This game needs a selector switch.

[imported_Whiskey]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

If you wanted versatility then you would use a different gun.

That's not versatility.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/versatile

–adjective
1. capable of or adapted for turning easily from one to another of various tasks, fields of endeavor, etc.: a versatile writer.
2. having or capable of many uses: a versatile tool.

..

By having a switch, a weapon becomes more versatile - it can be used in more situations (single shot, or burst, or auto).

So, on the one hand, this would cause some people to not switch between different weapons as much...instead using a single fav weapon for more situations/jobs.

On the other hand, it could encourage people to use other weapons more, that they didn't like because of the firing characteristics (eg. M16 or G3).

..

This is a classic example of the pros and cons of design decisions, and why game makers often struggle to make a choice in what features their games will have. There's no "right" answer...either way will have certain consequences to gameplay.

[Kylee!]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

That's not versatility.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/versatile

–adjective
1. capable of or adapted for turning easily from one to another of various tasks, fields of endeavor, etc.: a versatile writer.
2. having or capable of many uses: a versatile tool.

..

By having a switch, a weapon becomes more versatile - it can be used in more situations (single shot, or burst, or auto).

So, on the one hand, this would cause some people to not switch between different weapons as much...instead using a single fav weapon for more situations/jobs.

On the other hand, it could encourage people to use other weapons more, that they didn't like because of the firing characteristics (eg. M16 or G3).

..

This is a classic example of the pros and cons of design decisions, and why game makers often struggle to make a choice in what features their games will have. There's no "right" answer...either way will have certain consequences to gameplay.

:hmm: I didn't mean it in that exact context... In the same way what you want is versatility - so you get it by switching guns. Switching/choosing another weapon is that versatility. Doesn't match the exact definition - but I took some literary license haha.

I see more balance in this because of the fact that adding 2-3 other variables to a guns characteristics will just make the game (with so many other variables) even harder to balance and shape into a fine, polished MP game.

[Wizrdwarts]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

2-3 variables? It's just one. Single shot mode doesn't make your gun any more accurate, it just makes it easier to fire off a single shot.

The only one where it would actually be a major change would be the M16 or other burst weapons, since they currently force you to make 3 shots.

[Kodakk]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

2-3 variables? It's just one. Single shot mode doesn't make your gun any more accurate, it just makes it easier to fire off a single shot.

The only one where it would actually be a major change would be the M16 or other burst weapons, since they currently force you to make 3 shots.

If all you want is single shot, there's no need to even implement anything for that - play the game for an hour (if not less) and you can fire any automatic in single shot. The point that I'm arguing against is adding the selector switch to make semi-automatic weapons function as either a burst or fully automatic rifle, which would completely throw off the balance.

In general, if you want an automatic, the game should be designed to direct your toward an automatic rifle - which then also increases recoil and such. If you want more accuracy for long range, then you should be directed to a different gun for that job, and therefore sacrifice your ability to engage in close quarters. If you could use one gun for everything there would be absolutely no variety and balance.

[Wizrdwarts]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

If all you want is single shot, there's no need to even implement anything for that - play the game for an hour (if not less) and you can fire any automatic in single shot. The point that I'm arguing against is adding the selector switch to make semi-automatic weapons function as either a burst or fully automatic rifle, which would completely throw off the balance.

If you added a selector switch and made everything automatic. Not if you just add a selector switch. G3 and M14 could remain semi auto for the sake of balance, even though it might not be realistic. And why don't they just reduce the max ROF of the semiauto rifles and pistols to stop mousewheeling? That always confused me.

In general, if you want an automatic, the game should be designed to direct your toward an automatic rifle - which then also increases recoil and such. If you want more accuracy for long range, then you should be directed to a different gun for that job, and therefore sacrifice your ability to engage in close quarters. If you could use one gun for everything there would be absolutely no variety and balance.

Again, weapon attributes would remain the same. You could try and single shot a SMG at long ranges, but obviously it wouldn't work as well as an assault rifle.

[Kodakk]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

I'm not comparing between SMG/Assault, but rather between the variety of rifles of a particular class - namely the assault rifles. If there was an AK that had single shot, I can guarantee that you would see more of them than you do already. Also, why do people choose the M4 over the M16 or vice versa - because of their differences. Yes, as you said, weapon attributes would remain the same, but if the fire rates were changed it would change the purpose that the rifle serves.

The debate can't be won by either side, as there are valid points on both ends of the spectrum. I personally just feel that the added ability to toggle fire rates would remove the need for a variety of weapons.

[Wizrdwarts]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

I dunno, maybe I'm just thinking too much in a 'Battlefield' way. I haven't played CoD4 in a while. maybe I should actually buy it instead of leeching off my friends. :p

[CptainCrunch]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

Defekt is right.

Sometimes the truth is tough.


:wee:

Crunch

[Kreepy Kitteh =^o.O^=]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

lol I can just imagine some poor bastard trying to sit there and pick someone off with an AK using single shot fire mode xD This games too fast paced for any of that nonsense. If the maps were bigger and there was more room between us then sure it would work but there isn't so having single shot mode on an AK, M4, G63 etc is just pointless and going to get you killed.

As for having fully auto mode on other weapons like the G3, well there is a reason they made the G3 single shot in the first place.

I don't know what you guys are arguing about, wouldn't work.. (unless we get bigger maps)

[Stev0esque]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

lol I can just imagine some poor bastard trying to sit there and pick someone off with an AK using single shot fire mode xD This games too fast paced for any of that nonsense. If the maps were bigger and there was more room between us then sure it would work but there isn't so having single shot mode on an AK, M4, G63 etc is just pointless and going to get you killed.

As for having fully auto mode on other weapons like the G3, well there is a reason they made the G3 single shot in the first place.

I don't know what you guys are arguing about, wouldn't work.. (unless we get bigger maps)

Agreed (lol, ive done in this thread is agree with people)

[Micster]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

I agree with the uniqueness of weapon side of the discussion. :p

You know, I've always thought that the M16 was stuck with the 3 burst to teach newbies how to shoot that way with other weapons, so we don't end up with spraymatics all over the place.

[imported_Recon]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

Having a selector switch to change the rate of fire, is like having another gun though is it not?
Take CoD4 for example, you saw people using Overkill as their perk and taking say, a Sniper Rifle and an SMG so they could do CQC and also long range. Would having the selector switch be just like that?
In my opinion the switch isn't a bad idea, except due to it being like having another weapon I think it should be a Perk AND count as the weapon's Attachment.
So you would pick you M16 and for Perk 'N' you take 'Selector Switch' and this eliminates a choice of Attachment and that Perk.

[Wizrdwarts]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

But it wouldn't that big of a 'problem' if:

If there was an AK that had single shot, I can guarantee that you would see more of them than you do already

If all you want is single shot, there's no need to even implement anything for that - play the game for an hour (if not less) and you can fire any automatic in single shot.

But I doubt single shot be useful for any of the current CoD4 maps anyways.

[imported_Recon]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

Yeah, if you aren't capable of firing an automatic, single-shot, then I think you'd be best just giving up altogether..

[CaptainKirk]

Re: This game needs a selector switch.

We got into a mild discussion about this thread during the podcast... so... to prove Stu wrong, I've added a poll.

Please vote.