Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
pd3

So Arma 3 is out now, does it set the standard for future releases in the series?

Recommended Posts

Sounds to me like the reason for the arguments over who's a "true" Arma player is because narrowing it down is the only way for "the milsim fans" to be a demographic majority...

Yeah....i'm afraid i'm not a true ArmA player then...no luck :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Last I checked, ShackTac uses what they like and ACE is merely a base.

Speaking of which, ACE3 is already confirmed by NouberNou, but you'll have to check with him for any details because I'm not aware of any other ACE devs who speak in public.Sounds to me like the reason for the arguments over who's a "true" Arma player is because narrowing it down is the only way for "the milsim fans" to be a demographic majority...

You just have to keep in mind, how much attention arma 2 got by dayz and wasteland. Thus people are never "milsim fans" I can't call myself a milsim fan much, even im enjoying realistic feeling ballistics in ace. Constantly falling with tiring, laying for 10 minutes in ko, to wait until someone helps you, is not i enjoy. Correct me if i'm wrong, many or most hardcore milsim left, lost interest, diasspointed in arma with the time, but got replaced by more casual dayz and wasteland players.

Why would BIS want to lose all the newcomers, by making arma 3 a hardcore milsim? That would be pretty bad idea for them. So they probably are in situation - one step left, to make arma more accessible, all or most milsim fans will leave, one step right, all or most new comers will leave. + at the end, BIS wants to have more new people to buy arma 3, so they had to make arma more accesible. So BIS most likely had to find a compromis, they did try to not dissapoint their milsim fans, but either not lose their newcomers, more casual fans, and get new people to join arma 3 universe.

Have they successed in that? You judge.

Edited by NeuroFunker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what makes you think, i'm talking about dayz here? And yes, i know about thus hardcore tactical groups, there is also russian alternative group called "Tushino". But still, if we count all the hardcore groups together and compare them to regular arma 2 players, there never would be more then 10-20% of whole arma 2 community. So why again, BI devs, should make its next game for 10-20% people, when about 80% won't like that hardcore realism stuff anyway? I'm not talking about dumbing the game competly down, to make it another CoD or BF clone.

And you got those numbers from where? Sigh.. actually nevermind I wont even bother..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the milsim community isn't a majority, but it is not a minority either. By degrees, Arma 3 has not changed any of the core aspects of the concept behind the game, so the upset over these details is excessive at any rate.

But dismissing the milsimming community in its entirety, wether it is the hard fraction that yells rank at each other and demands salute, or the more relaxed kind that is about tactical cooperative gameplay is wrong I think. Pd3 is right in the sense that many of those players sustained BI over the past two releases. Problem is, wether they supported it or not, the games still weren't up to standards.

You cannot, however, take the milsimmers as the be all and end all of the community. I count myself to the soft part of that spectrum: I am interested in seeing a reflection of the real world in the game, and I won't deny that I have problems with some parts of Arma 3. However, dismissing the game on the count of changes that are somehow perceived as "Casualization", despite at the core being actual improvements to the realism of the game as far as fluidity and body control are concerned is irrational. If the milsimming community withers because of this overly harsh black and white perception of Arma 3 that some people seem to display it would indeed be a loss, but I doubt that most people are having such hard feelings over the game.

Especially since many in the milsim community are veterans and are familiar with BI's track record, and they will know that usually you need to wait quite some time before the game takes off completely. Again, Arma 2 and Armed Assault were nearly unplayable at release, and Arma 2 didn't loose its bitter aftertaste for me until the release of Operation Arrowhead. Arma 3 tastes kinda sweet to me, and I am confident that it will only get better. In that, I also hope that team morale internal to the company won't be affected by this whinging, because to be honest I'd be a little disheartened at such a response after this long and difficult development.

This degree of anger is misplaced and a waste of energy, and I feel sad at having to expend energy myself to counterbalance this. But it is important to me, because the perception of the game by some vocal members of the hard core milsim community on here feel distinctly skewed and overly emotional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And you got those numbers from where? Sigh.. actually nevermind I wont even bother..

actually i said before, i see no point in discussing it further.

---------- Post added at 22:42 ---------- Previous post was at 22:38 ----------

I think the milsim community isn't a majority, but it is not a minority either. By degrees, Arma 3 has not changed any of the core aspects of the concept behind the game, so the upset over these details is excessive at any rate.

But dismissing the milsimming community in its entirety, wether it is the hard fraction that yells rank at each other and demands salute, or the more relaxed kind that is about tactical cooperative gameplay is wrong I think. Pd3 is right in the sense that many of those players sustained BI over the past two releases. Problem is, wether they supported it or not, the games still weren't up to standards.

You cannot, however, take the milsimmers as the be all and end all of the community. I count myself to the soft part of that spectrum: I am interested in seeing a reflection of the real world in the game, and I won't deny that I have problems with some parts of Arma 3. However, dismissing the game on the count of changes that are somehow perceived as "Casualization", despite at the core being actual improvements to the realism of the game as far as fluidity and body control are concerned is irrational. If the milsimming community withers because of this overly harsh black and white perception of Arma 3 that some people seem to display it would indeed be a loss, but I doubt that most people are having such hard feelings over the game.

Especially since many in the milsim community are veterans and are familiar with BI's track record, and they will know that usually you need to wait quite some time before the game takes off completely. Again, Arma 2 and Armed Assault were nearly unplayable at release, and Arma 2 didn't loose its bitter aftertaste for me until the release of Operation Arrowhead. Arma 3 tastes kinda sweet to me, and I am confident that it will only get better. In that, I also hope that team morale internal to the company won't be affected by this whinging, because to be honest I'd be a little disheartened at such a response after this long and difficult development.

This degree of anger is misplaced and a waste of energy, and I feel sad at having to expend energy myself to counterbalance this. But it is important to me, because the perception of the game by some vocal members of the hard core milsim community on here feel distinctly skewed and overly emotional.

i wish, there would be more people on the forums like you. Keeping things calm, not whining over mass epidemia about: lack of conent! Futuristic! Arma 3 is casual Bis are retarted! etc. Maybe some of thus people should take as an example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Last I checked, ShackTac uses what they like and ACE is merely a base.

Your point is?

Speaking of which, ACE3 is already confirmed by NouberNou, but you'll have to check with him for any details because I'm not aware of any other ACE devs who speak in public.

Again, your point is? We were not talking about IF or WHEN ACE3 will be released.

Sounds to me like the reason for the arguments over who's a "true" Arma player is because narrowing it down is the only way for "the milsim fans" to be a demographic majority...

AFAIK nobody here is claiming that "the milsim fans" are a majority, I was just mentioning that NeuroFunker underestimates the amount of people that play or know about ACE, and whoever is a "true arma fan" is not important and would be a stupid thing to discuss.

---------- Post added at 20:45 ---------- Previous post was at 20:43 ----------

actually i said before, i see no point in discussing it further.

Ofcourse, because there is no way you can proof those numbers so why would you feel like discussing it further :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your point is?

Again, your point is? We were not talking about IF or WHEN ACE3 will be released.

AFAIK nobody here is claiming that "the milsim fans" are a majority, I was just mentioning that NeuroFunker underestimates the amount of people that play or know about ACE, and whoever is a "true arma fan" is not important and would be a stupid thing to discuss.

---------- Post added at 20:45 ---------- Previous post was at 20:43 ----------

Ofcourse, because there is no way you can proof those numbers so why would you feel like discussing it further :D

in that cause, same as you can't. Thats just a dead end :-P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in that cause, same as you can't. Thats just a dead end :-P

The only difference is that I was not claiming stuff by using statistics or numbers or whatever, therefore I wouldnt have to proof anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only difference is that I was not claiming stuff by using statistics or numbers or whatever.

yes, never mind now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, dismissing the game on the count of changes that are somehow perceived as "Casualization", despite at the core being actual improvements to the realism of the game as far as fluidity and body control are concerned is irrational.

That's a complete mis-characterization of what actually happened though.

They went halfway and stopped at the most meaningful criteria.

A non limited turn rate is not an improvement, definitely not realistic, though fluidity of movement may be, not if you're expecting gameplay that supports and emphasizes tactical planning.

As far as I'm concerned that completely undoes whatever benefit improving fluidity of movement confers.

"CQB is fun now": I don't have to worry about tactical blunders as much anymore.

This isn't ARMA.

0:13 - 0:16 in spite of camera movement is a good characterization of "aiming instability" occurs in the midst of a firefight, under direct fire and physical exertion.

2:01 - 2:10 Again another good example of minor effects of inertia/wobble.

I find it really amazing that there was such a hue and cry about the old green sights that made it far too easy to be accurate off the hip, because when it comes to long distances, that little bit of accuracy is a huge deciding factor, however not taking the time to simulate something as critical as the physical variables seen in the two videos is telling.

It's easy to dismiss it because doesn't seem considerable based on the perspective, but even deviation of that level makes a huge difference when we get into the hundreds of meters.

It completely changes the dynamics of the game, I don't see how a single person can mitigate it's importance.

Edited by Pd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What did you mean in your post "no limits on turning"? I have been looking in game at what you say you don't like and I really cant see it. I played Rogue Spear when it came out and was very upset at what UBI did to the Rainbow Six series so I can understand what you might think. I did not like Counter Strike, I told my friends that it was like playing on roller skates. I spent so many hours in OFP I could look at almost any screen shot back then and tell you its location.

I really think this is the best movement in animations that could be done with this game engine. I also think it's the best so far since OFP came out. I also have real life experience with firearms and have also been trained by ex FBI and law enforcement officers. I spent many years as a teenager up north in the woods and open fields of the Catskills with a rifle. I can maneuver a hell of a lot better with a firearm in real life than in this game so I don't really understand what you are talking about there.

Give me something to test in game and I will have a look and let you know what I think. I have not been playing Arma a lot like I used to so I might not be seeing it.

btw I am no fanboy, I do think they need to fix other things but this part looks good. If you have been playing OFP/Arma from day one I really don't think this part is reason to give up.

And yes I do know what its like to fire weapons like Arma has. This is one of them http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2myyelw&s=5#.Uje1d37D-Hs Over 1000 rounds with just that one so far.

Edited by R71

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all!

I follow BIS from the back in 2001 whit Operation Flashpoint and i must confirm that there isnt another FPS like BIS game..see ArmA and ArmA II + OA.

But this time,after bought ArmA III box,i must say that i am very disappointed.

ArmA III, right now, look like more a giant addons but whitout solid basament.

I am not talking about what it has been promise by BIS and yet realized...weapons...veicols...etx...etx ...i dont wont to shoot to the Red Cross...too easy!

But about the product...the final product...What it? Do you reale like it?

It's enough inusual to buy a BIS title whitout Caimpagns but...ok i will wait the DLC...so I told myself...It will be optimize to play in multiplayer...right? Forget it!

Why? Because the WORD lag (lag it's just a euphemism ) it's everywhere also if i run 45 about ping in the Servers.

Ah! Just in case,in SP run smooth and very well and my fps stay always up to 85 FPS....but not in MP...of course!

And what do you think about the weapons?

You run for 50 mt, you stop in crounch position and aaaaaargh ! How much weight this rifle assault?...30 Kg?

I think so because the only alternative is Alzheimer attack ! Como on...be serious ! (Now dont begin whit the famous urban legend about the backpack whit 35 kg.......i was testing whitout nothing!)

I know..we know that everytime is out a new bohemia title you must to be patient and accept the compromise that never will be close to be perfect and step by step, or may be it's better to say patch after patch, you will see your game to become more....mature.

May be one day it' will be the best game that BIS has never done?...May be! But dont call it now "ArmA" because look like a blasphemy!!

There are so many nice things where i agree that it's been good job...graphic texture...lights...new animations...Divers....but all this things together dont make a worthy successor...not for me!

I hope..i reale hope, that it's just a demo and very soon....very very soon...the Team BIS say:

..Ahahah...Como on guys...it's was a joke,whit the next patch you will see the real ArmA III!

Regards!

Edited by Enrico

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is ridiculous; utterly and ultimately stilted.

To the author, this is not how you voice criticism. Your posts are self-served, hatred-deflecting rants directed towards a game you've never played and an overtly passionate attitude in upholding a status quo of what you feel a military simulation fps game should be.

Any substance is immediately overshadowed by a waiving banner of contempt. Just the way you worded the thread speaks of poor taste and not one of us could possibly satisfy your agenda. You might as well have had the word, "entitlement" tattooed on your forehead.

How can one seriously offer you a rebuttal? Maybe the well-intentioned, the righteous few, and much more likely, the naïve. Well folks, you are wasting your time with him. You won't be addressed by any developer. Your initial post was a guarantee. My only hope is that others can learn from the fruitlessness of your stone-walled, frothy-mouthed, and highly fencing manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll just be happy when the AI drivers stop running over my squad members before I get to start a mission.

This is something I still don't get. Why were the AI improvements on devbranch omitted from final release? They were doing so well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is something I still don't get. Why were the AI improvements on devbranch omitted from final release? They were doing so well.
Pre-release data-lock; presumably at least some of those AI improvements only came in after that deadline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is ridiculous; utterly and ultimately stilted.

To the author, this is not how you voice criticism. Your posts are self-served, hatred-deflecting rants directed towards a game you've never played and an overtly passionate attitude in upholding a status quo of what you feel a military simulation fps game should be.

>makes an argument debating what constitutes a military FPS

>disregards points made that substantiate concerns have a valid point of reference.

>claims I'm not providing well thought criticism

Calm down sir.

I am somewhat annoyed at the infiltration of sensibilities from other games having a corrupting influence, I'm allowed to, I've expressed it pre-emptively in a fairly diplomatic manner. I've done nothing but provide mostly level headed criticism albeit some minor personal criticisms about the motives of those who support some of these new initiatives (which can't be easily disproven) - and express some of my well placed annoyance that has been legitimized by people actually critical of my own posts agreeing that there has been a marked reduction in the area of difficulty in order to make the game accessible.

You're making it sound like I'm spewing curse words and personal insults, of which I've done none of.

It seems as if your idea of applying criticism would be in a manner that wouldn't constitute criticism at all.

Any substance is immediately overshadowed by a waiving banner of contempt. Just the way you worded the thread speaks of poor taste and not one of us could possibly satisfy your agenda. You might as well have had the word, "entitlement" tattooed on your forehead.

So even my attempt at being diplomatic resulted in your amygdala being hijacked, well, I can't really say that's my fault sir. If you can't pair away my personal perspectives versus the criticisms I've made, that's not really my fault, and it's entirely fallacious on your part to toss the baby out with the bathwater as it were, but I respect your feelz.

How can one seriously offer you a rebuttal?

Quite easily, considering most of what I've said refers to the technical application of the gameplay mechanics.

Unless of course it just upsets you so much to realize that I attribute sensibilities coming from other sectors of the gaming community for being partly responsible.

Dude, I can't help you with that, that's your own issue.

Maybe the well-intentioned, the righteous few, and much more likely, the naïve.

Well, now you're resorting to calling me naive, and to be quite honest I've not applied a single direct epithet to any one person in all this thread, but there has certainly been a lot of passive aggression thrown at me, in spite of their strident assertions that there's nothing wrong with this game at all, in fact that it's quite possibly the greatest in the series.

If that's the case, seriously, go enjoy it, don't worry about little ol' me. ;)

I don't really aim to come off as self righteous, but one of the core aspects of the game which made it a truly unique and enjoyable experience is now gone from my perspective. I mean there isn't even any possibility of a dichotomy to now exist within the community as that concession was not provided.

I even acknowledged that there were supposed technical difficulties associated with the efforts that WERE made, but turned out to not work so well. Hence my original query: "Will there be another attempt in the future to implement these features and IMO restore the series to it's former glory?", the response from most people for that statement alone has been passive aggressive and vindictive. I'm sorry if you're upset that I find the game to be lacking, I'm not insulting you personally, although you seem more than insistent on claiming I am and then summarily using it as a pretext to insult me.

Well folks, you are wasting your time with him. You won't be addressed by any developer. Your initial post was a guarantee. My only hope is that others can learn from the fruitlessness of your stone-walled, frothy-mouthed, and highly fencing manner.

Okay there fella, I think you're a little overly sensitive on the issue which puzzles me considering it seems as if you've basically gotten your way from what I can tell.

It really doesn't add up, your indignation versus the collective endorsements for it's superiority which seem to coincide.

Secondly, I never stated that I wished to be addressed by a developer, I never said that nor did I imply it. You really seem to like negatively contextualizing what I'm saying in a way that I didn't at all period. I was asking for discourse and opinions on the future of the franchise, and what I did receive was a lot of hurt responses from others - who for all intents and purposes wouldn't really have much stake in responding.

With the exception perhaps to attempt to silence me, which is what I think you're trying to do right now.

I believe I received one half decent response that predicted the outcome that I myself had surmised, I simply wanted other opinions on the matter. I'm not the one being hateful here.

Edited by Pd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I even acknowledged that there were supposed technical difficulties associated with the efforts that WERE made, but turned out to not work so well. Hence my original query: "Will there be another attempt in the future to implement these features and IMO restore the series to it's former glory?"
I'll only answer this by stating my doubt that the devs have even thought that far, though I suspect that it would basically be "not until the next game at earliest", but in the case of Arma 3 what you describe was definitely not what I'll call a "before September 12" priority. (That is, if there were technical difficulties, then there would have been only so much attempting allowed until the-powers-that-be declared "okay, you had your chance, now move on and do something else".) Edited by Chortles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pre-release data-lock; presumably at least some of those AI improvements only came in after that deadline.

More than likely. I'm sure they'll be fixed soon enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What did you mean in your post "no limits on turning"? I have been looking in game at what you say you don't like and I really cant see it. I played Rogue Spear when it came out and was very upset at what UBI did to the Rainbow Six series so I can understand what you might think. I did not like Counter Strike, I told my friends that it was like playing on roller skates. I spent so many hours in OFP I could look at almost any screen shot back then and tell you its location.

Limits on turning speed.

With no limit on turning speed without being somehow technically "offset" with the implementation of a reasonably accurate physics model for weapons handling, you have pretty much the "roller skate" equivalent to weapons handling in A3. If you get that sort of clumsy analogy.

If you could turn off the aiming dead zone on S-MOD tactical (a quasi-realistic HL2 mod I enjoyed), that's pretty much where you'd be at insofar as how weapons appear to handle now in A3. I mean it was cutting edge for a HL2 mod at the time, but the Arma series filled a very special niche which there is now a potential vacancy for some period of time. I expect more to be quite honest, and so should others to be honest. But that's my opinion.

The addition of stances in terms of it's contribution to "realism" is completely marginalized by this fact, the single biggest determining factor in any military shooter is weapon handling and ballistics, a close second is movement, period.

That simply cannot even come close to being debated. The entire course of a battle will play out entirely different if certain variables are present or absent. Currently the standard of gameplay deviates toward deathmatchy, arcade'y twitch play which while I'm not terrible at, at all - I am completely tired of it.

Nothing kills the suspense and atmosphere of a potentially dangerous situation, or the satisfaction of superior tactical planning when somebody can basically just "chun-li" their way out of a bad situation, if you get my drift.

I really think this is the best movement in animations that could be done with this game engine. I also think it's the best so far since OFP came out. I also have real life experience with firearms and have also been trained by ex FBI and law enforcement officers. I spent many years as a teenager up north in the woods and open fields of the Catskills with a rifle. I can maneuver a hell of a lot better with a firearm in real life than in this game so I don't really understand what you are talking about there.

Again, my only complaint with the fluidity of actual feet-on-ground movement is the ability to change direction in a dead sprint, that and from a prone position, which AFAIK the game enables you to spin like a B-boy on crystal meth. Kind of eliminates some of the strategic elements which enforce sound tactical judgment on pain of being shot in the back or cut down when crossing a large, uncovered expanse.

I too have lots of experience with firearms, AR type rifles included, and simply put, the weapon handling is very wooden, it may have "smooth" movement, but it's very inorganic, it's quite robotic. I don't like it, and I think confers far too much tactical leeway as opposed to a system in which one must account for turning at high speeds, acquiring targets under duress or possibly injured and somehow manage to be perfectly rigid.

I've already provided examples as to how that's simply not a case in most conventional engagements.

Even an inch to an inch and a half of aiming instability translates to considerable inaccuracy hundreds of meters downrange. It makes a considerable difference for the worse in my opinion.

I wouldn't even care if BI puts a Nooby McNoobcakes mode which didn't have the features I would expect in some capacity toattract players. I wouldn't even give a shit if the majority of players simply relied on such a crutch out of apathy or necessity.

But my concern now is that as an option for the future, it's going to be overlooked completely, and I see that as fundamentally wrong, and I see anyone who would support that as being both fearful and vindictive.

Give me something to test in game and I will have a look and let you know what I think. I have not been playing Arma a lot like I used to so I might not be seeing it.

If you're accustomed to playing other games, you simply may not see it, in fact you may find it preferable, hence some of my concerns about external influences.

btw I am no fanboy, I do think they need to fix other things but this part looks good. If you have been playing OFP/Arma from day one I really don't think this part is reason to give up.

And yes I do know what its like to fire weapons like Arma has. This is one of them http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2myyelw&s=5#.Uje1d37D-Hs Over 1000 rounds with just that one so far.

Well, it's not a big deal if you are, I'm just trying to gauge my expectations for the future of this IP.

I can't really understand why anyone would flip a hairy fit over that.

Edited by Pd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a pretty large reply typed up but it's pretty much been discussed to death so I'm just going to address this point.

limited turn rate

If you want a limited turn rate, maybe you should force people to start playing with gamepads. It will never not feel terrible with a mouse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say that "external influences" is a bit... I don't know. It's hard to take the opinion of someone who hasn't played the game as seriously as someone who has, even with the valid points you present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll only answer this by stating my doubt that the devs have even thought that far, though I suspect that it would basically be "not until the next game at earliest", but in the case of Arma 3 what you describe was definitely not what I'll call a "before September 12" priority. (That is, if there were technical difficulties, then there would have been only so much attempting allowed until the-powers-that-be declared "okay, you had your chance, now move on and do something else".)

Oh yeah, A3 is a "write off" from a personal perspective on that issue, I'm beyond fretting over it. I love my A2, I have it configured just the way I like it.

Like I said, it's a done deal, there's nothing that can or will be done about it now. I'm just now looking toward the future.

I would be interested to know if there will be possibly in the future, another release which redresses this issue and either

- includes an expanded SDK to explicity implement it for those who want it, and an option to enforce it for multiplayer games

- or have it included as an option in tandem with the "casual mode" we now see in A3.

Put it this way, even if it were included as a "hardcore mode" DLC, I would pay for it.

Just, goddamn, give us other guys something. I'd easily pay another 30 bucks on top of the release cost for more detailed physics/kinesthetics when it comes to weapons handling.

---------- Post added at 05:38 ---------- Previous post was at 05:36 ----------

What did you mean in your post "no limits on turning"? I have been looking in game at what you say you don't like and I really cant see it. I played Rogue Spear when it came out and was very upset at what UBI did to the Rainbow Six series so I can understand what you might think. I did not like Counter Strike, I told my friends that it was like playing on roller skates. I spent so many hours in OFP I could look at almost any screen shot back then and tell you its location.

Limits on turning speed.

With no limit on turning speed without being somehow technically "offset" with the implementation of a reasonably accurate physics model for weapons handling, you have pretty much the "roller skate" equivalent to weapons handling in A3. If you get that sort of clumsy analogy.

If you could turn off the aiming dead zone on S-MOD tactical (a quasi-realistic HL2 mod I enjoyed), that's pretty much where you'd be at insofar as how weapons appear to handle now in A3. I mean it was cutting edge for a HL2 mod at the time, but the Arma series filled a very special niche which there is now a potential vacancy for some period of time. I expect more to be quite honest.

The addition of stances in terms of it's contribution to "realism" is completely marginalized by this fact, the single biggest determining factor in any military shooter is weapon handling and ballistics, a close second is movement, period.

That simply cannot even come close to being debated. The entire course of a battle will play out entirely different if certain variables are present or absent. Currently the standard of gameplay deviates toward deathmatchy, arcade'y twitch play which while I'm not terrible at at all - I am completely tired of.

Nothing kills the suspense and atmosphere of a potentially dangerous situation, or the satisfaction of superior tactical planning when somebody can basically just "chun-li" their way out of a bad situation, if you get my drift.

I really think this is the best movement in animations that could be done with this game engine. I also think it's the best so far since OFP came out. I also have real life experience with firearms and have also been trained by ex FBI and law enforcement officers. I spent many years as a teenager up north in the woods and open fields of the Catskills with a rifle. I can maneuver a hell of a lot better with a firearm in real life than in this game so I don't really understand what you are talking about there.

Again, my only complaint with the fluidity of actual feet-on-ground movement is the ability to change direction in a dead sprint, that and from a prone position, which AFAIK the game enables you to spin like a B-boy on crystal meth. Kind of eliminates some of the strategic elements which enforce sound tactical judgment on pain of being shot in the back or cut down when crossing a large, uncovered expanse.

I too have lots of experience with firearms, AR type rifles included, and simply put, the weapon handling is very wooden, it may have "smooth" movement, but it's very inorganic, it's quite robotic. I don't like it, and I think confers far too much tactical leeway as opposed to a system in which one must account for turning at high speeds, acquiring targets under duress or possibly injured and somehow manage to be perfectly rigid.

I've already provided examples as to how that's simply not a case in most conventional engagements.

Even an inch to an inch and a half of aiming instability translates to considerable inaccuracy hundreds of meters downrange. It makes a considerable difference for the worse in my opinion.

I don't even care if BI puts a Nooby McNoobcakes mode which didn't have that to attract players. I wouldn't even give a shit if the majority of players simply relied on such a crutch out of apathy or necessity.

But my concern now is that as an option for the future, it's going to be overlooked completely, and I see that as fundamentally wrong, and I see anyone who would support that as being both fearful and vindictive.

Give me something to test in game and I will have a look and let you know what I think. I have not been playing Arma a lot like I used to so I might not be seeing it.

If you're accustomed to playing other games, you simply may not see it, in fact you may find it preferable, hence some of my concerns about external influences.

btw I am no fanboy, I do think they need to fix other things but this part looks good. If you have been playing OFP/Arma from day one I really don't think this part is reason to give up.

And yes I do know what its like to fire weapons like Arma has. This is one of them http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2myyelw&s=5#.Uje1d37D-Hs Over 1000 rounds with just that one so far.

Well, it's not a big deal if you are, I'm just trying to gauge my expectations for the future of this IP.

I can't really understand why anyone would flip a hairy fit over that.

---------- Post added at 05:48 ---------- Previous post was at 05:38 ----------

I had a pretty large reply typed up but it's pretty much been discussed to death so I'm just going to address this point.

If you want a limited turn rate, maybe you should force people to start playing with gamepads. It will never not feel terrible with a mouse.

That's not what I'm recommending, you clearly didn't read my response.

An implementation of a physics model for weapons handling that responds to velocities in a way that would reflect human constraints would be more than a reasonable solution.

You're either trying to ply a false dichotomy or I wasn't clear enough in my response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
More than likely. I'm sure they'll be fixed soon enough.
That's outright DnA and RiE's declared intent for the Monday patch and apparently the next few dev branch patches. :p
Like I said, it's a done deal, there's nothing that can or will be done about it now. I'm just now looking toward the future.

I would be interested to know if there will be possibly in the future, another release which redresses this issue and either

- includes an expanded SDK to explicity implement it for those who want it, and an option to enforce it for multiplayer games

- or have it included as an option in tandem with the "casual mode" we now see in A3.

Put it this way, even if it were included as a "hardcore mode" DLC, I would pay for it.

Just, goddamn, give us other guys something. I'd easily pay another 30 bucks on top of the release cost for more detailed physics/kinesthetics when it comes to weapons handling.

... how is "an expanded SDK" different from "BI Tools 3"? Mind you, I'm still waiting on BI Tools 3 myself and I know that multiple modders are as well, I'm just wondering what exactly you're talking about.
Put it this way, even if it were included as a "hardcore mode" DLC, I would pay for it.
And right there you just set yourself up by giving away to BI the secrets to your wallet. :icon_twisted:

Again, based on my interpretation of the comments that devs have left along the way during Arma 3 development in 2013, they may not be averse to trying again, but in the case of a hypothetical Arma 4 it would probably be subordinated yet again to "what can we get out by x time done to an extent that QA finds acceptable". If that guesstimate of mine is not enough assurance for you, then go explicitly ask one of the devs already, though I suspect that they'll just feed you the same "no promises" mantra they've thrown around for over a month now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to say that "external influences" is a bit... I don't know. It's hard to take the opinion of someone who hasn't played the game as seriously as someone who has, even with the valid points you present.

I don't need to physically play it, I've seen how it's played, again, it virtually looks identical in function to the likes of S-MOD tactical.

I simply won't pay money for A3 at this point, I'm more than confident in my assertion that it's not to my liking.

---------- Post added at 05:54 ---------- Previous post was at 05:50 ----------

That's outright DnA and RiE's declared intent for the Monday patch and apparently the next few dev branch patches. :p... how is "an expanded SDK" different from "BI Tools 3"? Mind you, I'm still waiting on BI Tools 3 myself and I know that multiple modders are as well, I'm just wondering what exactly you're talking about.And right there you just set yourself up by giving away to BI the secrets to your wallet. :icon_twisted:

As it stands there's not a lot in the way of hard coded mechanics that can be changed as of Arma2. And typically implementations such as the ones I would want changes to aren't often facilitated for with traditional dev tools.

Again, based on my interpretation of the comments that devs have left along the way during Arma 3 development in 2013, they may not be averse to trying again, but in the case of a hypothetical Arma 4 it would probably be subordinated yet again to "what can we get out by x time done to an extent that QA finds acceptable". If that guesstimate of mine is not enough assurance for you, then go explicitly ask one of the devs already, though I suspect that they'll just feed you the same "no promises" mantra they've thrown around for over a month now.

Yeah, which is why I'm more interested in gauging the opinions of other users at this point. I'm not going to nag them, but I wanted to open a discourse on it before I put the subject to rest.

If A4 is based on A3 technology, I would make a strong assertion that this will in fact likely not change at all, given what I understand about the difficulties inherent in implementing such a system.

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  

×