Get in get out animation + more questions

[metalcraze 290]

None of the above statements is true. You played the game of just watched some random videos and read the rant from realism nuts around?

Perhaps you can explain to me how you can rest a weapon on some 'cover' without looking down the sights in RO2?

If Fire while in cover => Hollywood, wtf are you saying there?

Blindfiring (especially with automatic weapons) like in RO2 is a total Hollywood is what I am saying.

Someone already made the get in\out animations for the tank hatch in A1 and you had to climb the whole way to the turret to do so.

Did I say it was impossible? I'm saying that it will essentially lock you in an animation making you vulnerable. This isn't a problem in arcade games where you become invulnerable when entering the vehicle so you don't care but in ArmA it may be a big deal. So while I am all for animating stuff properly I'm against taking the control away from the player (which is what cover systems do too, since you take cover not how you want but how designers force you to while also limiting movement). There should be a balance between animations and playability.

[r20 10]

Today I dreamed about OFP geting out of hatch animation ;D

Weird

[frostwyrm333 1]

I am for slow animations, I hate so much when crewmen of destroyed tank instantly pop out and kill you. Vulnerability doesn't matter its realistic this way. You don't go in/out of vehicle all the time.

[Smurf 12]

Perhaps you can explain to me how you can rest a weapon on some 'cover' without looking down the sights in RO2?

Ok, I missunderstood you there. Anyway, you can do that with MGs and I really don´t see the point of doing that with any other weapon. In the end they have (and had for years...) a decent deploy\rest weapon system, which I hope that makes into A3 in some manner.

Blindfiring (especially with automatic weapons) like in RO2 is a total Hollywood is what I am saying.

Why? It is how I imagine how someone would do it. All in all it only serves to supress someone in a small room, otherwise it is just a waste of bullets. Rarely I use it or see someone using it.

Did I say it was impossible? I'm saying that it will essentially lock you in an animation making you vulnerable. This isn't a problem in arcade games where you become invulnerable when entering the vehicle so you don't care but in ArmA it may be a big deal. So while I am all for animating stuff properly I'm against taking the control away from the player (which is what cover systems do too, since you take cover not how you want but how designers force you to while also limiting movement). There should be a balance between animations and playability.

Never said you said it was impossible. :p

Just saying that it was done and you had to climb on the top of the turret to do so. (first you had to climb in the hull, then in the turret then you enter the hatch)

I think its a valid point since it would disable the "OMG a empty tnk in a middle of a firefight!!11! i will enter it and kill ALL THE THINGS!1!11!" thing. You only would be "out of control" of the avatar for 1-2 sec for each animation, which in my POV is a good compromisse if you want to enter in killing machine like a tank. If you doing behind the front lines (were you should be doing it anyway) its not a big deal.

__________________

IF we get some get in\out animations they probably would be some generic ones which its not a problem since we've been living with generic reload animations for a long time now...

[Panda_pl 0]

Ok, I missunderstood you there. Anyway, you can do that with MGs and I really don´t see the point of doing that with any other weapon. In the end they have (and had for years...) a decent deploy\rest weapon system, which I hope that makes into A3 in some manner.

I think ACE2 system was better. It makes RO2 faint in comparison IMHO.

BTW: Yes, cover system was introduced because there were never enough buttons on controller to have convenient implementation of lean/stance change.

Why? It is how I imagine how someone would do it. All in all it only serves to supress someone in a small room, otherwise it is just a waste of bullets. Rarely I use it or see someone using it.

You are thinking within the confines of RO2.

It makes sense in RO2 because you are not given a realistic amount of hand grenades and because certain things are not simulated well. Also: spawn points are predictable so you know it's not your friends approaching.

IRL you would have never used blind fire in combat because:

a) IFF (there is risk of hitting something you did not want to hit)

b) ricochets and wall penetration mean you'd probably get hit regardless of staying behind corner

c) you'd attract grenades and return fire

d) throwing grenade into room is more efficient and...

e) if you're supplied with ample ammo you do not bother to conserve you probably have ample grenades too

f) you were trained not to use it, ever

g) throughout my reading I cannot recall a historical case of somebody using it

As for tank entering/exiting there is more complexity, like locking/unlocking combat locks, using bottom hatch for evacuation (or in case of Merkava the rear hatch) etc. Then there is the thing like in combat scenario you'd probably crawl out of hatch and drop to the ground asap but in safe spot you'd walk off the tank casually...

The basic problem with IFVs is in many cases you need to unload them in specific order (since they are so tight) so if one player goes AFK you're stuck inside forever. The Desert Storm Modification for Bradley (OA Bradley) was one of attempts to remedy that IRL and simplify the process of loading/unloading of that vehicle. It did help a lot but you'd still be stuck if 2 people at the door refused to exit and Bradley is quite spacey with just 7 soldiers inside (6 on benches + 1 in jump seat if jump seat is present).

It might improve realism but frankly it will lead to frustrating incidents and people will probably disable it with addons. And kinda like having the 4th crew member in tanks, it's not really changing much gameplay-wise.

[liquidpinky 11]

As for tank entering/exiting there is more complexity, like locking/unlocking combat locks, using bottom hatch for evacuation (or in case of Merkava the rear hatch) etc. Then there is the thing like in combat scenario you'd probably crawl out of hatch and drop to the ground asap but in safe spot you'd walk off the tank casually...

The basic problem with IFVs is in many cases you need to unload them in specific order (since they are so tight) so if one player goes AFK you're stuck inside forever. The Desert Storm Modification for Bradley (OA Bradley) was one of attempts to remedy that IRL and simplify the process of loading/unloading of that vehicle. It did help a lot but you'd still be stuck if 2 people at the door refused to exit and Bradley is quite spacey with just 7 soldiers inside (6 on benches + 1 in jump seat if jump seat is present).

It might improve realism but frankly it will lead to frustrating incidents and people will probably disable it with addons. And kinda like having the 4th crew member in tanks, it's not really changing much gameplay-wise.

They could use a second animation set for the eject order and keep get out for normal circumstances. This would then allow exits through tank escape hatches etc or rapid vehicle exits where you wouldn't turn and close the door behind you as you leave, diving out the door in essence.

[Choki 10]

Hello.

Will there be get in/get out vechile animations with doors opening like in Far Cry 2?

Will every button and part of weapon move like fire mode?

Since it is future war game will there be urban indoor combat, underground lighting? ArmA needs to improve 10 year old indoors disasters.

Will anything be removed to simplify game for new comers? God I hope ArmA 3 doesn't do the mistakes Red Orchestra 2 did.

About the vehicle anims Its a lot of work for BIS make animations for each vehicle. But at least for ground transport would be great

Everywhere USA in every game. (I am in NATO, Europe union country, not a fanatic ;)

Same Here. I'm tired of using Yankee soldiers. Or play with the "supposed" good of the planet. But we will not change something that is profitable for the market.

I can not imagine seeing Yankees players using Russian or playing games that do not involve them or kill the marines

They have enter and exit animations active in Take On Helicopters, so they certainly know how to do it but like metalcraze mentioned it is just a case of making it work in the combat environment.

would be great if they used the animations of Take On. It also would increase the reality.

And I remember in ARMA 1 the mod SLX made some vehicles posible to open and close. I do not think that this part be hard to do for BIS

Edited February 23, 2012 by Choki

[saltatormortis 12]

i think we shoud not panic around

they minimized amount of cars with the modular system.

and belive the developer that they make it moldule based for the player that want have instantactions...

[antoineflemming 14]

i think we shoud not panic around

they minimized amount of cars with the modular system.

and belive the developer that they make it moldule based for the player that want have instantactions...

Where'd you get this information, that the customization applies to vehicles?

[r20 10]

Just played TakeOnH. Medium and Heavy helicopters are frustating with torque problem. But light are very easy smooth and fun.

Would you like to have all that wind and dinamics and startup on A3? Would make most people stay away from helicopters=good.

Those helicopter animations definately could be in ArmA 3.

First flight http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q14qcGGl5Ss

That was yesterday. Today I fly tourists under bridges with medium helicopters.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

^^ @R20 think its already been stated that some degree of the TOH flight model will ake it to A3

would be great if they used the animations of Take On. It also would increase the reality.

It would be cool but not a deal breaker for me. The getin/out animations in TOH are quite a bite more sophisticated than A2's, multi stage and specific to particular vehicles, so I'm not sure it's a good way to spend resources. And as long as there is always access to a range of generics I'll be happy, anything to avoid a work load crunch on community addon makers is a good thing.

[Derbysieger 11]

Just played TakeOnH. Medium and Heavy helicopters are frustating with torque problem. But light are very easy smooth and fun.

Would you like to have all that wind and dinamics and startup on A3? Would make most people stay away from helicopters=good.

Those helicopter animations definately could be in ArmA 3.

First flight http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q14qcGGl5Ss

That was yesterday. Today I fly tourists under bridges with medium helicopters.

Did you update TOH to v1.03? Looking at the severe ground effect in the landing tutorial I'd assume you didn't. Also try the latest Beta-Patch (requires 1.03) for FM updates and Coffee

[r20 10]

Dont want to create new thread for this: How to use lcd display for camera or flir on TOH?

[papanowel 120]

Dont want to create new thread for this: How to use lcd display for camera or flir on TOH?

There is a place on this forum for this kind of question ;)

Just have a look on the TOH forum.

[onlyrazor 11]

I've been thinking... you could have the APC crew open the rear hatch on an IFV or APC, and then the passengers would get in (sans "Get In" action) and the armour would drive off. I can dream, can't I.

[metalcraze 290]

Ok, I missunderstood you there. Anyway, you can do that with MGs and I really don´t see the point of doing that with any other weapon. In the end they have (and had for years...) a decent deploy\rest weapon system, which I hope that makes into A3 in some manner.

Mmm you haven't played with ACE? It allows you resting your M16 on any object high enough and it makes all the difference in the world since if you fire standing you have a huge recoil but if the weapon is rested and you stand - you have about as much recoil as lying down. At the same time you have a full freedom of movement and a full freedom of observation since you can rotate your head too however you want so it isn't some static locked-in "gamey" animation. And again - you have a full freedom of selecting where to rest your weapon at.

If anything BIS should learn from ACE made for RV, not from RO2 which has it to a much more inferior degree.

Why? It is how I imagine how someone would do it. All in all it only serves to supress someone in a small room, otherwise it is just a waste of bullets. Rarely I use it or see someone using it.

Because it's a waste of bullets since you can't suppress anyone with blind fire since you don't even see where you aim and you won't hit anyone too - but an enemy will easily kill you through a wall (especially when we are talking 7.62mm AKs in the hands of an enemy in case of ArmA). If anything when you have no other option you suppress the enemy through a wall too - as a last resort. Since room clearing is done in a very different and non-hollywoodish way. There was a video posted multiple times in cover-system discussions showcasing how rooms are being cleared by the real world SWAT. It's nothing like what you see in hollywood-games.

Never said you said it was impossible. :p

Just saying that it was done and you had to climb on the top of the turret to do so. (first you had to climb in the hull, then in the turret then you enter the hatch)

I think its a valid point since it would disable the "OMG a empty tnk in a middle of a firefight!!11! i will enter it and kill ALL THE THINGS!1!11!" thing. You only would be "out of control" of the avatar for 1-2 sec for each animation, which in my POV is a good compromisse if you want to enter in killing machine like a tank. If you doing behind the front lines (were you should be doing it anyway) its not a big deal.

Why not give a player the ability to press W all the time to climb out? Like you start to climb out... you hear gunshots - you press S and climb back in (reverse animation) from any position you want.

That may certainly work.

Of course this is it when it comes to tanks with hatches only.

IF we get some get in\out animations they probably would be some generic ones which its not a problem since we've been living with generic reload animations for a long time now...

Mmmm. Generic reload animations are OK because most weapons are of mostly the same design (either a mag at the back or at the front of a grip and mostly at the same distance). Generic animations for vehicles?

I can only see it working for cars and hatch-entries (like in those tanks). But APCs and choppers? Planes? They are much more different from one another and without real life reference for mocap I doubt BIS will be able to do naturally looking animations. Note how even mainstream games cut corners when it comes to almost all vehicles but cars. Case in point - BF3 (which is praised for its animations by some) - a game which has much worse problems with teleporting in and out of vehicles.

Edited February 24, 2012 by metalcraze

[r20 10]

Have you guys played RO2? I dont see reason not to implement as many new features as possible for the sake of diversity, freedom, dinamic gameplay.

OFF:TOH NPC's look so robotic just standing. Wonder why bis dont make them: walk around while talking sit down idle...

[Smurf 12]

Alright, I see that anything that isn´t ARMA or from BIS is good enough... no point in discuss anything here.

May I ask if you actually played RO2 or just basing this whole argument in others console shooters (Gears of War, Brothers in Arms, whatever...) ?

[r20 10]

Alright, I see that anything that isn´t ARMA or from BIS is good enough... no point in discuss anything here.

May I ask if you actually played RO2 or just basing this whole argument in others console shooters (Gears of War, Brothers in Arms, whatever...) ?

1. Never said that RO2 is better than A2.

2.

3. RO2 and RO1 are PC games.

4. u angry?

[Brutus404 10]

Regarding the animation for mount and dismount (I have this strange feeling we have been over this before):

Wouldn't it be a solution to, instead of complete freedom of movement inside vehicles, to have some kind of rail system? For instance: in a chinook you will have 3 rails running in the back. Running onto the ramp while it is lowered will put you on one of the rails. You can move along this rail through the chinook, sit down and stuff, or switch rails (I suggest using WASD, with W and S to move forward/backwards, A and D to switch rails). Same thing applies to IFVs or even tank crew seats if BI bothers making immersive interiors.

This would solve the problem of uninterruptible animations: if bullets fly over your head when trying to climb out of a hatch, you just reverse and close it again.

Now this comes with the problem of the person in front of you not wanting to move on, so I think you should be able to push the guy in front of you to some extent to avoid traffic jams on the ramp.

[Smurf 12]

1. Never said that RO2 is better than A2.

2.

http://s16.postimage.org/sjm3jy3kx/r02.jpg

3. RO2 and RO1 are PC games.

4. u angry?

Wasn´t replying to you....

[Landmine 10]

Not sure if it was posted, but animated emplacement positions would be nice! I don't remember at which game I saw, but I saw jeep gunners crouching down, when they are aiming at the sky and "standing on their toes" when aiming downwards, not to mention when the vehicle was moving on a harder terrain, you could see the gunners hang on the weapons. Not much of a biggie, and maybe only SP compatible, but small things like this can really make an experience.

[r20 10]

I don't understand why ArmA 2 didn't have everything that VBS2 had.

Hope A3 will have some of those feautures.

(from 5:40) (interaction with objects, trunk, animations etc)

(real time editor etc)

(shooting out of car etc)

And now VBS is A2, A3 and everything else it was before?

Why not that editor instead of current one?

Seriously, why they don't add all that cool stuff by default in A2 or DLC?

WTF? Now I am not sure if A2 is "The ultimate military simulator" as on the box.

BTW: Are there any normal players online on VBS2?

Edited February 27, 2012 by R20+

[Tulx 10]

I don't understand why ArmA 2 didn't have everything that VBS2 had.

I concur. Upon weighing the advantages and drawbacks of this, I conclude that ArmA III should have...

ALL THE THINGS!!!

[zigzag 0]

I don't understand why ArmA 2 didn't have everything that VBS2 had.

+1

Why does not my game that cost a couple of dollars have the same thing as the simulator that cost a couple of hundreds of dollar.