Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
krazikilla

ArmA3 Wishlist and Ideas

Recommended Posts

Yes, but arma2 is not fully functional in 3d. I havent tried it myself as I read that shadows isnt working properly and also smoke and particles doesnt look too good.

DMarkwick; can you use collimator sights as intended with 3d? Both eyes open and the dot projected at the target?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dream for arma 3 would be a large map with large islands were players get to make use of a usable carrier and water assets, boats and the most important thing i want to see the night vision fixed to were the game is playable at night.

without background lighting ruining the night vision experience!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but arma2 is not fully functional in 3d. I havent tried it myself as I read that shadows isnt working properly and also smoke and particles doesnt look too good.

DMarkwick; can you use collimator sights as intended with 3d? Both eyes open and the dot projected at the target?

Through one eye, yes :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All these things are ok but superfluous. In my opinion, all arma 3 needs is a brand new engine to keep the gameplay more fluid and immersive. Maybe a better netcode yeah and of course better AI behavior.

But the main thing is the game engine... please make a new one from scratch

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But the main thing is the game engine... please make a new one from scratch

Um :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All these things are ok but superfluous. In my opinion, all arma 3 needs is a brand new engine to keep the gameplay more fluid and immersive. Maybe a better netcode yeah and of course better AI behavior.

But the main thing is the game engine... please make a new one from scratch

I'm going to assume that you're not trolling.

You just haven't the slightest clue when it comes to video games, do ya?

:p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree of much post we have write but no one have write that:

IMPLEMENTATION OF A SYSTEM SKILL

Implementation of a system of skill, more shots are fired, the distance and how many and where they are going to sign, depending on where you hit, thesystem gives you more skill points, you have more skill than when he shoots you good, AS IN REALITY!

don't work if you fire a magazine to 1 mt of your enemy and the system give you skill point.

Can upper the skill for example to a shooting training field, that is not bad idea

I hope I have made ​​it clear what I mean, if someone like me, shoot with real weapons can understand what I mean

Edited by Americanel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree of much post we have write but no one have writa that:

IMPLEMENTATION OF A SYSTEM SKILL

Implementation of a system of skill, more shots are fired, the distance and how many and where they are going to sign, depending on where you hit, thesystem gives you more skill points, you have more skill than when he shoots you good, AS IN REALITY!

don't work if you fire a magazine to 1 mt of your enemy and the system give you skill point.

Can upper the skill for example to a shooting training field, is not bad that idea

I hope I have made ​​it clear what I mean, if someone like me, shoot with real weapons can understand what I mean

I tried running this through Google translate, but it didn't know what you mean either.

Brian :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree of much post we have write but no one have writa that:

IMPLEMENTATION OF A SYSTEM SKILL

Implementation of a system of skill, more shots are fired, the distance and how many and where they are going to sign, depending on where you hit, thesystem gives you more skill points, you have more skill than when he shoots you good, AS IN REALITY!

don't work if you fire a magazine to 1 mt of your enemy and the system give you skill point.

Can upper the skill for example to a shooting training field, is not bad that idea

I hope I have made ​​it clear what I mean, if someone like me, shoot with real weapons can understand what I mean

Well, if I understand you correctly, your system will allocate skill points for being a good shot right? To what end? What will we do with these points?

Suppression is also a skill, and only very occasionally results in a hit :)

BTW, I never got any skill points when I shot weapons in reality ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, I never got any skill points when I shot weapons in reality ;)

You sure? Don't you do +100 damage now? :cool:

Gaining experience would be accpetable though, if it effected things like weapon sway or something that more experienced shooters would perform better at (reload speed?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree of much post we have write but no one have write that:

IMPLEMENTATION OF A SYSTEM SKILL

Implementation of a system of skill, more shots are fired, the distance and how many and where they are going to sign, depending on where you hit, thesystem gives you more skill points, you have more skill than when he shoots you good, AS IN REALITY!

don't work if you fire a magazine to 1 mt of your enemy and the system give you skill point.

Can upper the skill for example to a shooting training field, that is not bad idea

I hope I have made ​​it clear what I mean, if someone like me, shoot with real weapons can understand what I mean

Less shots with good point give you skill for easy shoot in the future or at end of session, i mean for training, there will be a maximum possible score of skill will example, the standard of ArmA2 we have now, I thought I too at the speed of change of load, it will be implemented with the skill, the dexterity that one takes the field in reality is also this, i think is not bad, add the time, number of shot, point of shot and system calculate your total points and give you a personal skill, shit i think is very realistic, for example, if you start to shoot with real weapons and to make a comparison, try to make a shooting contest competition, of course, people who will make the competition will be better than you to shoot and make shots to score. Is not bad, i love weapons and professional warfare simulations.

Is a chance to love even more simulations, however, to the detriment of other people who want a simple game, but fuck, this will become a game with balls! and if people will want to take the gun and shoot and shoot with incredible easy, going to buy another game, but it is also the possibility to market a unique, incredible and rare game! i mean mine think of Implementation of a system skill and other, for example shoot into a vehicles if vechicles can permit that

Edited by Americanel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kill points, skill points, experience points and similar points/leveling features are so FPDR

Please buy + enjoy a mainstream shooter and be the MasterMasterSuperSergeantMaster...

Think of what happen if you don't train on a regular basis? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kill points, skill points, experience points and similar points/leveling features are so FPDR

Please buy + enjoy a mainstream shooter and be the MasterMasterSuperSergeantMaster...

Think of what happen if you don't train on a regular basis? ;)

Yes i know, but, if want try to play with maximum skill can do..for a part of game, for example, campaing, personal, i never do campaign in the armaII or armaII dragon rising, player versus player can feel more, for personal skill point you versus other player, i think Bohemia can add that on pvp mode, is not bad idea if they don't want loose parts of market for "only for professinal" is a good idea for pvp, what think about that?

I think is the possibility, to bring to market a game with balls!

Edited by Americanel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY?!?! :eek:

ahahah operation arrowed sorry! ahahahahahah

and for chronicle, i love current weapons, ships and others, don't want see much future in that, someone can think, is the same for play arma2, he think bad because the future become slow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Through one eye, yes :)

Sorry to keep bothering you, but how do you mean? Can you keep both eyes open and the sight is only infront of your right eye, or do you have to close one eye to aim?

The reason for me to ask is that aimpoints, reflex and other sights like that are ment to be used with both eyes open.

If you already know this my apologies, but I would like to know if it truly works. Then I really have to try it myself! :)

LOL, made me seriously Laugh Out Loud!!!

Edited by andersson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest problem for everyone I know and (try to) play with:

WARPING!

The second biggest problem:

WARPING!

Etc, etc... My wishlist:

FIX THE WARPING!! Please.

Otherwise, I won't be entertaining the idea of purchasing any other installments of the series. And preferably, put it at the top of the ARMA2 fix-list!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The biggest problem for everyone I know and (try to) play with:

WARPING!

The second biggest problem:

WARPING!

Etc, etc... My wishlist:

FIX THE WARPING!! Please.

Otherwise, I won't be entertaining the idea of purchasing any other installments of the series. And preferably, put it at the top of the ARMA2 fix-list!!

Copy that, thats why its also my absolute prioroty.

Fix this netcode and get rid of warping! please :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a long time ArmA pilot, also using other flying sims (MS flightsim, IL2, Falcon 4.0, etc.) I would LOVE to have airspeed given in KNOTS indicated (kias) rather than KPH. That's a ground speed number. It makes it so much easier to think, plan approaches and land when you have a real world number for your airspeed. And also, to have Altitude given that's ASL rather than AGL. I know that exists now, but it's not displayed on any HUD that I know of. But with ASL altitude, it's easier to maintain a level flight path, both for human and AI.

Also I know that A2/OA simulates wind direction for smoke etc. don't know if it affects aircraft. But it should. I should have to deal with xwinds on approach.

Just sayin!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm into aviation as well, but I have to say no. At least not mandatory, and not as the system is now. Let the overlay GUI show in whatever units you prefer, and for this AGL is just fine. I propose the following changes/updates:

1) Let the GUI be as it is today. It's easy, language coherent, and fits the grid of the map, despite not being accurate for western planes (I know AN-2 comes with metric instrumentation, no idea about fighters).

2) When user sets a waypoint on the map, he effectively adjusts his heading bug on the heading indicator (since we don't have cockpit interaction). However, it doesn't update - it's not a magic pointer. It lets him read the current heading to target as he sets it and will stay in that position no matter how far he goes off course. If aircraft has more advanced avionics, then on the HSI/EHSI draw a line to the waypoint as well. EHSI also shows distance to waypoint, but here it will be i nautical miles even if his map is still metric.

3) New DME instrument. Not realistic, but you either hit a key to switch source, or it shows 3 sources simultaneously.

4) For aircraft that features an RMI (currently they don't do anything), I propose to have the VOR needle (thin) always point to the main airport, and the ADF needle (thick) either points towards secondary closest airport if we have more than one main airport (Takistan), or to a point on the extended runway centerline on the main airports ILS approach to simulate an approach marker (closest NDB marker if airport have multiple ILS approaches).

5) Altimeter and Vertical Speed Indicators should work in feet and of course in ASL rather than AGL.

6) Airspeed indicator should measure in knots, and possibly account for wind, but can easily drop calibrated and true airspeeds and any errors associated with pitot tube attitude (position error?) - they don't matter in our application.

For the hardcore pilots among us, we can mod out the GUI leaving us with true instruments based on real units, while not alienating the game to those just entering. I don't get this "only for professionals" attitude. Uberhard flight simulation (I'd like to see many of those here who wants realistic helicopter controls have a go at realistic helicopter controls - just saying ;)). Noobs won't stop crash aircraft no matter how realistic they are. It's like twin engine aircraft - it only takes you faster to the site of the accident :D

And while they're at it:

7) No more compass roses rotating the wrong way, VSI based on AGL, non working pitch attitudes, or excessive roll indicators, and a working turn coordinator would be cool too (if we get to turn off auto coordination).

As for wind, I think it should be user controllable if he wants this level of realism or not. For those new to the game, even normal landings can be a challenge (I think they should have the Cessna back to practice with :D). Did you ever try heavy crosswind landings in flightsim using only keyboard and mouse? I can't imagine trying to manage crossed controls while flaring (assuming a crabbed approach). As a game, it should be playable with only these. In flight sim I use yoke, pedals, and throttles of course. But in Arma, I do all my flying with keyboard and mouse since flying is secondary (I'm infantry normally).

Also, it wouldn't be possible to nicely do crosswind simulations without being able to fly with crossed controls (auto coordination off). How would the AN-2 (taildraggers are special kind of beasts) behave in crosswind?

Edited by CarlGustaffa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Underwater combat: Pull enemy's oxygen mask off underwater, underwater knife fighting, harpoons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Running should fatigue someone and prevent his further running

2. Weight of gear should hinder someone to run

3. Characters should be able to jump and climb

4. Things should catch fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. Keep Weapons mostly not visible in first person, while you running ...

...

2. Vehicle Interior (Dont make 20 Tanks for a side, just make 5 but in best quality^^)

...

1. the way the waepon is visible in OFP:DR is pretty ugly i agree with that.

but i love and prefer the running animation from OFP:CWC wich allowed shooting while running and was looking quite nice for me.

having something like the OFP:CWC running animation for normal speed running and the ArmA variant for sprinting would be awesome.

2. yes this would be one awesome feature to have interiors for all vehicles! the way it is now (some vehicles have interiors, some not) is realy not good and i would prefer no interiors for APCs or tanks at all, rather then having this inconsistant mixup.

watching the physiX demonstration from E3 at the part where he enters the tank, you can see for a short time that this tank has no interior :(

edit: lol at OFP:DR (OFP : DR)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Underwater combat: Pull enemy's oxygen mask off underwater, underwater knife fighting, harpoons.

That's not as much CoD as it is James Bond. The drag caused by the water would make trying to stab somebody somewhat impractical, but not impossible, depending on how you're holding the knife.

3. Characters should be able to jump and climb

Have you ever tried jumping with 20+ kilos of gear strapped onto you? If you land incorrectly, you can break your ankles in a very nasty way.

If anything, I'd like to see characters being able to climb on objects that are too thick to step over, but are at the appropriate height.

Also, since we're getting some advanced water:

Jaws.

:yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm into aviation as well, but I have to say no. At least not mandatory, and not as the system is now. Let the overlay GUI show in whatever units you prefer, and for this AGL is just fine. I propose the following changes/updates:

1) Let the GUI be as it is today. It's easy, language coherent, and fits the grid of the map, despite not being accurate for western planes (I know AN-2 comes with metric instrumentation, no idea about fighters).

2) When user sets a waypoint on the map, he effectively adjusts his heading bug on the heading indicator (since we don't have cockpit interaction). However, it doesn't update - it's not a magic pointer. It lets him read the current heading to target as he sets it and will stay in that position no matter how far he goes off course. If aircraft has more advanced avionics, then on the HSI/EHSI draw a line to the waypoint as well. EHSI also shows distance to waypoint, but here it will be i nautical miles even if his map is still metric.

3) New DME instrument. Not realistic, but you either hit a key to switch source, or it shows 3 sources simultaneously.

4) For aircraft that features an RMI (currently they don't do anything), I propose to have the VOR needle (thin) always point to the main airport, and the ADF needle (thick) either points towards secondary closest airport if we have more than one main airport (Takistan), or to a point on the extended runway centerline on the main airports ILS approach to simulate an approach marker (closest NDB marker if airport have multiple ILS approaches).

5) Altimeter and Vertical Speed Indicators should work in feet and of course in ASL rather than AGL.

6) Airspeed indicator should measure in knots, and possibly account for wind, but can easily drop calibrated and true airspeeds and any errors associated with pitot tube attitude (position error?) - they don't matter in our application.

For the hardcore pilots among us, we can mod out the GUI leaving us with true instruments based on real units, while not alienating the game to those just entering. I don't get this "only for professionals" attitude. Uberhard flight simulation (I'd like to see many of those here who wants realistic helicopter controls have a go at realistic helicopter controls - just saying ;)). Noobs won't stop crash aircraft no matter how realistic they are. It's like twin engine aircraft - it only takes you faster to the site of the accident :D

And while they're at it:

7) No more compass roses rotating the wrong way, VSI based on AGL, non working pitch attitudes, or excessive roll indicators, and a working turn coordinator would be cool too (if we get to turn off auto coordination).

As for wind, I think it should be user controllable if he wants this level of realism or not. For those new to the game, even normal landings can be a challenge (I think they should have the Cessna back to practice with :D). Did you ever try heavy crosswind landings in flightsim using only keyboard and mouse? I can't imagine trying to manage crossed controls while flaring (assuming a crabbed approach). As a game, it should be playable with only these. In flight sim I use yoke, pedals, and throttles of course. But in Arma, I do all my flying with keyboard and mouse since flying is secondary (I'm infantry normally).

Also, it wouldn't be possible to nicely do crosswind simulations without being able to fly with crossed controls (auto coordination off). How would the AN-2 (taildraggers are special kind of beasts) behave in crosswind?

Had a couple of threads about this specific issue, the units of measurements and such, got shot down in flames.....i even put this in as a dev-heaven ticket ages back and even then it was voted down...instead we got shoulder tapping:mad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×