Arma 3 Alpha lacking Arma 2's immersion and fear factor.

[fixmygame 1]

I didn't think that this should be on the wishlist thread because it's not a specific feature to be added, it's really just a topic of discussion.

With that out of the way I would like to say that what I want most for Arma 3 is the immersion and fear factor that Arma 2 possessed.

The best way that I can describe it is, when I got shot at in Arma 2 I actually worried about being hit. In other words, suppressive fire in Arma 2 actually suppressed me and made me think twice about popping my head out to return fire. I am hesitant to use the word "fear" because Arma 2 never made me physically scared, but hearing the cracking of gunshots in that game did give me a jolt of awareness and energy that Arma 3 isn't providing at this stage in development.

I'm not a psychologist so I can't say exactly what makes the difference between the two gaming experiences. But I have a few ideas about what might help...

...And before someone asks; No, I don't have the volume any louder in Arma 2 than I do in Arma 3.

First of all, when I played Arma 3 for the first time and watched the first game play videos of it, the immediate impression that I got was that it didn't feel like I was watching soldiers shooting guns at each other, it felt like I was watching a paintball match.

The sounds of the guns and the overall feel of using weapons in Arma 3 MUST be improved.

Also, at this point in the games development, I wouldn't say that the AI is "bad"; but it definitely feels like im fighting against robots. When the enemy detects you they always know your exact position, they seemingly never just have a "vague" idea of your location, which is unrealistic. But I wont talk about the AI too much as i'm sure there's already hundreds of threads about it.

How does everyone else feel about this?

Is Arma 3 showing improvement over Arma 2 this regard?

By the way, I'm not just finding pointless stuff to complain about. I love this series just as much as the next guy, and I've been around since before DayZ. But this game NEEDS to start feeling more like a war simulator and less like a paintball game.

Thanks for your time.

[Zansie 1]

I do absolutely agree. With arma 2 when in a city, I would stay in a position in a house rather than run around. Where as in this game, I don't care. Maybe because I'm only in the editor, but it doesn't feel, like you said "scary."

And the AI does know your position immediately, and the AI is on easy, of course this game is in alpha and is always going to improve. But I do agree with you the AI needs to feel like a player, not a robot.

And the guns also need improvement, they do have a better 'crack' I would say, I think just starting in alpha they are better than arma 2. But they need more of a boom, like you are shooting a GUN not a pop gun.

[Nexerius 10]

I think its too easy to run around in arma 3, its more fluid. Im sure the clunkyness and slowness of arma 2 helped. But the sounds are a bit... bad.

If they were louder, it would be much better. Would seem like a guy with a huge gun shot at you.

I also see that more people run around and gun than before.

[Mac 1]

yup its the movement speeds. Its too easy to move back and forth quickly and running is ridiculously fast. Im sure these things will be fixed.

[EDcase 87]

I get MORE of a feeling of danger in ARMA3 than in ARMA2.

I think because the AI engage from further and are very accurate.

AND I cannot expect to kill enemy as quickly because of the high recoil.

[Beagle 684]

I noticed that the immersion factor and lilltle immersive features even got dropped from ArmA II to ArmA:OA...I guess thats the way it goes.

Examples:

A.I. chat module and greeting from A.I.

Reflector sights in A2 helos actually worked, no additiona crosshair in veteran mode

Windshild glass that would go blind and later shatter when shot at at HMMWVs

Ear ringing from nearby large gun fire, explosions or grenades.

No excessive smoke trails for RPGs or ATGMs

"Reloading" and "Fire in the hole" shouts from A.I.

A.I. did not use radio voice when near....etc

and a lot more what got removes just from A2 to OA.

Seems leke for every new feature for OA a immersive one from A2 got removed.

Edited March 19, 2013 by Beagle

[Guest]

^^

This, I noticed many similar things too. It is quite strange to be honest.

[metalcraze 290]

Unfortunately OP is right. Yes you can say it's an alpha and you are right - some may be bugs. But some may be design decisions - dismissing them can be a mistake and if we are vocal enough about this - maybe BIS will bring our ArmA back. And I don't mean crappy HDR or mouse smoothing.

Here are issues I have noticed with the design:

BIS seems to have cut out player suppression. When bullets were landing near the player - aim shake would increase and the screen would brighten a bit. It did produce that "oh shit I need to get out of here" feeling.

ArmA3 certainly started lacking that atmosphere of war with all these annoying magical 5-seconds-to-heal medkits which in case of medic take you from bleeding and unable to move properly to fully healed in 5 seconds. In ArmA2 it was a lengthy process and heavily wounded soldier was unable to fight. In ArmA3 you just wave your hands at him as if casting a spell while he can still move like he doesn't have a bullet in the leg.

The soldier body also doesn't feel like it has inertia anymore when running. You can take off from 0 to full speed almost immediately (try doing that IRL with a loaded backpack). You can spin 180 degrees while being prone in 0.1 seconds.

BIS also cut out the blinding sun, replacing it with a ridiculously small light bulb floating in the sky that you can ignore even when not wearing sunglasses.

You can easily run to the top of an almost vertical hill. In previous games you had to walk... like real humans.

If infantry showcase is an indication of things to come - we can be facing another crappy PMC DLC campaign with annoying linear scripts that never work right - except now on a scale of a whole standalone-game campaign.

This appeasing-the-casual-crowd is now at a dangerous border and if BIS will continue this way - ArmA3 can end up following RO2 footsteps. Tripwire too tried to sit on both chairs, now they complain that CoD-kids are the ones who ruined their game, not the design decision to make it "accessible"/"streamlined"/"zomg we must think about casual players!".

Tripwire thought appealing to both crowds is a good way to make more money but naturally it backfired badly. Just like Derp Rising did for CM. Either you go this way or that way, there can be no middle-ground.

Edited March 19, 2013 by metalcraze

[bangtail 0]

In it's own niche, ArmA is king - while I don't want to think too negatively, it does appear that A3 is trying to enter into the realm of BF3 etc.

Now I like BF3, so that's not a huge problem, but where it might be a problem for BIS is that A3 will not be king in that arena, I doubt it will even be part of the royal family.

This, in turn, may well alienate the core fans and all you have to do is look at SWG to see where alienating your fans by changing the formula too much kills your game.

There are some really awesome additions, the SCUBA for example, so it's obviously not all bad :D

As I said, I'm not making any judgements yet, but some aspects of A3 are a little worrisome.

Edited March 19, 2013 by BangTail

[chortles 263]

In it's own niche, ArmA is king - while I don't want to think too negatively, it does appear that A3 is trying to enter into the realm of BF3 etc.

Now I like BF3, so that's not a huge problem, but where it might be a problem for BIS is that A3 will not be king in that arena, I doubt it will even be part of the royal family.

I'm actually perfectly happy with that for two reasons:

#1, I believe that you as a self-admitted BF3 fan can admit that the Battlefield "combined arms" aspect, as arcadey as BF3 itself implements it, is still a way better bridge than COD in the sense of "what mainstream analogue will people will have to your product"

#2: So long as BF4 doesn't include the generally-powerful Editor -- and why would it, when someone in the Battlefield community would probably be more creative than DICE and not be willing to let EA monetize their work -- then Arma 3's niche is safe. ;)

(Re: "more creative than DICE" -- ever since DICE's response to the color filters, I've tended to suspect that it wasn't just EA at fault but rather developer egos.)

I believe that a bunch of you are running up against intentional design decisions by BI about "where to take the series" being decided by their evaluating of "the underlying principles behind what made Arma work" and frankly, they seem to be leaning more towards "sandbox" than "milsim" -- for example, see what Jay Crowe told GameSpot about the grenade implementation "it's going to be dialed back because it's not versatile enough, but it was left as-is for the alpha because it was still preferable to Arma 2's version because now I actually use grenades at all!" which implies that the dev view (or his at least) is "too far in the right direction but still the right direction!"... I'm actually happy with BI leaning more towards "sandbox with future military-themed content" and look forward to more thereof. :D

P.S. Disclosure: Tripwire, I didn't jump aboard RO2 because it wasn't both too COD and not COD enough, I didn't jump aboard RO2 because I'm still bored of WW2 shooters... the moment they went WW2 again they lost me as a potential customer. :rolleyes:

Edited March 19, 2013 by Chortles

[LordJarhead 1721]

There's no JSRS yet, so that explains it :P

---------- Post added at 05:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:17 PM ----------

In it's own niche, ArmA is king - while I don't want to think too negatively, it does appear that A3 is trying to enter into the realm of BF3 etc.

BIS is not trying to get into this realm, BIS is just listening to those idiots who want A3 to be like that more and more!

but where it might be a problem for BIS is that A3 will not be king in that arena, I doubt it will even be part of the royal family.

Not really, ArmA/OFP was ALWAYS a genre of game for itself and there was no other game around that was comparable to what we experienced in Arma. Now its just Generation XBox flooding the forums and BIS is listening...

LJ

[chortles 263]

There's no JSRS yet, so that explains it :P

:lol: Good one... I imagine that you're already on the task? ;) Wouldn't mind giving an A3 implementation a whirl, but are you only planning compatibility with stable build?

[LordJarhead 1721]

:lol: Good one... I imagine that you're already on the task? ;) Wouldn't mind giving an A3 implementation a whirl, but are you only planning compatibility with stable build?

Actually I running a early basic A3 version of JSRS with the dev build right now. But the constantly changes BIS is working on in the next few month will make a solid release impossible. I would end up updating the mod each week, maybe even less ;)I can provide videos though :P

LJ

[bangtail 0]

I'm actually perfectly happy with that for two reasons:

#1, I believe that you as a self-admitted BF3 fan can admit that the Battlefield "combined arms" aspect, as arcadey as BF3 itself implements it, is still a way better bridge than COD in the sense of "what mainstream analogue will people will have to your product"

#2: So long as BF4 doesn't include the generally-powerful Editor -- and why would it, when someone in the Battlefield community would probably be more creative than DICE and not be willing to let EA monetize their work -- then Arma 3's niche is safe. ;)

(Re: "more creative than DICE" -- ever since DICE's response to the color filters, I've tended to suspect that it wasn't just EA at fault but rather developer egos.)

I believe that a bunch of you are running up against intentional design decisions by BI about "where to take the series" being decided by their evaluating of "the underlying principles behind what made Arma work" and frankly, they seem to be leaning more towards "sandbox" than "milsim" -- for example, see what Jay Crowe told GameSpot about the grenade implementation "it's going to be dialed back because it's not versatile enough, but it was left as-is for the alpha because it was still preferable to Arma 2's version because now I actually use grenades at all!" which implies that the dev view (or his at least) is "too far in the right direction but still the right direction!"... I'm actually happy with BI leaning more towards "sandbox with future military-themed content" and look forward to more thereof. :D

P.S. Disclosure: Tripwire, I didn't jump aboard RO2 because it wasn't both too COD and not COD enough, I didn't jump aboard RO2 because I'm still bored of WW2 shooters... the moment they went WW2 again they lost me as a potential customer. :rolleyes:

BF3 > CoD - no question and as I mentioned, I quite like BF3.

The problem with BF3 when compared to A3 is that BF3 is a PvPcentric game and A3 is pretty much anything you want it to be.

The editor is definitely what sets A3 apart from other games and I don't see BF4 having an editor like A3's.

I've already bought 2 copies of A3 and I enjoy it.

I do however agree with some of the issues other people are having with it but I'm reserving judgement until the final product is released.

Much can change between now and then :D

[chortles 263]

Awesome, I look forward to that. :p Although there's the possibility of a stable build release this week instead of just 'whenever a dev feels like it' as with the dev branch... does that affect your decision-making here?

[bangtail 0]

There's no JSRS yet, so that explains it :P

---------- Post added at 05:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:17 PM ----------

BIS is not trying to get into this realm, BIS is just listening to those idiots who want A3 to be like that more and more!

Not really, ArmA/OFP was ALWAYS a genre of game for itself and there was no other game around that was comparable to what we experienced in Arma. Now its just Generation XBox flooding the forums and BIS is listening...

LJ

Well since BIS are making the game and you claim BIS are listening to Generation Xbox, by mission of action, aren't BIS changing the game?

[LordJarhead 1721]

aren't BIS changing the game...

... without the will to fit into the realms :P

LJ

---------- Post added at 05:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:52 PM ----------

Awesome, I look forward to that. :p Although there's the possibility of a stable build release this week instead of just 'whenever a dev feels like it' as with the dev branch... does that affect your decision-making here?

I dont think so. There is not much made yet, mostly ported. Just the handheld weapons are new, I didn't got the configs for vehicles yet which is bugging me the most right now, but when I get the main goal is to understand the new "way" how they implement sounds now. After that, and after I got the JSRS scripts back to work, the next main goal would be to fit into the new filter techniques.

But back in Topic now ;)

LJ

[bangtail 0]

... without the will to fit into the realms :P

LJ

Lol - I hear ya :D

Great soundmod btw, love it!

[metalcraze 290]

they seem to be leaning more towards "sandbox" than "milsim"

Why are the two mutually exclusive all of a sudden when that's what the game was all this time?

ArmA won't be able to become CoD with tanks (aka BF3) on a bigger map and stay interesting to any of camps here.

People who want ArmA3 to be like CoD and BF3 hate complex gameplay because it stops them from just frag grinding in a random TDM.

People who want ArmA3 to be like ArmA won't go for a game that is just BF3 on a big map because the moment it takes less than a blink to do a noscope headshot from 100m - this camp is out.

And if you stay in the middle both camps will just complain non-stop.

I personally always liked the series because the game felt closer to real war missions where you need to think before you act. Even if it's just a simple take-the-village mission.

Not only fighting enemies, but fighting the environment when every slope and sun direction matter and limitations of your own soldier is the complexity no other game offers.

Edited March 19, 2013 by metalcraze

[Variable 322]

Unfortunately OP is right. Yes you can say it's an alpha and you are right - some may be bugs. But some may be design decisions - dismissing them can be a mistake and if we are vocal enough about this - maybe BIS will bring our ArmA back. And I don't mean crappy HDR or mouse smoothing.

Here are issues I have noticed with the design:

BIS seems to have cut out player suppression. When bullets were landing near the player - aim shake would increase and the screen would brighten a bit. It did produce that "oh shit I need to get out of here" feeling.

ArmA3 certainly started lacking that atmosphere of war with all these annoying magical 5-seconds-to-heal medkits which in case of medic take you from bleeding and unable to move properly to fully healed in 5 seconds. In ArmA2 it was a lengthy process and heavily wounded soldier was unable to fight. In ArmA3 you just wave your hands at him as if casting a spell while he can still move like he doesn't have a bullet in the leg.

The soldier body also doesn't feel like it has inertia anymore when running. You can take off from 0 to full speed almost immediately (try doing that IRL with a loaded backpack). You can spin 180 degrees while being prone in 0.1 seconds.

BIS also cut out the blinding sun, replacing it with a ridiculously small light bulb floating in the sky that you can ignore even when not wearing sunglasses.

You can easily run to the top of an almost vertical hill. In previous games you had to walk... like real humans.

If infantry showcase is an indication of things to come - we can be facing another crappy PMC DLC campaign with annoying linear scripts that never work right - except now on a scale of a whole standalone-game campaign.

This appeasing-the-casual-crowd is now at a dangerous border and if BIS will continue this way - ArmA3 can end up following RO2 footsteps. Tripwire too tried to sit on both chairs, now they complain that CoD-kids are the ones who ruined their game, not the design decision to make it "accessible"/"streamlined"/"zomg we must think about casual players!".

Tripwire thought appealing to both crowds is a good way to make more money but naturally it backfired badly. Just like Derp Rising did for CM. Either you go this way or that way, there can be no middle-ground.

Spot on. I sign on every word, I really hope these behaviors are just because of the development stage although it does feel like BIS really tried to have the game appeal to a wider audience. Too bad for the BI community.

[Varanon 892]

Spot on. I sign on every word, I really hope these behaviors are just because of the development stage although it does feel like BIS really tried to have the game appeal to a wider audience. Too bad for the BI community.

Sadly, I have to agree as well.

[upredictable 10]

Sadly, money talks. The Xbox,COD,BF3 Generation are here to stay....:(

[Alwarren 2765]

The soldier body also doesn't feel like it has inertia anymore when running. You can take off from 0 to full speed almost immediately (try doing that IRL with a loaded backpack). You can spin 180 degrees while being prone in 0.1 seconds.

I'm fine with some concessions on movement up to and including the new tactical pace. However, after that, movement becomes robotic, and it looks like the Benny Hill show. Running and especially sprinting should involve more jumpy movement. Sprinting takes away a lot of control in reality (especially if in combat gear), and the game should reflect that. That aspect of movement was better in Arma 2. Stopping from Sprint should not be instantaneous. Changing direction while sprinting should not be instantaneous. I actually liked that part in Ghost Recon Future Soldier (but little else) because when sprinting, you lost a lot of control over your movement. Turning sharp corners was next to impossible, you had to stop sprinting and then change direction.

BIS also cut out the blinding sun, replacing it with a ridiculously small light bulb floating in the sky that you can ignore even when not wearing sunglasses.

Sunglasses would actually have more than a mere fashion value with blinding sun if the blinding effect was dampened/remove while wearing them.

This appeasing-the-casual-crowd is now at a dangerous border and if BIS will continue this way - ArmA3 can end up following RO2 footsteps. Tripwire too tried to sit on both chairs, now they complain that CoD-kids are the ones who ruined their game, not the design decision to make it "accessible"/"streamlined"/"zomg we must think about casual players!".

Tripwire thought appealing to both crowds is a good way to make more money but naturally it backfired badly. Just like Derp Rising did for CM. Either you go this way or that way, there can be no middle-ground.

Unfortunately, I have to agree. I just hope the hardcore fan community will keep on pointing out these issues more vocally, and BIS listening to them. I am glad that some of the clunkiness of Arma 2's movement is gone, but some things are over-fixed in the current Alpha. Good thing it is an alpha still. Obviously appealing to a wider market is a business decision, but truth is that CoD/BF3 players will play CoD and BF3

---------- Post added at 18:53 ---------- Previous post was at 18:50 ----------

Sadly, money talks. The Xbox,COD,BF3 Generation are here to stay....:(

Te Xbox/COD/BF3 generation will play Xbox/COD/BF3. The market for these games is way too big to allow for another contender. The Arma series stands for something else; it simply isn't a game for everyone, just like Red Orchestra wasn't a game for everyone. Dragon Rising did the same mistake of trying to pull in both camps and finally attracted neither; it was a short-lived affair, so short-lived that there never was any sort of community around it. It wasn't something that appealed to either category of players, and was quickly forgotten by history.

I cannot believe that anybody will want that fate for Arma 3, and I trust that BIS will listen to the input of their fans.

[Psychomorph 1]

I skipped on ArmA2 because of the clunkyness and was glad to hear BIS improves the things, though I'm a realism orientated player and I too find that ArmA3 is a bit too fast.

BIS needs to slow down every movement (especially the crouched ones) a tad bit, also make moving up and down hill much slower and far more tiring (including much less stable sights/muzzle).

[Smurf 12]

Right now the game need some tweaks, not a whole transformation.

Since we had no significant updates in the Alpha so far, chill out.