197 réponses à ce sujet

[NucularPikinic]

 From Dictionary.com:

 Cheating
"Verb (used without object)
4.     to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats without regrets.
5.     to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.
6.     to take an examination or test in a dishonest way, as by improper access to answers

---
Reload-cancelling is:

4. not a form of fraud or deceit, in fact, it's very blatant and well-known by both the community and the developers and is accepted as a whole so this definition doesn't work here
5. not a violation of rules or regulations. Again, the devs have stated time and again that reload cancelling is an intended mechanic and rewards whoever bothers to use it, this definition doesn't work either
     - You even said so yourself that rules are irrelevant so for the sake of your logic we'll just toss it out entirely
6. first of all, this isn't a test/exam where the answers are hidden and you must figure it out for yourself, so a comparison would be hard pressed to make. Second, the word "dishonest" is being used here. It's already been addressed in 4.

There. The impartial definition of "Cheating" that isn't tied to either side of this ridiculous argument.

[ErrorTagUnknown]

It bears somewhat irrelevant mentioning that many firearms (revolvers, most notably) allow you to insert ammunition and pull the trigger without priming the action or whatever the hell people who know more about firearms call it. In the case of a revolver you just have to pull the trigger harder than you would if you had cocked the hammer. But I do like the whole"only reload cancel if you left minimum of one round" thing. Tht would be great. And op I get you point. It is exploitation of a "hidden" mechanic to improve your performance.... but I think the difference lies in the fact that this was deliberately put in rather than a found glitch

[Rifneno]

This troll is getting really, really fat.

[NucularPikinic]

Rifneno wrote...

This troll is getting really, really fat.

Get it to the point where it won't be able to move anymore. Or explodes. Worked in Dragonball Z and other shows and Diabetes exists in the reality so there must be some breaking point.

[Cyonan]

Testosticore wrote...
Cyonan,

1) Medi-Gel is a part of ME lore and has existed from the beginning. It's been in various parts of the story, etc.

2) But actually cycling the loader is a part of this game as well as real life and we can just skip it sometimes because it's convenient?

3) I said that's not a part of my argument, just why I'm starting an argument.

1. Ah, but Medi-Gel doesn't actually cure everything. It's pretty much just a bunch of medicine in gel form that can keep liquid(aka blood) in you. it can't rebuild things that have been completely destroyed, and yet we can just ignore that because it's convenient =P

2. Still not real life. I don't fully know how guns in real life function and I don't care, because guns in mass effect are not real life guns, and they don't technically even function the same way according to the codex. So yes, we can skip it because game mechanics said we can.

[Testosticore]

lonefedaykin wrote...

Testosticore.. can you please define your terms? You started this thread by simply calling it a cheat. After people disagreed with you and gave their reasons for doing so, you "clarified" by admitting that it isn't a bug or a glitch, but yet you still call it a "cheat". Even after people have given you their arguments against it being considered a "cheat" you still disagree and simply ask for arguments as to why it isn't a cheat though at this point it looks like it is simply a difference of opinion. According to BioWare's rules, it isn't considered cheating. Now, either you are moving the goalpost, or you haven't managed to properly define your term. Can you please clarify what you mean when you use the term "cheat?"

I feel in several posts I've adequately explained why it's a cheat and an exploit.

One more legit summary:

1) Your weapon cannot magically **** itself. It requires physical interaction. Reload canceling removes this interaction yet gives you a fireable weapon. Having this occure only when a round is in the chamber would completely change this from cheat to realistic and awesome. Someone used a CoD example with a sniper rifle earlier. A good example of accuracy would be when reloading an LMG it takes an incredibly long time, but you can cut this time in half by reloading with rounds still in the magazine because you don't have to yank the charging handle again. I know that won't happen, though.

2) It's a shortcut, which by definition is a cheat. Shortcuts are sometimes intentionally placed, but that does not change what they are. As stated before, games have (nearly from the beginning) had cheat codes intentionally coded into them for something extra. It's still a cheat and a shortcut to use these, but they were intentional and the developers are fine with them being used.

3) I don't care if people use it. I use it. I don't like that I use it but it's a habbit and I'm willing to cheat to win. I acknowledge it's a cheat, however.

This last part isn't directed at you, sir, but at everyone who has said little more than "you're stupid". I don't appreciate that at all. Admittedly I'm being flippant on the subject because it's a forum where I'd like to have fun about a game I like to play for fun. That doesn't change the fact that it also has potential for some constructive conversation and a little self-awareness.

[Creighton72]

Cyonan wrote...

Testosticore wrote...
Cyonan, games have been programmed with cheat codes nearly from the beginning of gaming. It's still a practice today to include cheat codes. They are cheats, even though they were intentionally added. Your argument isn't really one at all.

Only we decided a long time ago that reload cancelling isn't a cheat, but rather a feature.

Your argument isn't really one at all, either. Your points consist of:

1. It doesn't follow lore

A lot of things in this game break lore. Is Medi-Gel cheating, too?

2. It doesn't mimic real life.

Excuse me while I go fly through space at a speed faster than light with a species of all females that reproduce using their mind. Video games aren't real life and don't need to mimic real life unless they're going for the modern warfare style of things.

3. You don't like it. 

Not a valid argument for it being cheating.

It doesn't mimic real life, hahaha, I love it when people say that. You want real life join the Corps. Until then zip your lip. I would love to see that, "excuse me Mr. DI, when do we get are force fields and medi gels?" "My M16A3 has to much kick and sucks at shooting from the hip can I have a Paladin instead, with extra thermal clips?" "What to do you mean watch out for friendly fire?" "There is no reload cancel? What kind of half #### military is this?" "I am getting a blanket party, gosh that sounds fun." "Has anyone ever soloed Afghanistan on platinum?"

Modifié par Creighton72, 14 septembre 2012 - 07:46 .

[Testosticore]

NucularPikinic wrote...

 From Dictionary.com:

 Cheating
"Verb (used without object)
4.     to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats without regrets.
5.     to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.
6.     to take an examination or test in a dishonest way, as by improper access to answers

---
Reload-cancelling is:

4. not a form of fraud or deceit, in fact, it's very blatant and well-known by both the community and the developers and is accepted as a whole so this definition doesn't work here
5. not a violation of rules or regulations. Again, the devs have stated time and again that reload cancelling is an intended mechanic and rewards whoever bothers to use it, this definition doesn't work either
     - You even said so yourself that rules are irrelevant so for the sake of your logic we'll just toss it out entirely
6. first of all, this isn't a test/exam where the answers are hidden and you must figure it out for yourself, so a comparison would be hard pressed to make. Second, the word "dishonest" is being used here. It's already been addressed in 4.

There. The impartial definition of "Cheating" that isn't tied to either side of this ridiculous argument.

cheat[/i]/CHēt/Verb:Act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, esp. in a game or examination: "she cheats at cards".Noun:A person who behaves dishonestly in order to gain an advantage.Synonyms:verb.  deceive - swindle - trick - defraud - fool - bamboozlenoun.  fraud - swindler - humbug - deceiver - trickster

[NucularPikinic]

Testosticore wrote...

NucularPikinic wrote...

 From Dictionary.com:

 Cheating
"Verb (used without object)
4.     to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats without regrets.
5.     to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.
6.     to take an examination or test in a dishonest way, as by improper access to answers

---
Reload-cancelling is:

4. not a form of fraud or deceit, in fact, it's very blatant and well-known by both the community and the developers and is accepted as a whole so this definition doesn't work here
5. not a violation of rules or regulations. Again, the devs have stated time and again that reload cancelling is an intended mechanic and rewards whoever bothers to use it, this definition doesn't work either
     - You even said so yourself that rules are irrelevant so for the sake of your logic we'll just toss it out entirely
6. first of all, this isn't a test/exam where the answers are hidden and you must figure it out for yourself, so a comparison would be hard pressed to make. Second, the word "dishonest" is being used here. It's already been addressed in 4.

There. The impartial definition of "Cheating" that isn't tied to either side of this ridiculous argument.

cheat[/i]/CHēt/Verb:Act dishonestly or [color=rgb(255, 0, 0)">unfairly[/u][u] in order to gain an advantage, esp. in a game or examination: "she ]verb.  [/color]deceive - swindle - trick - defraud - fool - bamboozlenoun.  fraud - swindler - humbug - deceiver - trickster

Alright.
What is it about the reload cancel that is "unfair"?

A broader use of this term can be applied to many things and become a mess to figure out quite easily.

[Testosticore]

Cyonan wrote...

Testosticore wrote...
Cyonan,

1) Medi-Gel is a part of ME lore and has existed from the beginning. It's been in various parts of the story, etc.

2) But actually cycling the loader is a part of this game as well as real life and we can just skip it sometimes because it's convenient?

3) I said that's not a part of my argument, just why I'm starting an argument.

1. Ah, but Medi-Gel doesn't actually cure everything. It's pretty much just a bunch of medicine in gel form that can keep liquid(aka blood) in you. it can't rebuild things that have been completely destroyed, and yet we can just ignore that because it's convenient =P

2. Still not real life. I don't fully know how guns in real life function and I don't care, because guns in mass effect are not real life guns, and they don't technically even function the same way according to the codex. So yes, we can skip it because game mechanics said we can.

1) We can reasonably assume when we go down on multiplayer all we need is to stop the bleeding and take some futuristic pain-killers in accordance with lore.

2) But they DO function the same way. When you reload cancel what you're doing is cutting out the animation of the firearm being cycled, yet it's magically cycled. If you don't reload cancel the guns go through the same steps.

[Testosticore]

NucularPikinic wrote...

Testosticore wrote...

NucularPikinic wrote...

 From Dictionary.com:

 Cheating
"Verb (used without object)
4.     to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats without regrets.
5.     to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.
6.     to take an examination or test in a dishonest way, as by improper access to answers

---
Reload-cancelling is:

4. not a form of fraud or deceit, in fact, it's very blatant and well-known by both the community and the developers and is accepted as a whole so this definition doesn't work here
5. not a violation of rules or regulations. Again, the devs have stated time and again that reload cancelling is an intended mechanic and rewards whoever bothers to use it, this definition doesn't work either
     - You even said so yourself that rules are irrelevant so for the sake of your logic we'll just toss it out entirely
6. first of all, this isn't a test/exam where the answers are hidden and you must figure it out for yourself, so a comparison would be hard pressed to make. Second, the word "dishonest" is being used here. It's already been addressed in 4.

There. The impartial definition of "Cheating" that isn't tied to either side of this ridiculous argument.

cheat[/i]/CHēt/Verb:Act dishonestly or [color=rgb(255, 0, 0)">unfairly[/u][u] in order to gain an advantage, esp. in a game or examination: "she ]verb.  [/color]deceive - swindle - trick - defraud - fool - bamboozlenoun.  fraud - swindler - humbug - deceiver - trickster

Alright.
What is it about the reload cancel that is "unfair"?

A broader use of this term can be applied to many things and become a mess to figure out quite easily.

All of my fancy words boil down to you (and me) exploiting a legal short-cut. It's, again, no different from a game with a cheat code; sort of like using a code in M:UA 2 to unlock The Hulk prematurely.

[Testosticore]

Creighton72 wrote...

Cyonan wrote...

Testosticore wrote...
Cyonan, games have been programmed with cheat codes nearly from the beginning of gaming. It's still a practice today to include cheat codes. They are cheats, even though they were intentionally added. Your argument isn't really one at all.

Only we decided a long time ago that reload cancelling isn't a cheat, but rather a feature.

Your argument isn't really one at all, either. Your points consist of:

1. It doesn't follow lore

A lot of things in this game break lore. Is Medi-Gel cheating, too?

2. It doesn't mimic real life.

Excuse me while I go fly through space at a speed faster than light with a species of all females that reproduce using their mind. Video games aren't real life and don't need to mimic real life unless they're going for the modern warfare style of things.

3. You don't like it. 

Not a valid argument for it being cheating.

It doesn't mimic real life, hahaha, I love it when people say that. You want real life join the Corps. Until then zip your lip. I would love to see that, "excuse me Mr. DI, when do we get are force fields and medi gels?" "My M16A3 has to much kick and sucks at shooting from the hip can I have a Paladin instead, with extra thermal clips?" "What to do you mean watch out for friendly fire?" "There is no reload cancel? What kind of half #### military is this?" "I am getting a blanket party, gosh that sounds fun." "Has anyone ever soloed Afghanistan on platinum?"

There is a form of real reload cancel. It's called a tac reload. I've explained it's real life application. You just can't do it when you're empty.

[Drummernate]

Nope.

[Testosticore]

Lol, a few posts up I tried to use the c word that ends in ock in relation to pulling back a hammer/yanking a charging handle/racking a slide/etc. and it got censored.

[Cyonan]

Testosticore wrote...

1) We can reasonably assume when we go down on multiplayer all we need is to stop the bleeding and take some futuristic pain-killers in accordance with lore.

2) But they DO function the same way. When you reload cancel what you're doing is cutting out the animation of the firearm being cycled, yet it's magically cycled. If you don't reload cancel the guns go through the same steps.

1) It's resonable to assume that a rocket to the face is just going to need some bandages and pain killers? Not even Garrus got off that easy.

2) According to lore you could fire a gun without a thermal clip, as they are just heat sinks. You can still fire a weapon without a heat sink, but it will overheat like it did in Mass Effect 1. We can reasonably assume that in the future our guns are capable of cycling themselves when we do a successful reload cancel.

[The Baconer]

Mass Effect guns don't even work like real-life guns, so I don't know why you're going on about that. You're not ejecting an empty magazine, there are no new rounds being put in the firearm.

[Testosticore]

Cyonan wrote...

Testosticore wrote...

1) We can reasonably assume when we go down on multiplayer all we need is to stop the bleeding and take some futuristic pain-killers in accordance with lore.

2) But they DO function the same way. When you reload cancel what you're doing is cutting out the animation of the firearm being cycled, yet it's magically cycled. If you don't reload cancel the guns go through the same steps.

1) It's resonable to assume that a rocket to the face is just going to need some bandages and pain killers? Not even Garrus got off that easy.

2) According to lore you could fire a gun without a thermal clip, as they are just heat sinks. You can still fire a weapon without a heat sink, but it will overheat like it did in Mass Effect 1. We can reasonably assume that in the future our guns are capable of cycling themselves when we do a successful reload cancel.

1) After you account for our shields and advanced armor, sure. There were cutscenes where more damage was taken and people survived.

2) I was under the impression bits were shaved off and that's what you were firing. In retrospect, I was thinking of a specific gun. I don't recall which. Regardless, if our firearms can cycle themselves then there should be no animation to cancel and I feel that argument moot.

Modifié par Testosticore, 14 septembre 2012 - 08:02 .

[rabidphoenix]

I'd just like to throw this out there: IIRC the "reload" animation only shows ejecting a heatsink, not inserting any. Presumably this suggests that all the heatsinks are somehow squeezed inside the gun and ejected as their heat capacity is filled. Therefore reload cancelling seems more acceptable than it might in other games.

Of course maybe I'm just remembering the reload animation wrong, in which case disregard my post.

[NucularPikinic]

Testosticore wrote...

NucularPikinic wrote...

Alright.
What is it about the reload cancel that is "unfair"?

A broader use of this term can be applied to many things and become a mess to figure out quite easily.

All of my fancy words boil down to you (and me) exploiting a legal short-cut. It's, again, no different from a game with a cheat code; sort of like using a code in M:UA 2 to unlock The Hulk prematurely.

What makes using the legal shortcut "cheating"? You've specifically used the term in your arguments. There surely has to be more weight to it.
In the case of M:UA 2, that isn't an unfair advantage since you obtaining the Hulk doesn't prevent other players from also unlocking him. It isn't dishonest or fraud. It doesn't negatively affect other players in any reasonable sense so there isn't harm or inherent advantage/disadvantage compared to everyone else.
The reload-cancel is available for everyone's use and is not illegal by any defintion. Cheating could imply "unfair" in some sense but that still needs to be proven in this case.

It's the fact that you hinge on the word "cheat". You want people to accept that they are "cheating" by using the reload-cancel so you should make the effort to clarify the definition for the sake of it.

[lonefedaykin]

Testosticore wrote...

lonefedaykin wrote...

Testosticore.. can you please define your terms? You started this thread by simply calling it a cheat. After people disagreed with you and gave their reasons for doing so, you "clarified" by admitting that it isn't a bug or a glitch, but yet you still call it a "cheat". Even after people have given you their arguments against it being considered a "cheat" you still disagree and simply ask for arguments as to why it isn't a cheat though at this point it looks like it is simply a difference of opinion. According to BioWare's rules, it isn't considered cheating. Now, either you are moving the goalpost, or you haven't managed to properly define your term. Can you please clarify what you mean when you use the term "cheat?"

I feel in several posts I've adequately explained why it's a cheat and an exploit.

One more legit summary:

1) Your weapon cannot magically **** itself. It requires physical interaction. Reload canceling removes this interaction yet gives you a fireable weapon. Having this occure only when a round is in the chamber would completely change this from cheat to realistic and awesome. Someone used a CoD example with a sniper rifle earlier. A good example of accuracy would be when reloading an LMG it takes an incredibly long time, but you can cut this time in half by reloading with rounds still in the magazine because you don't have to yank the charging handle again. I know that won't happen, though.

2) It's a shortcut, which by definition is a cheat. Shortcuts are sometimes intentionally placed, but that does not change what they are. As stated before, games have (nearly from the beginning) had cheat codes intentionally coded into them for something extra. It's still a cheat and a shortcut to use these, but they were intentional and the developers are fine with them being used.

3) I don't care if people use it. I use it. I don't like that I use it but it's a habbit and I'm willing to cheat to win. I acknowledge it's a cheat, however.

This last part isn't directed at you, sir, but at everyone who has said little more than "you're stupid". I don't appreciate that at all. Admittedly I'm being flippant on the subject because it's a forum where I'd like to have fun about a game I like to play for fun. That doesn't change the fact that it also has potential for some constructive conversation and a little self-awareness.

I thank you for your patience in your reply, I understand that such patience can be difficult to maintain. Please allow me to answer your points here.

1) It seems to me that your argument is based upon the operation of current firearms. These firearms are from the future and while this argument is essentially a "space magic" argument, please let me point out something from the codex to you in reference to small arms in the ME universe.

"The ammo magazine is a simple block of metal. The gun's internal
computer calculates the mass needed to reach the target based on
distance, gravity, and atmospheric pressure, then shears off an
appropriately sized slug from the block. A single block can supply
thousands of rounds, making ammo a non-issue during any engagement."

To me this implies that it does not matter if you have a round in the chamber or not. You are not reloading a magazine of ammunition, but rather a new heat sink, so the mechanics of being able to "reload" and return the weapon to a state where it can be fired again may be able to be shortened.

2) This is an interesting argument, and one I had not seen you use earlier in the thread. Forgive me for missing it and thus not addressing it earlier. Cheat codes were usually placed in a game for debugging or testing purposes. Their use was usually constrained to single player, and if they were ever used within multiplayer, it was through a deliberate exploit, not a shortcut placed in the game by the developer.

3) I use it as well to be able to fire my Widow with greater speed. I'll admit that if I was not able to do so, it would seriously alter my playing style. I'm still not convinced that it is a "cheat" but rather a "clever use of game mechanics" as I think I saw one developer put it. If this makes it a cheat in your mind, then I think we have a difference of opinion is all, and I'll respect your right to disagree.

[Cyonan]

Testosticore wrote...

1) After you account for our shields and advanced armor, sure. There were cutscenes where more damage was taken and people survived.

2) I was under the impression bits were shaved off and that's what you were firing. In retrospect, I was thinking of a specific gun. I don't recall which. Regardless, if our firearms can cycle themselves then there should be no animation to cancel and I feel that argument moot.

1) Survived, yes, but not still able to stand up and be perfectly ready to go. Garrus took a rocket to the face with all his fancy shielding(which is probably calibrated to be much stronger, just saying =P) and armour and he needed more than medi-gel.

2) Bits are shaved off an ammo block then fired, which generate heat. The ammo block doesn't get replaced on reloading, but rather the heat sink(Thermal Clip) does. Technically you could fire a gun without the heat sink, but game mechanics say no to that.

Lets just say that reload cancelling causes maintenance issues for the gun down the line, as without a heat sink the gun itself is constantly heating up and cooling off which is not good for metal(in the long run, it wont affect the current mission) so the operative has the choice of a fast reload, or a gun that doesn't need as much work after the mission.

[silencekills]

You can't be serious.

Nope. Can't be.

[Testosticore]

NucularPikinic wrote...

Testosticore wrote...

NucularPikinic wrote...

Alright.
What is it about the reload cancel that is "unfair"?

A broader use of this term can be applied to many things and become a mess to figure out quite easily.

All of my fancy words boil down to you (and me) exploiting a legal short-cut. It's, again, no different from a game with a cheat code; sort of like using a code in M:UA 2 to unlock The Hulk prematurely.

What makes using the legal shortcut "cheating"? You've specifically used the term in your arguments. There surely has to be more weight to it.
In the case of M:UA 2, that isn't an unfair advantage since you obtaining the Hulk doesn't prevent other players from also unlocking him. It isn't dishonest or fraud. It doesn't negatively affect other players in any reasonable sense so there isn't harm or inherent advantage/disadvantage compared to everyone else.
The reload-cancel is available for everyone's use and is not illegal by any defintion. Cheating could imply "unfair" in some sense but that still needs to be proven in this case.

It's the fact that you hinge on the word "cheat". You want people to accept that they are "cheating" by using the reload-cancel so you should make the effort to clarify the definition for the sake of it.

I'm not distinguishing between single and multiplayer, and cheating has nothing to do with harming other players in my eyes. To use the multiplayer distinction, however, taking shortcuts is a form of cheating. If you take a shortcut in a race you're cheating and I feel the analogy fits because the scoring is, for a very large percentage of players, a race to the most points. The only way you can compete is by taking the shortcut yourself. It forces you to play a specific way.

Edit: The Hulk was considered the panultimate bruiser in M: UA 2. Unlocking him prematurely gave some players an advantage over others in scored co-op games. Exactly the same as those who choose to reload cancel have an unfair scoring mechanism over those who don't know howto/are unable to reload cancel.

Modifié par Testosticore, 14 septembre 2012 - 08:34 .

[Testosticore]

lonefedaykin wrote...

I thank you for your patience in your reply, I understand that such patience can be difficult to maintain. Please allow me to answer your points here.

1) It seems to me that your argument is based upon the operation of current firearms. These firearms are from the future and while this argument is essentially a "space magic" argument, please let me point out something from the codex to you in reference to small arms in the ME universe.

"The ammo magazine is a simple block of metal. The gun's internal
computer calculates the mass needed to reach the target based on
distance, gravity, and atmospheric pressure, then shears off an
appropriately sized slug from the block. A single block can supply
thousands of rounds, making ammo a non-issue during any engagement."

To me this implies that it does not matter if you have a round in the chamber or not. You are not reloading a magazine of ammunition, but rather a new heat sink, so the mechanics of being able to "reload" and return the weapon to a state where it can be fired again may be able to be shortened.

2) This is an interesting argument, and one I had not seen you use earlier in the thread. Forgive me for missing it and thus not addressing it earlier. Cheat codes were usually placed in a game for debugging or testing purposes. Their use was usually constrained to single player, and if they were ever used within multiplayer, it was through a deliberate exploit, not a shortcut placed in the game by the developer.

3) I use it as well to be able to fire my Widow with greater speed. I'll admit that if I was not able to do so, it would seriously alter my playing style. I'm still not convinced that it is a "cheat" but rather a "clever use of game mechanics" as I think I saw one developer put it. If this makes it a cheat in your mind, then I think we have a difference of opinion is all, and I'll respect your right to disagree.

Thank you for acknowledging my patience, but it's taking absolutely no effort. This conversation was intended to be and indeed has been fun for me. I enjoy constructive conversation. It doesn't upset me that people reload cancel. I just dislike the contradictions inherent in it.

You and others have provided descriptions of my inaccuracies on the operations of ME firearms. I was mistaken. But it all begs the question: if the final bit of the animation is present and unnecissary, why include it? It's an unfair advantage over anyone who never figures it out and is not told about it. If it's a completely superfluous animation that was included on nearly every single gun and there was a shortcut created specifically for "clever use of game mechanics", I feel it's even more annoying. It's akin to quickscoping. 

[Derek Hollan]

Reload cancelling is a game mechanic utilized in a number of different game titles.  The philosophy is that it rewards particularly skilled players for accomplishing the action.

On the surface, it does not seem fair or realistic but it is merely a mechanic like any other.

Suspension of disbelief can be brought into it by saying your particular soldier, adept, infiltrator, or whatever, has learned speed reloading, or whatever, even though the animation does not support it.

It's not something accepted by everyone.  It took me a long time to be convinced by Corey Gaspur that this was a good idea, but he plays a lot of fighting games.

Cheers