Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Delimontana

No Bipods or ability to carry two rifles - Are you kidding me!?

Recommended Posts

Been playing since it first came out on steam early access, and it's a great game. I've also been active on your feedback page and this is what i expected from that; that BI would actually listen to the extent of what they would be able to do. And yet the most voted for and easy as hell to implement in the core game was Bipods, its been on everybodys mind and everybody has asked, how the fuck do i use the bipod?! I mean this is the most voted for and one of the most wanted features in-game. Deploying a weapon / proper use of bipods 2160 vote(s) 99,63%8 vote(s) 0,37%. And yet this is now something i need to find as a mod and just hope the servers i want to play on allow the use of bipod-mods and weapon resting. I don't have too much to complain about the game, but a realistic military sim, and no bipods? DAFUCK!?

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=432

Also here we have another extremly easy to implement with practically no impact on the gameplay and it's the ability to carry two main firearms, like a sniper rifle and be able to quickly switch over to a PDW or submachinegun which would be realistic. Yet this is also a lacking feature even though it was voted and cared for alot by the community and the feedback tracker.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=5374

What is the point with input from players when you don't really care what they have to say? BI do you think you should rls ARMA 4 even earlier in the process of "Steam early access" than you did with Arma 3 so you can actually find the time to correct/implement some of the most asked for and easy features to do? Otherwise i would not spend another minute on the next game trying to improve it for nothing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Been playing since it first came out on steam early access, and it's a great game. I've also been active on your feedback page and this is what i expected from that; that BI would actually listen to the extent of what they would be able to do. And yet the most voted for and easy as hell to implement in the core game was Bipods, its been on everybodys mind and everybody has asked, how the fuck do i use the bipod?! I mean this is the most voted for and one of the most wanted features in-game. Deploying a weapon / proper use of bipods 2160 vote(s) 99,63%8 vote(s) 0,37%. And yet this is now something i need to find as a mod and just hope the servers i want to play on allow the use of bipod-mods and weapon resting. I don't have too much to complain about the game, but a realistic military sim, and no bipods? DAFUCK!?

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=432

Also here we have another extremly easy to implement with practically no impact on the gameplay and it's the ability to carry two main firearms, like a sniper rifle and be able to quickly switch over to a PDW or submachinegun which would be realistic. Yet this is also a lacking feature even though it was voted and cared for alot by the community and the feedback tracker.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=5374

What is the point with input from players when you don't really care what they have to say? BI do you think you should rls ARMA 4 even earlier in the process of "Steam early access" than you did with Arma 3 so you can actually find the time to correct/implement some of the most asked for and easy features to do? Otherwise i would not spend another minute on the next game trying to improve it for nothing!

It's not a military simulator. The series never has been. Aside from that ignorance, yes it would be nice if you could use your secondary weapon slot to carry another primary weapon, instead of a launcher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not a military simulator. The series never has been. Aside from that ignorance, yes it would be nice if you could use your secondary weapon slot to carry another primary weapon, instead of a launcher.

A lot of people think it is and buy because of that. Realism is also an important part of Arma games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically, it is a Military Simulator. The reason i say this is because the entire game franchise is based off of VBS, Which to my knowledge, IS a Military Simulator.

Off that subject, I totally agree with OP, Implementing Bi pods into the game would not have been that difficult, not saying I don't appreciate the hard work that BI did with the game, but an official statement to yay or nay this would be great for the community. They have the Bi pods ON the weapons already, what the actual flock where they thinking? Weapon resting however, I could see that being problematic what with all the terrain clipping and glitches already. Last night I slipped in between two trees with a tank and it sent it flying into the air for 5 mins. Imagine what would happen if you tried that with a weapon on a log? >.>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poll's mean nothing to what will be developed. Who cares? Someone WILL mod it. That is the GREAT thing about this community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not a military simulator. The series never has been. Aside from that ignorance, yes it would be nice if you could use your secondary weapon slot to carry another primary weapon, instead of a launcher.

no, that's a new marketing tactic developed recently to draw in the cod and battlefield crowd. the franchise has always been a milsim, just a terribly outdated one that had its developmental resources siphoned off to work on a zombie game to drawn in more cod kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always funny to see people eager to jump on board and defend BIS for what is a key element of infantry combat. From the beginning of the Alpha to release (what, 6 months??), BIS didn't bother allocating anything to fixing this. And please don't try to belittle people ranting about it...we've all paid good money for this game and are entitled to whinge as much as we want. We should NOT have to mod something as important as this. Most servers don't allow mods, so what then? I'm sick of kneeling and trying to shoot an infantryman 100m away (AI) and missing because of the crazy scope sway...only for said infantryman to turn and headshot me.

C'mon BIS....you've collected the $$, you've had your release, now FIX THIS DAMNED THING.

Pareto principle (or 80-20 rule) which is usually applied to everything: 80% of complaints are for 20% of issues. Fix those 20% and keep the 80% happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not a military simulator. The series never has been. Aside from that ignorance, yes it would be nice if you could use your secondary weapon slot to carry another primary weapon, instead of a launcher.

Oh the irony in being condescending about ignorance when you're wrong. Hilarious!

Poll's mean nothing to what will be developed. Who cares? Someone WILL mod it. That is the GREAT thing about this community.

It's not about polls, it's about doing an early access game and have people pay money for it to be a part of the developement and give feedback and set priorities, i love this game but they failed to deliver most of the stuff they promised when they announced the early access, and they also failed to listen and meet the demands of the developement process they put the boundaries for. And yes i love the modding, but this was such an easy implementation to the game that the only reason it is not done is bc they just ignored what the consumers asked for which is not ok. Some stuff should just be there when you are doing an infantry based military simulator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Technically, it is a Military Simulator. The reason i say this is because the entire game franchise is based off of VBS, Which to my knowledge, IS a Military Simulator.

No, it isn't. VBS was created from OFP with the idea of: what if we took the game and turned it into a military simulator?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no, that's a new marketing tactic developed recently to draw in the cod and battlefield crowd. the franchise has always been a milsim, just a terribly outdated one that had its developmental resources siphoned off to work on a zombie game to drawn in more cod kids.

Clearly you've never played VBS. THAT is a military simulator. This is marketed as a Military sandbox. Go check their official site if you don't believe me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Been playing since it first came out on steam early access, and it's a great game. I've also been active on your feedback page and this is what i expected from that; that BI would actually listen to the extent of what they would be able to do. And yet the most voted for and easy as hell to implement in the core game was Bipods, its been on everybodys mind and everybody has asked, how the fuck do i use the bipod?! I mean this is the most voted for and one of the most wanted features in-game. Deploying a weapon / proper use of bipods 2160 vote(s) 99,63%8 vote(s) 0,37%. And yet this is now something i need to find as a mod and just hope the servers i want to play on allow the use of bipod-mods and weapon resting. I don't have too much to complain about the game, but a realistic military sim, and no bipods? DAFUCK!?

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=432

Also here we have another extremly easy to implement with practically no impact on the gameplay and it's the ability to carry two main firearms, like a sniper rifle and be able to quickly switch over to a PDW or submachinegun which would be realistic. Yet this is also a lacking feature even though it was voted and cared for alot by the community and the feedback tracker.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=5374

What is the point with input from players when you don't really care what they have to say? BI do you think you should rls ARMA 4 even earlier in the process of "Steam early access" than you did with Arma 3 so you can actually find the time to correct/implement some of the most asked for and easy features to do? Otherwise i would not spend another minute on the next game trying to improve it for nothing!

Instead of raging, perhaps some reading on the new inventory system is the thing? you can use backpacks to store rifles, which is pretty realistic. Or might you have another suggestion? Or was you expecting a 'overkill' perk like in Call of Duty?

And for the record, Yes I agree that no bipods yet is pretty stupid. however a VTS_weaponresting is an easy addon to use and to install.

What people actually should rage about is the action menu used in arma-series

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clearly you've never played VBS. THAT is a military simulator. This is marketed as a Military sandbox. Go check their official site if you don't believe me.

Have you played VBS?

Because I have it and it's just as simulator as ArmA1 and 2.

Even same maps, animations and assets among others. It even had zombies in a recent patch.

The only real difference is that it has after action report and 3D editor that can be used in a multiplayer format. But how does those make it any more simulator than ArmA?

What I can agree on though is that compared to previous ArmAs ArmA3 is definitely not a simulator since it's much more arcade and simplified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's totally never been marketed as a military simulator

haha nice one :)

It IS a military simulator and everyone that denies it must refrain from using logical thinking and compare petty crap to VBS that has no relation to what makes a game a simulation or not.

If you don´t say it´s a simulation then you put it in the same folder as Battlefield 3, it´s just that simple.

It is definitely a military simulator. Not a military training simulator like VBS but indeed a military simulator.

Same engine, same PhysX, same same but different.

Arma: Cold War Assault, Bohemia Interactive's debut game published by Codemasters as Operation Flashpoint in 2001, became genre-defining combat military simulation and the No. 1 bestselling PC game around the world and has won many international awards, including “Game of The Year†and “Best Action Game.†Over 2 million copies of Operation Flashpoint have been sold since its release.

This is why we need to keep pushing so that it remains a military simulator and not get dumbed down to BF3 levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh the irony in being condescending about ignorance when you're wrong. Hilarious!

Yes the irony is killing me. It isn't and never was a simulator. Have you actually ever played a simulator? Maybe something like blackshark or steel beast?

haha nice one :)

It IS a military simulator and everyone that denies it must refrain from using logical thinking and compare petty crap to VBS that has no relation to what makes a game a simulation or not.

If you don´t say it´s a simulation then you put it in the same folder as Battlefield 3, it´s just that simple.

It is definitely a military simulator. Not a military training simulator like VBS but indeed a military simulator.

Same engine, same PhysX, same same but different.

This is why we need to keep pushing so that it remains a military simulator and not get dumbed down to BF3 levels.

It isn't a simulator.

Technically, it is a Military Simulator. The reason i say this is because the entire game franchise is based off of VBS, Which to my knowledge, IS a Military Simulator.

OFP / Arma aren't simulators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A lot of people think it is and buy because of that. Realism is also an important part of Arma games.

I agree with you, besides there are at least 3 mods of ARMA2 can make bipod ability, and RO2 have the feature, even BF3 has it, even BF2 PR has it. Why BIS don't get it in the game?

---------- Post added at 08:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:47 PM ----------

Yes the irony is killing me. It isn't and never was a simulator. Have you actually ever played a simulator? Maybe something like blackshark or steel beast?

It isn't a simulator.

OFP / Arma aren't simulators.

BF3 isn't simulators too, but have you played BF3 ever? EVEN BF3 has bipod feature, what do you want to explain?

And I can confidently tell you, in the future, every FPS will have bipod feature except CS like game.

Edited by msy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Been playing since it first came out on steam early access, and it's a great game. I've also been active on your feedback page and this is what i expected from that; that BI would actually listen to the extent of what they would be able to do. And yet the most voted for and easy as hell to implement in the core game was Bipods, its been on everybodys mind and everybody has asked, how the fuck do i use the bipod?! I mean this is the most voted for and one of the most wanted features in-game. Deploying a weapon / proper use of bipods 2160 vote(s) 99,63%8 vote(s) 0,37%. And yet this is now something i need to find as a mod and just hope the servers i want to play on allow the use of bipod-mods and weapon resting. I don't have too much to complain about the game, but a realistic military sim, and no bipods? DAFUCK!?

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=432

Also here we have another extremly easy to implement with practically no impact on the gameplay and it's the ability to carry two main firearms, like a sniper rifle and be able to quickly switch over to a PDW or submachinegun which would be realistic. Yet this is also a lacking feature even though it was voted and cared for alot by the community and the feedback tracker.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=5374

What is the point with input from players when you don't really care what they have to say? BI do you think you should rls ARMA 4 even earlier in the process of "Steam early access" than you did with Arma 3 so you can actually find the time to correct/implement some of the most asked for and easy features to do? Otherwise i would not spend another minute on the next game trying to improve it for nothing!

You can carry two weapons with a carryall backpack. A rifle fits in the backpack, and, of course, you can carry one in your hands. It's slightly awkward, but you can do it (as in real life).

Regarding bipods, yeah, I'm miffed, but I'm not too miffed. Why? Because they're already modded in through TMR and any good server will let you run that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't get about the bipod is that they bothered to model bipods, but left them totally without function. Just put one of those magpul grips on it like the rest of the weapons and call it a day. Full-on weapon resting a la ACE would have been glorious, even just being able to deploy the bipod would have been nice to give autoriflemen sustained fire. But we get none of that, just the 9 stances and 4 or 5 different speeds to walk/run. Why do we have so many options for stances and paces, but no options for weapon stability? If I want to be effective machine gunner, it's currently prone or nothing. As some have said, we can expect the feature to come in mods. While that idea gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling, bipod deployment should be part of the base game. Especially for a game which prides itself on it's milsim aspects.

On the subject of milsim, though, just about everyone in this thread, moderators included, are engaging in the sim vs game debate which isn't the question at hand. What does this pedantic bickering serve to accomplish? Once we've determined Arma is a game or sim, will that change anything at all? Will Bipods suddenly work? Will backblast suddenly be in the game? Will a number of other problems get rectified? No, nothing will change except for the game's classification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It isn't a simulator.

Oh it most certainly is. You need to deprive yourself of rational and logical thinking to come up with another conclusion.

So far the most amazing argument against it has been, "it isn´t a simulator" or "VBS has a bigger island.."

Stupid arguments.

VBS has more features, that´s about it. It does not in any way detract from the fact that Arma series is a military simulator.

And yes i have played countless of simulators, especially simracing.

Just because the planes don´t have DCS level flight controls, the cars don´t have iRacing levels of simulation does NOT mean it´s not a military simulation.

It´s not a flight simulator, it´s not a car simulator, it´s not a weather simulator, it´s a military simulator.

In fact BI has dug themselves a huge hole with VBS. If they add features from VBS to Arma how would that affect VBS and the Bohemia Interactive Simulations company? Bad obviously.

So there´s a catch 22 here and the logical approach for BI is to refrain from using the word simulator when they have a whole company with the name that uses the same engine, same Nvidia PhysX just way more features.

Simple analogy:

Arcade - COD, Need for Speed etc.

Simcade - Battlefield 3, Project CARS, F1 2013, etc.

Simulation - iRacing, DCS, Star Citizen, Arma Series, VBS, Train Simulator, Farmer Simulator you name it.

Edited by RushHour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you can carry up to 4 weapons, just rack em' up in your back pack ;)..

Unless they fixed that one lol.

They Did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh it most certainly is. You need to deprive yourself of rational and logical thinking to come up with another conclusion.

So far the most amazing argument against it has been, "it isn´t a simulator" or "VBS has a bigger island.."

Stupid arguments.

VBS has more features, that´s about it. It does not in any way detract from the fact that Arma series is a military simulator.

And yes i have played countless of simulators, especially simracing.

Just because the planes don´t have DCS level flight controls, the cars don´t have iRacing levels of simulation does NOT mean it´s not a military simulation.

It´s not a flight simulator, it´s not a car simulator, it´s not a weather simulator, it´s a military simulator.

In fact BI has dug themselves a huge hole with VBS. If they add features from VBS to Arma how would that affect VBS and the Bohemia Interactive Simulations company? Bad obviously.

So there´s a catch 22 here and the logical approach for BI is to refrain from using the word simulator when they have a whole company with the name that uses the same engine, same Nvidia PhysX just way more features.

Simple analogy:

Arcade - COD, Need for Speed etc.

Simcade - Battlefield 3, Project CARS, F1 2013, etc.

Simulation - iRacing, DCS, Star Citizen, Arma Series, VBS, Train Simulator, Farmer Simulator you name it.

Yeah... it isn't a simulator. Blackshark is a simulator. Steelbeast pro is a simulator. Arma is not a simulator. Arma is a "realistic" sandbox game. How many times do the mods here & BI themselves have to tell people it isn't a simulator? Maybe if Maruk himself came into this thread and told you that Arma wasn't a simulator, then you guys would get the picture? The armor & aircraft in the Arma games especially, are NOT even close to being that of a simulation. It's laughable in that regard.

Edited by David77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Poll's mean nothing to what will be developed. Who cares? Someone WILL mod it. That is the GREAT thing about this community.

Some essential stuff should be ingame by default. Since we don't have any autodownload system ingame you'll be limited to closed or public communities running a weapon rest mod for playing with weapon resting. And that kinda limits your choice of servers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's only one realistic thing about Arma 3, and after struggling to think what that one thing is, I guess it's that there's a day/night cycle. Apart from that I can't think of much else that is simulated or very realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×