Arma 3: Confirmed features | info & discussion

[DeclaredEvol 10]

I've asked around and got a few answers but I still haven't really managed to get an answer about compounds. I noticed people mentioned compounds such as radio stations, or a under ground base... things like that. I saw that the game will have a 3d Editor, will it be possible to work inside of these kind of compounds and set up missions? And if so, I'm a little concerned over these kind of objectives. I apologize for the nasty threads I think I went a bit overboard on the comments and things. I was really trying to clear with everyone if the AI have 'squad' path finding skills in compounds or buildings now. I saw in the Infantry Showcase that the AI would break up in several places of a town and go through doors and gates on their own. AI generally travel in Formations until they reach an area near threats. By this time they start kind of peeking and trying to find enemies more carefully, when I watched the alpha release of the Infantry Showcase I was really looking forward to seeing enemy AI barricaded in a compound or a building. And seeing a Allied squad sort of stack up and infiltrate buildings and compounds. Maybe with this being available, it would open up a new realm of objectives and missions people could design. Such as, infiltrating compounds and securing data or taking photos of ammo caches. Sort of like in America's Army 2.5 with the SF missions. This would be COOL, it's something I wanted from day one in ArmA I and I was expecting it in ArmA II. So this is why I was BUGGING the F' out of everybody, it's a interesting subject.

Ok, yeah... the question has been asked and is frequent. I know you guys hate seeing this over and over. So if it helps... this will be the last time I am ever going to do it. ONLY, if I can find a straight answer. I am very excited after seeing this picture. It gave me the sort of idea that ArmA 3 was really going to include Squad AI assets for Compounds. What I was thinking of was kind of like how AI would wait in the corner of a room or some AI would be peeking out of a window or some would be watching the door. So if this is what Bohemia had in mind, I am a real sucker for annoying you guys. Just let me know, this is something I want from ArmA 3 because it's creative. This is evolutionary to the combat experience :)

Edited February 10, 2013 by DeclaredEvol

[^Th0mas^ 10]

Its rumoured that the PS4 will be more like a PC. Sony will announce their next console later this month, and we all know that we`ll probably get some ArmA 3 news this month as well. Maybe they are waiting for the PS4 to get announced along with their game on next gen :D ?

[Tonci87 163]

Yes. The rest of the simulation games usually have 1-2 vehicles simulated close to ~95% (yes even Falcon 4.0 didn't have everything simulated in its only F-16) while the rest is a purely abstract representation.

While the focus of ArmA is obviously more on the infantry side - even "arcadey" tanks, choppers, planes have fair ballistics, you can damage different systems on them with varied effects (like shooting off rotor or puncturing the fuel tank, damaging tank tracks, popping car wheels, disabling fire control systems, killing/wounding the crew without actually destroying the vehicle and so on) and they aren't controlled like toys-pretending-to-be-vehicles from BF3 where Apache can do a 180 degree turn at full speed.

So you have a "true" sim like Black Shark? So yeah they've spent years developing a single chopper but tanks still behave like cardboard cutouts and aerial vehicles are mere abstractions that do not abide by the same simulation rules as the titular Kamov chopper does.

Considering that it's impossible for any dev studio, no matter how big, to do a 100% simulation of everything and not go bankrupt in the process/have their devs die of old age - I'd say ArmA does a pretty damn good job at simulating all stuff within it. Because while Blackhawk in it isn't a true to real life representation, it's not some arcade abstraction from all other games not dedicated to it and does take some piloting skills to fly instead of just holding W and moving mouse around like in Battlefield games.

Do you remember that at the release of arma 2, you could destroy a tank with machinegunfire? The Armor penetration model is based on HP. It shouldn´t be like that.

[raptor90 1]

Anyway whats the difference between "Operation flashpoint dragon rising" and its sequels and the "wonder game Arma 2 CO" except different engine ?

I have a very bad feeling that Amra 3 will be something like this

[frostwyrm333 1]

From released videos its pretty apparent that Arma 3 will play similarly to Arma 2.

If you are comparing Arma to new OFP you should know that it doesn't contain mission editor.

[raptor90 1]

And thats all ?

[aus_twisted 0]

Anyway whats the difference between "Operation flashpoint dragon rising" and its sequels and the "wonder game Arma 2 CO" except different engine ?

I have a very bad feeling that Amra 3 will be something like this

lol is this guy for real, some of the things you expect ArmA 3 to have is in a unrealistic scale of whats actually needed.

[purepassion 22]

Throw me a bone here raptor. Are you afraid Arma 3 will become an Arcade game like OFP:RR? Do you think Arma has never been realistic to you? It seems that both is the case for you.

Arma has never been a fully fledged simulator simulating ALL the things. It's simply not possible to be something like that and also be a commercial entertainment product at the same time. (Not even speaking about stuff like performance etc etc)

The essentials of Arma and OFP will be carried over and improved in Arma 3. A lot of new stuff will be added, existing things will be more sophisticated, others will be streamlined.

You can rest assured, I have seen and read much of Arma 3 and nothing of what I saw made me believe it will be more arcade ;)

In all seriousness, if you don't want to be judged as a troll either completely stop or think about what you're stating and demanding but there is no point in continuing as everything has already been said. It's now your responsability to read and comprehend it.

There is no way to move forward so take a turn.

So anyways, to everyone not having seen it before, the stationary XM312 and XM307 have been worked on as well with tests for the FCS. :) Here is a screenshot of them taken from the Arma 3 devmode

best regards

[frostwyrm333 1]

He is just trolling a bit.

Btw. where does that screenshot originates from? I have seen it in other thread but I thought it was VBS.

[CriminalMinds 10]

He is just trolling a bit.

Btw. where does that screenshot originates from? I have seen it in other thread but I thought it was VBS.

Pure has a top secret mole working at the BIS FOB in Mnisek pod brdy, CZ. Just joking. Not a mole if I know it. :rolleyes:

[froggyluv 2130]

Anyway whats the difference between "Operation flashpoint dragon rising" and its sequels and the "wonder game Arma 2 CO" except different engine ?

I have a very bad feeling that Amra 3 will be something like this

Amra 3...? :rolleyes:

I have an even stronger feeling that your 100% wrong. Red River was absolutely atrocious -in many instances you couldn't move 10-20m from where the game wanted you to be or you''d die. The landscape was like a bad Martian shroom trip and lacked any sort of life/movement outside of the very standardish mission design. How is Arma 3, a massive free roaming game with really countless features remotely similar? Just don't see any similarity in the game, marketing or development process at all.

[fragmachine 12]

Really if someone says that BF3 blurred graphics are better than fotorealistic ArmA 3 ones - shoot yourself. I've seen many FPS and ArmA III is the best looking one - i would paid any money for BOX version of it even if its 300$ - don't show me other games, waste of time :D

But really - the attitiude of "what i want" should be changed to "what is needed" - You can't have everything inclusive - all in one - BiS is relatively small studio with small amount of money and priorities needs to be set. This is why visuals and animations are priorities but i hope that they will make improve on AI's, especially walking in urbanised areas, intelligent move inside buildings etc.

[Tonci87 163]

Improving the AI should have a very high priority.

But guys, I really think that the armor penetration system should be improved as well. IF has proven that this is possible to some degree.

[purepassion 22]

Pure has a top secret mole working at the BIS FOB in Mnisek pod brdy, CZ. Just joking. Not a mole if I know it. :rolleyes:

YES. CM, you're just joking. He's just joking. He definitely is.

pssh he's still in the mud over there :blues:

Tonci, I think you're absolutely right. Even while the IF implementation was hackier than right, it still works :) I hope that at least some more component driven damage with better special effects and stuff like turrets being blown off from the hull will be implemented! I think if people would see parts being seperately blown away, it would already make a big difference as opposed to the current "switch to wreckmodel".

[fragmachine 12]

You're right, old hitbox system should be changed with new penetration system. ArmA series has always been about infantry - and that if tanks have old hitpoint system or realistic armor system HAVE impact on infantry! I agree with you on that but im afraid that if something is added something must be cutted.

[metalcraze 290]

Look at the damage model especially on aircraft for example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_Online

I know what this game is. So it has better damage model (which is what exactly? Shooting off wings?) on the aircraft but everything else is inferior. It doesn't even have realistic ballistics for rifles/machine guns for that matter (0:30 shows that pesky cone of fire for german SMG).

And let's not forget ArmA also does a ton of various weapon systems that aren't just straightforward rifles/cannons.

Edited February 11, 2013 by metalcraze

[Tonci87 163]

You're right, old hitbox system should be changed with new penetration system. ArmA series has always been about infantry - and that if tanks have old hitpoint system or realistic armor system HAVE impact on infantry! I agree with you on that but im afraid that if something is added something must be cutted.

This has indeed a very high impact on infantry gameplay! In Vanilla Arma you need only a few RPGs to blow up any tank. It doesn´t matter if you attack it from the front or not. Now try the same using ACE. Shooting a T-90 or M1A1 with RPGs from the front is an extremely bad idea. You need to think of ways to get behind it, or at least on its flank.

[maddogx 13]

Yet again, the "confirmed features" thread mutates into a "cool features we'd like to have" discussion. ;)

[Smurf 12]

That happens when there is absolutely nothing else to discuss.

Not our fault. :rolleyes:

[metalcraze 290]

Do you remember that at the release of arma 2, you could destroy a tank with machinegunfire? The Armor penetration model is based on HP. It shouldn´t be like that.

And that totally wasn't because .50 cal bullet in MG behaved like a .50cal bullet shot from an antimateriel rifle?

If it's HP based why shooting 500 bullets with M249 does no damage to M1A1 but shooting at it with AT4 does (and even then it varies depending on where you shoot - shooting from the front does zero damage to 'hull')

That's because it's not as simple as simply based on HP however all components do have HP. Which is different from other games that simulate degrees of component damage how?

Unless it's the binary "component is okay" / "component is fubar" after the given shot was considered as penetrating of course.

The problem of ArmA is not that there is something wrong with how it does component damage (not that it can't be improved by adding more components for example and doing rebalance closer to ACE) - the problem is that the visual representation of it is way too simple.

Several hits from AT4 to the front won't damage the hull or kill the crew but they will make the barrel of the turret unusable. In the game it's represented as barrel getting stuck in the facing-down position instead of being blown off or messed up.

Edited February 11, 2013 by metalcraze

[Tonci87 163]

And that totally wasn't because .50 cal bullet in MG behaved like a .50cal bullet shot from an antimateriel rifle?

If it's HP based why shooting 500 bullets with M249 does no damage to M1A1 but shooting at it with AT4 does (and even then it varies depending on where you shoot - shooting from the front does zero damage to 'hull')

That's because it's not as simple as simply based on HP however all components do have HP. Which is different from other games that simulate degrees of component damage how?

Unless it's the binary "component is okay" / "component is fubar" after the given shot was considered as penetrating of course.

The problem of ArmA is not that there is something wrong with how it does component damage (not that it can't be improved by adding more components for example and doing rebalance closer to ACE) - the problem is that the visual representation of it is way too simple.

Several hits from AT4 to the front won't damage the hull or kill the crew but they will make the barrel of the turret unusable. In the game it's represented as barrel getting stuck in the facing-down position instead of being blown off or messed up.

Dude you are totally wrong. I didn´t mention 50. cal MG´s right? All you needed were a few SAWs. Several hits to the front will make the thing explode, unless you hit the barrel of course, then the barrel will be damaged. I really hope they improve this for Arma 3

[metalcraze 290]

If it was due to HP and not misconfiguration then that would mean that .50 cal and even anti-tank shells are weaker than 7.62 when it comes to damage - which is not true.

[raptor90 1]

I know what this game is. So it has better damage model which is what exactly? Shooting off wings?

Ye, for example... But its far more more realistic than that "fireball effect" in Arcade 2 oh ARMA 2 , arma 2 though.

Here is a insight for you.

[metalcraze 290]

So according to you in order for ArmA2 to stop being "Arcade 2" it needs to ditch the wounding system (that is medics, locational damage and bleeding), the body simulation, the ballistics and material penetration for infantry weapons, advanced damage systems that go beyond "oh jeez the engine stops working in my tank cuz it got shot too much" and also all of its advanced weapon systems not present in WW2 Online among many many other things but add a wings-falling-off eye-candy to be considered a simulation?

[raptor90 1]

Well you have all the things which you described already in game even like RO2 ( with tank interiors, does not matter if only 2 tanks but still ) except those planes and few other things, but...

I don`t know, but current stage of Arma 2 ( i hope not Arma 3 sooner or later ) simply looks really like some arcade to me though.