick to purely singleplayer games to keep it simple.
In reference to a "game" (as opposed to a "simulation") ADS accuracy feels like an arbitrary limit. From the programming perspective it factually *is* too. First you program a player character entity, then attach a camera to it (your eyes), then (typically) you ray-cast a line from the point of the camera to the furthest solid object or entity from the camera at the center of the screen. The programmer has to specifically add lines of code for some form of inaccuracy. Then you'd program methods to counteract that inaccuracy with ADS or something lol. Or not. Whatever.
In the case of NV (one of my fav games of all time btw) ADS works alright for me, since I'm mostly using it for sneaky tactical precise shots and stuff. It feels natural to have that step in "preparation" for tactical moves against enemies. Not only that, but NV did ADS different from how games traditionally do it, mechanically speaking. I won't get into that unless you're curious though. However I love New Vegas for the role-playing experience most. Characters feel so natural and grounded and genuinely intelligent.
Finally a little background info about me in case there's interesting correlation with fellow ADS-haters lol:
30yo, have played hundreds of games since the 90s, ~8k hours in competitive shooters (namely ~5k in Team Fortress 2). Preference for fantasy over simulation (think nintendo games).
Since ADS comes from a positive state (inaccuracy does not exist by default, it has to be specifically created and added as a game element), I think the reverse question is more apt. So since you're one of the rare polite people on youtube I'll ask you, if you don't mind:
Why do you like ADS? What's good about it? Is there something about it you find fun?
(lol that sounds so sarcastic. I genuinely mean it though, not rhetorical questions.)
Mainly because nobody plays fallout for the combat, the game is already clunky as hell so implementing ADS is more so a QOL feature to make the game less frustrating than it is meaningful gameplay mechanic that tests your skill and mastery.
Games that are built around the FPS experience would be held to a much higher standard
@@suico778It adds a layer of complexity. To varying degrees in various games, it adds new layers of shooting mechanics, which one may become more skilled in or which one may learn to identify the usefulness of. There is depth to it. It's also satisfying on the front of interaction; And it should be stressed that a game doesn't need to be a hard attempt at a simulator for ADS to be an important (relatively) quality of aesthetics and of the 'feel' of groundedness.
Preferring arcade shooters that stick strictly to the old formula is fine, but it isn't an argument against ADS per se.
And all of this aside, the fact that ADS is a mechanic that has to be programmed is almost a non-sequitur. ADS doesn't have to be proven, or some such, because of this. The one attacking it would have to show it to be deleterious somehow still.
your gameplay on titanfall says everything about your perspective.
I recommend playing multiplayer for a few more hours and seeing the true appeal
his gameplay on titanfall was him trying to show that using ads is not a good playstyle, and doesn't mesh well with the game. Saying his gameplay says a lot should be a compliment, yet using it as a rebuttal shows you didn't even understand that part of the video.
@@godlyvex5543 you do realize that the first dude was literally reffering to "the gameplay" so how vid creator plays with Titanfalls ads in a weird way, not that the ads mechanic in Titanfall is weird, right?
@@lionljb somehow you missed the point that he was playing titanfall that way on purpose despite the fact he even said so.
@@LKNear saying the combat is weak but playing it weak on purpose doesn’t prove a point. I ads with the Kramer while flying through the air to quickscope I’ve never seen someone do well camping in titenfall the more mobile yoh are the better and after a while you can be just as accurate ads moving as standing still. He’s basically saying I couldn’t figure out how to ads and move at the same time therefore it’s a bad mechanic. That’s subjective reasoning not objective he is applying his own experience to create a law. I’ve never met anyone who played totenfall for more than an hour or two multiplayer who thought ads was a bad mechanic.
@@godlyvex5543 His gameplay on Titanfall was abysmal and lead to many incorrect assertions, most glaring of all being "You have to stop in order to be accurate." Just look up Titanfall gameplay: that's patently false. You just need to be aware of how to utilize your weapons and the movement mechanics of the game. What he did was play the game like a noob and then pointed to it saying "this is an example of ADS being bad". Unfortunately it's just an example of *him* being bad.
I'd be genuinely shocked if Titanfall was the only game he was bad at and went on to complain about.
My biggest disagreement in the video is when you said "what's the point when you still lose to the guy on a building with a kraber" as someone who has actually put in a lot of hours into the game, you learn fast that standing still against someone who is actually good at titanfall, will get you killed 9 times out of 10. Additionally, I feel like the kraber, of all guns, is the worst one to camp with, despite it being a sniper rifle.
Deadass if you're losing to a dude using the Kraber, he's def outplaying you (or might low-key be suspect).
@Tensho usually people who main kraber, at least this far down the line, since release, are just insane at it (which would fall under the category of outplayed, but deservedly so)
Yeah this dude doesn't know what's he's talking about
I agree, the majority of my titanfalk experience the times when someone is crapping on you with the Kraber it's because they've mastered using it while moving at the mach 8 speeds titanfall's movement allow
@@the_bosuke moving at mah 3 on a bulding yes craber is fucking Hard to use but that doesnt mean camping in general isnt a mojor problem in tf2
you said, "to be as accurate as possible, you need to stand still", WHILE USING the most easily accessible weapon to use while moving in titanfall 2
he's just a massive skill issue
I dunno I actually like ads in many if not most games but Titanfall seems like a prime example of a game that would be better without.
@@Iisakki3000 idk titanfall ads is needed sometimes, It hooks you onto walls and hovers u in the air if u have the right perks i think
@@Domthecoverguy typically saying that would be unfounded garbage but I can't disagree here.
He tries to use titanfall as a prime example alongside Cod but he doesn't understand titanfall gameplay.
The only other video I watched of his was his pro player video and that had several problems as well even if you agreed with his premise (don't listen to pro's)
He conflated player rng with enemy rng and predictability, took what pro players wanted, and twisted it by giving a game that only had what they asked for and nothing else, and gave an example of a game made while listening to pro players, only to later admit they didn't actually listen to pro players.
@@Iisakki3000 it wouldn't be better without ads, you just don't really need to use it for most weapons
Perks affecting ADS in games that have them are there to facilitate different play styles, not specifically to diminish the negative effects of ADS. It's all about player choice. Another thing that ADS does do is add immersion to a lot of games that have it, which is good for the overall player experience.
I absolutely disagree with the ultimate premise here, and although I agree that different games should have different elements specific to them, I absolutely disagree with this false framing.
ADS is not just for immersion, it is an aid to the dynamics and is a mechanic in and of itself. In something like COD, it acts in the way you’ve described with the “speed decrease but aim increase”, but it’s more than just for show. It adds proper balancing to the game and its different equipment and guns (shotguns can be hip fired but don’t reach that far away and aren’t very accurate, and vice versa with snipers), and it adds a skill gap within that dynamic between weapons and dynamics of movement around the map and other objectives.
To the point of map and objective awareness, it’s not suddenly hindered by the fact that ADS provides a different dynamic to it, it either works the same as it always has (because you’re still needing to use movement tools and decisions to go places), or it’s even more complex because another factor is introduced into the situation.
Really nowhere ever are you just blatantly hindered by having it, you’re just within a different environment than you would be for something more like Doom. You still are rewarded for map awareness, overall gunskill, and knowledge of tactics and awareness (predictions/reactions/equipment and setup knowledge/lines of sight/etc.). All it does is add to what you have already
Basically all of that was a lie. It's a gimmick that was introduced as a gimmick. Literally. A gimmick. Not some hot new feature. A fucking gimmick. It is used 'today' as something else entirely. Snap shooters that rely on pressing button to aim for you and do all the work. People coming from Call of Duty pretending to have a useful opinion on game design is about the most hilarious thing I've seen all week. There isn't a game around that needs it so badly it can't be replaced with something better. The tradeoff, of course, is hipefire being nonsensical across the board. I'll pass on the games that demand I aim down sights to be accurate when the opponent can't be accurate without it. That isn't game design, it's a crutch. It's why Call of Duty is popular to begin with. It holds your hand and makes you feel good.
@@elimgarak1127 cope
Exactly. I don’t see why he thinks pressing l2 or right mouse is SUCH a demanding task that it kills multitasking
@@elimgarak1127
It’s not a gimmick inherently because it’s a natural part of most FPS games, a majority of shooters in general, and is also within many other types of games. And it’s not new at all, it’s been around for decades. Games that have auto aim or some variety of that are extremely uncommon, and typically the only thing you’ll see that’s close to that is like one or two weapons or situations in the vast bulk of the game where that is used.
How do COD players not have a legitimate opinion? That doesn’t make any sense. How does COD specifically requiring it mean that it’s a bad thing? That again, does not make any sense. Ok cool, play games that you enjoy, that’s not an argument for ADS being a bad thing. It’s literally a part of the game’s design (some of the most basic design, may I add), and it’s across the board in games like COD. As opposed to what game? COD isn’t an easy game to be the best at, although it is an easy game to initially pick up (most of the time), although ADS has jack shit to do with that fact.
Sounds like you’re just mad another aspect of the game was added that you need to get good at. Honestly just thinking about it, you’re probably some mad CSGO player who’s angry that every game isn’t like your own
@@elimgarak1127 You're way wrong. Go to a range and try firing at a target more than 30 meters away from you. There's a reason ADS is used in FPS games and in real life. It's more accurate at longer ranges. The idea that it's strictly about immersion is ridiculous.
As a gun owner ADS is essential for immersion in most games set in the modern world but Halo can hand wave it much better.
Yeah, don't they have aiming assist optics in the universe anyway?
The zooming animations in Halo Infinite look really good. It's also good that zooming in doesn't reduce the bullet spread so you don't feel like you always have to be zooming.
Honestly its alot easier to forgive halo, its 2550something and youd assume MCs helmet has the capacity to display where his weapon with hit depending on how hes holding it.
@@ZeSgtSchultz in halo lore it's actually canon that sometimes snipers will (Marines or Spartans) will put a cable into their sniper rifles scope that basically makes the scope pop up in their helmets HUD.
@@truly-oni3945 that goes for a lot of weapons, a lot of the "sights" show up on the hud or as holograms
Not having ads is detrimental to controller players in many games. Being able to turn fast is very important so you can make flashy, skilled plays and utilize the movement in the game. Ads allows controller players to be more accurate when they decide to aim by having a lower sens. It allows the player to effectively change their sensitivity to the situation
This. Plus, console games are meant to be played farther from a screen, because it's a console duh. That is why FOVs on console popular games is much lower, as the screen functions as a window. ADS helps unite console and PC by allowing different levels of zoom.
This
Gyro
You said that, but Halo is a console shooter and it didn't have ads until infinite
Gyro
12:58. I would kinda disagree here, Titanfall lets you ADS while flying or sliding, part of the skill comes from using the mobility to run AND gun. older shooters just let you run and gun and the skill (among other things) comes from what you do with that ability. Titanfall makes you do some skilled movement to be fast and shoot.
Have you not heard of quake, you have to have good movement.
@@ZZ-hb1ho I play a little quake, I'm mostly a UT fan TBH
@@ZZ-hb1ho TBH I don't think you understand my comment, I literally say you have to have good movement in older shooters, including quake " skill (among other things) comes from what you do with that ability"
There are other games that allow you to ADS or scope while in the air etc. as well. i think what he was trying to say was that you are still moving while doing so, so you still aren't as accurate as possible. Basically why even have that feature at that point, since its such a movement based game. ADS usually increases accuracy in most games, so if you are doing all this crazy movement, what real need is there for the ADS in that game. Titanfall feels more like it shoulda been quake-like. but it is more immersive though.
Titanfall 2 fell off the map pretty quick and straight up just wasn't as good as the first. The fact that people even bring this up with Titanfall 2 is hilarious, every gun was a laser when you fired from the hip. ADS is a symptom of simping for console players that need aim assists to play shooters. The visual change was for "immersion" at the expense of gameplay on the better platform for shooters.
wanna break from the ads?
Listen man, I usually love your content, but not every game can be Halo 3 or Quake. Different games have different aiming mechanics. In Halo and Destiny you don't have to ads because you're a super soldier, and even then you still do when you have the option. In COD and similar games the character isn't inherently a super soldier, so it makes sense to actually have to aim. What makes you super human in those games isn't the character, or the games mechanics, it's your own knowledge of those mechanics and skill that makes you super human.
These are all artistic choices that make games different from each other and just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's inherently bad. Sure, ads makes you move slower but it's a trade off just like many things in video games. You have to minimize the negative effects by being faster yourself, not just shit on an almost universally accepted mechanic.
Neat argument. You can't say *why* they need them though.
I know why. You don't. Care to explain to me why ADS is necessary and what accomplishes that other games without it can't do? Not a soul here can seem to cite a single example. Strange.
@@elimgarak1127 of course games don't need them. They're games, they don't need anything. You don't even need to move in a video game. Shittiest take I've ever heard
@@elimgarak1127 you have never touched a gun in your life
@@elimgarak1127 in games with snipers or really longer engagements you need to ads for longer engagements. if you're in a gun fight and your enemy us around 30+ metres then you should ads to get a better accuracy to hit them. not to mention hip firing at long distance becomes pretty much bad in any gane that I have played with hip fire. not to mention if you're going to shoot someone or something irl and they're far are you going to aim or just hip fire? plus you're leaving out the fact that people have stated why,you're just being willfully ignorant to that.
@@elimgarak1127 Tried to be witty, got destroyed by the first reply.
I find ADS very immersive. There's a reason it's so popular.
Also, reducing movement while shooting in a multiplayer game has some benefits because it reduces A-D-A-D spam and the like. A universal, constant movement speed is kind of boring and not immersive either.
And it's not a binary thing either. You can have degrees to how much movement is reduced.
more movement tech = more busted shit for cracked players to dominate lobbies with, making the game more inaccessible.
true. This video is one of the rants that is a bad take. ADS adds more options and makes a game less boring. Slowing movement speed makes dilemmas between Acuuracy and slower vs fast and less accurate.
@@phildiop8248
Yep. It’s not a universal good, but I agree that it works if done right like you said
@@acethemain7776 then play a diffrent game besides titan fall? Lmao. I own it and am trash. I dont want to make the game more "accessible". Im great at other specific shooters like seige. Nothing like csgo but yet very similar. Both of them should be more accessible as well because skill in one game doesnt translate to all?
@@acethemain7776 tldr; git gud
I liked iron sights in Metro 2033, a game all about immersion to the point it's best played without a hud, where you enter a room grenade first.
metro was a great series and the ADS and no hud option was a very worthy addition. if it was hip fire only i would feel like im playing a slow moody quake
Ye
It's not a bad mechanic, it can work in specific circumstances. Problem is modern games just use it without thought. Resulting in games that would play better without such mechanics.
Someone did not watch the whole video
only in this game? stupid tstes if yoy as me
This is literally the definition of "Plays boomer shooter once".
I don't think that ADS and fast-paced gameplay are necessarily mutually exclusive, but for there to be fast-paced decisionmaking as a result of the mechanic, *there needs to be a decision to make.* ADS and hipfire should both be broadly useful tools if there are to be ADS mechanics, or else ADS ceases to be a decision to trade mobility for accuracy and becomes a requirement.
If you play Ground Branch, Insurgency, Ready or Not, Arma, Tarkov, Squad, Hell Let Loose, etc, the bullet comes out the barrel of the gun allowing you to accurately hip fire up close. Like irl there are trade offs and you would be better off with a short barrel gun and ADS, but if you went with a longer gun or just hip firing you can still CQB effectively.
Blacklight Retribution threaded that needle well a long time ago when it was still alive. Shame what happened to it.
What i hate is when hipfiring in CoD and Apex your bullets just fly out at a 45° angle. Like that's how guns work. Like irl, guns are designed to be as accurate and easy as possible, but games make them exactly the opposite. Lol so dumb
@@ToxicTerrance and the insane recoil and weapon sway
@@ToxicTerrance Muh realism
Ah, yes I remember the good ol' times where Marines ran around shooting their guns without getting a proper sight. Or in my tank game where shooting people at precise armored plates is a bad mechanic.
I remember when video games and the real world were seperate, oh wait.
@@monkeymouse7670 THANK YOU. Jesus Christ, guys. If you want realism, play a fucking sim.
Bad argument lol
@@monkeymouse7670 Fine, ADS has been a mechanic for 20 years lmao its not going anywhere and shouldn't
@@yonsetv5223 have you watched the video?
I think you're missing the risk versus reward aspect. Zooming down sites also slows you down! Meaning while you get more accurate, so do your enemies. There's more decisions for the player with sights, as well as more game interaction then simply running and shooting.
yeah, and simply different games fit different mechanics. tf2 works great with simple bullet spread that doesnt change no matter if you sprint, jump or stand still, while something like csgo (which altho doesnt have aim down sights for almost all guns does have bullet spread depend on your movement and stance) fits well with having to trade accuracy for that movement and is a risk vs reward
This risk vs reward was pursued in some games in a similar manner before ADS too, for example in Halo CE you would automatically get knocked out of Zoom if you were hit. The goals of ADS existed in some games before the mechanic was invented or popularized, so this guy just trying to reduce it to "immersion" is stupid and, I think, willfully ignorant so he can have a "controversial" video with a boost in comments.
im pretty sure he did touch on that for quite a bit
Yeah but zooming your aim can be done without the obnoxious ADS animation and model, like in MOH Frontline.
But ADS + strafing is clearly the best of both worlds as long as you're not right on top of your enemy.
All I know is I love playing insurgency sandstorm and getting the wildest scope on the revolver and sniping people. Now THATS empowering.
Man I love just scrolling thru the comments as people form an entirely seperate essay as to why his core argument is flawed. It’s like a whole ‘nother video!
Jokes aside, all these comments bring up amazing points so if you’re reading this before the others, go look at them.
The most fun I had in Titanfall 2 was from using the EPG hip-fire to explode people while wall running with a projectile affected by gravity. It's incredibly satisfying.
same, except i suck ass and used the cold war
All the 'best' weapons of titanfall had one main thing in common - you barely needed to ads using them. Even the weapons with comparable time to kill that require a lot of aim down sights were way less fun to use. Imo if they just increased the accuracy of non-meta weapons in hip fire by 33% their usage would go up considerably, that's how much of an impact it had
Apart from the HUD, as someone who actually shoots guns IRL, ADS works pretty much the same way with a real gun. Although some guns like modded glocks these day also have UI elements like smart slides with round counters. Reduced spread because you’re stabilizing the weapon with proper form holding the gun with locked arms instead of hipfire. “Quick scoping” is a real life thing during target shooting and is possible with speed drills for self defense, and certain variable power sights with good eye relief really can quickly zoom in and out with just a quick thumbing. The really good expensive sights have enough eye relief allowing for you to snap the weapon to your cheek without blacking out the scope. And you can also cowitness sights or set up 45-90 degree offset sights. Run and gun drills and solo room clearing are real things too, and even when you run and gun, target acquisition is better if you take the half second to frame your sight picture. Of course, this also slows your real life movement speed because keeping your sight posts aligned takes effort to stabilize your gun while moving. Games with ADS just feel good because it feels like second nature. In any run or gun shooter, everyone has plenty of moments where you aren’t moving as much while shooting because human brain are scientifically proven to be unable to multitask. What we really do is switch between moving and shooting quickly anyway.
Real life isn't game though
@@IcchiNutz Real life isn't a game. Rather a game is meant to mimic real life, especially with shooters, they aim to hit some sort of realism.
@@virtualandroid9 "Rather a game was meant to mimic real life"
I can't say I agree with this wholely. Sure, if the aim of the developers is to incorporate realistic elements for immersion then yeah, go for it. But for the games such as Titanfall 2, the removal of ADS (on certain weapons in my opinion) I believe would encourage players to take advantage of the movement system earlier on. Especially when the two weapons that are considered META (Alternator and CAR) are available at the get-go and their hipfire spread in nonexistent.
If developers would depict real scopes the situation ould be different. But they don't.
Oh and for Titanfall: RE-45 with gunrunner!
@@IcchiNutz Some games are supposed to mimic real life and some aren’t
fun fact: this vid comes up after searching
"chud"
LMAO
I played Far Cry 1 recently, and when you "zoom", it lowers the sensitivity and there's no option to change it. Immediately conveys that you should use it to be more accurate. Far Cry 1 will kick your ass for going in guns a blazing regardless of difficulty, so I think it belongs in it.
Far cry 1 is the only good far cry game imo.
@@paulpesci1 Opinions on Far Cry 2 and 3 respectively?
@@paulpesci1 Definitely unique.
@@lopanreturns7085
Well I was very excited for far cry 2 back in the day. The fire physics, vehicle damage, supposedly next level AI etc etc. Seemed like such an ambitious game. It failed to capture the magic of far cry one for me though and the final game felt like an unfocused experience on which the developers spent a bit TOO long on fire physics. Disappointment.
Far cry 3 was a more complete experience but open world hurts far cry as a game in my opinion. About half way through I stopped caring that much and things started to feel like Assassin's Creed collectible missions. Ironically the more there is to do in a far cry game, the less I feel any of it matters.
Far cry was at its best in the first iteration. The illusion of big open levels but in reality, a very tightly designed game closer to half life than grand theft auto. Developers have forgotten that sometimes less is more and more for the sake of more just... Well to put it another way, quantity is not the same as quality.
Edit: the only video game my deceased father ever played was Far Cry 1 on PC. He finished it multiple times on veteran difficulty. Anybody who has played far cry 1 knows that's not easy to do. I couldn't ever recommend another far cry game to him because I knew what he loved about the first one simply wasn't there any more.
@@paulpesci1 Have you ever tried an immersive sim? I’ve only played one of the Far Cry but what you’re describing Far Cry 1 as sounds like an immersive sim.
Man’s really thought he had a point.
ADS is exactly as you explained, it is used so you can be MORE accurate.
So why would you remove it from “unrealistic” games? if it is a core part of using any gun irl why would it make any sense to remove it from video games that built their core mechanics around guns.
Some argued that "if you can be accurate why not be accurate the whole time without having to press a button?"
@@revimfadli4666 Well that's a stupid argument.
They might as well be arguing that autosprint be the only option in games because "if you can be faster why not be faster all the time without having to press a button?"
Ok, that one wouldn't be so bad, but it does seem stupid, so I'll give a better example.
They might as well be arguing for a feature where guns fire all the time because "if you can shoot why not shoot all the time without having to press a button?"
ADS adds a layer of skill that simply wouldn't be present if you were accurate all the time. By removing the HUD it forces you to be more aware of your surroundings, thus rewarding awareness and high accuracy. Plus, it allows players to have a different sensitivity for when they are aiming and when they are running around. This is especially useful for console players, who have less overall control/optimization in terms of accuracy.
@@commander8625 very well said!
I suspect the "autosprint all the time" part didn't look as stupid because you do sprint most of the time. Of course, it'd still be better if you can _opt out_ of that sprint. No unnecessarily tiring long button presses, yet still with the same interesting decisions
And I think the skill factor only applies if hipfire is a viable alternative at different conditions like you explained, and not the "obligatory ADS" like in some games
Because you're viewing a fake perspective in the first place. The game character is not the same as the player. Your character is aiming, but you're just seeing a different perspective. This is as stupid as saying third person shooters don't make sense "because you're not aiming down sight so how does your character hit anything"
Guns shoot where they're pointed. You don't need to be aiming down a sight to be accurate. Cowboys draw and fire without "aiming" ..yet they hit with nearly 100% accuracy.
You falsely correlate aiming with aiming down sight. You can aim without sights. Just like a pitcher can throw a ball without sights.
@@Sammysapphira u cant see where the gun is pointing without aiming
10:08 is when he starts to get to the point
Thank you. Ten minutes of a shitty take lol.
oh my god the area he placed the titan wall, why
@@zer0synd1cate the first half is basically skill issue coping
@@Atlantic_dummie HOIL loop
@Damsen Maybe he should learn how to get to the point instead of rambling like a mentally ill drone for 10 minutes.
"Dudes with english accents making long videos that go nowhere" sure is a saturated market.
pretty sure thats australian
@@ThePainkiller9995 pretty sure the implication is that they're included
This ENTIRE thing is based on your own bias (basically, you are only looking at the mechanic in terms of CoD and your own personal preference), outright ignoring the exceptions to the rule, and also relying on you conjuring up exceedingly arbitrary definitions for terms.
Like, as an example, how you define 'game speed' as 'players having to think about many things at the same time'. No, that's not game speed. Game speed is the rapidity of events and choices. It does not mean they are occurring at the same time, or even being actively thought about, but simply in a quick pace. As an example: Doom Eternal. You aren't thinking about many things at the same time, you are quickly making judgement calls about what to do in response to various stimuli. Once you have developed muscle memory for it's game loop, THEN you start planning steps ahead in order to manage resources more efficiently. Hence it's gamespeed is high. FEAR, on the other hand, has a SLOW gamespeed, mechanically speaking, and is only given the impression of speed by the shortness of engagements (or to be more specific, the TTK of most enemies). You also seem to be using some arbitrary definition for 'real-time strategizing' that just seems to encompass any 'in-the-moment' choice, while for seem reason arbitrarily excluding the CHOICE of when to aim and when not to, from the equation.
This is again followed through when you talk about titanfall, treating it as if you HAVE to lock into irons and stare at targets. You don't. The better players don't lock in on irons, they pop in and out of them as needed for short engagements and movements. They are rapidly cycling between 'need to move' and 'need to shoot' (which is itself, a skill-requiring feature, as it needs player judgement on appropriate times for each option), and there are a number of weapons in that series that you never even have to touch ADS with to be effective. ADS can make a game more 'newb-friendly', but it does not come at some inherent cost to skill ceiling.
Your ENTIRE PREMISE comes across as 'Because having iron sights makes me feel like I have to stand there and trade fire, that is what it is'. That's not factual, or backed up in ANY way by actual gamers.
Your example with Payday 2 is OUTRIGHT offensive, as you are completely and utterly ignoring that those skills aren't about 'player empowerment', and are instead entirely about 'playstyle choice' in service of 'empowerment'. There are skills that increase EVERYTHING your character can do by similar margins. Empowerment via progression is something you seem to have willfully ignored solely because it pokes holes in your assertion, which is NOT a good thing to be doing when trying to present an argument. You CAN be a crack-head sprinting around spraying from the hip. Or you can be a more methodical player, focusing on priority targets and durability. While this DOES fall apart at the highest difficulty levels, that's not to do with core mechanics of moving and shooting, and more to do with AI health and damage bloat tipping over a threshold where durability no longer functions and it becomes all about avoiding taking damage in the first place.
Then there is your thing about the throwback event in Destiny, which points directly to you again making totally unfounded assertions (speaking for the community as a whole) and also ignoring other possible reasons those new weapons might have been liked, such as nostalgia, or even FOMO factors. New and different will draw a LOT of attention regardless of other factors. The simple fact that those weapons function differently than typical will draw players to them.
You are CONSTANTLY making all the wrong conclusions from the data presented. I mean, just look at your repeated harping of 'ADS reduces skill ceiling and reduces number of factors in consideration'. It doesn't. It CHANGES YOUR APPROACH to those factors. Those factors are all still present.
Thank you!
ADS can not be boiled down to _move or aim and shoot._ The benefit of using ADS is improved accuracy with the penalty of decreased agility. This can either get you killed, such as if you try to ADS against enemies in close-quarters, or save your life by allowing you to land shots at a distance you might not have been capable of doing because bloom exists. The claim that ADS limits the skill ceiling is utterly absurd anyways because the ability to use ADS in combat is actually more challenging than simply turning, pressing an input and watching the enemy’s HP tick down.
That isn’t even getting into the discussion of when to ADS or hip fire. What is a weapon’s optimum range because of DPS and firerate? All of these are effected by ADS, some weapons are quicker at ADS than others while some slower ones might be more powerful when hip firing.
The entire video reads like he just dislikes ADS as an idea.
Facts
I swear when I was watching most of the video I was like is it just me or does he not understand the whole point of ADS? Like at all? It seems to me like he’s trying to over complicate a feature that’s pretty well understood by the community. Not only that but he took forever to even get to the point in ‘why ADS is bad’.
Yeah, this video cunfuses the flying fuck out of me, I'm not even sure what hes getting at
I'm enjoying these cope comments defending ADS as if it isn't visual garbage that serves next to zero purpose.
Please, fire a real gun sometime.
"increased accuracy, reduced recoil, blah blah blah"
That's literally how aim down sights works in real life compared to hip fire. Shouldering a weapon does wonders for accuracy and weapons handling. No one worth their salt in real life hipfires. Everyone shoulders it, even when you see those rapid fire range montages.
Only movies have people firing from the hip all the time for some reason
@@Groza_Dallocort Exactly. There's a lot of unrealistic things in video games that you can complain about, but the one thing that makes sense, they device to rant about. Seriously?
Most “hipfiring” in video games have the weapon shouldered anyway. The problem isn’t that the UI shows the gun sights. The problem is that the player has to trade movement for the ability to shoot accurately in an arcade game.
@@deriznohappehquite Well that might be true but if you try to hipfire in S.T.A.L.K.E.R unless the target is within five meters you aint hitting shit. I always aim down either the iron sight, holosight or scope depending on what rifle I got the diffrent sights on
@@deriznohappehquite Just like in real life? If I shoulder a weapon, I'm not going to be as dexterous as when I just have it sort of there, sort of shouldered, but not really. It's a pretty fair trade off. Anyone who knows anything about guns will agree that having it in the perfect position and shouldering it with good form will make or break accuracy, recoil, and everything in between. Hell, shouldering it, but not having it perfect will prevent you from looking through a scope, as it blacks out unless your head is at the perfect position. This is common sense and common knowledge to anyone who owns a gun and perhaps anyone with half a brain. So why is this a problem, again?
"ads belongs into tactical and team based shooters" I feel like csgo and valorant players would disagree. Also if you would play titan fall for more than 2 you would know that you basically don't use ads, at all, just with kraber and you can still be very fast while adsing. And tbh playing destiny or cod without ads would be so fucking stupid, like man, if you don't like ads don't play games with ads but don't cry about something that most people enjoy. It's not like ads is easier, as you said, ads sacrifice speed for accuracy, so knowing when to ads and when not is part of skill.
Bro has not played any ACTUAL tactical shooters. In fast paced ones where there's a dead-on crosshair in the center of the screen even while "hipfiring", ADS basically does nothing to help. In tactical shooters, however, basically all "stats" of the gun remain the same in ads and in hipfire. The only difference is that target acquisition, accuracy, and recoil control gets better as you can reliably see where you're aiming at and drag down efficiently.
This is one of those situations where being able to see the dislikes woulda been nice.
You can tell by how many views the video got and how many likes it currently has. Safe to say a lot of people disliked this video.
You can install the return youtube dislike extension
@@xbraedenx714 I’m on mobile.
use youtube vanced though it's android only plus you get no ads too. also the likes are 4.5k to 3.6 I think
Remove dislikes is cringe.
Not every game needs to be fast. Slower paces can be great too.
Exactly Halo 3 has the best fps gameplay ever and it’s very slow.
its boomer shooters crying over ADS lol. it aint ever gonna change
After getting in to VR "ADS" is basically mandatory. You will use iron sight or some kind of scope for aiming. With some time you can train/remember gun alignment to your hand and use that in close/mid range combat. With gun stock you can get more steady aiming. Some games has slow time functionality to get empowered feeling.
That's funny. In H3VR i almost always pointshoot if my target is within 40-50m
@@h1tsc4n40 almost certain it's placebo, but I cannot point shoot with an AR platform to save my life, but throw an AK in my hands and I'm golden
@@censoredduetowrongthink interesting. I have little issues pointshooting with anything in VR. Except pistols. Pistols i can't pointshoot very well with, despite being able to IRL.
Vr is completely different and doesnt really apply
@@PsychoMoFoGaming Homie your username has to be the most unique way I've ever seen someone spell "Captain Obvious" ;)
splatoon is so cool
it's like
3 decades "behind"
love this video! tysm. helps me explain things without needing to work at all :p
It was so weird coming back to Halo after playing destiny the last 6 or whatever years. Not needing to ADS was a real learning curve and I still catch myself panicking everytime I get de scoped
yeah I think I was using the sniper in halo and I was missing every shot while scoping in. Once I tried only hipfiring with the sniper i started actually hitting people because I wasn't accustomed to the fact that halo doesnt automatically reduce your sensitivity and movement speed when scoped in
Hardest disagree I’ve ever had. Go play MW 2019, make a hip fire MP7 class, get a few friends, and play a match on a normal sized map, not just shipment or a small map, and only hipfire. That is how cod would be like if ads wasn’t a thing. It would be extremely boring and you would hardly get any kills unless your close range.
Also, I can not believe you think titanfall 2 has weak gun play. If you ads while moving fast you maintain momentum. If you go on a wall run you don’t slow down, you keep going same speed. Also, hipfire is quite accurate in the game. Some of the best kraber shots and just over all clips on the game are using movement to outplay and outgun opponents. You can use grenades and grapples to speed you up, then you shoot some people while maintaining your speed. Even in cod you can use your jump button yo outplay opponents while aiming. Get better at aiming then try to complain
Ultimately I think that he simply doesn't have enough experience with titanfall. As for COD, he is right, it's a shit game. But then again, it's COD, it's hard to not be right when you call it shitty.
Okay but what if they made the hip fire more accurate
It's almost like MW2019 was made around being able to aim down sights and so they nerfed the hell out of hipfiring...
@@totallynuts7595 I agree. Cod is a shit show but still fun to me. I can run around with anything and have fun pretty much.
@@yemsullthegr899 the hip fire class is accurate. Just the tracking and actually aiming part would be hard
As someone who loves firearms, and was even in the US infantry, I love the ADS feature in games.
Although I'm not much of a PvP guy.
It just seems to add that extra bit of realism. Especially if they're iron sights.
Wow, I really like the realism of the scope in that old lucasarts game, very cool. And yeah, the fact games are from a chest POV with always be a little odd haha. My main bugs with shooters are that you have this odd perspective and also the fact very few shooters let you swap to left handed
I don't think I have ever seen a game that allows that not just fps, which socks cuz I'm left handed and It'd be nice to represent myself in games other than legend of Zelda lol
@@stephenhughes7062 Jesus Christ bro you sound like a snow flake, “I’m left hand and I want to be represented in video games 😂😂😂 and idk CSGO, valorant, there are cod games that let you switch the side of the weapon calm down bro your “represented” 💀
You're the only fella acting crazy here man.
@@jacobnierman9350 bro chill lmao your the only one who sounds offended right now
@@stephenhughes7062 valorant allows it
Maybe a bit too ubiquitous and doesn't need to be in every game, but definitely not a bad feature. One of the reasons aiming (not necessarily down sights) became so ubiquitous is because of how it helps compensate for the shortcomings of a controller. Even without aim assist, it can be a big help. This is especially the case for games that let you change the general sensitivity and aiming sensitivity separately. You can crank up the general sensitivity so you can quickly 180, and then use the left trigger when you need precision.
Making every game have to water it's self down for inferior control scenes seems a bit silly to me.
@@lazybroadcasts4917 that's a really dumb comment and you should feel bad about it.
Don't you guys think that insisting on using an input device which is borderline-impossible to use without game playing itself is kinda dumb? I mean it's great for genres like fighting games and racing games due to the ergonomic placement of all the things you need for perfect gameplay (and analogue input in case of racing games) but with mouse you are feeling the gun in hands of your character much more realistically (in comparison to controller, of course) since in real life when you want to raise your hand, you just raise your hand rather than thinking about how fast you need to move your arm upwards and how long it'll take for it to reach it's final point..
@@Spookatz. if you're forced to add in stuff like aim assist because of a control scheme, it's objectively worse
@@professorxxx4142 A controller much more accurately simulates the feeling and difficulty of shooting a gun. And unlike a mouse/kb, no desk is required. You can use it from your couch.
So, I watched the whole video. I heard your comments about "goals for each individual game" and "how it makes sense for realism" so now I can confidently say, you missed one of the biggest and most important parts of ADS, and that is the ability to control your aim on Controller.
If you play on PC with a Mouse and Keyboard, of course you wouldn't understand, you would just say "just aim at the person and shoot" which is easier said then done with controller.
The benefit of having ADS, especially with controller is that it reduces the looking sensitivity which allows you to more easily make long distance shots. Even if you are playing a power fantasy type game, if you want to be able hit anything at any range, you're gonna need either hefty aim assist or the ability to fine tune your sensitivity to make shots easier at range, unless if you are trying to imply that no fantasy shooters should have any ranged play, which I would think would be a terrible take. Halo was able to get away with not having ADS because it has super hefty Aim Assist and bullet magnetism (meaning if your shots didn't hit, if they were close enough they still counted), but this works because the time to kill in Halo is so long. You can't have a game with a very low time to kill like call of duty with the same gunplay mechanics of Halo because that would make the gameplay a chaotic mess. You would either have everyone walking around at full speed trying simply just ADS'ing around every corner, assuming you have no movement penalty like in Halo, or you would see everyone hipfiring every corner because you have the hipfire spread of Halo.
Another important aspect that you never brought up is Time to Kill. For games with a fast time to kill like Call of Duty, ADS is the best way to balance out close and long range combat. If you wanna go in close you have to deal with the random and inaccurate hip fire spread, if you want to go at a distance you have to slow down your movement and make you a standing still target to get the accurate shots and that's the pay off. This puts even more emphasis on your weapon choice and positioning which is why you are able to choose which weapons you start off with. Not having ADS works in arena/arcade shooters because everyone (should) have equal starts, so instead of strategizing what weapon you will bring, you instead think about which weapons to get. This is a pretty big difference because you are a lot less likely to get outgunned by someone with a more powerful weapon while being stuck in a position where you are helpless to do anything about it, especially considering you have a higher jump making it either to dodge bullets and reposition in all axes. That's a thing you'll tend to notice with games that don't have ADS, there's a lot more vertical play then games with it, and that is there to make it feel like you can kind of be out in the open without being at a distinct disadvantage, which wouldn't work in a game with a low time to kill.
In COD or Battlefield, if everyone started off with the same set of weapons then it would significantly reduce the decision making with both positioning and movement opportunities. This is a big reason why Halo 4 was such a flop. Being able to bring a weapon of significant power and range to every single gunfight basically meant that the most viable strategy was to just walk around with a BR and pot-shot people from a distance, which was boring and annoying. ESPECIALLY because there was no de-scoping, meaning ranged combat had exactly the same problems that a theoretical call of duty without ADS would have.
So no, Call of Duty and Battlefield, with their low jump height, relatively slow movement and low time to kill would not be better without ADS, in fact it would only destroy what semblance of balance the game maintains. So in those cases, they are well "justified to have this feature"
Now with all that being said, I do agree that developers should look at ADS as not a required default for all FPSs. In fact, I think some games would benefit from not having ADS, I just don't think you made a very convincing argument as to why, and what the alternatives are and what would happen if the games didn't have it. You basically said "ADS makes you slow and that slows down the pace of the game, and makes you disempowered" which by itself doesn't mean much of anything. Being required to multi-task isn't inherently a good thing, especially if it makes the game hard to follow. The reason why being able to traverse the map even when you can get one tapped from across the map by a Kraber is okay is because there is still a risk-reward element for standing still in Titanfall. It's fairly easy to get rushed with nothing but a sniper and a pistol and have your options get limited, especially when the Kraber has such a low bullet velocity, making it hard to hit moving targets at a distance. The way that you said it implies that as if standing still in the back of spawn with a Kraber is the most viable strategy and best way to get kills when surely you most know that hitting shots with a Kraber is very difficult, especially for controller players, so that just seems like a redundant point. Honestly, I think that Titanfall might actually be a better game without ADS, but unfortunately you don't play with the idea of that and instead talk about the game design of Titanfall as a whole, which is disappointing to say the least.
Finally, It's honestly not surprising that you got a lot of comments from people who didn't watch the video and just tell you that you are wrong, when it took you a whole 10:08 to actually address the question in the first place. Having to sit through more than 10 minutes of mostly redundant information just to get to a mediocre actual point that probably could have been summarized in 5 minutes is a bit of a chore, thankfully your presentation, and editing make it more enjoyable to watch for me, but I like watching and listening to video game essays, and not everyone is going to, and had the title been more of questioning the legitimacy of ADS on wider scale, having a long and drawn out documentary style video would have been perfectly suitable, but when you frame the title to ask a simple question and take 10 minutes to get to the question in the first place, no wonder people are going to be impatient.
tl:dr, you should have talked about the alternatives to ADS and why games would be better without them, and how you would balance the game around not having them, more so then pointing out flaws in games that do have ADS.
Holy Christ, what an essay!
@@dumbleking5172 yeah, I went a bit overkill on this one😅 so it's definitely a good call putting the tl;dr at the end
@@dumbleking5172 Thats not an essay, Thats a whole damn book!!!
@@cerjmedia Spotted a game designer. Lmao
The only actually good comment that criticized the video. My God the rest are a bunch of morons who were infuriated by the title and never even thought about what he was saying. I can see the point of ADS in a game like COD, but I also feel like there could be other ways of balancing it without that. Although would COD really be cod without it? It'd probably feel way different
Man's going to lose his mind when he finds out that you can move and still ads at the same time
He'd loose his absolute shit in an average titanfall mp match. The number of times I've had my head deleted by a sniper going Mach Jesus is funny. Or by a dude who knows wtf he's doin. Somthing this guy doesn't.
but you're usually slower, the fov gets closer, the gun take more space on the screen and you cant do much of the other tasks while doing it, like throwing a granade, abilities and other stuff without descoping
tbh bad take. I feel like aiming is empowering because you really have to demonstrate your skill i.e your aim. Also being able to know how to balance moving quickly and when to slow yourself for accurate shots is a good skill. I love aiming in
I like the idea behind this video and it’s obvious you worked hard on it, but I gotta disagree on some points. Aiming adds a 3rd element to learning. Memorizing the mission map, enemy locations, what parts of the map work for ADS and what areas don’t. The feature is bad when done where it doesn’t work but it’s a meta when done in places it is great at
I could get the argument that there are problems with how ads have been implemented, but they are NOT a bad idea In my opinion
Yeah just make hip fire more viable
But they are bad for arena shooters like Halo. As is sprint.
From someone who primarily plays in consoles, it's supposed to help with aiming, by slowing down your sensitivity and focusing your shots. It's why most games have a separate sensitivity, a camera sensitivity for movement, and an aim sensitivity for combat, I don't exactly have precise camera movement with my thumb moving around over an analog stick. It might be somewhat unnecessary on PC, but it definitely helps on consoles, at least in my experience.
Also the auto aim kicks in real nicely
@@BPMa14naim assist exists regardless of ads. Ads gives you slowdown while hipfire gives you rotational aim assist.
Yea i agree with this as a console player tho there isnt a reason why hipfiring shouldnt be just as accurate as ads
As an fellow console player
Skill issue
@@djerk2138 yes there is. Hip fire being less accurate simulates IRL. When you hold that at your hip, you flap around wildly.
90% of the time in call of duty I was running around hipfiring smgs and it worked pretty well. I'm also sure that if you stand still in titanfall, then you'll not live for long
oof, yeah titanfall is a speed shooter. so much fun though (before the hackers ruined it, considering the company gives zero shits about hackers in their games.)
tribes was the king of speed though. check out some tribes ascend gameplay at some point, that game was amazing.
@@Choryrth no shot, just run around and jump onto walls holding an EVA-8 and just win.
@@ryz_vik is that a response to the first, or second half of my comment? cause first half i'd just point out, hackers. legit go search up titanfall 1 hacker issue, it compeltely destroyed the game.
2 isn't "as" bad, but it's still atrocious.
and if it's the second half, you obviously haven't seen tribes gameplay.
If you were hipfiring SMG's and doing well in COD, you were playing in very low tiers lol.
Spitfire campers...
Let me explain what ADS does for CoD. It slows you down so you can hit shots, but more importantly, it slows you down so enemies can hit you. You mention Doom, so let's start there. How many flying demons are launching hitscan projectiles from half a kilometer away? Pretty few right? So why do you think that snipers should have that luxury? it's hard enough to hit snipers when they're standing still, you honestly expect anybody outside of the pro player base to collect ranged headshots while enemies are strafing like they have SMGs?
You see, ADS is more than a "realistic" mechanic, it's a balancing mechanic. That's why SMGs ADS fast and snipers scope in slowly. Snipers aren't meant to snap to ADS in 4 frames, that's what shotguns exist for. By removing ADS from CoD you remove the need for shotguns because there is something that does the job better and still works at longer ranges. That's why LMGs are so slow to aim, the immense sustained firepower they can bring to bear on a target is tempered by the long ADS time.
Not every game has to be CS: GO, a game you conveniently "forgot" to mention which is known in the gaming scene specifically for its design not utilizing ADS. This game is proof that you don't have to use iron sights to create a tactical game, but you never mentioned it once. Why is that? It really feels like you're cherry-picking your examples by deciding that CS: GO is too slow so it doesn't count. You make it seem like slow games have to have scopes when fast games shouldn't have them, and that is a contrast that simply doesn't work at all.
If I said that Dark Souls was a bad game because it didn't have an intrinsic combo system like Devil May Cry or Bayonetta, I would be wrong because the point of the games is different. Dark Souls isn't about stylish comboes and fancy acrobatics, it's about staying alive in a world where everything can kill you and you have to use every tool in your arsenal if you don't want to lose all your souls and get sent back to a bonfire again. The same thing can be said here. CoD isn't about flying over a Capra demon to hit them with a chainsaw like you're a fucking Trolldier, it's about playing carefully enough not to die but aggro enough to keep the enemies from dominating the map. Perhaps you'd know this if you spent 5 minutes playing the game instead of assuming you know everything from beating the campaign on easy mode.
I'll admit I don't know much about Halo, but that seems irrelevant since you don't know jack shit about CoD. But I'm not the one here saying that Halo is a crappy game because it has a different take on shooting, you're the one who started that shit. Seriously, you have better things to nitpick in gaming instead of going after CoD for trying not to portray WW2 fighters as Superman, are you so starved for content that you need these outlandish titles to keep people clicking on your videos or something? I respect the grind dude but you clearly got the unpopular opinion here according to 750 dislikes.
Wait how do you see the dislikes?
@@notredboi an addon called Return RUclips Dislikes, but mine says 595 dislikes for now and is not perfectly accurate.
Fantastic write up.
You don’t even need to see the dislikes you can just tell from how many views the video has compared to the likes it has.
@@nicwalker882 it's like 55 to 46 ratio dsng
13:41
Modern CoD games also have options to make you not have the need to use ADS.
Attachements, perks, weapon perks...
You can tune your playstyle by doing that. Is not *required* to ADS in modern CoD games. (Multiplayer/Co-op wise)
Also, the "campaign levels are memorized" part could apply to almost any game tbh.
did u even watch the video? he had already addressed the weapon perks, if u really think your argument is special then you really need to rewatch the video lmao
@@heftymagic4814
I did watched the video, he never mentioned perks in modern CoD's he made it seem like CoD always has worse hip-firing which makes ADS essential or something.
Also, i never made it seem like my argument is special, i just see the guy has never played a more recent CoD game. So his experience is based on up to CoD4.
@@GAMIR_SFM the argument would be the same regardless of which cod it is though
@@GAMIR_SFM Right? Which is dated... to say the least.
@@heftymagic4814 I hate the phrase “did you even watch the video” of course he fucking did it’s called having a different opinion. If somebody tells you to admonish someone because they didn’t initially agree with what they said then that says something about their ego.
ADS is not a bad mechanic, but it shouldn't become industry standard.
ADS, despite make the accuracy feels like auto aim, is not beneficial in close range where fast reaction time is needed nor prone position where large FOV is necessary and the differences between hipfiring and ADS become negligable. I've played some COD campaigns in hardest difficulty and this statement is confirmed.
The reason why it shouldn't become FPS standard is because it may ruin the pacing of those games. Valve for Left 4 Dead series did a good thing to not implemented ADS features because the player need to quickly react against melee attacks from zombies. It also make the player easier to dodge attacks. Back 4 Blood, while has similar gameplay as L4D series, has gameflow that feels janky due to ADS feature.
18:25
In COD (except BO1) snipers beat smgs at close range...
Left 4 Dead replaced ADS with crouching, which works better in that game. Horde shooters should always have you choose between standing your ground or moving, otherwise you get a dull kite-fest full of dodge-rolls.
I get your point about L4d, but L4D did have ADS feature via snipers. Though it's only one category of weapon not a lot of people use
Sounds like the balance would be Apex
Forgot the to mention the number 1 reason that ads should never be implemented into a multiplayer game, the removal of peekers advantage which forcibly slows down gameplay encourages camping.
I have to disagree with Titanfall. Your view comes from a new player perspective, which is ironic considering how you slam ads for being a new player crutch.
While Titanfall has the legacy of cod mechanics and it could’ve been better with ads removed entirely, many of the weapons work extremely accurately and well in hip-fire. All the smgs have 100% accuracy on hipfire and assault rifles are fairly accurate too. Plus your cloak allows you to avoid enemy fire and reposition, keeping that sense of movement instead of being stuck. Titanfall gives you so many more tools compared to cod, and it is unfair to slam the game for being slow when you aren’t utilizing the resources given to you and playing it like cod but fast.
There was saying me and my friends used to say whenever we killed a dude ADSing or running in a straight line down the map, or being insanely easy to kill because he is constantly losing track of his surroundings and becoming slow from ADSing.
'That dude was playing Call Of Duty'.
@@jaek__ So wouldn't you say it doesn't fit the game?
@@godlyvex5543 No, it does, it can be used in tandem with the movement without hindering your performance, it's implemented, in my mind, perfectly.
It has its place, can be used and mastered in its own right, while also allowing hip-fire to be consistently reliable as well, good Kraber players fly around the map while still sniping people.
What I was getting at was, bad players make use of good mechanics in poor ways doesn't make the way said mechanic was implemented inherently bad, not infallible, but not so terrible it shouldn't be in the game.
also like he completely slams cod without critically analyzing it? like sure it’s not as mechanically deep as a game like titanfall 2 but it’s clear to anyone with an open mind that ads is a very deliberate design choice to balance weapons, playstyles, and skill gaps. not every game can be quake 3 lol
@@smokey4433 Ain't no way I found another gezebelle garburgably fan I was just listening to Richard Mcbeef and squander
He failed to talk about the aspect character realism, which then results in the feeling of being a badass. I understand that master chief should be able to jump twenty feet in the air shoot two mags with 99 percent accuracy before hitting the ground, but if I saw captain price do this then I would laugh my ass off. If we were to give call of duty quake physics then the players suspension of disbelief would fall apart and the game would no longer make you feel cool or be as much fun. I know that's not what the video was advocating for, but it is important to realize that there is a spectrum to every first person shooter in terms of their realism and arcade feeling. Doom and Quake being on the arcade side, and Squad and Ready or Not being on the tactical realism side. Call of Duty, in my opinion, falls directly in the middle of this spectrum. This means that it keeps some of its Arcady roots, as well as grounding it in the real world with things like "normal" gravity and ADS. All of these games make you feel like a badass in different ways, and the immersion and gameplay are very important to that. If we were to make Call of Duty into a full on arcade shooter or a full on simulation then the tone and feeling the game attempts to evoke would have to be reworked in order for the player to get the same amount of enjoyment. Captain Price, Master Chief, the Police in Ready or Not, etc. are all are badass character that then make the player feel badass, but that does not mean that they should be interchangeable amongst their respective genres. Overall the Character the player is playing is just as important as the gameplay itself.
"a game is designed to be fun and compelling, and developers ought to add a feature to their game if it unanimously improves the experience, no matter how unrealistic." I fundamentally disagree with this statement because, to me, adding something to a game that would improve the fun of it sounds good, but if call of duty were to lean more into their arcade roots (presumably making the game more fun for an audience), then it would no longer be as fun, as a function of decreasing realism, which no longer sits well with the feeling they are trying to evoke. I'll say it again, captain price is cool because he is risking death for a noble cause. He is put up against unimaginable odds, and he succeeds no matter what. The only way the conflict in his story feels at all real is if it is grounded in realism. Quake physics in call of duty would call for an entire rewrite of the franchise, changing the stakes and characters. This is more of the same with master chief, except the comparative odds are up to par with master chiefs capability. He is not fighting in a battle, he is the battle, he is a one man army. If halo were to become a mil-sim, like Tarkov, then I would play the shit out of that, but it would also call for a rewrite and a reworking of the characters. This would change the feeling the player gets when the play as they once were an unstoppable force, but are now a mere, and vulnerable soldier in the heat of battle. These changes do not have to be bad changes, think Halo ODST, but they do change the tone, and may alienate some players as they are not getting what they are looking for in their game. Overall ADS is integral to the tone and feeling of the game, which is just as important as the actual amount of fun the player has while playing it. If a games tone and setting is not captivating to a player, but the gameplay is really fun, then the player will stop coming back after a while, when they have done all they do in the game. Setting and tone are often overlooked aspect of story telling and game design, but are important nonetheless. You cant please everyone, so it is important to have variety.
Thanks for reading my structureless word vomit!
Hey man you don't need to be sorry for the long-ish comment that you posted. In fact I think you made a valid point when you're making this comment. I also think that ads would be a necessary mechanic for some video games, like tarkov, cod, rainbow 6 sige, and more. I can't Imagine a call of duty game without ads at all, it would be just jarring to see a game that established a feature that is so expected in franchise that is there for so long. But then again it depends on the game that needed either ads or none at all, just like you said.
You did not watch the video before making this comment.
@@GegoXaren 1v1 MW2 rust snipers only you have 1 hour
@@Rotnoc473
Deathmatch Classic, or Half Life 2 Death Match... But not now, It's well past midnight.
Perhaps Xonotic or Warsow would be Better?
I feel like a “badass” in games when my gameplay is godlike and skilled not when I zoom in. Ultimately it lowers the skill ceiling and that’s never a good thing as far as I am concerned.
Pretty sure it’s not about immersion it’s about giving you a pinpoint place to show you where your bullets are going… hipfiring usually means uncertainty and was one of the complaints about the original doom. It’s hard to know if you’re gonna hit something if you can only vaguely aim in their direction and fire, hoping to hit
Tell me you never played Doom, without telling me you never played Doom, the gun is in the center of the screen, like in Wolfenstein and Quake, line up the gun and that's it, the game has a generous vertical autoaim (because moving the camera up or down distorts the image, like in Heretic, Hexen and Strife) and a slight horizontal autoaim
Eh... I dunno if i would agree with that.
The guns are centered, precise and they don't really spread for anything other than the auto-aiming correcting your shots. You might get a feel that there is no way to tell where your bullets are going, but that has more to do with the information output through the animations not being on modern levels
I have a dot in sharpie marker on my monitor for this reason.
CS:GO
its easy to do no ads well
You don't need ADS, to get a pinpoint place to show where your bullets are going that's what the static reticle is for. You've never played the original Doom.
A game that does a lot of things right is borderlands, in the pre sequel I believe there was a vault hunter who had an ability to shoot while sprinting, and plenty of class mod perks that boosted movement speed while using certain weapons
Borderlands weapons in general have the luxury of not caring in the slightest about how weapons work irl (and that's a good thing)
ADS-ing with Dahl guns literally switches the firing mode, which is absurd, yet it's a genius iteration of a common mechanic
In modern cod games, there are different "movement techs" for gaining an advantage in a gunfight. there are also other modern shooters that have implemented movement techs to gain an advantage, R6, Apex, and even Destiny being some examples. They all have movement mechanics that are integral to winning gunfights while you also had to aim down sights. having to be accurate and the game sense to know when to ads so you don't get assfucked is not a poor mechanic IMO.
Also, the Destiny 2 perks you picked to prove your point seem to be pretty weak.
hipfiregrip is almost never used outside of shotguns without full choke, it's a pretty bad perk and an uncommon one as its benefits don't really make gunfights easier and usually harder with minimal benefits for most guns, weird to use it as some sorta omission that the older style of gameplay is an upgrade since its really not in D2.
Moving target you put in the video because one of its benefits is your ads and strafe faster, which sure I'm sure its -3% ads penalty is beneficial, but that objectively isn't why most D2 players pick it, you glossed over its +10 aim assist perk which is going to win you more gunfights by a significant margin. which is also a weird thing to use.
And he fails to mention Icarus grip which makes you more accurate in air including hipfire. Plus destiny is a really movement heavy game sliding, jumps, abilities. Ads doesn't take away from that because you can do it while in air and sliding which are some of the most important things in pvp. Additionally hipfire is commonly used with smgs hand cannons and shorty's in situations.
@@sugxi I agree Icarus grip is a great counter to his point, and hipfiring with hand cannons are only common in point-blank ranges but you're right smgs and shottys are hipfire for a good amount of engagements.
@@alsonsulos8547 I see cammycakes hipfiring hand cannons a bit especially when he's abusing hunter verticality but I don't know the reasoning behind it or if other people do it cause I don't really keep up with the game anymore.
It's just that hipfire is too weak nowadays, ads should stay as it is
Did you watch the video?
@@FF-kc7fc I did and I agree. hipfire should be weak since it doesn't change movement and it's fast. This adds to games and make them less boring instead of a click pew pew with nothing else.
@Arthur Brown yeah I agree, adding ads to a game that doesn't have it can be bad since it changes it, but I don't believe that the trend of putting it in new games is bad.
You absolutely did not watch the bloody video.
@@GegoXaren ok and?
Its hilarious watching blind playthroughs of the old Halo games by CoD kids and the first thing they say is "how do I aim?"
You already are aiming, son.
When anyone says that all I can think is "where the barrel is pointing"
some weapons can aim
I’m 16 and okay half life 1 and still try to aim my pistol and assault rifle 💀💀💀
That's pretty much why I didn't like halo as a kid I began with cod first
Every kid has used a stick as a gun and part of the imagination is scoping in cuz thats what real guns require. Ill be damned if they dont let me use it in a video game. But solid points in this video.
While I do appreciate your breakdown of ADS and old school shooters there are some holes in your theories.
1. Not all ADS games slow you down or complicate gunplay/movement. Titan Fall for instance had the same walk (jogging) speed as the ADS movement when firing. And that was a huge success.
2. ADS in most games actually has less aim assist than games like Halo. The ADS "snap on" is only toward the target for a brief moment. The control of the weapon and recoil is then solely on the player. Games such as Halo, that snap, is and can be, immediate for a kill. Look at Halo Infinite's multiplayer with PC vs Console. It's way too broken because that aim assist is so heavy.
3. Having to multitask in a game whether campaign or PvP, is essential to gaming. Even as simple as moving and shooting. You mentioned how it's "too much" for the player. How? Unless you have MS, one arm, or are old as hell and never played a game in your life, the only people that would have difficulty with what you mention aside from what I listed would be... well... you suck at modern games. I'll tell you right off the bat, I am good at ADS modern FPS games, but I'm decent at best at Halo. Why? Because I feel that not being able to ADS is a step BACKWARDS in the evolution of gaming. In today's age of shooters, it's archaic at this point.
4. Having a "simplified" static shooter is not fun. We had nearly a decade of these types of shooters and we evolved our games to be more precise with our shooting. Being more deliberate with our shots. Also have recoil truly be felt while we shoot. I loved Counter Strike Source, however, not having the weapon truly feel the recoil led to this weird pull down method while the rounds were sporadically shoot around everywhere.
"having a simplified static shooters isn't fun" you have definitely never played tf2 or much of quake
@@literallyvergil1686 I've played them. And I've had fun doing so. My point being, that those game styles of FPS's are old at this point. They've had 10 years of the same old "static shooter" platform. The new and still evolving play style is ADS.
@@silvershadow001 old doesn't mean bad or stale, tf2 is still played after over 14 years csgo is still player after a decade, and so is quake, can't say the same about any of the "new and improved games" that die within a few years, this doesn't mean ads is good or should be forced down games when it doesn't make them better, doom eternal proved that
@@literallyvergil1686 doom eternal made guns feel like plastic
I wouldn't say that MMS with ADS mechanics are any worse or better than older ones without that feature. They are different games that use different mechanics to focus on different gameplay. If we take stuff like the railgun in Quake or the sniper rifle in UT, those are perfectly accurate without scoping and landing those headshots feels incredibly satisfying.
And modern games rarely have accurate recoil, most just add randomized spread.
I would say we have more than a decade of the generic modern military shooter that haven't evolved much since 2007
Oh, and I don't even enjoy Halo. Something just feels off and clunky.
The only reason those people know the campaign maps like the back of their hand and can fly away in a million directions without looking is because they have played them a million times. You cannot just ignore the most popular maps in fps history just because they are multi-player maps that get played a lot. The very fact that they get played a lot and are some of the most memorable maps every is because the ADS game that you hate is so good at what it does.
Bro i can hand draw you couple of doom eternal arenas from my memory and i played it once 6 month ago. I can not draw you any cod world at war map and i replay it every 3 month.
Arena shooters are superior to arcade shooters in terms of making you relay on quick decidions, tacktical shooters good at making you ralay on long term planning, cod is game for casuals, you cant argue with that.
Bro you need better titles for your vids, "Why aim down sights are bad for mobility shooters"
But the clicks XD
when you spoke about map knowledge in the video I think that's truly where you lost me, especially the part where you discounted frequently played maps in games like call of duty. you used quake players as an example, saying they have a "6th sense" for being able to move around the map without looking, but the reason they able to play like that is because they've played on that map a million times before. drop one of those players into a map they've never seen before and they won't be able to play as good for the first few games because they don't know the map yet, the same is true for every shooter ever made. ads isn't bad for map knowledge, and you don't always have to move in the direction you're looking in games with ads, not doing that is better for you anyway since you can sort of provide covering fire for yourself at the cost of slightly slower movement speed.
Legit. He acted like people don't learn maps
Tell me you've never played something like Battlefield without telling me you've never played Battlefield.
A submachine gun and an assault rifle could have identical ROF and damage profiles and yet they have unique roles thanks to the hipfire/ADS system. SMGs tend to be more accurate when fired from the hip. Plus, it's HARD to aim down the sights at someone who is sprinting 5 feet in front of you. An assault rifle is more accurate down the sights and allows for precise aim at longer ranges when targets are deviating just a few pixels and not half your entire screen.
There was a place for both. Hell, even on the same weapon, there are times when you would rather hipfire than ADS and vice versa. A long range x8 scope is useless when your target is 5 meters away in the same room, just as hipfire is useless when the target is 50 meters away.
exactly, I do that in non-PvP games like fallout new vegas where I will sometimes use my AMR as a "shotgun" because they got closer than I was expecting in a timeframe where I couldn't swap weapons efficiently enough to pull out my closer range gun. My complaints with CoD's guns are that for some reason a SMG like the Grease Gun, a historically horrible gun at any range farther than 10ft, is somehow more accurate at the same range when fired from the hip than something like the STG-44 when aiming down the sight, there is no consistency between weapons of of the same types always leading to horrible balance and less player expression through gear and more about who can get better with whatever gun is good in the current meta. this coming from someone who has never really cared about the meta in shooters as I just like to snipe and have a solid full-auto rifle as a back up for the ranges where a sniper wouldn't be that good
Making use of bad game design, doesn't make the bad game design not bad.
Tell me you've never played something like Battlefield without telling me you've never played Battlefield.
That's a game where encounters can 5 meters in one second and 500 meters away in the next second. Choosing hipfire or ADS is part of the tactical layer of gameplay. Choosing weapons that excel in hipfire or ADS is part of the strategic layer of gameplay. If you prefer hipfire or ADS, positioning yourself to make use of your playstyle is also part of the strategic layer of gamplay.
The last one I played was BF4 so I'll use that as an example. It wasn't like CoD or CSGO. You could *not* use sniper rifles in close range. When I played Recon, I used fully automatic pistols explicitly to deal with opponents at close range. When I played SMG assault, I used powerful revolvers as my sidearm for high-damage precision shots that my bullet hose primary weapon wouldn't be good at. In games with limited mobility where you can't just zoom into knife-fighting range, this is crucial.
The biggest difference isn't even tethered to the guns' mechanical stats like damage or accuracy. It's SENSITIVITY. Imagine playing DOOM and using the same sensitivity to hit close up targets that you would use to hit targets 500 meters away.
@@Wylie288 Oh so Red Orchestra is badly designed? What about STALKER? Or literally any game without a crosshair.
SMGs having better hipfire is actually pretty standard. Hipfire for use at close range with a highly mobile target is also fairly normal. SMGs probably shouldn't have similar damage output to ARs though considering they're firing tiny pistol bullets while ARs are firing larger rounds with more propellant. Just make them handle better in general if you don't want to go full arcade.
for sure depends on what type of FPS imo, as i play tactical/mil-sims like arma, squad etc ADS is required. i agree with some points in this vid though, good video
Whenever someone mentions speed in an FPS, my mind goes straight to Tribes: Ascend. To this day it has the fastest movement and gameplay I've experienced in the genre.
Is that game still alive? I mean I'd like to return some day to score my celebratory 10th ever hit on a living player.
Tribes 1 and 2 and Fallen empire legions were even faster.
ITs also fucking dead. All the good FPS are dead, all the unoriginal trash for console trash are alive.
@@TennoSkoom some people occasionally play it, but you'd have to go on forums to find dedicated groups, cause you won't be finding a match on steam (even though it's still downloadable, and the servers are still up, hilariously).
i checked a couple weeks ago lol.
sadly in the past year or so, it's dropped almost entirely. last year this month, it had 30 or so players of steam regularly, couple weeks ago it says 0.
they killed the legacy of tribes for a forgettable game. smite
I still love playing Quake 3 Arena. The speed of that game blows my mind. Picking off other players with unscoped pixel-perfect railgun shots while flying at 300mph off a bouncepad is incredible.
I think one problem is that immersion and gameplay focus are not necessarily opposites. A game can strive to do both somewhat well. I think that's where Call of Duty falls in this; it aims to make you feel like a real soldier, but the gameplay is that of quick action. That's why the ADS feature doesn't seem to fit the gameplay too well, it's mostly there for the immersion and not so much for the actual gameplay. That said, I do prefer the gameplay of older games like Unreal without ADS, but I think both types of gameplay have their place.
that's also why in cod, basically everyone doesn't use sights, and uses all the attachments that make you move faster while aiming, to mitigate it's effects, but keep the accuracy boost.
cod is an arcade shooter, but the makers of it don't seem to realise that, and keep trying to make it more "realistic", and it's suffering for it. it's meant to be the fun, casual shooter, not the competetive, wonky one.
that's why this video doesn't make sense to me. I think his definition of player empowerment is too heavy on the speed aspect. For me I feel most satisfied when i slowly clear a building without taking any injuries. when i play i go slow, and i like realism which is why i like ads. i guess i must be more of an arma iii/tarkov/insurgency guy
I fully disagree. You say that shooters separating movement and shooting simplifies things, yet I think it's the opposite. Requiring the player to choose between mobility and accuracy at any given moment puts weight on them to make the right decision at the right time, rather than just having both for free. In Call of Duty, it puts emphasis on deciding whether you want accuracy for landing shots on the enemy, or movement speed to get out of the way, and the right and wrong decisions are what can often determine your death. Also you mentioned that modern shooters have unmemorable level design, aside from the multiplayer maps you've played thousands of times, but then immediately bring up watching people play on multiplayer maps in older shooters, often professionally. Professional Quake players need to not only know the map layout to a T, they need to be able to memorize the exact timers for every pickup to move on rotation.
Overall I don't have a problem with ADS in video games, and I think it's a really subjective opinion due to what kind of games use it. Some games don't bother with it because they put more emphasis on other difficult aspects, while others use the decision between movement and accuracy as a choice for players to make competently.
Agreed, like.. a game like The last of us I would understand not having ADS but COD, Titan Fall or Destiny? That has me scratching my head...
I feel as if the argument is flawed and unrealistic in a sense that is only in perspective of a "new player"
All I can say is just.. "get good" thats it.
Like.. imagine trying to play SQUAD without ADS... it doesnt make any sense
Ive been playing FPS games aince 2004 and still have never seen, had or even thought ADS was an issue. Its a benefit more than anything else
Even then, Apex exists. Beaming people while sliding down a mountain is fun
@@latenightthinker4737 it is
So you're saying that having to choose between moving and shooting is more complicated than... having to handle both moving and shooting at the same time? Isn't cutting down on the amount of stuff you have to do at once the definition of simplifying?
It starts with one thing
I don't know why
It doesn't even matter how hard you try
Keep that in mind
I designed this rhyme
To explain in due time
All I know
Time is a valuable thing
Watch it fly by as the pendulum swings
Watch it count down to the end of the day
The clock ticks life away
It's so unreal
Didn't look out below
Watch the time go right out the window
Trying to hold on, didn't even know
I wasted it all just to watch you go
I kept everything inside
And even though I tried, it all fell apart
What it meant to me
Will eventually be a memory of a time when
I tried so hard
And got so far
But in the end
It doesn't even matter
I had to fall
To lose it all
But in the end
It doesn't even matter
One thing, I don't know why
It doesn't even matter how hard you try
Keep that in mind
I designed this rhyme
To remind myself how
I tried so hard
In spite of the way you were mocking me
Acting like I was part of your property
Remembering all the times you fought with me
I'm surprised it got so
Things aren't the way they were before
You wouldn't even recognize me anymore
Not that you knew me back then
But it all comes back to me in the end
You kept everything inside
And even though I tried, it all fell apart
What it meant to me will eventually be a memory of a time when
I tried so hard
And got so far
But in the end
It doesn't even matter
I had to fall
To lose it all
But in the end
It doesn't even matter
I've put my trust in you
Pushed as far as I can go
For all this
There's only one thing you should know
I've put my trust in you
Pushed as far as I can go
For all this
There's only one thing you should know
I tried so hard
And got so far
But in the end
It doesn't even matter
I had to fall
To lose it all
But in the end
It doesn't even matter
Wtf man
@@hyen4rap r/wooosh
Good poetry
@@curiouskid1547 its a song
This video comes across as someone who's salty that games like Team Fortress or Counterstrike didn't become industry standard. Hipfire only games blatantly lack core gameplay elements to the degree that there's a reason why even in hipfire focused games they will always offer some kind of weapon with sights or a scope. It adds more player agency to decide whether they want to run and gun at the cost of accuracy, or to aim and sacrifice movement and overall awareness. If you were to truly apply the argument that the mechanic only has a place in games based on realism or mil-sim you'd kill multiple leading shooter franchises simply because ADS is that integral to a game feeling good. People get irritated when a game doesn't let them aim because the game is forcibly preventing that player from utilizing the full range of skill they have and instead are now effectively shooting with one hand behind their back.
I have to heavily disagree, hip fire isn't something done commonly during combat and as most FPS are military based it makes no sense that armed combatants wouldn't use the sights built into their rifles. Even in games where player empowerment is the main point of the game like Titanfall or Destiny Aim down sights in games is a risk/reward mechanic and is not about immersion, you slow yourself down and lower your field of vision so that in return you can fire more stable and accurate shots. This is honestly one of the worst gaming takes I've ever heard ADS has become such a staple in the industry and it's such a small mechanic that it's inclusion hasn't hurt any game it's been placed in.
Agreed
I don’t have time to write why this is a bad take, just know it is. 👍
@@ZZ-hb1ho I didn't have the energy to hear him out passed 3 minutes. Didn't want the history of fps bruh
You've literally never been in combat before. Please, shut up.
It actually hurt many games, including f.e.a.r 2, Serious Sam 3,back 4 blood and a few others, you have clearly never played anything outside of generic military shooters
In games like stalker, you don't have a cross hair normally, you go down sights to see where the bullet goes, and to lower your sensitivity
It works perfectly fine
I agree with the last argument, that devs shouldn’t include ADS just because it’s ubiquitous nowadays. But whenever it’s needed I think ADS just works as a trade off mechanic
If a game has guns and doesn’t have ads, I’m bothered. The ads is nice but in some games aiming down sights is a commitment. Like in siege and it’s other Clancy counterparts. Ads is a mechanic that was introduced to add realism and more engaging gameplay. Ads should always be there
@@Zuleva_Officialconsole player detected
idk I think making speed a trade off for accuracy isnt inherently bad. making speed have pros and cons instead of just moving your max speed all the time with no downsides adds to total potential complexity. of course, if it becomes so extreme that hipfire is useless then it does become a movement OR shooting scenario rather than movement AND shooting scenario.
It is a very good mechanic that is unanimously loved by a very big percentage of player base. People like acting cool and rebellious about some topics from time to time. This video is merely one such act of rebellion.
Coming from a gamer and a competition shooter, I'd say sights an under utilized (or rather unoptimized) feature for alot of games. Customization of sights are one of my favorite parts of a firearm. A good sight picture can mean the difference between a bullseye at 100 yards or a two foot miss. The same goes for games. Iron sights have disadvantages, especially when with the sun in your eyes. Red dots have advantages and disadvantages. Scopes have theirs. Besides a scope with a high optical zoom, I've yet to really encounter any disadvantages for other types of sights in games. These would make hip fire more relevant in different situations.
You're right. It'd be nice if there was an actual reason to choose irons over red dot or red dot over irons in video games. Be pretty easy to do too with just some small tweaks to the actual mechanic. Red dot could lose accuracy at longer range and have better snap on auto aim while irons actually take longer to line up and have better accuracy at range.
I'll be honest, I'm guilty of the aim-down-sights COD thing you mentioned, but I'm not a COD player, I just functionally usually take a backline slow and cautious approach to shooters.
I think the last COD I played was original MW2 and I didn't even play it much, I stuck to Fable 2 usually at that time
Unfortunately, I have to hard disagree on this. You lost me with the whole "I think it's fair to say, ADS isn't a tactical choice" in reference to how it fits into COD. That's... Pretty shortsighted, in my opinion. If you want to play semantics, fine, it's not a 'tactical' choice, coz COD isn't a tac-shooter. That said, I would consider it to be VERY MUCH a tactical choice. It fits in with sprint there, as well. There are trade-offs with both mechanics, which means you MUST choose when to use them and how. Not something to be so easily discounted.
Now about that COD and Doom comparison... "In Call Of Duty, you only have to worry about navigating the map quickly in the direction you're facing, aiming, or regular movement, at any given time. In a game like Doom, you have to be concerned with aiming and movement, in any direction, in every gun battle, all simultaneously." That summation of COD gameplay - especially in Multiplayer - is so painfully basic it kind of hurts. In fact, it kind of sounds like a Doom player's view of COD through a heavily biased lens. I sincerely hope you omitted situational awareness, map knowledge of vantage points and sight lines and weapon effectiveness in any given situation by accident. I don't think you did though, purely because a few seconds later you bring up map knowledge and cover, but regarding something like Doom. I can't be the only one who finds that a bit disingenuous considering that's something that's also fairly key to playing pretty much any shooter...
One last point. You talk about the vague concept of Player Empowerment, and how that plays into expression of skill, and that ADS is disempowering. Me, as a player who enjoys games that have ADS (like CoD and Destiny 2) as well as games that don't (like Halo and Mechwarrior 5) find that 'feeling of being powerful' differs from game to game. Let me use COD MW3's SpecOps mode for my COD example here. With that, I feel powerful when I quickly and efficiently clear a room. Flashbang, move in, careful, efficiently placed shots with my M4 to each stunned foe. When the stun wears off, I find cover. Assess. Adapt. React. I'm a calculated, efficient killing machine. In D2, that feeling of power comes from blowing stuff up or using my Super to be a badass for a time. In Mechwarrior 5, that sense of power comes dominating a mission through commanding my lance while piloting a walking tank while navigating terrain while fighting other walking tanks. Player Empowerment is vague because at the end of the day it's subjective and it's expression will differ from game to game.
Obviously this is an opinion piece, so a lot of personal biases are kind of expected here... I do think that in this case, they worked against your points. It was a good watch, overall. Good job!
Glad I'm not the only one that noticed this guy gave COD the shaft with this, it looks like he's never even been in a Ranked lobby before making a video saying that there's no skill involved. Sounds like one of those morons saying Ferg, Shroud and Ninja are all shitty noobs just because they don't kill every player there with melee weapons. Seriously, he should have talked to someone who has played the fucking game for more than 20 minutes before he determined that it's a game with no skill whatsoever.
developer of repuls io here, was disappointed when I clicked on your channel and saw you didnt have video breaking things down as you did this comment ^ ^ Either way, good read.
ADS has been something my community has been begging me to implement, I'm still torn on it so digging for data.. this was a good read.
@@docskiDev Glad you liked it!
Also yeah, I have been told that I should do breakdowns and such, that I'd be good at it, etc. Truthfully, as much as I have considered it, enjoying the breakdown is one thing, but putting it to a video is another. I've only got one open project of that nature that I genuinely want to finish, everything else is just a big 'maybe'.
@@HazopGaze Ah, I understand that - especially if you have other things on your plate. Though, maybe all it needs is some footage and some yapping - we tend to overthink things sometimes.
Either way, I subbed, for whenever/ifever you do decide ^ ^ Breakdowns are good because often as developers, we can lose sight of whats important.
The reasoning in the video isn't well-constructed, but the hypothesis is correct: ADS is a functionally-limiting mechanic that truncates gameplay. It's a bad mechanic. The purpose of any mechanic is to create interplay opportunities. Interplay is the functional unit of gameplay, and the most critical feature of a deep, high-functioning video game. In other words, interplay is the key ingredient of good gameplay.
What novel interplay does ADS create that isn't present in games without an ADS mechanic? Nothing is actually gained by ADS, it's just an arbitrary input that must be made to effectively do the exact same thing you would otherwise do without it. It's a non-choice, the illusion of making a meaningful decision.
A mechanic like ADS is symptomatic of bad game design; its implementation is a band-aid to shallow, dynamically-compressing shooting mechanics that attempts to squeeze nuance from a system that is functionally limited. This is true even a "good" implementation of ADS, where it has its own drawbacks that must be weighed against its advantages when deciding whether or not to use it.
Reducing FOV and mobility are really the only functional compromises that make logical sense given the form of the mechanic without it being useless or rendering hipfiring (and by extension, ADS itself) completely redundant. Reducing FOV works well enough to reduce the player's access to visual information, but if reducing mobility for the sake of accuracy is a viable option in a game where spacial dynamics play a large role (like with shooters), then something is fundamentally wrong with your game design and the dynamics of space and movement are being under-utilized. Rather than using space and mobility to avoid projectiles, you need to use a physical obstruction. Gameplay typically degenerates into hiding behind cover waiting for your opportunity to shoot back, or running away. The former introduces negative space in place of engaging interplay, and the latter avoids gameplay altogether. In instances where both you and the enemy are caught in the open, then it usually comes down to who shoots first unless there's a wide disparity in the players' ability to aim. This can be mitigated with longer TTK, but most games with ADS also have short TTK because a lengthy gunfight with your mobility compromised while aiming down the sight disrupts the game's pacing when there isn't interplay or spacial dynamics to create emergent states.
The most likely outcome of this design approach is a lack of depth and dynamic influence. A recycling of interplay and interactive context that gives the impression of doing the same thing in the same way with the same set of circumstances over and over. This is what prevents games like CoD, Battlefield, etc. from developing the same level of emergence and expression as games like Halo or Doom and make them seem so repetitive and "suffocated" by comparison, because they simply lack the depth and are too dynamically compressed to create a wide array of novel emergent states.
Not only that, but ADS also occupies an input that could otherwise be used for a function that actually _does_ contribute something positive to gameplay.
Man has never seen an action movie
12:30 "you mostly just fight guys."
The plasma drone he's currently shooting: "are you sure about that?"
"mostly"
Imagine R6 but 100% hip accuracy and no ADS, it wouldn't be the same game at all
I think that this would have been good to include in your Halo SAVED FPS video, where console friendly mechanics like ADS and sprint trickled down and plagued the entire industry, however Halo never had them from the start and they then they added the mechanics in later Halo games to keep up with industry trends.
Now that everything has settled, I think I'll just answer the question if ADS is a bad mechanic.
Is ADS a bad mechanic?: Completely not, I really think it's about what kind of game you're going for and/or how it's implemented. Going for a fast-paced, arcade type game like Ultra-kill, Doom, or Quake? Then having no ADS is fine but if ADS is implemented correctly, it will still be fine. Going for a tactical, realistic, shooter? Add in ADS. However, there are games like Team Fortress Two which is EXTREMELY successful without the use of ADS. Why is that? It's because the devs just implemented it well.
So there's really nothing wrong about ADS or no ADS.
One thing Errant Signal recently brought up is that ironsight mechanics seem to be directly descended from the aim mode toggle in Goldeneye - but the thing is that in Goldeneye such a thing was necessary because the controller didn't have a second analog stick.
It's a mechanic that mainly makes sense in the context of a game that started development as an on-rails shooter and still plays largely like an expanded Virtua Cop, and with the N64 controller in mind.
golden eye does have dual analog support with two controller plugged in
like a og wii mote or og joycons lol
In the way ADS works for that, sure, but not all ADS’s work in that same respect
Next video: "Why reloading and shooting is a bad mechanic"
The Wolfenstein games by Machinegames feel really empowering. You can ADS with every weapon, but on most cases it's better to just dual wield and run and gun everyone. Movement is a very important aspect of these games, and on most cases it's better to sacrifice precision for speed.