3rd person view and difficulty levels

[EDcase 87]

Infantry 3rd person should not exist for ARMA.

I use it sometimes in vehicles because the views outside are unnaturally limited. Hopefully 6 DoF will be introduced to see out of windows better (like the Little-Bird) then it won't be needed at all.

---------- Post added at 16:44 ---------- Previous post was at 16:43 ----------

Dammit, read it wrong and thought it said "3d should be disabled at which levels" so said Elite.

You can 'Unvote' in top right

Edited April 4, 2013 by EDcase

[PN11A 2]

3rd person view gives you a sense of your body, first person view just feels like your along for the ride. Without 3rd person its hard to get covered correctly. I use that mod that changes 3rd person view to tighter and lower.

[Tr51 1]

hi folk

You could take away from Veteran and beyond, but I'm not convinced.

At the very least improve the FOV .... it is really tiring for the eyes to go around like a horse with blinders.

or at least leave it to vehicles

bye.

[Sneakson 1]

3rd person view gives you a sense of your body, first person view just feels like your along for the ride. Without 3rd person its hard to get covered correctly. I use that mod that changes 3rd person view to tighter and lower.

Yeah, seeing your body makes it easier to figure out how well you are covered until you learn all the stances and adjustments.

[connorwarman 60]

If I has my way first person would be default for all difficulties....

But I don't have my way.

[lev 21]

Have we gotten any official word from BIS on whether or not difficulty settings will be standardized for release?

With respect to features such as:

-3rd person

-crosshairs

-maps that identify your location automatically

-maps that identify friendly/enemy locations automatically

[big_t 1]

I'm going to bump this enquiring about any news on this? Can we have 3rd person disabled by default on anything higher than recruit? The poll seems to indicate this is what the people want.

The more I play ARMA 3 in Multiplayer the more I realize that 3rd person is an exploit type wall hack that everyone seems to be using thus killing the emersion and realism.

I find myself playing in 3rd person and hating it. I play it because I don't want to give up the advantage of miraculously looking over hills and walls because my enemies will most likely be using the same exploit.

[ProfTournesol 956]

I'm going to bump this enquiring about any news on this? Can we have 3rd person disabled by default on anything higher than recruit? The poll seems to indicate this is what the people want.

Read the poll better. Nothing indicates that people voted for recruit only.

[Longjocks 0]

I'm left confused with this. Are we talking about separate MP and SP difficulty settings? The MP one being a general template for hosts/servers so they don't have to bother mucking around with all of the possible settings? This seems like a reasonable request, but I have no opinion on what difficulty setting it should be. It's too arbitrary without context of other settings and what it means to be playing reg/vet/etc. But it's important they be separate because I don't subject my SP experience regarding these kinds of (existing) game features to popular vote.

[Cannon_Fodder121 10]

Have server-side feature to decide to allow or disable 3rd person.

[chortles 263]

Read the poll better. Nothing indicates that people voted for recruit only.

Pretty much, in fact when one looks at how the poll was "built" in terms of the question and the multiple choices allowed: almost three-fourths of responding members who are okay with third-person on Recruit (vs. 5.7% who don't want any third-person), just over two-thirds are okay with it on Regular, and you still have just over a fourth who are also okay with it on Veteran.

[Messiah 2]

Have server-side feature to decide to allow or disable 3rd person.

This has always been possible, and sort of nullifies this poll/discussion. It's dictated by the server, so regardless of what you choose to play in, the Server will decide if people can play in 3rd person and 'cheat' in PvP.

[celery 8]

This has always been possible, and sort of nullifies this poll/discussion. It's dictated by the server, so regardless of what you choose to play in, the Server will decide if people can play in 3rd person and 'cheat' in PvP.

No, it does not "nullify" anything. If the server admin has to change any settings, the damage is already done with an absolute majority of servers sporting 3rd person view in missions where they shouldn't. I believe you should think about the significance of default settings in games and why they should conform to the most desired functionality in the long run.

[Messiah 2]

No, it does not "nullify" anything. If the server admin has to change any settings, the damage is already done with an absolute majority of servers sporting 3rd person view in missions where they shouldn't. I believe you should think about the significance of default settings in games and why they should conform to the most desired functionality in the long run.

What on earth has made you so uppity?

I merely stated that the server sets the rules about 3rd person view, regardless of your difficulty setting. Thus it doesn't matter in the slightest what the default is for the client, when the server changes it, thus the poll doesn't particularly have much sway in a PvP setting, which is the direction the thread has mostly taken when discussing 3rd person. It's not the same sort of 'cheating' in single play, is it now?

If you'd been more precise in your opening statement that this entailed server settings as well as client settings, then I'd have more to go on. Servers should be optioned as per client side in my opinion (set to recruit, elite, etc etc with the same default options), with the client being able to filter out the various 'skill' levels so you find what you personally wish to play with. As to where 3rd person comes into that, I've voted.

[celery 8]

I merely stated that the server sets the rules about 3rd person view, regardless of your difficulty setting. Thus it doesn't matter in the slightest what the default is for the client, when the server changes it, thus the poll doesn't particularly have much sway in a PvP setting, which is the direction the thread has mostly taken when discussing 3rd person. It's not the same sort of 'cheating' in single play, is it now?

The problem since Operation Flashpoint has been that servers run missions with 3rd person enabled largely because that's the default functionality without fiddling with any difficulty settings, config file or otherwise. You're basically suggesting that any and all difficulty settings that a server is using for a given mission are always conscious decisions on the admin's part, which is very much untrue and uppity indeed.

These are the various steps where playing a mission without 3rd person mode can fail:

1) A multiplayer game's default difficulty level is Regular to begin with, and even admins who know its implications may simply forget it on, not to mention automatic rotation.

2) Veteran, a difficulty level whose very name suggests the removal of most aids not necessary in a milsim environment, is by default a false friend for admins who might attempt to disable 3rd person that way.

3) The Expert difficulty has some settings such as disabled VON names, score board and kill messages that make it an unwanted difficulty level just for solving the 3rd person issue.

4) You need to change the server's settings in order to edit difficulty levels, and that is something that most hosts simply don't do, much less to accommodate for missions that are only sometimes played on the server.

The result: missions that would work better with 3rd person mode disabled are running with 3rd person mode enabled most of the time. The default disabling of 3rd person for the Veteran difficulty would remove three of the latter issues. So no, your uppity statement of the obvious does not make default settings a non-issue.

[Messiah 2]

It wasn't my intention to suggest that it was a conscious decision to not turn 3rd person off, you're reading into things on your own accord. I think you're making slightly broad statements about people's intentions with the servers and their settings. Are we talking CO-OP servers, PvP servers, Life servers? The spectrum of servers and users are far broader than your emphasis on 'I play PvP, I don't like 3rd person, etc' (or that is the gist I'm getting from these, and previous posts whilst you were still faithfully employed at BIS, I appologise if this is not the case). I could sooner state that for every server that has 3rd person enabled because they simply forgot/ignorance, there's probably one that chooses to keep it on. Anyway I digress, and if we're talking server settings, rather than client side (which is where I got distracted - i.e. what does it matter when the server decides at the end of the day) my early comment was wholey incorrect.

Regardless (you're clearly passionate about all things MP, and more informed than myself), I agree things need to be streamlined in terms of how settings are presented and laid out in a more intuitive manner so that server admins can make a more conscious and informed decision. That and (as you've pointed out) the difficulty/ranks could do with a spring clean to be more clear on what you're to expect from joining - the 50/50 split indicated seems fair to me, but that's my personal opinion.

[big_t 1]

Read the poll better. Nothing indicates that people voted for recruit only.

I read the poll perfectly fine thanks. The majority of people who voted wanted 3rd person by default only on recruit. You cannot deny that fact sorry please look again at the results of the poll.

If you were to combine those that voted for no 3rd person at and those that only want it enabled on noob/recruit mode that would be whopping 79%! << Bohemia please take note .

A large portion went a step further and said ok for regular too so ok duly noted. You cannot deny the main results of the vote though. 3rd person default = recruit mode, and possibly Regular.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Read chortles answer to my post.

[big_t 1]

Read chortles answer to my post.

yep read it, that post is not relevant to what I have stated: The majority of users want 3rd person enabled only on recruit. Please read the poll and resulting chart and try to dispute.

Many are ok with it also enabled on regular but the majority would like it only on recruit /noob mode.

[Dallas 9]

No need to remove a popular feature, just because you can't fill up a first person server.

If first person is so incredible popular as the poll shows, why are you having problems filling up the servers? No need to shame people, who like what you define as "n00b" features. People had similar issues in DayZ and DayZ had similar polls. First person view players, voted and voted, thus demonstrated how many people, wanted to experience DayZ in first person, yet they couldn't fill up their servers, because they, themselves filtered servers based on player count and obviously joined the nearly full third person servers, instead of joining a half full first person server and help out filling it up. They admitted, they'd rather join a full server, than join a first person server.

The great thing about ArmA is that you can modify every aspect of the game even difficulty, so you can get it just the way you want. Some people prefer mostly Veteran settings, but with crosshairs enabled, some with 3rd person enabled or others want to micromanage and tweak AI skills to their very specific needs. Instead of removing modable difficulty settings, you should put in an effort to build up your own server populations and it is in fact possible to populate your first person server, if you provide a stable and reliable experience with reasonable and vetted admins.

No need to penalize everyone else, when ArmA allows you to dictate whatever difficulty feature you want on your specific server.

[celery 8]

yep read it, that post is not relevant to what I have stated: The majority of users want 3rd person enabled only on recruit. Please read the poll and resulting chart and try to dispute.

Many are ok with it also enabled on regular but the majority would like it only on recruit /noob mode.

The majority of users wants 3rd person enabled both on Recruit and Regular. It's a multiple choice poll.

The great thing about ArmA is that you can modify every aspect of the game even difficulty, so you can get it just the way you want.

No need to penalize everyone else, when ArmA allows you to dictate whatever difficulty feature you want on your specific server.

If that's your main argument, why is it such a problem to you that the majority of people want 3rd person view disabled by default on Veteran and Elite difficulties? You can just turn it back on like you advertised.

[chortles 263]

The majority of users wants 3rd person enabled both on Recruit and Regular. It's a multiple choice poll.

This is correct, Big_T is seemingly-willfully misreading the chart and my prior post.

[Dallas 9]

The majority of users wants 3rd person enabled both on Recruit and Regular. It's a multiple choice poll.

If that's your main argument, why is it such a problem to you that the majority of people want 3rd person view disabled by default on Veteran and Elite difficulties? You can just turn it back on like you advertised.

My main argument is that there seems to be a discrepancy between the people voting here and the people actually making the decision ingame, just like in the DayZ community.

As long as many 1st person players prefer to join a full 3rd person server, instead of joining and help filling a 1st person server, no matter what kind of artificial obstacles you try to place for 3rd person players wont matter. 1st person players need to start congregating on 1st person servers, instead of thinking up measures to funnel 3rd person player on to their servers.

If you provide a quality 1st person server, people will soon queue up, waiting for an empty slot.

You have to accept that there are many ways to enjoy ArmA and that some people have other preferences than you.

[liquidpinky 11]

You have to accept that there are many ways to enjoy ArmA and that some people have other preferences than you.

This.

I would also like to add that you never hear Third Person preference players asking to have First Person removed as it is cheating or leetist, even though driving through woods and hiding under a bush is dire in third person and piss easy in first (pffft, first person cheater noobs). :P

I would also state that every time one of these topics pops up the First Person advocates tend to come out as a bit extremist, some even coming across more like bigots, in their demands and actions.

News for you guys, the ball isn't yours and everyone can in fact still play on once mummy has dragged you back in the house after playtime is over.

Just choose the playpark you prefer to use the swings on better next time, they are often quite clearly signposted in the server browser. Although maybe better signs may be required to be implemented by the BIS council to make it absolutely clear what is in place.

BTW, I play on third and first person, doesn't really bother me much either way as I know what is in store on each.

[tortuosit 486]

I prefer 1st person because of the immersion, playing feels much more intense. Because of your limited sight you must be much more careful...

I wish more people would prefer this - because currently there are veeeeery few servers running with disabled 3rd person. I was really surprised, the other day I wanted to play Wasteland (ArmA III) a bit, and searched for "hardcore" in the filters (I think this is the best search term for this) - there was ONE full server and one completely empty. What a tiny minority! All others seem to allow 3rd person.

Maybe also some administrators aren't aware: If they allow 3rd person, no one can play 1stp on their server any more, because of the massive disadvantage.

Edited July 25, 2013 by tortuosit