So, who here toggles this off in the options menu? Because I've been using it A LOT. Like, probably to an unfair degree and am starting to feel bad. There's no way to differentiate scores on the leaderboard by who uses it or not and, when combined with a mouse, it's a huge advantage. Admittedly I play with a controller to make multitasking easier with the default controls but still, I only found out about the COD-like 'snap to target' a few days ago but since then my points per minute average has shot up from 1400 to 1893. It's definitely made a difference.

Options -> Game -> Aim assist

Options -> Game -> Aim assist

The existence of a system that assists a player's aim in a game about aiming is as baffling as the candid consumer theft called DLC.  
Stop using it.

The existence of a system that assists a player's aim in a game about aiming is as baffling as the candid consumer theft called DLC.  Stop using it.

The analog stick making your legs move forward automatically is pretty bad too. When I walk I have to operate my legs independently of one another.

@AhmadMetallic said:

The existence of a system that assists a player's aim in a game about aiming is as baffling as the candid consumer theft called DLC.  Stop using it.

You're right, they should probably get rid of all easy difficulty levels as well.

@Spoonman671 said:

@AhmadMetallic said:

The existence of a system that assists a player's aim in a game about aiming is as baffling as the candid consumer theft called DLC.  Stop using it.

You're right, they should probably get rid of all easy difficulty levels as well.

Making the enemies easier to kill is the same as a system that guides your crosshair for you and sticks it to enemies when you push it towards them? What's the point of a shooter if they do half the aiming?

I fucking hate aim assist. In all of its forms.

What I hate more is when you turn aim assist off, and it is clearly not off.

What I hate even more than that, is aim assist that actually moves your aim for you, such as CoD and more recently Arkham City Impostors. Like somebody is moving left to right, right in front of you and your aim literally follows them. I cannot stand that shit.

But I'm an inverter, so what do I know.

The snap to tagret thing is a necessity for console shooters to make their singleplayer appeal to a wider audience.

@Vitor: Where Syndicate co-op is concerned on the PC it seems fair to use it if you are on a controller as long as you are not abusing it. By abusing it I mean zooming in and out constantly on purpose just to make the snap to target do all the work. If you are doing that then yes it becomes kind of silly. I actually had it turned on for a long time in this game but I never did the whole zoom in/out on purpose thing, I always fire with my shotgun from the hip and a sniper rifle I move from target to target while zoomed in, in both scenarios the snap to tagret function is not doing anything (shotgun and sniper being my most used weapons, third being electron mace that is incapable of zooming). It's also not quite as magnetized to enemies as say MW2/3 shooting is in singleplayer.

@AhmadMetallic said:

Making the enemies easier to kill is the same as a system that guides your crosshair for you and sticks it to enemies when you push it towards them? What's the point of a shooter if they do half the aiming?

No the snap targeting functions only at the act of zooming in by slighly centering your aim, when you are already looking at a target. Compensating for lack of precision mouse movement basically. It will not work when you are not targeting the enemy within your crosshair anyway. And it does NOT follow your target after zooming in (at least not in Syndicate), considering the enemies in the game are strafing 24/7 you need to let off a shot instantly or it makes the snap to useless anyway. Again all this is only in realtion to the way it works in Syndicate.

The problem with the snap to targeting is that it is easy as fuck to abuse. What people do is basically keep zomming in and out on targets shooting in the split second in between. Thus the snap to is doing much of the aiming for you and you can very very quickly switch between targets, much faster then normal people even do with a mouse.

I know there are some games that make aim assist much more egregious where the snap to functionality works fromwithin a much bigger portion of your screen, AND follows the target afterwards. At that point yea, why even bother?

@Brodehouse said:

The analog stick making your legs move forward automatically is pretty bad too. When I walk I have to operate my legs independently of one another.

I love you.

@Canteu said:

Arkham City Impostors.

Sorry, I don't think that game exists.

                   

The analog stick making your legs move forward automatically is pretty bad too. When I walk I have to operate my legs independently of one another.

                   

               

@Canteu said:

I fucking hate aim assist. In all of its forms.

What I hate more is when you turn aim assist off, and it is clearly not off.

What I hate even more than that, is aim assist that actually moves your aim for you, such as CoD and more recently Arkham City Impostors. Like somebody is moving left to right, right in front of you and your aim literally follows them. I cannot stand that shit.

But I'm an inverter, so what do I know.

I play inverted on consoles too duder.

Yeah, really not a fan of the deadzone aim assist that slows your crosshair when you're over someones hitbox. It made RDR MP kind of hard to enjoy when I'm at the max sensitivity and I still can't keep up with someone running while I'm running because of that slow down.

Making the enemies easier to kill is the same as a system that guides your crosshair for you and sticks it to enemies when you push it towards them? What's the point of a shooter if they do half the aiming?

I'm with Ahmad, at least for PC games. Console controls are so shittily imprecise that they need all the help possible to make the games playable.

@Tennmuerti said:

The snap to tagret thing is a necessity for console shooters to make their singleplayer appeal to a wider audience.

@Vitor: Where Syndicate co-op is concerned on the PC it seems fair to use it if you are on a controller as long as you are not abusing it. By abusing it I mean zooming in and out constantly on purpose just to make the snap to target do all the work. If you are doing that then yes it becomes kind of silly. I actually had it turned on for a long time in this game but I never did the whole zoom in/out on purpose thing, I always fire with my shotgun from the hip and a sniper rifle I move from target to target while zoomed in, in both scenarios the snap to tagret function is not doing anything (shotgun and sniper being my most used weapons, third being electron mace that is incapable of zooming). It's also not quite as magnetized to enemies as say MW2/3 shooting is in singleplayer.

@AhmadMetallic said:

Making the enemies easier to kill is the same as a system that guides your crosshair for you and sticks it to enemies when you push it towards them? What's the point of a shooter if they do half the aiming?

No the snap targeting functions only at the act of zooming in by slighly centering your aim, when you are already looking at a target. Compensating for lack of precision mouse movement basically. It will not work when you are not targeting the enemy within your crosshair anyway. And it does NOT follow your target after zooming in (at least not in Syndicate), considering the enemies in the game are strafing 24/7 you need to let off a shot instantly or it makes the snap to useless anyway. Again all this is only in realtion to the way it works in Syndicate.

The problem with the snap to targeting is that it is easy as fuck to abuse. What people do is basically keep zomming in and out on targets shooting in the split second in between. Thus the snap to is doing much of the aiming for you and you can very very quickly switch between targets, much faster then normal people even do with a mouse.

I know there are some games that make aim assist much more egregious where the snap to functionality works fromwithin a much bigger portion of your screen, AND follows the target afterwards. At that point yea, why even bother?

Actually it does move with the target. Very briefly, but it's noticeable. I can take out moving targets with ease. Even then, as the sniper is so powerful, usually the initial shot is all you need.

Also, yeah, I've been using the sniper with the constant zooming in and out recently and my word does it make a difference. It's starting to leave a bad taste as it really does feel cheap. I'll zoom in and aim for far off targets but, even then, I've come to line up my shoots with the crosshair first just so I know it'll snap straight to them.

I won't do that for every shot. Usually just to line up the first, but it's been tempting to just switch between targets at super fast speeds as you know you won't miss.

I would turn it off but the fact that other people are clearly using it judging by the last few games I played makes me wary of creating an uneven playing field. I've got my points per minute to be the highest on the leaderboards and don't want to lose that. Then again, it hardly feels fair.

I'd like to challenge any of you who hate aim-assist to beat a game like The Darkness II on hard with it turned off. Aim-assist in player-versus-player multiplayer is pretty lame, but in solo play or player-versus-enemy multiplayer, it just allows the player to deal with more chaos at once. For games like Borderlands, I like my aim-assist.

@Vitor: Ah I guess I don't notice it with the mouse since the tiniest of movements breaks the target stick.

@Tennmuerti said:

@Vitor: Ah I guess I don't notice it with the mouse since the tiniest of movements breaks the target stick.

I had the same 'problem' at first even with a pad. I just learned to snap to targets when standing still and not fine tuning my aim with the sticks, and then it's noticeable.

It's definitely the heaviest aim assist I've ever seen in a game though. Usually it would only nudge your cross hairs but the entire 'snapping' thing is a little much.

@BitterAlmond said:

I'd like to challenge any of you who hate aim-assist to beat a game like The Darkness II on hard with it turned off. Aim-assist in player-versus-player multiplayer is pretty lame, but in solo play or player-versus-enemy multiplayer, it just allows the player to deal with more chaos at once. For games like Borderlands, I like my aim-assist.

Dude, once you unlock the gun channelling power, why do you even need to aim any more? With an SMG in one hand and pistol in the other, it feels so damned satisfying to let loose.

@BitterAlmond: I beat the darkness 2 on Don with auto-aim turned off. And Syndicate. Do i get a cookie?

@Napalm: It does?

edit: oh no I got a name wrong, whatever shall I do! You knew exactly what I mean you little shit, so my point still stands.

The lock-on targeting combined with the one-hit kill capabilities of the sniper rifle or laser rifle (alt fire) on regular enemies definitely makes parts of the game ridiculously easy especially if you are using the sniper rifle with the short-range sights.

That said, I don't mind the aim assist when using a controller, especially when trying to kill far away enemies without a scope.

Hm I never use aim assist, but as long as it's only in the sp campaign (and can be turned off) I don't have a problem with it at all. I mean, let people feel like they are badass and "pro" if that's what they want/need.  
Having said that, I think for multiplayer modes on the PC aim assist is absolutely unacceptable when there are leaderboards involved.
 
I have, apart from the Vanquish campaign, not played a single FPS with a conroller so I'm curious if there is aim assist in all competitive multiplayer FPSs on consoles?

I have, apart from the Vanquish campaign, not played a single FPS with a conroller so I'm curious if there is aim assist in all competitive multiplayer FPSs on consoles?

@emem said:

I have, apart from the Vanquish campaign, not played a single FPS with a conroller so I'm curious if there is aim assist in all competitive multiplayer FPSs on consoles?

There isn't. At least not in the blatant terms of adjusting your aim and sticking to the target after like in campaigns. (but there are some minor accelerations/consessions, messing with hitboxes etc in some games)

@emem said:

@Tennmuerti said:

@emem said:

I have, apart from the Vanquish campaign, not played a single FPS with a conroller so I'm curious if there is aim assist in all competitive multiplayer FPSs on consoles?

There isn't. At least not in the blatant terms of adjusting your aim and sticking to the target after like in campaigns. (but there are some minor accelerations/consessions, messing with hitboxes etc in some games)

I just read that all the CoD games do have some sort of aim assist on consoles and most other games seem to have it as well. It may not snap directly on the enemy model, but it seems like it "assists" quite heavily. So... shouldn't the answer be "yes"?

Not in the way aim assist has been disgussed in this thread. (the snap to target then follow it, kind)

I'd like to challenge any of you who hate aim-assist to beat a game like The Darkness II on hard with it turned off. Aim-assist in player-versus-player multiplayer is pretty lame, but in solo play or player-versus-enemy multiplayer, it just allows the player to deal with more chaos at once. For games like Borderlands, I like my aim-assist.

Reading this made me sad at first. All this time, I was trying to figure out how people were getting so many points and killing so many NPCs so easily. Then it hit me: I don't use i, I'm having fun, and I'm advancing. Who cares how they play as long as I'm getting a kick out of my game.

I dislike aim assist. It's like someone telling me: here you go, you're not fast enough, or good enough to hit these targets without our help. I don't like people patronizing me.