Arma 3: Confirmed features | info & discussion

[wizbomb 10]

;1966179'](sarcasm) Yes' date=' of course. (/sarcasm)

But then we wouldn't have OFP patch after 10 years if BI would drop support for a game just after new comes out... :)

sorry i just didn't know, i guess im getting to used to Call of Duty and Battlefield always pulling their tricks

[DeclaredEvol 10]

We need 3d. Scopes + Acogs...

The ability to just have a zoomed lense is so much more reliable and less stressful to use than a full screen optic. It also runs betters and is more authentic, lord I hope these guys will take this as a perfection and not a criticism. The games like Project Reality, and Insurgency... are so much more enjoyable with these kind of scopes. Give it a shot, and here is some examples of someone's fake 3d. ACOG scope in ArmA 2.

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/7576/acogtest.jpg

[Big Dawg KS 6]

We need 3d. Scopes + Acogs...

No we don't, and this is a thread for confirmed features not for suggestions/requests, isn't it?

[purepassion 22]

but since RtT is a confirmed feature, this could be on BIS's list.

You cant tell by the current gameplays we've seen, because at the stage they were at E3, RtT was not yet implemented.

[ravendk 25]

We need 3d. Scopes + Acogs...

The ability to just have a zoomed lense is so much more reliable and less stressful to use than a full screen optic. It also runs betters and is more authentic, lord I hope these guys will take this as a perfection and not a criticism. The games like Project Reality, and Insurgency... are so much more enjoyable with these kind of scopes. Give it a shot, and here is some examples of someone's fake 3d. ACOG scope in ArmA 2.

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/7576/acogtest.jpg

Wheres the enlargement(zoom)..

The idea is good.. BUT current stage of it.. its too MW2'ish, with out the zoom its 'just' a aimpoint with a diffrent look.

(sorry to sound negative mate)

[DeclaredEvol 10]

Wheres the enlargement(zoom)..

The idea is good.. BUT current stage of it.. its too MW2'ish, with out the zoom its 'just' a aimpoint with a diffrent look.

(sorry to sound negative mate)

no no lol

it was just an example of the Field of view... there wasn't any zoom included. But from just seeing 3d. optics on other games, it certainly pleases me because its a little less difficult for me to look at. But the good thing is, they will apparently let you use either the full screen zoom or the 3d zoom. Difference being, whenever someone shoots with their eye against the scope. Its almost equivalent to getting hit by a professional boxer lol

[instagoat 133]

We need 3d. Scopes + Acogs...

The ability to just have a zoomed lense is so much more reliable and less stressful to use than a full screen optic. It also runs betters and is more authentic, lord I hope these guys will take this as a perfection and not a criticism. The games like Project Reality, and Insurgency... are so much more enjoyable with these kind of scopes. Give it a shot, and here is some examples of someone's fake 3d. ACOG scope in ArmA 2.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/835/rtt5.jpg/ Proper ACOG with zoom, etc. Way too tiny, if you ask me (irl you get closer to the scope, but this is the closest you can get using camera.sqs)

Would be a neat feature, though until I see it, I wouldn´t count on it being in. You need an insane texture resolution on the scope to make it work, and what I´ve seen from RTT in VBS2 is that it´s kind of laggy (which isn´t helpful in a scope).

Still, here´s to hope.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

...and what I´ve seen from RTT in VBS2 is that it´s kind of laggy (which isn´t helpful in a scope).

Hit the nail on the head.

[DeclaredEvol 10]

You guys have good points, but... Depth of field... has always been used to direct the eyes attention towards the scope. I guess this could be difficult on ArmA 2 or ArmA 3 since the engine isn't really supportive of this idea. But just to explain why this matters so much to me, its because there isn't a single weapon that you look into that close without getting smacked against the eyebrow. I'm just saying, look at Crysis... or COD or anything really. They all have Acog scopes at a 3d view, but it does position the scope a little closer to the players face... and that is fine. The fullsized scope on the screen hurts my head, and I can't half stand using it because of its resolution anyways... so I haven't spent one day on ArmA 2 using an ACOG or a Sniper Rifle without noticing how much more big the scope is than it needs to be. Its the same as looking into Holo, Red Dot or anything else... you cant put your eye right up to it lol

I just ask for you guys not to give me grief for voicing my opinion, just like everyone else... no one knows where to put crap on this forum lol

[ACE1434 10]

will arma 3 be backwards compatible with ArmA 2 content, maps, vehicles, units, armies??. I really dont want to have to wait months and months just for REAL MILITARY factions. I dont want to be stuck with cool new features and FICTIONAL forces.

[purepassion 22]

After what Ivan and the devs said, it will be compatible with arma 2 content and as easy to mod as arma 2.

a sidenote: what do yo mean by "REAL MILITARY factions", isnt the NATO and Iran real enough for you?

i really dont get how people still say BIS is going unrealistic and "Sci-Fi" when every unit we've seen so far, apart from the Mi-48 and the RHIB( whose exact camo is also in use), is completely real and does already exist just like that.

[ACE1434 10]

REAL MILITARY FACTIONS, such as the chinese PLA, Russian Federation, Hezbollah, IDF, Bundeshwere, British Army, Australian Armed Forces, those units on ArmA 3 DO NOT EXIST, Iran ofcourse, but the vehicles and equipment they use are no where near factual. 1st the merekava is a jewish/isreali tank, Iran would never use 2nd the MATV is an american MRAP project vehicle, and 3rd there is no such thing as an MI-48 or whatever that inbreed of a mi-24 is........get it now?

[purepassion 22]

you know that the game is still one year away from its release, do you?

All we have seen so far is some extrem WIP footage from E3 with only a hand full of units and vehicles.

After years of intense warfare against Eastern armies,[...]

that means we have eastern armies such as Iran (which is surely not the only one)

Europe has become the last stand for the battered NATO

you dont think the US is the only NATO member, right?

A small group of Special Forces[...] leaving Cpt. Scott Miller washed ashore[...]

Scott Miller is a member of the british SAS

so we already know about ( which totally doesnt mean that its all) various eastern factions such as the Iran and the Nato with its member like GB and US.

At this point you just cant say that they

DO NOT EXIST

!

We just know very little about arma 3, which is with a release set to 2012 not a strange thing

and i find it kind of strange that you say the merkava is a jewish tank... which puts your statements in a strange light. :(

[lone.wolf 80]

REAL MILITARY FACTIONS, such as the chinese PLA, Russian Federation, Hezbollah, IDF, Bundeshwere, British Army, Australian Armed Forces, those units on ArmA 3 DO NOT EXIST, Iran ofcourse, but the vehicles and equipment they use are no where near factual. 1st the merekava is a jewish/isreali tank, Iran would never use 2nd the MATV is an american MRAP project vehicle, and 3rd there is no such thing as an MI-48 or whatever that inbreed of a mi-24 is........get it now?

Hmm Iranians uses israeli made weaponry look at the attached link for the iranians soldiers using the UZI.

http://www.irandefence.net/showthread.php?t=65723

[ziiip 1]

After what Ivan and the devs said, it will be compatible with arma 2 content and as easy to mod as arma 2.

Epic. :cool:

[Mr. Charles 22]

...

SLA, Chernarussians, Chedakis, NAPA, Takistanis, Guerillas were all fictional. They had all unrealistic vehicles like the KA52 and KA50. US Marines had the Apache and the Army had SCARS. Why is the enjoyment of this game strictly bound the the colour and sound of the models in the game? Why are gameplay changing features, like PhysX, Volumetric Clouds, divers, RTT and weapon-attachment on the fly so unimportant in contrast to the models???

[maddogx 13]

...

SLA, Chernarussians, Chedakis, NAPA, Takistanis, Guerillas were all fictional. They had all unrealistic vehicles like the KA52 and KA50. US Marines had the Apache and the Army had SCARS. Why is the enjoyment of this game strictly bound the the colour and sound of the models in the game? Why are gameplay changing features, like PhysX, Volumetric Clouds, divers, RTT and weapon-attachment on the fly so unimportant in contrast to the models???

Because... ALL CAPS! That's right! You, with your logic and sensible arguments, you can NEVER beat ALL CAPS! There's just no defense against it! ;)

[Mr. Charles 22]

oh noez :(

I forgot the 3D editor, can we get some infos on it in a devblog?

[KEVINMGXP 20]

Because... ALL CAPS! That's right! You, with your logic and sensible arguments, you can NEVER beat ALL CAPS! There's just no defense against it! ;)

sometimes you just have to love how some people are conversating about differances hey :D

anyway as far as i can see it looks good, like already said there is not to much info in how many content we will get when it will be released, so it is kinda silly to make asumptions. Maybe it is better to just wait and see when we get some more screens, in the end we will always have people that are going to hate "and still buy it" to complain some more after :p

kind regars

Edited June 28, 2011 by KBourne

[maddogx 13]

in the end we will always have people that are going to hate "and still buy it" to complain some more after :p

So true. :)

Actually, I think by the time BIS show off some more polished PhysX examples and other features people might just realize that the heart and soul of any Arma game is its engine, not the vanilla content. Perhaps then the whining about the futuristic setting and fictional equipment will die down.

[KEVINMGXP 20]

So true. :)

Actually, I think by the time BIS show off some more polished PhysX examples and other features people might just realize that the heart and soul of any Arma game is its engine, not the vanilla content. Perhaps then the whining about the futuristic setting and fictional equipment will die down.

Well, Bis developed a nice RV engine with game features never seen before. In al the years they kept innovating supporting and growing, and so a great community embarked with it. I play the Armaverse games for a long time before even my daughter was born, i was not even a gamer back then. Yeah like everyone i played doom or even games like wolfenstein but when OFP came out i was hooked on the story and the play style.

but yeah we need to agree on the part where ArmA3 would be too futuristic is a bit well :rolleyes:

The Cold war era was a political conflict it never was a full scale war between the party's but bis made a good choice to build on that conflict with their first cold war crisis and after that resistance, but it was fictive. Armed assault was even entirely unreal the only existing faction was the US if i recal correct. ArmA2 settings where not any better however yeah we had the Us and the Russians again in a fictive war that could refer to a similar conflict, but we had gotten also a plain and several other things that where putted on hold or even canceled and so on. Operation arrowhead was also referring towards something more closer to conflicts we are in now but not entirely correct with totally different load ouds that are not accurate to date.

Yeah definitely bis you suck at settings oh darn this means, yeah you will catch my drift :D No setting released so far by Bis was entitled to be entirely correct. Anyway it will not spoil my fun when it comes out!

ohw and my gramma sucks ill correct it later when i get home :p

Edited June 29, 2011 by KBourne
Grama correction.

[ACE1434 10]

my point was about the overall existence, which you still dont seem to get...BRDM=REAL, BMP=REAL,MI-24=REAL, commanche=CANCELLED, MI-48=FAKE, W/E thats APC in the background is=FAKE, MATV=U.S. Army MRAP project, so how would Iran obtain them, and Iran exists of course we all know that, but they should have made real weapons and units that Iran has instead of wasting time creating fictional fantasy crap, plus theres already Iran Mod so whats the point of even bringing them, and if you use ACE mod the apache goes the U.S. Army like it should, and ACE brings AH-1W for the USMC, so fail to the noob normal game player that said that.

[maddogx 13]

my point was about the overall existence, which you still dont seem to get...BRDM=REAL, BMP=REAL,MI-24=REAL, commanche=CANCELLED, MI-48=FAKE, W/E thats APC in the background is=FAKE, MATV=U.S. Army MRAP project, so how would Iran obtain them, and Iran exists of course we all know that, but they should have made real weapons and units that Iran has instead of wasting time creating fictional fantasy crap, plus theres already Iran Mod so whats the point of even bringing them, and if you use ACE mod the apache goes the U.S. Army like it should, and ACE brings AH-1W for the USMC, so fail to the noob normal game player that said that.

No no, we get it. We just don't give as much of a fuck as you seem to...

[Minoza 11]

I say, let BI do their job and let the modders to theirs... No need to worry that much about future setting...

[ACE1434 10]

I care, because I am fan of realism, obiviously your not, quit trolling, this about features, not you disrespecting others.