ARMA 2: OA release candidate 1.59 build 78955

[Beagle 684]

@ Kevaskous

Input from people that actually used some of the depicted weapons in game and noting that the handling is far off and becoming more and more arcade in the last versions after 1.07, while the aim in the past in the series was towards realism the last 9 years, can hardly be called whining. Its fact tell. 'Im only guilty in beeing dedicated and not silently taking it like it comes.

[Defunkt 431]

Furthermore, I have just as much a right to voice my opinion about his conduct as he does about his views, which are simply that, his views.

Outstanding, how about making another long-arse post that has nothing at all to do with the RC just to make it absolutely clear to all of us that you want nothing whatsoever to do with any dramatics.

[dreday 1]

There is a definitive difference between voicing an opinion and simply stirring the drama pot and whining and moaning.

What you consider whining and moaning, others consider useful input. BIS can not always gauge the proper sense of what the community wants without the community being vocal on the important issues.

I think people who have been here a long time have forgotten what other games are like. I suggest you pick up a new block buster style game see just how much they listen to your opinions there, or see what they fix and don't, or try to improve, or even how long they support their title. I think one game will be disappointing enough to accept that sometimes you may not get what you want here, but for a large majority of the time you, and that's a blessing.

That's why I gladly support BIS with my purchases. However, I also feel free to voice my disagreements with certain BIS decisions as their past, current, and potential future customer.

Furthermore, I have just as much a right to voice my opinion about his conduct as he does about his views, which are simply that, his views.

You absolutely do, and I respect all your input until you start telling other members that it's either your way or the highway... I find it inappropriate to tell other members to leave the community if they are vocally voicing their criticism over something that you don't consider a big deal. More so, telling that to a respected veteran of this community...

Sorry for any trouble this may stir but I just don't appreciate the tone being pushed on BIS especially after having dealt with some truly awful companies like Activision.

Again, our money does not go to Activision, it goes to BIS. Therefore, we feel entitled to voice our concerns as loyal and committed customers.

P.S.: I am perfectly calm, happy as a clam outside of a busted tooth, but as he, I'm voicing my opinion on something i don't agree with ;) Always a two way street mate.

That's good to know and I wish you further happiness, calmness, and best of luck with your tooth!

Peace,

DreDay

[kevaskous 10]

You absolutely do, and I respect all your input until you start telling other members that it's either your way or the highway... I find it inappropriate to tell other members to leave the community if they are vocally voicing their criticism over something that you don't consider a big deal. More so, telling that to a respected veteran of this community..

That is where you mis-understand me. I don't tell BIs to do anything, they leave the door open for me to make things as I wish on my own, everyone's taste differs, hence the extent they go to to be sure if they themselves don't provide the experience you want, someone else can make tweaks that do.

I never told anyone they need to leave, but that is most definitely the impression being given off at multiple points hence why i said what I did. Some of the things said seemed like ultimatum "I think I might leave over this" and be that the case, there's no chains that bind.

I find the community here good but I also promise this forums is the farthest thing from their primary source of information, furthermore there is no need to post the same broken record like 50 times.

@ Kevaskous

Input from people that actually used some of the depicted weapons in game and noting that the handling is far off and becoming more and more arcade in the last versions after 1.07, while the aim in the past in the series was towards realism the last 9 years, can hardly be called whining. Its fact tell. 'Im only guilty in beeing dedicated and not silently taking it like it comes.

I have been playing A2 since like 1.03. So i do know what you are talking about but i also do not agree with you on such a broad statement. I think many things have improved in the realism department, while yes some others suffered from the changes. These things take time and badgering them to death will not make it any faster of a process, and your choice of words sometimes as i said above seems almost as a ultimatum in nature.

As i said i don't wish to push anyone's buttons but BIS can't just up and defend themselves and i have too much respect for them not to say something. Everyone is entitled to their opinions but please know they are just that, and that you are by no means forced to do anything, there is always options available to you, to personalize this game to meet your wants and needs like i have with my 78 mods. Why so many? I'm picky, but don't hear me chewing out BIS for not meeting my picky needs ;)

P.S.: it is also naive to think that even a quarter of the people who play this game visit these forums, you have to keep that in mind with the information they get, just because you never heard a complaint far from means there wasn't a big one.

Edited March 21, 2011 by Kevaskous

[PlacidBox 10]

You know what, i'm kinda tired of hearing people whine moan and complain. The wonderful thing about Arma is with mods and a little patience it can be played exactly how you want to play it. If you don't like these new aspects, as many don't personally like others (Myself included) -change- them. In reality this changes effects you only as much as you want it too.

Unfortunately this won't work if you want to play multiplayer. You'll either fix nothing by only running the mod yourself, or you'll have a dead server because you require a mod that no one cares about or can find.

As an example, during US prime time, there's about 14 servers with 8 or more players. Only two of those have forced mods on, being the one big mod, ACE. And one of those ACE servers is private. The rest are public servers which aren't forcing any specific mods on.

Our main problem is that BI is doing config changes to get around the clunkiness of their animation system and detracting from the realism influenced gameplay we come to arma for, while ignoring some trivial config changes that would update old content or help improve gameplay (Things like FLIR on arma 2 units, stopping NV from being used with A2 scopes, adding 'dumb bombs' that are actually dumb and don't turn in to missiles when used..)

As a side note, I would LOVE to see BI start some kind of community change submission process. Where small patches / config changes could be submitted and included in major patches if they're really good. Things like the FLIR texture mods / addition weapon set ups come to mind.

[AZCoder 921]

I had something similar once, I used a launcher (dunno which one, Spirited Machine I think) and said to launch "Arma 2 CO", which included ArmA 2 and Operation Arrowhead, but ArmA 2 was already in the extension list so I got it twice, including campaigns and single player missions.

Good call on that. I use Spirited Machine. I was also getting Arma 2 listed 3 times when you click the Expansions button. However if I just load up OA without the launcher, everything looks normal. It was not doing that as of the previous beta, how very strange. Thanks!

Also I just tried Spirited Machine with only OA selected to load (as opposed to combined arms) and the game has loaded as it should.

Edited March 21, 2011 by AZCoder

[kevaskous 10]

Unfortunately this won't work if you want to play multiplayer. You'll either fix nothing by only running the mod yourself, or you'll have a dead server because you require a mod that no one cares about or can find.

As an example, during US prime time, there's about 14 servers with 8 or more players. Only two of those have forced mods on, being the one big mod, ACE. And one of those ACE servers is private. The rest are public servers which aren't forcing any specific mods on.

Our main problem is that BI is doing config changes to get around the clunkiness of their animation system and detracting from the realism influenced gameplay we come to arma for, while ignoring some trivial config changes that would update old content or help improve gameplay (Things like FLIR on arma 2 units, stopping NV from being used with A2 scopes, adding 'dumb bombs' that are actually dumb and don't turn in to missiles when used..)

As a side note, I would LOVE to see BI start some kind of community change submission process. Where small patches / config changes could be submitted and included in major patches if they're really good. Things like the FLIR texture mods / addition weapon set ups come to mind.

Your post is more along the lines of reasonable, and I can agree with you. I myself play co-op with my own friends so this is not a issue for me but for others I can see that being a problem, but again, this could be addressed with better mod support server-side AKA a download system like many other games got, I do believe BIS even said they are working on such a system

[NinetyThird 10]

i was forced to make EXAMPLE out of this post:

seems like these bugs aren't reported on CIT ...

we have CIT (Community Issue Tracker)

which in fact is BUG Tracking System to actually help us track bugs and get them fixed!

this system is officially supported and used by us (BI staff)

how use it is explained in sticky here : http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=102991

since it supports OpenID (google account for example) login i doubt there is anyone unable create account or login

why it's not used by many community members is mystery to me?

so instead of posting repeated forum 'rants' w/o sense or Youtube videos which often are in such bad resolution or w/o needed explain details

why not make CIT report ticket like this and this

(which i made myself after trying to figure out wth the bugs are):

1. L-39ZA crash on landing at South Takistan airfield

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/18370

2. Su-34 crash after takeoff from South Takistan airfield

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/18371

* this one has specific conditions to be met hence pain to figure out w/o repro mission or repro steps

notice that included is repro mission and simple repro steps and description ...

this should be way how report bugs (at minimum)...

thanks for the explanation with an example. I will try to explore and join the community Community Issue Tracker :)

[Beagle 684]

Sorry if I repeat myself, but after trying this RC i see where the series is heading...towards

and away from

. The last RC is a good indication.

Notice the PG-7V trajectory in the second video and the stance and negation of mobillity and the steps needed to reload a RPG-7 or Bigger Launcher with the help of a assitant.

The first video shows more of what we have in ArmA II RC now.

Edited March 21, 2011 by Beagle

[Steakslim 1]

It can always change later. I think the animation system should be overhauled in general, but I don't see that happening in the near future.

[Nutlink 10]

Sorry if I repeat myself, but after trying this RC i see where the series is heading...towards

and away from

. The last RC is a good indication.

Notice the PG-7V trajectory in the second video and the stance and negation of mobillity and the steps needed to reload a RPG-7 or Bigger Launcher with the help of a assitant.

The first video shows more of what we have in ArmA II RC now.

That's pretty much my ONLY concern in regards to the animations. I can live with the rest of the changes, but AT is effective as hell as it stands (especially with the unlimited range). Now that you can swap to AT even faster, it completely ruins the vehicle aspect (as if it wasn't fast enough already).

Fortunately I own the DVD versions of the game, so I won't be forced to update like Steam owners. I'll hold off once the patch is released to see if they really did make AT faster, and if they did I think I'll stay with 1.57.

[PlacidBox 10]

Sorry if I repeat myself, but after trying this RC i see where the series is heading...towards

and away from

. The last RC is a good indication.

Notice the PG-7V trajectory in the second video and the stance and negation of mobillity and the steps needed to reload a RPG-7 or Bigger Launcher with the help of a assitant.

The first video shows more of what we have in ArmA II RC now.

surprisingly, the AT weapons in bfbc2 actually have parabolic trajectories, you can kinda see it in that video, they're not very pronounced but it's more than arma's 'small amount of drop then straight line' method.

[Beagle 684]

surprisingly, the AT weapons in bfbc2 actually have parabolic trajectories, you can kinda see it in that video, they're not very pronounced but it's more than arma's 'small amount of drop then straight line' method.

Trajectory was much more pronounced in 1.07, most notably for the PG-7VR. For a reason not undertandable the trajectory in 1.50was straightened even more...as I said...we can see the path this is leading to clearly already.

[PlacidBox 10]

Trajectory was much more pronounced in 1.07, most notably for the PG-7VR. For a reason not undertandable the trajectory in 1.50was straightened even more...as I said...we can see the path this is leading to clearly already.

Even in 1.07 and before I _never_ saw any unguided at behave differently than having a slight decrease in angle at the start then flying perfectly straight for the rest of the flight time. They may have decreased the amount of initial drop but it's never actually been parabolic (as it should be.)

I also realllllyyy dislike the new collision models for guns. Changing it so that you can go through doors sideways with smgs at the largest would have been nice, but now you can walk through them sideways with an m107...it's just wrong and removes the advantages of using smaller weapons :(

[andersson 285]

Maybe a paradigm shift, but not as big as the first anim-speed-change patch. BIS is trying find a playable balance.

We all know that some anims are way too fast compared to RL, but that has more to do with the mechanics of the equipment than the human body. That is not that easy to fix as the same anim is shared with all weapons of the same class (not gonna argue that the AT anim are too fast for my taste, but thats not the only anim or change).

The stance anims.. Yes if your loaded with a rucksack you will be slow, but if your running as a guerilla with an ak47 you will be very agile. The speed must cater all situations, not all of us play as heavy assault marines.

So regardless of "realism vs playability" there must be unrealistic general anims that fits all situations.

Another way of looking at this is that more fluent anims will be better for new players that most often are put of due to the very slow avatar. More sales for BIS and more playmates for us. For us that believe in the church of BIS its not a big deal to make an anim pack that cater for our needs. From a business perspective I guess its better to cater for new players and let the cunning old school players fix the game as they want, as we already do (the ones that will not accept the changes).

Personally I dont mind a bit more fluent gameplay. I have to admit that I have learned to compensate and put a blind eye to some things, afterall I am an armaholic.

A good thing with this is that competitive PvP will have a more fluent gameplay (not meaning more general corridor shooter type, but less hassle with old buggy situations, been discussed and explained), the big win is that they dont need addons that change the anims and can make it more accessible and easier to fight of cheaters. For a coop clan one more small addon will not be much of a problem.

I'm ok as long as it doesnt look un-natural, if its not breaking my immersion and it makes the gameplay more fluent I will not complain.

edit:

I also realllllyyy dislike the new collision models for guns. Changing it so that you can go through doors sideways with smgs at the largest would have been nice, but now you can walk through them sideways with an m107...it's just wrong and removes the advantages of using smaller weapons :(

Agree. That I dont like.

[PlacidBox 10]

That is not that easy to fix as the same anim is shared with all weapons of the same class.

Which is really the source of the problem, both smgs and anti material rifles reload at the same speed. The correct way to fix it to maintain both gameplay and realism would be to have most animations play faster when the unit is carrying less weight.

Unfortunately only BI could make that change easily, and they're not easily able t,o or unwilling to, invest development time in to such a change.

So you end up with the awful situation of them fiddling with animation speeds, which won't really address the core issue, it'll just make some weapons handle like they should (smgs come to mind) while making larger weapons far, far easier to use than they should be, effectively fixing nothing at all and annoying a bunch of people in the process.

Also, these animation changes don't make PvP any easier or harder, both sides get equally effected by the change. What arma PvP needs is more depth, not to become more run and gun. More pronounced tradeoffs between different weapons and more user intensive target acquisition than just jamming tab comes to mind. The animation changes will speed up PvP sure, but it won't necessarily make it more challenging or interesting.

Tl;dr BI is going about making the game more fluent the wrong way, and isn't really fixing anything in the process.

[Prodavec 10]

DreDay

Nice vid!

There're no problems with retarded anims at that guy compared to arma. Realy, because it's reference. BIS has adjusted time a bit and now it is closer to real (including discarding mag).

Still I can't interrupt anim while other began, for example you can't begin to move when changing mag process is started.

Also I think basic movements should interrupt any other anims like in CoD or BF. Very often you see danger, but can't do something because your "bot" is doing some sh.. useless actions.

Other:

1. Unload primary weapon to ammo box

2. Unload pistol

3. Take other primary weapon from ammo box

4. Your "bot" are taking invicible RPG (????)

[Posta 10]

I love faster anims and hate when this happens.

1. Standing up, NLAW ready.

2. Boom one T-34 gone to h*ll.

3. Switching to m16.

4. Being shot at.

5. CAN'T go Prone 'cause of the switching weapon anim.

6. Dying.

Yeah you need to go prone first and the weapon switches automatically.

Good work BIS. And make this an official patch already. I wan't to play online with this! :)

[SyNcRoNiCzZ 0]

The "1.59 build 78955" it´s good as it is, hopefully Release BIS the 1.59 Final soon. ;)

[kremator 1064]

Loving the RC. I'll get used to the animation changes. Everything is looking good.

[maruk 80]

We invested a lot of effort to tweak animations as much as possible for 1.59 based on the community feedback so it is not easy to understand poster stating the opposite,

Yes, it is time to launch 1.59 and move ahead to 1.60 development.

I can see more things that can be improved (from those what seems to be the most annoying is problem in the Russian localization and warfare scenarios that seems to be there for quite some time now).

The only last thing we probably will change for now 1.59 is new exe that should be more optimized in dense scenes to get it closer to 1.57 performance (note that with the new lod management such dense scenes are looking significantly better, which is also the reason for lower performance on some systems).

[stk2008 14]

optimization would be really good tbh that would have been the only thing I would put at the top of my list.

There is other things that need fixing but I really want the game to run as smooth and fast as possible....Yes I all so know ARMA engine has its work cut out as it does what NO other SIM does.

But any ways BIS you rule and thanks for all the hard work you lot put in.

-XX- ;)

[Dwarden 1124]

thanks for the explanation with an example. I will try to explore and join the community Community Issue Tracker :)

to make You happy both airplane issues were resolved for upcoming builds ...

[NinetyThird 10]

We invested a lot of effort to tweak animations as much as possible for 1.59 based on the community feedback so it is not easy to understand poster stating the opposite,

Yes, it is time to launch 1.59 and move ahead to 1.60 development.

I can see more things that can be improved (from those what seems to be the most annoying is problem in the Russian localization and warfare scenarios that seems to be there for quite some time now).

The only last thing we probably will change for now 1.59 is new exe that should be more optimized in dense scenes to get it closer to 1.57 performance (note that with the new lod management such dense scenes are looking significantly better, which is also the reason for lower performance on some systems).

to make You happy both airplane issues were resolved for upcoming builds ...

I can `t capture the emotions that with me now ..... thanks only for what you have heard about the problem and is not ignore. Thanks guys :bounce3:

[PeterBitt 10]

... The only last thing we probably will change for now 1.59 is new exe that should be more optimized in dense scenes to get it closer to 1.57 performance (note that with the new lod management such dense scenes are looking significantly better, which is also the reason for lower performance on some systems).

i realy look forward to this one! but as you said, the look is much better than with 1.57, i guess a new graphics card is needed anyways.

seeing two bi guys that active makes me need to point at my signature :o

these tickets are true gamebreakers on my side, because i always play with full mousefloating and would like to have it working in the way it should.