roshnak

I think that official gametypes are far less of a factor than multiplayer performance.

Um, no. That's not what I am saying. What I am saying is that doing something "because that's how it is in real life" is not a good reason by itself. There are lots of ways the game could be made to be more like real life but would also make the game not fun to play. We can make compromises so that the game feels authentic without being 100% realistic. For example, medics can fix your legs and you can walk again instead of being crippled for the rest of the game. Now it might not sound like it, but 6-10 seconds is really, really long time to be performing one combat action in a video game. Besides which, a time based system for throwing grenades is a bad idea. Like I said on the first page: Arma should work like every other PC FPS ever and let you hit a key on the keyboard to pull a grenade out, then let you throw the grenade from there.

Well, I guess instead of addressing the point that I was pretty clearly making you can try to get pedantic about whether all bullet wounds require surgery.

Haha, that's supposed to be a joke, right? Edit: I mean you can't really believe that.

In real life you have to have surgery when you get shot.

The problem with Arma 2 was that the throw animation was terrible and locked you in place. Arma 3's system is a huge improvement on that, but there is still room for tweaking. Oh, and 6-10 seconds is way too long for something that you are probably going to be doing while people are shooting at you.

I think it's pretty great that you can tell exactly who read the OP and who just read the thread title before posting.

I agree with pretty much everything you have to say except the part about anything being clunky ever. This seems pretty exclusionary. Not a great way to grow the community.

I think it sounds like an unnecessary complication, to be honest.

Didn't FAKs used to make this sound?

If we are going to have to equip grenades before throwing them we really need a better system for switching weapons. Maybe something more like every other game in history does and use the number keys.

Come on, now. You can't seriously be suggesting that just because a feature wasn't implemented exactly as it was requested that it wasn't intended to fulfill the request at all. Especially since using RTT for scopes would have made them basically unusable for people with moderate to low-end systems. The thing is, it should probably be easier to build features into the engine than to figure out convoluted hacks that modders have to. Someone had a post a while back about the crazy stuff the ACE team had to do to get their CCIP pipper working. That would have been drastically more simple to do engine side. (Note: I am not requesting a CCIP pipper. Please do not be angry at me.) I wouldn't necessarily expect them to be the highest priority, but surely some of the most frequently requested features over the years should be fairly high on the list, right?

Wouldn't it be cleaner to just set those values in the F-18's config? That way people wouldn't need to have HRP installed to have nice 6DOF settings. It seemed to me that was Feint's intention with HRP, anyway.

Not really. It's also kind of a hacky way to fix the problem. He clearly already has some form of modelling package, and I can't think of one that wouldn't allow you to simply select the whole model and mirror it. Also, CS models aren't really "dumbly" mirrored. The original game was made with the players holding the weapons left handed, and in order to add a right-handed option without redoing all the first person animations, the game just mirrors them, which results in the weapons displaying wrong if you have them set to be displayed as right handed. Custom weapons made for CS are therefore usually modeled and then mirrored so they display properly for right-handed users. By the way, I don't suppose this particular model has normal and specular maps?

If you have the software to convert the model, it shouldn't be any problem to mirror it.

There's no reason to ever have Blastcore running on a server, so that doesn't make any kind of sense. I could see there being problems in PvP, though, as people using Blastcore would not be seeing the same effects as people without it.

Hmm, it seems like that was just the sort of thing I suggested in my second reply to this thread. All you've done is accuse people of whining. Or not being "developer types" when they in fact are. Or discount people's opinions because their regdate isn't as old as yours. Why do you continue to bring personal attacks into a discussion where people are making rational and logical arguments about BIS's customer service? No one has said "I hate BIS" or "Arma is a bad game." I'm sorry if not everyone feels the same level of unfailing loyalty to a business that you do. Wanting a pretty good game to be better does not make us "whiners." Neither does making polite inquiries into the state of development. Or wanting a company that markets their game based on the strengths of it's modding capability to document their own engine and release their own tools without requiring the community to do it for them. Or wondering if features that were promised years ago and never mentioned again were cut or simply delayed. BIS is a pretty good company, and Arma 3 is a pretty good game, but neither is perfect, and I'm sorry if some people wanting them to be better upsets you. Edit: What double standard, specifically, are you referring to?

Why are those the only choices? It's not like the devs aren't already posting on the forums.

This thread is not about a personal minor feature or issue. This thread is asking a very broad question about the development process in general. You might want to go back and reread the OP. It was very politely written by a person who I am given to believe is a longtime customer and fan who has some experience in the software development field.

Wouldn't it be prudent of them to simply add "This is not a planned feature" to that statement? Seems like that would solve any issue with anyone taking their statements the wrong way. Which is not what this thread is about.

They've already forecasted a ton of features that aren't in the game. How is not clarifying their intentions helping anything? I would also like to clarify that I am not mad, just confused as to what the overall strategy is here.

Pretty sure you're the angriest person in this thread, dude. And "maybe" would sound real good if it came from anyone in an official position.

And I'm not even asking for Java support. I'm asking if the developers still plan on implementing it or not. All it takes is a yes or a no. Which is the same kind of thing this thread is asking for. Just for BIS to be a little bit more engaged with the community.

Customer service. I understand that it's not something people who deal with video game companies are used to.

First of all, it leads to me not feeling useless and bored when I'm not actually driving the car. Second, maybe a good reason for it to be a priority is that it has been one of the most requested features for this series for more than a decade. Honestly, what does scuba diving add to gameplay? Which isn't even the point. This thread is asking for for clarification as to what BIS's development priorities are. Are they working on adding new features? Do they plan on adding new features? Or do they pretty much consider the game complete at this point? I find it far more frustrating to not be told anything than to be told no. If BIS has, for example, abandoned the idea of adding Java to the game, then that's fine (not really, I would be sad) and I can move on. On the other hand, it's pretty upsetting that there have been like 4 or 5 threads asking for updates on that specific feature and there hasn't been a single official response. That's upsetting. It makes me feel like I've spent my time and money on a company that does not value me as a customer. This thread is 10 days old and has 70 replies and no response from anyone from BIS. Maybe they should hire a community manager or something... I'm sure there are several people who would even be willing to do it for free for some insight into the dev process.