150 replies to this topic

[n r g]

Sarlic, on 25 July 2014 - 12:08 PM, said:

I have to vent a little here. Apologies in advance. But i would like to hear your opinion on a civilised manner.

After the invasion i find it became just another casual game. I see no more fun after the clans arrived. You can't even properly survive without modules(for example) or any upgrades or in the end equipping the best meta available; shared within the active community. The mechs armor (or if you look at the internal structure) feels like thin paper and the balance is nowhere to be found. It feels like Call of Duty with some bad perks.

It's not only that.

In my eyes It's a joke that the Innersphere and the clans are fighting side by side. The animations on most of the Clan chassis are horrible executed. (I am sorry if i have offended the artist, i didnt ment to, but please see this as a criticism to look at it again and ask the question to yourself 'How can i improve the animation?') Also we're still left with many broken assets on excisting maps. With each patch pulled out the game is brining new problems or old ones which were fixed are yet broken again.

PGI have my respect for trying to learn, adapt and evolve this game. Nothing wrong with that. It's a hard game to make it work for a not too large community. A community which is slowly growing. From the start i suppported this game as a Founder. I am one of the early ones who both partipicated in closed- and open beta. As many other Founders who are still active i have seen the game changing the hard way. Some very good and some in my opinion bad game breaking changes. I can understand why Founders and others like the Overlord/Phoenix are complaining, are on a temporary break or even left the game for a unkown time. The reason and explaination why these people have left speaks for itself. Too much to say and too many words.

There was a few times i though: "Is this game on the edge of closing down the game and his servers?"

Unfortunatly to me i find the overall game quality is discouraging and it's getting worse overtime while people are just spending money thus encouraging PGI's bad behaviour. In beta i felt we had more slow paced gameplay. Yes, we also had XL engines, but those were higly capped on low speeds. Basicaly all engines were slow speeds. We didn't had high speed engines yet. Sure, the game was in a state which you can't actually argue about, (Maps were much smaller before they made it larger, we had 4vs4, 8vs8) but the core gameplay was much(!) more excistent. Mechs felt like heavy slow mechs; something heavy i was piloting and it sure felt good!

I was farily a decent Atlas pilot. Not bad, but not good. Pilots began to shudder if they saw a heavy armed Atlas with his red glowing demonic eyes battling on the field. But as many other battlemechs the Atlas had his weak points. The glory of the Awesome who is now a forgotten battlemech biting in the dust. Every step i made could be my last. Pilots were actually more aware of their surroundings.

Nikolai have my deepest respect for trying to inform the community much as possible. What a great guy; one of the few (actually the only one) who are actually very active communicating with the community and trying to make the best of it.

I really do not hope that IGP(not PGI) holds the ropes for the marketing department. But i would not be surprised if they do have a wet finger in making plans, strategies and roadmaps of PGI's developent case. In other words: I am higly dissappointed with the current marketing paymodel and IGP's vision of serving (paying) customers. For example: The Plan, no worthy patches, patch-problems, gameplay problems, balance problems and the endless matchmaker problems and more. Pumping MC and the Clan mechs out before fixing a huge list of bugs, broken assets, and so on is just a typical sign of prioriting things the wrong way. We don't even have SLI, proper DX11 and missing out some of the basic features like a basic menu for communicating between the team.

For now i am highly doubting if i should start or just unistall the game. I do not play much as i have used to. Perhaps a hour a week. But when i want to play, i want to enjoy a game worth my invested time and money. As i said before i am really dissappointed with the current state of the game and i can understand why some of the core players, Founders and more have left the game. I am not sure if i like the way the game is changing in a more casual ( read: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__3584847 ) game for teenagers then for the diehard fan of the Mechwarrior series. I really hope the game is getting better in the future, but i do not have high hopes.

They have lost me, and i am not sure if i can recover.


How do you feel about the community and the game? Do you like the direction? I would really love to hear your opinion about my thread and your vision on this game.

Thank you for your reading, time and perhaps commenting on this matter. Please do not be ticked off by my thread, i personally hope that you still enjoy the game.

With best regards.

As a competition player from other FPS games and competitive MW4 player - I completely utterly agree with you.

Most of my team, CSJ, Clan Smoke Jaguar are also MechWarrior 4 pilots and competitive gamers from other FPS games. We have had discussions on how PGI/DEVs are essentially diluting the gameplay to pacify and satisfy the mainstream game base (non competition players).

Sad but true.

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

Tombstoner, on 28 July 2014 - 09:06 AM, said:

Tactical game play for me is players can mover from one position to another trying to gain a positional advantage. as it is with damage being what it is... if your caught trying to make tactical move your dead. either from massive pin point alphas or LRM swarms. very much like COD and every other FPS that has re-spawn. Tactical for games like that devolve into WWI and Russian WWII swarm assaults to gain tactical positions for the flag or capture point.

You're basing your argument on comparing MW:O to other traditional FPS. One aspect of this game being FPS (Damage goes wherever I point and click) does not really make the comparison as fair/balanced as you think it does. In a traditional FPS you have people who can sprint/walk/crouch move based on the situation. In MW:O you can only sprint/walk/crouch move based on what Mech you're piloting. Traditional FPS allows you to rapidly redeploy because everyone carries the same firepower, can move at the same speed, and have the same survivability. In MW:O, the people who can move the fastest have the lowest damage payload and the least survivability. The people with the highest damage payload have the most survivability and move at the slowest speed. If your force is caught then you have to engage. You can't really continue comparing this game to an FPS because they're fundamentally different.

Yes, I've called this game a veiled FPS, but that's due to the mentality of most of the PUG players standing and shooting at each other in the same places on every map. That's more a reflection on there being a lack of content other than to point and click at people.

How about consider your argument of "no tactics" to a King of the Hill game-type. Limited tactical decisions (individuals recognizing a weakness in the enemy formation during combat and shifting to exploit the weakness) happen, but major tactical moves generally happen before main combat is initiated. Blue team camps a spot. Red team has to figure out a way to make that spot disadvantaged. If Blue doesn't react then they will be destroyed. If Blue team can counter Red team's movement then Blue team wins.

When you factor in the varying payloads each of the 12 people on a team carries, the different mix of Mechs, whichever map you're on, different levels of individual map awareness and battle recognition, then you can see this game does require tactics. Just because you don't see it in the majority of PUG matches doesn't mean this game lacks tactics or doesn't require it.

Edited by Be Rough With Me Plz, 28 July 2014 - 10:27 AM.

[Wolfways]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 28 July 2014 - 09:43 AM, said:

The difference is you couch your points in an absolute sense. "My wife can do it in 3 days so how can you say it's not a casual game/steep learning curve." That's a blanket statement that disregards a real issue that many people here acknowledge exists. Blanket statements are always false because it takes one thing and applies it to everything as an absolute. Most of your posts arguing a point falls into the blanket statement category. It shows you're not interested in acknowledging issues or the validity of other people's points, but that you're goal is to discredit people's views through anecdotal observations and inherently false absolutes.

So every post i make is from my point of view. Well done Sherlock.
Obviously i post with my own experiences in mind, just like everyone else. I may think that saying MWO has a steep learning curve is laughable, but then again i've played EVEOnline which actually does have a steep learning curve...imo. I consider MWO one of the easiest games to pick up that i've ever played.

And speaking of blanket statements..."Most of your posts arguing a point falls into the blanket statement category". Really?

divinedisclaimer, on 28 July 2014 - 09:54 AM, said:

I picked up Sins of a Solar Empire and learned to pay it in an afternoon (and well) - that doesn't make the game casual, that makes your wife good at video games.

It's a perspective thing.

Maybe i overestimate people...but that really doesn't sound like me. I think most people are idiots

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 10:34 AM, said:

So every post i make is from my point of view. Well done Sherlock.

*Sigh* I guess you really are that dense...

I never once said otherwise. What I said is that most of the points you make in your posts are couched as an absolute. I've already explained what that means and it seems to have gone straight over your head.

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 10:34 AM, said:

Obviously i post with my own experiences in mind, just like everyone else. I may think that saying MWO has a steep learning curve is laughable, but then again i've played EVEOnline which actually does have a steep learning curve...imo. I consider MWO one of the easiest games to pick up that i've ever played.

So the way you perceive things makes your reality everyone else's reality? This is the main concept you're not comprehending. It's also very telling. On the forums (consider it as the world for this point) the reality is that this game has a steep learning curve. That reality is validated through majority agreement/perception. If the collective reality is different than an individual's reality then that individual would be considered delusional or "special". In that case, you're delusional. Or would you prefer being "special". Please don't even try with me.

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 10:34 AM, said:

And speaking of blanket statements..."Most of your posts arguing a point falls into the blanket statement category". Really?

Maybe you don't know what a qualifier is, but that's what "mostly" is. I didn't say "All". If I had said "All" then that would be considered a blanket statement.

Edited by Be Rough With Me Plz, 28 July 2014 - 10:55 AM.

[Wolfways]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 28 July 2014 - 10:15 AM, said:

In MW:O, the people who can move the fastest have the lowest damage payload and the least survivability. The people with the highest damage payload have the most survivability and move at the slowest speed.

This is why we can't have sensible discussions about MWO. We're all playing a different game.

[TheCaptainJZ]

To the OP,
TTK
Closed beta: No HSR meant everyone missed shots. Only lasers were used. Ballistics had a firing delay.
Launch: HSR in effect for all weapons, sniping weapons highly effective now, SRMs broken (until recently), teams changed from 8v8 to 12v12.
Last Christmas: Maps with far away spawns (tourmaline, alpine) had them brough much closer together as all the slow assault pilots whined about not wanting to travel 2 minutes to get to the front line. TTK decreases as teams meet each other much faster.
Invasion: Clan mechs can rip you to shreds fast if you aren't careful, don't use cover enough, or don't play to their weaknesses.

Also consider that you had the most fun back at the beginning because of the "newness" factor, and because all your friends were also experiencing the "newness" and gameplay was simplier and people hadn't figured out a meta yet and really everything was just underdeveloped and not figured out yet. You were all going through the learning curve still.

[mogs01gt]

IMO this is one of the least casual games I have ever played.

[Tombstoner]

Valid contrasting posts from many.

yes comparing games within and between each other is a very convoluted multi facited issue. Personal opinion often colors views. At issue here is damage output resulting in a short life span, limiting your tactical choice and why one shot and your dead games typically have re-spawn.

what happens if damage is reduced to 1/3 with no re-spawns for MWO. i say it improves tactical game play. Improving durability will by extension also improve the new player experience. The illusion of doing good. something that cant happen in games like COD and l337 campers. your dead in seconds after running across the map into an ambush.

Not very tactical... but then again its also bad game play.

[Wolfways]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 28 July 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

*Sigh* I guess you really are that dense...

Resorting to insults already. Faster than i expected tbh.

Quote

I never once said otherwise. What I said is that your posts are couched as an absolute. I've already explained what that means and it seems to have gone straight over your head.

lol so i give an example of how one person found the game easy and that means i expect it to be easy for everyone. Could you point out where i said that please?

Quote

So the way you perceive things makes your reality everyone else's reality? You can easily say the reality of one person is the delusion of another. Collective reality is the perception of the many. On the forums it is clear that the consensus is that this game has a steep learning curve. If the collective reality is different than an individual's reality then that individual will be considered delusional. In that case, you're delusional. Please don't even try with me.

Or maybe those who found the game easy just haven't posted to say that. After all, the forums are for whining on.
I'm delusional because i found the game easy to play...great

Quote

Maybe you don't know what a qualifier is, but that's what "mostly" is. I didn't say "All". If I had said "All" then that would be considered a blanket statement.

You've read most of my posts? So, stalker or liar?

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

Resorting to insults already. Faster than i expected tbh.


lol so i give an example of how one person found the game easy and that means i expect it to be easy for everyone. Could you point out where i said that please?


Or maybe those who found the game easy just haven't posted to say that. After all, the forums are for whining on.
I'm delusional because i found the game easy to play...great


You've read most of my posts? So, stalker or liar?

All your response is is a petty and incredibly weak attempt at ridicule. When you have nothing of substance to say Ad Hominem is always good. 2 replies in... Faster than I expected tbh...

http://www.merriam-w...ictionary/dense - Definition 2a. So yeah, I believe you're dense.

I also think you're intransigent. http://www.merriam-w...ry/intransigent

If your reading comprehension is really that bad then it's pretty obvious you'll disregard everything anyone says that opposes your view or purposefully misconstrue what is being said as a form a defense. Ignorance is bliss, right? In such an instance, considering I've already spelled everything out to you in the simplest way possible, it's a lesson in futility.

/facepalm

Edit:

If you wanted to actually have a discussion, you would answer:
1) Why you believe your view of the game invalidates the views of the majority in regards to there being a steep learning curve.
2) Why you believe that your wife's experience with this game should reflect everyone else's experience.

Edited by Be Rough With Me Plz, 28 July 2014 - 11:25 AM.

[Wolfways]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 28 July 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:

All your response is is a petty and incredibly weak attempt at ridicule.

Well the last sentence was
But then, you did start insulting me.

Quote

When you have nothing of substance to say Ad Hominem is always good. 2 replies in... Faster than I expected tbh...

http://www.merriam-w...ictionary/dense - Definition 2a. So yeah, I believe you're dense.

I also think you're intransigent. http://www.merriam-w...ry/intransigent

If your reading comprehension is really that bad then it's pretty obvious you'll disregard everything anyone says that opposes your view or purposefully misconstrue what is being said as a form a defense. Ignorance is bliss, right? In such an instance, considering I've already spelled everything out to you in the simplest way possible, it's a lesson in futility.

/facepalm

I didn't expect a reply to my question though tbh. But i don't really know what to say to someone who tries to turn everything i say into something else. Well i do, but the mods wouldn't like it...

You can believe what you like about me, but you obviously haven't read many of my posts.

I could link dictionary definitions too, but i'm not that much of a bell end.

Edited by Wolfways, 28 July 2014 - 11:22 AM.

[Sarlic]

TheCaptainJZ, on 28 July 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:

To the OP,
TTK
Closed beta: No HSR meant everyone missed shots. Only lasers were used. Ballistics had a firing delay.
Launch: HSR in effect for all weapons, sniping weapons highly effective now, SRMs broken (until recently), teams changed from 8v8 to 12v12.
Last Christmas: Maps with far away spawns (tourmaline, alpine) had them brough much closer together as all the slow assault pilots whined about not wanting to travel 2 minutes to get to the front line. TTK decreases as teams meet each other much faster.
Invasion: Clan mechs can rip you to shreds fast if you aren't careful, don't use cover enough, or don't play to their weaknesses.

Also consider that you had the most fun back at the beginning because of the "newness" factor, and because all your friends were also experiencing the "newness" and gameplay was simplier and people hadn't figured out a meta yet and really everything was just underdeveloped and not figured out yet. You were all going through the learning curve still.

It's not all about the learning curve. It was the core gameplay which was in my opinion a different experience then we have now. Sure, as you mention it the game was in a different state. Back then i already had a unit and we were regulary playing together with 4vs4 and on comms. Since i started i have played out the Atlas and already had a medium killing machine. Neitherless back in beta we also had the same thread as now with 'Whats the best weapons to pick at for [insert mech]. Remember the Dual Gauss Cats? Or perhaps the 6 PPC builds. All shared. So in that particulary case meta did already excist back then. The firing delays was a great addition and shame that they have decreased the output of that matter.

Please keep it civilized people.

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

Well the last sentence was
But then, you did start insulting me.

uh...

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 10:34 AM, said:

Well done Sherlock.

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 28 July 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

*Sigh* I guess you really are that dense...

Who started insulting whom first? If you decided to take offense at my descriptive usage of "dense" then I have the right to take offense at the phrase you used. Your sudden conciliatory tone doesn't change anything. It's an acknowledgement that your position is untenable.

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

I didn't expect a reply to my question though tbh. But i don't really know what to say to someone who tries to turn everything i say into something else. Well i do, but the mods wouldn't like it...

If you never expected an answer then why ask it other than as a petty attempt at ridicule. All I've done, as others have done, is point out how absurd some of the things you're saying are. The way you view things is what is responsible for twisting what others say. You take offense when other people point out differing views with supportable reasoning.

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

You can believe what you like about me, but you obviously haven't read many of my posts.

I've read enough of your posts in the threads I'm involved in to reinforce that belief. Case in point, your replies in this thread. You may be a nice person, but that doesn't mean you know how to provide sound reasoning to support what you're trying to say. That's the whole point of absolute statements. The reasoning is simply "because".

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

I could link dictionary definitions too, but i'm not that much of a bell end.

I didn't want to take the chance of you misconstruing what the words meant.

If you wanted to actually have a discussion, you would answer:
1) Why you believe your view of the game invalidates the views of the majority in regards to there being a steep learning curve re: making this game "casual"

2) Why you believe that your wife's experience with this game should reflect everyone else's experience.

Edited by Be Rough With Me Plz, 28 July 2014 - 11:59 AM.

[Wolfways]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 28 July 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

uh...



Who started insulting whom first? If you decided to take offense at my descriptive usage of "dense" then I have the right to take offense at the phrase you used.

Maybe "well done Sherlock" means something different to you. It's not an insult...maybe a little sarcasm. It merely means you pointed out the obvious.
*puts on the PC hat*
If that offended you then i apologize.
I don't wear that often...

Quote

If you never expected an answer then why ask it other than a petty attempt at ridicule. All I've done, as others have done, is point out how absurd some of the things you're saying are. The way you view things is what is responsible for twisting what others say. You take offense when other people point out differing views with supportable reasoning.

I asked because i knew you couldn't point out the evidence to support your claims...and you didn't. I never stated that "because this is how i see things this is how they must be". I'm actually more of an "on the fence" type of person...until it comes to stupid things like ECM and LRM's. This may be the only game i've ever played where i thought the devs were...deranged for coming up with such weird rules.

Quote

I've read enough of your posts in the threads I'm involved in to reinforce that belief. Case in point, your replies in this thread. You may be a nice person, but that doesn't mean you know how to provide sound reasoning to support what you're trying to say. That's the whole point of absolute statements. The reasoning is simply "because".

Why do i need to support fact? Which is after all the only thing i posted about my wife playing MWO.

Quote

I didn't want to take the chance of you misconstruing what the words meant.

So you just assume i'm stupid...

Quote

If you wanted to actually have a discussion, you would answer:
1) Why you believe your view of the game invalidates the views of the majority in regards to there being a steep learning curve.
2) Why you believe that your wife's experience with this game should reflect everyone else's experience.

1) I never said it did.
2) I never said it did.

That's the whole point of this discussion...if it actually has a point.
I said something about the game from my point of view and you're saying that i believe it must be everyone's point of view or they are wrong.

Every day on these forums people post things that, as far as they are concerned, are facts. I sometimes post something counter to their opinion to show that not everyone thinks the same. I may not always be right (or telling the truth for that matter), but i at least have some people agreeing with some things i say.
The forums should not just be one point of view but they mostly are...and that's why LRM's suck and ECM is stupidly OP

[Shae Starfyre]

I find the game easy.

[Vanguard319]

I play a match every once in awhile, but in all hindsight, the last major patches have been extremely disappointing. It feels to me like PGI for all their professed "love" of the franchise, completely forgot what made these games so good in the first place.

Among the major problems IMO:

• No single-player campaign. Training grounds is decent, but it offers no real means to learn the basic mechanics outside of movement and heat management. a campaign at least let you learn how to fire on the move at enemies who fight back, meaning you got some real combat experience before you jumped into multiplayer. Considering there are still a number of pugs who still can't fight to save their lives, not having one at all was clearly a bad idea.
  
• Weapon balance. some of the weapons in this game are horrible, particularly weapons that are supposed to be among the best. I've spoken at length just how useless SSRMs are, and the Clan ER PPC still has horrible hit detection compared to it's IS counterparts.
  
• Jump Jets. They're not worth carrying anymore, as they're no longer useful for moving over terrain. All the recent adjustments did was make mechs that are supposed to be highly mobile craptastic. Give us back our ******* jump jets PGI.
  
• Instead of addressing the real issue of pinpoint aim, PGI instead gave us horrible ideas like ghost heat, and the aforementioned JJ nerf, nerfs that were not only not needed, but did absolutely nothing to curb cheese builds and poptarting.

All these issues have pretty much killed any enjoyment I got from this game, and I'm starting to get the impression that PGI simply doesn't give a damn about the playerbase enough to even consider ideas that have been proposed by the community, some of which as proposed are genuinely good ideas. I'll keep popping on every once in awhile, but unless the devs figure out that their methodology isn't working, I no longer have much hope for this game.

Guess there's always Star Citizen.

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 12:09 PM, said:

Maybe "well done Sherlock" means something different to you. It's not an insult...maybe a little sarcasm. It merely means you pointed out the obvious.
*puts on the PC hat*
If that offended you then i apologize.
I don't wear that often...


I asked because i knew you couldn't point out the evidence to support your claims...and you didn't. I never stated that "because this is how i see things this is how they must be". I'm actually more of an "on the fence" type of person...until it comes to stupid things like ECM and LRM's. This may be the only game i've ever played where i thought the devs were...deranged for coming up with such weird rules.


Why do i need to support fact? Which is after all the only thing i posted about my wife playing MWO.




So you just assume i'm stupid...


1) I never said it did.
2) I never said it did.

That's the whole point of this discussion...if it actually has a point.
I said something about the game from my point of view and you're saying that i believe it must be everyone's point of view or they are wrong.

Every day on these forums people post things that, as far as they are concerned, are facts. I sometimes post something counter to their opinion to show that not everyone thinks the same. I may not always be right (or telling the truth for that matter), but i at least have some people agreeing with some things i say.
The forums should not just be one point of view but they mostly are...and that's why LRM's suck and ECM is stupidly OP

*sigh* Reading comprehension is a valuable skill to have in life.

Wolfways, on 28 July 2014 - 12:09 PM, said:

1) I never said it did.
2) I never said it did.

Then why bring up your wife's experience as a refutation of there being a learning curve

Critical writing is also an essential tool to life. If you can't explain why you believe you're right then you're right because you believe you're right? Apparently you think so. That leads to Ad Hominem statements, something you resorted to since your arguments have no substance.

/facepalm

[Galenit]

E N E R G Y, on 28 July 2014 - 10:00 AM, said:

As a competition player from other FPS games and competitive MW4 player - I completely utterly agree with you.

Most of my team, CSJ, Clan Smoke Jaguar are also MechWarrior 4 pilots and competitive gamers from other FPS games. We have had discussions on how PGI/DEVs are essentially diluting the gameplay to pacify and satisfy the mainstream game base (non competition players).

Sad but true.

Iam not competive, i just play for fun.
But i want a more intelligent and tactical game too!
After playing tribes2 a lot, iam dissapointed with most games i have seen after that.

For them that dont know what t2 was:
Sensornetworks, turrents (outdoor with changeable barrels) and forcefields powerd by generators digged in bases.
You could kill the generator or just the sensor to reduces the enemys sensor and radarnetwork, but you could also deploy sensors (radar and motion) to increase your network, you could also take over the turrents or deploy cameras for picture in picture use in the commandinterface as you could deploy small turrents. You had a great battlemap with more then lots of fuctions and an easy quickchat interface with voiceovers.

Think about openig the battlemap, marking an enemy and giving your allys the order to "Attack my target!" with voiceover, marking the target and making a note in the orders panel with 2 clicks (+2 keys for opening and closing the battlemap).

Different air and ground and hover vehicles, some must be used with more then one for full effect.
I remember matches with 36 vs 36 with great tactical play and that was pug.


Should i shame bf, ps, cod or mwo?
T2 was 13 years ago!

Its more then sad, that most new games mostly have less then half the options and tactical play ...

Edited by Galenit, 28 July 2014 - 02:13 PM.

[ollo]

Heeden, on 25 July 2014 - 12:31 PM, said:

Depending on what you mean by "casual", MW:O has always been very casual friendly.

He. Hehehe. Hehehuahahaaaaahheeeheeehrrhrrrhuaaaaaaaa. Good one! (You're kidding, right?)

[Mcgral18]

ollo, on 28 July 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:

He. Hehehe. Hehehuahahaaaaahheeeheeehrrhrrrhuaaaaaaaa. Good one! (You're kidding, right?)

It is a pretty basic game.

Shoot guns, don't reach 100%, twist your torso. Press R to target.

Pretty much all you need to know.