ARMA 2: OA release candidate build 78473

[Defunkt 431]

Is this topic still providing any valuable information to the release candidate of the patch or maybe we simply should close it now?

Perhaps close it, having not sought feedback on animation changes through the beta-testing process I wonder at the point of inviting it now it's a fait accompli, besides based on that poll I think you can probably look forward to a whole lot of very specific feedback in the not too distant future. Very disappointing after earlier changes to recoil were so superbly enacted in a consultative fashion (and consequently yielded a very satisfactory result).

[Zipper5 74]

Anyway why so cryptic names and brief comments? And do not tell its because of spoilers...

Here's a list of all the missions and their corresponding codes, in chronological order:

• C0 - First to Fight
  
• C1 - Into the Storm
  
• I1 - Amphibious Assault
  
• C2 - Harvest Red
  
• C2B - Razor Two
  
• I2 - One Week Later
  
• C3 - Manhattan
  
• C4 - Bitter Chill
  
• I3 - Delaying the Bear
  
• C5 & C5B - Badlands
  
• C6 & C6B - Dogs of War
  
• C7A - War That Never Was
  
• C7B - Setting Sail
  
• C7C - Missing In Action
  
• C7D - Revelation
  
• C7EF - Newborn Republic
  

Yes, the naming system does not seem to make a whole lot of sense to me either, but that's how they're defined in their mission files' names. I'm sure there's a reason for it, though. :p

Edited March 1, 2011 by Zipper5

[toxim 0]

Re: feedback to animations, there is a lot of different changes and adjustments (some made also to the player collisions with objects) and it would be much more helpful for us to get more specific feedback to particular animations instead of just general opinion. We will certainly look at this problem for next update more thoroughly.

Well if this was brought by the new patch, it now is possible to move sideways trough doorways and stairs, without getting stuck. So no more need for @stmovement

Or maybe i am imagining things...

[der.hannes 10]

but the other side of the changed collision model of the player is that you can look through many objects if you get close and turn your head a little, also leaning around corners is often buggy...

about the animations speeds, here is what i like:

- keep the slower movement in crouched stance & while jogging (always wanted this! easier spotting, more difference between jogging&sprinting)

bring back the old (slower) animations for:

-walking, slow walking in crouched stance (much too fast, almost like jogging. we need a slow movement animation!)

-all weaponswitch or transition animations (they look realy bad! and they feel very bad)

edit: i noticed that the AI behaves very well with this patch, good work with that! playing a nice open world mission with my AI mate for about 6 hours without him being stuck at all!

Edited March 1, 2011 by der.hannes

[maruk 80]

I am afraid you (and many users in this community) heavily underestimate what it takes to release a patch...

I don´t understand, why you can´t just change animation speed back to original values(or better said, previous values) before releasing next official patch?

[celery 8]

If the normal run is going to be slower, I expect it to take less stamina. The Arma 1 system was great with the slower jog not taking any stamina so that you were able to move at a moderate pace without being useless at aiming when a surprise contact appears.

ArmA jog: 14.7 km/h (no stamina drop)

ArmA sprint: 22.9 km/h

ArmA exhausted sprint: 17.6 km/h

Arma 2 1.58 run: 17.8 km/h

Arma 2 1.58 sprint: 23.2 km/h

Arma 2 1.58 exhausted run/sprint: 17.6 km/h

[Beagle 684]

If the normal run is going to be slower, I expect it to take less stamina. The Arma 1 system was great with the slower jog not taking any stamina so that you were able to move at a moderate pace without being useless at aiming when a surprise contact appears.

ArmA jog: 14.7 km/h (no stamina drop)

ArmA sprint: 22.9 km/h

ArmA exhausted sprint: 17.6 km/h

Arma 2 1.58 run: 17.8 km/h

Arma 2 1.58 sprint: 23.2 km/h

Arma 2 1.58 exhausted run/sprint: 17.6 km/h

thats in the range of professional athletics in shorts and running shoes. A marathon runner has a average speed of 14km/h Edited March 1, 2011 by Beagle

[Nutlink 10]

I am afraid you (and many users in this community) heavily underestimate what it takes to release a patch...

I take it that this pretty much confirms that we will be stuck with these sped up animations, correct?

[Beagle 684]

I take it that this pretty much confirms that we will be stuck with these sped up animations, correct?

Don't invoke this demon!

[ast65 10]

Is this topic still providing any valuable information to the release candidate of the patch or maybe we simply should close it now?

I would like to clarify few things:

* the reason for this topic originally was solely to release patch to the community as rc to ensure there is no major bug found

* it was our mistake to attach (later) a poll to it that diverted the discussion here towards animations speed changes in the patch only. It also created false impression we were able to change animations for the final patch release (despite there no feasible way how we could do it).

Re: feedback to animations, there is a lot of different changes and adjustments (some made also to the player collisions with objects) and it would be much more helpful for us to get more specific feedback to particular animations instead of just general opinion. We will certainly look at this problem for next update more thoroughly.

Didn´t get this, Beagle?

[Nutlink 10]

I'm with you on that. If these animation alterations make it in the final version, I'm definitely staying at 1.57 instead. I feel bad for the Steam users though.

[Bulldog72 10]

I take it that this pretty much confirms that we will be stuck with these sped up animations, correct?

If so Dwarden should better run... way faster than only 14km/h...

[NoRailgunner 0]

Players are back to use beta patches because of the animation speeds. They probably will not use the next full patch if there is no return to old speed or an better + authentic tuned one.

Or in other words: coop+sp players still do prefer a more authentic gameplay and pvp-only players still on the hunt to increase their own statistics. This won't change anytime soon. ;)

No need to sit between chairs if the main focus + soul of the game is still the same.

[.kju 3245]

Make a copy of the anims.pbo of 1.57 and load it with modfolders.

[Cloughy 0]

thats in the range of professional athletics in shorts and running shoes. A marathon runner has a average speed of 14km/h

14km/h is 8.75 mph, which is way slower than a professional marathon runner. Thats about a 6:51 a mile, pros do about 5:00 ish mile.

But, that said, if this is the speed of a jog for a soldier with full kit, then this does seem quick.

Cheers

GC

[cm. 10]

please tell me the animations can be tweaked... they are fucking way too fast atm it looks retarded.

[duckmeister 10]

Wait, when did it become standard procedure to:

1. Put in a very subjective change.

2. Offer a poll to let the community approve/disapprove of the change.

3. Wait until the community speaks out against the change.

4. Claim the change is permanent until next official patch and that the poll and "release candidate" status didn't matter at all.

What a letdown. I really dislike these changes, and was under the impression that, since they are simply changes to the animation speeds, this "release candidate" was to "test the waters", as they say, and if the community did not approve of the "release candidate" then these changes would not be in the final patch. What was the point of even having a "release candidate", let alone a poll?

I'm quite disappointed. How can you say "they will be looked at more thoroughly in the next patch" when everyone knows the real meaning of that is, "you're stuck with this whether you like it or not"? I think the way BI handled the recoil changes was much better, more transparent, and more professional.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the entire thing (as I usually do), but that's just my take. Of course, I'll still be downloading the patch anyways seeing as it fixes the VRAM detection that has plagued my game of OA since the beginning. Oh well.

[rundll.exe 12]

Hmm lets hope this is one of the better April fools jokes? (patch on 1-4 ??)

[dslyecxi 23]

It really is unacceptable to put out an RC with massive animation changes, conduct a poll about said changes (which definitely could have been tested some other way) in which 75% of your polled userbase vehemently dislike said changes, and then go through with the patch anyway.

The fact that it's "hard to release a patch" should not overrule the overwhelming and clearly-stated dislike of the changes that have been tacked-on to this patch.

I speak only for myself in saying that if this goes out as a final patch, I am through with playing ArmA2/OA until a replacement mod is made available to revert these changes - whether from BIS or the community. I am not interested in moving at ~8mph while "walking" (har har) in ironsights - it's ridiculously comical, and completely at odds with what ArmA is about.

I hope that this ham-fisted and ill-conceived attempt at addressing major flaws in the animation system is not indicative of the direction the series is going.

ARMA 2 1.58 public RC (most likely it will not change unless You find something TERRIBLE)

We "found it".

[NoRailgunner 0]

PvPscene or was/is it kju (?) 150:46 is a damn good sign to revise+tune the RC.

[stk2008 14]

Oh I thought it would get reverted back to how it use to be.....that was I thought the idea of the poll FFS so we now have to use the fast forward animations :(.

I know a few who do like the new system will say

"dont play it then"

Well I have played it from OFP days and I have never nor heard of any one moan that it was to slow but to speed the animations up like this is gutting I really thought BIS you knew better.

Well I suppose for the first time in BIS history they have not listened to the majority of there fans.

PLEASE BIS PLEASE REVERT IT BACK AND MAKE THE SELECT FEW RUN A MOD.

Ok you will say why should they well

1. Its been like this for years at the speed it was at and you had little complaints

2. you posted a poll and the majority liked how it use to be

3. Why change some thing that was not really broken only to please a few ( I am sorry to them that liked the new speeds but WTF) looks like ya got what ya wanted in the end though :(.

[Zipper5 74]

Now now, guys, calm down. ;)

If the changes do continue into the 1.58 final patch, you've hopefully seen from the PROPER team, the SLX team, and the TrueMods team, to name a few, that it's pretty simple to change them in a mod, so it's likely to be equally as easy to change them back. Then you can wait for it to be reverted in peace. :)

Or you can always just use the beta that came out before this RC.

Edited March 1, 2011 by Zipper5

[stk2008 14]

But what a dumb move BIS.

The poll speaks for itself I for one am gutted.

Why should I run a mod on some thing that did not need changing.

Now all my mates have to download a mod and mess about with that now.

[Zipper5 74]

It's hardly a challenge, nor does it require much effort, to add -mod=@OrigAnims (or something like that) to a shortcut target line and place said mod folder under your Arma 2 install folder.

And guys, come on, it hasn't happened yet so it's not a "dumb move". If you must stay with it being "dumb" then at least use more appropriate terminology like "proposition" or... Something, as all it will do is make the lesser-informed of the members here jump to conclusions.

Keep calm, it's not the end of the world. ;)

[celery 8]

Now all my mates have to download a mod and mess about with that now.

Isn't that what was proposed for the pvp players in the first place? Of course, it would be silly to use a mod because everyone has the same animations and you'd be making yourself slower.