Is Arma3 still the "Flagship"

[celery 8]

If BIS decided to make their game more "accessible", they would follow the BF3/MOH method by making it easy to get into and mainly about the action. If that is truly the case and they want to stray from what we all know as the ArmA milsim style of gameplay, then I won't be a BIS customer anymore and I don't think I would be alone.

Yeah, I think I read a dictionary entry somewhere that said "make accessible - to stray in the direction of BF3/MoH towards action and no realism".

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Yeah, I think I read a dictionary entry somewhere that said "make accessible - to stray in the direction of BF3/MoH towards action and no realism".

I bet you could find that on the Urbandictionary. :p

N0M4D1C, following BF 3 in pursuit of a share in an over-saturated market would be akin shooting yourself in the foot. BIS hold monopoly on the ultimate simulator and everyone, I mean everyone goes to ArmA for general simulation goodness, be they DCS: KA-50, Lock-On pilots, Silent Hunter or any other sim enthusiast.

Besides, look at all the DayZ hysteria by people who hadn't played OFP/ArmA prior to the mod. Clearly, they love the concept and complexity, but they would prefer a prettier package, and that would be ArmA III.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

^Well said Iroquois Pliskin excatly right.

What I find wierd about the idea of a CQB game mode is that I thought CQB was something that just happened in any space to small to swing a cat or any situation where you were within closing distance (~3 steps) of a target. Honestly not up what they teach on the subject today, but I always felt it occured often enough during the normal course of play. I think the connection between CQB, accessibility and BF3 is that twitch shooters like BF3 make folks feel more comfortable in CQB situations and less helpless. However I think what we have seen of the new animations and weapon handling in A3 may make the issue a moot point.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Pathetic_Berserker

[celery 8]

A CQB game mode = a mission, most likely pvp, with a certain set of rules which happens in a setting where CQB is naturally prevalent

The simplest way to make a CQB mission (intentionally or not) is to put all the mission-critical points of interest inside a settlement.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Why should BIS follow or copy EA/Ubisoft stuff? Just that people will say "OMG these missions/maps are like in shooter 123465!!" ? How should people think about + perhaps remember A3?

[antnxx 1]

Im hoping that ARMA3 will be more streamlined more solid experience that the arma2. Especially i hope that the netcode will greatly improve.

[bigpickle 0]

I heard that Rocket was the net-code development guy, not sure if its true but if so, then surely A3 will take a hit in that department if he's not with the team?

[maddogx 13]

Especially i hope that the netcode will greatly improve.

In what way? :)

[celery 8]

I heard that Rocket was the net-code development guy

He was an MP mission designer.

[maddogx 13]

I'm pretty sure Suma is the net-code development guy. Then again, I've always been under the (probably false) impression that Suma is the only one working on the core RV engine features. Surely that must be wrong. :D

[nodunit 397]

...

You know it's funny, because many of the things in A2 and A3 were requested by the community, things such as reloading on the move, changed crosshairs, more fluid movement system, a more versatile leaning system, quicker reaction time, aiming deadzone level so that you can go from always centered screen to moving arms as in OFP, jogging with anti tank/AA launchers, throwing grenades on the move, centered screen grenade throwing, changed crosshairs and so on.

Arma 3 isn't being "standardized", if that were the case then leaning would be out, replacing by sticking to walls to change ones height. Ballistics would be gone or not be as effecting as they are now, especially with the new A2 patch. You would take a dozen shots to die, making body armor pointless, damage system would be gone, no more taking a vehicle out through wheels and no more crawling or poorer aim because you were shot in the arms. Regenerating health, no gun sway, no freelook and a plethora of others.

What Arma 3 is doing is trying to cater to as many groups as possible. You see the pvp community has been asking for a more reactive, more fluid movement system in A3 from day 1, and they got it. there were complaints about the windows and crouch vs standing position in operation arrowhead. Crouching made it so you were unable to shoot from the window, but standing concealed nothing. Other times you couldn't fire over that rock while crouching, through that window period, or look above the grass without changing stance and blatantly giving yourself away, all of these things asked so many times by the community.

Edited August 22, 2012 by NodUnit

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

A CQB game mode = a mission, most likely pvp, with a certain set of rules which happens in a setting where CQB is naturally prevalent

The simplest way to make a CQB mission (intentionally or not) is to put all the mission-critical points of interest inside a settlement.

But then again it is not only mission, animations and movement mechanics are crucial here, and Smookie brings his expertise to the field, which could actually make CQB fun.

[rye1 21]

Yeah so basically, what Celery said plus "have player functions to allow the players to adequately operate in the CQB environment".

[chortles 263]

N0M4D1C is the reason Jay had to say back during E3 "let's not be afraid of that word, streamlined" and "usability not accessibility" :rolleyes:

Besides, look at all the DayZ hysteria by people who hadn't played OFP/ArmA prior to the mod. Clearly, they love the concept and complexity, but they would prefer a prettier package, and that would be ArmA III.

There's been a bunch of DayZ comments about holding out for a standalone -- whether from Rocket/BI or "hoping that someone else does it better" (from those who gave up on Rocket as a game designer) -- instead of continuing to play the mod, and in turn a LOT of "DayZ on the ARMA 3 engine please!!!" sentiment. They'll be disappointed of course, although Vespa justified why the standalone isn't using RV4, but the latter is a GOOD sign for ARMA 3 because of the implied positive first impressions of Real Virtuality 4's on-the-surface look and UI. :D

I think the connection between CQB, accessibility and BF3 is that twitch shooters like BF3 make folks feel more comfortable in CQB situations and less helpless. However I think what we have seen of the new animations and weapon handling in A3 may make the issue a moot point.

BF3 isn't as twitch as COD, but there's a worthy discussion of the compromises of game design in there -- and of course, ARMA's own "design priorities" (see the discussion of "consistent 60 fps" versus "destruction/player count/map size") STILL differ from those two franchises. ;) As long as the weapon handling and animations changes in ARMA 3 do "make folks feel more comfortable in CQB situations and less helpless" then it's okay if ARMA 3 achieves this end by different means.

A CQB game mode = a mission, most likely pvp, with a certain set of rules which happens in a setting where CQB is naturally prevalent

The simplest way to make a CQB mission (intentionally or not) is to put all the mission-critical points of interest inside a settlement.

I actually had a hopefully not too odd idea along these lines... recreate Hong Kong as depicted in Sleeping Dogs in Real Virtuality 4 with any needed "don't sue us" changes, then set an mission there. Bam, you've got a lot of places where longer-ranged weapons (or at least longer-range optics) are viable but even more where direct lines of sight are limited to "CQB" distances, while you can just throw in vehicles (tracked or wheeled, fixed- or rotary-wing, boats and even submersibles) to make it a more complex mission without having to make any further concessions in realism (authenticity is a different story :p).

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

I think the connection between CQB, accessibility and BF3 is that twitch shooters like BF3 make folks feel more comfortable in CQB situations and less helpless. However I think what we have seen of the new animations and weapon handling in A3 may make the issue a moot point.

It is a shame CQB has come to be associated with BF3 and/or COD. Real life is very twitchy and you will bend yourself, and crouch, and perform miracles to neutralise the threat, this is why Smookies animations are so awesome, but what's equally important is proper physics engine - you want to see that motherF drop down without delay and provide instant feedback as to your success or failure to neutralise the threat, because as it stands right now, some death animations are played with half a second delay, which is killer.

Everything considered, this looks to be an awesome combo for CQB in ArmA III.

[rye1 21]

Real life is very twitchy and you will bend yourself, and crouch, and perform miracles to neutralise the threat

;)

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Dayum... Scary for whomever would be inside. That's 170 degrees killing field from two assault rifles. :p

[rye1 21]

Well you have more efficient ways of doing things. Tactical pace could, potentially, allow for bursting into the room. But the environment should allow for 2 operators to fit through a door, or at least be able to get really close to each other so they can squeeze in within a good time limit; at the same time getting really close would allow for a better stack and less time between operators into the room and through the FF. Every second counts. Get what I mean by player functions to operate adequately?

[nodunit 397]

Something like that would require gun collision to be smaller/gone, the weapon to automaticly be lowered when so close to a wall, or fair amount of skill in the controls to lower and then raise the weapon as you pass through.

[rye1 21]

Have BIS mentioned anything about gun AND character collision? (Because it needs characters to be able to get through tight(er) spaces without randomly getting injured as they do now.

[Pulverizer 1]

I wouldn't mind if they cancelled the sci-fi Arma to better focus on making DayZ a proper AAA-title of its own. It's fun as hell even as a broken proof of concept.

[onlyrazor 11]

I wouldn't mind if they cancelled the sci-fi Arma to better focus on making DayZ a proper AAA-title of its own. It's fun as hell even as a broken proof of concept.

DISCLAIMER: I do not in fact mean the "or just stupid" part of the following, but I'm too lazy to make my own variation and upload it.

[smookie 11]

BIS cancel all things!

[krazikilla 5]

BIS cancel all things!

Nah, just keep on going^^

Work on the physics, graphics, lighting, map, animations, explosions and tracers as long as u need.

Only thing important is, that when u think the game is ready, keep it in development one month longer and add some featuers from wishlist. :)

[kylania 567]

BIS cancel all things!

Aww, that's too bad.