New weapon, a 9mm pistol with full auto mode, the P18C, was added.
Damnit blizzard whoever wrote this game, you already had two pistols named P{meaningless letters and numbers}. I understand P stands for Pistol but could you try being slightly more creative?
...what? Those are actual guns in real life. They're not meaningless letters and numbers at all.
That may be true (I've shot lots of guns IRL, mostly .22 rifles, but hell if I know what any of them were called). But why use even bother to use real names, especially when those names are generic crap? Someone already mentioned license problems, so that's one reason not to.
Using a naming convention like PUBG does removes the "what should I call this instead" work from the dev and keeps everything consistent. They're adding a Glock 18C so instead of having to figure out something completely different that makes sense they can just call it the P18C and move onto more important things. It's close enough to the real name that it works fine and helps keep things feeling at least a little realistic. A lot of the guns are called what they really are (i.e. M16A4, VSS Vintorez, UMP9, etc.) so it's only a minority of firearms (mostly just the pistols and shotguns) that need the name change.
Tried playing a few games with @Mvrck and our last few had just teerrriiibbblle loot RNG and then we got killed via wacky car hit detection. Then I went off to a solo match and all I found was a shotgun.
I always wondered how putting real life guns in games worked. Did they have to get permission from the people who make the vector to put it in the game? Do gun manufacturers just let it slide because it's free advertising? Is it fair use?
I always wondered how putting real life guns in games worked. Did they have to get permission from the people who make the vector to put it in the game? Do gun manufacturers just let it slide because it's free advertising? Is it fair use?
The way I've always understood it it's the manufacturer's name that can't be used and obvious manufacturer specific markings can't be put in without getting a license to do so from the manufacturer. As long as the devs make their own model for a firearm it can look pretty damn spot on and nobody gives a shit. Counterstrike is a great example where, yeah, it's pretty obvious those are Beretta 92FSs, but they've been called Dual Elites forever and nary an eyebrow has ever been raised. IANAL but after playing video games most of my life this has been how it has always worked so I think it's a pretty safe assumption about the legality of everything.
The virtual gun has long been an indispensable item in the game designer's toolkit, then. But as weapons popped into 3D, developers began to set their games against the backdrop of real-world conflicts, and to hanker for brand-name firearms. A real-life weapon could lend a sheen of authenticity to a game. The gun's role in the video game was expanding.
This shift was experienced first-hand by Martin Hollis, the creator of GoldenEye. Released in 1997 for the Nintendo 64, it was one of the first console games to feature 3D firearms. "Most of the guns in the game were modelled on real weapons," he says today. "The Walther PPK, Kalashnikov AK47, FN P90 and so on."
"I assumed novelists and filmmakers have no compulsion to license. We removed the real gun names, replacing them with fictional ones - sometimes based on team member's initials and sometimes on a sense of authenticity."
The Klobb, named after GoldenEye's producer Ken Lobb, is based on the on the real-world Skorpion VZ/61.
But at a late stage in development Ken Lobb, the game's producer, called Hollis to say they could not use the genuine brand names. "I was not pleased because it would decrease the realism, or at least verisimilitude," he recalls. "I assumed novelists and filmmakers have no compulsion to license. We removed the real gun names, replacing them with fictional ones - sometimes based on team members' initials and sometimes on a sense of authenticity. So we have the DD44 Dostovei named after [GoldenEye designer] David Doak, the Klobb after Ken Lobb and the PP7 because... It just sounds good."
The use of fabricated gun names was acceptable in the fictional universe of James Bond, where a licence to kill did not rely upon licensing. But for those games based around real armed forces, the inclusion of brand names was necessary to remain faithful to the source material.
Today licensed weapons are commonplace in video games, but the deals between game makers and gun-manufacturer are shrouded. Not one of the publishers contacted for this article was willing to discuss the practice. (EA: "I'm afraid we can't progress this." Activision: "Not something we can assist with at present... My hands are tied." Codemasters: "We're focused on our racing titles these days." Crytek: "We can't help you with that request." Sega: "[This] doesn't sit comfortably." Sony: "I can't help with this I'm afraid.")
However, the gun makers are more forthcoming. "[It's] absolutely the same as with cars in games," says Barrett's Vaughn. "We must be paid a royalty fee - either a one-time payment or a percentage of sales, all negotiable. Typically, a licensee pays between 5 per cent to 10 per cent retail price for the agreement. But we could negotiate on that."
According to Vaughn, the cost of the license fee depends on the reputation and achievements of the developer in question. "It could be a few thousand dollars or many thousands, based on past projects and projected sales," he explains. The way in which the weapon is presented in the game is important too. "We must give prior approval to the image or logo in order to protect the brand's integrity."
Some game makers have found ways to include real-life guns in their games while avoiding licensing costs. One ex-Codemasters employee, who asked to remain anonymous, described his experience of working on Operation Flashpoint, a franchise featuring the US Marines. "We didn't license weapons in the Flashpoint series," he says. "We covered ourselves from a legal angle [by not using any] names or manufacturers. The general rule is that you can use the model delineation but you can't use its proper name manufacturer name without prior permission.
"For example, we used 'M4A1 Carbine' which is the weapon's military code. Carbine means it's a shorter version for use in Close Quarters Battle. I forget if we refer to the weapons by name in the script but we were being so careful that we checked, double-checked and in many cases triple-checked with legal that we could use the weapon model numbers."
Another benefit of eschewing brand names is that developers can ignore the additional stipulations laid down by gun manufacturers. "We want to know explicitly how the rifle is to be used, ensuring that we are shown in a positive light... Such as the 'good guys' using the rifle," says Vaughn. His company insists that its gun isn't "used by individuals, organisations, countries or companies that would be shown as enemies of the United States or its citizens." Ideally, Vaughn says, Barrett's gun will only be used "by US law enforcement or US military".
Another key concern is that the weapon functions in a realistic manner. Barrett insists the game developer purchases one of the company's guns to aid the 3D modellers in their work. "[The gun must] perform to the standards that our rifles do in the real world," Vaughn says. "Barrett firearms is known for its quality and the brand must always be placed on that foundation."
I would really prefer imaginary manufacturer names to short number/letter combinations. That's pretty high up in my list of "things I'd like changed in PUBG".
Memorable, non-technical names for guns
Shortcut button to place map marker on your current location
Squad member color used in more places (so I can say RED instead of trying to pronounce usernames)
Ammo-type icon next to every weapon instead of just the ammo type name (which is weirdly absent for a few guns right now?)
Mic-toggle option added to always-on, mute, and push-to-talk
Option to roll a grenade or just drop it where I'm standing
I would like to see a variant match playlist. Like, sometimes the game is normal, sometimes every gun is a micro uzi. Sometimes there's more ARs, sometimes it's ONLY GRENADES. Low gravity! The ENTIRE MAP is a red zone! There could be a lot of weird fun stuff.
I would really prefer imaginary manufacturer names to short number/letter combinations. That's pretty high up in my list of "things I'd like changed in PUBG".
I would really prefer imaginary manufacturer names to short number/letter combinations. That's pretty high up in my list of "things I'd like changed in PUBG".
Totally on board with fake branding for weapons. Even as a guy who's into guns, I much prefer easy to remember names to model numbers, or at least having unique shortcodes instead of all pistols being P### or shotguns being S###
AK-762
M16 Service
M416 Carbine
SCAR-L (sounds cool already)
[*] Option to roll a grenade or just drop it where I'm standing
Hold left click to ready a grenade, then right click to switch to the lower throw arc/roll... you still have to be holding the left click, or you will just throw it.
It doesn't really count, but if you want to drop a flash or smoke grenade, just hold left click until it drops. The flash will be behind your character, so it won't blind you. You can also just switch to a gun while you have a grenade cooked to drop it to your feet, although at one point I'm pretty sure it kept the grenade in your hands.
I would really prefer imaginary manufacturer names to short number/letter combinations. That's pretty high up in my list of "things I'd like changed in PUBG".
Option to roll a grenade or just drop it where I'm standing
Edit: Sorry, left click, then right click to roll it.
[*] Option to roll a grenade or just drop it where I'm standing
Hold left click to ready a grenade, then right click to switch to the lower throw arc/roll... you still have to be holding the left click, or you will just throw it.
It doesn't really count, but if you want to drop a flash or smoke grenade, just hold left click until it drops. The flash will be behind your character, so it won't blind you. You can also just switch to a gun while you have a grenade cooked to drop it to your feet, although at one point I'm pretty sure it kept the grenade in your hands.
One day I'm gonna try the "run into a room where I know 4 guys are while cooking a grenade" tactic
Also known as "Hazing the XCOM Rookie"
+1
Options
Tynnanseldom correct, never unsureRegistered Userregular
Looks like the new shacks are vulnerable to vehicles, going by some gifs on r/pubattlegrounds
That makes me indescribably happy. I'm going to get a UAZ and drive around the map crushing every shack while piping battle music through the ingame voice.
I hope one day we have buildings that are completely breakable. Slam a car through a wall or grenade a second floor room and it leaves a hole in the floor that someone falls through. Be able to knock trees down for instant cover or a death trap.
+3
Options
Librarian's ghostLibrarian, Ghostbuster, and TimSporkRegistered Userregular
I hope one day we have buildings that are completely breakable. Slam a car through a wall or grenade a second floor room and it leaves a hole in the floor that someone falls through. Be able to knock trees down for instant cover or a death trap.
So long as it will also cause near total destruction to the car as well.
Tynnanseldom correct, never unsureRegistered Userregular
The new sunset condition is so gorgeous, even just from watching streams on my phone. I can't wait to jump in.
+2
Options
Librarian's ghostLibrarian, Ghostbuster, and TimSporkRegistered Userregular
edited June 2017
I tired out the test server. My game seems to run much better now.
Also I made it to #16 and got killed by the new rifle.
Also I don't know if that rifle has a learning curve or what but the guy shooting at me had to fire a ton of bullets before he hit me and I was not particularly trying to dodge much. They were hitting the ground all around me.
I finally played some 4 man squads with some good buddies. All I really had was a Kar98 and an AK with no attachments, so I was playing support sniper for the team. It got down to the point where we were holding out at the top of a hill and made it to the top 10.
One of my squaddies when down and no one could reach him. We dealt with his attackers. Last few boys were below us. And, well, first chicken dinner for me and it sure was tasty.
Tynnanseldom correct, never unsureRegistered Userregular
I don't think I'll ever get tired of "First Chicken Dinner" posts. I remember how tense and amazing it was to get mine, and that feeling comes back vicariously when WINNER WINNER shows up in a new post.
What I love about this game is wins are so rare for most people that I don't get mad about losing. It's more a game about personal bests. Something like Overwatch gets me mad is I'm on a losing streak. In PUBG I'm happy if I just kill a dude, and pretty psyched if I get top 10.
Well when it comes to winning, the best that you can really do is work to consistently make it to the final circles and the small club of remaining players. Once you get to that point, victory favors the guy who's foxhole stays within the circle. The people within that final crucible are all competent and being flushed out of your cover while they can stay entrenched in theirs is practically a death sentence.
You can mitigate that to an extent with grenades. Mostly smoke grenades to buy you an opportunity for obscured movement to new cover within the next circle, but also potentially frags or flashbangs to defeat some types of cover. But that doesn't change the fact that RNG plays a tremendous role in selecting who ultimately wins the chicken dinner. You just can't allow yourself to become distraught if the dice roll against you at the end. You just need to work so that you consistently make it into a position where you can partake in those final dice rolls.
Well when it comes to winning, the best that you can really do is work to consistently make it to the final circles and the small club of remaining players. Once you get to that point, victory favors the guy who's foxhole stays within the circle. The people within that final crucible are all competent and being flushed out of your cover while they can stay entrenched in theirs is practically a death sentence.
You can mitigate that to an extent with grenades. Mostly smoke grenades to buy you an opportunity for obscured movement to new cover within the next circle, but also potentially frags or flashbangs to defeat some types of cover. But that doesn't change the fact that RNG plays a tremendous role in selecting who ultimately wins the chicken dinner. You just can't allow yourself to become distraught if the dice roll against you at the end. You just need to work so that you consistently make it into a position where you can partake in those final dice rolls.
People in the last circle being competent? Not exactly a given. I mean, I've been there semi-regularly, man!
All joking aside, though. Every time I'm in the last 10, there's a clown or two who just floated in from whatever hidy hole he had. These are the jokers that I get to kill, thus giving my position away to the trained killers who proceed to take me down.
These are the stories of Dwarf Fortress. Legends have been forged there, and meticulousy gathered in one mighty hub: http://dfstories.com/start-here/
They may not be mlg pros with 360 no-scope headshot skills, but they're not making stupid mistakes. At least the people that consistently make it to the finals.
Occasionally clowns get lucky and make it to the finals. Especially if they're hiding in a place that was in the last 3-4 circles and have just waited as the circle closed around them.
But the point is that the final circles contain a high concentration of dangerous people and that's why RNG forcing you out of cover is so dangerous at the end.
Well when it comes to winning, the best that you can really do is work to consistently make it to the final circles and the small club of remaining players. Once you get to that point, victory favors the guy who's foxhole stays within the circle. The people within that final crucible are all competent and being flushed out of your cover while they can stay entrenched in theirs is practically a death sentence.
You can mitigate that to an extent with grenades. Mostly smoke grenades to buy you an opportunity for obscured movement to new cover within the next circle, but also potentially frags or flashbangs to defeat some types of cover. But that doesn't change the fact that RNG plays a tremendous role in selecting who ultimately wins the chicken dinner. You just can't allow yourself to become distraught if the dice roll against you at the end. You just need to work so that you consistently make it into a position where you can partake in those final dice rolls.
I think an aggressive playstyle neutralizes most of the late game RNG. Just watch the popular twitch streamers, they can consistently bring in wins. This wouldn't be possible if RNG played a major factor at the end of game. Yes, you see an occasional loss, completely due to a bad final circle, but for the most part it just seems like these streamers are just always lucky. When you look at it more in depth, you see that their aggressive playstyle ends up clearing their side of the circle, which frees more movement options up. This allows them to make big moves into the last circles that just can't happen if you play a normal, more passive style.
Ratsult2 on
+4
Options
mojojoeoA block off the park, living the dream.Registered Userregular
Unused cars now spawn facing random directions.
Unused cars now spawn facing random directions.
Nothing is safe.
Chief Wiggum: "Ladies, please. All our founding fathers, astronauts, and World Series heroes have been either drunk or on cocaine."
Played two matches this morning after the patch. It feels good ya'll. Even the starter island/plane is smooth now instead of a laggy stuttery mess. I haven't had any giant frame drops like I used to get while playing or during firefights, either.
What I love about this game is wins are so rare for most people that I don't get mad about losing. It's more a game about personal bests. Something like Overwatch gets me mad is I'm on a losing streak. In PUBG I'm happy if I just kill a dude, and pretty psyched if I get top 10.
The best thing about this win was that our team, despite the drinking (I had 3.5 beers at the time of the win), were playing really well. We had good call-outs, good positioning, and overall just good teamwork. Squaddie got knocked down, I run over and pick him up and throw a first aid kit his way. I had the only lv3 backpack, so I was carrying a lot of supplies like extra meds and ammo. It felt well earned.
Well when it comes to winning, the best that you can really do is work to consistently make it to the final circles and the small club of remaining players. Once you get to that point, victory favors the guy who's foxhole stays within the circle. The people within that final crucible are all competent and being flushed out of your cover while they can stay entrenched in theirs is practically a death sentence.
You can mitigate that to an extent with grenades. Mostly smoke grenades to buy you an opportunity for obscured movement to new cover within the next circle, but also potentially frags or flashbangs to defeat some types of cover. But that doesn't change the fact that RNG plays a tremendous role in selecting who ultimately wins the chicken dinner. You just can't allow yourself to become distraught if the dice roll against you at the end. You just need to work so that you consistently make it into a position where you can partake in those final dice rolls.
I think an aggressive playstyle neutralizes most of the late game RNG. Just watch the popular twitch streamers, they can consistently bring in wins. This wouldn't be possible if RNG played a major factor at the end of game. Yes, you see an occasional loss, completely due to a bad final circle, but for the most part it just seems like these streamers are just always lucky. When you look at it more in depth, you see that their aggressive playstyle ends up clearing their side of the circle, which frees more movement options up. This allows them to make big moves into the last circles that just can't happen if you play a normal, more passive style.
This is a great point. To add to this: they're setting up their endgame position way before they get to the final circles. They're assessing the possible positions several circles in advance and deciding where they'll end up (and therefore, where they need to approach from), sometimes down to the level of a specific defilade. This is usually something that happens on stream without much fanfare - sometimes a streamer will talk through their thought process, but more often it happens invisibly as they're checking their map. The difference between a decisive player and a reactive player shows in win%.
Advice I'll port over from hearthstone, but which definitely applies to pubg: always go through your games as a series of decisions, and have a rationale for every choice. It's fine to be wrong about those decisions, as long as you can assess what led to that choice and how to improve on it the next time you see the same situation.
Well when it comes to winning, the best that you can really do is work to consistently make it to the final circles and the small club of remaining players. Once you get to that point, victory favors the guy who's foxhole stays within the circle. The people within that final crucible are all competent and being flushed out of your cover while they can stay entrenched in theirs is practically a death sentence.
You can mitigate that to an extent with grenades. Mostly smoke grenades to buy you an opportunity for obscured movement to new cover within the next circle, but also potentially frags or flashbangs to defeat some types of cover. But that doesn't change the fact that RNG plays a tremendous role in selecting who ultimately wins the chicken dinner. You just can't allow yourself to become distraught if the dice roll against you at the end. You just need to work so that you consistently make it into a position where you can partake in those final dice rolls.
I think an aggressive playstyle neutralizes most of the late game RNG. Just watch the popular twitch streamers, they can consistently bring in wins. This wouldn't be possible if RNG played a major factor at the end of game. Yes, you see an occasional loss, completely due to a bad final circle, but for the most part it just seems like these streamers are just always lucky. When you look at it more in depth, you see that their aggressive playstyle ends up clearing their side of the circle, which frees more movement options up. This allows them to make big moves into the last circles that just can't happen if you play a normal, more passive style.
This is a great point. To add to this: they're setting up their endgame position way before they get to the final circles. They're assessing the possible positions several circles in advance and deciding where they'll end up (and therefore, where they need to approach from), sometimes down to the level of a specific defilade. This is usually something that happens on stream without much fanfare - sometimes a streamer will talk through their thought process, but more often it happens invisibly as they're checking their map. The difference between a decisive player and a reactive player shows in win%.
Advice I'll port over from hearthstone, but which definitely applies to pubg: always go through your games as a series of decisions, and have a rationale for every choice. It's fine to be wrong about those decisions, as long as you can assess what led to that choice and how to improve on it the next time you see the same situation.
I've noticed games where we've done the worst are when we have like two people standing outside while two more people loot/share loot and half the team is like "Okay now where do we go?" and the other half isn't paying attention and sharing loot and then the circle shows up and everyone's in a rush and can't decide and then everyone gets ambushed and killed. Gotta have a plan, gotta stick to the plan, gotta go fast.
I was watching a streamer (can't really remember his name. English fellow though) last night and he was basically doing a real-time play by play of his game. "I won't go over there because that boy has the high ground and loads of cover. It's best to just run away and wait for him to leave his safe zone."
He also kept checking behind him around the edges of the white/blue circles, always repeating that he's checking for stragglers who won't think twice about getting a free kill. So now, I will incorporate that into my gameplay.
Well when it comes to winning, the best that you can really do is work to consistently make it to the final circles and the small club of remaining players. Once you get to that point, victory favors the guy who's foxhole stays within the circle. The people within that final crucible are all competent and being flushed out of your cover while they can stay entrenched in theirs is practically a death sentence.
You can mitigate that to an extent with grenades. Mostly smoke grenades to buy you an opportunity for obscured movement to new cover within the next circle, but also potentially frags or flashbangs to defeat some types of cover. But that doesn't change the fact that RNG plays a tremendous role in selecting who ultimately wins the chicken dinner. You just can't allow yourself to become distraught if the dice roll against you at the end. You just need to work so that you consistently make it into a position where you can partake in those final dice rolls.
I think an aggressive playstyle neutralizes most of the late game RNG. Just watch the popular twitch streamers, they can consistently bring in wins. This wouldn't be possible if RNG played a major factor at the end of game. Yes, you see an occasional loss, completely due to a bad final circle, but for the most part it just seems like these streamers are just always lucky. When you look at it more in depth, you see that their aggressive playstyle ends up clearing their side of the circle, which frees more movement options up. This allows them to make big moves into the last circles that just can't happen if you play a normal, more passive style.
This is a great point. To add to this: they're setting up their endgame position way before they get to the final circles. They're assessing the possible positions several circles in advance and deciding where they'll end up (and therefore, where they need to approach from), sometimes down to the level of a specific defilade. This is usually something that happens on stream without much fanfare - sometimes a streamer will talk through their thought process, but more often it happens invisibly as they're checking their map. The difference between a decisive player and a reactive player shows in win%.
Advice I'll port over from hearthstone, but which definitely applies to pubg: always go through your games as a series of decisions, and have a rationale for every choice. It's fine to be wrong about those decisions, as long as you can assess what led to that choice and how to improve on it the next time you see the same situation.
I've noticed games where we've done the worst are when we have like two people standing outside while two more people loot/share loot and half the team is like "Okay now where do we go?" and the other half isn't paying attention and sharing loot and then the circle shows up and everyone's in a rush and can't decide and then everyone gets ambushed and killed. Gotta have a plan, gotta stick to the plan, gotta go fast.
When I play with my friend, I always tell him that once we arrive a place we wanted to be, we need to know where to go next. He finds it irritating that we get to a small village and I'm asking him for suggestions on where we should go.
Well when it comes to winning, the best that you can really do is work to consistently make it to the final circles and the small club of remaining players. Once you get to that point, victory favors the guy who's foxhole stays within the circle. The people within that final crucible are all competent and being flushed out of your cover while they can stay entrenched in theirs is practically a death sentence.
You can mitigate that to an extent with grenades. Mostly smoke grenades to buy you an opportunity for obscured movement to new cover within the next circle, but also potentially frags or flashbangs to defeat some types of cover. But that doesn't change the fact that RNG plays a tremendous role in selecting who ultimately wins the chicken dinner. You just can't allow yourself to become distraught if the dice roll against you at the end. You just need to work so that you consistently make it into a position where you can partake in those final dice rolls.
I think an aggressive playstyle neutralizes most of the late game RNG. Just watch the popular twitch streamers, they can consistently bring in wins. This wouldn't be possible if RNG played a major factor at the end of game. Yes, you see an occasional loss, completely due to a bad final circle, but for the most part it just seems like these streamers are just always lucky. When you look at it more in depth, you see that their aggressive playstyle ends up clearing their side of the circle, which frees more movement options up. This allows them to make big moves into the last circles that just can't happen if you play a normal, more passive style.
This is a great point. To add to this: they're setting up their endgame position way before they get to the final circles. They're assessing the possible positions several circles in advance and deciding where they'll end up (and therefore, where they need to approach from), sometimes down to the level of a specific defilade. This is usually something that happens on stream without much fanfare - sometimes a streamer will talk through their thought process, but more often it happens invisibly as they're checking their map. The difference between a decisive player and a reactive player shows in win%.
Advice I'll port over from hearthstone, but which definitely applies to pubg: always go through your games as a series of decisions, and have a rationale for every choice. It's fine to be wrong about those decisions, as long as you can assess what led to that choice and how to improve on it the next time you see the same situation.
I've noticed games where we've done the worst are when we have like two people standing outside while two more people loot/share loot and half the team is like "Okay now where do we go?" and the other half isn't paying attention and sharing loot and then the circle shows up and everyone's in a rush and can't decide and then everyone gets ambushed and killed. Gotta have a plan, gotta stick to the plan, gotta go fast.
When I play with my friend, I always tell him that once we arrive a place we wanted to be, we need to know where to go next. He finds it irritating that we get to a small village and I'm asking him for suggestions on where we should go.
Dude just wants to settle down in a small town with you and start a family. A man can dream.
Posts
Using a naming convention like PUBG does removes the "what should I call this instead" work from the dev and keeps everything consistent. They're adding a Glock 18C so instead of having to figure out something completely different that makes sense they can just call it the P18C and move onto more important things. It's close enough to the real name that it works fine and helps keep things feeling at least a little realistic. A lot of the guns are called what they really are (i.e. M16A4, VSS Vintorez, UMP9, etc.) so it's only a minority of firearms (mostly just the pistols and shotguns) that need the name change.
Tried playing a few games with @Mvrck and our last few had just teerrriiibbblle loot RNG and then we got killed via wacky car hit detection. Then I went off to a solo match and all I found was a shotgun.
That's it.
I think that's enough PUBG for tonight >_>
The way I've always understood it it's the manufacturer's name that can't be used and obvious manufacturer specific markings can't be put in without getting a license to do so from the manufacturer. As long as the devs make their own model for a firearm it can look pretty damn spot on and nobody gives a shit. Counterstrike is a great example where, yeah, it's pretty obvious those are Beretta 92FSs, but they've been called Dual Elites forever and nary an eyebrow has ever been raised. IANAL but after playing video games most of my life this has been how it has always worked so I think it's a pretty safe assumption about the legality of everything.
EDIT: This article gets into at one point and yeah, basically what I said only with people who do this shit for a living talking about it. Relevant bits have been quoted. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-02-01-shooters-how-video-games-fund-arms-manufacturers
(Spoilered for wall of text)
Barotto 92fs
Block 18c
Sega 12
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
"8008-135"
"NATO X-Treme"
"The Killinator"
AK-762
M16 Service
M416 Carbine
SCAR-L (sounds cool already)
SKS Simonov
Kurtz 98
AWP (comon')
M24 Recon
VSS Thread Cutter
M249 SAW
Kolt 1911
Italiano P92
Leon 1895 Revolver
Antelope 12k
Chesterfield 1897
Italiano Gold 686
KRISS-45
GAL Machinepistol
Chicago Typewriter
UMP-9
Hold left click to ready a grenade, then right click to switch to the lower throw arc/roll... you still have to be holding the left click, or you will just throw it.
It doesn't really count, but if you want to drop a flash or smoke grenade, just hold left click until it drops. The flash will be behind your character, so it won't blind you. You can also just switch to a gun while you have a grenade cooked to drop it to your feet, although at one point I'm pretty sure it kept the grenade in your hands.
Edit: Sorry, left click, then right click to roll it.
One day I'm gonna try the "run into a room where I know 4 guys are while cooking a grenade" tactic
Also known as "Hazing the XCOM Rookie"
Inquisitor77: Rius, you are Sisyphus and melee Wizard is your boulder
Tube: This must be what it felt like to be an Iraqi when Saddam was killed
Bookish Stickers - Mrs. Rius' Etsy shop with bumper stickers and vinyl decals.
Some shacks are breakable, they are missing a roof and a door, and look pretty broken down. The destruction looks like like the fences.
Some shacks are the old model, only made of cement, and are unbreakable.
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
So long as it will also cause near total destruction to the car as well.
Also I made it to #16 and got killed by the new rifle.
Also I don't know if that rifle has a learning curve or what but the guy shooting at me had to fire a ton of bullets before he hit me and I was not particularly trying to dodge much. They were hitting the ground all around me.
One of my squaddies when down and no one could reach him. We dealt with his attackers. Last few boys were below us. And, well, first chicken dinner for me and it sure was tasty.
You can mitigate that to an extent with grenades. Mostly smoke grenades to buy you an opportunity for obscured movement to new cover within the next circle, but also potentially frags or flashbangs to defeat some types of cover. But that doesn't change the fact that RNG plays a tremendous role in selecting who ultimately wins the chicken dinner. You just can't allow yourself to become distraught if the dice roll against you at the end. You just need to work so that you consistently make it into a position where you can partake in those final dice rolls.
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
So I play this with a group of friends when I get a chance. This was 2nd chicken dinner and it tasted as good as the first.
I'm happy to die as long as I killed someone in the match.
Also beating someone crawling with a crouched frying pan never gets old. Thunk!
Edit: Yes the pic above no kills but I survived the play zone.
People in the last circle being competent? Not exactly a given. I mean, I've been there semi-regularly, man!
All joking aside, though. Every time I'm in the last 10, there's a clown or two who just floated in from whatever hidy hole he had. These are the jokers that I get to kill, thus giving my position away to the trained killers who proceed to take me down.
Occasionally clowns get lucky and make it to the finals. Especially if they're hiding in a place that was in the last 3-4 circles and have just waited as the circle closed around them.
But the point is that the final circles contain a high concentration of dangerous people and that's why RNG forcing you out of cover is so dangerous at the end.
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
I think an aggressive playstyle neutralizes most of the late game RNG. Just watch the popular twitch streamers, they can consistently bring in wins. This wouldn't be possible if RNG played a major factor at the end of game. Yes, you see an occasional loss, completely due to a bad final circle, but for the most part it just seems like these streamers are just always lucky. When you look at it more in depth, you see that their aggressive playstyle ends up clearing their side of the circle, which frees more movement options up. This allows them to make big moves into the last circles that just can't happen if you play a normal, more passive style.
Unused cars now spawn facing random directions.
Nothing is safe.
The best thing about this win was that our team, despite the drinking (I had 3.5 beers at the time of the win), were playing really well. We had good call-outs, good positioning, and overall just good teamwork. Squaddie got knocked down, I run over and pick him up and throw a first aid kit his way. I had the only lv3 backpack, so I was carrying a lot of supplies like extra meds and ammo. It felt well earned.
Teamwork is the dreamwork.
This is a great point. To add to this: they're setting up their endgame position way before they get to the final circles. They're assessing the possible positions several circles in advance and deciding where they'll end up (and therefore, where they need to approach from), sometimes down to the level of a specific defilade. This is usually something that happens on stream without much fanfare - sometimes a streamer will talk through their thought process, but more often it happens invisibly as they're checking their map. The difference between a decisive player and a reactive player shows in win%.
Advice I'll port over from hearthstone, but which definitely applies to pubg: always go through your games as a series of decisions, and have a rationale for every choice. It's fine to be wrong about those decisions, as long as you can assess what led to that choice and how to improve on it the next time you see the same situation.
I've noticed games where we've done the worst are when we have like two people standing outside while two more people loot/share loot and half the team is like "Okay now where do we go?" and the other half isn't paying attention and sharing loot and then the circle shows up and everyone's in a rush and can't decide and then everyone gets ambushed and killed. Gotta have a plan, gotta stick to the plan, gotta go fast.
He also kept checking behind him around the edges of the white/blue circles, always repeating that he's checking for stragglers who won't think twice about getting a free kill. So now, I will incorporate that into my gameplay.
When I play with my friend, I always tell him that once we arrive a place we wanted to be, we need to know where to go next. He finds it irritating that we get to a small village and I'm asking him for suggestions on where we should go.
Dude just wants to settle down in a small town with you and start a family. A man can dream.