[For free] Proof of concept: weapon attachements

[DieAngel 0]

I agree with Firehead, what I would be looking for is a simplified interface in the editor and the gear menu of the mission briefing. Right now having a boatload of variations of the same gun here makes the inventory messy.

[DaSquade 0]

Firehead....

Well personally i think we aren't directly looking for this kind of swappable attachments, but rather 'animated' attachments. Again personally there is still one hot feature on my list i hope BIS will ever hardcode and that is the ability to animate parts of the weapons. If not mistaken, untill today it is still not possible to animate (even a 'static' 0 -> 1 animation) witch makes weapons in ArmA feel lifeless.

I'm talking about raising ironsights, grenade launcher sights, sideways flipping open additional zoomsights (eotech/aimpoints), adjusting shoulder stocks and bipods.

Zeroing weapons was something, but so far as been mentioned by the devs is limited to certain ammo and again visually the weapon stays the same.

Some stuff the community already tried to bypass with succes, but in the end afaik it is all done by swapping main models. Not the best way as it isn't that good performance wise and also has its limites.

I'm no expert on how easy this is for BIS but i do know certain people within BIS (no offence) aren't all for making it more complex for players. I'm glad i and some others managed to make BIS look how wanted certain features are and OA showed BIS are taking a new road by adding additional features that add more 'life' and interaction. For that alone i think OA is a succes on itself as it shows BIS truely listens to its customers and still isn't at it end. I can only hope BIS keeps watching our hopes and one day we can finally say we are playing THE best (soldier) combat simulator ;) .

[P. Gaudette 10]

That's a great thing there, BIS should've had something like this implemented in the game.

[Firehead 0]

DaSquade, excellent reply. You have managed to clear some of this up for me. I was thinking to narrow. Now...

Based on what you're saying its more about aesthetics than function? The game isn't complex enough(I'll elaborate) to require a lot of these features. Now, there are some things that I am all for, for instance, using a magnifier on an Aimpoint/EOtech, and flipping down/removing the magnifier for close up fighting. Grenade launcher sights? I don't feel the need to have those animated, when you pull up the leaf sight for it(the optics key, whatever you may have it at) thats good enough.

Personally, I'd be more concerned with complex character animations. Proper reloads of machine guns, various loading sequences for non-M16 family(AK variants, FALs, ect) weapons, better fighting stance, not holding machineguns like rifles while in the prone, correct IMTs(individual movement techniques), and down to a simple thing like correct ejection pattern for spent casings for each weapon(ex: pistols have terrible ejection pattern, I didn't know my Glock ejects rounds that just clear my hand, and the 240 ejects spent casings from the bottom, not the side). I could go forever to be honest. Stuff like that should be more of a concern to the community than making it so you can "personalize" your weapon(there are only so many places you can put stuff on a rifle).There are only so many parts on a rifle that move, versus movements of a human being while using said weapons. There are tons of things that set this game aside from other games, but I mean, down to simple stuff like the ability to look a different direction than where your rifle is pointed. Most games can animate a weapon more than it needs to be because in most FPS', its the only thing that needs animation from a player perspective(other than player models). At what point do we decide what is nitpicking and what is necessity? I think this is nitpicking.

Now to elaborate on "complex". My idea of complex would be electronic sights that fail(dead batteries, ect), things that can be destroyed(taking a hit from a rifle round to your ACOG), weather/environmental conditions that affect the use of weapons. Having irons along with an optic, are useless until something like that is added(why use Irons when you have a CCO?). Making the game too realistic like this makes it less fun(I'm a realism whore, but even I'll admit to this). Soon enough people will be complaining that you can't lubricate your weapon or something. There are just WAY WAY WAY too many things that go into combat to make this game/simulation perfect. I, along with many others I would imagine, are perfectly happy with having an animation that cycles the bolt on the weapon.

All I'm saying is this engine is WAY too modular to get into complex detail.

Edited July 10, 2010 by Firehead

[PuFu 4600]

Personally, I'd be more concerned with complex character animations.

if bis brings FBX2RTM animation to the table, i am certain you will see more animations, improved ones etc done by this community

[DaSquade 0]

Grenade launcher sights?

Well to give you an idea why this is needed...take the M32 (the multi grenade launcher with sight). It is useless without an adjustable range. IF BIS could hardcode the ability to animate weapon parts, you could easly animate the sight and its memory points.

I'm not sure how soldiers in the field use other sights (that work with horizontal sub aiming bars..like the M79 for example) but afaik they are there for a purpose, to adjust on the fly.

Anyway, like said, OA proven that BIS is willing to add wanted stuff, stuff the community tried to workaround since years. But we have to understand BIS doesn't want it to be too complex. I'm sure if they really want they could add anything though...just a mather of time i guess.

EDIT: Don't get me wrong, i'm also not really for personalising your weapon..like this topic was about. Therefor you pick your layout out the crate for. Enough variant to do the job. I just want the things on my riffle to behave like they should and i'm not taking about internal parts etc but sights and other combat attachments.

I agree malfunctions (dead battery, weather conditions, etc) could be a plus although this might be for some too much and take away the fun (if you can't fix it..replace battery for example when you have the time).

Character animations is something else. At least there are ways to adjust those if not mistaken. Weapons remain limited and as we all know, it are the limitations in this engine that makes people cry.

Edited July 10, 2010 by DaSquade

[DaveP 66]

I don't see why it wouldn't be possible now with the zeroing for weapons in OA; isn't it effectively the same thing just with bullets instead of grenades?

[rstratton 0]

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/11711

[Big Dawg KS 6]

You really wouldn't need user actions (which wouldn't even be possible because weapons aren't objects, thus there's no way of handling them) if there was a zeroing animation source, which IMO is probably a more practical feature request.

[pre-Vet 10]

Why is this not in the original game?

was thinking about this to but I lack 1337editing skills

[[frl]myke 14]

Why is this not in the original game?

was thinking about this to but I lack 1337editing skills

read the thread. It probably isn't ingame because people don't want it.

[dimitri_harkov 10]

Well, I like the idea.

Reminds me of the endless weapon upgrade possibilities of the Jagged Alliance series (which, by the way, would be an excellent scenario for a nice addon with RPG elements).

For me, the pros outweight the cons by far.

And People who think that this is not realistic simply shall not use it.

Put people who like unrealistic stuff (like Domination, Evolution, Warfare, flying planes in ArmA...) might come to like it. After all this is a GAME.

Thanks for sharing your ideas, Myke!

Cheers,

D.

[Jonny_LI 10]

From the idea i made a similar script with my RFJ_mercenaries back in the ofp day, where i used a similar script to allow switiching between 2 primary weapons. the full mag bug couldnt really be avoided but it worked.

anyway, from a realistic POV, no one would take off acog´s or reddots during combat or in the field, simply because it throws off zeroing and rendering the scope useless.

therefore modern scopes also have a piggyback reddot or can swith inside the optic like the elcan specter.

same goes with grenade launchers and in a similar way with suppressors.

nice gimmick but in my eyes not THAT really applyable.

Well that's poo, because we do take SUSAT/ACOG off to put CWS (our night sight) on at night, then take it off and replace with our 'normal' weapons sight at first light.

Provided you don't play football with it after you've taken it off and you put it back onto the right 'lug' when you fit it back to the weapon (talking SA80 here) then zero is held.

Cracking idea, I'd like to be able to do something similar to what I've just mentioned where we could switch our night sights with our normal weapons optics and vice versa.

[nephilim 0]

Sure that might apply in RL.. but do you spend 24 hrs gaming? :D

[rksl-rock 1301]

Sure that might apply in RL.. but do you spend 24 hrs gaming? :D

No but some of the missions i've played recently do span the day and night thanks to "Fast time", eg domination etc. The ability to switch from a day sight to night sight as Jonny describes would be useful.

Edited July 14, 2010 by RKSL-Rock

[[frl]myke 14]

*snip*

RKSL-Rock cleared it up for me. :D

[Drumheller 19]

...from a realistic POV, no one would take off acog´s or reddots during combat or in the field, simply because it throws off zeroing and rendering the scope useless.

therefore modern scopes also have a piggyback reddot or can swith inside the optic like the elcan specter.

This is incorrect and pretty much entirely untrue.

Almost all modern optics(Red Dots, ACOGs, and even ironsights) retain their zero when removed. I regularily take my aimpoint off my real m-4 for storage and whenever I go back to the range and pop it back on it is perfectly zeroed. This holds true for my m-16 and aimpoint while I was in the Army.

This is the reason that most optics have "quick release" latches on them. So that you can take them off or switch optics at the drop of a dime.

Optics like the acog and elcan that have back up sights built directly on to them is for when you need to instantly switch from one to another and don't have the time to remove your optic, or for when you may need the capability of both at the same time.

[Steakslim 1]

This is incorrect and pretty much entirely untrue.

Almost all modern optics(Red Dots, ACOGs, and even ironsights) retain their zero when removed. I regularily take my aimpoint off my real m-4 for storage and whenever I go back to the range and pop it back on it is perfectly zeroed. This holds true for my m-16 and aimpoint while I was in the Army.

This is the reason that most optics have "quick release" latches on them. So that you can take them off or switch optics at the drop of a dime.

Optics like the acog and elcan that have back up sights built directly on to them is for when you need to instantly switch from one to another and don't have the time to remove your optic, or for when you may need the capability of both at the same time.

Good thing I read this thread, I was about to post the same response about Neph's comment.