Gun view movement is "TERRIBLE"

[Bunks 0]

FYI metal, bugs are the least important aspect of why I see this game failing like it is. But your blind support is well noted. But if you keep this "Emporer's New Clothes attitude", then the changes needed wont take place and a year from now it will be you "booohooing" because there wont be anyone playing the game.

I think its time to stop making excuses for it. Bottom line is they did just the opposite I expected in this game. They spent all their time making it "look good" trying to appeal to the BF2 types. But they may end up losing the diehard OFP fans who overlooked the glitz of graphics for something more meaningful like gameplay and concept.

[jantenner 0]

gameplay and concept in ofp 1.96 and arma are the same

[Metal Heart 0]

What blind support, what excuses? Don't get me wrong, I don't like how ArmA turned out either so save your fanboy accusations for someone else. I was hoping for everything else but just a gfx-pimped OFP. So yeah, FU.

[Waika 0]

Thanks froggyluv! I guess some people here just don't get it, and don't really listen to anyone but themselves; it actually appears that's a fortunate outcome considering their hysteria and hostility.

I just hope BI is not influenced by the kicking and screaming of an immature and noisey few...

[Bunks 0]

I guess some people here just don't get it, and don't really listen to anyone but themselves; it actually appears that's a fortunate outcome considering their hysteria and hostility.

I just hope BI is not influenced by the kicking and screaming of an immature and noisey few...

I guess your referring to yourself since the majority of people even on this forum are not to happy with what they see so far. And go to game forums and see what they are saying about it once they have played it a while. But what I go by is what the community who has stayed with OFP all these years. And by no means is this game getting the majority who tried it excited in any way like OFP did. Even with all faults.

Like i said before, everyone I know who has tried the game said its either "ok" or its "garbage". And they are all Coop OFP players or long time gamers. Besides, BIS already knows where this game stands. Which is why im confidant they have no choice but to make major changes to it, or watch the game die a quick death with little support. I dont hate the game, but I do know it needs major (not minor) changes to game function, not only bugs and silly stuff like that. But if you fanboys just sit here and tell those who dislike it the way it is to shut up, you do the game and BIS a diservice. But most of all, you hurt the OFP community more than the critics.

[poitings 0]

Waika sure you can't snap a gun far to the left and aim in the time it takes you to twitch in real life. But guess what, you know why nobody complains about that in real life? Because the gun has weight so when you feel that resistence it registers as something you would expect from a gun of however many pounds an M16 or whatever weighs.

A mouse on the other hand weighs next to nothing so when you try to move it and it's simulated counter part on screen isnt reacting to how your brain calculates it should move based on the tactile feedback from your hand then you gt a jangling clanging sensation in the 'realism' monitor of your brain, just as you would int he real world if a heavy rifle was suddenly able to move as if it weighed nothing.

See, that's another take on what is and isn't 'real' in a game.

There are many things you can do in real life such as perhipheral vision etc that you can't simulate, yet, in a game so what we are saying is swings and roundabouts, compensate for the disadvantages of what we lose by giving us a bit of a boost in other areas.

Maybe if the mouse weighed ten pounds it wouldnt feel so freaky to have the on screen gun lagging behind it like a heavy barge in the water but it doesnt, it is light and we want 'imersion'.

Imersion is the best way to capture reality and if you break down the feeling of imersion for some 'symbolic' representation of reality rather than keep everything intuiiton based then you have lost more than you have gained in the end.

I think that was Ghost Recon 1's secret. It was a good balance between being dilligently realistic and 'if you will excuse the crude langauge' anally realistic.

I for one think the game looks beautiful for those that have a fast enough system to run it. I played it on line with some cap the flag and the game play was there, just was lagged up so i couldn't enjoy it.

The bare bones are there, all it needs is some tweaking.

If there are two camps then why not give us options. I don't even mind if they insult us by calling a responsive gun swing 'arcade mode'. Just make two game types 'vetran' and 'regular' as they already have and people can choose which server they want to play in. I mean, even our type of ArmA will still be considered heavy on the sim side by most online FPS players. We just want a smooht running game witha gun movement/aim that corresponds so the actions of the physical thing in our hands and not a translated, adjusted, symbolic estimate of how 'in fact' a gun would move. it's a key point i think.

ArmA is the only thing out there that will suit most of us. I don't think i could play it though if those few small things arn't changed or at least given as an option. That would be a pity cause i have massive respect for BIS and there is no other dev i'd rather give my forty or so pounds to.

[froggyluv 2130]

@Bunks

I think your over-reacting. It is possible that you can really dig this game while pointing out where changes are needed. Its not "with us or against us". As far as the fan-base your talking about, as far as I've seen most if not all of the major modders are behind ARMA, developing as we speak, and they're really the only ones that matter.

[Metal Heart 0]

Quote[/b] ]Like i said before, everyone I know who has tried the game said its either "ok" or its "garbage". And they are all Coop OFP players or long time gamers. Besides, BIS already knows where this game stands. Which is why im confidant they have no choice but to make major changes to it, or watch the game die a quick death with little support. I dont hate the game, but I do know it needs major (not minor) changes to game function, not only bugs and silly stuff like that. But if you fanboys just sit here and tell those who dislike it the way it is to shut up, you do the game and BIS a diservice. But most of all, you hurt the OFP community more than the critics.

It's just that whining about the same damn things over and over on the forums doesn't help jack shit. If you are so worried about ArmA then you can help by posting bugs on the wiki (for example, the map issue is already there thus no further whining required on the forums).

There's also a wishlist but keep in mind that wishes don't always come true. BIS has come up with their vision how ArmA should be and the "major changes" you request are pretty much left for the mod makers. And for every major change there would be people who liked it the way it was or who would've wanted it some other way, BIS can't possibly please everyone.

[dm 9]

Like i said before, everyone I know who has tried the game said its either "ok" or its "garbage". And they are all Coop OFP players or long time gamers. Besides, BIS already knows where this game stands. Which is why im confidant they have no choice but to make major changes to it, or watch the game die a quick death with little support. I dont hate the game, but I do know it needs major (not minor) changes to game function, not only bugs and silly stuff like that. But if you fanboys just sit here and tell those who dislike it the way it is to shut up, you do the game and BIS a diservice.

"Dumbing" the game down to suit the whingers would be more of a "diservice" to the game than leaving it as it is.

OFP and ArmA are two of the few games which try to move away from the nano-second jerk reaction games that most FPS are, and that is an honourable choice.

Modifiying ArmA to be another run of the mill strafe-shoot CTF game would be crippling, and would cause it to die its "quick death" with even less support than you currently predict.

[Waika 0]

Waika sure you can't snap a gun far to the left and aim in the time it takes you to twitch in real life.

That's not quite correct; while you are correct on the latter point you make -- and it is possible raise and bring a light assault rifle or SMG to rather precise aim quickly in say a 40° firing arc (which also takes an enormous amount of skill and practice to do accurately on a firing range no less in combat), no one can raise a rilfe, turn their torso or entire body and a rifle 270° in 250µs or less -- that's just a fact of physics and human kinesics.

The fact that you can do these things with a mouse, with zero effort, and very little practice dramatically effects the way games are played and adds a very unrealistic and arcadish dimension to games that makes killing with virtual firearms ridiculously simplistic and easy.

In a quasi-realistic first hit decisive game with magic zero player model kinesics and no inertia physics; game-play will always devolves to who sees who first prevailing... That may be adequate for shallow death-match spammy arcade games, but in a game where both realism and more tactical depth of play are game design objectives BI has clearly taken the correct approach.

I guess your referring to yourself since the majority of people even on this forum are not to happy with what they see so far.

No Bunks, my grammar and English are quite clear and I was in fact referring to you with your personalizing, petty insults, hysteria, over reaction, over generalization, ridiculous and unsupported arguments...

Even if your statement about the 'majority of people on this forum' was true; which is not a fact as it's neither proven or known; it would be completely immaterial on two counts -- as the majority of people that own ArmA aren't even registered on or posting to these forums, and the game is BI's to build as pleases them, not to satisfy you or because what you fictionally allege is the desire 'the majority of people posting to these forums'.

[Stealth3 0]

So you're all telling me BIS tried to simulate inertia when they can't even simulate the harrier taking off like it's suppote to. Nice try

[Waika 0]

Technically illiterate histrionics don't make for a qualified argument. In fact simple lateral inertia, is a very simple physics feature to model in a game.

4DS control and the realistic aerodynamics of a jump jet in hover is dramatically more complex and requires enormous overhead in both code and resources to render and scale realistically.

[sanctuary 19]

From what i remember having read, wasn't there an option in ArmA allowing the player to disable the "free aim" system , to get a fixed aim ?

If this option exist, doesn't it get rid of the problem some people have with the gun movements ?

[Stealth3 0]

Quote[/b] ]Technically illiterate histrionics don't make for a qualified argument. In fact simple lateral inertia, is a very simple physics feature to model in a game.

I agree, its easy to put it in the game. But making it good becomes the hard part. Thats why it sucks so much in ARMA, because the inertia is done half assed.

About the vertical take off, whats so hard about it? Mods did it in OFP.

[ebud 18]

I just went in and played with my settings just to see if I could "tighten" up the aiming although I hadn't had any issues with it since I turned down by AA settings.

I jacked up the mouse sensitivity and lowered the floating zone to 0 and the mouse overshot each time.

I ended up putting 3 ai in front of me at 10 12 and 2 oclock at 100m. I then just played with the mouse settings and floating zone until I could swing the aimpoint on each one as quick as I thought it should go. I still continue to overshoot the target with the sights and need 2-3 mouse twitches to get one target, but this is a target 100m away, not a guy in a hallway 20 feet away. Anything under 50m and I'm on target in one motion. With the mouse sensitivity tweaked it actually did help, but not to the point where I think most people "think" it should be.

Also at first when I installed the game I had every single video setting maxed out and my aim precision was a joke. After tweaking settings and screen res to the point where I get 30+ FPS most all of the time, my aiming precision "seemed" to get much better. FSAA was the biggest culprit which seemed to hold the aiming back.

[Sniperwolf572 758]

So you're all telling me BIS tried to simulate inertia when they can't even simulate the harrier taking off like it's suppote to. Nice try

Placebo summed it up quite nicely:

Or alternatively, you could shut up with the repeated and excessive bitching and moaning and whining and complaining and move on?

Stealth3 your trolling won't be tolerated, this is your last warning, next time I won't be hesitant to hand out post restrictions.

[Stealth3 0]

Moderators have to be fair, not biased. You call that trolling or whatever, I call that the truth.

And if it makes you feel any better, I barely post here, so don't say I'm trolling.

[Homer Johnston 0]

i've only got the demo but i think it is saaa-weet. it makes me sad when people try to claim features as crap stains

example, in that poll the guy whines about lighting changing... man, that is a COOL effect, I can't believe BIS thought to put it in! it really screws you over at night if you stare at a light, or fire your gun for a while...

with regards to aiming.. I think it is spot on in terms of how fast a highly trained soldier could do it... for crying out loud, I dare you to pick up a broomstick, and see how fast you can ACCURATELY point it at something (a man) standing at the OTHER END OF A FOOTBALL FIELD! (and that's a fairly short combat engagement distance! ) ... in-game when you get good at it, i'd say you can do it pretty fast...

One other point... many of the things that are annoying people, are simply things that they need to give a chance... I guarantee you 75% of the complainers, if they got used to the coded elements that they initially find obtrusive, would actually appreciate these things, and further, enjoy the game for them... will they do it?... nah, easier to play CS  

[Sniperwolf572 758]

Moderators have to be fair, not biased. You call that trolling or whatever, I call that the truth.

And if it makes you feel any better, I barely post here, so don't say I'm trolling.

I'm not warning you because I don't agree with the point you're making (My personal opinion of your argument is irrelevant), I'm warning you because you're not doing it in the right tone and attitude. And the last time I checked, trolling is not post-count dependent.

[Dallas 9]

People either love or hate ArmA... or they think it's ok.

[-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0]

ok, i hate to say i love it

[poitings 0]

Waika i agree that anything over 270 degrees should encounter some resistence with the panning of the gun. Strangely enough you get just that in Ghost Recon when prone and you don't get it in AA. Go figure.

I think this is also a bit of a sytems thing. it seems people with uber systems have a sharper experience.

I have an Athlon XP 2.4, 1 gig of ram, nVidia 7600GT. . . . i guess it's not enough even though it meets the minimum. It also has the effect of looking worse than OFP in some ways when i playing with the settings low enough to run near smooth. But even then the gun feels like a heavy boat. He he i do love the M249 though so i guess i'll stick with that for now.

I guess in a year or a year and a half when i finally have to upgrade whether i can afford it or not i'll get AA that is patched to a level of total or near total smoothness in every aspect and the upgrade in graphics will be a nice change for me.

I'm willing to put the love into the game as it has such great pedigree.

[Waika 0]

Waika i agree that anything over 270 degrees should encounter some resistence with the panning of the gun.

Actually it should be anything over 40° rotation in any direction. Even if you're not an experienced Marksman or Soldier all you have to do is look at the mechanics of how a weapon is aimed to understand why.

IRL you don't just raise a rifle and turn in a 'snap' to a point of aim off your present generally forward facing POV/A; you either turn your torso using your external obliques or turn your entire body by changing your stance in order to follow where you want your weapon aimed and to observe a proper stance to offer a suitably accurate platform so you can actually hit what you're aiming at.

The kinesics of this kind of motion even with a fantasy/magical arcade massless weapon just isn't as fast as you can flick a mouse with your wrist, even if you're in an ideal stance and ready, and execute the movement with the utmost preparation and focus.

Add the mass of a real weapon, the encumbrance of 30+ Kilos of gear, and having to turn from a less then ideal stance, or even more challenging while moving, and the time to bring your weapon to aim is going to be even slower.

It appears this is just exactly what BI has done; granted they had to arrive at some middle of the road metrics for the effect, but they even offer you a generous margin of float control that tightens up the 'feel' of effect to personal taste.

As I said in the previous page of the thread, the value of this level of realism has much more benefit then simply being more realistic; the biggest pay-off is game-play with more tactical depth, sophistication and that rewards a broader range of tactical skills with success.

[KaiserPanda 0]

Waika: Again, confusing actual game features with bugs. The free-aim, where your mouse moves around the screen, is a feature. The weapon movement problems isn't at all tied to incumbrance or degree of motion. When you try to aim in small increments, the mouse "lags" noticably on slower systems (like mine). This isn't about the weapon turning as your turn fast, the actualy movement time after you move the mouse is delayed. What would be easy minor adjustments in aiming in real life feel realy slow and akward because of this.

[Waika 0]

Waika: Again, confusing actual game features with bugs.  The free-aim, where your mouse moves around the screen, is a feature.  The weapon movement problems isn't at all tied to incumbrance or degree of motion.  When you try to aim in small increments, the mouse "lags" noticably on slower systems (like mine).  This isn't about the weapon turning as your turn fast, the actualy movement time after you move the mouse is delayed.  What would be easy minor adjustments in aiming in real life feel realy slow and akward because of this.

No, in fact you're not reading the thread in entire, and/or aren't paying attention to what I'm responding to. The lag issue is seperate from the design intention of slew and mass, and free-aim while independent of both does effect the feel of the aim system as implented.

Now if one of the BI Developers were to say there is no weapon/player interace inertia, slew or kinesic drag intended -- I'll acknowledge you as right; but I get the impression from their remarks that the effect is intended, and the lag players like you experience is a seperate matter, though a valid part of the discussion...