No women at all

[giorgygr 61]

Yeah well it's quite logic though, for the campaign takes place on Mykonos island.

Baahh..in Mykonos there are mostly men with woman clothes around ..if you catch my drift ;D

[Static 10]

Mechanically speaking, this probably isn't going to happen. There's 3 ways BIS can integrate female characters into the new engine:

1: Female characters would be set up in the same way as animals (ie, an extremely limited character class, like in ArmA.2), <sarcasm> which I'm absolutely certain would be a perfect solution that wouldn't make anyone unhappy. </sarcasm>

(nb - if it does happen, that's how it's going to happen)

2. Simply have a female head model (similar to how we have a beard head model) and voice. If BIS did this everyone would accuse them of half-assing it, because you guys are dicks like that.

3. Create a female version of each character model (including all proxies). Completely rewrite the uniform code so that the female models are applied to characters who are female. Do all the animations for female characters. After completely recreating all of their work, BIS has slightly appeased the handful of players who wanted a female character model, and everyone who's been complaining about the lack of shotguns, a "proper" 3D editor or <INSERT VBS FEATURE HERE> is angry because they didn't get what they wanted.

It's not a pretty truth, but oftentimes the truth isn't.

If they chose option 3 they wouldn't have to redo every uniform. In 20 years time Iran isn't going to have women in its armed forces, so CSAT uniforms can remain as is, and on could make an argument that says that the AAF are unlikely to have women in their army, so they can leave. NATO forces are really the only ones with any chance of having a sizable number of women in their army* and so only NATO uniforms would need to be reworked.**

Even if they aren't included in the armies, the game needs female civilians; currently missions in towns or cities or that involve civilians in any number are very uncanny. I don't really have much sympathy for BIS if including females is difficult or time-consuming, frankly, I'd rather have female models than shotguns or new vehicles/weaponry. I can get all of those from mods, but this is 2014 and the game should, at the very least, have equal numbers of female civilians.

* Although even with NATO it's not likely that the various armed forces will have a sizable female population in 20 years, given how misogynistic the armed forced in most NATO countries are.

** Is it not also a possibility, however clunky it may be, to make different models for uniforms? So a male wouldn't be able to wear a female uniform and vice versa, but they'd still exist? Surely this make sense fluff-wise too as many of the uniforms are made from sturdier stuff than modern fabric and so a woman wearing a male uniform would be less than comfortable.

Edited February 14, 2014 by Static

[2nd ranger 282]

If they chose option 3 they wouldn't have to redo every uniform. In 20 years time Iran isn't going to have women in its armed forces, so CSAT uniforms can remain as is, and on could make an argument that says that the AAF are unlikely to have women in their army, so they can leave. NATO forces are really the only ones with any chance of having a sizable number of women in their army* and so only NATO uniforms would need to be reworked.**

No, if you make playable female soldiers in one faction, you need to make them for all factions. Making them playable would be about letting female players have a female avatar, so in that case you must cater for all factions.

I don't care at all if female soldiers aren't included, but female civilians are a must. The civilian faction is severely lacking at the moment, and not just for women. If BIS just reskinned all the Arma 2 civilians and put them in A3, that would at least be something.

[artisanal 22]

Baahh..in Mykonos there are mostly men with woman clothes around ..if you catch my drift ;D

I totally see what you mean ;)

[genesis92x 810]

I too am dissapoint about the lack of females.

You would not need to re-do the uniforms for the female characters. Please tell me the last time you could really tell a female soldier apart from a male soldier unless their face was uncovered?

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/9559/44884198.jpg

http://i.usatoday.net/news/_photos/2011/03/17/suicidesx-large.jpg

Come onnnn BIS is just bein' lazy.

But to be honest, I would rather just have more content (as in weapons/vehicles) at this point than anything else...SIGH...

[simon1279 52]

So basically all that you want is this

So at this point shut down your PC and go outdoor in pubs and discos and just find one ;)

[christianmo 10]

You would not need to re-do the uniforms for the female characters. Please tell me the last time you could really tell a female soldier apart from a male soldier unless their face was uncovered?.

This is how a female in arma 3 looks like with only the face replaced.

http://s7.directupload.net/images/130903/8cyfty2e.jpg (683 kB)

You would need to replace the body and a couple of faces for each faction. Record a entirely speechbank set for each faction featuring women, including pain and fatigue sounds. On top of that male animations might look kinda wierd on a woman, women do walk and move differently than men. Yeah i guess you are right, BI is just lazy :confused:

[biggerdave 56]

If they chose option 3 they wouldn't have to redo every uniform. In 20 years time Iran isn't going to have women in its armed forces, so CSAT uniforms can remain as is, and on could make an argument that says that the AAF are unlikely to have women in their army, so they can leave. NATO forces are really the only ones with any chance of having a sizable number of women in their army* and so only NATO uniforms would need to be reworked.**

Even if they aren't included in the armies, the game needs female civilians; currently missions in towns or cities or that involve civilians in any number are very uncanny. I don't really have much sympathy for BIS if including females is difficult or time-consuming, frankly, I'd rather have female models than shotguns or new vehicles/weaponry. I can get all of those from mods, but this is 2014 and the game should, at the very least, have equal numbers of female civilians.

* Although even with NATO it's not likely that the various armed forces will have a sizable female population in 20 years, given how misogynistic the armed forced in most NATO countries are.

** Is it not also a possibility, however clunky it may be, to make different models for uniforms? So a male wouldn't be able to wear a female uniform and vice versa, but they'd still exist? Surely this make sense fluff-wise too as many of the uniforms are made from sturdier stuff than modern fabric and so a woman wearing a male uniform would be less than comfortable.

Even ignoring the fact that Iran does have female soldiers, uniforms are only part of the issue. If you've played "Adapt", you'll know the first thing you'll want to do as a guerilla is grab the first helmet and armour off an AAF dude. Do you really think no one would bat an eye if a little message popped up saying "hey, you can't wear this because you're the wrong gender"? If BIS wanted to do something like this (and, again, it's not impossible, just look at something like Skyrim or the new fallout games) half assing it is just going to make things worse.

Yeah, you could conceivably make it so that males could only wear male uniforms and females could only wear female uniforms (that way you're only pissing off crossdressers :p ). This still means you'd need to completely rewrite the uniform code, since right now the only thing that determines if you can wear a uniform or not is your side (so unless you want to put all men on blufor and all women on opfor...). And it still doesn't solve the issue with vests/headgear - it'd be pretty ridiculous that you couldn't wear this pistol belt, because it's a womans pistol belt.

[lugiahua 26]

Correct me if I was wrong, but aren't most military body armors have no gender difference?

Only police/concealed body armors make gender based models. So body armor model shouldn't be a big deal in the game.

I personally wouldn't mind if female characters only have limited, or even none combat ability. The point is authentic of environment.

Edited February 14, 2014 by Lugiahua

[granQ 293]

No women irl, no women in arma3.. thats why..

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?173123-Forever-alone-in-Sweden

[almanzo 144]

So basically all that you want is this

So at this point shut down your PC and go outdoor in pubs and discos and just find one ;)

I am married, thank you very much :P

[bad benson 1733]

half assing it is just going to make things worse.

and here is where you mix up reality with your own opinion. this attitude might make sense in a thread lecturing people why their wishes are so unreasonable (btw i think most people who know just a little about modding know what is involved) but does it make any sense at all when it comes to the actual game? you are basically saying "something is worse than nothing" which makes no sense whatsoever in any universe. you are basically saying that arma 2's "solution" was worse than arma 3's just for the simple fact that people will complain about anything. who gives a fuck? again. well played on a forums level but i'm sure in the real world you would be as happy as me with "some" solution.

i know it's easy to drop some "insider knowledge" and simply say "BI can't win" but did it ever cross your mind that the game is maybe better off with any solution rather than none? and since when does whining dictate which direction a game has to go? i don't see weapon resting implemented yet. and people "whine" quite a lot about that.

This still means you'd need to completely rewrite the uniform code

eventhough i agree that the modular gear system is pretty much the death of any detailed solution and that it will probably never happen, i think you are exaggerating quite a lot when you say "completely rewrite". all you would need is a bool to determine female or male (much like what arma 2 had "women = 1/0"). i don't see how that equals rewriting "the system".

but you are right about it being a ridiculous solution since the moment you deny taking the uniform will be quite awkward. so i don't really get why you yourself bring it up as a possible solution.

if anything, and eventhough it won't happen, it would make much more sense to ACTUALLY change the system a bit more drastically and make female versions of all the clothes that need it (aka short sleeves, scuba suit and the "breath taking amount" of civilian outfits) and leave all the baggy stuff as is since it would look totally fine. then you'd need to make a change that checks for the gender of the character and apply either the male or female model as the proxy. that would need a second model path a bool on the unit and a check for those in whatever part of the engine that does that.

[biggerdave 56]

and here is where you mix up reality with your own opinion. this attitude might make sense in a thread lecturing people why their wishes are so unreasonable (btw i think most people who know just a little about modding know what is involved) but does it make any sense at all when it comes to the actual game? you are basically saying "something is worse than nothing" which makes no sense whatsoever in any universe. you are basically saying that arma 2's "solution" was worse than arma 3's just for the simple fact that people will complain about anything. who gives a fuck? again. well played on a forums level but i'm sure in the real world you would be as happy as me with "some" solution.

Quite often, something is worse than nothing. Again, not a pretty truth, but the truth rarely is.

"Who gives a fuck" is a fine attitude for someone who can afford to take it. Ultimately, however, BIS, like any independent developer, are completely accountable to their fanbase, and don't have this luxury.

eventhough i agree that the modular gear system is pretty much the death of any detailed solution and that it will probably never happen, i think you are exaggerating quite a lot when you say "completely rewrite". all you would need is a bool to determine female or male (much like what arma 2 had "women = 1/0"). i don't see how that equals rewriting "the system".

but you are right about it being a ridiculous solution since the moment you deny taking the uniform will be quite awkward. so i don't really get why you yourself bring it up as a possible solution

No. I'm not exaggerating. I can't stress this enough. This would require a complete rewrite of the uniform code.

Permit me an explanation - right now, the code for a uniform looks like this: (taken from the samples pack)

	class U_Test_uniform: Itemcore
{
	scope = 2; /// scope needs to be 2 to have a visible class
	allowedSlots[] = {BACKPACK_SLOT}; /// where does the uniform fit to when not equipped
	displayName = "Test uniform"; /// how would the stuff be displayed in inventory and on ground
	picture = "\A3\characters_f\data\ui\icon_U_BasicBody_CA.paa"; /// this icon fits the uniform surprisingly well
	model = "\A3\Characters_F\Common\Suitpacks\suitpack_blufor_diver"; /// how does the uniform look when put on ground

	class ItemInfo: UniformItem
	{
		uniformModel = "-";
		uniformClass = Test_Soldier_base_F; /// what soldier class contains parameters of the uniform (such as model, camouflage, hitpoints and others)
		containerClass = Supply90; /// what fake vehicle is used to describe size of uniform container, there is quite a lot SupplyXX classes ready
		mass = 80; /// combined weight and volume
	};
};

Even with the most basic understanding of code, you should notice this doesn't really define anything aside from its appearance in the inventory screen and a reference to character class which defines all the stuff that's actually important (appearance, protection, etc). That is to say: in the current iteration of the engine, clothing literally does define who you are.

[bad benson 1733]

Even with the most basic understanding of code, you should notice this doesn't really define anything aside from its appearance in the inventory screen and a reference to character class which defines all the stuff that's actually important (appearance, protection, etc). That is to say: in the current iteration of the engine, clothing literally does define who you are.

it's true that uniforms are kind of like units but pls tell me what makes you think that deciding whether to switch into A unit rather than B unit is such a monstrous task to code in your eyes...

you pasting a uniform class here doesn't illustrate that AT ALL. to be clear. yes there would be additions needed to each uniform class but the configs are NOT "the system" they are just the static data the engine reads to act accordingly. so yea. one additional check for gender and additional data in the configs. NOT complete rewrite.

"Who gives a fuck" is a fine attitude for someone who can afford to take it. Ultimately, however, BIS, like any independent developer, are completely accountable to their fanbase, and don't have this luxury.

i mean yea i see what you did there but it's still non sense if you actually not only quote "who gives a fuck" but also the context i added. what i was saying is that they shouldn't give a fuck. and they don't to the degree you try to make it sound like. hence my example of resting.

also to show even more how unlogical that thought is. you are saying that the current complaining is less than what would happen if they added just civilian women, or heads or what ever? pure opinion and speculation about a non defined mass of people you call "fan base". very convincing...

and again. you are too concerned (only?) with if people rant. people rant. period. that wouldn't change, or even get worse how you like to think, if they actually added new content to the game.

Quite often, something is worse than nothing. Again, not a pretty truth, but the truth rarely is.

first of all, before you jizz so much over your own wise phrase again. give an example of the first part. what "something" would be "worse" in this case? and please don't tell me your definition of "worse" is solely based on forum threads and not the actual game. tell me. how would female civilians or female heads or whatever break arma?

about part two. yea the truth hurts blabla. we get it. no need to repeat it. it's not THAT original.

Edited February 15, 2014 by Bad Benson

[roshnak 41]

Even if it were to require an entire rewrite of the uniform system, all I would have to say is that maybe BIS should have taken into account the fact that more than half the population is female and that maybe it would be a good idea to represent them in some form or other.

BIS has been really, really terrible at representing women in its games. They should probably try to change that.

Also, while researching women not being able to use guns in Arma 2 I found this awesome post which may be relevant to BiggerDave's "too much work" argument.

[vegeta897 13]

I'm stick of seeing people call the developers "lazy" just because they didn't do something. It's the silliest development fallacy. As if them not spending time doing one specific thing, it means they didn't do anything at all and took a vacation during the time they would have spent. Come on, really? It's called priorities. They have to set out a roadmap for themselves and decide what can and can't be done to meet deadlines and budget requirements. There is nothing "lazy" about it. Go develop software yourself and you'll understand.

[biggerdave 56]

it's true that uniforms are kind of like units but pls tell me what makes you think that deciding whether to switch into A unit rather than B unit is such a monstrous task to code in your eyes...

Generally speaking, any change to the base code is a monstrous task. Asking the engine to say "hey this character is male" or "hey this character is female" might seem like a simple task, in reality you're asking that the code do something it's not designed to do. It'd probably be easier to rewrite the code from scratch.

To use a (slightly ridiculous) analogy, it's like asking a blind man to sort fruit by colour. Only the man's hands are covered in paint that constantly changes colour, so the sorted fruit is never the same colour as it was before. Also, there's a chance that whenever the fruit is sorted your blind man will vomit a swarm of rabid man-locusts who go off and ruin your Mother's teaparty.

first of all, before you jizz so much over your own wise phrase again.

There's no need to be confrontational. I don't fundamentally disagree with what you're saying, I'm just providing an input from a perspective you might not have considered.

Also, while researching women not being able to use guns in Arma 2 I found this awesome post which may be relevant to BiggerDave's "too much work" argument.

Adding a full set of animations for female characters in ArmA.2 would be child's play compared to what we're talking about here. (To be honest, I'm kind of surprised no one's done it yet... I guess people today are afraid to try animations without a mo-cap studio on hand... shame, really...)

[roshnak 41]

Adding a full set of animations for female characters in ArmA.2 would be child's play compared to what we're talking about here. (To be honest, I'm kind of surprised no one's done it yet... I guess people today are afraid to try animations without a mo-cap studio on hand... shame, really...)

I don't know anything about animating for Arma, but I wonder if it has anything to do with tools. Oxygen can't possibly be designed for animating in -- I have a hard time believing it was designed for modeling -- since mocap has always been such a big deal for Arma.

As far as implementing the clothing switches: I'm still not sure how it would be such a big deal. It really shouldn't be such a huge problem to make the kind of change that Bad Benson is talking about in the engine code for the people who made the engine. The game already checks what faction the player belongs to before allowing uniforms to be taken, no?

[bad benson 1733]

It'd probably be easier to rewrite the code from scratch.

again. you are just saying that without any actual proof or explaination. simple speculation. as i said before modding something to do an additional check is not a fundamental change. you repeating it and using analogies doesn't change that.

there is no magic involved when doing a simple yes or no check and pick the right data (uniform type). again you are exaggerating without any actual base.

Adding a full set of animations for female characters in ArmA.2 would be child's play compared to what we're talking about here. (To be honest, I'm kind of surprised no one's done it yet... I guess people today are afraid to try animations without a mo-cap studio on hand... shame, really...)

you got it all wrong. the actual work load is the models and animations. it's way more time consuming than adding some config data and modding the configs to provide female uniform data for each uniform. not to mention the animation config that would need to connect the countless weapon specific stances combined with all new stances from the stance system. and all that matching the quality of the male character anims aka doing it all via mocap. since arma is still mainly a fullbody system when it comes to animations this would mean an actual SHITLOAD of animations.

no idea where you get your info from but you might want to reconsider your sources.

There's no need to be confrontational.

sorry about that but your analogies and "common truths" just arenn't adding any depth to what you say to be honest.

and yes i agree that fully functional females probably won't happen due to workload while it is entirely possible to achieve.

and please answer my question. you can't just say things and then not explain.

give an example of the first part. what "something" would be "worse" in this case? and please don't tell me your definition of "worse" is solely based on forum threads and not the actual game. tell me. how would female civilians or female heads or whatever break arma?

[biggerdave 56]

there is no magic involved when doing a simple yes or no check and pick the right data (uniform type). again you are exaggerating without any actual base.

All code is magic. You should know that by now. And not happy-go-lucky Disney movie magic, neither. Terrible magic! With terrible consequences!

You want an example, how about the FSM support that broke the domove command? How about the changes to the way armour is handled that left CSAT troops nigh bullet-proof? How about using the "climb over" command to phase through walls?

Heck, just look at all the unsolvable bugs in AiA wrought by seemingly inconsequential changes to the engine.

you got it all wrong. the actual work load is the models and animations. it's way more time consuming than adding some config data and modding the configs to provide female uniform data for each uniform. not to mention the animation config that would need to connect the countless weapon specific stances combined with all new stances from the stance system. and all that matching the quality of the male character anims aka doing it all via mocap. since arma is still mainly a fullbody system when it comes to animations this would mean an actual SHITLOAD of animations.

no idea where you get your info from but you might want to reconsider your sources.

To go back to my ridiculous analogy - adding a new animation set would be the equivalent of putting a wig on your blind man. Adding new animations is work, yeah. It's a lot of work. I can't disagree with this.

However; compared to rewriting the base code, rewriting all the uniform and vehicle configs, recreating all the infantry models and adding a new animation set... it suddenly doesn't seem like so much work.

and yes i agree that fully functional females probably won't happen due to workload while it is entirely possible to achieve.

and please answer my question. you can't just say things and then not explain.

To be frank, I didn't answer your question because it has absolutely no bearing on the situation whatsoever (other than one of the "common truths" that I'm apparently so fond of). An example of how something can be worse than nothing... well... nuclear waste, people trying to kill you, cancer, the conservative party... you'd rather have these than nothing? I didn't say females heads or female civilians would break the game, just that people would complain about them. How do I know people would complain about them? Because these solutions were used in ArmA and ArmA.2, and people complained about them.... at length...

The game already checks what faction the player belongs to before allowing uniforms to be taken, no?

No, the engine only checks which side you're on. And, more importantly, it's not changing anything about the uniform based on this, just telling you you can't wear it if you aren't the right side.

[LowFlyZone 10]

In ArmA women have yet to receive equal rights, they were in ArmA 2 but completely covered to prevent any scandals. ;)

I imagine they're currently left out because you'd join MP life servers and everyone would run around nakid, more than usual. Imagine if we also had female soldiers, people would do beach insertions in underwear all the time.

[krycek 349]

Glad we clarified this one,so the bottom line is that with every new Arma version things get more complicated.Ok,by Arma 5 we should expect to ride only a bicycle(CROWS version included) because vehicles will be way too hard to implement and would require a total rewrite with the new engine,there's one thing to use 2 wheels but going to 4,6 or 8 wheels we're already pushing it.

Wait until we get the PP presentation with bullet points of why this isn't possible and it would require an insane amount of work which BI couldn't afford to waste resources with them being only 10 guys in a studio apartment(oh wait 2001 passed).

We will also run around commando because the uniforms will have to take into account the different types of crotch so yeah those will be cut too(not the crotch,the uniforms).

This reminds me so much of the whole rail tank fiasco that was cut because people complained it didn't suited their fragile view of what this game should be and the universe balance might get broken.

As a side note,I don't believe that BI should drop everything they work on in A3 in the next min(performance tweaks,fixes,other content and so on) and just add some damn women asap,but it will be pretty ok if we could have an yes or no answer if they're in plan as an expansion pack or content pack in the future that will beef up the civ side a bit more(not just the women).It seems it's really hard to understand that some people like to include the civ side in their missions.

Edited February 15, 2014 by Krycek

[nomisum 129]

+1 for women, old and young. and children :P (no, i dont want to shoot them ffs)

Sent from mobile

[Gunter Severloh 4057]

Female Civilians in Arma2, why not port them over and give them a uniform and gun where needed, and some faction/duty/role that woman usually fill in, in the military.

[13islucky 10]

Female Civilians in Arma2, why not port them over and give them a uniform and gun where needed, and some faction/duty/role that woman usually fill in, in the military.

Because they were animals, not people. Like, literally.