This game is not realistic.

[fragmachine 12]

ACE2 showed that backblast routines for AI are less of a problem than a bipod deployment routines :)

[nodunit 397]

And how long did that take? Do we always have to rely on third party mods for these things?

Edited May 21, 2013 by NodUnit

[Ghillie 10]

Isn't that what a "game" is about? Who has faster reaction time when shooting in first person anyway? LMAO.

If you wanted to play a game based on 100% strategy you could go play an RTS

[nodunit 397]

Isn't that what a "game" is about? Who has faster reaction time when shooting in first person anyway? LMAO.

If you wanted to play a game based on 100% strategy you could go play an RTS

In the most basic sense of a shooter, yes.

This is not a basic shooter.

[dmarkwick 261]

Isn't that what a "game" is about? Who has faster reaction time when shooting in first person anyway? LMAO.

A "game" is whatever game you're playing, there is no single definition. In a game where you have one life, do you shoot? Do you take time to make an identificcation? Do you take cover first? Do you worry about other units who may suddenly notice you?

If you wanted to play a game based on 100% strategy you could go play an RTS

Perhaps. But who's playing a game based on 100% strategy here?

[fragmachine 12]

I wonder how much resources does VBS team have compared to ArmA 3. Remember that ArmA 3 team still have to spent more of resources to advertise the product while VBS team is more of contractor of the project. ArmA 3 team needs to worry if they product sells well on the market.

That's why they "MoSCoW" features in upcoming build.

[Messiah 2]

I wonder how much resources does VBS team have compared to ArmA 3. Remember that ArmA 3 team still have to spent more of resources to advertise the product while VBS team is more of contractor of the project. ArmA 3 team needs to worry if they product sells well on the market.

That's why they "MoSCoW" features in upcoming build.

MoSCow isn't just down to resources and budget, VBS have the same, if not stricter dealines, especially with high profile customers who are paying a lot of money for their product and content. Whereas BIS can say to the general population 'sorry, we're going to push it back a few more months, tough cookie', I don't imgine BISim have the same leeway.

[nimrod123 11]

I wonder how much resources does VBS team have compared to ArmA 3. Remember that ArmA 3 team still have to spent more of resources to advertise the product while VBS team is more of contractor of the project. ArmA 3 team needs to worry if they product sells well on the market.

That's why they "MoSCoW" features in upcoming build.

vbs get requests from clients that pay money for updates and are paying thousands per licence. the client also has a clear idea of what they want, and know that they have to front the moeny to get it.

having worked in engernering contracting its a far easier enviroment then retail products since everything is on paper (for lack of a better term)

[fragmachine 12]

So unless we all pay BiS hundreds of dollars we won't see half of our most requested features. Seems like a nice deal for BiS :cool:

[nimrod123 11]

So unless we all pay BiS hundreds of dollars we won't see half of our most requested features. Seems like a nice deal for BiS :cool:

try thousands, that editor they got, probally 100,000 USD+ at the very cheap end if you assume 2 guys for 6 months (which is probally low). the ADF package custimised for aussie, probally .25 million

having worked beta before (not for BIS) the biggest flaw a team can do is to try and do to many features, less and polished is better then more and unplayalbe. paradox inter was a classic example of this.

at the end of the day you take the best ideas long and start working on them, once your within 3 months of launch changing anything seriously is a massively stupid idea.

theirs no way we will see walable vechile interiors if they are clever. we might get armor pen models post launch if they can scrounge a method of making it work. bipods might get in

but at the end of the day mechanics don't sell. if you have to close between doing better AI or creating something you can screen cap, the screen cap will always be a selling point to the masses. and BIS is a company, not a charity

[chortles 263]

I wonder how much resources does VBS team have compared to ArmA 3. Remember that ArmA 3 team still have to spent more of resources to advertise the product while VBS team is more of contractor of the project. ArmA 3 team needs to worry if they product sells well on the market.

It should be added that VBS doesn't have nearly the brand awareness "problem" that Arma does.

So unless we all pay BiS hundreds of dollars we won't see half of our most requested features. Seems like a nice deal for BiS :cool:

Not only "thousands" as nimrod123 said, but we're going to have to get their promise ("BI promising to implement the requested feature at the requested time") in writing. :lol:

[Sugz 10]

I thought I would come out of my hole to post on a topic which has a subject that I have only recently started to consider more when considering what is 'realistic'. Sound.

Something that has put me off Arma and Arma 2, and so far Arma 3 - Yes I know it's in beta, but bear with me.

Leaving the other obviously impossible to simulate senses aside, so far in the Arma series, we have achieved incredible immersion in the sense of Sight, the visual quality and tangibility that the latest generation of graphics tools and effects offer is nothing short of unbelievable. However, I don't feel that sounds has been given the level of attention and credit that it deserves in terms of creating a truely immersive gaming experience.

Many current generation games (not just first person shooters) for example Company of heroes. Use sounds to aid the believability in the world, the characters, the props.

One thing that sticks out particularly from my limited experience in the british armed forces, and every day life for that matter, is that a particular sound doesn't sound the same period at whatever distance you hear it at. period.

Our ears are naturally tuned to identify the differences in pitch, tone, treble etc to identify the direction and distance of a sound. E.g. An approaching storm. The same goes for gunshots and explosions.

** At this point, I am going to say, that I am aware that the game is in alpha, and this is more about what I would like to see, rather that what we are going to see. **

The sound of a gunshot or explosion has a distinctly different signature depending on the distance from which it is heard. (the further the distance, the deeper and more 'muffled' the sound) The higher pitched sounds are drowned out by the distance and when heard from a greater distance, we are only left with the lower pitched sounds. The current implementation of reducing the volume for the same sound sample and some additional alterations, simply in my opinion, is not enough to create this level of immersion, and is a real killer when I am trying to become immersed in the world in which I am playing.

This is trivial, games as old as Half life 2 have simulated this (simply using different channels for different sound samples). And in the case of Arma 3, the addition of different sound samples heard at different distances, can tell the player instinctively, the distance, type and level of danger the source of the sound imposes.

I know this has been achieved by mods in the past, but I feel that this is a quintessential feature when achieving realism for this genre of game.

I will be looking forward to hearing about the improvements to the engine that the Bis are working on and will keep my fingers well and truely crossed that the above is considered.

[chortles 263]

... yeah, see, "immersion" is where we differ -- no Arma game or set of mods has ever given me enough sense of "immersion" to lose sight of the fact that I'm playing a video game with a mouse, keyboard and speakers, but then again I haven't been "engrossed" in TV or movies either.