Please note that I'm only posting this topic to clear the confusion around a very controversial weapon, the Laser Sight SCAR. I'm not complaining about it, and I'm not saying people who use it are noobs, but this specific gun with this specific attachment is bugged.(or "glitched", if you will.)
_____________________________
Let's begin:

-Your normal movement speed while walking is 100%(1.0), logical, right?

Well, in fact, if you equip any weapon(for example, the SCAR AR), your walking speed decreases to 98%(0.98) due to the added weight. In other words, your movement speed will depend on how heavy the weapon you're holding is.

Example: While equipping the MK MOD 0 LMG, your speed decreases to 96%(0.96), simply because the MK MOD is a heavier weapon than the SCAR.

*The Feline, K-Volt, Grenade, C4, and all secondary weapons give you 100%(1.0) movement speed due to them being extremely lightweight. This is one of the reasons why everybody uses the Feline, speed.

_____________________________

-Now, let's think logically once more. If you're trying to aim at an enemy down your sights, you'll slow down to be more accurate, right? This applies to Crysis 2's mechanics as well.

While ADS(holding L1), your speed decreases from 96-100% to 50-80% depending on how heavy your weapon is.

*The only weapons that give you 80% movement speed while ADS are your secondary weapons.

*Attaching an Assault Scope or Sniper Scope to your weapon will ALWAYS decrease your ADS speed. No other attachment affects movement speed except for the glitched Laser Sights.

_____________________________

AIM ENHANCE III. Allows you to move faster while ADS(holding the L1 button).

This module will multiply your movement speed while ADS by 1.6x no matter which weapon is equipped!

Example: The SCAR's movement speed while ADS with Iron sights is 60%(0.6). Multiply it by 1.6 and you get 96%(0.96), so with Aim enhance III equipped, you will only be 4% slower while aiming than while walking.

_____________________________

The Glitch

Now, for the actual bug.

For every weapon in the game, adding any attachment will NOT decrease your movement speed. The only exceptions are Assault and Sniper scopes.

The Laser Sight attachment is included, it does NOT raise your ADS speed in any of the 10 weapons that can equip it. EXCEPT FOR THE SCAR.

The SCAR's ADS speed is 60%(0.6) without any attachments, 60%(0.6) with the Reflex Sight, 50%(0.5) with the Assault Scope, but it's speed with the Laser Sight attachment is 75%(0.75)!

If you don't understand, that means somebody with the Laser Sight attached to his/her SCAR will allow him to aim while moving 15% faster than anybody else! This makes a HUGE difference in firefights.
_____________________________



The 1.6x multiplier from Aim Enhance III is applied to the 75% movement speed of the Laser SCAR!

0.75x1.6=1.2 or in percentage: 120%

So, to all of you saying the Laser Sight SCAR is "just good". What do you think when I say:

You move FASTER while ADS than you do while walking, ONLY for the Laser Sight SCAR. This means you can basically dodge enemy bullets and melee while firing back at your enemy with AMAZING accuracy thanks to the Aim Enhance module and Laser attachment.


The Laser Sight SCAR is a bugged weapon


*As a side note, the MK MOD also gains a 5% boost while ADS from it's normal speed. This is also a glitch, but is overlooked because it's not good enough to give you an advantage, and we can't have that.
_____________________________


All information is provided by DenKirson's detailed anolysis of the Crysis 2 arsenal and the mechanics behind them. If you wish to see proof of my statement, take a look at the "movement speed" portion of the graph he made in the following link:

http://denkirson.xanga.com/742784256/crysis-2/

Very good, and thorough argument. The SCAR w/ Laser Sight is one of those last few things Crytek didn't manage to patch. It's without a doubt a bugged weapon and you described exactly how it is.

Very good, and thorough argument. The SCAR w/ Laser Sight is one of those last few things Crytek didn't manage to patch. It's without a doubt a bugged weapon and you described exactly how it is.
lol? you are both right but i think they gave up, i mean i expect if they really could be bothered to patch it they would, but i really do not think that they can to be honest...

Very good, and thorough argument. The SCAR w/ Laser Sight is one of those last few things Crytek didn't manage to patch. It's without a doubt a bugged weapon and you described exactly how it is.
lol? you are both right but i think they gave up, i mean i expect if they really could be bothered to patch it they would, but i really do not think that they can to be honest...


Oh they are definitely done patching, I think the last patch came out in August 2011? Trouble is corporations like Sony and Microsoft are charging Developers upwards of $30,000 to release a patch. Some people make the argument that if they just made the game properly they wouldn't need a patch, but really since the evolution of online gaming there are so many variables that can happen it's necessary to provide patch updates. It would be in everyone's best interest if these corporate giants dropped the fee they charge developers for patches. It's better for the Developer, better for the game, better for the console provider! and better for the players. It's just greed that the few heads of these companies that don't care about their product and just want more money because they know they can. What they don't realize is that it's actually biting them in the ass.

We definitely wont be getting another patch for Crysis 2, they over ran the budget on the game crafting the new engine, and then dug themselves deeper releasing the DX11 patch and the SDK on the PC, but it was the right thing to do, they should've had DX11 from the start.

Without a fee for patches, BioShock Infinite would be here right now. Mass Effect 3 would have released months earlier without an ending which would have been better lol. Imagine Skyrim even buggier. Scary stuff, but that would happen if there wasnt incentive to getting it outs as polished as possible on Day 1. Both Crytek and EA have the money to patch the game, and it could all be in one mega patch liek BF3 on consoles, like 8 GB or something, LOL. All the fixes the game needs for 30K. I assure that their fawking corporate lunches cost more by the end of the year. They could have even raised the fund in a kickstarter like program, and many of us devoted fans would have paid. The fact is that Crytek and EA turned their backs on us while we remain devoted to the concept of Crysis 2 and not the execution of its final release.

If it happends again, I'll never support a Crytek game again. If you are touting triple A status, part of being that is exceptional online support.

Very good, and thorough argument. The SCAR w/ Laser Sight is one of those last few things Crytek didn't manage to patch. It's without a doubt a bugged weapon and you described exactly how it is.
lol? you are both right but i think they gave up, i mean i expect if they really could be bothered to patch it they would, but i really do not think that they can to be honest...


Oh they are definitely done patching, I think the last patch came out in August 2011? Trouble is corporations like Sony and Microsoft are charging Developers upwards of $30,000 to release a patch. Some people make the argument that if they just made the game properly they wouldn't need a patch, but really since the evolution of online gaming there are so many variables that can happen it's necessary to provide patch updates. It would be in everyone's best interest if these corporate giants dropped the fee they charge developers for patches. It's better for the Developer, better for the game, better for the console provider! and better for the players. It's just greed that the few heads of these companies that don't care about their product and just want more money because they know they can. What they don't realize is that it's actually biting them in the ass.

We definitely wont be getting another patch for Crysis 2, they over ran the budget on the game crafting the new engine, and then dug themselves deeper releasing the DX11 patch and the SDK on the PC, but it was the right thing to do, they should've had DX11 from the start.


yeah, i know what you mean... but its a shame as it is a great game and ea have to ruin it now by leaving everything. Wouldn't be surprised to see the same thing happen with c3. I think though to not listen to your customers and if you just look at the known list of patches thread. There are like 55 pages and people are always moaning about trophy glitches... But i couldn't give a damn myself about those stupid glitches, i care about the ones where you lose all your energy... it is really quite sad to be honest... a game with such potential...xD life for ya ;D

Imagine if it was only up to Game Devs and Pubs to self-manage, and quality check. Oh wait it is!!!! Unlike the Food and Drug administration or Politics there is nothing governing a game be of a certain quality, or fit for "consumption." So platform owners seek to curtail the amount of buggy unfinished games floating around so as to ensure the platform is collectively good, and not marred by a mess of games that released just to make shareholder happy. Zito think about this. What game would have ever been delayed without such excessive patching fees?

the game crafting the new engine

The new engine is sweet nonetheless

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TtgW20IEm0

Guys keep it short, not reading all those long texts...

Don`t visit a FORUM then!!! Go and read comics!

Don`t visit a FORUM then!!! Go and read comics!
LOL.

Seriously though Bugster, a long post takes maximum 5 minutes to read.

Don`t visit a FORUM then!!! Go and read comics!
LOL.

Seriously though Bugster, a long post takes maximum 5 minutes to read.

Do you know what you just wrote? 5 minutes to read a post? ->_<-'

Yeah.. and I only said 5 minutes so slow readers wouldn't feel bad.

In the time you spent complaining about how you can't waste 5 minutes to read in a day, you could have finished reading it and learned something about the game you play every day.

Imagine if it was only up to Game Devs and Pubs to self-manage, and quality check. Oh wait it is!!!! Unlike the Food and Drug administration or Politics there is nothing governing a game be of a certain quality, or fit for "consumption." So platform owners seek to curtail the amount of buggy unfinished games floating around so as to ensure the platform is collectively good, and not marred by a mess of games that released just to make shareholder happy. Zito think about this. What game would have ever been delayed without such excessive patching fees?


I'm not sure exactly how to answer your question, but I will talk about the conflict between Developers and Publishers. Publishers are mostly involved with investors, people who put their money on something they think will make a return on their investment. Publishers are constantly barraded by these investors to get the product out as soon as they can, the investors don't want to wait for their return. On the other side of things, the development side, where the creative juices flow, it takes time for them to craft a great game. Because of this there is always going to be a conflict of interest, many development teams come together, make one game and then are disbanded. It's in the interest of the Developer to keep the investors investing in the game over time, and be able to feed their families, than to rush a game and be back on unemployment.

Publishers that own the Intellectual Property of the game are more likely to advertise and feel in debt to that game.

The Crysis IP belongs to Crytek (or the Yerli family). Other games, I believe like Dead Space are owned by EA, therefore you see massive advertising for Dead Space and less for other games.

Crysis 3 is a way for Crytek, EA and their investors to recoop from the lackluster Crysis 2 sales (due to a Alpha Leak) and hopefully get a return on their investments. If Crysis 3 flops this could be the last Crysis we ever see. If this game sells in the top 5 of video games of the year, I bet Crytek would think twice about becoming a full F2P company.

That being said, with no disrespect to Crytek, the other titles they make just don't captivate me and interest me the way their Crysis franchise does. However, Crysis is Crytek's baby, they are not going to just lock it up after C3 and throw away the key.

With regards to Bioshock Infinite, I think 2K might be the "best" publisher around today. They have given ample time to their developers and don't force them to rush a product. Games I have purchased published by 2K have given me a fair share of free DLC. If I was developing a game I would look to 2K first as my publisher and Bethesda as my second. Those two publishers seem much more interested in putting out a quality product rather than EA and Activision who rush games constantly. Bioshock Infinite which is published by 2K has had some very kind investors to allow Levine and his staff to push back Bioshock Infinite and develop a unique in depth multiplayer mode that is true to the Bioshock style. Bioshock Infinite was originally scheduled to release February 2012, got pushed to August 2012, and now is pushed again to Q1 2013. If EA rallied behind Crysis the way 2K did for Bioshock we would be getting a higher standard of gaming. 2K seems to care about a titles lasting power, EA and Activision seem more concerned with getting the title released and moving on to the next money maker.