Arma 3 full analysis - The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

[-Snafu- 78]

Quote

 

[Alwarren 2767]

If I remember correctly, there will be some kind of First Aid Module like in Arma 2.

I do not believe we are seeing the Final Version of wounding/medic/first aid system in the Beta, so judging Arma 3 at this point for the lack of better system is a bit unfair.

To the best of my knowledge, this first aid system is final. RiE said in an interview on E3 that they had plans for something more sophisticated but are not likely to change this one.

I think a few simple changes could already make this system much more believable:

- Introduce bleeding. When you are shot, you bleed, and if you don't take care of the wound, you will eventually bleed out and die.

- FAK's should stop the bleeding, and POSSIBLY heal a bit of damage, but that healing should be like "add 10% of health" instead of "heal up to 75%".

- Only Medic can heal you completely (as it is now). Medic healing will stop bleeding.

- Bleeding units will leave a blood trail. This already happens, but is over too short.

At the very least this should be an option, either difficulty-based, or by module. FAK's can stay that way, in fact the changes aren't really that big, and the result not really great, but certainly better than what we have now.

---------- Post added at 13:00 ---------- Previous post was at 12:57 ----------

YES - MISSION MAKERS BALANCE THINGS FROM SCRATCH.

Ignoring the fact how rude it is to write in all caps, the point is that this isn't "balancing". This is fixing a bad design decision. Mission balancing contains things like how many enemies you pit against a player team. You reasoning could be applied to bunny hopping as well. Design a mission in such a way that bunny-hopping isn't an issue. It still means this is a workaround, not a solution.

[Varanon 892]

I do not believe we are seeing the Final Version of wounding/medic/first aid system in the Beta, so judging Arma 3 at this point for the lack of better system is a bit unfair.

Well, I think devs said no changes until after release (if any), so I would say it is fair, since it's probably going to be the final version.

I hope I'm wrong.

There are so many differend ways it could be done, Arma 2 module wasn't that good.

Better than now, in any case. Without a module, only a medic could heal you. With module, anyone could get you up again, but again, only a medic could heal you fully.

Finding a solution that actually works, feels right, doesn't break anything else (like AI) is not easy.

I would guess the AI is the definite factor in all this. Changing the amount of damage healed by a FAK, changing whether it heals you to a certain number, or by a certain amount, that's minor changes. Since there's no real missions in the game yet (except the showcases, but those are pretty short), breaking existing content is minimal (definitely not more than the class changes did before).

The AI on the other hand needs to be made aware of the new system. And I would guess that this is the major problem in any such change. Sigh....

[dmarkwick 261]

You're suggestion that mission designers should "fix" a core element of the game by removing FAKs is entirely ridiculous and unacceptable.

Right, so your solution involves simply complaining about it then?

Look, if the FAKs are in to stay, they're in to stay. That means it is a gameplay decision, whether you like it or not. If you wish for a mission that does not have them, how are you going to solve this problem?

---------- Post added at 11:52 ---------- Previous post was at 11:43 ----------

Ignoring the fact how rude it is to write in all caps, the point is that this isn't "balancing".

Of course it is. FAK is just an equipment that can be removed for gameplay. Just like equipments can be added etc.

This is fixing a bad design decision. Mission balancing contains things like how many enemies you pit against a player team. You reasoning could be applied to bunny hopping as well. Design a mission in such a way that bunny-hopping isn't an issue. It still means this is a workaround, not a solution.

It sounds like a solution to me. How is simply removing something you don't like a "workaround"? If your mission units needed to have no grenades, would you consider it a workaround to remove them too?

[-Snafu- 78]

Quote

 

[dmarkwick 261]

You seem to have trouble understanding that it is the function of the FAK that is the problem and not its presence.

*shrug* You're right I don't fully understand why the removal of offending item X seems to be ignored or ridiculed in its entirety, and that the *only* solution is that BIS must fix it for you.

BIS have said themselves that the current system is not what they intended to have in the first place. What is present is broken. As the medic is no longer of critical importance due the fact that FAKs are everywhere and heal to almost full health. As the medical system is supposed to be an integral part of the game it is up to BIS to fix it and not that of mission creators.

Then I guess you'll simply have to wait then. I still think the whole thing is overwrought, but I guess I seem to be the only one who thinks mission design has a part to play in it.

[GottyPlays 10]

Im trying to find anything that is not broken in some way or form.

There is none sadly.

Everything seems to be made "just because they had to do it". It seems a total mess.

[metalcraze 290]

I really don't get you sometimes. You seem to willfully ignore solutions while endlessly complaining that something is not to your liking. Got wounded? perhaps you cannot run because of wound. perhaps you cannot simply move to the medic with impunity because, you know, there's a reason you got wounded - there's a firefight going on.

Yeah but there's no need to move to a medic since you will not bleed out or lose consciousness or be less effective since aim shake is easily avoided with hold breath or prone. No rush.

Also which solutions? You haven't told me of any that are realistic or adequate.

YES - MISSION MAKERS BALANCE THINGS FROM SCRATCH. That's what they do, ArmA isn't an auto-balance mechanism, the mission designer needs to make sure the gameplay he wants is realised through design. Look, I'm sorry that you refuse to believe this can happen, but also maybe the missions you're playing are designed that way, with default loadouts. Don't like it? Do something about it other than complain of their existence - make a mission the way you wish it to be played, like you're supposed to. That's a core feature of ArmA.

See here you are being inadequate again just like I've mentioned above. You solution is "if the game is broken - fix it yourself!". This is ridiculous.

And as I've said before both FAK and medic gameplay mechanics are bad in ArmA3. So what's the difference between removing FAKs or not when getting wounded is a minor inconvenience?

What difference does not having FAKs make when getting wounded gives only 1 real negative effect at most and not always. And then FAK or medic heals you instantly.

When Dragon Rising has a better injury system than ArmA3 you know something is off.

Yes I agree that bleeding should be implemented if it's not already. I also don't believe the actual animation is even remotely important.

Yes it is an issue. You shouldn't be able to keep fighting when the medic pulls bullets out of you or bandages you.

Edited August 13, 2013 by metalcraze

[dmarkwick 261]

Yeah but there's no need to move to a medic since you will not bleed out or lose consciousness or be less effective since aim shake is easily avoided with hold breath or prone. No rush.

Yes I guess.

Also which solutions? You haven't told me of any that are realistic or adequate.

Or rather, ones that you like :)

See here you are being inadequate again just like I've mentioned above. You solution is "if the game is broken - fix it yourself!". This is ridiculous.

Well lets see... you don't like the FAKs (neither do I really) but it doesn't represent "broken" gameplay - just gameplay you (and I) don't like. As such yes mission design overcomes gameplay you don't agree with (where it can). You might decide to not allow grenades (as an example) because you don't like them. How else are you going to do this other than by mission design?

And as I've said before both FAK and medic gameplay mechanics are bad in ArmA3. So what's the difference between removing FAKs or not when getting wounded is a minor inconvenience?

What difference does not having FAKs make when getting wounded gives only 1 real negative effect at most and not always. And then FAK or medic heals you instantly.

When Dragon Rising has a better injury system than ArmA3 you know something is off.

Well I guess I can agree that the medical system needs attention, and also that getting wounded does not give you a sense of urgency (if there is no bleeding). However it's far from saying that the medic is now useless, which is the thing I'm really saying is not true... given proper game setting up.

Yes it is an issue. You shouldn't be able to keep fighting when the medic pulls bullets out of you or bandages you.

I was referring to the medic's animation (as I believe were you) but yes, you should both be unable to do other actions without breaking out of the medic aid action.

[Azzur33 1]

Im trying to find anything that is not broken in some way or form.

There is none sadly.

Everything seems to be made "just because they had to do it". It seems a total mess.

There is no such thing as a total perfectionist game developer. He would never get a job done.

He has to be a realist too, and perfectionism and realism just don't mix.

Too bad there are perfectionist gamers, who'll be never satisfied.

To trust on polishing and continuation of the developement, while playing with what you've got, even if it's not perfect in every way, is just so much more fun.

[metalcraze 290]

Well lets see... you don't like the FAKs (neither do I really) but it doesn't represent "broken" gameplay - just gameplay you (and I) don't like. As such yes mission design overcomes gameplay you don't agree with (where it can). You might decide to not allow grenades (as an example) because you don't like them. How else are you going to do this other than by mission design?

Because FAKs are just a part of a bigger problem of medic system being very arcade and almost nothing but primitive 100 hp?

Removing them will not solve that. And again - nobody is going to bother. When even BIS is beginning to have official missions that have no medics (see Combined Arms showcase) because even they realize their system is so arcade their medics are simply not needed - why should mission makers care?

Well I guess I can agree that the medical system needs attention, and also that getting wounded does not give you a sense of urgency (if there is no bleeding). However it's far from saying that the medic is now useless, which is the thing I'm really saying is not true... given proper game setting up.

There's no bleeding. In fact you can shoot a dude in a torso with 6.5mm from point blank and he will still be able to fight like nothing has happened not needing any medical attention.

You can repeat "it's all about how the game is set up" a dozen times yet it won't change the fact that ArmA3 wounding system is greatly inferior to what ArmA2 offered.

I was referring to the medic's animation (as I believe were you) but yes, you should both be unable to do other actions without breaking out of the medic aid action.

The problem is that current medic system isn't going to be fixed and fixing it isn't even in plans (according to Jay Crowe).

And it will stay that way while people keep defending what BIS did to it.

[chiefboatsret 14]

And your complaining about it will get it fixed? When are you all going to realize that there is a limit of time and resources that the developers have and that everyone is not going to get what they want. The game would never come out if they had to put in all the expectations people have. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you bought it and don't like it chalk it up to experience and move on because it will never be everything to everyone. Go bitch to EA about their games and see where that gets you, they will offer you another part for the game for more money.

[metalcraze 290]

Yes keep defending. That surely will help.

They don't have resources (riiight, but small DayZ SA team for some reason has) to implement a normal medic system - but they had resources to cut a vastly superior one out?

And your complaining about it will get it fixed?

Let's see - me and other people complaining fixed:

- total lack of communication from Bohemia

- Sniper rifles and some other "balancing"

- AMV Marshall

- Fatigue and loadouts (or at least forced BIS to start working on them despite having no plans to do so)

- some decade old AI issues that BIS was ignoring up until a month ago

So yes complaining does help as long as it's not drowned by fanboy "everything is perfect in ArmA3!" defense.

Edited August 13, 2013 by metalcraze

[NordKindchen 12]

The effects: You call the effects an improvement? O.o O.o O.o Wow......srsly....wow....the explosions and impacts are the WORST Ive seen since ages! Even Arma 2 with warfx had better effects. And I wouldnt call warfx good up to date anymore.

Just wow....

Here (BIS Forum)

and Here (Forum tracker) are topics to improve the effects

And destroyed vehicles: The ugliest UGLIEST piece of modelling Ive seen this year. I so hope they are WIP.

Feedbacktracker entrance

And the landscape? Its a two edged sword. Pretty nice close up but after 100 meters the midrange texture is not milli percent better than Arma2. In fact its the ugliest midrange we get in a graphic wise comparable game.

Forum entrance

Feedbacktracker entrance

[dmarkwick 261]

Because FAKs are just a part of a bigger problem of medic system being very arcade and almost nothing but primitive 100 hp?

Removing them will not solve that. And again - nobody is going to bother. When even BIS is beginning to have official missions that have no medics (see Combined Arms showcase) because even they realize their system is so arcade their medics are simply not needed - why should mission makers care?

Lol, well I guess some mission makers do care :) but I note you haven't offered to make such missions.

There's no bleeding. In fact you can shoot a dude in a torso with 6.5mm from point blank and he will still be able to fight like nothing has happened not needing any medical attention.

You can repeat "it's all about how the game is set up" a dozen times yet it won't change the fact that ArmA3 wounding system is greatly inferior to what ArmA2 offered.

The problem is that current medic system isn't going to be fixed and fixing it isn't even in plans (according to Jay Crowe).

And it will stay that way while people keep defending what BIS did to it.

Hmm yes - you have a tendency to throw everything up in the air as broken because of one single element, disregarding that you can make things better. Not perfect or even as you wish it to be, but definitely better. However, that's not your paradigm as far as I've noticed.

[Smurf 12]

Yes keep defending. That surely will help.

They don't have resources (riiight, but small DayZ SA team for some reason has) to implement a normal medic system - but they had resources to cut a vastly superior one out?

Let's see - me and other people complaining fixed:

- total lack of communication from Bohemia

- Sniper rifles and some other "balancing"

- AMV Marshall

- Fatigue and loadouts (or at least forced BIS to start working on them despite having no plans to do so)

- some decade old AI issues that BIS was ignoring up until a month ago

So yes complaining does help as long as it's not drowned by fanboy "everything is perfect in ArmA3!" defense.

It's not defending but accepting. If I'm happy with this simplistic approach to medics that even remove the drag and carry mechanics? Nope, could be better, but they already stated that it won't change at least for release and most probably won't after it.

And how do you know that all this complaining in fact changed things? To me all those fixed you listed there are part of a normal dev cycle.

This go beyond feedback and falls into annoyance, Lord Boncy seems to think the same. :j:

[dwaight 17]

The effects: You call the effects an improvement? O.o O.o O.o Wow......srsly....wow....the explosions and impacts are the WORST Ive seen since ages! Even Arma 2 with warfx had better effects. And I wouldnt call warfx good up to date anymore.

Just wow....

Here (BIS Forum)

and Here (Forum tracker) are topics to improve the effects

And destroyed vehicles: The ugliest UGLIEST piece of modelling Ive seen this year. I so hope they are WIP.

Feedbacktracker entrance

And the landscape? Its a two edged sword. Pretty nice close up but after 100 meters the midrange texture is not milli percent better than Arma2. In fact its the ugliest midrange we get in a graphic wise comparable game.

Forum entrance

Feedbacktracker entrance

Wow thats amazing...

[chiefboatsret 14]

I guess my real point is that giving a feedback report instead of whining in the forums is probably the way to go. If you can't get what you want here, go find the game that has it all and play the shit out of it. I still think I will get many more hours of entertainment value out of Arma III than I paid for it, not even the price of a meal for one at a good restaurant. Really, go play something. People spend way too much time in here trying to one up each other on what a bitch a game is. If spending $40-$60 give you this much pain and stress you have a very bad life in front of you.

[Azzur33 1]

Yes keep defending. That surely will help.

So yes complaining does help as long as it's not drowned by fanboy "everything is perfect in ArmA3!" defense.

Are you SURE they'll fix things because some of you call them incompetent, lazy, ignorant losers who can't make anything right?

You whip them to submission?

Might there be a possibility that "constructive criticism" does mean something else?

If some are against continuous overreacted whining, does that make them "Fanboys defending everything and saying everything is Perfect"?

There really are many differend ways to raise a child, teach a dog or get your workers to work better.

Shouting and abusing is usually one of the bad ways. It won't lead to anything good.

If you want someone to do something differently, keep calm, communicate, and trust. Verbally abuse them, and they'll just be ....annoyed.

Edited August 13, 2013 by Azzur33

[Tonci87 163]

The medic system really has to change. This is a fact and shouldn't need much discussion.

[Varanon 892]

If some are against continuous overreacted whining, does that make them "Fanboys defending everything and saying everything is Perfect"?

Begging your pardon, but you're not against constant whining, you are constantly defending a system that even the developers say is broken.

And thank you very much for calling concern "overacted whining". Contrary to you overreacted defense, I usually try to argument my case, something a lot of others (on any side) do not do.

If you want someone to do something differently, keep calm, communicate, and trust.

I do that. I bring arguments every time I post something against the current (IMHO) problem areas. I'm still labeled as "whiner", "dumb", "idiot" and "overreacting" all the time. So it seems no matter what you actually do, you are always going to get flak, even if it's arguing (with IMHO valid arguments) against things like "It's a game".

[purepassion 22]

The medic system really has to change. This is a fact and shouldn't need much discussion.

Indeed! I think that just having bleeding as something that will gradually hurt and kill the player and the FAK's mainly existing to stop said bleeding would already increase its usability and authenticity very much.

[HKFlash 9]

The medic system really has to change. This is a fact and shouldn't need much discussion.

The whole battlefield medical assistance feature really is borked. I see alot of complaining, much of it justified (yet rarely done in a constructive manner), about many features, but I believe this area has not received enough attention by the community, i.e. with the exception of some fans/users/players alot of people are requesting not so urgent stuff, such as being able to deploy bipods or the lack of fixed wing aircraft for NATO and CSAT. The aircraft will eventually come, ability to deploy bipods was never a feature of the series (do not confuse this statement as me not wanting them because I would love to) but IIRC the medical system is not going to change. Worse, it is actually a regression from ARMA2.

This is an huge mistake, because this aspect of the game is out of place and feels so non-ARMA, even going as far contradicting its very nature, making it reminiscent of titles such as Battlefield or Call of Duty. By the way, is there a ticket about it?

However, considering that I bought an Alpha/Beta and thus I'm a game tester, I feel that I should point a solution to this problem. This is of course, my opinion and you know how those work, they are likes arses, everyone has one.

First Aid Kit:

This Item should only stop bleeding, not heal the character (although healing it by 5-10% would do no harm)

Medical Kit:

Should heal but not to 100% but rather to 50-75% and of course it should stop bleeding. I also believe (and I think I'm pretty much alone in this regard) that it should have a limited amount of use, 20 times at maximum yet rechargeable at specific objects (for example a medical tent or medical supply box) or vehicles (ambulances for example). This would create a new spectrum of the logistical chain, where medical supplies matter as much as ammo and fuel.

[enex 11]

Bleeding is indeed way to go!It will make medic useful again

and elevate simple system from I'm hit -> IFAK.

Could someone be so kind and highlight vannila arma 2 medic system?

Something along arma 2 medical system in nutshell.

So how to improve system?Well I would heavy rely on ACE medical system.

If you are hit -> bandage (to stop bleeding) if not you can bleed out and die.

If you are hit -> in pain (apply morphine) to kill the pain and improve aim.

So if you get hit you suffer from shaky aim, and bleeding which can lead to death.

And that can be enough for all.

Edited August 13, 2013 by enex

[froggyluv 2135]

To the best of my knowledge, this first aid system is final. RiE said in an interview on E3 that they had plans for something more sophisticated but are not likely to change this one.

I think a few simple changes could already make this system much more believable:

- Introduce bleeding. When you are shot, you bleed, and if you don't take care of the wound, you will eventually bleed out and die.

- FAK's should stop the bleeding, and POSSIBLY heal a bit of damage, but that healing should be like "add 10% of health" instead of "heal up to 75%".

- Only Medic can heal you completely (as it is now). Medic healing will stop bleeding.

- Bleeding units will leave a blood trail. This already happens, but is over too short.

At the very least this should be an option, either difficulty-based, or by module. FAK's can stay that way, in fact the changes aren't really that big, and the result not really great, but certainly better than what we have now.

All of the above sounds reasonable. Have to be honest I too am a little shell shocked that the current FAK/non wounding/no injured crawling is totally absent. Of course some mod will save the day but once we get to a certain level of 'needed mods', pretty much all my plans of playing CooP again are out the window. Me and my buds are all family guys, married with jobs and generally trying to get everyone on the same page mod wise in Arma 2 meant a few hours of "Wait, are you sure you have the most current mod X?", "Somethings wrong -server restart.." etc.. sure, us being old farts has something to do with it but some things just become unmanageable after a while sending us back on our merry SP ways. Than of course, you have "is the mission properly calibrated for Mod x? Is it going to break/make to easy or hard?".

I tend to get lost in mod mashing after a while and that becomes more of my full time gaming hobby than actually playing. Of course, I don't or wouldn't blame BI for not making the full game the 'Everything Game' -as we all have different aspects and ideas of what needs to take utmost priority. One guy its tank penetration, another ToH flight model, another realistic wounding, another inherent AI suppression or indoor ability, another better terrain res, another more Chernarus forests, another explosive effects, another variety of content, another 3D editor, another more fish.........................................

Personally I've grown use to a certain level of wounding that is natural to OFP and it's removal feels unwarranted without some sort of substitute. I hope BI reconsider this.