This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

How do you feel about aim assist in PC FPS?

#61Shin_GallonPosted 3/3/2014 2:03:46 PM
Sir_Meowcat_Esq posted...
The pinpoint accuracy and quickness of a mouse is PC's aim assist... even more "cheaty" than an auto aim in it's own way. .


Stopped reading right there.
---
Friends don't let friends watch dubbed anime.
#62Critcal50Posted 3/3/2014 2:15:34 PM
One thing I really look forward to in the switch I'm making to PC from PS3 is that I won't have to put up with auto aim scrubs anymore. If someone is really that bad then sure give them auto aim. But once they get past a certain rank, like maybe 10% or around to max rank (For example, max rank is 80 so once they reach level 8. I'm bad with wording things.) auto aim is restricted for them. I have seen videos of some people destroying competition with free aim and using a controller. Games just feel TOO easy with aim assist. It destroys the whole point of a competitve game. I don't feel like going on hardcore matchmaking just to get away from aim assist. When I get a kill with free aim, it feels satisfying. When I get a kill using auto aim...it feels so boring. A competitive game isn't really "competitive" if you have one side trying to use skill, and one side using a handicap. I will probably get my *** handed to me when I start playing on PC..but you know what? I won't care, because I was killed because the other player actually got me, not because they had me slightly in their reticle and they simply pressed the aim button and their camera snapped to me.
#63AsucaHayashiPosted 3/3/2014 2:19:47 PM
Macro's in a fighting game is cheating. A little aim assist for ONLY controller users is not.

you're directly circumventing one of the main competitive aspects of fps: the ability to put your crosshair in front of your opponent.

aim assist is "assisted" cheating regardless of how you really debate it since you're not doing 100% of the aiming by yourself.

sure, when you say macro in fighters you instantly think about one button presses that lead to 20 hit combos but when i say macro i think about shortcuts mapped to different button presses like XYB or whatever which allow for hard moves to be performed much easier and the timing of the execution is still 100% in the player's hand compared to aim assist where control is actually taken out of the player's hand.

you have a good point about analogue vs digital input and the 1:1 movement of mouse but aim assist is just that bad of a mechanic since it automatically calculates when your crosshair is close to an opponent and does part of the job for you.
---
PC hardware doesn't need to match console hardware in price when PC gamers save literal thousands from the software they buy.
http://i.imgur.com/E5CYOem.png
#64DV8ingSourcesPosted 3/3/2014 2:24:47 PM
AsucaHayashi posted...
you have a good point about analogue vs digital input and the 1:1 movement of mouse but aim assist is just that bad of a mechanic since it automatically calculates when your crosshair is close to an opponent and does part of the job for you.


See, I just feel its the only way to even the playing field with a controller. I get what you guys are saying, I just disagree that controllers have no place in casual competitive shooters. Anything with an progression system is casual unless its purely aesthetics.
---
2500k @ 4.4 | P8Z68-V Pro | H80 | 8GB RAM | 770 + 670 physx | 256 SSD | 8TB HDD | Win 8.1 64bit | ax1200w | CM690II
Steam: DV8ing1
#65jaoman69Posted 3/3/2014 2:31:35 PM
100% necessary on pc.
#66DaedalusEx(Topic Creator)Posted 3/3/2014 3:50:37 PM(edited)
DV8ingSources posted...
See, I just feel its the only way to even the playing field with a controller.


Well then you clearly don't understand the concept of a level playing field:

A level playing field is a concept about fairness, not that each player has an equal chance to succeed, but that they all play by the same set of rules.

Handicapping is the very antithesis of a level playing field.
#67pothocketPosted 3/3/2014 3:57:59 PM(edited)
Every professional sport ever has placed limitations on what equipment is legal. You think you can just show up to a golf tournament with any clubs and balls?

It has everything to do with placing the skill on the player, not the equipment they're using. Hence a level playing field, not 'handicapping' the players.
#68pothocketPosted 3/3/2014 3:58:54 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
#69DiviDudePosted 3/3/2014 4:06:18 PM
The idea that a control scheme is so inadequate for a shooter that the game has to actually help the player aim is pretty silly to me, at least when there exists other control schemes that work far better. As far as I'm concerned, aim assist should not exist in a game that is supposed to requiring aiming skill. If gamepad players are getting destroyed by KB/M players, then so be it. It's their choice to play a less effective control scheme.

Analogy: if I show up to a math exam with a calculator and some other guy shows up with an abacus, he shouldn't be given special tips and hints from the professor just because he chose to bring a less effective tool.
#70DaedalusEx(Topic Creator)Posted 3/3/2014 4:08:51 PM
pothocket posted...
Every professional sport ever has placed limitations on what equipment is legal.


And none have imposed different rules based on the equipment chosen.

Hence a level playing field, not 'handicapping' the players.


Again, that's not what 'level playing field' means. It is, however, exactly what handicapping means:

hand·i·cap:
a race or contest in which an artificial advantage is given or disadvantage imposed on a contestant to equalize chances of winning