Dear Splash Damage,

My name is Alex and I wish I loved BRINK.

Ever since I saw the amazing cinematic trailer for it i was obsessed over what this game could mean for the industry. But sadly, what it is right now is lacking in a few key areas. Obviously you don't really want to hear a whole lot of negativity from a consumer, because, I mean, what the hell do I know about making a video game?

But here's what I do know, as a designer; BRINK is amazing looking. You nailed that. You clearly have some talented artists and designers working with you and it shows in that BRINK doesn't look like every other first-person shooter flooding the market trying to be the next Call Of Duty (which is a hideous, completely overrated game anyway).

Another thing you pulled off very nicely is the movement system. Getting around the map is fluid and feels very natural. I feel at times maybe the level design doesn't lend itself to you using S.M.A.R.T. all the time, but that could be more a reflection on me as a player than the layouts themselves.

Customisation is very well done with all of the outfits being able to be chopped and changed without clipping issue on all body sizes, and you should definitely be stoked about that because I've yet to see it done so well in a game this generation.

But now I have to get to the things that need changing, and more importantly, the future of BRINK.

CONTENT

The biggest issue, right now, is that there just isn't enough content. I have passed the whole game and I got it yesterday. This was without playing with other players as well. It needs more maps, more levels, more everything. The customisation system is very solid but again, there's just not enough outfits there to warrant playing for too much longer. More importantly they are just too easy to unlock. More levels as well, I'm halfway through the leveling process and it's the second day of me playing. This needs to be rectified in future downloadable content, but not in the way every developer is doing it right now. More on that later.

HEADSHOTS

The lack of substantial headshot damage is a huge huge issue for several reasons.

Firstly, it means that your S.M.A.R.T. movement system is not being integrated into the combat as effectively as it could be, because when the air is full of bullets and the only way to kill people is to start spraying them with your weapon before they do the same to you, sliding and jumping around gets relegated to the sort of thing you do when you're getting TO the combat, not once you're in it.

Secondly, because of the hideous bot balancing (which i am aware many people have made clear to you guys) you become incredibly frustrated with the way that you cannot take on more than, at maximum, two enemies at once, because you simply can't kill them quick enough. While your bots are constantly securing command posts (still not sure what command posts actually do for you that's worthwhile) or doing other unimportant tasks, or hanging back to run around in circles, you are left to plant/defuse bombs on pillars and fight off all the enemies at the same time. If your headshots did significantly more damage you'd get to a point where you could really feel like the hero (something i believe you were trying to convey by making friendly bots deliberately less adept). I would assume that fixing the damage headshots do is a fairly painless process (please correct me if I'm wrong, I really am only guessing). As for the bots; the enemy AI is ruthless and at times, very effective, so I know this is an issue that'd be easy (proportionately) to address. Wouldn't it just be a matter of changing the friendly bots' priorities rather than rewriting the way they work entirely?

ONLINE PLAY

But you never really wanted people to play with bots, did you? That's why you give things like EXP bonus for being online, or completing the match while online, and all the other things you did to encourage online play. But my online play experience has been completely broken. I am playing on Xbox 360 in Australia and to say the connection is horrible would be an understatement. I have connected with a maximum of one other human while playing co-op campaign during the times I have tried. One person is not enough. I get constant "rubber banding" (a term I never knew until i looked it up to explain my BRINK experience) and huge amounts of lag which leaves the game completely unplayable online. I can't get around relying on the bots because they are the only option I have. Maybe you haven't taken into account that Australia's connection to American and UK players would be so bad, but let me tell you, it really really is. And you're probably getting the best profits per game from Australian customers. We pay $89.95AUD for your game here, a standard price for new Xbox 360 games set back when the Australian dollar was low and the American dollar was high. But if you do a bit of research you can now see that the Australian dollar is actually stronger than the American dollar in 2011. Which means we are paying thirty dollars more for a product that deliberately excludes us. Smart business would dictate that this needs to be fixed immediately if you want to maximise profits. Halo works fine here, the Gears Of War 3 Beta is fine also, minimal lag for both. I understand these are made by companies with much, much bigger budgets to play with, but I feel like right now, I'm getting a third of the experience you have slaved over for almost double the price!

CLASSES

The Soldier class feels completely useless compared to the Engineer class. There's no reason to be a soldier except to complete the objectives the friendly soldier bots are refusing to do. It needs something to make it worthwhile, perhaps an action that lets you shield other players so you can, as a soldier, protect engineers while building, repairing and upgrading, and operatives while they hack things. If they could plant a physical shield (with a certain amount of damage threshold before it breaks) on the ground or create a forcefield (with a timer) like Halo 3's bubble shield (but with less overt copyright infringement, obviously) I feel like the soldier class could become a very important role on the battlefield.

Also the operative's disguise ability is not great because headshots and melee attacks don't do enough damage right now. A melee attack whilst disguised should do extra damage (i.e. instantly kill) because firing your gun instantly removes the disguise but doesn't actually allow you to "get the drop" on enemies due to the fact that once undisguised, you still have to empty the whole clip into them to kill them.

Both of those ranks feel boring and unimportant right now.

Also improve the reaction time of the Engineer's Turret to enemy players, by the time it starts firing at them it's dead.

CHALLENGES

I love the idea of the challenges but would like to see more of them. Have a look at Timesplitters 2 on Playstation 2 for an example of how to do challenges amazingly. There was a huge amount of them, and you were always doing something different and exciting. Also if you are playing the challenges in solo mode, you NEED to make the priority of the bots to stay with you as best they can and to always support you, because solo challenges for the Be More Objective missions are infuriating. The bots just don't do their job. Instead of three different difficulties for each, how about have two different rounds for each challenge, using the Be More Objective one again as a template, where in the first round you're achieving the objectives, and in the second you are playing as the opposition trying to prevent the other team from achieving them. Less of doing the same challenges over and over, more of doing varied challenges from each side of the fight.

WEAPONS

There need to be more guns, and more variation in gun designs and purposes. I feel like I have 20 iterations of the exact same SMG that looks slightly different, and the Assault Rifles feel like SMGs with less ammo! More shotguns, more explosive weapons, more difference in everything! Also boost the amount of ammo in the guns, something I feel was deliberately limited to give the Soldier class the facade of importance, it feels like a cheap move and it doesn't make me want to play as a soldier, it makes me want to stop playing the game. This is something that feels particularly like adding insult to injury because it takes so many bullets to kill an enemy.

DEATH & RESPAWNING

You need to be able to respawn at the closest command centre, not the always the starting one. Dying is something that happens a lot and when you have to rely on medics that won't always be around because of the limit of 8 players per team, having to respawn at the far end of the level constantly becomes incredibly frustrating. Especially in missions such as the escort missions where you have to constantly be in the thick of the fighting and dying. The respawn timer is too long as well, too much of the game is spent dead waiting for a chance to get back into the action.

PARTIES & LOBBIES

That party and lobby system everyone keeps suggesting is another very important feature that needs to be included. But obviously I don't need to stress the importance of that, as everyone has been complaining to you about it.

DOWNLOADABLE CONTENT

Ok this is my last point I have to make, but it's the most important one. Downloadable content in modern gaming is a joke. They always insignificant and tacked on to the original game, overpriced, and not game changing enough to warrant playing the game again that you put down months ago. The exception to this is real time strategies on PC and in regards to console games, the expansions for Grand Theft Auto IV. In regards to GTA IV, they spent much longer developing their DLC than any other company, and charged significantly more for it, and people were happy to pay for it. Because it had so much more content in it and because people will pay anything for new GTA content. The latter point doesn't really help you, but the first point, about the extra content, really does. I understand that your team is much smaller and working on large DLC packs may seem like a waste of resources, but think about it;

The reviews for Brink on Metacritic.com currently stand at "mixed or average", Brink got quite a few glowing reviews, but these were generally from the smaller, less professional gaming publications and websites, the big ones, like IGN, 1UP and Gamespot gave you more average reviews. They are also the ones who give the most thorough DLC previews and reviews too. Imagine if you will, the headline that could come with a large and game altering DLC release, you'd have these websites encouraging readers to give Brink another go or buy it now, because this DLC fixes so many of the gripes they had with the original product. You didn't spend this many years working on your first original IP to give up on it with lackluster three map, two piece of clothing DLCs for 800points every three months. You could change minds with the DLC you have no doubt already started working on, or you could get another 6 out of 10 for it. Whether the major publication's reviews were right or wrong, they have major pull over the gaming public, people cancel their pre-orders over what these people say, that's something you should keep in mind while making the add-on you're working with. You can either work with the community who have bought BRINK already, a smaller one than everyone originally thought it'd be, that's only going to get smaller as they get bored and trade it in, or you could shoot for the stars and take more time with the DLC in order to release something really impressive.

By impressive i mean at least 5 more levels, more challenges, more outfits (and not novelty ones, legitimate ones), more guns (different types too) and a promise to listen to and address and patch issues as they arise with balancing and functionality for all the platforms the same way Epic Games did when Gears of War 2 came out with broken multiplayer. Also, there needs to be a more deathmatch-skewed mode, one similar to battlefield's 'ticket' idea. Taking objectives will reduce the enemy tickets/respawns but killing them will do so also. That's the sort of thing people would love. People will happily pay more for DLC that seems like it actually adds something to the game that won't be over in a few hours.

--------------------------

I realise it's all well and good to ask this of you when I don't have to do any of the work myself, but I have also made a conscious effort to not just list problems, but to provide possible solutions as well.

I want so badly for BRINK to be the game it has the potential to be, I want you guys to fix all the things that bug many of the people who bought it and prove that smaller developers making original IPs (everything is sequels or remakes these days!!) can do it right, and can be taken seriously. Please don't let me down, don't let yourselves down either, you made it this far, don't give up!

EDIT

Just got a reply from Splash Damage. I really feel like they read and took the time to respond to everything I said in the same detail I gave them! Love the link to the patch news that everyone already has:


Hi Alex,



Thanks for your thoughtful and elaborate feedback. We are absolutely committed to supporting Brink and have already got game updates in the works. Have a look at this blog post to see where we’re at right now: http://www.splashdamage.com/content/brink-update-splash-damage



Thanks again and see you online!



Steve

Engineers do too much. Soldiers should disarm planted charges seeing as how they set them, while Operatives should counter hacks seeing as how they are hackers. That would spread some more primary and secondary objectives around to the Soldier and Operative who are some what lacking in that area, while toning down the options that Engineers have as they do everything.

That's some fine letter writing, son. I like how everything is properly labeled.

Also they said a thousand times over there wouldn't be one kill headshots in the game. Maybe you should have done more research.

The class balance of the engineer is a known concern.

Operative aren't assassins, they're intel gatherers. As in spotting mines, capturing enemy CPs, hacking turrets, Comms hacking, etc etc. Disguising is basically just to move around enemy lines between these points, not attack them from behind.

They know about our desires for proper lobbies.

I agree with on weapons, though

Agree you on the content. I wish a shooter would come out that would require at least two discs for the x-box version. To me it seems like enemies go down faster when concentrating fire on the head area, as opposed to center mass. But the game does not indicate if you landed a headshot or award extra xp for headshots. Which is something that we all have become accostumed to playing other shooters.

I agree with pretty much everything you said here. This is a very well thought out criticism.
I love the game and I think it's quite good, but it has potential to be great with a few changes, namely a huge and well thought out DLC pack with lots of added content.
I particularly agree with what you are saying about the classes and the re-spawning as well. There is definitely room for improvement and I hope they use it.

Head damage > Body damage > Limb damage

And there is an icon for head shots. They're just not 1 hit kills.

Yeah I'm fully aware the headshots thing was a deliberate choice they made, but you can't just rewrite the rules of the shooter genre unless you can back it up with gameplay that supports that decision. The lack of ammo and the incompetence of the bots means that without headshots, you're doomed to die over and over again and fail time sensitive objectives because the enemy is just sitting on top of them and blasting you to hell. It's great that they tried something different with the headshots but it's clear that something isn't working with it. Also headshots don't have to be instant kill but just do much more damage. Like, lights will die from a headshot, mediums need two shots, heavies need three etc. Nobody wants this to become a headshot-a-thon like Call Of Duty, just for it to change and be more fair.

That Operative one is a good point, I never thought about it like that.

Thanks for taking the time to read my wall of text. I tried to break it up with the large titles.

I didnt notice the Icon, I get really focused when shooting and the firefights are pretty intense. I havent played too much yet either with PSN down, thanks for the correction.

Because it was mentioned...

The hell is the point of the Health Command Post? Woo hoo. An extra pip of health (Two if an engineer sits there for 3 min!) that gets destroyed with 4 damage and doesn't come back unless a Medic comes and rebuffs me. You know how often that is? Never.
The health needs to go back up to a certain percent, NOT "The current Pip" or whatever.

I should mention I read through your letter and agreed with most, if not all of it.

This is in order of what I think should be pointed out. As for the rest, they are pretty decent points and in some cases, good ideas.

Headshots are intentional. They do more damage but are not meant to be instant kills to cheapen one's death or force you to focus on dropshots or other dodging tactics to avoid them. Plus what good is buffing health and being Heavy if a headshot destroys you instantly?

As for the online lag, while there is lag and it needs to be fix, it sounds to me the problem is that not enough people in Australia where you live have the game. I think that's why you have so much lag with just one person and thus honestly svcks.

Classes: Well the low ammo is because it's suppose to encourage the Solider Class. If the ammo was higher then yeah, for sure no one would be running a Solider just as right now, most people don't In Bad Company 2 because you tend to have enough ammo. (less people are wanting to spam grenades and motion sensors) Not only that Soliders do get to use several kinds of crowd controlling grenades that help keep groups of enemies distracted for him and his team to finish off. So as ammo and grenadier he is not bad but can do a bit more. Then the Operative has a lot on his plate and he's not about stealth and easy kills as you or most think. He gets info and disrupts players where they least expect it. I have not played him but my friend does wonders and loves what he does. Last, considering the Engerineer has a lot of things going for him, why on earth do we want to make him stronger and turn his Turret into those we see in Team Fortress?

Respawning: Well that's the point. Your suppose to be punish by being knocked all the way to the beginning for death, thus making a Medic very important and not just so he can buff you and heal. Your force to either wait to be revived or start from the beginning and must choose which is better. Also command posts are meant to give you health and Supply Meter bonuses. That's why they are important. Engineers can even buff the effect to double it.

Their reasoning for not adding instakills like the knife suggestion or making headshots deal absurd damage is because they wanted to cultivate intimacy between you, your team, and your enemies. That's why each team can't have more than 8 players and the maps are relatively small. There's a certain disconnect when you're being sniped from a balcony. That being said a buffed Barnett will kill an unbuffed light in one hit if it's a headshot. There are still hit boxes, it's just not as drastic.

I thought it did, if you watch the obituaries? <-- Ninja'd.

Little more ontopic: More defined and varied guns would be nice. And a few more maps/objectives would also be enjoyable. (I still havent played online, stupid PSN)

Granted, more challenges would be for fun, or to unlock the new weapons requested. Perhaps 1 or 2 new types of attachments aswell? Maybe...A shorter magazine that holders marginally higher calibur ammo(More damage) or something akin to that.

Gun customization just feels....laking. Compared to the quadrillion or so characters I can make.


Edit: An unbuffed barnett tends to drop an unbuffed light in one shot, actually.

That medic thing only works if your medics aren't getting killed trying to get to you as well, which they always are! But more importantly if they are bots, which is what I have to deal with being in Australia, they don't do a great job of coming to you straight away. That said though, the medic bots are the most effective and focused of all the friendly bots.

The turret for the engineer should be faster to respond but easier to kill. That'd fix the problem because right now it's not all that great. It's not so much about making the engineer worse, it's about bringing the quality of the other classes up to the engineer level.

I agree with this. It seems like Engineers always have some sort of big objective to complete. I play with 2 other friends and I'm often switching between Operative and Medic, as they fill the other 2 roles. As an Operative, most of my time is spent hacking enemy turrets and buffing command centers. It would be nice if the Operative class played a larger role in some of the bigger objectives.

OP - it sounds like most of your complaints (apart from the lag) are about intentional design choices made by the developers. It's clear from playing Brink that the developers wanted the game to focus on teamwork and not on individual achievements. Brink doesn't want players obsessing over leveling up and "prestiging" after hitting the level cap, nor did the developers want to create a grinding treadmill of weapon unlocks. Changes to headshot damage, grenade damage, etc. are all conscious choices to prevent one player from dominating the game. I have no complaints about the amount of content - but of course, you are entitled to your opinion.

It just seems like you're not into this type of game because you seem to measure it against today's twitch shooters (e.g., CoD, Halo, Crysis 2) as if they are the objective baseline to which all FPS games should aspire.

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1189629-quick-partial-fix-for-friendly-ai/

It's only a partial fix, but it makes a VERY distinct difference. Play on Hard. It makes the game more fair. not really "easier," but you respect your losses and victories more, and it feels like you earned your success instead of getting lucky with a run of unusually good decisions from bad friendly AI.

Also, I don't think the damage and no headshot "issues" are issues at all.

Ican't truly call it "innovative" though - it's taking a step back to the old days of FPS gaming - it's actually bringing back concepts which were used early in the genre's history, and it's the first game in years to do it - it only looks innovative because it hasn't been done since the original Halo (which was also a "mash old ideas together in a combination that's never been tried before" game).

They're bringing back a design philosophy which made a LOT of games GREAT - and it's part of what makes Brink great too. You have to be prepared to let go of modern preconceptions about shooters, but if you can do that, the game is AMAZING.

Don't worry so much about "but in (insert other game title), (insert description of how a fight would go in said game)" - just worry about what happens IN THIS GAME. Learn how to play, don't try and force the devs to make their game a cookie-cutter clone of the current-gen hits. partly because it won't work, but mostly because the game is so much better at doing things the way it's been made - if they rebuild things to fit your experiences, it won't be the game SD wanted it to be.

Turret is plenty easy to kill as is(IMOffline Opinion). I play PS3 so, I cant attest to the Gattling Turret but the Mediums are 1 grenade or just a clip or so to disable, more to kill, but its already out, thats enough for me.

Though, I strongly agree with spreading some objective focus off the Eng, playing the capaign ffelt like I HAD to be an Eng or the game wouldnt ever be won.

Very well put!

I like the turrets as is, personally. They deal plenty of damage if placed properly (I've seen a lot of people placing them too high/low/far/in too tight a corner to be effective) and it also gives operatives something else to do, not in just hacking them but taking control of friendly turrets and using them as portable MG nests, which is great if you're spec'd as an operative but playing a tight map without many objectives like CCity.

Yeah the lag is the main one that in turn affects all the others. When playing with humans, several of these issues would be far less of an issue. But I can't because it's so broken for me, PS3 owner can't either because of PSN being down. The game shouldn't make the non-online part completely unfun and argue that it's not the part you should be paying attention to. There is no real teamwork when you're playing solo. You can't rely on the bots because they are nowhere to be found. All the modes should work, not just be placeholders for the real show.

I love objective based games, and I love so much about BRINK as well, I do love Halo for its multiplayer but making these changes I'm suggesting wouldn't change the game into a Halo clone, nothing will feel like Halo I don't think, and that's a good thing. As for Call Of Duty, I could go on an essay-length rant as to why it is the worst thing to happen to videogames that has ever happened, but this isn't the place. Crysis 2 multiplayer is just a copy of a lot of the things that make COD a moron-fest. Just know that I do not want it to be anything like that game. The levels don't matter to me, but the content I unlock does. it's fine having most of the guns straight away, it lets you create the character you want from the get go. But feeling like you're working towards something such a powerful motivator to apply yourself in ANY field, not just videogames, more aesthetic unlocks to work towards would aid in creating this feeling.

Other than more headshot damage, which makes more sense realistically as well, none of the points I raised would change BRINK into a cookie-cutter clone of the FPS games out right now I don't think. Again I must stress the headshots should only be instant kills for lights, the heavies should take at least 3 headshots to kill. Most of the issues I raise are just wanting improvements to the content that's already there, not radical changes. You can't say, surely that the classes don't need to be reworked a bit?

And what happens in THIS game is that it's incredibly frustrating in many of the mechanics. The removal of these mechanics would ruin the game, but the refinement? Sounds like it's something to make the game even more GREAT! Without a worldwide beta test there was no way for them to know on a wide scale how these things would turn out, so to say that everything that occurs in this game was deliberate seems like you're putting a bit too much trust in their omniscience.

I love this game.
I really do.
But the following would add some polish to the game:
soldiers should disarm charges.
operatives should diable hack boxes.
operatives also need some kind of buff. maybe give them the speed buff instead of the medic. (rename medic's adrenaline to painkiller, and give the op a speed-increasing adrenaline buff?)
modify weapons so that each has a clear role and adding more to fill in the gaps would be nice.
engineer turrets need better targeting systems. damage shoudn't change, as they still need to be support weapons, not killing machines (get it?).
friendly bots need to be just as good as enemy bots.

Thanks for the constructive reply. I agree that it is frustrating not being able to play an online-focused game the way it's meant to be played. Brink is pretty unique because all of its game modes, even the campaign, are designed to facilitate the multiplayer experience. I don't think any videogame in history has made it enjoyable to play with bots (Killzone 3 and Tribes 2, for example). That said, I think bot gameplay is exactly a type of placeholder for the more authentic Brink experience. This has really been the case for any multiplayer-driven game. Even if the bot AI was incredible, I still would avoid it because I prefer to play with humans. SD is working pretty quickly to resolve the lag issues, so hopefully this just becomes a moot point soon enough.

Halo Reach's unlock system is very similar to the unlock system used in Brink. In fact, there are more aesthetic options to unlock and use in Brink than in Halo Reach. Both games do not really have any weapon unlocks (Brink has more to offer on this front). The only difference between the two unlock systems is that Reach requires an absolutely ridiculous amount of grinding in order to unlock the aesthetic armor pieces out there. I guess that may be a motivator for some, but I think Brink is consciously trying to avoid that grind-fest for the important reason that grind-fest games elevate the individual over the team effort. Brink's developers probably did not want people running around not caring about the objectives but only worrying about getting experience points for the next unlock. People who don't care about the teamwork aspect and only care about the leveling part are going to be disappointed because that's just not what this game is about.

I understand where you're coming from, but working toward individual unlocks and weapons is really just a figment of the the CoD-style of shooter that predominates the genre today. I think it's designed to mask the shallow gameplay that those types of shooters have to offer. Brink tries to harken back to the old school breed of shooters where the gameplay and the teamwork is the ultimate reward - not the toys you unlock afterward.


As for the other points you have been making in the thread. I see what you're arguing, but again, those are really just design choices by the developers and not objective flaws.

That was a well thought out Wall o text you got there my friend :goodjob:

I especially agree on the lack of Guns and Engineer being a work horse

I now have 2 guns i use constantly now: 1 for ADS and the other for sliding Hipfire

Also the point made about Engineers doing too much, tho i don't agree on the soldier being useless

to me he's the one to do the guarding or lay down cover fire while others do the objective

I don't think anything needs to be done with headshots i think you fighting multiple people will clear up when the multiplayer is working correctly

If you feel that turrets are useless there is a Operative ability to take manual control of it like an MG nest

I think the reason they make you spawn at your base is because it switches sides so often or because you might spawn on someone trying to take which would be unfair

I agree with most of your comments, with the exception of the one-hit kills as others have already indicated. I wish that we could choose to respawn at captured command posts as well, as it would give them more significance then just a health and supply, which the Medics do anyway. Also, the guns do need a little more differentiation as they are all pretty much the same (which isn't necessarily a bad thing).

The vast importance of the Engineer is really compounded by the objectives for each map, but the Soldier and Medic are supposed to be the Escorts for them while the Operative is by and far the "lone wolf" class.

The Drop Shield for the Soldier is probably your best idea. This could be something like a riot shield or collapsable wall that can be deployed, but only when stationary and can only take X amount of damage before being destroyed, with a long cool down.

For the Operative, giving him another top tier offensive ability would be great. Perhaps something that is an upgrade to disguise that gives you bonus damage while disguised (giving you a better reason to break cover before it expires) or better yet, allows you to plant traps on command posts or other objective areas (these could be placed on your own and would automatically stun/knockdown and enemy trying to capture it). In order to place traps on an enemies command post or objective, you would have to be disguised at the time, otherwise you can place them only on your own areas.

I noticed that the Soldier and Engineer each has 11 abilities, and the Medic and Operative each only have 10. By giving the Operative the ability above, would bring him up to 11. In turn I would combine the two grenade abilities (Blast and Damage) in to one for the Soldier, so as to allow a spot for the Drop Shield.

This leaves the Medic. As all of his abilities are primarily health/supply/speed support, giving him one that has offensive benefits would be good. I would suggest either a Nerve Gas Grenade that causes enemies to have slowed reload speads and decreased accuracy (think of it as shaky hands) for a short period of time, or a Tranquilizer buff that you can apply to yourslef (debatable if only for yourself or also for teammates) that gives you "steady hands" for improved reload and accuracy.


Those are my ideas for small improvements.