Tazer or Flamethrower? Vote Please.

[Farley4Fan]

Okay.  Just to clear this up.  The flamethrower attachment/gadget could be the replacement for your traditional tazer in Project Stealth.  The tazer or flamethrower would do the same exact things - just look different.  So, for some cosmetic differences between CT/PT and PS, would you like to see a flamethrower instead of a tazer?

What does the Flamethrower do?: 

Instead of the spy shaking uncontrollably when tazered, he would flail for a few seconds until the fire goes out.  Then, he'd pass out like when tazered.  The flamethrower would have the same exact range and damage as the tazer, as well as the cool down time between the flame spurts. 

Maybe for a cool effect have a bit of smoke rising from the spy's KO'd body?

To me, it just seems like a merc's style. I also think it's better to have more differences between spies/mercs.  Seems odd that both can electrocute people.  Instead, mercs burn, spies shock.  This would not take more work, just different work.

Thoughts? :)

[Wanted_David]

flamethrowers are overpowered. also a tazer should be a little easier on the engine (those flame lighting effects can be a real pain in the neck, you know? xD)

[Farley4Fan]

The tazer or flamethrower would do the same exact things - just look different.

It would not be overpowered. 

If there is really an issue with lighting or whatever then forget it.   :)

I remember hearing something about dynamic lighting effing with performance but I'm sure there is a way to create a flamethrower without it being performance-heavy at all.

[VaNilla]

No, for obvious reasons. There's nothing discrete about someone getting burned and flailing, so it attracts too much attention from the spies mate, and secondly it's unrealistic even for a game. If you had a flame-thrower why not burn him to death.

[LennardF1989]

No, for obvious reasons. There's nothing discrete about someone getting burned and flailing, so it attracts too much attention from the spies mate, and secondly it's unrealistic even for a game. If you had a flame-thrower why not burn him to death.

Actually, it will just look dull. Stone summarizes it all.

Either make it a weapon on its own or leave it alone, but don't make it a tazer which looks/acts like a flamethrower.

[InvisibleMan999]

If there is really an issue with lighting or whatever then forget it.   :)

I remember hearing something about dynamic lighting effing with performance but I'm sure there is a way to create a flamethrower without it being performance-heavy at all.

Um... animating fire is actually pretty difficult. It has to produce light, then you'd probably want some kind of animation where the spy actually burns to death....

totally not worth the effort.

[frvge]

I think it's cool. Doesn't mean that it'll be in. It probably wont.

[Test-Subject]

Wow... wtf is that man... it couldn't be further away from the spirit of splinter cell or make less sense... I mean how do you justify ''a flamethrower having the same effect as a tazer''

[LennardF1989]

Wow... wtf is that man... it couldn't be further away from the spirit of splinter cell or make less sense... I mean how do you justify ''a flamethrower having the same effect as a tazer''

Exactly my thoughts.

[Farley4Fan]

Wow... wtf is that man... it couldn't be further away from the spirit of splinter cell or make less sense... I mean how do you justify ''a flamethrower having the same effect as a tazer''

Exactly my thoughts.

Nope.  You guys just aren't getting it.  It's a small flamethrower only capable of shooting short spurts of flame.  Jesus. 

Lol.  Maybe it has small capsules of fuel that are loaded each flamethrower shot.  It would explain the low capability of the "flamethrower".

You guys need to get the Gears of war/call of duty/halo idea of the flamethrower out of your heads.  It's more a flame shooter.  A quick burst of flame.  It's exactly like a tazer, except fire/different animation/possible new lighting effects.  If adding a flash of light is too complicated then forget I suggested it.

I'm sure that animating electricity is equally hard anyways.

[Farley4Fan]

No, for obvious reasons. There's nothing discrete about someone getting burned and flailing, so it attracts too much attention from the spies mate, and secondly it's unrealistic even for a game. If you had a flame-thrower why not burn him to death.

How/why are mercs supposed to be discreet?

And you can burn the spy to death!  Just like you can taze a spy to death.  It takes more than one shot though.  The real issue here is performance.  If the dev team could find a way to work around that then what would be the issue?  I think it would be cool.  Mercs burn, spies shock.  Fits the style.

[Roberto1223]

i dont think flamethrower would make good weapon in project stealth at least for spy.



maybe it would for merc though. if you carry it then the advantage would be that you can throw a gas granade in a spy vent then ignite the vent and burn spies in it to death.


the trade off of merc having it would be that it has short range and that if you try and "disable" the bomb objective by shooting it with the flamethrower it would only blow up the bomb


what do u guys think? i think its an iintresting idea, just a little misplaced.

[Blank Man]

I'm having trouble imagining how flamethrower will do the same thing as tazer... How does fire knock you out, but keep you alive untill someone or something finish you off?

But regardless of that, I agree with david that the fire would have some visual issues. And even though I don't know anything about animating, it's obvious that fire is harder to animate because the electricity animation is the same every time... scripted, but the fire has to act naturally... not scripted.

[Farley4Fan]

I'm having trouble imagining how flamethrower will do the same thing as tazer... How does fire knock you out, but keep you alive untill someone or something finish you off?

Who cares?  Spies pass out because of the pain?  Lack of oxygen?  How does electricity knock you out for a few seconds?  The game is not based on realism.  I'd take coolness over realism anyday.  :)

But regardless of that, I agree with david that the fire would have some visual issues. And even though I don't know anything about animating, it's obvious that fire is harder to animate because the electricity animation is the same every time... scripted, but the fire has to act naturally... not scripted.

The performance issue/animation "issue" is the only potential real problem that I can see.  However, the fire does not have to act naturally - and can be a scripted flame.   Don't know what you are talking about there. 

[Westfall]

I actually spit some beer on the floor when I saw this thread...I lol-ed quite hard. Too bad April fools is in April ;)...silly Papa.

For real though...no thanks on the flamethrower, which would burn the maps down.