Is it true that shotguns in fps games would be absolutely broken if they had their IRL reach instead of spreading out moronicly right out of the barrel?
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Max Payne shotgun is like that.
Kinda, yeah. The drawback of shotguns in real life tend not to translate well to vidya.
Basically this. It really depends what game exactly and what enemies you're fighting, but if your enemies are largely unarmored the shotgun would just be the best weapon because video games tend not to play out at ranges where having a rifle is really necessary and shotguns are deadly at the kinda of close ranges. The AA-12 would basically be a BFG.
Yes. But only because engagement ranges in fps games is hilariously tiny. Result of the poor resolution vs what your eyes can see irl. If resolution also increased to a level that allowed more realistic engagement ranges, then a realistic shotgun wouldn't seem very overpowered.
see
with some exceptions like RS2:V shotguns are typically gimped to compensate for the very close range distances most FPS's occur at
pic cause shotgun
this
ARMA can have biblically accurate buckshot or whatever, but it won't help when you engage people 200m away
the shitty shotgun range thing only matters for call of duty and halo games because nobody is ever more that 50m away
Yeah lol, some games do it 'right' and accurately spread the pellets in their game but it's usually broken as shit. Even one or 2 of the little pellets in a buckshot round will frick your day up pretty bad.
If you want an answer just look at MW2's pre-nerf 1887.
No. Tarkov proves it is almost always better to have an assault rifle/carbine. The versatility makes it better than anything.
LMAO Tarkov homosexuals think they have an opinion
I mean, tarkov is one of very few games that semi-accurately portrays the way the guns would work IRL
>he think tarkov guns are realistic
ha
He said "semi-accurately" you idiot. It's not perfect, but it simulates the weapons more accurately than most games.
>semi-accurately
Can you not fricking read my brother?
I notice that you didn't make an argument, so I accept your defeat.
lol right and when you find the one non-hacker in the game he's wearing the biggest baddest plates and the best option is to delete his legs with a shotgun. you are a dumb Black person. go play your shitty dumb Black person game.
moron. That small chance scenario doesn't outweigh the negatives of having a shotgun and not being able to reliably kill from further than 50 meters. Having good ammunition can also completely counter high-level armor, making the reliance on shotguns basically non-existent.
Even then, a submachine gun would be better than a shotgun since you can carry more ammo than with a shotgun, and you will more than likely save on weight.
but alas, you still find yourself playing a god-awful game. didn't jump in at the start of a wipe? good luck killing people, doing quests, or even getting to the point you can purchase ammo that actually hurts people with armor. just run a shotgun and leg people, hoping for the best.
the game was a cool idea but in practice the realistic mechanics do not translate to fun gameplay. locking proper ammo behind levels and quests is moronic.
Ok, doesn't change my point, does it? You're just moving the goalposts because you were BTFO. You tried saying something smart but just ended up embarrassing yourself.
wow a shotgun isn't better when you are fully fricking geared with the best guns, attachments, and ammo? you dont fricking say.
Yes, and it's also not better even when you fully kit it out, because that guy with the "biggest baddest plates" happened to engage you from more than 50 meters away, so you can do frick all but hide from him because he brought a gun that can actually shoot at you from a distance.
Shotguns are useable, sure, but they are seriously outclassed in almost every scenario and require the user to be better (or luckier) than their opponent in the majority of cases.
i miss when games were allowed to have FUN weapons and not have to worry about muh balance
Yes but fps games have really short engagement ranges and you don't have to worry about weight and carrying space. Most of real combat is just blind firing at shadows really far away.
ill bet this shitkov defender is also a cheater. or his favorite streamer he's obsessed with tells him how it's the best game ever.
Notice how this b***h is too afraid to reply directly. And also notice how not a single person in this thread has "defended" Tarkov, just stated facts about the game, only to be misinterpreted by sub 70 IQ Black folk.
>shotguns in fps games would be absolutely broken
If they'd be broken if you gave them realistic range/ballistics then it's probably because the game isn't designed around realistic weapons in general. A shotgun's lethality is great and all (without considering armor, which also tends to be a problem), but it's not some kind of miracle weapon and even within it's effective range it's not going to do a whole lot a rifle can't do.
>Play Bad Company 2
>Equip shotgun with slugs
>Outsnipe the snipergays
Yes. In most videogames besides milsims the distances you're fighting at would almost always be dominated by a shotgun. Soldiers don't typically use them because you can use a rifle at both short and very long range.
They are fine in Insurgency