General Discussion (dev branch)

[chortles 263]

Seriously, the influence of weapon resting on mission design isn't as big as you make it.

It's not how much we think it is, it's how much the-powers-at-be think it is. :/

[Alwarren 2767]

Resting weapon on a wall or a stone or a car hood does not need any animation.

Animation's lack is just concerning weapon with bipod. Most weapon can be rested (even without bipod)...

DarkDruid already said it - weapon resting requires resources that are not currently available or very limited, namely an engine programmer. I get the impression that BIS has way too few programmers, and that that's the reason why certain features are not getting added or do not receive a lot of attention.

In the case of weapon resting, as you said yourself, it's not a question of animation. It's a question of "players wants to deply the weapon, so we need to find out if it is possible here, and if yes, do the actual work" (which probably involves finding out when the player moves again to cancel resting).

The lack of programmers is a troublesome implication, but it explains quite a lot of things :(

---------- Post added at 10:25 ---------- Previous post was at 10:22 ----------

It's not how much we think it is, it's how much the-powers-at-be think it is. :/

See my last post. I don't think that they are not putting in weapon resting because it would require remaking missions (it wouldn't), but rather because of the lack of sufficient numbers of programmers that could implement this feature. At least that is how I interpret DarkDruid's post.

Weapon resting only impacts sway and recoil. If the mission would need to be redesigned for that, then they would need to throw away every mission each time any of these are adjusted, and missions would break if you play the infantry showcase like I do - throw away your own weapon and swap it with Alpha Point at the beginning, who is a marksman (or autorifleman) and has a scope.

[das attorney 858]

Thx for reply Druid -is there any chance to see anything like Weapon Rest soon? And does it really need to change the engine for it, because Ace2 in Arma 2 and even an Addon for Arma3 implemented it already quite well. You can even "rest" your gon on a fellow soldiers shoulder :) It doesnt seem to be that complex and time consuming.

Don't forget that for implementation to be as close to the real thing, the pivot point for turning would be at the place the bipod is, and not the centre of the model. Sounds like some engine changes need to be worked in there.

[krazikilla 5]

DarkDruid already said it - weapon resting requires resources that are not currently available or very limited, namely an engine programmer. I get the impression that BIS has way too few programmers, and that that's the reason why certain features are not getting added or do not receive a lot of attention.

In the case of weapon resting, as you said yourself, it's not a question of animation. It's a question of "players wants to deply the weapon, so we need to find out if it is possible here, and if yes, do the actual work" (which probably involves finding out when the player moves again to cancel resting).

The lack of programmers is a troublesome implication, but it explains quite a lot of things :(

---------- Post added at 10:25 ---------- Previous post was at 10:22 ----------

See my last post. I don't think that they are not putting in weapon resting because it would require remaking missions (it wouldn't), but rather because of the lack of sufficient numbers of programmers that could implement this feature. At least that is how I interpret DarkDruid's post.

Weapon resting only impacts sway and recoil. If the mission would need to be redesigned for that, then they would need to throw away every mission each time any of these are adjusted, and missions would break if you play the infantry showcase like I do - throw away your own weapon and swap it with Alpha Point at the beginning, who is a marksman (or autorifleman) and has a scope.

Thats why i dont really understand why they dont just add some awesome addons and improve them a bit if needed. Its not like they need to ask the developers for it, not pay them. All content belongs to BIS.

[afp 1]

They probably mean the animated bipods - which require new commands but it was about time to say something about it

I don't think this is really asked(of course is nice to have it), you can consider that you should get less sway as long as you are proned. What is needed is the possibility to rest the weapon on objects (rocks, windows) when you're crouch or standing. That should be easier to do - check the position related to the object in front, check the object type, reduce sway if key pressed.

[Dwarden 1125]

well the SMAA fix which was working yesterday isn't working today due to temporarily reverted binary to older version , wait You must again

[dmarkwick 261]

Thats why i dont really understand why they dont just add some awesome addons and improve them a bit if needed. Its not like they need to ask the developers for it, not pay them. All content belongs to BIS.

This is incorrect, content you make belongs to you.

[krazikilla 5]

I don't think this is really asked(of course is nice to have it), you can consider that you should get less sway as long as you are proned. What is needed is the possibility to rest the weapon on objects (rocks, windows) when you're crouch or standing. That should be easier to do - check the position related to the object in front, check the object type, reduce sway if key pressed.

Also true actually, most weapon rests dont even need Bipods in Reallife, as they just put it on sandbags, walls, car hoods, whatever, ALSO if the Gun has bipod its often not used. The only time it would actually make sense is in prone position, and then only when you are firing a machinegun or maybe sniper. So the "animation" of bipods shouldnt be a reason to not implement it.

[Alwarren 2767]

Thats why i dont really understand why they dont just add some awesome addons and improve them a bit if needed. Its not like they need to ask the developers for it, not pay them. All content belongs to BIS.

Adding third party addons to the product requires effort. You need to look at the code, see if it breaks something or if it contains malicious code or exploits, ascertain the quality etc. It's not as easy as just adding the stuff.

---------- Post added at 10:45 ---------- Previous post was at 10:43 ----------

This is incorrect, content you make belongs to you.

That too, but I guess a lot of addon makers would gladly agree to having their stuff included. I know I would.

[R0adki11 3949]

Thats why i dont really understand why they dont just add some awesome addons and improve them a bit if needed. Its not like they need to ask the developers for it, not pay them. All content belongs to BIS.

Not sure where you got this information from, any content created by an addon maker belongs to them.

[dmarkwick 261]

That too, but I guess a lot of addon makers would gladly agree to having their stuff included. I know I would.

I'm sure most would :)

But the thing that I get from the dev comments here is that any solution must be applied as an engine solution.

[pawelkpl 29]

where is detailed dev changelog ? I can't repair broken mission...

[bigpickle 0]

There was an inclination of a second development update today after the hotfix, has it been confirmed?

[artsi 11]

well the SMAA fix which was working yesterday isn't working today due to temporarily reverted binary to older version , wait You must again

Is there another update coming later today, or should we wait for tomorrow?

[chortles 263]

DarkDruid already said it - weapon resting requires resources that are not currently available or very limited, namely an engine programmer. I get the impression that BIS has way too few programmers, and that that's the reason why certain features are not getting added or do not receive a lot of attention.

In the case of weapon resting, as you said yourself, it's not a question of animation. It's a question of "players wants to deply the weapon, so we need to find out if it is possible here, and if yes, do the actual work" (which probably involves finding out when the player moves again to cancel resting).

The lack of programmers is a troublesome implication, but it explains quite a lot of things :(

See my last post. I don't think that they are not putting in weapon resting because it would require remaking missions (it wouldn't), but rather because of the lack of sufficient numbers of programmers that could implement this feature. At least that is how I interpret DarkDruid's post.

Based on DnA's post and stance it sounds to me less like "not enough programmers" and more "zero-sum equation" where resourcing one feature would be directly at another feature's expense...

Plus if it's not just "bipods-only" as in BF3 but actually resting, then presumably they would have to account for wherever and however one might want to/try to position the weapon against, i.e. corners (for aiming and shooting past cover the way that people can do with the "sidestep" stance adjustments), objects (anything from a rock to a sandbag to a Hesco barrier to, say, a "hole" within a wall or fence that's become a makeshift firing port) or even buddies...

As for amount of programmers: JdB characterized it as "around 10 people working on the RV engine, and getting assigned to other BIS projects (and I wouldn't entirely be surprised if they also had to do some scripting on the side)", while according to DM "no more than 10 people are working on the engine at BI" while "The team working on A3 at BI is closer to 60." To forestall others from saying "it's in VBS, why not in Arma", I'll note that Rocket has said that "a vast amount of work went into VBS, employing thousands if not tens of thousands of people worldwide."

Then again, considering that "all the extra money" that supposedly turned into "more Arma 3 devs" didn't directly turn into "better development" due to the burdens that came with new devs, it seems that "lack of programmers" isn't necessarily solved by "more programmers". (I found this line by Rocket amusing: "Does 120 pilots make a plane go faster? No, you have two pilots, and even then only one flies the fucking thing.")

ACE3 was confirmed last year when they switched ACE2 in "maintenance" only and there was hope for A2 release in 2012. Nothing else has been said so I hope they're still excited about the mod since BI seems to be happy with delivering a stable base *game* and let people do what they do.

Arma 2 looked rather different last year in terms of what BI would be doing, then this year after the Steamworks announcement Xeno had his... thing, and Sickboy seems otherwise occupied with PlayWithSIX (I don't envy the task) so NouberNou was the only one that I found who confirmed things this year, soon after the public alpha release in fact. (He mentioned ViperMaul but I haven't found any statements by VM so I'm taking NouberNou as the authoritative voice on what's going on with ACE3.)

[Varanon 892]

More like "the missions would have to be redesigned to account for players or AI being able to use bipods"

The actual impact on the mission would be negligible. Just because you can use a bipod does not mean you have to redo any mission. That's just an excuse.

[Alwarren 2767]

Based on DnA's post and stance it sounds to me less like "not enough programmers" and more "zero-sum equation" where resourcing one feature would be directly at another feature's expense...

From DarkDruids and other posts, I'd venture to say that the lack of programmers currently is an issue. If it weren't, then why don't we have the briefing loadout back, and where did the rain go?

(I found this line by Rocket amusing: "Does 120 pilots make a plane go faster? No, you have two pilots, and even then only one flies the fucking thing.")

I happen to be a programmer myself by profession. While I usually do OS kernel and driver work, I have worked on games projects in the past (both porting and original development), and I happen to know very well where extra programmers can make a difference or not (granted, I only have 25 years of programming experience). The comparison with a plane is very nice and amusing, but it is not about making any plane fly faster; it is about adding features to the plane, and in that case you could say that adding 120 flight attendants will make the flight more comfortable for the passenger.

In any case, Rocket's comment was aimed at people complaining about his mountaineering trip and the speed of development, not the lack of features. We're talking here about whether a few more programmers could add more features, and the answer is yet, they could.

I am not trying to blame anyone for anything here, and I am not trying to tell BIS they should hire more programmers, just saying that to me, as an outsider, it seems like there is a lack of programmers (reinforced by comments I read on chats and other media), and that an extra programmer or two could help getting those features added; because it is very well possible for two programmers working on different, disjoint parts of a project at the same time. Whether that is a budget possibility or not, I dare not say, or maybe it's just the general lack of programmers in the market, or whatever else.

Whatever it is, extra programmers are extra resources to implement extra features, and this is coming from someone with a few years of experience in that field.

[gliptal 25]

Wait, they are working in SIXTY people on ArmA III? Seriously? That's like nothing, if they got this game running up by working in 60 only huge Kudos to the whole team, seriously guys...

Yay!

[Varanon 892]

Does 120 pilots make a plane go faster? No, you have two pilots, and even then only one flies the fucking thing

That quote is IMHO only partially applicable to programmers. Yes, it's true that more programmers sometimes don't solve the issue. However, the comparison with the pilots is IMHO totally wrong. No pilot make the plane fly faster, unless it's driven by a treadmill.

I think Alwarren's assessment isn't too far off. There's only very few actual programmers working on Arma 3. Most are content creators (including scripting and config work) anyway (which is only natural given the nature of the project).

[metalcraze 290]

Yeah seems like BIS has pretty much thrown ArmA series onto a sideline with the stuff that is needed the most - engine changes - not happening at all. Because obviously most programmers are working on DayZ SA incl. lead engine programmer. And we aren't going to see any much needed improvements for a long time since they are planning to support DayZ for at least a year (but it will not even take off since zombie fad is dying out).

No AI fixes. No physics improvements. No features promised years ago. 4 months since alpha's release and there are still no fixes other than content fixes with team obviously having nothing better to do so they waste time on barely usable things like gimmick 3D scopes that also let you cheat massively.

A "sixty people" team has done a lot less in 3 years than an even smaller team on DayZ SA in less than one. In fact "sixty people" mostly broke it and keep doing it as evidenced by the latest patch which makes one man armies absolutely unrestricted. And if it's not deliberate then the only other explanation - is, again, the lack of programmers.

Edited July 10, 2013 by metalcraze

[nimrod123 11]

i keep wondering if noone here understands project management.

ARMA 2 is a example of feature creep, where shit keeps getting added long after you should have decided whats in the game. they may still be adding stuff to this game, but they shouldn't be changing that roadmap, since down that path lies unfinished features and a bunch more bugs.

normally it works like this for full features. you get 1 thats pretty decently finished, their may be some bugs and balance issues, but overall its done, or you get 2 that both need a several hundred more hours TLC EACH along with every thing else that will crop up when the game hits a wider audience, with all the hardware configurations that intails

if they say they can't do it without compromising the project plan, then we should accept that and look for work arounds

also, and this is important

MODELER/ARTIST =/= PROGRAMMER/CODER

Yeah seems like BIS has pretty much thrown ArmA series onto a sideline with the stuff that is needed the most - engine changes - not happening at all. Because obviously most programmers are working on DayZ SA incl. lead engine programmer. And we aren't going to see any much needed improvements for a long time since they are planning to support DayZ for at least a year (but it will not even fly).

A "sixty people" team has done a lot less in 3 years than an even smaller team on DayZ SA in less than one. In fact "sixty people" mostly broke it and keep doing it as evidenced by the latest patch which makes one man armies absolutely unrestricted.

this is a perfect example, dayz became popular ~12 months ago, WTF are you meant to do with 12 months, engines take years to build, RV4 is clearly a extension of what come before, alot of what was in the alpha was clearly done (by looking at screenies) early last year. where they meant to scrap all that and somehow still make the Q3/4 2013 deadline, which if they missed, the community would implode?

Edited July 10, 2013 by nimrod123

[Varanon 892]

Wait, they are working in SIXTY people on ArmA III? Seriously? That's like nothing, if they got this game running up by working in 60 only huge Kudos to the whole team, seriously guys...

That depends. Most of the staff working on larger, big budget titles are marketing, voice acting, support, beta testing and other stuff. I've seen big budget games that had core teams of 30 or 40 people.

[chortles 263]

From DarkDruids and other posts, I'd venture to say that the lack of programmers currently is an issue. If it weren't, then why don't we have the briefing loadout back, and where did the rain go?

I get your drift, though I suppose what I was trying to convey was "with only so many programmers, hard choices will be made and someone's going to lose out." Though admittedly neither "lack of programmers" nor "zero-sum decision-making" seems to directly explain to me removal of features that were already implemented in Arma 3 and even publicly presented as such, as opposed to "announced in 2011 or 2013 but then never showed up in public alpha or beta" (because that I just chalk up to early overambitiousness)...

A "sixty people" team has done a lot less in 3 years than an even smaller team on DayZ SA in less than one.

That's depending on how many words you believe coming out of Rocket's mouth... hell, my general rule for Arma 3 has been "if it was announced in 2011, it doesn't count. Hell, if it was announced in 2012, it probably doesn't count either."

where they meant to scrap all that and somehow still make the Q3/4 2013 deadline, which if they missed, the community would implode?

Here's the thing though: several people spoke up after the Steamworks announcement to declare that they would have been willing to let Arma 3 slip a 2013 release in order to be non-Steamworks... while the Steamworks announcement had Maruk basically saying "no, release in 2013". I can't help but believe that that deadline influenced more than just Steamworks... although even in 2012, I believe it was Vespa who declared himself proud to be cutting features because it meant that they were focused and on track, one dev said that they can't "make all the things" or else they'd end up like Duke Nukem Forever (in development hell)... and not only does "feature creep" go against the creative director's own declared goals (admittedly in 2012) of making the most optimized, polished, stable Arma release ever/to date, but even Maruk has talked about the company's past overambitiousness (i.e. Game 2) and how Arma 2 was supposed to be closer to the high ambitions thereof but still manageable... Edited July 10, 2013 by Chortles

[nimrod123 11]

That depends. Most of the staff working on larger, big budget titles are marketing, voice acting, support, beta testing and other stuff. I've seen big budget games that had core teams of 30 or 40 people.

ah nope, marketing is normally sperate. most large AAA teams are 100+

i will bet that BI has a better ratio of code monkeys to artists then almost any studio out their

[metalcraze 290]

ah nope, marketing is normally sperate. most large AAA teams are 100+

i will bet that BI has a better ratio of code monkeys to artists then almost any studio out their

Except not on ArmA3. Haven't you been following the news?

When Dean Hall himself says DayZ SA got a lot more improvements in 1 year over ArmA3 - there's nothing much to add.

DayZ SA even gets vastly improved VON while we are stuck with the horrible 2001 version of it till this day that has crap sound quality and also tends to lag servers to death when several people are talking at once. And people have been asking to improve it for at least 4 years (at least as evidenced by DH ticket that is stuck in "assigned" since 2009)