Better animations?

[smookie 11]

Yes, there were some recent design decisions made to introduce ironsights mode into tactical pace.

[gliptal 25]

Could someone explain me in detail how the moving system works?

For what I got, you can sprint (shift+W or 2xW) and switch between walking and jogging (w+s or s+w): in the controls though "Combat Pace" is present, although it doesn't seem to do anything...

Yay!

[chortles 263]

Yes, there were some recent design decisions made to introduce ironsights mode into tactical pace.

Excuse me, but: HHNNNNGGHH :coop:

Now then... I would like to say, now that parallax was somehow seemingly implemented for the purpose of collimator sights, I'm actually cool with that -- my principle here is "easy aiming CQB, difficult (read: skillz plz) aiming long-range", which seems to be the principle behind the change in the crosshairs, and for "ironsights mode into tactical pace", I believe that "the optic dot sways within the optic frame" is a fair tradeoff, not least since the optic frame's movement isn't as... jarring as it is in Arma 2, thankfully.

I would therefore like to thank you, Vespa and whoever is behind these changes (which my earlier remarks were meant to convey "I think this has been planned for a long time now by the creative director and other Arma 3 development VIPs"). You're on the right track here! :D I look forward to seeing whatever movement speed (as opposed to animation speed) tweaks you guys will be trying.

Gliptal: TL;DR: combat pace = faster movement than walking while still having the weapon raised (at one point a dev said that it was precisely between walk and run speeds?) but walking accuracy is greater (this seems to be more important at long range than at short range, which I understand) and "combat pace" is fatiguing, though less than like jogging (Arma run) and sprint.

Edited March 6, 2013 by Chortles

[smookie 11]

I suggest totally rebinding your keys to your expectations because there is no better option. For instance, my current preference is:

W,A,S,D - general movement
V - zoom in
C - toggle crouch
X - toggle prone
Z - look around
2xV - step over
LCtrl (+ 1st mouse thumb button) - adjust 
Space (+ 2nd mouse thumb button) - tactical pace (temporary)
LShift - walking (Temporary)
LAlt - sprinting (temporary)
T - throw
Ctrl + t - toggle throw 
G - inventory
RMB - aiming down the sights (temporary/toggle) + hold breath

And there would be maybe dozen of people who would agree with me :)

Edited March 6, 2013 by Smookie

[Tonmeister 14]

... I strongly hope this is only due to alpha status.

its almost like reading an argument that nullifies itself based on your final statement. Maybe it is a reflection of the fact that it is an alpha and "things are subject to change". And where you've mentioned game in your reply, you should substitute the word Alpha there instead, and bring you views into some reasonable perspective

But I bought the supporters ed. to support the devs. If i wasn't interested in supporting the devs i would have purchased only the basic level.

[Ekko 1]

I actually can't see how someone thinks the animations were better back in ArmA 2, if "better" means unrealistic animation pace compared to movement speed when jogging and running, then I can understand, but then "better" would be a less used word in any ArmA 3 animations thread... ;) wink*

I love the new animations and the feel of moving around, but currently there are some speed issues occurring in multiplayer with me. But no need to worry, I have seen alphas with way bigger problems.

Thank you Bis! for a nice alpha start.

[Muscular Beaver 0]

its almost like reading an argument that nullifies itself based on your final statement. Maybe it is a reflection of the fact that it is an alpha and "things are subject to change". And where you've mentioned game in your reply, you should substitute the word Alpha there instead, and bring you views into some reasonable perspective

But I bought the supporters ed. to support the devs. If i wasn't interested in supporting the devs i would have purchased only the basic level.

Or maybe it was because I am concerned that it will stay this way, if I dont voice my opinion.

What do you expect? That I keep silent until its to late? Seriously...

As someone else pointed out, the OA animations were very well made. Duck run, run, walk, duck walk, very authentic, just the feel of the controls were clunky and laggy, and some animations were simply too slow, like changing weapons, or letting the AT launcher drop, or going prone while having an AT launcher in hand, raising your weapon up after stopping, not to mention going over fences.

But as it stands right now, the controls feel fine, with a few little exceptions, but the animations dont fit at all. They look very stiff and thus unrealistic and some are far too fast.

As I said, look at your char from 3rd person view and then look at him in ArmA 2. In ArmA 2 everything moves that needs to move, it looks very real. While in ArmA 3, the body barely moves, as if hes some kind of Adonis running with no gear at all and only has a body weight of 30 kg. Even the backpacks dont move a lot! Ther is NO WAY that this is authentic. Seriously, Im going nuts pondering why people dont see it.

And YES, I will say it again, I am quite embarrassed by the animations right now, when I want to tell someone that ArmA 3 is supposedly better than ArmA 2. But as I also said, its not only the animations. The trees, the textures, it looks worse than ArmA 2. That isnt only limited to land movement, btw.

I am only being honest here, and its kinda sad to see that some people take it personally, because that means that my opinion isnt worth anything to them and that it will most likely stay that way.

[chortles 263]

The point I was trying to make was that I think that you and the devs stopped seeing eye to eye on animations and speeds well before the alpha... hence my mention of some of what Jay was talking about, and the choice of Dyslecxi to give the first "impression setting" video (I think I see his influence in a bunch of these animations).

EDIT: As far as controls, I've heard that there's a basically-Arma-2-but-with-stance-adjust preset? Sounds more or less like the one that was used at Gamescom 2012.

Ekko, what are your speed issues in MP, are they not appearing in single-player?

Hey Smookie, didn't you personally mo-cap like over half of these moves while Rocket did the rest? Or so that was the gist of what Vespa said in that interview over a year ago on the BI site!

Edited March 6, 2013 by Chortles

[smookie 11]

Yes I did but of course acting crew was not limited to the two of us. Nevertheless, for gameplay purposes the mocap data had to be processed to fit the design.

An example: the step over animation was mocapped with one hand resting on the obstacle and the other hand holding the weapon and aiming (the primary concern of mine of supposedly realistic ArmA2 animation was the fact it made you defenceless). The legs obviously did not go so high. The design of the feature however had to be more universal then just limited to one type of height etc. and to make it super proper it would take insane ammount of resource compared to the benefit. So the solution was worked out in which the legs were raised slighty higher manually as well as to put the other rifle on the hand.

Also, on side note, I fail to see how ArmA2 animations were any more realistic than ArmA3, especially that the equipment/weapon weight factor is being brought up. It makes no sense to me, looking back at ArmA2 animations which clearly display no feeling of weight what-so-ever (the acting didnt even account for it).

[Nixo 10]

I like the new aninations and the smoothness. However, throwing grenades... It feels, too mainstream FPSish. You just fling the grenade. I ave thrown a live hand grenade and that's not how I would do it. I likes the previous arma animations but they could still be a bit inproved

[gliptal 25]

Gliptal: TL;DR: combat pace = faster movement than walking while still having the weapon raised (at one point a dev said that it was precisely between walk and run speeds?) but walking accuracy is greater (this seems to be more important at long range than at short range, which I understand) and "combat pace" is fatiguing, though less than like jogging (Arma run) and sprint.

Thanks, so this is what I got:

Combat Pace OFF:

- Sprint

- Jog

- Jog aiming

- Walk

- Walk aiming

Combat Pace ON:

- Sprint

- Jog faster

- Jog faster aiming

- Walk faster

- Walk faster aiming

I suggest totally rebinding your keys to your expectations because there is no better option. For instance, my current preference is:

W,A,S,D - general movement
V - zoom in
C - toggle crouch
X - toggle prone
Z - look around
2xV - step over
LCtrl (+ 1st mouse thumb button) - adjust 
Space (+ 2nd mouse thumb button) - tactical pace (temporary)
LShift - walking (Temporary)
LAlt - sprinting (temporary) 
T - throw
Ctrl + t - toggle throw 
G - inventory
RMB - aiming down the sights (temporary/toggle) + hold breath

And there would be maybe dozen of people who would agree with me :)

Could you please explain what "step over" is? And how did you put in toggle the crouch and prone positions?

Yay!

[metalcraze 290]

An example: the step over animation was mocapped with one hand resting on the obstacle and the other hand holding the weapon and aiming (the primary concern of mine of supposedly realistic ArmA2 animation was the fact it made you defenceless). The legs obviously did not go so high. The design of the feature however had to be more universal then just limited to one type of height etc. and to make it super proper it would take insane ammount of resource compared to the benefit. So the solution was worked out in which the legs were raised slighty higher manually as well as to put the other rifle on the hand.

The issue is not with the way you do it. In fact I think it's the correct way of thinking. The issue is with how artificial it looks. Maybe a better compromise should be found? There's nothing wrong with making anyone defenseless for a short time when stepping over stuff - it's just milliseconds of vulnerability but it's like that IRL too. If you can't mocap it clearly it's not possible IRL that way.

Vaulting in BF3 makes you vulnerable too for a short time - so why doing the same is so scary in ArmA3?

Now I'm not advocating vaulting just sayin'

Also, on side note, I fail to see how ArmA2 animations were any more realistic than ArmA3, especially that the equipment/weapon weight factor is being brought up. It makes no sense to me, looking back at ArmA2 animations which clearly display no feeling of weight what-so-ever (the acting didnt even account for it).

ArmA3 movement animations are better hands down.

I like the new aninations and the smoothness. However, throwing grenades... It feels, too mainstream FPSish. You just fling the grenade. I ave thrown a live hand grenade and that's not how I would do it. I likes the previous arma animations but they could still be a bit inproved

Yes about grenades. Please vote up the issue in my sig. There should be pin pulling and throwing. It shouldn't be instant. Not even arcade shooters do it that way.

Edited March 6, 2013 by metalcraze

[Muscular Beaver 0]

Yes I did but of course acting crew was not limited to the two of us. Nevertheless, for gameplay purposes the mocap data had to be processed to fit the design.

An example: the step over animation was mocapped with one hand resting on the obstacle and the other hand holding the weapon and aiming (the primary concern of mine of supposedly realistic ArmA2 animation was the fact it made you defenceless). The legs obviously did not go so high. The design of the feature however had to be more universal then just limited to one type of height etc. and to make it super proper it would take insane ammount of resource compared to the benefit. So the solution was worked out in which the legs were raised slighty higher manually as well as to put the other rifle on the hand.

Also, on side note, I fail to see how ArmA2 animations were any more realistic than ArmA3, especially that the equipment/weapon weight factor is being brought up. It makes no sense to me, looking back at ArmA2 animations which clearly display no feeling of weight what-so-ever (the acting didnt even account for it).

Huh? Moving much faster (velocity and reaction) with lots of gear (ArmA 3) vs moving much slower with lots of gear (ArmA 2) is more realistic?

Ohhhhkay. Whatever. Now I only feel bad for spending money on the supporters edition...

As a last comment: I read that you guys did the motion capture yourself? I can only suggest paying actors next time. They are there for a reason.

Edited March 6, 2013 by Muscular Beaver

[chortles 263]

Thanks, so this is what I got:

Combat Pace OFF:

- Sprint

- Jog

- Jog aiming

- Walk

- Walk aiming

Combat Pace ON:

- Sprint

- Jog faster

- Jog faster aiming

- Walk faster

- Walk faster aiming

No, it's actually more like:

- Sprint (fastest moving, no aiming, most fatiguing)

- Jogging (even faster movement, no aiming, somewhat fatiguing)

- Combat Pace (faster movement, aiming is a bit shaky, a bit fatiguing)

- Walk (slowest movement, aiming is better, not fatiguing)

Note that according to Smookie, the decision was made that combat pace can be maintained even when aiming through sights;

demonstrates the differences ("combat pace" appears at 1:13). Whereas many first-person shooters will force the character to move at walk speed when aiming through the sights; this was the case with Arma 3 after Gamescom, but "recent design decisions" (Smookie's words on the previous page) means that you can move at combat pace speed even if you aim through the sights. Edited March 6, 2013 by Chortles

[Tonmeister 14]

"Wah wah, its so clunky, and I cant play it because I am only used to CS-like controls".

Its silly...

I feel kinda ashamed...

The whole game now feels pretty cheap ...

Also graphics arent that great...

So far I am pretty disappointed and almost regret paying

In your original post you at least had the decency to state your opinions objectively. But after that every sentence was a cheap shot at the quality of an unfinished product. No one is saying your views don't count, but I imagine most people reading your post would find that your thread isn't just about the animations. You are either confused, or BIS are confused about their product

[gliptal 25]

No, it's actually more like:

- Sprint (fastest moving, no aiming, most fatiguing)

- Jogging (even faster movement, no aiming, somewhat fatiguing)

- Combat Pace (faster movement, aiming is a bit shaky, a bit fatiguing)

- Walk (slowest movement, aiming is better, not fatiguing)

Note that according to Smookie, the decision was made that combat pace can be maintained even when aiming through sights;

demonstrates the differences ("combat pace" appears at 1:13). Whereas many first-person shooters will force the character to move at walk speed when aiming through the sights; this was the case with Arma 3 after Gamescom, but "recent design decisions" (Smookie's words on the previous page) means that you can move at combat pace speed even if you aim through the sights.

Thanks for the video, I'm completely lost right now (mainly because the combat pace key seems to do nothing)...

Yay!

Edited March 6, 2013 by Gliptal

[Zorg_DK 10]

how do you walk? I can only do combat pace.

I like the animations and stances a lot, very nice. I just think it would be nice if you could make small jumps too.

[chortles 263]

Once again, Smookie, Vespa, I wish to thank you both (and hell, Jay, Ivan, Maruk, DnA, whoever's been backing you guys on animations inside BI) for coming to this thread and defending your design concepts and philosophy! I want you guys to know that besides the positive comments here the animations/movement/weapons handling are getting rave reviews outside of these forums too!

[gliptal 25]

how do you walk? I can only do combat pace.

I like the animations and stances a lot, very nice. I just think it would be nice if you could make small jumps too.

Please no, if there's something I really hate that is bunny-hopping...

Is there a way to toggle crouch and prone positions like Smookie was saying?

Yay!

Edited March 6, 2013 by Gliptal

[chortles 263]

At one point before the alpha Jay Crowe mentioned that he was using X for crouch-toggle, Z for both prone and stand, and C for combat pace with LShift as sprint...

[metalcraze 290]

how do you walk? I can only do combat pace.

I like the animations and stances a lot, very nice. I just think it would be nice if you could make small jumps too.

You toggle walking/tacticool pace with W+S

Basically when you move forward you hit S with your free finger and you toggle. Hit the key again to toggle it back again.

I've tried to reconfigure it to make Shift be a walking toggle and W+S being a toggle for sprint/jog but I was unsuccessful. Game won't allow me to use W+S in anything but default "walk/run" toggle.

[Vespa 1]

Once again, Smookie, Vespa, I wish to thank you both (and hell, Jay, Ivan, Maruk, DnA, whoever's been backing you guys on animations inside BI) for coming to this thread and defending your design concepts and philosophy! I want you guys to know that besides the positive comments here the animations/movement/weapons handling are getting rave reviews outside of these forums too!

Thank YOU for supporting us! It is nice to finally see reactions of the public. Definitely keep the feedback coming, we try to make the best out of it.

---------- Post added at 12:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:44 PM ----------

I've tried to reconfigure it to make Shift be a walking toggle and W+S being a toggle for sprint/jog but I was unsuccessful. Game won't allow me to use W+S in anything but default "walk/run" toggle.

This is weird, I can reassign anything on my steam copy. Are you sure you don"t forget to click OK or anything?

EDIT> Make sure to manually unassign W+S from toggle walk too!

Edited March 6, 2013 by Vespa

[Guest]

In my opinion Arma 2 was the epitomy of realistic "looking" animations. I have never seen another game like it. The soldiers feet hit the ground, and stayed on the ground, until the other foot moved forwards and the standing foot began it's stride. Animations were perfect and there was no floating at all.

However, it was this perfection that meant although the animation looked perfect, in terms of practicality, movement was very clunky.

The new system is much more fps style, "floating" where the animated soldiers tend to float a little as they walk, however, in terms of practicality, it makes movement a lot more fluid and brings a new dimension to the Arma series.

For video making, I prefer Arma 2, for playing, Arma 3 is vastly superior.

With some luck the dev's can tweek it to try and get a good comprimise.

[CombatComm 10]

Why is it that the ARMA engine has such static animation? From a technical perspective I mean. Grand Theft Auto and many other games today, the AAA titles I guess we call them, have fluid natural animations that blend together well. I understand that ARMA has computations that far exceed any of those games under the hood.

ARMA games seem like a bunch of static poses (3D modeled pictures so to speak) that instead of flowing into, we seem to "activate". Is a fluid natural transition from one pose to the next in a realistic time frame too much of a burden for the engine? Would it kill performance terribly? I ask out of ignorance and not judgement. While I am a sucker for the aesthetics, my gripes lie more with lack of new features and disappointing sound engine than the animations. Which are a marked improvement.

[Guest]

And @Vespa, as has been the case since Ofp in 2001, I fully support you and all the devs and you should all be very proud of what you have achieved with Arma 3! :)