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

[LordJarhead 1733]

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

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

We had some at the dev build, a bigger one with 150 MB too. But I dont see any differences but a stats list and removed/reworked muzzleflashes wich look weird now^^

LJ

[bad benson 1733]

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.

my thoughts exactly.

while i like the "new movement" too i have to say that the changes apart from new features like stances and combat pace are just superficial. while you can move around more smoothly now the old real problems with the animation system remain.

- bad transitioning

- being stuck in animations with no ability to break the action

- corresponding with the latter: "dead ends"/missing fast connections in the animation tree which lead to awkward stuff you sometimes have to do when coming from a certain animation to another

- the whole animation system is basically the same except for said features

with the making everything faster we also lost a unique feature of arma which was that it was one of the few games where the feet of the player and the AI almost never were sliding like in almost any other game. they stayed in place properly which made it always look much more realistic. when cleaning up and revision was needed mostly new content in form of animation replacements and new moves was added.

so for me while i'm really happy with the alpha and am pretty optimistic that it will improve a lot on its way to the full version there's also a part of me that more and more feels like when arma 2 got released. what i mean is the realization that this is just a content update and most new features are graphical instead of functional.

and i couldn't agree more with this

but fighting the environment when every slope and sun direction matter and limitations of your own soldier is the complexity no other game offers.

my opinion was always that not being able to move like in other games made the gameplay. no matter if caused by flaws or design decisions. sure it would be nice to change your weapon faster and while moving (i suggested it myself) but if you think about it all it will do is introduce the "empty rifle mag - switch - empty pistol mag" procedure from ANY OTHER SHOOTER which makes people fight differently with no sense of consequence of anything.

same goes for grenades. sure it was horrible the way it was but crowe's statement about him not using them at all is just stupid. you could use them and i did a lot. not everything has to be measured by the best selling shooter that's out to date. while the new nade throwing is an improvement it also allows you to spam them which is just horrible. arma was always one of the few games where a grenade actually felt like a little pocket bomb that needed a careful procedure to use it instead of just a HE projectile fired from a always available second muzzle.

and if BI keep ignoring some of the major AI problems they will have to do what metalcraze described. compete as bf3 with bigger maps. PvP should always just be a part of the spectrum because you should never underestimate the power of arma's coop side. (i hate to mention it but..)dayZ shows perfectly fine what happens if you leave the creation of gameplay just to the players...

sometimes it feels like BI themselves start to believe what people who don't get what the game is about anyways have been saying for years: "arma is just a badly made clunky battlefield with bigger maps".

my hope is that those superficial changes are just a temporary marketing strategy to make potential new customers aware of the series and not the way it is going. people have to stop judging games by one single measure. press isn't everything. look what happened to whole genres like RTS just because they weren't flashy and accessible enough at their core.

diversity not fascism of accessibility. less patient people should just go play games for less patient people. problem solved.

[UbiquitousUK 11]

I would gladly take Arma 3 in its current state over the awkwardness that was Arma 2's movement controls. The negative mouse acceleration et al were the worst things about Arma 2.

[ak1287 1]

I have no rose-tinted glasses about Arma 2's movement; anyone who thinks that was realistic movement must have observed a bunch of retarded gorillas, or the dance party at a retirement community, and thought 'This is how people move, right?'

Arma 3's movement does have some issues (the previous poster mentioned that movement is too fast, and I think that's accurate to a degree), but a wholesale switch to anything resembling Arma 2's movement is a horrific mistake, at best, and willfully stupid at worst. There's a medium ground (which stays closer to the current model) that a lot of people seem to be refusing to see.

What Arma 2 did have right was the suppression, though. I'm betting that will come back (although to be honest, I can't swear that there isn't some form of it it already, because I didn't notice one way or the other).

[ProfTournesol 956]

The movements are obviously vastly better, thanks Smookie, even if they will need to be toned a bit but that's what an alpha is made for. The main problem is AI IMO. All those complaints about "cod downgrades" are drama queen much, until we see the final product.

[Reuben5150 2]

Hmm, Blinding sun and the suppression effect were two of the many things people complained about in Bf3, interesting.......

[Alwarren 2767]

I have no rose-tinted glasses about Arma 2's movement; anyone who thinks that was realistic movement must have observed a bunch of retarded gorillas, or the dance party at a retirement community, and thought 'This is how people move, right?'

I wonder why people think this kind of "argumentation" makes them come across as convincing, or mature. It does neither.

Arma 3's movement does have some issues (the previous poster mentioned that movement is too fast, and I think that's accurate to a degree), but a wholesale switch to anything resembling Arma 2's movement is a horrific mistake, at best, and willfully stupid at worst. There's a medium ground (which stays closer to the current model) that a lot of people seem to be refusing to see.

The movement in Arma 3 is way too fast. As I said, it is fine up to the tactical pace, anything beyond that is simple too fast. I don't think anybody is advocating going back to Arma 2's movement, we're talking about something realistic here. What a lot of people do refuse to see is that this game isn't BF3; any attempt to force a fully functional skeleton into this kind of motion must seem comical.

[ak1287 1]

I wonder why people think this kind of "argumentation" makes them come across as convincing, or mature. It does neither.

The movement in Arma 3 is way too fast. As I said, it is fine up to the tactical pace, anything beyond that is simple too fast. I don't think anybody is advocating going back to Arma 2's movement, we're talking about something realistic here. What a lot of people do refuse to see is that this game isn't BF3; any attempt to force a fully functional skeleton into this kind of motion must seem comical.

I wasn't actually trying to do either; I'm not going to attempt to convince anyone, because I learned a long time ago that attempting to convince people of anything they don't want to believe over the internet leads to brain aneurysms and chronic smoking. Really, it was just a joke, and you probably shouldn't take the statement THAT seriously.

I will stand by the meat of the statement, however; Arma 3 is CLOSER to how people move than any of the other Arma games. Of course there's tweaks that should be made, but the system as it stands right now is probably more realistic than most. I actually agree that sprinting is too fast, but everything OTHER than that is fairly realistic. Even the jog.

[Masharra 10]

I wasn't actually trying to do either; I'm not going to attempt to convince anyone, because I learned a long time ago that attempting to convince people of anything they don't want to believe over the internet leads to brain aneurysms and chronic smoking. Really, it was just a joke, and you probably shouldn't take the statement THAT seriously.

I will stand by the meat of the statement, however; Arma 3 is CLOSER to how people move than any of the other Arma games. Of course there's tweaks that should be made, but the system as it stands right now is probably more realistic than most. I actually agree that sprinting is too fast, but everything OTHER than that is fairly realistic. Even the jog.

unlimited "low" crouch without your thighs and calf's burning the heck out? go prone/ crouch/ sat down position and do 3- unlimited _{citation needed} 360's in one mouse turn? any if most movement up a hill is just near lulzworthy. imo

im sorta inclined to trying to record a 360 noscope

[LordJarhead 1733]

Lets put it together though: The animations are much better, far more smooth and they look more natural. But they are too fast. Even if they are recorded with real humans (what I really think they are, motion capture) then those people did not wear army clothes, gear, heavy equipment and weapons. I wouldn't believe that those could suite any real soldier out there besides special forces who just have needed equipment for one short mission.

Even if they are in hurry, like in this video where the dude gets hit four times, he is not making this "crouching shooting move" which would be somehow impossible for normal human skeleton I think. But the point is, that those animation need to fit to ANY kind of surface. Since, as you can see in the video, he just CANT move fast on that surface, how would it look like if he could move like in A3?

So, to keep the stuff short: The animations are way better, more natural and more fluid, but does not feel realistic enough for that kind of game. Since being on foot is the general kind of movement in ArmA I think that there should be some more, surface-, up/downhill- and gear/equipment-related movement. Some one packed full with MG Mags and his giant m240 plus what ever shit, cant move as fast as lets say a civilian without any kind of clothes... for what ever reason he might be naked in that moment though :P

LJ

[ak1287 1]

unlimited "low" crouch without your thighs and calf's burning the heck out? go prone/ crouch/ sat down position and do 3- unlimited _{citation needed} 360's in one mouse turn? any if most movement up a hill is just near lulzworthy. imo

im sorta inclined to trying to record a 360 noscope

Which is why I said 'fairly' realistic.

I know I, personally, can (and have been forced to) move in a low crouch for an extended period of time; I also believe that any mechanic that attempted to replicate the sheer pain and exhaustion I felt after maintaining posture and pace for even the .5 miles I did would be borderline asinine.

The crouching/prone 360 thing is actually my real beef. Mainly from an aesthetic viewpoint; in crouch you should re-position accordingly, and in prone you should be using one arm to drag yourself.

[metalcraze 290]

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.

Exactly. With the way movement is now it's almost like a generic FPS. Turn down camera shake and you have a perfectly floating camera. Can do that benny hill sprinting and still see everything perfectly a km away.

And I do like tactical pace (BIS now uses 'combat pace' for it which sounds much less cheesy).

But it says a lot that even arcade shooters like Future Soldier have more realism in movement than ArmA3. Sprinting has to be changed.

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

I'm all for working sunglasses. It's about time, considering you can take or put them on at any time - not just select them in profile.

BTW if you (not you Alwarren) think that I'm against new animations or movement system - I'm not. I love a new raven shield-like stance system too.

But the problem is that sprinting is way too cheaty and too unreal. The transition between standing animation and sprinting one is non-existent. There's no inertia. You can sprint to the west then quickly move your mouse and here you are sprinting to the east like it's some floating camera and not a body.

You can say ArmA2 did movement wrong and clunky... apart from sprinting. Sprinting was done right there. You can't run so fast and do insta-turns.

And it's not just visual realism - it's quite annoying how you line up that perfect shot and then the enemy just takes off like that road runner from Warner Bros. cartoon

Edited March 19, 2013 by metalcraze

[ak1287 1]

BTW if you (not you Alwarren) think that I'm against new animations or movement system - I'm not. I love a new raven shield-like stance system too.

But the problem is that sprinting is way too cheaty and too unreal. The transition between standing animation and sprinting one is non-existent. There's no inertia. You can sprint to the west then quickly move your mouse and here you are sprinting to the east like it's some floating camera and not a body.

You can say ArmA2 did movement wrong and clunky... apart from sprinting. Sprinting was done right there. You can't run so fast and do insta-turns.

That's actually what I agree with here; I also don't think, nor have I ever thought, that would be in the final game.

I guess I just don't see the point in complaining about it as opposed to writing a ticket on the feedback tracker. Because you're right, changing your bearing while sprinting was the only thing Arma 2 did correct in regards to movement.

[metalcraze 290]

There's a ticket (like this one http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=3164) but unfortunately as you can see the other camp downvotes it. That and judging by comments some people suffer from an extreme case of tunnel vision (they think ticket creator hates whole ArmA3 movement because he dislikes one aspect of it).

Edited March 19, 2013 by metalcraze

[ak1287 1]

There's a ticket (like this one http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=3164) but unfortunately as you can see the other camp downvotes it. That and judging by comments some people suffer from an extreme case of tunnel vision (they think ticket creator hates whole ArmA3 movement because he dislikes one aspect of it).

I actually did JUST see that ticket, and upvoted it.... But I kind of think the reporter's wording, and frankly the wording of a lot of the notes, make a knee-jerk reaction against the ticket.

Saying 'This is stupid' or 'yeah its fast and looks stupid' creates a negative perception of the entire issue; for the purposes of the forums, that's okay, but for the actual feedback tracker, you should attempt to avoid that kind of language. Of course, the people responding aren't any better.

And honestly, I do think it's an issue of them not implementing a specific mechanic, rather than an indication of how the game is going to be.

Also, just saw your ticket. I think it's worded much better, and hopefully will reduce any sort of knee-jerk reactions. Of course, the internet being the cesspool of human stupidity that it always devolves into, I think there will be a flame post in three.... two.... one.....

[metalcraze 290]

I know. Here I've tried to create a better one.

I hope it describes the issue better and more in-depth and won't just be another dupe

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=5509

[-=Borz=- 10]

I also felt the same as the author of the post, but in my case it happened when moving from the initial Op flashpoint (cold war assault :) to the arma series.

ANd, still remember that feeling while being hidden in a bush and hearing a tank looking for you a few meters away (niinii niinii nniiiinnii nniinni inniii...), turning and coming back, almost driving over your body... that was the fear factor.

[NeuroFunker 11]

Partly, i do agree with OP.

I think it is because of new setting, arma takes place. I put it simple - bright sunny weather, sea, beaches, cute looking villages with cute and accurate houses, all that simply gives ur wrong impression, you should get from a milsim game. It makes u want just dive/walk/drive/fly around, take pictures, chill around. But you can hardly imagine yourself having a gun in ur hands, to fight an enemy/doesn't make you want to pick up a gun and fight. Maybe u know what i mean by that.

Unlike in Chernarus, with its detailed world, lone villages along deep woods, enemy can nearly ambush you from anywhere. You feel sometimes claustrophobic, in a city or on a road between some heels, it is not so simple to spot an enemy in such reach detailed world.

Arma 3 feels more "dangerous" at bad windy, rainy weather, where it's getting pretty dark, and ur visuals are getting worse.

---------- Post added at 22:55 ---------- Previous post was at 22:51 ----------

I also felt the same as the author of the post, but in my case it happened when moving from the initial Op flashpoint (cold war assault :) to the arma series.

ANd, still remember that feeling while being hidden in a bush and hearing a tank looking for you a few meters away (niinii niinii nniiiinnii nniinni inniii...), turning and coming back, almost driving over your body... that was the fear factor.

good old operation flashpoint. I remember playing years of CTI missions with a buddy. Thats where i had my fear factor most. Knowing there is a enemy somewhere on a map, who can simply roll you over, if your not fast enough, to capture cities, get your resources, build tanks to be able to stand against him.

I was missing this feeling in Arma 2 already, and that made me return back to flashpoint. It didnt felt so dangerous/depressive enymore for a reason. Maybe BIS and us community, could research on that, why does it feel so dangerous in flash point (arma: cold war assault). But lacks in next titles.

[froggyluv 2136]

Not really fair to say it lacks 'immersion or fear' as that is something a designed campaign or mission is there to do. I never felt fear in Arma 2 when first opening the editor but felt fear, well maybe tension is a better word, when playing the campaign or EW. I certainly felt full tension in PvP shootouts!

As far as movement is concerned, meh, I can pretty much adjust to anything and I was totally fine with how Arma 2 characters moved just as I'm fine with this one though obviously the speed of sprint needs reducing and a slight bump in inertia would be welcome as well.

[Alwarren 2767]

I wasn't actually trying to do either; I'm not going to attempt to convince anyone, because I learned a long time ago that attempting to convince people of anything they don't want to believe over the internet leads to brain aneurysms and chronic smoking. Really, it was just a joke, and you probably shouldn't take the statement THAT seriously.

I don't usually take sentences that contain the word "gorilla" and "retirement community" very serious, it is just that ridiculing other people's opinion doesn't make your point.

I will stand by the meat of the statement, however; Arma 3 is CLOSER to how people move than any of the other Arma games. Of course there's tweaks that should be made, but the system as it stands right now is probably more realistic than most. I actually agree that sprinting is too fast, but everything OTHER than that is fairly realistic. Even the jog.

Sprinting around 90 degrees corners without losing your balance, changing direction by 180 degrees, no visible acceleration/deceleration phase is not my idea of realistic. As I said before, everything up to the tactical pace is fine, after that it just turns into a mess. There is nothing realistic about the sprinting.

[hekuball 10]

I think, rather than moaning about it on the forums, people should go do a little urban CQC in the mission editor and see how close this game comes to COD or indeed, any regular shooter. It doesnt, its incredibly difficult and incredibly lethal.

Personally, I think the movement is where it should be, whilst agreeing that the sprint needs some attention. The fact that a soldier can now walk through an open door way or ascend stairs without a bout of Parkinsons doesnt make this an arcade shooter all of a sudden.

[jmac6888 1]

I think, rather than moaning about it on the forums, people should go do a little urban CQC in the mission editor and see how close this game comes to COD or indeed, any regular shooter. It doesnt, its incredibly difficult and incredibly lethal.

Personally, I think the movement is where it should be, whilst agreeing that the sprint needs some attention. The fact that a soldier can now walk through an open door way or ascend stairs without a bout of Parkinsons doesnt make this an arcade shooter all of a sudden.

Couldn't agree with you more. The movement in buildings and stairways only seems fast because its so fluid...( a welcomed change IMO). I am confident they will fix the sprint speed, it is an alpha after all and that's why they released it to get feedback and work on it. And lets face it, in A2 they were so slow and retarded at walking up stairs and through doors, realistically if your were being shot at you would be hauling ass to make it through a doorway and not be sticking to an ideal walking speed....

Love arma 2 and arma 3 already, cant wait for the finished mission editor :D:D

[Masharra 10]

Oddly enough Ive never had trouble hauling ass up stairs and into doorways. double tap w and turn into doorway. hope I turn into doorway and not something invisible blocking me.

I hope people realise CqC isnt the main point being made as I can 360 whilst walking up and down stairs the stairs + strafing. Smoothness is fine Being Hermes and having wings on my shoes.

Ive done my fair share of building clearing and ive seen way more people falling, and slipping down stairs/mountains than I know will EVER happen in this game.

As in LJH's Link

Good luck moving at any speed down that really without slippin and sliding every couple o feet/ using your hand for balance. I should know I showed off that graceful part of myself infront of the cc.

[jmac6888 1]

Oddly enough Ive never had trouble hauling ass up stairs and into doorways. double tap w and turn into doorway. hope I turn into doorway and not something invisible blocking me.

I hope people realise CqC isnt the main point being made as I can 360 whilst walking up and down stairs the stairs + strafing. Smoothness is fine Being Hermes and having wings on my shoes.

Ive done my fair share of building clearing and ive seen way more people falling, and slipping down stairs/mountains than I know will EVER happen in this game.

As in LJH's Link

Good luck moving at any speed down that really without slippin and sliding every couple o feet/ using your hand for balance. I should know I showed off that graceful part of myself infront of the cc.

Well I'll be the first to admit I have never been in that situation... I guess it all comes down to where you draw the line between realism and playability. I think its a pretty good balance as is, I'm sure they could make it more realistic and turn the head bob way up and make the player stumble all the time but imo it would probably become just unplayable for me anyway.

[bad benson 1733]

The fact that a soldier can now walk through an open door way or ascend stairs without a bout of Parkinsons doesnt make this an arcade shooter all of a sudden.

can't remember one person saying that...

it might be inconceivable to some people but there is more than just haters or fanboys.

Edited March 20, 2013 by Bad Benson