Arma 3: Confirmed features | info & discussion

[onlyrazor 11]

would not it be great that you be able to shoot of lights, if you will sneak up on a base without being detected as soon as possible. and the player had to fix the lights to get them to light again!:D

*ahem*

[DancZer 65]

EDIT! OnlyRazor was faster! :D

[dragon01 902]

Not to mention you can do that in ArmA II. They're not fixable, but it should be easy enough to script a "replace lightbulb" action.

[dmarkwick 261]

Then the feature name "Smoke will be dynamic" is not very precisse. It can be a global thing(i hope) or simple just for missle smoke trails. Event to it can be animation or Physx stuff too.

"Smoke will be dynamic"... sounds to me like particles can be affected after they're floated off. Currently, you cannot affect a particle once it's been floated off. Only the wind can affect it. So the above declaration might mean that either particles, or a subset of particles, can be affected during their lifetime. I can only think of two things straight away that might affect particles: rotor-wash and obstructions (terrain, buildings).

---------- Post added at 11:05 ---------- Previous post was at 11:04 ----------

I'm wondering how wind will affect the game. Mostly how firestorms are going to work after napalming a hill for 12 hours.

Sounds like a job for me :)

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

"Smoke will be dynamic"... sounds to me like particles can be affected after they're floated off. Currently, you cannot affect a particle once it's been floated off. Only the wind can affect it. So the above declaration might mean that either particles, or a subset of particles, can be affected during their lifetime. I can only think of two things straight away that might affect particles: rotor-wash and obstructions (terrain, buildings).

http://physxinfo.com/wiki/PhysX_SDK_3.x

PhysX can do "SPH (Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics) or simple (without interparticles collisions) simulation", meaning only the wind, rotor downwash (however it is simulated) and, as you've said, buildings would affect the dynamics of the smoke. Shouldn't exert a too heavy toll on performance. ; )

[BobcatBob 10]

Vehicles

(new) Full vehicle model that includes components such as engine, clutch, gears, autobox, differential, wheels, tyres, suspensions and chassis

DRRRRRRRRROoooooooOoOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL.... this alone make the wait for the 3.x upgrages worth it!

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Vehicles

(new) Full vehicle model that includes components such as engine, clutch, gears, autobox, differential, wheels, tyres, suspensions and chassis

DRRRRRRRRROoooooooOoOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL.... this alone make the wait for the 3.x upgrages worth it!

Check out the DX11 & PhysX thread down below, mind the trolls. :)

[On_Sabbatical 11]

Guys,we really need to convince BIS to get us a decent targetting stuff for ArmA 3,all these realistic features you're talking about can't fit in a game that still uses TAB lock and skill-less targetting systems that rely on AI's Uber relentless spotting capabilities,it's so Arcade and it needs to be changed in ArmA 3 ...

PvP with vehicles is just impossible with TAB on the vanilla game !

[chortles 263]

... so what does comprehensive "realistic targeting" for guided weapons look like as far as the user interface? Because BI's attitude seems to be "if it breaks something else in the engine, realistic targeting can be thrown to the wayside." That is to say, based on the past work of BI I'm not so sure that "walk and chew gum at the same time" is within the capabilities of the Real Virtuality engine at a fundamental level, and I wish Real Virtuality 4 would prove me wrong. :p

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Guys,we really need to convince BIS to get us a decent targetting stuff for ArmA 3,all these realistic features you're talking about can't fit in a game that still uses TAB lock and skill-less targetting systems that rely on AI's Uber relentless spotting capabilities,it's so Arcade and it needs to be changed in ArmA 3 ...

PvP with vehicles is just impossible with TAB on the vanilla game !

/Agree.

One possible solution is to have Render-To-Texture FLIR/Optics cameras on the main instrument panel of KA-52/AH-64/A-10 etc, similar to DCS A-10, Black Shark simulators.

In "Optics/FLIR" mode, holding down the ALT key would enable control of the camera by mouse with the scroll wheel used to zoom in/zoom out, while retaining full flight control of the aircraft. Upon spotting a target on the display, center your crosshair on it, hit TAB to lock-on and you may then fire. :)

[On_Sabbatical 11]

Something like MANDO missile in the original game mod would be more than welcomed ... but not this useless TAB lock thing ! we have enough of it,it's time to get something new that will bring the gameplay to a new level.

TAB lock is ,by the way, one of the main reasons of PvP failure in this game !

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

:)

The FLIR/black-white display could be controlled via ALT key + mouse, then TAB to lock and system would keep tracking it, but only if you first acquire target via this camera.

Qaz, this is the wrong topic for it me thinks. :( Good ideas all round, tho.

[On_Sabbatical 11]

for arma 3 context,we need some "simplified" version of what is done on DCS,with a longer process that comes before you can hit a target,something that will require a bit more time and skill to happen.

And of course ,you should not be able to kill targets you don't see,it should be related to the maximum viewdistance allowed by the server for example.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

for arma 3 context,we need some "simplified" version of what is done on DCS,with a longer process that comes before you can hit a target,something that will require a bit more time and skill to happen.

Can't get more simpler than ALT+Mouse to control the camera, scroll wheel for zoom and TAB+click to target and fire. :)

And of course ,you should not be able to kill targets you don't see,it

Yep, that's the whole point.

[On_Sabbatical 11]

TAB lock affects also Launchers and tanks ...

I sugested few months ago to adapt T55 model to all tanks,but no one seemed to love the idea ...

Removing TAB lock for launchers is not very hard ... removing radar for vehicles and air should also help !

[NoRailgunner 0]

Hmmm, not a itsy-bitsy confirmation/news about a new or old Arma/OFP feature? Some new or improved damage/wounds or repair/healing features for A3??

[nodunit 397]

TAB lock affects also Launchers and tanks ...

I sugested few months ago to adapt T55 model to all tanks,but no one seemed to love the idea ...

Removing TAB lock for launchers is not very hard ... removing radar for vehicles and air should also help !

That it certainly would, only a few aircraft have active air radar and even then unless it's a dedicated to a set purpose, radar warning should be the only radar display on most of the birds and tanks should have none at all.

For targetting I'd say toss that only fighter jets should have lock on capability, helicopters and tanks use lasers, the tank tracks the laser to steady the cannon, whereas a helicopter only locks on to a target to track that specific silloheutte with a weapons computer, so we need less lock on capability and more laser designation.

As it stands with the current setup there isn't much diversity between helicopters in the way they function, the hind in OA handles targeting in the same way the Apache despite all the vast differences between them, it also makes helicopters too godlike when they can fly at high speeds and engage with the most powerful of weaponry with any form of precision.

Edited September 25, 2012 by NodUnit

[-Coulum- 35]

Indie Games CZ - my mini report

It took me only 30 minutes to get home, yet I still managed to forget A LOT on the way... long and difficulty day

It was a great event, wonderful to speak to Dean, Matt and Karel... Thanks for answering all those questions! Anyway, here's what I can remember:

particles are not dynamic, only affected by wind (those Comanche missile trails are pre-set), rotor downwash affects only clutter

it will be possible to adjust the particle limit in the video settings

radio protocol is being completely reworked (starring Jay Crowe), more fluid

a team of developers (nicknamed Balance Task Force or something like that ) is dedicated solely for editing AI and weapon configs for balancing purposes

AI engagements will be much more fun, no more "sniped from 300m with an AK without optics"

when spotted by an AI, the AI will shoot a little imprecise at first, gradually improving aim after that

the idea of underground structures in Arma is was put on hold because the AI couldn't navigate in them and the developers didn't want to move resources from elsewhere

it will be possible to have different key-binding presets (Arma 2 style / Arma 3 style etc)

different methods of giving commands are being checked (tried commo-rose, didn't like it because it would lock player's movement)

the goal is to make commanding units a little more personal, not just shouting at people by numbers

the campaign is far from being done

all missions should be on par with the Eagle Wing missions when it comes to quality

PhysX will be awesome

lot less horses in front of BI HQ, lot more sheep

I don't taky any responsibility for the info being wrong, either because I didn't get it right... or because I was deliberately trolled by Karel

Thanks Myshak. I like what I hear about the AI. sounds like they are going to make their shooting ability more dynamic which will lead to better firefights. I just hope by "enjoyable" they don't mean dead easy/no thinkng caution required - but I am sure BIS know what they are doing. I am looking forward to testing firefights with this new ai. And I hope all these things are applied to static/mounted weapons as well - Infact those are more important to be balanced than the small arms in my opinion. Also hope "balance task force" will take the sight the ai is using into acount when doing their config magic.

different methods of giving commands are being checked (tried commo-rose, didn't like it because it would lock player's movement)

the goal is to make commanding units a little more personal, not just shouting at people by numbers

How exactly is player movement locked? does that mean that commo-rose definitely won't be in?

PhysX will be awesome

Deatails! me want Details!

Edited September 26, 2012 by -Coulum-

[froggyluv 2130]

Thanks Myshak! This entire thread has been starved for real news and thats a meaty list there. Dedicated team for AI fun-ness is what Ive been wanting to hear for a long time :)

[Nicholas 5]

That is some juicy information. Makes me even more excited for ArmA!

all missions should be on par with the Eagle Wing missions when it comes to quality

This is good to hear because Eagle Wing was the best mission of this generation.

radio protocol is being completely reworked (starring Jay Crowe), more fluid

a team of developers (nicknamed Balance Task Force or something like that ) is dedicated solely for editing AI and weapon configs for balancing purposes

This is really cool. Can't wait to see the final result.

[myshaak 0]

How exactly is player movement locked? does that mean that commo-rose definitely won't be in?

Well, I cannot confirm "definitely" because the UI is not finalized, but if I recall correctly, they didn't like the idea of your mouse/keyboard locking when selecting commo-rose options. Like, you cannot start issuing orders whith the commo-rose and be turning around with your mouse. What Karel said is that he will experiment with limiting the command numbers from 1-0 to just 1-4, so the players wouldn't have to look away from the screen to the keyboard when issuing more complex commands.

Deatails! me want Details!

I don't have any juicy details about that, I just remember Karel was very excited about PhysX, especially vehicle interactions with the envirnonment. Most of the stuff isn't properly configured for PhysX yet, the stuff we saw was just done hastily for the presentations.

PS: I didn't expect any of the Arma 3 guys to be there (I went there to see Dean and ask about DayZ), otherwise I would (maybe) prepare some more interesting questions. On the other hand, I got the feeling that I asked a little too much... there were other people too, you know :D

PPS: Oh, and before anyone asks, I don't have any pics. The DayZ presentation was in a form of an interview (will definitely pop up somewhere someday) and the only visual material were a few looping DayZ screens.

Edited September 26, 2012 by Myshaak

[CarlGustaffa 4]

My idea about a rose involved introducing a new GUI class. A mix of display and dialog, where mouse inputs are given to the rose while keyboard inputs still work as normal (other than the precedence system wrt qualifier keys are held). The current number system where I accidentally bump my mouse around after issuing commands with my right hand isn't very ideal either :)

[paecmaker 23]

"the missions will be less about politics but no hollywood-ish presentation; in general, they are trying to avoid missions like Manhattan"

Sad, I liked manhattan

[instagoat 133]

"the missions will be less about politics but no hollywood-ish presentation; in general, they are trying to avoid missions like Manhattan"

Sad, I liked manhattan

Problem with manhattan style missions is the sheer complexity. It was worked on for almost a year by a single person, apparently, and even then it wasn´t finished on release day. (It was probably the mission that was complained about most in the troubleshooting section as far as bugs went.)

I´d rather have smaller, tighter OFP style missions that work every time, with a concise and interesting challenge and objective, rather than a big sandbox that doesn´t work half the time. Manhattan could´ve been a game in itself.

[-Coulum- 35]

Well, I cannot confirm "definitely" because the UI is not finalized, but if I recall correctly, they didn't like the idea of your mouse/keyboard locking when selecting commo-rose options. Like, you cannot start issuing orders whith the commo-rose and be turning around with your mouse. What Karel said is that he will experiment with limiting the command numbers from 1-0 to just 1-4, so the players wouldn't have to look away from the screen to the keyboard when issuing more complex commands.

Interesting. If they were to put the commands in the 1-4 keys do you know if they would be doing so by just having more "levels of menu" or by simply taking out less used/not working commands?

I don't have any juicy details about that, I just remember Karel was very excited about PhysX, especially vehicle interactions with the envirnonment. Most of the stuff isn't properly configured for PhysX yet, the stuff we saw was just done hastily for the presentations.

No prob, was hoping to hear something like "helicopters no longer instantly explode with the slightest touch" or something "new" like that but thats just wishful thinking. Did they mention anything about the alpha? I know at one point the devs said they wanted to have physics all finished up for the alpha, but if they still haven't finished much, maybe only a bit of the alpha will feature full physx support?

On the topic of missions, I personally prefer the open sand box ones - but most of all I prefer the missions that work. I am sorry, but Manhatten didn't work well enough in my eyes and I never had the perseverance to finish it. So if it were a choice between Manhatten and smaller OFP style missions I would prefer OFP style. I also think randomness is key to any mission, in order to keep the player on his toes whether it be his first or fortieth play through.