Author Topic: Tarkov loving sucks  (Read 746 times)

Does anybody actually like this game? I've played at least 70 hours so I can safely say this game is a loving pile of dogstuff, and theres nothing else to it.

First of all, balancing.
The ARMOR. What absolute buffoon was in charge of this system? Why can someone wear a jacket that is able to absorb 15 rounds of rifle shots? A helmet that completely botches all handguns? For a game so based heavily on realism, this is some Looney Tunes type bullstuff. How are new players supposed to progress throughout the game when they are being paired against people who have been playing for months, walking around as an invincible Terminator? I guess if they wanted to make separate brackets of players get paired with one another, being something like, Low gear, Intermediate gear, and Endgame gear, that would be a step in the right direction, but since someone who starts day 1 has the pleasure of fighting someone on day 100 is the stupidest stuff in a game I've ever seen.


Lag/desync/FPS
The desync is horrible in this game. People teleporting 10 feet infront of them instead of walking, sometimes complete MINUTES of lag which end in you suddenly dying, despite being in a place where the only entrance is being covered by yourself. Random spurts of pain and damage, invincible statues of people standing still, moonwalking scavs, you name it.

The only redeeming factor about this game is the weapons, their customization, animations, and graphics are pretty neat. I like how the weather goes off of Moscow's real, current weather.
Other than that, this game loving sucks harder than Fallout 76.

what ammo are you firing into what armor? my boy if you say HP i'm gonna whoop your ass. also people haven't been playing for months, it wiped not too long ago. if you wanna kill people that you call "terminators" just buy a loving Mosin and load it with the stuffty lvl 1 ammo from prapor and you can forget their day up easily.

oh and it's based off St. Petersburg weather
« Last Edit: May 07, 2019, 03:24:53 PM by Renousim »

I don't use HP but it doesn't matter anyway. An entire mag of 5.45 WILL kill you, regardless of ammo.

I remember shooting someone with a Mosin 4 times until they died. 3 of them were body shots.

I don't use HP but it doesn't matter anyway. An entire mag of 5.45 WILL kill you, regardless of ammo.

I remember shooting someone with a Mosin 4 times until they died. 3 of them were body shots.
an entire mag of stuff 5.45 ammo on gen4 armor would break your ribs not kill you

also the game is still beta and ammo is getting balanced constantly. armor matters more than you think

also early game you shouldn't be using 5.45. use 7.62x39 in an SKS or stick to the 7.62x54 with the Mosin. The Mosin can one shot to the head even with an Altyn

2-3 rounds will break your ribs. And I know for a fact, non-frangible lead coming at you at 3000 FPS isn't just gonna tickle you with a vest on.

I really struggle to see any sort of enjoyment from this game when fighting players with armor. Even when I'm wearing stuff, to balance it out, its such a silly mechanic.
I believe BSG's main goal is to make a hyper realistic shooter, is it not? So why do players turn into enemies from The Division?

Even when I'm watching streamers or Youtubers, they are outright mag dumping onto enemies to kill them, as 10 rounds aren't enough for some reason. 556, a notoriously fast, light cartridge with lots of armor piercing potential isn't enough. You need the 556 armor piercing incendiary tracer heatseeking autoaiming +P magnum rounds. That'll be 400,000 roubles for 10, please.
I know thats an overstatement, but whats the point of all the other 20 types of the same caliber?

also early game you shouldn't be using 5.45. use 7.62x39 in an SKS or stick to the 7.62x54 with the Mosin. The Mosin can one shot to the head even with an Altyn
see how silly this sounds? A rifle caliber used by the Russian military is not enough?

"But it will hurt a lot!" is a stupid argument for video games. The point of wearing armor in real life is very different from the point of wearing armor in video games. "Hyper-realism" isn't worth it if it invalidates half of the underlying game play mechanics.

whats the point of all the other 20 types of the same caliber?

What's the point of having more than 3 types of armor if everyone goes down in 3 hits with standard rifle ammo? All these different types of ammunition have different specs. If someone has taken the time to grind up to awesome unobtainum grade 6 body armor and helmet he should rightfully be able to withstand more than literally 1/10th of your magazine filled with lame-o cheap standard russian ammo. At the end of the day if your armor only protects you from a single extra bullet then nobody is going to bother with armor because it's going to be completely inconsequential in a game about shooting unsuspecting people in the back of the head

You're playing a glorified loot-die-repeat game, if you're looking for awesome 'realistic' gameplay where everyone dies in 1-3 shots because their ribs broke under their protection level 5000 body armor you should switch over to Insurgency or something. You're right about one thing: Tarkov does loving suck

i read the title and for a second i jumped with joy because i thought destroyerofblocks was back

yeah if ur looking for kills taking 1-4 shots, maybe 6 at most, just go play insurgency. 90% of the time you die in two or three bullets,40% of the time just one. armor just lets you survive a couple extra small arms rounds or a round from really far away, or survive being on the fringe of a grenade explosion.

anyone who judges game design off of 'realism' or anything pertaining to it is missing the point of video games. dying in 1-2 shots in real life isn't fun; dying in 1-2 shots in a video game isn't fun either. in fact dying in general by means outside your direct control isn't fun both in real life in video games.

when an engagement takes 4 seconds to end that gives both parties plenty of time to reassess their tactics, equipment and environment in order to outsmart the enemy and give themselves an edge. if the engagement takes 0.3 seconds because all the guns instakill then tactics, equipment and environment are no longer important and the gunfight has less depth. video games are an escape from real life and give you the ability to assert your dominance over enemies. but anyone can move their mouse to a pixel on the screen and press the mouse button twice. asserting your strategic dominance by making use of your equipment and environment to win an engagement is much more powerful and fulfilling then just popping someone in the head and watching them die.

there are plenty of games that prefer not to pride themselves on their unique gunplay. insurgency is one of those games. if you really want all your guns in the game to kill in 1-2 shots because its realistic and you want all 40 weapons to be functionally identical because they all kill in 1-2 shots because its realistic there are games like that.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2019, 06:34:29 PM by PhantOS »

there are plenty of fps games that pride themselves in realism. tarkov takes place in post apocalyptic russia. there might be some good complaints against the game but realism just doesn’t hold

there are plenty of fps games that pride themselves in realism. tarkov takes place in post apocalyptic russia. there might be some good complaints against the game but realism just doesn’t hold
squad is a good game

anyone who judges game design off of 'realism' or anything pertaining to it is missing the point of video games. dying in 1-2 shots in real life isn't fun; dying in 1-2 shots in a video game isn't fun either. in fact dying in general by means outside your direct control isn't fun both in real life in video games.

when an engagement takes 4 seconds to end that gives both parties plenty of time to reassess their tactics, equipment and environment in order to outsmart the enemy and give themselves an edge. if the engagement takes 0.3 seconds because all the guns instakill then tactics, equipment and environment are no longer important and the gunfight has less depth. video games are an escape from real life and give you the ability to assert your dominance over enemies. but anyone can move their mouse to a pixel on the screen and press the mouse button twice. asserting your strategic dominance by making use of your equipment and environment to win an engagement is much more powerful and fulfilling then just popping someone in the head and watching them die.

there are plenty of games that prefer not to pride themselves on their unique gunplay. insurgency is one of those games. if you really want all your guns in the game to kill in 1-2 shots because its realistic and you want all 40 weapons to be functionally identical because they all kill in 1-2 shots because its realistic there are games like that.
actually the more you play insurgency you realize that like in real life, guns of different types do serve a purpose. time-to-kill and effectiveness of various weapons actually makes a difference in the split second you and your enemy can see each other, esp when considering where you end up shooting (leg shots dont kill fast, prone reduces profile but more likely that a shot that hits you will instantly kill you due to only vulnerable parts being visible). but yeah there isnt room for 40 different weapons, but there's room for at least 15-20 as evidenced by the game's armaments.

regardless, the main appeal/focus is the tenseness of combat - nobody can one-man-gun and outskill everyone else, and you can die at any moment if you're not paying attention to your teammates and your positioning. the tactics reassessment is basically frontloaded - if you forget up and dont consider things carefully you die the second you're out of cover. there's no time to reassess or reposition while under fire unless your enemy is stressed and not aiming well, or you've already decided ahead of time where you're going. equipment definitely matters as explosives and scopes definitely make a difference in how effectively you can take control of an area (by killing the enemy or forcing them to retreat).

its definitely fun, and i dont think you should keep making these blanket statements about what is/isnt good/fun. i dont think anyone will dispute your statement about death irl though.

Right now the game is unfinished, and there are plans to add dozens of other affects to being shot. Right now if you're shot in the head in the game, and somehow survive, you'll become dazed and lose hearing temporarily.

Also idk what you're doing to suck at this game, but even with HP I only need 30 rounds. to kill a dude wearing Gen4. And if you look at it, despite the fact there's no negligible affect besides loving destroying your armor, it's still pretty realistic. The only completely unbalanced things in the game in terms of realism are helmets and drugs, but that's a given since it's a video game.

Also if you actually keep up to date with progress on the game, the Lead Dev is super active on reddit, and talks about his plans for the game all the time. He's noted in a few posts that the game actually isn't trying to be entirely realistic, it's trying to maintain realism with weapons, armor, and environment. Some things have to be balanced out of realism to be in favor of even being purchased.

Also 5.45 BT is super loving cheap just use that nerd. Literally rips through armor.

actually the more you play insurgency you realize that like in real life, guns of different types do serve a purpose. time-to-kill and effectiveness of various weapons actually makes a difference in the split second you and your enemy can see each other, esp when considering where you end up shooting (leg shots dont kill fast, prone reduces profile but more likely that a shot that hits you will instantly kill you due to only vulnerable parts being visible). but yeah there isnt room for 40 different weapons, but there's room for at least 15-20 as evidenced by the game's armaments.

regardless, the main appeal/focus is the tenseness of combat - nobody can one-man-gun and outskill everyone else, and you can die at any moment if you're not paying attention to your teammates and your positioning. the tactics reassessment is basically frontloaded - if you forget up and dont consider things carefully you die the second you're out of cover. there's no time to reassess or reposition while under fire unless your enemy is stressed and not aiming well, or you've already decided ahead of time where you're going. equipment definitely matters as explosives and scopes definitely make a difference in how effectively you can take control of an area (by killing the enemy or forcing them to retreat).

its definitely fun, and i dont think you should keep making these blanket statements about what is/isnt good/fun. i dont think anyone will dispute your statement about death irl though.
forget it man i can't argue on this forum anymore because you completely own me every time