Arma 3: Confirmed features | info & discussion

[purepassion 22]

but what does the term cell size mean?

You have to imagine maps working somehow like this raster of squares which represents the ground mesh. If the cells, the squares, are big like these, you can only form rough things with them.

But if you enhance, or better, shrink the cell size like these here, you can form much more detailed things like small ditches and trenches.

There were even some tests with a 1m cell size which makes some nicely detailed landscapes possible but also heavily limits their overall size, performance etc.

You can check out some of Bushlurkers awesome work!

Edited June 24, 2012 by PurePassion

[fraczek 4]

i didnt know proving grounds was special - had to actually play in editor. and yes it feels more natural and all that.. not like a plane surface!

but what does the term cell size mean?

http://resources.bisimulations.com/wiki/Visitor_3:_Making_of_simple_landscape

If I understand correctly, grid size a x b is the number of map points with elevation, and cell size is the distance between these points in meters. Anything between two grid points is planar surface. Now a smaller cell size for a same grid size map would be like more detailed contour map, with more varieated terrain possible (more terrain detail) in the same area than with a larger cell size. Just imagine the map as a 3D mesh of polygons. A smaller cell size means more polygons. So as you yourself summed it up, the Arma 3 terrain will be more detailed like the Proving Grounds map than the Shapur map. Just to which extent remains to be seen (or deducted from released videos and pictures).

/edit: Ninja'ed by PurePassion :)

[frostwyrm333 1]

They should implement something like quadtrees to add details where necessary and keep the rest nice and flat. Inherent flatness is a big problem, if you look around at any random time you will realize that arma is unrealisticly flat. This new res. should be enough I guess.

[Within360 1]

Thanks to everyone posting all these updates. Things just keep looking better and better.

[fraczek 4]

They should implement something like quadtrees to add details where necessary and keep the rest nice and flat. Inherent flatness is a big problem, if you look around at any random time you will realize that arma is unrealisticly flat. This new res. should be enough I guess.

Variable cell size depending on locally desired terrain detail would be awesome, or procedural microterrain (but how about syncing it across MP?), though probably not until Arma4 at the very least :)

[frostwyrm333 1]

Variable cell size depending on locally desired terrain detail would be awesome, or procedural microterrain (but how about syncing it across MP?), though probably not until Arma4 at the very least :)

maybe not so impossible, it could also work like nice terrain LOD and graphic settings, but same problems like tessellation, this would cause to players to see things differently, server sync problem if soldiers are positioned 10cm up/down

[Stubaf. 10]

I haven't followed the progress of Arma 3 in the last months and although these 200+ page threads are super lame I'll just ask here anyways.

Will the new Arma feature more tactical possibilities like f.e. a Platoon or even Company layer? I have playe Combat Mission Shock Force a lot lately and often wish Arma was more like it...

Also, I have never seen any real tactical manouvering in any Arma game, which would be really cool though, normally it's just shoot until everthing is dead (another thing I'd like to see would be non-fatal casualties).

With all buildings enterable, will we finally get realistic material penatration features? If a squad with lots of 7.62mm automatic weapons open up on a typical Mediterrean house (or any type of civilian house) I would expect not much would be left of anyone inside.

Arma always delivered the tools to simulate the technical aspects of war, but sorely lacked tools for tactical stuff.

Honestly, things like underwater combat maybe nice to look at or may be fun for a few hours, but as long as those things I mentioned are missing I don't really see what its good for.

[antoineflemming 14]

I haven't followed the progress of Arma 3 in the last months and although these 200+ page threads are super lame I'll just ask here anyways.

Will the new Arma feature more tactical possibilities like f.e. a Platoon or even Company layer? I have playe Combat Mission Shock Force a lot lately and often wish Arma was more like it...

Also, I have never seen any real tactical manouvering in any Arma game, which would be really cool though, normally it's just shoot until everthing is dead (another thing I'd like to see would be non-fatal casualties).

With all buildings enterable, will we finally get realistic material penatration features? If a squad with lots of 7.62mm automatic weapons open up on a typical Mediterrean house (or any type of civilian house) I would expect not much would be left of anyone inside.

Arma always delivered the tools to simulate the technical aspects of war, but sorely lacked tools for tactical stuff.

Honestly, things like underwater combat maybe nice to look at or may be fun for a few hours, but as long as those things I mentioned are missing I don't really see what its good for.

Dude, I'd love for ArmA3's AI to be able to run through a battle drill. Picture an AI platoon that decided to envelope an enemy squad on the battlefield after considering the terrain, enemy's position, weaponry, and size, all in relation to the platoon, and then decides the best type of attack to conduct based on that information. That would be awesome. Unfortunately, I highly doubt we will see that in-game... :(

[Stubaf. 10]

This is whats awesome about CM (not wanna do advertising or nothing), command a company of Stryker infantry, if enemy has no ATGMs keep them just out off effective RPG range and utilize firepower, if not use your 3 Plts w/ 1 HQ, 3 Squads and 2 MMG teams. Place the MMGs wisely and put 2 squads per Plt in overwatch while advancing with the 3rd. Any resistance pops up it gets suppressed by large volumes of fire, in case of fierce resistance company HQ or FOB team calls in offmap 81mm mortars or heavier ordnance.

If something like could once happen in any Arma title I could die happily ;)

(just kiddin' people are unsatisfiable)

That being said I don't expect to see anythin alike in Arma 3 either.

But I'm a little bit disturbed to see how Arma goes more "mainstream" with this installment and how pretty useless and/or unrealistic features are included with probably very great effort (like changing uniforms or changing scopes on the fly or underwater environments).

[antoineflemming 14]

This is whats awesome about CM (not wanna do advertising or nothing), command a company of Stryker infantry, if enemy has no ATGMs keep them just out off effective RPG range and utilize firepower, if not use your 3 Plts w/ 1 HQ, 3 Squads and 2 MMG teams. Place the MMGs wisely and put 2 squads per Plt in overwatch while advancing with the 3rd. Any resistance pops up it gets suppressed by large volumes of fire, in case of fierce resistance company HQ or FOB team calls in offmap 81mm mortars or heavier ordnance.

If something like could once happen in any Arma title I could die happily ;)

(just kiddin' people are unsatisfiable)

That being said I don't expect to see anythin alike in Arma 3 either.

But I'm a little bit disturbed to see how Arma goes more "mainstream" with this installment and how pretty useless and/or unrealistic features are included with probably very great effort (like changing uniforms or changing scopes on the fly or underwater environments).

The underwater part is realistic I think. There ARE special underwater rifles.

[Stubaf. 10]

Yeah the first and second I consider unrealistic, the underwater part I consider superfluos ;) (pun intended)

Lots of time wasted on creating it (animations, graphics, filters, coding, etc.) for not much use.

[fabrizio_t 58]

"we’d like to expand the Chernarus theme in the Arma 3 engine"

Best news i've heard about ArmA3 in months!

In my opinion Chernarus is by far the best map made by BIS over a decade.

It basically needs 2 things: majority of buildings enterable and better terrain resolution.

Give me this and i would happily trash Limnos ...

[antoineflemming 14]

Yeah the first and second I consider unrealistic, the underwater part I consider superfluos ;) (pun intended)

Lots of time wasted on creating it (animations, graphics, filters, coding, etc.) for not much use.

What do you mean for not much use? What, you mean you aren't going to use it?

[paecmaker 23]

Yeah the first and second I consider unrealistic, the underwater part I consider superfluos ;) (pun intended)

Lots of time wasted on creating it (animations, graphics, filters, coding, etc.) for not much use.

Believe me "I" will spend LOTS of time underwater(I wonder if you can play as a fish in the editor)

[Stubaf. 10]

Honestly, everyone will play around with this feature for a few hours, it will be (over-)used in a bunch of missions and then it gets old.

But infantry combat is at the heart of the game, and improved infantry combat never gets old.

[Mr. Charles 22]

Honestly, everyone will play around with this feature for a few hours, it will be (over-)used in a bunch of missions and then it gets old.

But infantry combat is at the heart of the game, and improved infantry combat never gets old.

Yeah, i also think this way. There is only so much you can do underwater, combatwise.

[CriminalMinds 10]

@Stubaf. I honestly don't know why you are soooo annoyed by this feature. Don't moan about it. It's already in-game and nearly all the work is done. So please stop it.

[Stubaf. 10]

I'm not annoyed. It sure is nice to have. It is (to me) just an example for ressources and time that could have been better spent on other, more important (again, to me) features.

[DeclaredEvol 10]

http://www.armaholic.com/datas/users/arma3_lightning_bonus_e3_4.jpg

I've grown fond about ArmA 3, and like what I see. Especially with all of the enhanced combat features now, and I also saw this photograph recently. Is there any confirmation of what may be enhanced Close Quarters Engagements for Buildings??? It is 'one' thing to give players more animations and control, but it is another to give AI that as well. For instance, the SMK Animations for ArmA 2 was not fully optimized for the AI and they didn't know how to get out of some of those animations like Sniper Sit. And on this, would AI effectively know where to take cover in buildings. My guess from the Photo that may had been a staged photograph with the Player doing the leaning while the others are doing standard things.

The MAIN issue I have seen is the AI's Situation awareness in buildings being a struggle, they stare out into space for some reason or another and seems like they still think they are fighting outside. I am only wanting some confirmation on the AI for Close Range engagements because originally the game was really only good for terrain based combat. And not everything is like that in war zones...

[HKFlash 9]

Well we all know that having a good dynamic A.I. that actually moves within a space full of objects (i.e. urban terrain) is not easy. Personally I would not expect huge improvement to how A.I. behaves in ARMA III. I think BIS made it very clear ever since the game was announced that their focus was animations, physics, a refreshing new setting (instead of Russia vs USA), huge and detailed terrain, underwater combat and some deep graphic changes such as lightning. This is my interpretation.

[DeclaredEvol 10]

The FIRST video games ever made ARE AI Based Games... Simulating Chess, Simulating Sports and Racing. It is the MOST important feature for any video game, any simulator out there.

Well you see, its not a matter of opinion at all. In fact, its a necessity for most modders and even just players who want to play without laughing at retarded things like the AI chat spam. Even though you're correct, it is a hassle getting all of this stuff done. It is also a hassle for other game designers that have to work from scratch too, its not like BI is the only independant game company out there. I remember my first game Unreal that was 14 years old today and it was made by a company without gobs of money, and they were able to do perform realistic human survival traits. I'm talking about simple terminology like Attitudes, such as Fear... Aggression... Assertion. The works of the Human Brain and how we manage to survive daily through our lives, none of this is given to AI in ArmA correctly. And it isn't rocket science, I have done the programming too. Without the Source Code of ArmA III, you are asking too much from modders to fix these problems. We're all going to have to wait till ArmA 4 sadly.

You know, I just keep seeing AI modders coming around, and them pointing things out like how the AI does not respond to suppression or they keep walking around in circles while bullets fly by them. Or they naturally don't go into buildings, or they stare into space... or they can't re-arm, or they can't survive. The Dev's are being a bit TOO lazy not to cover things like that. While we are not given any SOURCE CODE and only CBA tools to work with. That is bullshit man, this game is not a simulator until you can fight an enemy that survives and I'm not buying into it until I can play the game without killing 500 enemies in three hours of Warfare. We pay these guys decent money and support to implement better and more powerful features for us to work with, and don't take me wrong Bohemia Interactive has accomplished so much for us. My question is why is the AI not important to anyone? The first video games were AI based. After all, the community cannot fix their sloppy mistakes.

I am trying to simplify this, its easier for us as modders and gamers to work with smaller parts of the game... while the people we pay to work the bigger parts like Physics, AI, Audio, Graphical and other "ENGINE" related things that us modders are not given source code for. I've been observing the features ArmA III has and I have hardly not seen one bit of AI related material. ArmA III is not a simulator, ACE is. And this game is the partial copy of a true Simulator VBS2. But it lacks so much potential that I am not completely as impressed as I was before, the likely hood of people like ACE wanting to remake the entire game would not turn out so well either. There is a lot more said than done, people do not realize the consequences of them taking the game to a different realm of technology such as the Future. The amount of material to be reworked with is difficult and it would be avoiding the original purposes of ArmA III to go back to modern day war designs. I my self have given up on this Simulation strive people have, and am just going to play it Vanilla. They've only made it harder to work with ;D

Edited June 27, 2012 by DeclaredEvol

[onlyrazor 11]

I love it when a game isn't even out yet and all the pessimists come out from their bunkers to bemoan how it will suck. I mean, let's just give them a chance, heh?

Edited June 27, 2012 by OnlyRazor

[CarlGustaffa 4]

The FIRST video games ever made ARE AI Based Games... Simulating Chess, Simulating Sports and Racing. It is the MOST important feature for any video game, any simulator out there.

Pong had single player? :D

[jakerod 254]

Pong had single player? :D

Yep, it was just very hard to lose.

I'm hoping the AI use buildings more effectively now and that we get real trenches and real bunkers.

[slatts 1978]

@Stubaf.

You can easily change scopes in the field. It's one of the points of RIS, quick and easy changes if you have the scopes.