Controls Scheme & User Interface Feedback

[dmarkwick 261]

The layout you mentioned wouldn't be default, since that's a VERY personal preference in key layout, nobody is saying it isn't valid though, and dedicated weapon/equipment keys bring full customization to the table. For any of that to happen, BIS first has to even consider weapons and equipment on number rows, because I haven't seen a single post on this and there's danger we will end up with a scroll menu or a menu of some kind for vital, often-used Actions like weapon selection, in-vehicle interaction. :(

Pragmatically, the easiest thing they could do is open up the UI to modders. Actually, the easiest thing they could do is nothing... :) but in any case I wouldn't hold on to too much hope about the UI being just the way you'd like it. I agree it'd be good to have out-of-the-box, but I guess we'll just see.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Pragmatically, the easiest thing they could do is open up the UI to modders. Actually, the easiest thing they could do is nothing... :) but in any case I wouldn't hold on to too much hope about the UI being just the way you'd like it. I agree it'd be good to have out-of-the-box, but I guess we'll just see.

To delegate basic game design to modders is a crap solution. Every PC game worth its salt has dedicated key customizations, why reinvent the wheel? Besides, if UI sucks out-the-box, as it did in previous games, online multiplayer won't be bigger than it is today - if that's not a concern, then okay, they can do whatever they feel like it.

[Janez 507]

Dynamo;2216882']

X: Stance-Prone

C: Stance-Crouch

V: Stance-Stand

You can bind "up" and "go prone". I.E. I have "up = x" and "go prone = left CTRL". That way I press x once to crouch and x again to stand up. Same with LCTRL. However, this may cause issues if you have for example "lower weapon = LCTRL + R". Everytime you want to lower the weapon you go prone as well. If keys worked on release, not press, this could be avoided probably.

[dmarkwick 261]

To delegate basic game design to modders is a crap solution. Every PC game worth its salt has dedicated key customizations, why reinvent the wheel? Besides, if UI sucks out-the-box, as it did in previous games, online multiplayer won't be bigger than it is today - if that's not a concern, then okay, they can do whatever they feel like it.

They already have basic game design. You may not like it, but they don't have a mandate to appeal to Pliskins :) it's been in place for 10+ years now so obviously they like it. I'm only talking about pragmatics here when I say open up the UI to modders. The chances of you getting what you wish out of the box are rather small, but the chances of you getting exactly what you wish with moddable UI is rather large.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

You can bind "up" and "go prone". I.E. I have "up = x" and "go prone = left CTRL". That way I press x once to crouch and x again to stand up. Same with LCTRL. However, this may cause issues if you have for example "lower weapon = LCTRL + R". Everytime you want to lower the weapon you go prone as well. If keys worked on release, not press, this could be avoided probably.

Very useless operation, you're cramming a multi-dimensional-operate-any-way-you-want stance system into a one-dimensional cycle train and you can't go prone from standing, and vice versa.

Left CTRL key is now a modifier and is reserved for advanced stance animations by Smookie in ArmA III.

---------- Post added at 10:19 ---------- Previous post was at 10:17 ----------

They already have basic game design. You may not like it, but they don't have a mandate to appeal to Pliskins :) it's been in place for 10+ years now so obviously they like it. I'm only talking about pragmatics here when I say open up the UI to modders. The chances of you getting what you wish out of the box are rather small, but the chances of you getting exactly what you wish with moddable UI is rather large.

It's been there for 10 years, because the game had been small, one of the reasons it is small is because of the antiquated UI. They don't want ArmA III to hit big?

Look, a lot of people like the concept of the game, they can't get past the controls. I almost quit Armed Assault 1 back in 2006 myself.

[Janez 507]

Very useless operation, you're cramming a multi-dimensional-operate-any-way-you-want stance system into a one-dimensional cycle train and you can't go prone from standing, and vice versa.

Left CTRL key is now a modifier and is reserved for advanced stance animations by Smookie in ArmA III.

Sorry, Im not sure what are you saying here. And you can go prone from standing and vice versa as I stated above. You can go in any stance from any stance with only 2 keys not 3. Thats in Arma 2.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Sorry, Im not sure what are you saying here. And you can go prone from standing and vice versa as I stated above. You can go in any stance from any stance with only 2 keys not 3. Thats in Arma 2.

I.E. I have "up = x" and "go prone = left CTRL". That way I press x once to crouch and x again to stand up. Same with LCTRL.

You (needlessly) transition through a crouch stance before standing up in your example.

[Janez 507]

No, you do not. I suggest you start up Arma 2, bind two keys that you like to "up" and "go prone" and try it out.

[chortles 263]

It's been there for 10 years, because the game had been small, one of the reasons it is small is because of the antiquated UI. They don't want ArmA III to hit big?

Look, a lot of people like the concept of the game, they can't get past the controls. I almost quit Armed Assault 1 back in 2006 myself.

This is why the ARMA 3 community alpha should not be preorder-only, I want the casuals to flood the playtesting :icon_twisted:

Oh by the way, when I was suggesting a "half circle" radial menu, it was meant as an idea for not impeding one's view of the center of the screen where crosshairs or otherwise de facto point-of-aim would be.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

This is why the ARMA 3 community alpha should not be preorder-only, I want the casuals to flood the playtesting :icon_twisted:

I think a lot of the forum-dwellers would pre-order simply for the Alpha, then if positive first impressions come streaming across the Internets, a lot more random people will jump in, since they're either already playing DayZ, heard of it, or are looking for dat "realistix gaem". We need semi-derps here, even if they don't know jack shit, they are willing to learn if the controls are logical, accessible, streamlined, which means you don't have to battle them to function in this game.

[chortles 263]

Unfortunately "pre-order" DOES seem to be a usually insurmountable barrier... plus the forum-dwellers are going to have be thick-skinned in he process of proselytizing ARMA 3, especially when someone requires the forums-dwellers to sell them on the concept instead of just assuming that everyone will be receptive and share common understanding... but yes, we and BI need the semi-derps to playtest the community alpha, if only because so much of what's been visibly changed in ARMA 3 fundamentally seems specifically geared towards them!

I remember what Mondkalb said about the community versus new players, and my amusement when one of the community took offense ("hey WE've been demanding changes for years, why aren't you catering to US!"), since my personal response (whether or not I posted it) was that it was a matter of BI having to prioritize WHOSE problems would get fixed... also reminded of that one exchange between RobertHammer and Vespa over "features" (RobertHammer viewing Arma as being "about the weapons" while Vespa had a much different take on what Arma is about, and warning of the perils of features bloat).

P.S. Even RiE has mentioned the community posters having their own "competing interests".

Edited August 31, 2012 by Chortles

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Kinda agree, but either way the controls out the box better be streamlined, we can argue later whether Grenades should be mapped to number key 5, or 4 - the basic concept of playability better be in place for everyone to enjoy it.

P.S. I'd be hyping up controls problem, if everything remained the same in Alpha. :p

[chortles 263]

I look forward to seeing your hyping up of the controls problem. ;) I would definitely advise you to make clear what you intend to play and what you want the controls to be geared towards. For example, unit command is NOT a priority of mine, nor do I tend to make missions where there's player unit command, so I would for example support a 1/2/3/4/5/6-style system.

Mind you, apparently the command interface itself was apparently up for revision even before this thread came about to wonder what "SHOULD" the interface be revised TO, but presumably it's not yet ready for prime time or even public playtesting.

[dmarkwick 261]

We all have our fingers crossed :)

[chortles 263]

Again, to emphasize -- we have no details on ANY of what the command interface could actually look like by the community alpha, only that as of E3 and I believe Gamescom the A2-style interface was still in use but that at Gamescom the possibility of a quite different interface was being discussed internally and deemed okay to mention to the public.

Mind you, I'd prefer to have a UI that caters to "the individual character" first with unit command distinctly a secondary priority, even if that simplifies the extent to which one can command AI squadmates to something more "corridor shooter" like... because I'm more concerned with (i.e. making or playing) the individual character in a 'mission' where he (or she) is NOT doing any unit commanding whatsoever, so at least I've an idea of where my priorities are.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

I look forward to seeing your hyping up of the controls problem. ;) I would definitely advise you to make clear what you intend to play and what you want the controls to be geared towards. For example, unit command is NOT a priority of mine, nor do I tend to make missions where there's player unit command, so I would for example support a 1/2/3/4/5/6-style system.

It's a problem of what came first: the Chicken or the Egg? Which is most vital: character interaction with weapons and the world as a single unit, or AI command? Current interface is 100% based around the AI command, because it takes up SO many keys, they were forced to introduce cycle via F and bunch of Actions and weapon selection on the scroll list.

Reverse everything, build from ground up, not top to bottom. Weapons > World interaction > AI command.

Some motivation for the Devs,

4kU0XCVey_U

Edited August 31, 2012 by Iroquois Pliskin

[dmarkwick 261]

It's a problem of what came first: the Chicken or the Egg? Which is most vital: character interaction with weapons and the world as a single unit, or AI command? Current interface is 100% based around the AI command, because it takes up SO many keys, they were forced to introduce cycle via F and bunch of Actions and weapon selection on the scroll list.

Reverse everything, build from ground up, not top to bottom. Weapons > World interaction > AI command.

Having considered it, I would say that the AI command is as important as the action commands. Squad management and the dynamics of squad tactics is one of the most important things that separates ArmA from other games. Like it or not, command commands are as paramount as action commands. However, we seem to have come to a decent solution where the number keys are contextual, no units selected = action commands, units selected = command commands. I think that works very well.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Having considered it, I would say that the AI command is as important as the action commands. Squad management and the dynamics of squad tactics is one of the most important things that separates ArmA from other games. Like it or not, command commands are as paramount as action commands.

Under the current mechanics, you can't have both AI command and not crap controls. Everyone uses weapons and equipment, not everyone takes up command of AI - choice is obvious, can't really fvck it up.

However, we seem to have come to a decent solution where the number keys are contextual, no units selected = action commands, units selected = command commands. I think that works very well.

Yes, yes, the problem is that we don't know if it's even considered.

Edited August 31, 2012 by Iroquois Pliskin

[pathetic_berserker 4]

It's a problem of what came first: the Chicken or the Egg? Which is most vital: character interaction with weapons and the world as a single unit, or AI command? Current interface is 100% based around the AI command, because it takes up SO many keys, they were forced to introduce cycle via F and bunch of Actions and weapon selection on the scroll list.

Reverse everything, build from ground up, not top to bottom. Weapons > World interaction > AI command.

Have to say I kind of disagree with with you. '100% based around the AI command' is just a foolish exageratation, and I've never known interaction with weapons to be as easy as just pressing one button in real life so I've never felt it to be all that bad, and my key board seems to have enough keys to cater for all the non Ai stuff so I'm getting by just fine.

There are many who view this as a combined arms simulation/real time strategy shooter and AI command gets exactly the attention it deserves. Sure freeing up the 1-0 keys for weapon selection, unitil an AI unit is selected is a good idea. But almost everything else posted seems to be about you getting the last word in towards pushing a BF3 style game on an ArmA scale. I have BF3 and scaling it up wont remove my regret, and I've played many of the 'classic' shooters over the years, but realy don't think of them twice now. Thankfully BIS have already stated that A3 will lose none of the current A2 features so I'm not actually too worried that much of this talk will have any negetive effect, and I'm sure BIS recognises that the AI in this game is in fact one of things that makes it unique. Sure many will gripe about it from time to time ,but at the end of the day few would argue that it's been done better.

Maybe its time to step back and see if your 'selfish desire to see this game reach great heights' isn't translating into 'homogenous shooter on low grade steriods'.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

I want to leave everything as it is, as OFP was, as ArmA II is, but to swap places certain things. F1 to F12 + 0-9 + Backspace + Space = You think 24 keys for AI command is rational? If the game can't have logical controls for a player, as he stands there! Alone! In the basic training area! If he's not able to intuitively control his character even in the basic training area, then there won't be any new blood in this game anytime soon.

[dmarkwick 261]

I want to leave everything as it is, as OFP was, as ArmA II is, but to swap places certain things. F1 to F12 + 0-9 + Backspace + Space = You think 24 keys for AI command is rational? If the game can't have logical controls for a player, as he stands there! Alone! In the basic training area! If he's not able to intuitively control his character even in the basic training area, then there won't be any new blood in this game anytime soon.

Maybe you underestimate general ability to adapt to control gamestyle, I can think of at least one, massively popular ArmA2 addon, that supports this ;)

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Maybe you underestimate general ability to adapt to control gamestyle, I can think of at least one, massively popular ArmA2 addon, that supports this ;)

DayZ argument doesn't fit here, DayZ is successful due to the map of Chernarus and MMO-like Hive server, which saves stats. If you point these same players to ArmA II, they'll tell you it "SUCKS". Again, these clunky controls are not fit for playing competitively online, where you have to fight while your CO is yelling, "DEPLOY THAT MG!", as you scroll the list of death and then ALT+F4 in agony. :(

"Why play ArmA II, when there's BF3? On the other hand, a Zombie apocalypse on Chernarus you say? Count me in, then."

[dmarkwick 261]

DayZ argument doesn't fit here, DayZ is successful due to the map of Chernarus and MMO-like Hive server, which saves stats. If you point these same players to ArmA II, they'll tell you it "SUCKS". Again, these clunky controls are not fit for playing competitively online, where you have to fight while your CO is yelling, "DEPLOY THAT MG!", as you scroll the list of death and then ALT+F4 in agony. :(

"Why play ArmA II, when there's BF3? On the other hand, a Zombie apocalypse on Chernarus you say? Count me in, then."

Well you can choose to decide why DayZ is successful, I'm just here to say that the control system isn't a barrier to popularity.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

I want to leave everything as it is, as OFP was, as ArmA II is, but to swap places certain things. F1 to F12 + 0-9 + Backspace + Space = You think 24 keys for AI command is rational? If the game can't have logical controls for a player, as he stands there! Alone! In the basic training area! If he's not able to intuitively control his character even in the basic training area, then there won't be any new blood in this game anytime soon.

Your right , it's challenging. And though I'd be happy to see improvements such as a reduced need to micro manage AI and maybe better handling of the spacebar and contextural elements (if possible) I think the rewards for learning a few of those 1-0 short cuts is worth it. Its THE game after all and as far as I'm concerned these are the elements that make it this game, they make it ArmA. And tell me I'm playing a BIS creation and not just a WASD banger with next gen graphics.

But I agree, knowing what sort of changes BIS may be considering would help better formulate all this posturing. Coz it realy would be cool to have multiple bindings to number keys

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Well you can choose to decide why DayZ is successful, I'm just here to say that the control system isn't a barrier to popularity.

Don't lie to yourself.

suhv-JI4OeY

The guy plays BF3, likes ArmA/DayZ, but probably won't be staying due to controls, which create absolutely shit CQB dynamics. I'm not saying ArmA should be, or ever will be BF or Quake e-sports, but there's a reasonable solution to provide entertaining, dynamic gameplay on small-ish TvT maps. Dynamics won't equal COD, Quake, Unreal Tournament, or BF, because long transitions between weapons and other animations used are the limiting factor.

We need the remove the irrationality, surrounding the number row keys from the equation, because if things stay the same for weaponry and equipment, Smookie's animations go down the toilet. Please, please don't lie to yourselves.

---------- Post added at 14:26 ---------- Previous post was at 14:19 ----------

Your right , it's challenging. And though I'd be happy to see improvements such as a reduced need to micro manage AI and maybe better handling of the spacebar and contextural elements (if possible) I think the rewards for learning a few of those 1-0 short cuts is worth it. Its THE game after all and as far as I'm concerned these are the elements that make it this game, they make it ArmA. And tell me I'm playing a BIS creation and not just a WASD banger with next gen graphics.

You'll know it's THE game when you can kill somebody with a TOW missile 3 km away. I can't believe people are in favour of the scroll list or the current weapon mechanics. Jesus wept. Tactical vests apparently don't exist and we're subject to World War I infantry mechanics.