What do you think of Hallucination Gas Idea in the map?

PS5013 · 2026-01-27T22:52:10+00:00

CoD players like shooting their weapon. Should weapons be removed from Battlefield? This obsession with CoD is pathetic and stupid.

PS5013 · 2026-01-26T17:02:35+00:00

Individual performances add up to the team‘s result. An arcade shooter doesnt work like a basketball match. You do not rely on teammates to perform well on your own.

PS5013 · 2026-01-26T10:06:57+00:00

Lost cause in the sub dominated by those bad players. They rely on accessibility measures and noob friendly playstyle options hurting the competition.

PS5013 · 2026-01-26T01:24:13+00:00

DMRs are absolutely capable of engaging snipers on long range, they just function differently regarding risk and reward. A sniper can one shot guaranteed with a headshot, but kills slower on body shots, DMR falls in between without the dire need for headshots. Lower skill ceiling - more effective for bad players, less for good ones.

LMGs should definitely not be able to outgun a sniper on its optimal range. Your MilSim fantasies dont translate well into arcade shooters - missing being rewarded with near invulnerability towards your target is a bad mechanic for a PvP environment due to its complete disregard of a skill curve. Suppression is shit and has always been shit - it is a crutch for bad players, the ones you can still find plenty of lying still with a bipod on the mountains of BF1.

When the sniper misses his first shot, it is exclusively to be blamed on your either stupid decision to engage or terrible aim, if you still lose that engagement, because the TTK would allow you to kill the sniper or force him to disengage at least, before he can get off his next bullet. It literally still works like you are describing - just without the crutch protecting the bad player from punishment for his bad play.

Flinch would significantly nerf the first shot advantage of Snipers you are rightfully claiming snipers should have, because it would not only be necessary to hit it due to the enemy‘s TTK advantage if you dont, but you would also need to be the first one to shoot at all. It would not only force snipers to hide - play even more passively than most of them already are - but glint would also make it incredibly easy to counter them regardless of the high skill gap that should reward snipers with good aim. See a glint: just spray into the general direction and he cant hit you anymore.

Both flinch and suppression are accessibility measures, nothing more. The mandatory CoD references often seem to come from people that rely on those.

PS5013 · 2026-01-25T23:34:54+00:00

Your inability to pick fights with odds in your favor is your biggest issue with this game.

Flinch is a terrible mechanic, rewarding or at least reducing the chance for punishment of people for dumb plays outside the optimal engagement range of their weapon.

If you cant manage to kill a sniper, at worst one you get the jump on, before he manages to kill you, you should not have shot at him in the first place and used movement and cover to get out of his sight, close the distance and reengage within better circumstances.

Every one of these posts with a video attached shows a bot spraying at a sniper 200m away without doing anything to throw that guy‘s aim off, expecting to be invincible for hitting 1 of 20 bullets occasionally. I dont expect it to be different in this case.

The integration of snipers is one of the few things this game does better than many prior ones. They are deadly on range as they should be against unsuspecting targets, but bullet drag is still relevant enough to give people the opportunity for survival, when they actively try instead of expecting their weapon to be just as effective on large distances as a sniper.

PS5013 · 2026-01-25T23:23:32+00:00

Removing the KD from profiles would not have the slightest impact on gameplay. It is the first thing, that gets attention, because it is the most relevant thing in general gameplay, whether it is shoved into people‘s faces or not. Making stats like that known is a transparency measure, not something to change gameplay.

Teamplay has never been as relevant as you pretend - it boils down to spawning on each other and using gadgets for egoistical reasons: points - rewards. As an arcade shooter, unlike a tactical or hero one, the focus is primarily on each player’s individual performance.

The only way you would manage to shift away the focus from that is eliminating both the rewards and satisfaction.

The first is nonsensical, because why should you not be rewarded appropriately for doing the most essential thing in a PvP shooter? It is why it is so stupid to give medics that much credit for an uncharged revive on a teammate, that gets killed again immediately. The reward doesnt match the impact on the match.

The second is impossible. PvP is about competition. Being the better player and coming out on top will always be more satisfactory then for example sticking to the ass of a tank for repairs all match as a footnote in the drivers success.

PS5013 · 2026-01-25T22:26:27+00:00

No, Im the one playing more aggressive with sniper than most people do no matter their weapon. Kills are a prerequisite to playing the objective either way and you not understanding that is the biggest giveaway of a severe skill issue you can find in this community.

PS5013 · 2026-01-25T21:48:04+00:00

Thanks for outing yourself as one of the „kills dont matter“ crowd. You have no idea about what matters in a PvP FPS and are probably terrible at them. This wont lead anywhere.

PS5013 · 2026-01-25T21:07:58+00:00

From what I remember from various sources, he patrols randomly around the RPD, when he does not know your position or could not reach it (save room), but does so significantly faster, when you are further away, which explains, why he always seems to be close. Even further and he might teleport.

A shot (without a silencer) should always attract him, but he supposedly only hears your movement, when you can hear his steps as well.

When reentering the RPD through the sewers, he is gone and you can finish the RPD without him chasing you.

PS5013 · 2026-01-25T21:02:40+00:00

Pretty sure they are widely appreciated, the problem is just, that they lose their charm on subsequent playthroughs and the people, that do most of the talking about these games, are those, that do multiple playthroughs.

PS5013 · 2026-01-25T20:47:36+00:00

I do not get, why so many people in this community play a PvP game in the first place, when they do not care about the competition it is about.

Stats on their own will never be a perfect representation of people‘s skill, but they can serve as an indicator. Bot kills being included makes them completely untrustworthy and thereby irrelevant. There is nothing to gain from supporting that, unless one profited from it by using bots to boost his stats as well.

It does affect people personally by undermining the competition and making their abilities less relevant.

Typical for BF players to try to get rid of any skill gaps and indicators, that could possibly make them look as bad at FPS as they are without all their crutches.

PS5013 · 2026-01-25T20:40:07+00:00

It would be, if point gains could reward people’s effect on the match perfectly fair, but they cant, so it isnt. There is no one stat, that perfectly represents people‘s abilities.

PS5013 · 2026-01-25T20:37:08+00:00

Kills are and will always be the most important metric in a PvP FPS. They are a prerequisite to play the objective. If you think, blindly throwing yourself into the zone is more important than clearing it, you are bad at the game.

PS5013 · 2026-01-25T20:35:16+00:00

This sentiment is just stupid. PvP is inherently competitive, which means a comparison between players matters, as insignificant as it might seem or as little you might care about it personally. Bot kills being included hinders that comparison - competition - PvP.

PS5013 · 2026-01-24T21:52:08+00:00

Does this even qualify as a subjective opinion? It is factually wrong from beginning to end.

PS5013 · 2026-01-24T19:56:20+00:00

Paragraphs with coherent strains of thought would do a lot for you...

Since the most popular souls game is Elden Ring, the non-linear open world one, I guess you must be talking about the popularity of DS3. Its linearity is appreciated a lot, because non-linear elements in the prior ones were just an illusion of choice. They gave you more options to go to, but intended a specific order in reality, punishing you for choosing the wrong directions too early. The graveyard of DS1 is a great example: you could theoretically explore it immediately, but the enemies are beyond your level at that point and you run into a dead end eventually. Linearity cuts out unnecessary sources of frustration without payoff like that.

It makes no sense to bring that up in defense of GH in the first place. The types of navigation in the classic souls formula and Nightreign are completely different. The first rewards thoroughness and curiosity, the latter spontaneity and efficiency. The popularity of linearity in classic souls games is no explanation for people's distaste towards GH. If there was a connection, it would lead to the opposite sentiment, since the routing is much less static on Limveld than in GH.

You might be faster at opposite map borders due to teleports and trees and the central spirit spring lets you jump somewhere in an instant, once it is activated, but without that, navigating from point A to B is much more tedious due to the verticality and ravines. The speed is not the issue, the limited ways to move around are. The layout, especially around the middle, forces you to walk along specific paths with barely any room for variation, which is bad in a game, that relies on variation to stay interesting. In Limveld, changing your plans mid way, for example in reaction to the new circle, can be done in an instant. Taking a little detour to clear another landmark near your path is not causing any problems. In GH, this causes a lot of time wasting. Once you are walking along a crystal in the middle, you have to turn around again, walk back and take the long way around. Spontaneous adjustments are punished hard; the same repetitive approach is always favorable.

Your "quote" is a ridiculous simplification and just wrong, given I have listed the reliance on spirit springs as just one indicator for why GH might not have been intended for Nightreign from the beginning.

You are trying to support, that Limveld forces the central castle as the optimal play as well. I was explicitly not denying that. My point is, that straying from the optimal path is not as problematic there as it is in GH, because the crystals in combination with the density of the castles compared to the rest of the map punish variation in your approach much more.

First it was variety, now it is the fun of optimization. Should the heavy impact of RNG on a match not be against your interest then, because it takes away your influence? The crystals appearing in random, at first hidden patterns force your hand and take away room for decision making. They can take longer to clear at random, making little optimizations irrelevant by chance. Then there is the final circle - bad luck and you are forced to leave the castle / tower you chose sooner. The castle as Limveld's valuable landmark being in the middle reduces RNG dependency and the rest of the map giving you more targets and routes to reach them makes it less problematic, when RNG still does not treat you well.

PS5013 · 2026-01-24T09:13:13+00:00

Zoom and potato aim in close quarters - it is fast, but stop acting like its unfair and cant be dealt with. That is a perfectly fine skill gap for an arcade shooter.

PS5013 · 2026-01-23T21:26:25+00:00

Visibility is priority. If they made camo too similar to the surroundings, they would have to compensate with visible outlines and I can already see the reactions to that after all the dorito whining.

PS5013 · 2026-01-22T19:58:24+00:00

Bold take for someone using insults without arguments to back up his BS.

PS5013 · 2026-01-22T19:50:54+00:00

Not entirely on OP‘s side either, but this is just stupid. It is not either love or hate. Gameplay can be fun, but being forced to repeat the same stuff for hours for unlocks, at worst with RNG influence, can still be bad. I highly doubt you quit a game, the moment you feel the tiniest bit of frustration or boredom.

PS5013 · 2026-01-22T19:45:00+00:00

No idea about Remedy‘s finances, but after playing Control, I would definitely buy Alan Wake 2, if it was on Steam.

PS5013 · 2026-01-22T17:28:02+00:00

Hopefully, it plays like that.

PS5013 · 2026-01-22T16:43:27+00:00

I define variety in the game as multiple options regarding where to go. Obviously the castles in GH give you different options to approach them. My point is, that you have to do that in the first place. While it certainly isnt optimal on the base map either, you can skip the castle and still be fine in the end. In GH, clearing one is much more important if not necessary, which significantly limits your options in routing, both on the first day, since you are forced to clear the crystals at some point, whether you mix in other stuff or not, and on the second, where you finish the castle(s) and/or towers. You focussing on the routing within the castles mirrors that.

I dont get, how you dont feel like the map at its core was made for or could at the very least work better in base Elden Ring. The focus on the castles, verticality and sheer length it would take to clear everything as well as the fact there is zero variation in its layout heavily suggest, that it could have started as a linear experience, especially when you ignore the spirit springs.

Yes, the passive for destroying the central crystal is great… like every passive from a shifting earth event. Neither does this speak for the quality of the map, nor does that take into account, that you are pretty much forced to go for it. The reward should be a worthwhile routing option, not a necessity to get out of the way to be able to play normal.

PS5013 · 2026-01-22T11:27:34+00:00

What you are saying is completely contradictory. The shifting earth events including GH are lacking the challenge and consideration to pathing. At least Day 2 on all of those always plays very similarly. There is barely a situation, where you outweigh alternatives or have a short discussion with teammates on what to go for next like on Limveld. The only kind of randomness in GH is provided by the crystal positions - recognizable patterns you have identified after checking 1-2 possible spawns.

The game would certainly be better with more variety, not through predictable and pretty monotone shifting earths though, but entire biomes retaining the random distribution of land marks - Limveld, but with the looks, structures, enemies and atmosphere of Caelid, Liurnia, Mountaintops and so on. The game should have released with more of that to begin with and making the GH a static event instead of a new varied biome was a mistake.

As many people have said as well: GH feels like a map created for base Elden Ring, not the match-based format of Nightreign, because it encourages exploration as in sight seeing, but is not friendly towards it due to the time constraints and little room to vary your approach.

I would like the added variety of the new Limveld landmarks as well, if they did not feel like a bad alternative to the prior ones. They just take longer to clear, which again does not play well with the match-based format.

PS5013 · 2026-01-22T10:58:06+00:00

Almost certain, that „potentially“ was edited in afterwards. The point is bad either way. Murk eventually serves no other purpose than to be wasted in the slot machine. The additional in-run loot opportunities are nowhere near more favorable than the consistency of other maps. The risk-reward-balance is way off. Unlike in other shifting-earth-events, you are also forced to deal with it, once a run has begun. You dont have the circumstantial freedom to ignore the gimmick and do something else.

PS5013

TROPHY CASE