You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
TC can believe what he wants. People that try quickscoping know that it's no where near as 'simple' as TC claims. One example: Spray and pray- every gun can do it well except for snipers, the only ones that have a chance of doing so are the semi autos.
A beast of the night... I am DARKSTAR! You may shake in terror now.
What? All I got from the video was the guy playing said it was more difficult to quickscope with Aim Assist off.
But to break this whole thing down:
1) from what I remember, TC says (or someone else says), that quick scoping is 'all aim assist'.
2) you post that link to a video to somehow prove him wrong.
3) quickscoper from video says, even though it is doable, it is more difficult, and somehow blames his not winning at FFA down to aim assist being off. With the words "I don't often lose FFA" (referring to his past games where aim assist is on) and "since taking aim assist off, I was getting close to winning", oh and let us not forget "I stopped playing after half an hour because I didn't like losing and I didn't like the fact I wasn't good at sniping (compared to when aim assist was on)".
So what have we here? A quickscoper of whatever worth, tries quickscoping without aim assist, shows it is possible without aim assist, but says it's more difficult without aim assist.
So, though it isn't 'all aim assist', and though it does require 'some skill', according to your video, aim assist does do something in a quickscoper's favour?
Is that right?
Edit: Because of said video, can we put an end to the reflex argument that aim assist isn't a factor now?
^The point is that quickscoping is clearly not all aim assist since its still entirely possible with it disabled. However, just like with every other gun in the game, scoring hits is easier with aim assist on. That's just how consoles work.