Headshot in a middle of the screen!

[Spekkio]

Sort of like good looking graphics, amIrite?

I realize that you are being sarcastic, but you actually make my point...how many games today have stunning graphics, but less than 10 hours of actual gameplay to beat the singleplayer portion of the game? Now, how many games have more than 20 hours of gameplay to them? The latter list is much, much thinner, and you're paying on average $60 for a game.

I'm not saying that every game should look like ass, but I am saying that if I read somewhere in the game review that the game takes less than 10 hours to beat the first time around and doesn't have a multiplayer that interests me, I'm not going to buy it. I don't indulge in video games so that I can pay 3-4x as much money to get a "cinematic experience" that I can get just fine from a $10-20 Blu-Ray.

In the end, the PS devs have been working on this game for over 6 years in their spare time, and we still don't have a playable beta. You now want them to draw an icon that doesn't look like shit (Sorry, Farley, but your 10 second drawing looks like pure asshole), program it into the game, and then program it into the options for the multitude of people who don't want or need something obstructing their view to be told into the obvious. I'd rather have the devs work on something useful, like a game we can actually play.

[frvge]

6 years is a bit exaggerated. 3 or 4 depending on your point of view.

[comicsserg]

i think if we don't finish the game in less than 6 year then it will be too late and nobody will play it, because graphics and performance of the Computer increases every year so peoples expectations will be higher and higher.

[Cronky]

Sort of like good looking graphics, amIrite?

I realize that you are being sarcastic, but you actually make my point...how many games today have stunning graphics, but less than 10 hours of actual gameplay to beat the singleplayer portion of the game? Now, how many games have more than 20 hours of gameplay to them? The latter list is much, much thinner, and you're paying on average $60 for a game.

I'm not saying that every game should look like ass, but I am saying that if I read somewhere in the game review that the game takes less than 10 hours to beat the first time around and doesn't have a multiplayer that interests me, I'm not going to buy it. I don't indulge in video games so that I can pay 3-4x as much money to get a "cinematic experience" that I can get just fine from a $10-20 Blu-Ray.

In the end, the PS devs have been working on this game for over 6 years in their spare time, and we still don't have a playable beta. You now want them to draw an icon that doesn't look like shit (Sorry, Farley, but your 10 second drawing looks like pure asshole), program it into the game, and then program it into the options for the multitude of people who don't want or need something obstructing their view to be told into the obvious. I'd rather have the devs work on something useful, like a game we can actually play.

This is pretty much the reason why I'm glad you (or I. Read on) aren't "In Charge" of the people making this game.

Perhaps I'm getting the wrong idea from what I've seen from the people making this, but to me it sounds like they're actually having some fun with it. Good graphics because... hell... they want their product to shine.

If it were up to you though it sounds as if YES we would have had a Beta by now, but it would be the most bland, straightforward game we've all ever played. Yeah, you got your fix list and everything. Hooray, I can once again shoot at spies, but it's exactly like chaos theory and any sort of logical (or illogical) additions would be on the backburner till, "I feel like the game is done enough to implement them".

Since they aren't doing all this work for money, let them have fun with it. Whether that means spending a day putting in a headshot icon, or any of the other multitude of things that are either needed or just for the hell of it.

Waiting sucks, but I can wait for the product they actually want to release instead of the one that just gets the job done.

Perhaps though I've missed the point. ;)

[VenomousNinja]

Basically, Spekkio, my argument can be summed up with one line from Cronky's post:

Good graphics because... hell... they want their product to shine.

The little details make a product sparkle, make it shine. A headshot icon is a relatively simple but noticeable, and nice, detail. And again, it takes about fifteen seconds to implement. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this idea, right now you're just whining because we're asking them to make this game a little better. Obviously they already have a kill message for when a spy dies, and a special case for when a spy is hit with a headshot, there is absolutely no reason to simply put these two things together in four-five lines of code to make something that helps PS sparkle a little bit more.

[Spark Mandriller]

I dunno why you guys even care so much about headshots when like half the kills in this game are from grenades or on people who are knocked down or whatever. I guess some people just need a game to keep telling them how awesome they are or somethin'.

[Cronky]

Well duh. If the games not telling me I'm awesome then who will? My teammate probably doesn't have a Mic, my friends are outside partying while I'm inside playing with you guys, and while my mom will tell me I'm awesome... I have to assume she has to by some kind of Mother-Son Law or something like that.

[Farley4Fan]

The only ones who believe it or even care when the game tells them that they are awesome are little kids.  And no one cares about little kids. 

[DreadStunLock]

The only ones who believe it or even care when the game tells them that they are awesome are little kids.  And no one cares about little kids. 

Yeah we don't go around saying "OH I USE A 360 CONTROLLA AND I PWNED U WITH IT"

[Spekkio]

Basically, Spekkio, my argument can be summed up with one line from Cronky's post:

Good graphics because... hell... they want their product to shine.

The little details make a product sparkle, make it shine. A headshot icon is a relatively simple but noticeable, and nice, detail. And again, it takes about fifteen seconds to implement. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this idea, right now you're just whining because we're asking them to make this game a little better. Obviously they already have a kill message for when a spy dies, and a special case for when a spy is hit with a headshot, there is absolutely no reason to simply put these two things together in four-five lines of code to make something that helps PS sparkle a little bit more.

Devs can do whatever they want -- it's their artwork, not mine. However, most companies want to make money so they can pay devs to keep putting in long hours to make more art. I'm saying that, as a consumer, a game with top notch graphics but thin game time won't get my money. In the end, I buy video games to actually play a game, not stare at beautiful rendering and listen to shitty voice acting. And, IMO, a dev who prioritizes shiny graphics over game content doesn't have the right priorities. Again, though, that's their choice to make.

[DreadStunLock]

As much as I would love to believe in that it's not true. Ubisoft made tons of cash on Conviction, yet the consumers hated it, it's like a Justin Bieber faggotry ><

[Spark Mandriller]

The only ones who believe it or even care when the game tells them that they are awesome are little kids.  And no one cares about little kids.

Then I guess you don't need an icon telling you how awesome your aiming skills were do you?

[Farley4Fan]

I don't care if it's there but a headshot icon by the kill message is a little different from "killtacular!" or "you are now a COLONEL!"

[puuusianka]

I don't care if it's there but a headshot icon by the kill message is a little different from "killtacular!" or "you are now a COLONEL!"

killtacular... Lol

[DreadStunLock]

Bottom line part of my idea rulez!