I feel the need to make this topic to clarify to any CoD scrubs that are raging that there is as they put it accurate hip-fire. first off please realize that if it was a true "hip-fire" the gun wouldnt show on your screen the way it does, the graphic and animation imply that the gun is actually raised and against your shoulder. which in face is the way you fire in CQC you do not look down your iron sites you point and shoot. Also in CoD explain to me how the bullets come out of the gun sideways by "hip-firing"???

Anyways I just wanted to make this because I kept seeing people say you should have to look down your sites to fire accurately because hip-firing wouldnt be accurate and they are right, however as I said before the gun isnt at your hip according to the graphics and animation in the game.

I dont know why people try to compare and contrast the game instead of just enjoying it.

I feel your pain. ^^ When I was more active on these forums, I already got bothered by the amount of people that wished to make certain things like CoD.

Iron sights are great but I don't see a problem with having accurate "shoulder fire." A real soldier in combat or someone who knows how to hold an actual fire arm knows that firing from the hip is as accurate as throwing the gun on the ground and praying that it hits the intended target.

As Suk A Face has pointed out, the soldiers in brink either shoulder their weapons or look down the sights for the best accuracy they can have. Except for the mini-gun because aiming down the sights with one of those I would imagine would be pretty intense to pull off.

I'm guessing the ADS button, then, is for spooling up the minigun.

Is iron sights more accureate the hip fire?

at the two posts after my OP i am not trying to compare or contrast the game I just want these people who complain about every little thing to realize why it is this way (or my opinion on why it is ok for it to be that way) I am fully aware that there will be things I dont like it in but I think that those things will be greatly outweighed by the greatness the game has to offer

I think the ADS button spools the mini-gun because that would make sense. Shoulder firing that gun, I would imagine, would literally fill the entire screen with bullets. Of course, if you are the heavy carrying a huge mini-gun then that is what you want... at least it is what I want. :hubbahubba:

That word never fails to elicit a chuckle from me. And yes, the ADS button does indeed rev up the minigun.



Yes, since there is no bloom while aiming down sights.

i have fired a number of guns, when you are familiar with a gun and the way it shoots firing from the "hip" does not make it any less accurate. if your pointing at a target and fire at it the bullet will hit it simple as that

Very true Digital Death.

Now imagine that there are guys with guns running at you, you are moving, adrenaline is pumping, there are explosions, there are firefights around you, and you now fire form the hip.

I would imagine the "hip firing" in an actual combat experience is left to Tony Montana or a guy with a shot gun or a guy who is just spraying and praying.

but im also not trained for that lol, them being soldiers would be, also adrenalin sharpens and focuses the mind when in danger

Very true. In that situation that's when I grab a French flag (aka a white flag) and begin waving it.

I'm not really a (real) gun person myself, although I have fired one or two. However, I have played some airsoft, and that was my experience as well. If you know how your gun aims and shoots, you can easily send your bullets/pellets where you want them to go without sighting in. In many situations it actually makes more sense than using the iron sights. If you've got the time, sure, line up a good shot. But once the shooting really starts you might actually be better off not using the sights.

I also agree with the OP; the core misconception is with the term itself...hip firing. When you 'hip fire' in a video game you're not actually firing from the hip. As others have said, the 'realistic' system in games like CoD is anything but. In real life you (assuming you've had the training that your character has supposedly had in those games) could consistently hit a target that's standing still out in the open at forty feet without needing to use the sights. In CoD not using the sights would be a risky gamble. People have just gotten used to that system, and expect other games to conform to those rules.

Yea being able to walk let alone run while firing a real fire arm even a .22 with no recoil is infintely harder to do accurately than shooting while stationary. But games are designed so that they're fun to play ( good ones at least). If any game was "realistic" then it would take years of intense training to be able to be able to accurately the weapons. Thank god they code it so that it's much easier.
I'm really done beating this dead horse if you want realism join the military

Accurately the whole weapons? Sorry.

Good points, though. In a realistic system (but using the current 'cross-hairs represent accuracy' system) firing on the move, sighted in or not, would have the cross-hairs blow up to cover a quarter of the screen, at least. 0_o'

Dysfunkshion \o/ where have you been mate ? Release in 3 weeks , are you ready ?


/overexcited 0

Actually only the security are trained properly, the resistance just get given a gun and get told 'go kill those bad guys brother!'

Resistanve get little to no training, the most would be a week i assume, unless they have been training before the start of the war, which would make more sense.

It's not weather hip fire is more accurate than ADS, it's more like which is best for the right occasion. Usually your turning speed is faster during hip fire and you can see more peripheral, which makes it better suited for CQC to mid range encounters. ADS on the other hand usually has a slower turning speed to simulate focus and to balance the advantage of teloscopic sight, thus ADS is better suited for long range encounters.

Should be common sense really but the problem here is that certain games put all the emphasis on ADS and that is what their fans are used to.

If the devs have used common sense , then they took etqw as an example. It has the same same smooth feeling for both ironsights and hip fire. With the hip fire still having a reasonable amount of accuracy to keep the game fast-paced enough.

Took me 5 minutes to write that sentence , wth :spotted owl:

Ha yea was supposed to be "Accurately fire the weapons"... was forum surfin on my phone, leads to mistakes
Im all for people giving their opinions of the game mechanics but I just get tired of people throwing out the realism card. If the game was called "BRINK: warfare simulator" then their points would be valid.

ive only fired one weapon from the hip. and that was a 12guage pistol grip shotgun. 1. the recoil wasnt as bad as you think it would be. and 2. you can be pretty accurate with it firing from the hip. as long as your not trying to snipe with it.

LOL "french flag" reminds me when I searched google "French military victories" (i clicked the I'm feeling lucky" and a funny page popped up ^_^

actually i beg to differ im sure the're not as trained as security but living in a [censored] hole u know there's a lot of violence and crime around seeing that security is on other side of island so the resistance would at least have a gun already for protection reasons and most will most likly be fit by running away from others with guns (whether security or criminals), be a criminal themselves (running away from seens of crime) and being poor there is little to no transportation not to mention in life today mostt poor areas do actually have many fit ppl just for reasons of defending themselves if anything does break out

People only want "realism" when it benefits their cause lol. "Oh, just to explain that its accurate hip-fire, we're just going to call it shoulder fire, this time."...come on man.

It has always been known that the un-ADS view has been seen as hip fire. Aside from Halo and some of the earliest FPS...this is pretty much "de-facto".