In the future apparently human beings are not subject to inertia or weight.

[metalcraze 290]

Just set the top speed limit for turning.

When you can turn around at any speed as fast as you can move your mouse it's silly.

There should be a limit like 360 degree turn per 1 second.

So that means 180 per 0.5

So let's say you turn 30 degrees - you can do it as fast as you want.

60 degrees? as fast as you want

100? same

180 - now you hit that speed limit.

Because right now the game is less realistic than some arcade shooters. When I see dudes rotating like a chopper propeller while prone on their belly it cracks me up.

360 noscope frags are only a matter of time otherwise since the only thing that keeps ridiculously ridiculous ArmA3 frag movies from happening is low fps.

Edited March 21, 2013 by metalcraze

[drill 1]

That's really bad that BIS removed turning speed limitation/inertia of the soldiers in Alpha. That was one of the features in ArmA 2 (and early games in the series) which actually put the game on a new level of realism among most of other FPS. And that the features fow which I could "forgive" many defects and flaws of the game.

Without all those (this features, sun blind, etc) details that bring additional (and not seen in most other games) realism, I'm afraid Arma could actually become more-or-less just another one BF (but possibly of worse quality).

[ak1287 1]

So we were good for like, a day, and then everyone when back to the fear-mongering and elitism. I mean, it's OBVIOUS that this movement isn't working as intended for the final product; feedback is fine, but saying 'Arma 3 is CoD' is both dickish and premature.

[bars91 956]

I play Mil-sim airsoft. (yes yes I know, 25kg of gear is not 40 but still)

Having done enough firing-in-alot-of-gear-after-X km-hike I can safely say that ppl that claim A3 mechanics to be COMPLETELY unrealistic are not knowing WTF are they talking about.

(sorry to bash you so directly but that's how I'm used to solve things - straight on)

When in a combat(albeit airsoft) situation you are literally overrun by adrenaline, thus being able to pull off similar turns and side-strafing for a certain amount of time.

You just have to be in a good physical health(like most military personel are).

But I agree fully on the penalty after doing so for longer then say 20-30 seconds non-stop.

[PN11A 2]

If they could implement this without causing that slow response lagging feeling I am all for it, just in my experience something like this is to hard to get right.

[bars91 956]

If they could implement this without causing that slow response lagging feeling I am all for it, just in my experience something like this is to hard to get right.

Ex-fuckin-actly! Therefore now it's either proper controls without any penalty, or the shit/clunky ones like in A2.

So as of right now I'm more then happy with the new ones.

[Leon86 13]

Ex-fuckin-actly! Therefore now it's either proper controls without any penalty, or the shit/clunky ones like in A2.

So as of right now I'm more then happy with the new ones.

ravenshield did it right, well, for most weapons, some were unusable :P

[bars91 956]

ravenshield did it right, well, for most weapons, some were unusable :P

R6: Rogue Spear and the original Ghost Recon are still my ideals of infantry handling. :)

[Leon86 13]

Having done enough firing-in-alot-of-gear-after-X km-hike I can safely say that ppl that claim A3 mechanics to be COMPLETELY unrealistic are not knowing WTF are they talking about.

Full sprint with full gear and do an instant 180 staying at full speed. Easily done.

[metalcraze 290]

Full sprint with full gear and do an instant 180 staying at full speed. Easily done.

Going prone and rotating on your belly just as fast - even more easily done.

[bars91 956]

A proper stamina system is the cure for all this - not buttfuck of finally-good controls. (again IMO and based solely on my own PC and airsoft gameplay experience)

[metalcraze 290]

A proper stamina system is the cure for all this

No it's not. Stamina has nothing to do with the ability to rotate like a hurricane on your belly and instantly change direction to the opposite one at full speed

not buttfuck of finally-good controls. (again IMO and based solely on my own PC and airsoft gameplay experience)

Yes because we just want to ruin your precious controls by stopping extremely ridiculous stuff from happening.

When people will do instant 180 turns while armed with 14 kg anti-materiel sniper rifles - will you provide airsoft expertise on that too?

Edited March 21, 2013 by metalcraze

[ak1287 1]

There's a civil way to have this discussion.

This thread isn't it.

[keefehb 0]

A proper stamina system is the cure for all this - not buttfuck of finally-good controls. (again IMO and based solely on my own PC and airsoft gameplay experience)

No one wants to ruin the controls, simply make them more authentic.

Also, drawing on your airsoft experience to comment on the movement of actual soldiers is about as relevant as having every episode of Soldier Soldier on VHS.

[Leon86 13]

R6: Rogue Spear and the original Ghost Recon are still my ideals of infantry handling. :)

Yeah ghost recon, raven shield, they all use the same system, view is fast, but it takes a bit of time for the weapon to get on target, bigger movements take longer.

[chortles 263]

Yeah ghost recon, raven shield, they all use the same system, view is fast, but it takes a bit of time for the weapon to get on target, bigger movements take longer.

I think what he's trying to say is that the current state is still closer to the ideal according to him than Arma 2's were... basically "Take this and dial back" instead of " Take Arma 2 and dial it up".

The alarm bells should have gone off in your head after Vespa referred to using "fps standard" acceleration and smoothing anyway months ago.

[bars91 956]

I think what he's trying to say is that the current state is still closer to the ideal according to him than Arma 2's were... basically "Take this and dial back" instead of " Take Arma 2 and dial it up".

The alarm bells should have gone off in your head after Vespa referred to using "fps standard" acceleration and smoothing anyway months ago.

Yeah! Thanks for the correct explanation =) Somehow failed to do that right myself. A3 controls aren't perfect by any means - I see them an improvement tho.

Also, I'm pretty sure I read somewhere about a new stamina and weight system to be added to A3(not sure so don't quote me on that).

But IMO it would be the perfect system(or close enough) - movement based on stamina, weight, injury area(leg,arm) and weapon type in hand.

EDIT: Some of this has been implemented in various games, like Xenus 1/2, Ghost Recon, R6, Stalker, to name a few. So it surely can be done.

Edited March 21, 2013 by Bars91

[Leon86 13]

this would be my ideal :p

basically the mouse : view stays as is, but the gun behaves differently.

if you move the mouse to a new location the gun would take a bit of time to get there and might have a little overshoot, if you move the mouse at a constant speed the gun will quickly "catch up" so you'd still be accurate shooting a moving target.

Of course the variables should have a better response than real life, because it also takes time to move the mouse.

feedback control however, is a bitch and it'd be very hard to get right, otherwise it'll be a massive pita. although bi should have the data to get a system working right by analysing their motion capture. Still, a lot of work.

Maybe just using an acceleration limiter and speed limiter on the gun rotation and body rotation while keeping the view instant would be a better approach. You'd have to tweak the values per gun type, but that's not that much work I guess.

[PN11A 2]

So how would this work in CQB? When my weapon is up, i dont turn my head then move my weapon. Thats what it sounds like your suggesting there is no lag between my sighting and my rifle because I move them as a unit. You dont think this is trying to push too far for realism? I understand realism but there needs to be a line, because like I said before if you press the movement simulation too far you will lose all responsiveness it will feel like your in someones body and they are just slow and annoying. Like when your medication and your body doesnt do what you tell it.

[chortles 263]

feedback control however, is a bitch and it'd be very hard to get right, otherwise it'll be a massive pita. although bi should have the data to get a system working right by analysing their motion capture. Still, a lot of work.

Maybe just using an acceleration limiter and speed limiter on the gun rotation and body rotation while keeping the view instant would be a better approach. You'd have to tweak the values per gun type, but that's not that much work I guess.

The most likely reason that none of this would happen.

You dont think this is trying to push too far for realism? I understand realism but there needs to be a line

Dammit, did you have to use that argument? Now all the realism complainers are gonna consider you as one of the COD kiddies. :rolleyes: Edited March 22, 2013 by Chortles

[dnk 13]

Just going to leave that here.

I realize we're talking primarily about aiming inertia here, but this is surely related. Edited March 22, 2013 by DNK

[drill 1]

To remove hard fixation of gun to camera and then apply (at least) the limits/inertia to the gun which was in ArmA 2 isn't so complex task. But it will both save "good control" (because player could rotate camera as fast as he wants without any limits to mouse) and add some realism (no instant turn and fire to 180 degree ould be possible). So there're compomise and not complex solutions for the issue. The main question is if BIS would like to fix the problem or leave it as arcade as it is now in Alpha (and therefore step by step neutralizing unique and important features of ArmA series).

[dslyecxi 23]

The video cited in the OP is showing something that I have trained to do IRL, live-fire, while moving, and while firing with one hand. The reason I was so happy to have that situation occur in A3 was because of that fact - I've done this "for realz" and it has always driven me crazy that prior Arma games lacked the controls to allow for such movements. I have extensive training IRL for shooting - both from the military and from my pursuit of tactical training as a civilian - and pistols in particular are a strong point for me. That video is something I could absolutely reproduce IRL with those timings, from that range, with that kind of pistol, I've done it before many times.

Every complaint that can be leveled against proper mouse controls can be solved by simple aiming/shooting mechanics. Games like Rainbox Six and Ghost Recon, the originals, did this many years ago. A3 has some aspects of this currently, but they could (and should) be fleshed out further.

There are things wrong with how A3 handles certain aspects currently - for instance, turning should be restricted in speed while prone (something I've done a concept for already), grenades should be fleshed out (I'm sure you're familiar with my concept on that), and the recoil and aiming penalties in general should be changed (again, something I've done a concept for - not for 'the forums', but for BIS directly). The Arma series has always had fairly quick movement speeds, and I personally think they should be toned down throughout - but who knows if that's something BIS would go for.

Ultimately, A3's still an alpha, and there will be changes. What is there right now is extremely solid already, and a far better baseline than any prior game in the series has had, controls-wise. "Freeaim" is a junk system that should be retired - it has no basis in realism, except perhaps when prone. Sorry, but that's the physiological truth of how aiming works in reality.

The stockholm syndrome that some Arma community members have developed over the years of having to cope with busted, flawed controls is kind of remarkable.

Mouse movement represents your intent. Your crosshair is where you intend to shoot. It's akin to looking at something. IRL you look at a target and your weapon/sights move to match whatever you're looking at. Your crosshair/view in A3 represents where you're focusing your intent and trying to shoot - whether you actually can hit that point should be based on a large number of factors, and like I said - some of those are implemented, some aren't. You should not mush up the mouse response or add negative acceleration to the controls or any other such inertial nonsense, as none of that belongs at the human/computer interface. Those must be abstracted through other means. Period. To do otherwise is a fundamentally flawed system - and I'm not so blinded by fanboyism as to think that OFP, Arma, or Arma2 were anything other than fundamentally flawed in how their mouse controls worked.

TLDR, the sky isn't falling, A3 isn't final, and those of you crying "realism!" might want to pick up an object and see how fast you can turn around IRL. I am not exaggerating in the least to say that what you see in that video is something I have done for real, live-fire, while moving, and while firing one-handed.

[chortles 263]

Thanks for explaining in detail, Dslyecxi! Truthbetold I see shades of your grenade concept in the current implementation, but it's an admitted placeholder/WIP anyway so I'm not holding that much against anyone.

[sakura_chan 9]

I'm pretty sure that the new aiming is the best and biggest change since ofp 1.00. All the other stuff like lighting/scripts/vehicles blah blah blah is just eye candy, The aiming is really what makes a game. I can't believe people are ragging on this stuff...A3 is stuffed top to bottom with 100% pure awesomesauce. Its like they took good old ofp, made it super smooth, stuffed as many far-out daydream goodies as they could into it (render to texture, physx, heat distortion, ragdoll, customizable weapons) and then sold it for 1/2 price of their other titles. Sure, it needs a little tweak here or there, but I think we will finally get to see the ofp series in a final polished state. From that there will be no reason to go back to the "old ways"