Bohemia Interactive @ E3 2013 - DISCUSSION

[scrim 1]

Why is that a deciding factor for whether there are interiors or not ? It's a reason to HAVE an interior, but not being able to transport troops is no reason NOT to have an interior.

+1. At the very least, start off with interiors for the drivers, so it's no longer reduced to a narrow slit on an otherwise dark screen.

[Wolfstriked 11]

Sad day for me as I love all vehicle interiors.I love the immersion of turning in and out thru the hatch for that slightly better FOV.Please at the least have it so you can turn out and drive the tank with proper perspective.

And please work on making vehicles more functional when in 1st person.There is already a ticket asking that when turret aim is set to WASD you still keep WASD functional for steering when driving.Right now if you set WASD to turret aim it just moves the view when in driving position(if you have freelook always enabled).But that is just one area that can be further improved.We need more options to set the many unused keys when in vehicles.

When in commander/gunner position

G=throw smoke

F=change ammo

R=stabilize weapon

WASD is set to command driver but this also needs to be improved since if you put WASD as turret aim you now will be moving turret and telling the driver to move in that direction at same time.I think a good workaround for this is to implement SHIFT so when held the WASD keys give commands.

The zoom of the optics is done with the +/- keys on numpad and that should instead be done with mouse as its a pain to constantly take hands off controls to do a task that is done constantly.Hold Rmouse for slow zoom in and click Rmouse to instantly zoom back out for widest view of battlefield.

An option for slow forward by clicking W once.Try being tactical and exposing as little of vehicle as possible with uncontrollable speeds.;)

And of course please put an immersive heading and bearing indicator when in the commander/gunner positions.

Edited June 17, 2013 by Wolfstriked

[old_painless 182]

Very close: the entire BI team lost their luggage flying back to Prague - luckily it was returned today :cool:

Spies from EA. I knew it! Anything missing ?

[pawelkpl 29]

+1. At the very least, start off with interiors for the drivers, so it's no longer reduced to a narrow slit on an otherwise dark screen.

+1, I'm really disappointed TO NOT HAVE INTERIORS...

[kremator 1065]

I'm not bothered about interiors, as I only drive vehicles in 3rd person anyway. Is it even possible to make an addon to put the interiors in without touching the model? Excuse my noobishness.

[Alwarren 2767]

I'm not bothered about interiors, as I only drive vehicles in 3rd person anyway. Is it even possible to make an addon to put the interiors in without touching the model? Excuse my noobishness.

I haven't done any vehicles yet, but AFAIK, no there is no way. The interior is one of the model's LOD, and without the MLOD you cannot put it in.

[Tonci87 163]

OK, what about a compromise? I think we can agree that there is no need to look around in a tank since you will be focused on your optics. I understand that the driver has a particulary boring sight. So how about this:

BIS models ONLY the visible part (currently plain black) around the hatches, optics, and not the whole interior. How does this sound?

It could be benefficial by slapping some LCDs to that area as well, for example to show the footage of the rear camera

[Masharra 10]

OK, what about a compromise? I think we can agree that there is no need to look around in a tank since you will be focused on your optics. I understand that the driver has a particulary boring sight. So how about this:

BIS models ONLY the visible part (currently plain black) around the hatches, optics, and not the whole interior. How does this sound?

It could be benefficial by slapping some LCDs to that area as well, for example to show the footage of the rear camera

I think its less boring and more extremely restrictive?

[Tonci87 163]

Why would it be more restrictive? As it is now you can´t turn your head inside the tank and you only have a black box with a hole cut into it. With my proposal you still wouldn´t be able to turn your head but at least the black box would be gone.

[Smurf 12]

I said that a long ago, make a generic interior with MFDs all around and maybe the option to look through other hatches\viewports (tied to a system similar to what was used in TkoH to operate single buttons) and you are good to go.

[Varanon 892]

OK, what about a compromise? I think we can agree that there is no need to look around in a tank since you will be focused on your optics.

There's two things that are worth mentioning I think: First of all, the immersion factor is immense. Every vehicle in Arma 2 that has a real interior is much more "fun" to use than one without.

Secondly, and I think that is an even bigger thing, if you can look around in the interior, you will actually see people (i.e. your crew). This enforces the feeling of being part of a team and not just a disembodied optics floating around somewhere.

[Alwarren 2767]

I think we can agree that there is no need to look around in a tank since you will be focused on your optics.

I don't agree. The same argument could be used with infantry - you don't need to see your body because you are focused forward.

Just look at this video

at around time 5:30. Yes, you are mostly focused on the optics, but this just looks way better and is more immersive, more so since the loader can actually see something. And in a Merkava (at least in a real one) you can ferry up to six passengers around.

Any game benefits from immersion. Arma is no difference. A fully modeled interior greatly helps to convey the feeling of immersion, because it makes you feel like you are sitting in a real vehicle and not in a black box with a hole that can go boom.

[Mr. Charles 22]

RO2 shows how fun it can be to use authentic tank interiors. They don't have to be realistic or this detailed. But it's much easier to drive a tank if you have more than just the 2D Panel you look out of. I can drive way better in RO2 than in ArmA, because I'm not as dependent on another crewmember or infantry soldier to tell me if I'm in the right position or not. Of course, if you have 3rd person on on the server, thats no problem, but if you spend 30mins-1 hr driving a tank around on a normal COOP mission, you get pretty sick of it quite soon. The Bradley is therefore much more fun to drive around in, as the driver has this interior.

[Masharra 10]

"I understand that the driver has a particulary boring sight. "

I think its less boring and more extremely restrictive?

[Smurf 12]

It's boring and restrictive.

[dunedain 48]

muh RO2 interiors

RO2 also showed us how having tanks with fully animated and modelized interiors, that take three months each to make, can kill a game. Two years later RO2 still only has 2 tanks and no infantry carrier, while Osfront has at least 16 vehicles and 32 using Darkest Hour with still pretty good quality standards. When it comes to tank battle RO2 is pretty boring, it has nothing on Darkest Hour by any means, despite the fancy interiors.

Edited June 18, 2013 by dunedain

[Tonci87 163]

RO2 shows how fun it can be to use authentic tank interiors. They don't have to be realistic or this detailed. But it's much easier to drive a tank if you have more than just the 2D Panel you look out of. I can drive way better in RO2 than in ArmA, because I'm not as dependent on another crewmember or infantry soldier to tell me if I'm in the right position or not. Of course, if you have 3rd person on on the server, thats no problem, but if you spend 30mins-1 hr driving a tank around on a normal COOP mission, you get pretty sick of it quite soon. The Bradley is therefore much more fun to drive around in, as the driver has this interior.

And how many different tanks does RO have?

I´m quite sure that BIS could make interiors for all vehicels in the game, but the chances are high that in this case we will be stuck with one Tank per faction. And that is not something I would want.

[Alwarren 2767]

And how many different tanks does RO have?

How many tanks does Arma have?

[Tonci87 163]

We don´t know yet.

But I know that there will be a nice variety of other vehicles, so really don´t compare this with RO, or a cutscene in BF3

[Varanon 892]

But I know that there will be a nice variety of other vehicles, so really don´t compare this with RO, or a cutscene in BF3

Thanks for making the point. The nice variety of other vehicles ALL have interiors, just the few tanks we'll expect don't.

So basically, your argument is "we have a lot of vehicles with interiors", and that should be an argument against tank interiors ? Sorry if I don't get that.

As it stands now, the tanks will be the only vehicles without interior.

Honestly, how much difference is there between a tank interior, or a car/APC/plane/chopper ? None.

I can accept that BIS doesn't have the resources, but don't give me this "it's not necessary" stuff. There is no argument against it EXCEPT development resources.

[Alwarren 2767]

We don´t know yet.

Well, Arma 2 had the M1, the T72, T80, and T-34. That's four. Not exactly a lot of them

But I know that there will be a nice variety of other vehicles, so really don´t compare this with RO, or a cutscene in BF3

It doesn't change the facts that you are making up excuses. I can accept that they are not going to add them for time constraints, but all the talk about "unnecessary" and "cutscenes" doesn't make up for the fact that this is a big immersion breaker. It's like X3 removing the cockpits from their ships, you feel disconnected from what you are actually sitting in.

[Wolfstriked 11]

Looking out a 2D window while driving just sucks.If BIS will not model the interior how about modeling just the window you drive out of and putting face very close to it and blocking the turn ratio in all directions so that you cant see whats not modeled but can still move the view slightly.You will get the immersive jolting of screen from head movement etc and you can if you so desire use trackir to lean around to get a wider fov.Or use mouse that when you push mouse up the view point rises and points downwards and vice versa for mouse down.If anything just the 3D optics view at 05:30 in video linked above looks amazing and can be excellent for the tanks in Arma3.

[HKFlash 9]

Not only I agree with Alwarren, Wolfstriked and Varanon's opinions, lack of tank interiors creates a frankengame style where some vehicles have (very) detailed interiors and the main battle tanks, the kings of the battlefield, have none. To make matters worse the new 3D optics will probably only be avaiable to the ones that dont use Thermal/Night Vision optics. This creates an incoherent game, where "some have some don't".

But personally I blame the community because we were always divided in this subject. Half of us always came up to this discussions and said "its not worth it". Bohemia, seeing no consensus, decided to take the aproach they took before with ARMA and ARMA II.

[EricM 0]

how about modeling just the window you drive out of and putting face very close to it and blocking the turn ratio in all directions so that you cant see whats not modeled but can still move the view slightly.

That'd be a nice "in-between" solution : Only model a limited portion of the interior and restrict the movement possible, a bit like the 3D scopes.

[Crierd 24]

A nice feature, but from my point of view, you've addressed the 'why not' of it for ArmA. It's a very applicable feature in a survival/scavenging based game such as DayZ, but in ArmA 3 it's just going to become a huge annoyance.

I disagree.

There's a reason why some people carry secondary weapons, and damaging a weapon like that can have a huge impact on a firefight. One less person means possibly a bullet not hitting an MG, which means an entire squad could die. A real life example of this is during Operation Red Wings, one of the guys took a round through his M110 magazine and it forced him to reload, taking time out of the firefight. Plus, it adds a sense of urgency to the general feel of what's going on at that point in the game. I've hit people's rocket launchers on their backs or their rifles in their hands more times than I can remember. I mean, you play the game enough it's bound to happen, but not every game to be an 'annoyance' like you said.

The point of Arma is to give an authentic experience, and small things like that make a huge difference on your gameplay.