Cull

Well being British, he had me fooled but I'm glad the loser is out of here. I've read his posts here and at the UBI forums, never suspected him of being a fake for a minute. I've had family members in the armed forces, my father was in the Royal Navy during WW2, his father before him, in the Great War, they served their country and there are ppl like this lowlife claiming off of their backs, it makes me sick. Keep up the good work guy's as I'm sure there'll be more like him, around the next corner. Be ever vigilant !!

[FWEF]-Cull...used to be Culloden in the early days but now shortened to Cull, has more than one meaning too [FWEF]=[Fire Wolves Elite Force] Just 4 members, friends from work... Revol Mflyer Tic-Tac

@ Ruggbutt I know we're both highly passionate about GR1 and how GR2 is going to be implemented but man, let's try to get on, I'm just as sick of the trivialities too.

I'm sorry you feel like that PGT95 but it had to be done but as from now, I can assure you that, that is the end of my quibbles. I've said what I had to say and [Wx] .:Nightmare:. sorry to disappoint...lol. Infact a big genuine sorry goes out to everybody in this thread, if it caused you distress in any way. I'm not the one to just sit there you see, if things need to be said to defend myself, I'll say them. Thanks for understanding

@ ruggbutt I agree with you, that reading is a fundamental practice in all forums but your post below, was posted on page 1...correct? ...your post below was on page 3... ...so explain this next post, which is on page 4, this page infact... And this is where reading is fundamental, the next page over I state: ...I also think practicing what you preach, is another fundamental practice that should be adopted in forums, what say ye?. The '...next page over...' as you stated would be page 2 not page 3.

@ Ruggbutt Let's remind everybody what your early response was on page 1 of this thread before you start having a rant about me flaming you. When a few respondants stated their like for FPWV you deliberately tried to belittle their opinions and you have done in many threads containing such content. This is how you responded... ...and I responded with a thought I had in mind after I'd read it but as in r/l I'm often accused of sounding off before thinking it through but I'm not apologising for what I said. I thought it was a selfish thing to say epecially after what whoa182's last sentence was... ...and as for this... I could certainly accuse you for doing the same thing Ruggbutt but I won't cause you already did, I've just quoted you, and as for this... ...my mind is open and I just saw you flame me in three sentences and feel quite offended by your over reaction, when someone joins in the fray when they wholeheartedly agree with somebodyelse's viewpoint that you don't agree with. And whats this?... ...LOL...I've been in enough threads stating that same thing along with a lot of others and all you've done is target ppl because of our FPWV opinions. You've never got the point about having options for all and you've never admitted to getting my point, until Hatchet brought it up...laughed? I nearly wept . In all of these threads I state quite categorically, that all I see is my ironsight view when aimed in, I never strafe unless surprised, then I'll take cover and go to the Ironsight and even when strafing I don't look at how realistic my gun is, it's just an aesthetic addition which adds to the immersive value of a FPS, when done correctly. And this too... I'll tell you what I said and then explain myself slowly... ...I'm not trying to flame you Ruggbutt but it's like the proverbial red rag to a bull syndrome. I've never once flamed you, I just thought your answer was a selfish, condescending one and I replicated my thoughts to this thread, I just wrote as I saw fit which in most cases, is what you have done too. Not to mention I've seen your name in a few threads where ppl have accused you of trying to derail a thread by flaming...think on.

but of course not Of course not, would never happen...LOL...ain't that right RR_GRT?

Nicely explained Hatchetforce, something I've tried to explain many times but hit a dead end trying...lol Every respect Hatchet, you've done the time so you know what you're talking about, I on the otherhand just used common sense and common sense tells me there's a weapon there, however out of focus it is, it's still there folks, whether you like it or not !! and like yourself Hatchetforce, I don't concentrate on the actual weapon when I'm aiming, because I've just toggled to ironsight view and i'm too busy concentrating on my target. I agree with you 110%

Sorry RR GRT but it's my British humour...some others fail to understand it too...LMAO but I did understand yours...LOL. Turning other ppls jokes on their heads, is a speciality.

Moderator edit for content. [3.2] Personal attacks : Any posts containing personal or racist attacks will be edited or deleted and the originating account risks banning.

You wouldn't be that selfish to ask thousands of original GR gamers across the world to have to wait for the game release to have that implemented would you? I am an original GR gamer and I'd be prepared to wait aslong as it took to please everybody and btw it wouldn't take them long to implement such a view. As it's been explained on numerous threads and again on this one...the OTS is just a shifted camera view, they can change the camera view for FPWV. So to make such a flawed statement as to make people wait is absurd.

Well perhaps it is unrealistic, you have more then enough qualifications to make that type of statement but i'm sure you wouldn't be that selfish, not to allow the FPWV and make it an option, for those that like it...would you?

The exact reply I'd have expected from somebody who was selfish.

Thanks for the reply anyway MarauderMike, I'm with you and have always said that options are needed to please everybody, I'd be more at home playing with a FPWV+ironsights coz I find it more immersive IMO and thats all I will say from now on coz, this whole thing about "he said and you said" is going way off course, it's just a poll. I'll admit to saying a lot of things but when my posts are mis-interpreted, I can't do anymore than explain them, unless somebody takes the hard work out of doing that and explains them for me...lol

The point I've been trying to make all along, thankyou MarauderMike

That I did, the word 'could' being used to indicate possibility or probability but you conveniently left out the rest.

If I may correct you I did not at any time say that either I actually said... ...thats just a question I posed and in the previous post I said... ...so as you can see, at no time did I declare that the guy could see his weapon, only that, there was a chance he could.

In which of my posts did I say they were staring at their barrels?

lol...Whiteknight77, is this to your satisfaction? http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b4db1...658720000002610 ...why won't you budge from the original FPV and giving other people what they want to see in GR2? people want and need change, so therefore please everybody.

I honestly can't see the problem with FPWV as an option...I've said it before, I'm all for choice, for the common man and the good of the gaming community...keep everybody happy and UBI/RSE will have another success story. In one of my previous posts, don't make any of these options server side but thinking about it, perhaps the OTS view should be...lol ...but to bring this point to order... ...this is a photograph of Force Recon advancing, weapons to the front and ready to raise... http://www.specialoperations.com/USMC/Forc...mages/Recon.jpg ...they're not by any means shouldered , port arms(To throw, as a musket, diagonally across the body, with the lock in front, the right hand grasping the small of the stock, and the barrel sloping upward and crossing the point of the left shoulder; as, to port arms.) or pointing down out of sight. The weapons are pointing down but the lead man must surely see his? each to his own I guess, whatever degrees you wish to carry the weapon, it's ready to go, out in front and ready to raise, as adopted by most SF today. When advancing through unknown areas, your weapons have to be facing in the direction you are walking. Port arms and shouldered weapons are for square-bashing.

...but Whiteknight77, wouldn't that happen in reality, unless of course you'd put your weapon on the ground or on your shoulder or across your chest?

From this example the lead soldier could see his weapon... http://www.specialoperations.com/USMC/Forc...mages/Recon.jpg ...even when you look ahead like he is, you can still see a weapon...blurred as it may be, you are concious there's a weapon there and anyway this is only a poll to see what people prefer and to get a general concensus on what people want in GR2. IMO FPWV feels more immersive more personal and games are all about escapism, right? Even if the poll reaches it's climax and nobody else votes and whichever choice comes top, whether FPV, FPWV or Ironsights, all options should be implemented in GR2. If the server side option is bugging most of you, then don't make it a server side option, right?

The original FPV in GR1 is by no means realistic...In reality your view is obscured anyway, if you're right or Left handed, when you bring that weapon to bear and aim along the barrel through an iron sight, thats all you get, coz you are so focused on that ironsight that nothing else matters. If you're aiming at an enemy soldier 50 yards infront of your position are you focusing on the other enemy soldier 50 yards to his left or right? You shouldn't be able to see them and the orig. FPV does not reflect this obscurity. If you want more realism in GR2 then FPWV with Ironsights should be included.

Thanks Whiteknight77, much appreciated...thankyou

Thanks Pyro_Monty...my friend is in the same opinion as yourself and Whiteknight77 but even he didn't like the new OTS view but it has to be left in if some people want it...I'm all for choice...lol.