chortles 263 Posted July 4, 2012 Smookie, so long as the regular transition is fast enough to save my in-game life in CQB and I can move while transitioning (since I could not in ARMA 2 even with your animations pack), I can live with it being "unrealistically" fast to sling the weapon; I'm looking for gameplay over realism here. ;) That is to say, both in real life and in games, "faster than reloading" is the point of a pistol transition, so if the community alpha still does ship with the Editor as advertised, I may try to put together some "shoot houses" to test out the transition(s), does this make sense Smookie? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echo38 1 Posted July 4, 2012 Why not do it realistically? Can't think of any decent reason to do this. Arma is marketed as the most realistic infantry sim ever, so there's no excuse for deliberately making a weapon mechanic unrealistic. Doing it realistically would also solve the problem being discussed here (switching to pistol taking longer than reloading), so there's even less reason to do it unrealistically. Only potential reason to do it unrealistically fast is to keep Call of Battlefield players happy. And they won't stay here long, anyway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smurf 12 Posted July 4, 2012 Was done this way because of (animation + time) x gameplay. A rifle hanging in the char's chest wouldn´t fit all stances (clipping, muzzle on the ground an so on). I can live with that.... But a solution to what panda_pl said (and he has a point) would be: Standing up => Switches to pistol => This. (or, with a clacker there) Once crouched or prone the weapon goes like this (1 2)by "magic" (like when equiped with binos then walking => weapon that was hanging in the chest goes "to back") or a quick and unnoticiable animation and stays there. Anyway, it is a fix for something that ain't broken, just doesn't look that good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chortles 263 Posted July 5, 2012 Only potential reason to do it unrealistically fast is to keep Call of Battlefield players happy. And they won't stay here long, anyway.I'll mildly disagree here -- if you were trying to "keep Call of Battlefield players happy," it'd involve the assault rifle magically disappearing while the pistol "draw" animation began! Though from what I can tell, in both "Call of Battlefield" and ARMA 3, the pistol still itself "magically appears in the hand"...Ironically, I think that the main (if not only) reason that we're seeing this brouhaha is BECAUSE Smookie's pack used the "sling drop" standing pistol transition that Smuf linked to... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tom1 10 Posted July 6, 2012 He means that they wont like the gameplay or have the patience to experience arma how it is intended. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echo38 1 Posted July 18, 2012 (edited) Anyway, it is a fix for something that ain't broken, just doesn't look that good. I would disagree, because, in a simulator, a weapon mechanic which is the exact opposite of how it is in reality is indeed "broken." If I were King, the weapon switching would be 100% realistic, which would generally mean dropping the rifle and drawing the pistol (with, of course, the option for the slower put-rifle-on-back-then-draw-pistol). I doubt that this will happen, however; despite the marketing, Arma is a game with some simulator elements, rather than a simulator, and very often things are intentionally made unrealistic to attract more players. I don't like it, but I suppose I can't blame the developers. Edited July 18, 2012 by Echo38 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
