Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
almanzo

No women at all

Recommended Posts

Except you can't "just port" from dayz. There is so much going on "behind the graphics" and there is so much archaic bullshit in the engine, that just mashing the two things together is NOT going to end well.

There are probably more things in this post I want to reply to, but this is the most pressing. Once again, he didn't say that you can port anything from DayZ. He said that the fact that DayZ has fully functioning females is evidence that implementing fully functioning females is not only possible, but not nearly as difficult as some people would like to make it seem.

Yes, it would be a lot of work, but no one ever said making a video game wasn't a lot of work.

Edit: And here it goes

And they have decided that it isnt one?

For the reasons stated throughout this thread, that is the wrong decision.

Female models, whether combat capable or not are still eye candy. Not in the sexist way most people in these sorts of threads take that to mean, but in the same way having different RWS models for both sides (instead of the "cut and paste" jobs we have at the moment) would not provide any different functionality. They are there purely for aesthetics.

So is a lot of stuff. Different uniforms for different classes of soldier, sleeves up, sleeves down, short sleeves, long sleeves, helmets with goggles on them, helmets with paint on them, beanies with and without microphones sticking out, different colored helicopters, different color backpacks, different color hats, optics with different colored reticles, graffiti on walls...

None of this is stuff really has any functionality have functionality; it's all arguably eye candy, but that doesn't mean it doesn't add to the game. Our primary method of engaging with video games is visually, after all (yes, other stuff is important, too).

No, generally thats what happens when you argue with idiots. They bring you down to their level, then beat you with experience [of being idiots] :)

Nice.

Edited by roshnak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why?

1. BI have stated clearly that they are not going to do anything in half measures anymore. So if they do women, they do them fully.

2. Female models, whether combat capable or not are still eye candy. Not in the sexist way most people in these sorts of threads take that to mean, but in the same way having different RWS models for both sides (instead of the "cut and paste" jobs we have at the moment) would not provide any different functionality. They are there purely for aesthetics.

dude listen. you said "eye candy for missions" refering to female civs FOR MISSIONS, recycling what people said before about needing them for believable scenarios. no amount of bold text will change that :p so please don't treat me like a fool.

AND FOR THAT MATTER PLEASE READ THE TITLE AND FIRST POST...

you can philosophize about how much stuff is needed all day. that won't change the fact that this is a game. and the request for some form of females is being made by the players. many of them. the opposition consist mostly of people being against it for "realism" reasons. and then there's people like you who just like to lecture people...

so stop acting like your own view is a general fact and like every decision made by "non-peasant dev level people" (as opposed to "non-dev" :rolleyes:) is perfect. the whole release of arma 3 is riddled with questionable decisions.

If you go the full hog you also have to rework weapons, equipment, interacting with vehicles, climbing, scuba, skydiving, etc etc etc, the list is endless.

bullshit. the dayZ mod already had a female that could do everything (not sure about the CWR one). there are many ways to make this work. you are simply trying to make it sound horrible in general.

If you follow the twitter accounts of various people who work at BI, you will see quite clearly that the animators are all working on other projects (DayZ, and others), leaving no one to work on A3.

which is my point when i bring up dayZ...you are mixing things up again. first it's only lack of gameplay gain then it's suddenly an entire other game that is developed on the "same" engine eating all the resources. if you would acknowledge the whole picture (being lack of resources not allowing to get more elaborate overall) more you might maybe come across as less lecturing and more informing which you claim to be.

Except that A2 had little to no real creative leadership. And as such was a bit shonky (ACR DLC anyone?).

now you're just reaching for straws. you are telling me that all the arma 2 realism units being on patrol in afghan villages with civilian population had a problem with the fact that the local females couldn't carry a gun to an extent that they welcome the total lack of females in arma 3 as the better alternative? good for you if your own opinion matches the "official" BI one that much. it doesn't make it more true or better...

No, generally thats what happens when you argue with idiots. They bring you down to their level, then beat you with experience [of being idiots]

i'll just hope you are not refering to me and will also ignore what a smug thing to say that is. for the general context. no one here is responsible for problems with your argumentation. it's all on you.

I know a lot more truth than 99% of the people in this thread

no need to actually say it. it's pretty clear that this is the motivation behind your posts. so far you are not delivering though. you are simply repeating that it's hard to do in various forms bringing up partly questionable reasons (see above).

Except you can't "just port" from dayz. There is so much going on "behind the graphics" and there is so much archaic bullshit in the engine, that just mashing the two things together is NOT going to end well.

read again and you may understand...(just so i won't need to say this again...no i didn't say "just port")

besides. rigging a model with human proportions to another very similar skeleton is not rocket science so while i agree that it's still quite some work i'd really appreciate you not trying to make this about obscure "code things" that only you supposedly understand :rolleyes:

Except there really is. Many different reasons at that.

yea right. while you say yourself that dayZ has all the animators it's suddenly the technical reasons again that make it near impossible. you should really try to settle on either "priorities" or "technically near impossible" since you are getting quite wonky when challenged to being more specific.

anyways. i'm happy for you for being so much insync with every decision BI make. i hope it makes you feel good about yourself...

Edited by Bad Benson
had to add this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except you can't "just port" from dayz. There is so much going on "behind the graphics" and there is so much archaic bullshit in the engine, that just mashing the two things together is NOT going to end well.

It's the same skeleton with extra joints for clothes, don't act like it's some voodoo black magic that will break everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's the same skeleton with extra joints for clothes, don't act like it's some voodoo black magic that will break everything.

actually i wouldn't be too sure about that. i mean knowing BI they still probably recycled the shit out of things but i'd say that at least some positional changes have been made. and bone names could be different too. but yea as i said. if proportions don't differ a lot it would be easy to rig model to another skel. yes! easy! unless you aren't fit for the job in which case you should consider a different career.

another problem i see with directly "porting" from dayZ is simply doing that ;) i mean it would be a bit strange to share content that extensively. i'd rather have new stuff that expands on the current scenario.

seems like we're left with mods until BI decide to make more than just the very least (VERY, considering copy pasta and lack of air crafts). i think most content creators aka modellers are working on dayZ. it's the only explaination i have for the lack of new weapons for example. modders pump these out a lot faster in (some cases) superior quality. makes you wonder if any modellers are left at all who are assigned to arma 3.

Edited by Bad Benson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way you have to mess around with new skeletons/rigs (something I know the engine doesnt like), new anims, and new models. If you go the full hog you also have to rework weapons, equipment, interacting with vehicles, climbing, scuba, skydiving, etc etc etc, the list is endless.

You mean there is a real M4A1 out there in the real world, in common use today, which is made for women? Ridiculous. Bringing a skeleton over from DayZ wouldn't be a one day job, but by the same token it wouldn't be soul crushing either. An in fact, it wouldn't need to be done at all, the existing male skeleton could be adjusted to account for the differences, which believe it or not, aren't very different at all.

Is there a HMMWV for women too? Does water interact differently to a female body than it does to a males? When you say skydiving, are you talking about boobs flapping around near shoulderblades? I'm pretty sure that doesn't happen to pixels.

What it comes down to is that you don't see a need for it, for whatever reason. Fine, we get that. You are entitled to your opinion and you have aired it. If by some miracle we should get female character models in the game, you are completely free to never use one at all. You will also be completely free to whine and moan because female character models were included but your militarized, armoured attack unicycle still isn't in.

Your argument against aesthetics is weak at best and you know it. If aesthetics weren't important, why is Altis as gorgeous as it is? In a game like Arma, immersion is important. Immersion comes from an almost magical combination of functionality, normality and aesthetics. I say magical, because a game designer needs to find this balance without falling into uncanny valley, where things are close enough to reality to almost be real, but there is something about what you perceive which really jars you. Unfortunately, Arma 3 falls directly into that uncanny valley as soon as your subconscious mind notices the total lack of females.

I'm afraid your arguments are weak. Not only that, they are pointless, unless you are a BIS decision maker in disguise. We'd like some female character models please BIS.

Edited by Spudly
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would rather see furnishings in all the empty buildings. The biggest immersion breaker for me is the sterile empty houses that populate both vanilla islands. Until they do something about that we will continue to play in takistan and chernarus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would rather see furnishings in all the empty buildings. The biggest immersion breaker for me is the sterile empty houses that populate both vanilla islands. Until they do something about that we will continue to play in takistan and chernarus.

I think that was done for performance reasons rather than 'we ran out of furniture budget' or something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You mean there is a real M4A1 out there in the real world, in common use today, which is made for women? Ridiculous. Bringing a skeleton over from DayZ wouldn't be a one day job, but by the same token it wouldn't be soul crushing either. An in fact, it wouldn't need to be done at all, the existing male skeleton could be adjusted to account for the differences, which believe it or not, aren't very different at all.

Is there a HMMWV for women too? Does water interact differently to a female body than it does to a males? When you say skydiving, are you talking about boobs flapping around near shoulderblades? I'm pretty sure that doesn't happen to pixels.

i think he is refering to the limitations of arma 2 female civilians which can't be over come that easily. i think they couldn't get in vehicles even or it was buggy. but again. that is not the only way to get the job done if you want them equal to males. so far it seems for example that (don't quote me on that) in dayZ males and females are sharing anims and the skeleton. this was also the way it was done with the female in the dayZ mod afaik.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i think he is refering to the limitations of arma 2 female civilians which can't be over come that easily. i think they couldn't get in vehicles even or it was buggy. but again. that is not the only way to get the job done if you want them equal to males. so far it seems for example that (don't quote me on that) in dayZ males and females are sharing anims and the skeleton. this was also the way it was done with the female in the dayZ mod afaik.

They didnt have animations for driving vehicles (cept the Gulf)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so they could drive the vehicle? i actually never tried i think. only used them as part of alice or similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so they could drive the vehicle? i actually never tried i think. only used them as part of alice or similar.

They could drive the Golf look alike, one woman in the campaign was driving it around and you had to stop her and interrigate her I believe. I guess that's why they could drive that car in ARMA II.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I still have to understand this magical line between "usefull" and "eye candy".

Same for me. DM is working on a sim, but we would like to have a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DM still cant let go i see :)

once he was admired has an integral part of a very much loved addon team , his coleagues moved on , i guess he becomes these days more know as the guy who used to know and do so much but now only suggests through badly advised posts that he is a rebel without a cause , such a shame to see a decline in a forum.

Women need Voice Underwear model , combat model , vest and Head , the skeleton suggestion is lauaghable , simply use Ofp2manskeleton and cfgmovesmalesldr ,

Bis can even scale using pivot model , i tried it it works but BIS would need to document how hand proxies should be managed .

This is a female took 5 minutes to weight in blender using the available A3 skeletons around she shoots drives flies and dies with ragdoll because she uses OFP2man skel :), there is only one problem , The walk animations are too manly , i hear same even from VBS2 devs who tried same and i agree just walk anim looked a bit tooo manly on a woman :) ..

anyway proof of not just any women but exceptoional womens take no time at all .

Some very exceptional women in Arma 3 lol

be careful here this may affect your eyes and mind for a long time click with caution ;)

IMO all forum questions about performance , content and quality can be answered with obe very obvious and simple equation in terms of , "if i owned a business with 3 products (albeit one only uses the core engine but still an income and still requires joint devving ) right now where would i concentrate all my efforts and the answer would be :

DayZ and VBS3 > A3

Edited by Sealife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you are simply trying to make it sound horrible in general.

Because it IS horrible. I know, I've done it.

first it's only lack of gameplay gain then it's suddenly an entire other game that is developed on the "same" engine eating all the resources. if you would acknowledge the whole picture (being lack of resources not allowing to get more elaborate overall) more you might maybe come across as less lecturing and more informing which you claim to be.

I'm not the one suggesting these issues are mutually exclusive? They all stack up against the notion.

now you're just reaching for straws. you are telling me that all the arma 2 realism units being on patrol in afghan villages with civilian population had a problem with the fact that the local females couldn't carry a gun to an extent that they welcome the total lack of females in arma 3 as the better alternative? good for you if your own opinion matches the "official" BI one that much. it doesn't make it more true or better...

1. Your words, not mine.

2. If my opinion does match with that of BI's, it makes it the correct one to have.

3. No where have I ever said that having women in the game is bad. All I have ever said is that adding them properly (which is what BI have hinted at being the only way they will add them now) is a fuckload more work than ANYONE here has even guessed at.

no need to actually say it. it's pretty clear that this is the motivation behind your posts. so far you are not delivering though. you are simply repeating that it's hard to do in various forms bringing up partly questionable reasons (see above).

Because no one ever takes in when I explain just what needs to be done (I have, a couple of times in different threads)

besides. rigging a model with human proportions to another very similar skeleton is not rocket science so while i agree that it's still quite some work i'd really appreciate you not trying to make this about obscure "code things" that only you supposedly understand :rolleyes:

Rigging and creating a new skeleton is easy. Yeah, it takes time, but its still easy. Getting the engine to actually use that new skeleton? Yeah, good luck with that. (See images in reponse further down)

yea right. while you say yourself that dayZ has all the animators it's suddenly the technical reasons again that make it near impossible. you should really try to settle on either "priorities" or "technically near impossible" since you are getting quite wonky when challenged to being more specific.

Again, where do I say these issues are mututally exclusive. They all add up to more hurdles against the work being done.

It's the same skeleton with extra joints for clothes, don't act like it's some voodoo black magic that will break everything.

Well, mr know it all, this is what happens when you use a character with a different skeleton to the one defined ingame:

Kym5azr.jpg

So yeah, I'm dressing it up to be harder to do than it actually is...

You mean there is a real M4A1 out there in the real world, in common use today, which is made for women? Ridiculous. Bringing a skeleton over from DayZ wouldn't be a one day job, but by the same token it wouldn't be soul crushing either. An in fact, it wouldn't need to be done at all, the existing male skeleton could be adjusted to account for the differences, which believe it or not, aren't very different at all.

Is there a HMMWV for women too? Does water interact differently to a female body than it does to a males? When you say skydiving, are you talking about boobs flapping around near shoulderblades? I'm pretty sure that doesn't happen to pixels.

1. Here is the fundamental lack of understanding about how the game engine handles characters. You would need to re-work all the systems that involve character interaction (so, wearing gear items, holding weapons, driving vehicles, climbing ladders, sky/scuba diving, etc etc) to allow for 2 different sets of anims/2 different skeletons/etc etc. But you knew that already, right?

2. You can not just "adjust" the male skelton, because the skeleton/animation system is simply not designed to allow for it. See images above.

3. Well, you can see in VBS (and other peoples Arma experiments) that females using the male skeleton are not only too big and bulky, but also move wrong. But you don't really care about the actual technical details of it do you?

What it comes down to is that you don't see a need for it, for whatever reason. Fine, we get that. You are entitled to your opinion and you have aired it. If by some miracle we should get female character models in the game, you are completely free to never use one at all. You will also be completely free to whine and moan because female character models were included but your militarized, armoured attack unicycle still isn't in.

What it comes down to is a fundamental inability to read and comprehend my posts. Find and quote me saying "I don't think that there should be women in the game" and I will shut up. But you won't be able to find that. Because I never said it. All I have been doing is explaining the reasons why it is unlikely to ever happen (for A3, by BI) because of how much work it is to achieve properly.

I'm afraid your arguments are weak. Not only that, they are pointless, unless you are a BIS decision maker in disguise. We'd like some female character models please BIS.

Yes, technically informed arguments based on years of knowledge about how the engine works and what would need to be changed in order to achieve female characters the way BI have stated they want to achieve them are weak arguments. I would love to know what a strong argument is (I'm guessing it will be "we want them, BI should add them". )

there is only one problem , The walk animations are too manly , i hear same even from VBS2 devs who tried same and i agree just walk anim looked a bit tooo manly on a woman :) ..

anyway proof of not just any women but exceptoional womens take no time at all.

Yes, the male-replacement models are easy, but they are full of so many shortcomings that BI have said they dont want to do it that way. The animations being the key problem, because (as I have said for the 356235232th time now) the engine is NOT set up to deal with 2 different animation sets using the same skeleton. It just doesnt work.

And for everyone saying "oh but having manly women wont break our immersion" I simply can not believe that you will not be the same people who would instantly be complaining that BI did "a half assed job" if they added females this way.

Edited by DM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would rather see furnishings in all the empty buildings. The biggest immersion breaker for me is the sterile empty houses that populate both vanilla islands. Until they do something about that we will continue to play in takistan and chernarus.

Considering the current state of Greece's state budget, I can't say I find it very unlikely that they'll have resorted to confiscating and selling all furniture owned by Greek citizens within the next 20 years or so in order to pay off their debts. :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having no women civilians if fine, but having no rabbits or sheep or goats would be such an immersion breaker ... I wonder what Sigmund Freud would have to say about a fictional island that is exclusively populated by muscular young men with shaved bodies and goats and sheep and snakes.:butbut: BIS is probably working on a mermaid addition to the marine life, but woman civilians - still out of the question.

Edited by MissionCreep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, the male-replacement models are easy, but they are full of so many shortcomings that BI have said they dont want to do it that way. The animations being the key problem, because (as I have said for the 356235232th time now) the engine is NOT set up to deal with 2 different animation sets using the same skeleton. It just doesnt work.

Lol ya dont need two skeletons though thats the point , you are aguing something that hasnt been written :)

The main reason for Women using Ofp2man skeleton is its the only recognised Ragdoll skeleton , so anybody apart from Bis would be silly spending any time doing anything with a new skeleton .

And for everyone saying "oh but having manly women wont break our immersion" I simply can not believe that you will not be the same people who would instantly be complaining that BI did "a half assed job" if they added females this way.

Oh and like i said but again you refused to remind yourself , only the walk anims would need changing and that only requires a simple inheritance in cfgmoves , like is already done for the new TC4 TC3 cargo positions .

honestly DM let it go your really showing now that your knowledge is Ofp and Game2 specific and not Arma2 and later , its embarassing.

edited for Offtopic stuff lol .

Edited by Sealife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lol ya dont need two skeletons though thats the point , you are aguing something that hasnt been written :)

The main reason for Women using Ofp2man skeleton is its the only recognised Ragdoll skeleton , so anybody apart from Bis would be silly spending any time doing anything with a new skeleton .

"finally someone gets it" :rolleyes:

Because it IS horrible. I know, I've done it.

it rather seems to me like you failed to be honest :p

so because you fail with your methods everyone else will ;) yes your results and method seem to suck. maybe overthink them?

1. Here is the fundamental lack of understanding about how the game engine handles characters. You would need to re-work all the systems that involve character interaction (so, wearing gear items, holding weapons, driving vehicles, climbing ladders, sky/scuba diving, etc etc) to allow for 2 different sets of anims/2 different skeletons/etc etc. But you knew that already, right?

2. You can not just "adjust" the male skelton, because the skeleton/animation system is simply not designed to allow for it. See images above.

3. Well, you can see in VBS (and other peoples Arma experiments) that females using the male skeleton are not only too big and bulky, but also move wrong. But you don't really care about the actual technical details of it do you?

1. you are the one with the lack of understanding. you are just too deep up your own butt to see that there are alternatives to just forcing a new skeleton ingame. actually reading my posts would've shown you that.

You would need to re-work all the systems that involve character interaction (so, wearing gear items, holding weapons, driving vehicles, climbing ladders, sky/scuba diving, etc etc) to allow for 2 different sets of anims/2 different skeletons/etc etc. But you knew that already, right?

yes i did which you would see if you wouldn't be so busy celebrating yourself. :p i never suggested a new skeleton for fully functional women.

2. you can adjust it via animation. you are just too stuck on your own failed experiments. sad really. CfgMovesFatigue? heard of that? if so, why do you think it's hard to make a skeleton use a different set of anims? it can basically even be done via scripting. and yes i have done that and it worked like a charm.

3. since you ignore everything out of your own crappy experience and refuse to think a bit creative because it would ruin your nice ofp-veteran parade, it makes not much sense to respond to that after 1. and 2. according to you females are a lost cause in this engine which is kinda not true. but yea...

Yes, the male-replacement models are easy, but they are full of so many shortcomings that BI have said they dont want to do it that way. The animations being the key problem, because (as I have said for the 356235232th time now) the engine is NOT set up to deal with 2 different animation sets using the same skeleton. It just doesnt work.

*cough* cfgMovesFatigue *cough*

whatever dude. i'm starting to feel a bit sad for you. seems like the engine has made you a pessimist.

honestly DM let it go your really showing now that your knowledge is Ofp and Game2 specific and not Arma2 and later , its embarassing.

pretty much, yea. seems like some people think that having tried something some time gives them some kind of free pass to tell people they don't know shit :rolleyes:

your responds to me pretty much boil down to this

But you knew that already, right?

to sum it up. you didn't tell me one thing i didn't know yet so i can't see why you are still trying to talk down on me. so it makes not much sense to talk to you.

typical arma veteran elitist swell head. impossible to talk to.

EDIT: @DM: watch this. but careful. it might blow your mind

i rest my case

Edited by Bad Benson
removed uneeded things ;P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. BI have stated clearly that they are not going to do anything in half measures anymore. So if they do women, they do them fully.

2. Female models, whether combat capable or not are still eye candy. Not in the sexist way most people in these sorts of threads take that to mean, but in the same way having different RWS models for both sides (instead of the "cut and paste" jobs we have at the moment) would not provide any different functionality. They are there purely for aesthetics.

And yet, Zeus has full-on poultry simulation.

Care to fit that into your theory?

Yes, the male-replacement models are easy, but they are full of so many shortcomings that BI have said they dont want to do it that way.

On what planet do they live, where females walk and run dramatically different from males? Their civilians always look awkward and stilted no matter what they're doing, standing bolt upright and diving on their faces all the time. No one is going to notice.

Edited by maturin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't beleive this tread is still alive.

First thing you will know if they ever implement female soldiers is that you will constantly be fighting with armies composed of at least half of females (all of them played by man) in multiplayer (Just think of this female character looking at you, and suddently the guy is using direct chat!). That would be totaly immersion breaking.

Yes yes I know, some of you just want them as civilian for your mission, but we all know the rage we will see if they they are again not able to use a gun.

You are telling DM to let it go, but I think you are all the one who should let this issue go. Really, this thread is like 6 month olds and I am pretty sure there was another thread before this one complaining about the same damn thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First thing you will know if they ever implement female soldiers is that you will constantly be fighting with armies composed of at least half of females

Stupidly easy to prevent.

but we all know the rage we will see if they they are again not able to use a gun.

And while the missionmakers are completely happy and a retarded oversight in the atmosphere of many, many gameworlds and modes is being filled... we (and BIS) care about the rage of a few pedants why, exactly? When the game benefits in objective terms?

The fervor with which so many people cling to invalid arguments to justify the current state of affairs makes me wonder if there's not some deep-seated need to justify the boys-club atmosphere of the game. A kind of pre-adolescent misogeny carried over into the entirety of what we call the gamer community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't beleive this tread is still alive.

First thing you will know if they ever implement female soldiers is that you will constantly be fighting with armies composed of at least half of females (all of them played by man) in multiplayer (Just think of this female character looking at you, and suddently the guy is using direct chat!). That would be totaly immersion breaking.

Yes yes I know, some of you just want them as civilian for your mission, but we all know the rage we will see if they they are again not able to use a gun.

You are telling DM to let it go, but I think you are all the one who should let this issue go. Really, this thread is like 6 month olds and I am pretty sure there was another thread before this one complaining about the same damn thing.

Read the original post once more. This thread is requesting female civillians first and foremost, not female soldiers. Having goats, rabbits, butterflies and eagles while no females is the main complaint, not the lack of female soldiers, even if that would be very much welcome as well. Female civs, not female soldiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×