Originally Posted by Foosinho
I kind of waffle back and forth on the minimap stuff. Lots of the aids are, IMO, a recognition that we cannot accurately "simulate" the experience via an HDTV and surround sound system. You lose a lot of situational awareness (I used to work in computer interface scientific research) that the aids add back in.
IOW, who's to say adding the minimap dots for unsilenced shots doesn't make up for the fact that the auditory quality limitations of the simulation prevents us from naturally determining the approximate location of the shot (which we would likely be able to do in RealLife)?
Of course, it might be better if the minimap dots were somehow "approximate". Ie, either drop them randomly within a radius of the actual shot origination, or drop down a faint circle indicating approximate location of the shot.
Agree with this. I've always thought that. That's why I like the spotting so much. In "real life" the soliders would be able to communicate more effectively than we can, to the point that they would be able to identify the things they saw. Since it's not as practical for us to do that (ie we only have our voices and can't point, etc), the spotting seems like a good compromise, a way to say "I saw that guy there
But yeah, the spotting in BC2 was a little bit too much perhaps. But in my experience with BF3 in the beta, it was too little to the point of "why bother" wasting your time trying and hoping it would take a spot. It's one thing to prevent spotting people you don't even see by spamming the horizon/forest, but it's another to make it hard to spot guys you truly do see. It felt like BC2 let you get close and would let it spot, but in BF3 you need to be aiming dead at them. And if you're aiming dead at them anyway, why in the world would you take your finger off the aiming sticks to spot them, when if you just pulled the trigger, they are dead anyway, with no need to have spotted them. So, again, why bother.