How to improve the Close Quarter Combat experience in Arma 3?

[metalcraze 290]

More thought and input from the DEV team needs to be put into the gameplay and gun mechanics to accomodate for long range and close range fighting at the same time. Americas Army 2 did it better than any game so far and is proof it's do able. So really it's up to them.

America's Army 2 is an unrealistic arcade shooter similar to Battlefield. Why is it being brought up?

But smoother player movement at realistic speeds and realistic weapon handling are needed. I'm yet to see a soldier struggle in CQC enviroments with standard issue equipment so the players in there game shouldn't either. If that means reworking the controlls, do so but it's up to them. It's easily done so we will see what happens and if not, then MOD tools.

Are you telling me soldiers float in air with their 1m long weapons passing through walls as they navigate through narrow buildings?

Because that's exactly how it is in America's Army 2.

[rye1 21]

America's Army 2 is an unrealistic arcade shooter similar to Battlefield. Why is it being brought up?

And why do you always ask questions like this?

Think about it: Good grenade system. That's a big fucking plus.

It's also something called fun. Holy shit, people buy fun.

[metalcraze 290]

I don't find America's Army 2 fun.

I find ArmA2 fun.

If you find BF-like games fun, why bothering with ArmA?

I don't bother with BF-likes after all.

There are no people on BF-&-Co forums demanding realistic gameplay. But there are constantly people posting in this forum and asking to turn ArmA into a boring frag-CQB-grinder.

Naturally I'm worried BIS may listen and ArmA3 will not be realistic.

Good grenade system is cool and all, but it wasn't what was being asked.

[dmarkwick 261]

America's Army 2 is an unrealistic arcade shooter similar to Battlefield. Why is it being brought up?

Are you telling me soldiers float in air with their 1m long weapons passing through walls as they navigate through narrow buildings?

Because that's exactly how it is in America's Army 2.

I think the point of the post is that AA plays well in the context of moving through buildings AND long-range combat. Players really get too tough of a time in ArmA moving through buildings, and the reasoning that it's more realistic because of the encumbrance of a rifle is discounting the notion that IRL you have a lot more senses and abilities controlling your movements than you do in ArmA. Obviously AA has "solved" this in their own context by reducing collision mechanics, in a primitive way they're "simulating" your ability to wrangle your gun around. Some similar system is needed for ArmA so that you're not fighting the game to move through buildings.

IMO the main priority in CQB is to make the focus on the fighting, not the collision.

[rye1 21]

AA2 offer that - you asked what it offers. Well, there you go!

It also offers a cool medical system. Look at it's features and decide for yourself - what would you take out of it for A3 and what wouldn't you.

Sure there are things you and I wouldn't.

If you don't find it fun, cool story. Other people might. Same with BF. Same with COD.

It's up to the individual.

What the hell is a frag-CQB-grinder?

I'm worried BIS won't listen and we'll be stuck with retarded hand throwing grenade animations.

We obviously have a difference of opinion and perception here.

My version of it means better grenade system means better CQB system. End of story. No grenade spamming, no crap like BF2/COD.

[SexParty 1]

Sorry mate but you have no idea what you're talking about. I've got 1000+ hours in AA2 and it is in no way an arcade shooter like the battlefield series. It's not a simulator but it's been the best mix of realism and skill in a fun FPS game to date and every game at the moment could learn a lot from it. Especially when it comes to the grenade system, weapon ballance and accesable medic/damage system.

Game wasn't perfect and it was low budget so sure it had some issues but ARMA isn't perfect either and thats why this discussion is being had. And that quote of mine was not reffering to any game, simply stating that ARMA can achieve what I'm takling about if the DEVs want it to. There is no need for a game like this to be great at mid to long range firefights and then lack when it comes to CQC, they are perfectly capeable of making it seamless at all ranges.

And as for your BF players don't want the game more realistic? Lol. You're really out of touch with things aren't you. All BF players complain about is wanting the game to be more challenging, slower and more realistic. So no, you're wrong again.

Nobody wants a frag CQC grinder except 12yr old COD kids and since they will never play ARMA you don't have that problem.

[metalcraze 290]

I think the point of the post is that AA plays well in the context of moving through buildings AND long-range combat. Players really get too tough of a time in ArmA moving through buildings, and the reasoning that it's more realistic because of the encumbrance of a rifle is discounting the notion that IRL you have a lot more senses and abilities controlling your movements than you do in ArmA. Obviously AA has "solved" this in their own context by reducing collision mechanics, in a primitive way they're "simulating" your ability to wrangle your gun around. Some similar system is needed for ArmA so that you're not fighting the game to move through buildings.

IMO the main priority in CQB is to make the focus on the fighting, not the collision.

Autolowering your weapon when close to a wall and autoraising it when not is an easy solution.

The problem is that in CQB America's Army plays very much like BF. You can just move back and forth through doorways blasting enemies inside easily.

To me people's issue seem to be because of the easiest way to clean insides of buildings in ArmA being the usage of SWAT-like procedures (they do work, while running inside guns blazing does not) but alas they require teamwork, which is something not present on all those Domi/Warfare/PvP public servers. If you don't want to work as a team clearly the best solution is to dumb down the game, not to learn to play it.

And I still don't understand what exactly people mean by "clunky movement" as I never had any issues with moving in ArmA and if I wanted to clean narrow takistani buildings I just used the pistol or SMG.

---------- Post added at 12:36 ---------- Previous post was at 12:26 ----------

Sorry mate but you have no idea what you're talking about. I've got 1000+ hours in AA2 and it is in no way an arcade shooter like the battlefield series.

Really? I guess floating camera, hip shooting, hopping, steady aim don't count? Among other things.

It's not a simulator

Exactly. So why is it being used as an example in a discussion about a simulator? And why realism and "skill" are mutually exclusive? And what do you mean by this "skill"?

There is no need for a game like this to be great at mid to long range firefights and then lack when it comes to CQC, they are perfectly capeable of making it seamless at all ranges.

So what exactly is wrong with ArmA's CQC? In America's Army 2 CQC is completely and utterly broken because you just waltz through buildings BF-style - clearly that means America's Army 2 is doing it wrong too. So tell me what is the right way of doing CQC?

And as for your BF players don't want the game more realistic? Lol. You're really out of touch with things aren't you. All BF players complain about is wanting the game to be more challenging, slower and more realistic. So no, you're wrong again.

They want realism so much BF3 got health regeneration and got rid of medics with soldiers jumping out of planes in the middle of the air to blast another plane with RPG and also come here wondering why ArmA has no bunny hopping :D

Edited April 8, 2012 by metalcraze

[-Coulum- 35]

Hole you shoot or observe out of. Hence the artificial or natural - it could be some dodgey builder and a dodgey wall that's cracked and created a hole to a demolition charge or chisel used to knock one out. The latter is a bit over-the-top (actually shaping the battlespace individually), so I stated a war environment as BIS have talked about in their videos. It would be great to see partially damaged and fully destroyed buildings which actually offer some advantages such as loopholes. Like mouseholes (that the Taliban use) but not for movement but more for concealed shooting.

Ah thanks for that explanation. Never heard of it being called loop holing. cool I learn something new everyday.

Metalcraze, although I understand your concern that Arma will be turned into a arcade shooter there are certain things BIS can learn from arcade shooters just like there are things they can learn from vbs 2 flight sims etc.. Things like auto lowering your weapon and more precise movement are in my opinion some those, when concerning CQC. But I do agree that we shouldn't just "copy and paste" from other games but rather take out a bit of this a bit of that and combine it to make a unique and realistic game. I think that Bis actually has a chance to make some awesome CQC fighting, the type that has never been made before. Brutal, quick and requiring teamwork and coordination rather than running and gunning into buildings and jumping off walls to make ones self a harder target. But first in needs to be smoothed out a bit so players don't have trouble performing it.

IMO to achieve this:

Auto lowering/raising is a must

more precise walking - not so much jump, allowing for small adjustments

less getting stuck on objects - right now it is not uncommon to run through a doorway and get stuck on the sides for a second or so because you just missed it.

new features such as kicking in doors

throwing back grenades

easier grenade throwing

cooking off grenades

being able to breach doors via explosives, sledge hammers, shotguns, kicking etc.

Are all needed

And when it comes to more precise walking and getting stuck less BIS could learn from other games. This does not mean BIS should also copy the speed of movements, accuarcy while moving, health systems etc etc. of other games -- just the best features that are realistic.

[dmarkwick 261]

Autolowering your weapon when close to a wall and autoraising it when not is an easy solution.

Yes that'd work, although I'd like to keyhold-disable that temporarily if I decide I'd like to shoot through a wall :)

The problem is that in CQB America's Army plays very much like BF. You can just move back and forth through doorways blasting enemies inside easily.

To me people's issue seem to be because of the easiest way to clean insides of buildings in ArmA being the usage of SWAT-like procedures (they do work, while running inside guns blazing does not) but alas they require teamwork, which is something not present on all those Domi/Warfare/PvP public servers. If you don't want to work as a team clearly the best solution is to dumb down the game, not to learn to play it.

I don't think that's the case. You also couldn't use those tactics in Rainbow 6 or SWAT and yet those games also didn't have clunky indoor movement issues. I think maybe it's just the case that engines designed primarily for middle-distance field warfare cannot do close-quarter indoor warfare as well. However I'd also think it was the case that improving technologies can solve that limitation.

And I still don't understand what exactly people mean by "clunky movement" as I never had any issues with moving in ArmA and if I wanted to clean narrow takistani buildings I just used the pistol or SMG.

Well the most common perception is described as "clunky", and I'd agree with it. As for tossing a smoke/flashbang/frag grenade, well forget it :D

[Whirly 1]

And I still don't understand what exactly people mean by "clunky movement" as I never had any issues with moving in ArmA and if I wanted to clean narrow takistani buildings I just used the pistol or SMG.

metalcraze why is it that you seem to be the only guy here that doesn't grasp what is meant by 'clunky' movement in Arma. I'm not trying to be a smartass, it's just that I genuinely can't understand how it could possibly be that you haven't noticed how fluid all other FPS games movements are compared to the movements in Arma. Also when clearing buildings standard infantry units generally use rifles and light machine guns.

[rye1 21]

sledge hammers

Fuck you doors.

[metalcraze 290]

@DMarkwick: R6 and SWAT still had floating camera design mentality. ArmA simulates soldier's body with all that IRL stuff of you walking with your head and eyes swaying.

Oh and yes you could use breaching procedures in them. Remember - stack by the door then breach commands? (don't remember if they were in SWAT3 but SWAT4 definitely had them, R6RS also has them, even R6V has them).

Saying that it would've been great if you could give a similar command to AI in ArmA3 because in ArmA2 thus far it only works with human players.

metalcraze why is it that you seem to be the only guy here that doesn't grasp what is meant by 'clunky' movement in Arma. I'm not trying to be a smartass, it's just that I genuinely can't understand how it could possibly be that you haven't noticed how fluid all other FPS games movements are compared to the movements in Arma.

Because they use unrealistic floating camera, while ArmA simulates body forcing you to be more careful and proceed at a slower pace.

I'm not trying to be a smartass but it must be a pure coincidence that those games are advertised as shooters while ArmA is advertised as a military simulation.

Also when clearing buildings standard infantry units generally use rifles and light machine guns.

Generally yes. And for some silly reason they don't strafe with an LMG through a 70 cm wide doorway. Reality is clunky.

Edited April 8, 2012 by metalcraze

[-Coulum- 35]

I'm not trying to be a smartass, it's just that I genuinely can't understand how it could possibly be that you haven't noticed how fluid all other FPS games movements are compared to the movements in Arma. Also when clearing buildings standard infantry units generally use rifles and light machine guns.

I think that what metalcraze notices is that in all the other games that are "fluid" running and gunning is the way of survival and CQC is composed of bunny hopping and strafing back and forth across door ways instead of clearing rooms out like in reality. And to a certain extent I agree with him. If we make animations to fluid we might end up with less realism, which is why I personally think we should keep the clunky feel to running and make it so that the slower you go the more "fluid" your actions feel. Surely that will make run and gun impossible while also making CQC feel more natural.

I don't think that's the case. You also couldn't use those tactics in Rainbow 6 or SWAT and yet those games also didn't have clunky indoor movement issues.

Yes RC and swat aren't clunky but you don't feel like you are actually attached to anything but rather a floating gun at head height. The problem is making things smooth without making it so that you feel detached from your in-game body. Its definitely a tough task.

I think maybe it's just the case that engines designed primarily for middle-distance field warfare cannot do close-quarter indoor warfare as well.

meh I don't think this is true. I believe it is possible to have both good ranged and close combat. Its just that in ranged combat you don't notice the flaws as easily so it feels alright, but when it comes to CQC they become glaringly obvious.

However I'd also think it was the case that improving technologies can solve that limitation.

I hope so... guess we'll find out.

Edited April 8, 2012 by -Coulum-

[metalcraze 290]

Auto lowering/raising is a must

more precise walking - not so much jump, allowing for small adjustments

less getting stuck on objects - right now it is not uncommon to run through a doorway and get stuck on the sides for a second or so because you just missed it.

new features such as kicking in doors

throwing back grenades

easier grenade throwing

cooking off grenades

being able to breach doors via explosives, sledge hammers, shotguns, kicking etc.

Oh but I completely agree.

My problem is that for people I'm arguing with the point of approach to the issue is "ArmA why u no play like BF" instead of reality.

ArmA is not trying to be "all other FPS", it's trying to be a milsim. So each issue should be approached from a position of how real soldier would do it - since for some reason in reality close combat never looks like something from America's Army.

If we make animations to fluid we might end up with less realism, which is why I personally think we should keep the clunky feel to running and make it so that the slower you go the more "fluid" your actions feel. Surely that will make run and gun impossible while also making CQC feel more natural.

Except in reality the slower you move - the more control you have. I have no problem with this. But soldier's body simulation must be there. It's a milsim after all.

Don't forget - in reality CQC is the most dangerous kind of combat, there's a reason why town fights are considered so hellish. And so they are in ArmA.

Firefights also tend to last for long. Surely if every soldier could just control himself just as perfectly as one does in America's Army - firefights would be over in a minute?

Edited April 8, 2012 by metalcraze

[onlyrazor 11]

being able to breach doors via explosives, sledge hammers, shotguns, kicking etc.

You forgot one.

. No,

.

What? They're legit tactics. They obviously work in real life. :rolleyes:

[Whirly 1]

Because they use unrealistic floating camera, while ArmA simulates body forcing you to be more careful and proceed at a slower pace.

I understand what you mean about the floating camera, but that doesn't explain why we get 'stuck' in Arma. We don't get stuck in the real world. Also room clearing procedures are very fast and violent, not slow paced.

Generally yes. And for some silly reason they don't strafe with an LMG through a 70 cm wide doorway. Reality is clunky.

Can you explain exactly what you mean, I would like to discuss this point in detail but first want to be sure that I understand exactly what you mean.

[rye1 21]

You forgot one.

What? It's a legit tactic. It works in real life.

Body breach. :D Used a lot in Fallujah.

Not actually flying ninja kick but more... bash down the door with your body.

Love to see some door charges though... mmm my donut charge is getting dusty.

[metalcraze 290]

I understand what you mean about the floating camera, but that doesn't explain why we get 'stuck' in Arma. We don't get stuck in the real world. Also room clearing procedures are very fast and violent, not slow paced.

- I agree about "stuck" argument. If that's issue is the only problem you have with ArmA's body simulation - I surely support fixing it.

- They are like that in ArmA2. When I played missions involving clearing compounds (meaning any mission in a village or town) we stacked at the entrance into the compound f.e. then first guys immediately moved in in two separate directions with 2 following them, killing everyone who we saw. Mind you the probability of having some losses was still there - but so it is IRL.

Can you explain exactly what you mean, I would like to discuss this point in detail but first want to be sure that I understand exactly what you mean.

In America's Army 2 (and not only, it's like that in almost every FPS) you can easily strafe sideways through a doorway (as an example of a narrow path) with your gun being at the ready. Even if it's M16 which is quite long and can't fit into the doorway. And not only that but you can strafe back and forth while firing which is very arcade-ish which is OK for an arcade game, but not for ArmA.

When passing through narrow paths soldiers lower weapons, while raising it back up when they get more freedom to do so. This solution was discussed already and it won't detract from gameplay while making the usage of SMGs and pistols much more effective inside those very narrow takistani stairways compared to, say, M16 - which is quite long, you can't just do 360 turns with it raised there.

The current issue is that even clunky M240 can be used to sweep buildings clean with barely any issues.

[dmarkwick 261]

@DMarkwick: R6 and SWAT still had floating camera design mentality. ArmA simulates soldier's body with all that IRL stuff of you walking with your head and eyes swaying.

Oh and yes you could use breaching procedures in them. Remember - stack by the door then breach commands? (don't remember if they were in SWAT3 but SWAT4 definitely had them, R6RS also has them, even R6V has them).

Well you're doing a good job of explaining why ArmA indoors is clunky, but not why it's a better result than a floating camera system. If Rainbow 6 and SWAT can get good, realistic gameplay indoors that does not suit run & gun tactics, and yet does not punish a player by making him wrestle with the geometry, then I say A3 should be the same way. Any benefit you get by removing the clunky geo-fighting will surely be reciprocated by your opponent's ability to appreciate the same, so I don't quite see the benefit of deliberately making it clunky, if that's what your point is. My point is: making it less clunky for everyone makes the change a null-game, but it DOES improve the feel and fluidity of the game. Net benefit is that everyone sees a better game.

---------- Post added at 15:20 ---------- Previous post was at 15:16 ----------

In America's Army 2 (and not only, it's like that in almost every FPS) you can easily strafe sideways through a doorway (as an example of a narrow path) with your gun being at the ready. Even if it's M16 which is quite long and can't fit into the doorway. And not only that but you can strafe back and forth while firing which is very arcade-ish which is OK for an arcade game, but not for ArmA.

When passing through narrow paths soldiers lower weapons, while raising it back up when they get more freedom to do so. This solution was discussed already and it won't detract from gameplay while making the usage of SMGs and pistols much more effective inside those very narrow takistani stairways compared to, say, M16 - which is quite long, you can't just do 360 turns with it raised there.

The current issue is that even clunky M240 can be used to sweep buildings clean without any issues.

I can agree with you on the point of strafing through doors, but I would suggest that those guys who do it in real life do not lower or raise their weapons, they simply orient their weapons to go in barrel first, easy to do when you can swivel your torso, your aim, and your head. Not so much in ArmA :)

To be honest, I wouldn't like to say what the best system would be. Obviously we all have our ideas, but one thing that does crop up as (mostly) unanimous, is that the current indoor system is too clunky.

[metalcraze 290]

I'm not for wrestling with geometry. I'm for keeping body simulation by which I mean movement affecting weapon sway in a realistic (motion captured) way and body actually making steps.

After all even floating cameras have some kind of "body" that doesn't let you to just go through a wall.

As for SWAT and R6 - well they aren't really realistic. The only thing that stops you from charging is that you die fast, but stuff like no weapon sway even when aiming and moving, no recoil, no ballistics, being able to float 1mm at a time is still there. Remember how simply adding more health made GRAW play so inferior compared to GR (since you can still turn off all the helpers)?

Edited April 8, 2012 by metalcraze

[Whirly 1]

I agree about "stuck" argument. If that's issue is the only problem you have with ArmA's body simulation - I surely support fixing it.

We agree. Cool.

In America's Army 2 (and not only, it's like that in almost every FPS) you can easily strafe sideways through a doorway (as an example of a narrow path) with your gun being at the ready.

OK so that's what you meant. Yeah that is unrealistic and it's not something I want to see in Arma. We agree again.

What I would like is the ability to move rapidly, smoothly and realistically through confined areas like this -

PHTko4yvzJ4&feature=relmfu

I think we all want the same thing, realistic gameplay, it's just a matter of solving the best way to go about it.

[metalcraze 290]

Good video - btw you can see them slightly lowering the weapon when close to the walls, while when they move into the room they raise it again. I would like to see a solution like that. BIS is adding faster walking speed compared to ArmA2 and I hope they will consider this. Just faster autolowering/raising speed for gameplay and it's perfect. Obviously the firing button should still be active since you can still hit enemy in the feet if he's too close in those bits of seconds you raise the weapon.

Edited April 8, 2012 by metalcraze

[dmarkwick 261]

As for SWAT and R6 - well they aren't really realistic. The only thing that stops you from charging is that you die fast, but stuff like no weapon sway even when aiming and moving, no recoil, no ballistics, being able to float 1mm at a time is still there. Remember how simply adding more health made GRAW play so inferior compared to GR (since you can still turn off all the helpers)?

Well by realistic I mean the larger gameplay, by that I mean how you as a player move through a building and how your battle plays out with opponents. The micro-gameplay stuff like weapon sway and recoil is not what I really meant. And, I never played GRAW, but I did play GR. Even that had a more satisfying CQB feel than ArmA though.

[-Coulum- 35]

Firefights also tend to last for long. Surely if every soldier could just control himself just as perfectly as one does in America's Army - firefights would be over in a minute?

Yes but it goes both ways. Firefights are made shorter when people get stuck running to cover, accidently jump out of cover when they were merely trying to get closer to the edge to peak out etc. etc. and are shot because of it.

I understand what you mean about the floating camera, but that doesn't explain why we get 'stuck' in Arma. We don't get stuck in the real world. Also room clearing procedures are very fast and violent, not slow paced.

Room clearing combat is very short and brutal like you say. It is more the general "fighting in the streets" that is so very slow in modern combat, because there is so much cover and movement must be slow and careful because every alley is a possible ambush. I think this is what metalcraze means.

You forgot one.

What? It's a legit tactic. It works in real life.

That looks pretty damn fun. It would probably be more effective than a flash bang too, the enemy would be so dumbstruck. once they got their wits back they would realize they were being attacked by ninjas, drop their weapons and flee.

In America's Army 2 (and not only, it's like that in almost every FPS) you can easily strafe sideways through a doorway (as an example of a narrow path) with your gun being at the ready. Even if it's M16 which is quite long and can't fit into the doorway. And not only that but you can strafe back and forth while firing which is very arcade-ish which is OK for an arcade game, but not for ArmA.

This is one thing arma should avoid at all costs. there should be no "dodge" strafing - that is, strafing that is used as a defensive measure. This is what many FPS have today and it makes CQC not feel like reality. Because in real life you don't strafe in and out of rooms shooting all the while. You strafe in and you shoot anyone in there before they shoot you. If you are not quicker then them you are not fast enough run back out the door again. In real life once you are commited to clearing a room out you can't go back. You either clear it or die trying. That's one of the reasons urban combat is so deadly. You can't recover from mistakes and all it takes is a small one. One game that I believe portrayed this well was ghost recon 1. Once you go in a room theres no turning back. R6 unfortunately didn't really do this well. The reason it appears to have is that the ai are so damn quick and accurate there is simply no time to retreat - but this isn't because of movement speed which is actually fairly fast.

I hope arma tries to accurately prortay this bruatility. i think a good way to start is making movement more "fluid" and controlled when you are moving slower. That way, if you go slow you can properly maneuvre yourself and engage targets, but won't be fast enough to do "defensive strafing" and what not effectively. You then can also move quickly to run away or someting but you will be clunky and unable to engage targets, and make use of strafeing to make yourself a harder target in confined spaces because you will not be in such precise control and will be clunky making you an easier target and making it so you have troubel unning out the door you came in easily.

Well by realistic I mean the larger gameplay, by that I mean how you as a player move through a building and how your battle plays out with opponents. The micro-gameplay stuff like weapon sway and recoil is not what I really meant. And, I never played GRAW, but I did play GR. Even that had a more satisfying CQB feel than ArmA though.

So if I understand you correctly, you mean that "floating" camera style may be unrealistic but it will produce realistic firefights. Am I corect? If so I agree that sometimes certain things must be sacrificed to achieve the greater goal - but in this case I don't think BIS has even tried to focus on improving CQC kind of stuff so it is to early to give up and take the easy way. I think it is still possible to get realistic CQC without the floating camera view style.

[dmarkwick 261]

So if I understand you correctly, you mean that "floating" camera style may be unrealistic but it will produce realistic firefights. Am I corect? If so I agree that sometimes certain things must be sacrificed to achieve the greater goal - but in this case I don't think BIS has even tried to focus on improving CQC kind of stuff so it is to early to give up and take the easy way. I think it is still possible to get realistic CQC without the floating camera view style.

I don't know that the introduction of the floating camera system is a desirable solution, I wouldn't say that, but something, something :) Like everyone else, I like the notion that your ingame body is always there. For one thing you get to see your shadow, which is a game enhancing detail IMO. But, it's main benefit seems to be underplayed, localised hitboxes. If localised hitboxes are not used to effect yet the player's body is still calculated, why bother? Aside from shadow generation (which could still happen if we just render shadow geometry) I don't see the full benefit. And if the benefit is more accurate geometry collision, well obviously it seems to be causing at least as many problems as it solves.

I wonder if a specific new collision logic could look after fluid movement, so that the barrel/player colliding with geometry makes you fluidly slide away from the collision, much as you would naturally IRL. Basically, the idea is that ingame you should be able to enter through a doorway as fast and as naturally as IRL, and that's simply not the case now. You always seem to spend a couple of valuable and unnecessary seconds dancing about trying to rattle yourself in. I dunno. Something needs to be improved somewhere, that seems to be generally agreed on.