To ArmA Developpers: aiming system

[Andre 10]

.....

Edited January 31, 2013 by Andre

[whisper 0]

Shift + Walk?

[Andre 10]

.....

Edited January 31, 2013 by Andre
waste of time

[SaBrE_UK 0]

I know what you mean and I think it's somewhat annoying, too. I suggest trying ACE; it's fixed this problem on the most part

[Lepardi 0]

Also it would be nice if it didn't require 100+ fps for perfect control. In other games it doesn't matter that much even if it's 30ish fps.

[The-Architect 0]

Also it would be nice if it didn't require 100+ fps for perfect control. In other games it doesn't matter that much even if it's 30ish fps.

That is so true. I find aiming is almost impossible with anything but lowest settings.

[4 IN 1 0]

yes the weapon does not move very much at the butt end

but the front end of your sight did move,

so i still find that not as much of problem for me

[baddo 0]

I wouldn't expect these sort of changes to be done to this game.

[Namikaze 0]

Too little of a request and way too late, in all likelihood it probably wouldn't even be implemented in ArmA2. I'd be willing to bet that a community-made addon could solve the problem that you're having though, so maybe put a request in the request thread?

[Second 0]

The weapon's butt DOES NOT move, never !

Yes it does. You think too much about flat asphalt field. ArmA is supposed to have all kinds terrain, forests with such heavy undergrowth or trunk densitity that moving can be considered to be from somewhat to very hard and time consuming. You can't keep rifle steady there if moving. Same goes for rocky terrain.

I find it major immersion breaker if i can move in that kind terrain with speed while keeping sights steady. I dont care about MOUT so much, ArmA for me is forests and jungles.

[baddo 0]

I guess a lot of people often forget that in a game such as in Armed Assault, it is very easy to move around.

Even though I think something really stinks in the animations in Armed Assault, or in something, that makes the movement of the character feel clumsy and is one of the major points making the game feel "not done right" I guess not only for me but for a lot of other people as well.

I've not analyzed the problem in depth but I am sure the problem is there: they changed something going from Operation Flashpoint to Armed Assault and the result was that controlling the character became annoying, when in Operation Flashpoint it wasn't that. Playing Operation Flashpoint I never had the feeling that there is something wrong with controlling the character, but with Armed Assault that feeling is constantly there.

But then again we need to remember it still is easy and fast to do things in the game. Such as reloading a rifle is a very fast thing to do in Armed Assault, in real life you are most often definitely not able to do it so smoothly and quickly and consistently as in the game.

Or entering and getting out of a cabin of a vehicle. I know something about this as I am a military truck driver. Having the assault rifle with me all the time, as instructed by my superiors, was a major pain, as I had to take it with me every time I stepped out of the cabin of the truck, even if I walked outside 2 meters and then went back inside the cabin. It's good training in case war happens and I take part in it, but this point shows very well how in the game it is very very easy to do things like get out of a vehicle while in real life you will get annoyed easily of such things as keeping a rifle with you when stepping out of the car for half a minute. In contrast things like this is very easy in the game and no annoyance with it at all.

These things often get forgotten when we critisize the games, and I have done it as well.

I honestly believe that if the controlling of the character was more like it was in Operation Flashpoint, then Armed Assault would be more fun. But would it be more "realistic" then? I would say that if we consider the time it takes to do things in real life, no. Doing things in real life is no-where near as easy and fast to do like in Armed Assault.

I think the annoying feeling with the character controlling in Armed Assault is a separate issue, it can very well be more realistic than in Operation Flashpoint if we consider the time it takes to do things, but nevertheless they made it so that it is annoying. I will give BIS the benefit of the doubt and say they didn't do it annoying intentionally, it's just a consequence of using certain ways to do things in the code or in the artist side.

[Andre 10]

.....

Edited January 31, 2013 by Andre
waste of time

[SaBrE_UK 0]

Andre: ACE mod. Try. The end.

[Andre 10]

.....

Edited January 31, 2013 by Andre
waste of time

[NoRailgunner 0]

Andre ArmA is sold in entertainment - gaming corner of real life.  

ArmA is not a real simulator or exact simulation for all mil purposes.

Steady and precise aiming in all situations would be imho more like in mainstream fps. Its not only the "aiming system" you talking about - its overall animation and movement system that should be tweaked, tuned and improved. Lets hope ArmA2 will be the masterpiece from BIS in mil gaming corner. Micro AI on second cpu sounds good hope its much better than both OFP+ArmA AI.

[whisper 0]

/don't care, tbh, side-issue not central to what the game is about (sry for you guys real-time shooters).

when you begin to think about the side effects, etc, and the load of work needed just for this, then forget it.

btw Andre, you're wrong on ACE account about FPS, the WGL guys make as much FPS friendly as possible since they began working on OFP years ago.

[Andre 10]

.....

Edited January 31, 2013 by Andre
waste of time

[Col. Faulkner 0]

I really don't like the way your rifle oscillates wildly in and out

as you side step. It feels like your rifle is on a bungee and

some addon rifles actually appear to dig into your character's

head. The rest of it I can pretty much live with. The whole

weapon handling system is pretty crude in ArmA anyway.

[SaBrE_UK 0]

It's far less than a gigabyte, Andre, and I have a middle-system, too, and it runs no differently to normal. I still think you should try ACE before you say it'll give you performance issues.

[dmarkwick 261]

I don't see what difference the butt rolling makes, as long as the aim is reasonably realistic. Sounds to me like an aesthetic complaint over a gameplay one. If I want more accurate aim while moving I need to slow down and shoulder the weapon, that seems to work fine.

[Second 0]

The weapon's butt DOES NOT move, never !

Yes it does. You think too much about flat asphalt field. ArmA is supposed to have all kinds terrain, forests with such heavy undergrowth or trunk densitity that moving can be considered to be from somewhat to very hard and time consuming. You can't keep rifle steady there if moving. Same goes for rocky terrain.

I find it major immersion breaker if i can move in that kind terrain with speed while keeping sights steady. I dont care about MOUT so much, ArmA for me is forests and jungles.

Well, I read you Second, and I realize you absolutly do not know what you are talking about.

Did you already serve in army ?

Did you already walk and aim with real weapons ?

I am sure you did not because what you write.

I agree with you, aimpoint may move, I say again: may.

Because with experience you reduce so much that aimpoint movement.

May I remember you we are talking about the weapon's butt movement, roling in a strange movement in ArmA.

Like I said, and like every ex-soldier and real shooter knows, when you aim, you get your weapon on your shoulder.

To say again in other words to avoid your confusion again, you push your weapon's butt on the shoulder !

Your weapon's butt is then like fixed on the shoulder, and do not move, never, impossible !

Now, start ArmA, pick a rifle, aim, and walk...

What do you see ?

You see aimpoint moving, that's correct for inexperimented soldier (but we are supposed to be marines or SF).

But you also see the weapon's butt rolling ?!

Weapon's butt is rolling in a strange movement absolutly not realist, absolutly not credible for who already handled real weapon.

You are talking about all kind of terrain...

Sure, if you fall down because a log on the ground your weapon butt leave your shoulder and move, hehe.

You are also talking about move in that kind terrain with speed while keeping sights steady ?!

You definitly do not know anything about soldier behaviour.

First, soldier never aim when moving fast.

Why ? because it is not possible to move in high speed while aiming.

But try into ArmA, move, then aim... what happens ? you get back on slow speed automaticly.

Second, when you run, you run fast into cover and do not aim.

Maybe you think I am rude but it ids truth.

Buy a rifle, train a bit with it, then come back into ArmA and aim... you will understand what I am talking about such an absurde weapon's butt movement.

Like I said in my first post:

when you aim, you block the butt of your weapon on your shoulder.

Your weapon is then like "fixed" with your chest !

The weapon's butt DOES NOT move, never ! (except if you fall down because a log on the ground, hehe)

The aiming point may move, but only if you are unexperimented and if you do not control it correctly.

But we are supposed to be marines, even SF in ArmA, aren't we ?

ArmA is a simulator and should be immersive for who already handled real weapon.

We are not in CoD or quake, but in Armed Assault.

So, the only thing to be real, credible, to get an immersive simulator, is the aiming system.

A software is not reality but it is very important, the most important, to get a realist aiming system.

Else, what does ArmA looks like ?

Again, no offence Second, but truth.

Cordialy,

Andre.

I'm soldier, former active nowdays just active-reservist. So yeah i have quite a lot of experience, almost 10 years... Infantry, mostly interested querilla/light infantry action now days. So enough of that.

I don't care is it butt or barrel swaying in game as long as i don't get too steady weapon in terrain where i shouldn't. I'm more interested about things actually affecting battle dynamics of game... Which i think soldiers should pay attention to more than slightly cosmetic small things

I do see your point, it's just that i couldn't care less.

[Noraf 0]

I'm just currious,   witch movement ??

this is arma 1.15b and dbe1,  nothing more

[Andre 10]

.....

Edited January 31, 2013 by Andre
waste of time

[whisper 0]

Once again : you're not asking for a little change.

You're asking for much in terms of work needed.

The anims for walking show the shoulder moving but the rifle remain steady for better aiming. Which leads to the movement of the weapon butt relative to the shoulder.

If the rifle was to be glued to shoulder, the movement of the rifle would be horrible.

That requires either a complete redoing of anims with something that block shoulder movement, or a deformation system that permits the weapon to be kept glued to the character without physically entering the 3D model.

It's a huge task.

For what? Sorry, but for a completely cosmetic issue. Not worth the time or any penny.

[Lepardi 0]

completely cosmetic issue. Not worth the time or any penny.

It affects CQB, when clearing buildings it's hard to hit enemies while moving because it just sways so much.