Why the silence in marketing this game?

[Gunter Severloh 3952]

Concerning the AI, don't expect ArmA III to be having something similar to what has been carried out so far by the community for ArmA II (TPW, ASR, GL3...).

Obviously, many changes have been carried out in these regards, but basing myself on what I have seen so far the last years.

I would take all this with a pinch of hindsight. ;]

Good post thunderbird.

What i think BIS should do is outsource themselves, I mean the community has created an amazing array of addons and mods that alot of us use,

not implementing them into the core of the game to me at least would be foolish or rather dumb, I mean these mods

would cost them less money to have to test and develop themselves, it would still cost them money to implement it, and so forth.

Overall I think a player base would increase if the AI were doing things that all the addons and mods, and scripts from the community were integrated int he core game,

I mean look at all the AI additions made by the community http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?117674-AI-Compilation-List-of-Addons-Mods-Scripts-amp-Misc

BIS could put in the game without having us have to download something in order to improve them game ourselves!

so why not list all the things like vehicles/weapons/objects that people are here for instead of making this place full of people guessing what they're waiting for?

Already been done:

Arma3 confirmed Features

http://www.armaholic.com/forums.php?m=posts&q=14450

[avfc 10]

Or even looks like the Alpha and Beta for that matter.

Indeed, it only sets you up for disappointment.

[AlexVestin 24]

Already been done:

Arma3 confirmed Features

http://www.armaholic.com/forums.php?m=posts&q=14450

They're not the ones behind that list. Arent those just more successful guesses that the devs came in to confirm?

If something there for sure gets taken out of the game, chances are you're not going to hear about it from the devs for some time.

Maybe from a translated interview. No disrespect meant to the devs.

[Ekko 1]

Not to appear to be a wanton fanboy or anything - but if you think the ArmA AI is shit, then you don't really know what you're talking about :) perhaps you mean they're not... orchestrated enough? :)

You have a point there DMarkwick, most AIs in fps games are made to do simple things like shoot at player and take cover on a scripted route, and thats a vey good illusion of a great AI.

[Gunter Severloh 3952]

The Arma3 press coverage section of that page which are good "guesses" is a good place to start to get info on confirmed features.

Personally I dont really care what others think if those are the features or not, if thats what they say is there will be ingame I will take their word for it,

and when I see vids, and possibly play a demo of the game then I'll see for myself, you decide what you want to believe.

I dont think a moderator of such a major news/addon.mod/file site as Armaholic would post what he thinks are the confirmed features, or post what he wants on a page only

to thwart folks from believing that those are the real features, what has he got to gain by posting false info on a game, this isn't EA where everything

they tell you is more amazing then what it really is.

[rehtus777 10]

I'm confident in ArmA 3 improving the AI. Why? Because I play 'Iron Front Liberation 1944' and the AI are much improved compared to ArmA 2. If the AI in 'Iron Front Liberation 1944' is improved, then ArmA 3 will have AI improvements. Also, ArmA 3 will come out 8 or 9 months since Iron Front's debut, this will give BIS extra time to improve the AI even further.

[Gunter Severloh 3952]

I agree. To add what i said in my previous post before last about the AI, if BIS were smart they would take the developed mods, and scripts

from the community with permission (not sure if they would have to ask) and implement the new Ai coding into the game and make the AI

do what any smart, trained soldier would do at varying degree or levels, instead of reinvent the wheel per say.

To be on topic, i think BIS's silence has always been fitting for the series yet they still do well for themselves, I personally enjoy the no hype aspect of

the games makes them to be more about the game then about making a ton of money.

[rehtus777 10]

You nailed it, Gunter. Also, as another poster said earlier, "The game will sell itself on reputation." I got into ArmA 2 while playing BFBC2 on-line with a friend who turned me on to the MilSim. After listening to my friend and watching several youtube videos, I was hooked. I went out and bought a $1200 computer system - I've loved every minute of ArmA 2 ever since I downloaded the game. Also, it is a "thinking" game - it takes brains to run the editor and it has a huge learning curve to play the Milsim.

[^Th0mas^ 10]

I'm confident in ArmA 3 improving the AI. Why? Because I play 'Iron Front Liberation 1944' and the AI are much improved compared to ArmA 2. If the AI in 'Iron Front Liberation 1944' is improved, then ArmA 3 will have AI improvements. Also, ArmA 3 will come out 8 or 9 months since Iron Front's debut, this will give BIS extra time to improve the AI even further.

Are you kidding me? Gamespot gave both ArmA 2 and Operation Arrowhead a good score. 8/10 I think it was. Iron Front got 2/10 score.

And I quote Gamespot:

Filled with bugs and technical snafus Controls and situational reports are confusing Graphics and sound are terrible Multiplayer matches are hard to find and set up AI is absolutely awful.

"AI entities stand around doing absolutely nothing while receiving effective incoming fire; and sound suddenly cuts out or goes extremely quiet in the middle of critical briefings. AI pathfinding is also a huge issue, with non-player characters frequently getting lost or trapped on geometry, and enemies patrolling in endless circles, doing nothing of importance."

Let's say you manage to look past all this and struggle through Iron Front's interminable tutorial levels to get to actual missions; you only have complete chaos to look forward to, because enemy AI is completely moronic, allies are useless, and death will randomly hit you with no warning whatsoever. You might be walking along a friendly runway in your HQ during the first 10 seconds of a mission, about to climb into the cockpit of a Focke-Wulf 190, only to be summarily laid out by God knows what in the middle of your own base. Was it an enemy bomber? A piece of shrapnel? Friendly fire? A sniper? It doesn't really matter--have fun looking at another loading screen while the entire mission resets.

Multiplayer offers little respite, although at least you don't have to deal with much in the way of AI idiocy.

[frostwyrm333 1]

Not only graphics and physics, I believe that the animations will be the biggest change, they will bring lots of new potential. There will be also lots of smaller stuff. What has Arma 2 brought? Better AI, graphics and.. lots of other stuff. Don't forget patches and expansions....

Be patient, 17 days to GamesCom. And you will have your hands on it in less than 2-3 months.

@rehtus777 how exactly was AI improved in Iron Front?

[rehtus777 10]

@Th0mas. I mainly play the Multiplayer where you take on the AI in certain maps. Take my word for it, the AI are very good especially if you play them on expert - you easily get your butt kicked. Also, the AI (in multiplayer mode) are smart and a challenge....even the AI on your team play as a team. As for the Campaign, I will agree...the AI aren't the greatest, but the game is new and hopefully they are fixing that problem.

Yes, I've read the reviews and I disagree with most of them. The Graphics are really good (better than ArmA 2, IMHO) and it runs very smooth....very little bugs. I like "Iron Front Liberation 1944" - it is a challenge and a lot of fun.

BTW, I see that you 'copy and pasted' your large paragraph from Gamespot...... have you even played Iron Front? If not, then you need to play the game before you judge it. Again, the Campaign needs work with the AI, but the Multiplayer AI are superior.

Edited July 30, 2012 by rehtus777

[^Th0mas^ 10]

4:22 most retarded AI ever.

[-Coulum- 35]

Even if ai in ironfront is better than a2 (I don't know haven't played) I doubt it will mean that a3 will recieve the same improvements. It was my understanding that Ironfront only uses BIS engine, but has a totally different development team - am I wrong? Ironfront also has pretty detailed damage handling yet I believe a3 will be the same old system as in a2. But I am hoping a dev will correct me...

[rehtus777 10]

I'm just going off experience. I have played both games for many hours. The AI in ArmA 2 are pretty good, especially if you download certain mod's to improve their performance when playing the Single or Co-op missions. As for Iron Front, in the multiplayer mode, the AI run with me as a team to get the objective and we all support each other; the AI medic will come over and heal me when I'm injured and some of the other AI will lay down suppressing fire while I'm trying to take the flag. As for the AI that are my enemy, they are sharp and somewhat of a challenge for me (I'm an average player...so, others may think the AI are weak...but for me, they are a formidable opponent).

As for ArmA 3, I think I heard Jay Crowe say in one of the Video's at E3 that the AI were improved in one of the DLC's for Combined Operations (can't remember which DLC) and the AI were somewhat "over bearing"...so they toned them down a bit for ArmA 3. Also, if the developers of Iron Front come up with an improvement to the AI, you would think that BIS would ask them how they improved the AI so they could put them in ArmA 3. I believe that the Developers at BIS are ahead of the curve....the AI will be fine.

[-Coulum- 35]

I believe that the Developers at BIS are ahead of the curve....the AI will be fine.

meh, I don't share the same optimism as you do but I certainly hope you are right. One thing I will say is that when arma 2 came out there was lots of demos of the ai and how it was improved over a1.

Now there is absolutely nothing really being said. BIS actually seem to be avoiding showing us any real ai and recently from what I have heard, basically the ai is the same with tweaked configs to make for longer gunfights (asr but deeper under the skin I am thinking).

No doubt the ai will be better than a2 but I don't think it will be by the margin that many people want... And the thing is the ai are actually quite close to being "good enough". Just a final push to improve them and fix key problems in their behaviour and I think they would be really enjoyable to fight against, even if not particularly hard to fight.

But I am sure that there will be other ai improvements due to animations, and the design of the game/map. ie. there will probably be more and better configured cover positions for the ai, and if they are able to use the new stances effectively I am sure there will be a noticeable difference fighting them.

Anyways how did this become a topic about ai? On topic, I believe BIS is not showing anything new because they simply don't have anything to show that would make the community happy. Probably also working hard to fix problems with the latest patch and release Czech forces, which I am eagerly awaiting.

[rehtus777 10]

@Th0mas. Your youtube link is of the Campaign, we've already established that the campaign needs improvement. Try this link to watch the AI in the Multiplayer and listen to this man's commentary.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzFUbYsXcgo

[^Th0mas^ 10]

The only AI demo we have so far is the infantry demo from E3, and it didnt really impress me. He just killed one guy, some seconds later some guy runs out of nowhere and gets killed.

[Placebo 28]

I think this question has very clearly been asked and answered, Gamescom is in pretty much two and a half weeks, that will obviously be the next big Marketing/PR push for Arma3.