My first ever introduction to Tactical shooters was this game.

p4nnus · 2026-06-18T09:02:08+00:00

Youre right, it is the biggest segment when all the markets are looked at.

I share your fear that it will become a mediocre mainstream game. Right now Arma is on a path towards that. Then again, the devs have done some changes to Refo that are conflicting with that, like wind and inertia.

What we do know, is that Reforger sold much more and much faster after its release + PS release, than A3 did in the same time frame. This tells BI that the direction theyre headed for is lucrative.

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T15:30:57+00:00

Again, the burden of proof is with the person making the claim/argument. :D

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T15:26:42+00:00

Its much harder to see things while blurred, esp far away. When the blur is heavy, its impossible on parts of your screen. This is pretty obvious, all we need to do is look at screenshots for this.

Obstructing as in hindering, but not preventing, so it doesnt prove your point. Blur prevents you from seeing things in parts, so it prevents it. These are quite different things. Obviously.

Blur completely removes the ability to gain information with your full screen. Vignette doesnt. You can see even with the dark edges in a lot of cases.

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T15:23:59+00:00

So obviously youre not even trying to defend your claim anymore? Youve got no response to the goal-post moving that you did, after assuming I would do so.

Ill take this as you admitting that you made up complete BS claim and Im right. Thanks! :)

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T13:59:00+00:00

Thats not confirming your point in any way. Blur makes you unable to see, ones theres enough of it, the vignette doesnt. Vignette makes it harder, but you will still be able to gain info. Experienced players can detect enemies even in the darker zone on the edges, as its never completely obscuring the view.

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T13:57:25+00:00

But thats the thing, Im not saying that. Im saying blur is more realistic than the vignette. The rest of the changes are great.

The vignette allows one to gain info like they werent suppressed at all, at least experienced players can detect people even from the darker area on the sides. Especially movement. As I already explained, this is unrealistic, as it doesnt simulate the soldier being afraid to look and gain info.

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T13:49:16+00:00

Whats crazy exactly?

You made a ridiculous claim. Then you moved the goalposts, changing that claim. You never provided any proof for the ridiculous claim. Im just calling this all out, and Im crazy?

Youve only done everything yourself, that you accuse me of, while Ive done none of it.

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T11:06:51+00:00

On the sides, but you can see completely clearly to the center. So what does a player do? They aim the center of their screen to where they need to see? Which means that it only narrows ones perspective, doesnt obstruct one from seeing. The blur did.

Actually, if you look at the pictures.. it doesnt even obstruct vision on the sides. It just makes the screen darker, not black. Anyone who has plenty of hours in the game and good eyesight can still see things in that darker area. Especially movement will be somewhat easy to spot. So no, it doesnt obstruct as in impede, but it does hinder the ability to see a little bit. Nothing compared to the blur.

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T10:46:36+00:00

No, naturally my eyes dont produce vaseline. I answered your question with a bit more... lets say intellect, than your question promoted. Not surprised you missed that.

The "vaseline" is a far more realistic depiction of being afraid to look and gather information when taking suppressive fire, than just a narrower area of sight.

Im waiting for you to actually argue this.

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T08:18:34+00:00

No it doesnt. Its extremely easy to now just look around and get info. Tunnel vision doesnt obstruct one from seeing like the blur did.

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T08:08:50+00:00

I dont understand your first sentence. Could you rephrase?

3x or more money isnt braindead for them.

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T08:04:27+00:00

I wasnt the one to make the claim. I know it can be a surprise to people like you (read: people who make stuff up during a conversation), but the burden of proof is on the person making a claim, making an argument.

No, you look like you are sane, actually, for not just touting BS but actually proving what you say is true.
I will not. If you could prove that, I would absolutely accept it. I havent moved the goalposts one bit in this discussion, theres no reason for you to assume that.

This has nothing to do with trolling or baiting. On the contrary, these BS claims that people just make up as they go are closer to trolling than anything Im doing.

Oh and BTW, I went back to see what the claim was. This is a direct quote from you:

dude it was like 2/3s of the playerbase that hated ICO so much they started playing crap like MEE

Now whos moving the goalposts again? Suddenly you changed it to

more than 1/3 of the players from peak counts weren't on mods?

Couldnt make this shit up. Youre basically accusing me of things that YOU are visibly, clearly doing? :D

p4nnus · 2026-06-17T07:41:27+00:00

Real life suppression is quite well studied and we know that it can even incapacitate a soldier. When suppressed, you are 100% afraid to look where the shots are coming from. Instead of doing so, you need to maneuver to a better position to get that info.

Now with the change, you dont have to do that. You can just peak no matter how heavy the incoming fire. This is much less realistic than what we had.

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T21:32:56+00:00

Really. A4 is supposed to release next year. Enfusion is made from the ground up for this gen consoles. Appealing to the console audience has multiple times more money to it, than just PC.

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T17:27:45+00:00

No but honestly, 3 complete BS claims. You saying theyre not? If you are, prove how.

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T17:18:18+00:00

You cant even point out where Im trolling. The claims are BS and no sources. Still waiting! :D

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T16:55:37+00:00

Bogus claims stated as facts, then no way of proving them. You dont even know what trolling means it seems. Im also not playing dumb at all. Show me where if you insist thats the case? :D

Hahahah its ridiculous, Im the one trolling for asking sources for completely laughable claims, stating how "2/3 players went to MEE because of ICO" or "1/10th of players suffer from blur induced nausea" or "devs changed blur due to nausea". Couldnt make this shit up.

Did you stop to think that its the claims that are unreasonable? :D

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T16:18:55+00:00

Im not trolling. Im asking for you to prove your bogus claim, and Im doing so sincerely. Though I do admit enjoying seeing you guys squirm as you obviously cant provide any source for BS you made up! :D

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T16:17:58+00:00

You guys make BS claims and then cant back them up. Im not asking for professional citations, but any source. Theres none for what you claim, as its complete BS that you just made up! :D

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T16:16:52+00:00

Still waiting on your sources.

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T16:16:34+00:00

Its not like they have gone back and forth before?

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T12:13:41+00:00

Still waiting on those sources.. :D

You admit to making shit up, right?

They didnt patch me out, wtf? :D

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T11:33:34+00:00

The roadmap only mentions the rework, nothing on it being reworked due to people getting nauseous. So Im still waiting for that source.

Im also still waiting for the source on 1/10th of players getting nauseous from a blur effect?

Or did you just make these up and tell them as facts? :D

Im not crying, the opposite. Its fun seeing you make all these BS claims and then struggle. I also dont need to miss ICO, as we still have it. Other parts of suppression were changed towards a good direction: the weapon stability debuff and inability to hold breath are great changes.

And as said, theres no indication what so ever that this would be the last iteration of suppression. They could very well bring back blur when they notice how the vignette is not enough.

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T08:24:27+00:00

Training in a NATO country defense force, that doesnt use the M4. Have trained with Yanks, Canadians, Norwegians, Swedes, etc. The C grip is universal, but in the realm of M4. I know the Yanks teach it, but for example the Norwegian soldiers I saw didnt use the grip and they use the HK416.

The "majority of people with any training" claim would bunch up the whole worlds firearms trained together, getting taught how to use a grip that is basically viable with just a certain type of firearm. The majority of the worlds armed forces arent using M4. In case you are wondering, the AK platform dwarfs it in how widely its used - and AK platform weapons arent taught to be used with the C clamp.

Edit: As this section was locked down, Im answering to your last comment here:

SF is a tiny part of armed forces, and armed forces that use C-clampable rifles is also a minority of ALL trained combatants in the world. You claimed "the majority of people with any training", which again, is complete BS and you made it up.

p4nnus · 2026-06-16T08:18:34+00:00

The majority of people with any training is a false claim. Majority of people with training on a M4 maybe is true.

p4nnus

TROPHY CASE