Fatigue Feedback (dev branch)

[bad benson 1733]

So if you held a MAAWS/Javelin you'd need around 5-6 seconds to turn full circle.

 

but isn't that just the launcher turn anmation in general rather than a weapon weight specific thing? with the way the current anim system has 3 slots for 3 weapon types i don't see this working for SMG vs long rifle.

[MadocComadrin 12]

I've seen mentioned here that the new system is Bohemia dumbing things down because a majority of the playerbase is Altis Lifers/Wastelanders/DayZers/Etc. I have to disagree with that notion. I do not think the majority of the playerbase are these people who solely play these. I have 700 hours in ArmA 3: most of that is single-player, setting up missions for myself to enjoy. I've still played a decent amount of multiplayer missions--from coop with friends, to domination-like missions, to KoTH. I've even played a little bit of Wasteland and Exile.

 

I would argue that most of the player-base actually plays a variety of game-modes. They're players who come for the realistic sandbox and stay for the other things. Sure, some players are brought in by the attention things like DayZ get, but the ArmA 3 audience still wants ArmA 3, and any sort of dumbing-down--intentional or otherwise--is going to hurt the majority of the playerbase.

 

I'd also say that a lot of the players who buy the game based off hyped up RPG mods/mission don't stick around (and that the players of these mods also play other things in ArmA 3). They're not worth it. They buy for the (easily created) hype. You don't need to develop for them because they're going to spend without thinking or even playing that much.

[-Coulum- 35]

You just described the old system - true in places it was a bit harsh (cmon let me crawl), but that was the old system. Wounds affected fatigue. Load affected fatigue. Stance affected fatigue. Terrain affected fatigue. And fatigue affected movement and accuracy. You feel like you can't aim at anything after hiking up a hill with a MMG? That's why the bipod is on your gun, friend. Feel too slow while carrying that HAT? Give a rocket to carry to the lighter rifleman next to you. The old system was fine, just needed fine-tuning. Not a lazy and arcadey redesign.

 

Bingo! Old fatigue system was far superior to what we got now. I had no problem with it. This one should take the good parts of the old system while keeping the new weapon sway build up over time (and better yet animation slowdown) to represent low intenstiy tiring, and the much quicker to deplete/replenish, stamina that we have now, to represent high intensity tiring (sprinting, lifting alot, lugging up a hill, crouch running etc.). Add in the nice new stamina bar and who knows maybe it will turn out better than the old fatigue.  

 

Huh, that's weird. That's 0 sway comparing to what I got. And I didn't even sprint.

 

Im guessingthe combination of inertia and movement sway amplified one another to make it alot higher for than what you saw in the video. Also sway always looks big and ridiculous when you do nothing to compensate for it. Not saying that was the case for you, but in the video I was definitely countering or following the sway to get on target. Anyhow the sway from just moving isn't that bad from the get go IMO. It is when its combined with crazy spins and rapid change of direction that you get the crazy sway - Aand you should, because being able to 180 spin and easily land a hit on the guy who supposedly had the one up on you is kind of bad for realistic gameplay. Methodical and focused movement/aim really help, especially in close quarters. If you slow down and cover sectors it will really reward you rather than bursting in tacical pace and guns blazing. I like it!

[Roach_ 52]

Im guessingthe combination of inertia and movement sway amplified one another to make it alot higher for than what you saw in the video. Also sway always looks big and ridiculous when you do nothing to compensate for it. Not saying that was the case for you, but in the video I was definitely countering or following the sway to get on target.

That'd make sense.

[stburr91 1009]

Good game designers put less weight in verbal feedback than they do in observed feedback.

 

Here's the difference:

 

100 people tell them via PMs that Fatigue system is great!

 

Meanwhile

 

100 of the more popular scenarios have Fatigue disabled.

 

--

 

Which feedback do you respond to? The feedback people are telling you, or what you observe?

 

 

 

 

This is a really good point, and one that is understandingly unpopular among the regulars here. The opinions of most vocal here, aren't necessarily the majority, surely it is important to look for other forms of feedback. I know there are many in the community that do not care for the old fatigue system (the current stable branch system), especially the slow-motion animations, and weapon sway penalty.  

 

I don't see this as any different than the 1st, or 3rd person debate. Is there really a benefit to making it one way, or the other, and alienating a large portion of the community in the process?  The best approach is to give the community the option to choose what they prefer. So, why not give the players the option to choose how intense the fatigue, and weapons sway becomes?    

 

I mean, let's face it, one size does not fit all.          

[-Coulum- 35]

This is a really good point, and one that is understandingly unpopular among the regulars here. The opinions of most vocal here, aren't necessarily the majority, surely it is important to look for other forms of feedback. I know there are many in the community that do not care for the old fatigue system

Good game designers put less weight in verbal feedback than they do in observed feedback....

 -snip-

Which feedback do you respond to? The feedback people are telling you, or what you observe?

Sorry if this is offtopic but I want to comment on it... and since there are no big changes today...

Silent majority vs. vocal majority. Loud negative vs. quiet positive. verbal vs. observed. Who's feedback do you follow? My opinion...

None. Devs shouldn't implement features content etc. because the majority told them so, or the old timers told them so, or because a certain mod is popular, or game mode is popular or there is a huge amount of whining and complaining or any other form of feedback. That would be poor game design imo.

Good game designers would try to listen, as much as possible, to all feedback equally. And only act on it if it is constructive to their vision for THEIR game. If they hear a suggestion they really like and think would make the game more like what they want it to be... act on it. Regardless of popularity. If they hear suggestions that they don't think match up to the goals of their game... don't act on it. In the end a game will only be exceptional if it is made with passion and vision. If the devs aren't passionate about a feature, or they don't see how it fits into the vision of their game, I see no reason why they should implement it - aside from money - that usually ends up in generic, shitty, overpriced games...

 

Hope others agree. I may misinterpret some comments, but there seems to be alot of entitlement. "We want this, we are the majority/veterans/paying customers(smh)/etc., you devs have an obligation to do as we say". That is wrong. And I hope I don't come across that way in my own posts (though I recognize how it is very possible). My goal is to sell my ideas and opinons best as possible and hope they compliment or fit in with the devs goals so they implement it. Most times they don't or can't. Oh well. I'm grateful when the devs implement suggestions purely for the sake of the community (my community of course) because I am pretty sure they do it purely for our satisfaction. Very nice of them. But I would never expect this.

 

Anyhow food for thought. And options are always great... but ultimately its at the devs' discretion.

[bad benson 1733]

@-coulum-: i generally agree about the whole backbone and vision concept, but consider this. maybe their goal/vision is to make something that fits more a wider range of gameplay. like people keep saying "but arma!!" but arma 2 was even more simplistic so i don't see where the COD reference keeps coming from. was arma 2 arcadey because of its simplistic system? what would your past arma 2 playing self say?

maybe they even made the old system in the way it was for other reasons than it being their clear vision but maybe rather like what they thought was expected of them. i'm just wildly interpreting and speculating of course but the whole "sandbox" thing, as PR-voodoo-like as it may sound, seems to be what the vision is here. and i don't think taht needs to mean run and gun or zero penalty.

 

and eventhough i respect the opinion of the old system being "perfect", i gotta say that it had some big flaws in my own personal opinion. and not because i want to run and gun or just get annoyed by sway per say. as others and myself have said. doing high intensity and long term fatigue with one value just can never be "right" or "realistic" even. of course if all you are looking for is penalty no matter what than i guess it was fine.

 

while i still couldn't test the latest build (was in mod developement and needed stable), what i saw seemed to have some obvious flaws, but maybe it's just the base and it will be more complex in the "end" (if such a thing as end of developement even exists for arma :P ).

like someone else said, losing the complexity kind of scares me too now that it's gone (had some scripts myself hat were based on it) but i have hope that it will return just in another fashion as long as feedback is pointed forward and constructive. and seeing RiE's points combined with the fact that not all of them are met properly in the current state (dev/stamina) should be a good sign. i dunno. maybe i'm just in a good mood but i think this could be good in the end.

[Varanon 892]

This is a really good point, and one that is understandingly unpopular among the regulars here. The opinions of most vocal here, aren't necessarily the majority, surely it is important to look for other forms of feedback. I know there are many in the community that do not care for the old fatigue system (the current stable branch system), especially the slow-motion animations, and weapon sway penalty.  

 

It is a valid point, yes, but one made without any substance. What top 100 scenarios does he refer to ? When were they created ? What about missions that were made in the past, say, two months (i.e. after the new fatigue system has stabilized ?).

 

Saying "the top 100 missions disable fatigue" is simply an assumption made because it fits his own thinking.

[ruPal 143]

Have just checked new system. Don't like it.

[R3vo 2654]

Have just checked new system. Don't like it.

 

And what exactly don't you like? I was sceptical at the beginn too, however it has improved drastically. If you don't like something, then leave feedback, otherwise they can't know.

[spidypiet 17]

just make it a server/host option that way any one has being served

[goomer 10]

I know it's not the best but it's effective - also i doubt we will see a weapon collision system in A3 which would help a lot

 

weapon like SPMG from realistic standpoint - you wouldn't be able to hit anything with it , unless you use a bipod/rest weapon or in the prone position

Mouse control is primarily for head/view rotation, and only secondarily for body/weapon control. Weapon-sway is the only good design. Even if that means the weapon needs to be moved off the screen and then back in after a while.

Weapon collision only works with auto-weapon-lowering/raising (to not restrict head/view rotation), which would rely on objects that are exactly as large as they appear to be (accurate collision). I don't think that's the case with objects in arma.

 

Both of these ideas make me think of trying to run with both legs in casts. :<

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

It is a valid point, yes, but one made without any substance. What top 100 scenarios does he refer to ? When were they created ? What about missions that were made in the past, say, two months (i.e. after the new fatigue system has stabilized ?).

 

Saying "the top 100 missions disable fatigue" is simply an assumption made because it fits his own thinking.

 

Yes you're right I should have said "most of the more played" rather than "top 100". A colloquial expression to illustrate a point, the important thing was comparing between a seemingly large majority on here, vs the actual majority out on the server list. We in here are a noisy minority, and I think BIS staff would be making a mistake to act as if we represent the majority of the A3 users. The majority of users play with fatigue disabled. Meanwhile I'm sure most of us here enjoy playing with fatigue more than without it.

[ppitm 43]

 

A colloquial expression to illustrate a point, the important thing was comparing between a seemingly large majority on here, vs the actual majority out on the server list.

And where do you get the idea that the mouthbreathers playing Altis life on the server list are the majority?

 

What happened to the thousands of players who are involved in clan MP or just SP?

 

 

It's very simple, in my view. The people who want to play offshoot gamemods that aren't classic ArmA turned off fatigue and were happy. The people who play ArmA as a military game left fatigue on and were happy. So now BIS have gone and pissed off the latter to no purpose.

[Variable 322]

The majority of users play with fatigue disabled.

Where are you getting this data from?

I don't think this is true counting all SP, Coop and other classic game modes players.

[mamasan8 11]

I don't like fatigue, be it online or in my own missions. It's the first thing I turn off and it's the biggest reason I leave an MP server.

Because the reality is in most cases, I have to run 2km to AO (Invade & Annex). Now, doing that with fatigue turned on means I go from a 5-10 minute jog to something like 30-45 min.

Before I even get into any action. Why would any sane person do that?

 

If you want real realism, you would have to wait 2-12+ hours after launching of the game before you even get into the menu. Why? Real world deployment isn't instant. You always have to travel some place.

 

Out of a gameplay view, that restriction is not feasible or fun and does not add anything but frustration.

Fatigue is the same, only it has a lesser time constraint as it's side effect.

 

Current fatigue-system (stable-version) flies in the face of realism. If a soldier would get tired after moving 2-300 metres and must have a lie down, every war would be over before the first footsoldier gets to it (slight exaggeration).

 

One of the big problems is that most missions are built on the fact that you CAN jog for eternity and when that no longer is the case, like when the fatigue system was introduced, the missions become tedious because of hours of running, resting, whatever. To get around that, we would have to teleport magically to the AO instead. No one wants that, do they?

How many missions, Single- or multiplayer has vehicles at spawn? Certainly not all of them.

[aliascartoons 182]

@mamasan8

 

Then is a problem of mission design not of game engine design.

I personally prefer to play a mission designed considering fatigue system than remove the system, and trust me there are plenty of missions, very good missions, to be played with fatigue system on.

 

Is just a matter of choosing what you want to play. If you want to be able to run with 50 kilos for 5 km in your back just choose a mission or server that can accommodate that. Is much easier and fair to disable fatigue system on your missions/server than spoil the game for others.

[razor6014 35]

here is the thing , if i recall correctly , most special forces require soliders to jogg 20km with 40kg packs,

granted they look like hell after it but its been done , the current fatigue system does that after 2 km,

if it was 10km id be fine with it, but it isn't.

 

I tried the new system , the only issue i see is when you use up all stamina , i feel the more you are in the red the more severe the penalty should be,

i mean IRL you would start to expirience pain , slowing down animations sounded like a good idea , but i feel , oh how do i sum this up , well its sort of like a gaus bell curve the pain , you start normal , then slowly the pain rises , but as you persist you get used to it and you just carry on , and it doesent bother you as much.

 

i feel the new system should reflect that.

 

also when you stop the longer you where in the red you should expirience appropriate pain levels. 

[Roach_ 52]

tl;dr: I don't like fatigue

 

As valid as your point of view may be, you can always disable fatigue and so can other mission creators and servers (as you said). There are even mods for it so that when fatigue is enabled, you can still disable it. The thing here is that you CAN play without it as of right now and you CAN play with it. You have the choice. But when stamina comes out to stable branch, you'll only have that, either stamina or, yet again, no stamina/fatigue. No choice for those who 'enjoy' fatigue.

And guess what, all those people who disabled fatigue (as I did for quite some time) will still disable stamina.

 

The Arma series are military based and should focus on that, anything else can be collateral.

 

That being said, I want to trust BI as they're pretty close to the community and just overall unique as developers (imho) so I'll try to only judge the new system once it's completely done.

[St. Jimmy 272]

@mamasan8

It's still your preference. You can play the campaign with the current fatigue. It's bit slower but you can. If you can't cope with that running 2km in AO in Domination or those gamemodes then try demand transport that gets you closer or deal with it. If you need to carry so much weight that it takes you jog 2km in 30min then either you're doing something wrong or the coop in the server isn't enough good. If you don't like any kind of fatigue then as you have seen there are plenty of servers that suits you. Transport to the AO in those mods can sometimes take a freaking long time because of bad luck or AA threat is so big that it needs to be eliminated first. I guess you leave the server also then?

[ruPal 143]

And what exactly don't you like? I was sceptical at the beginn too, however it has improved drastically. If you don't like something, then leave feedback, otherwise they can't know.

Well, I left feedback.

I don't like:

- you can run without punishment;

- new sway system (in fatigue system situation was clear: any physical activity -> sway increase).

[Varanon 892]

 The majority of users play with fatigue disabled.

 

Careful with general statements like that. You have absolutely no way of knowing this. Neither have BI, by the way.

 

So in absence of any hard evidence to that claim, you can only assume.

[Alwarren 2767]

(slight exaggeration).

Exaggeration makes your argument invalid. Lower your weapon, and with a realistic loadout you can jog a kilometer without feeling any adverse effects.

[bad benson 1733]

And where do you get the idea that the mouthbreathers playing Altis life on the server list are the majority?

 

wow. what happened to live and let live, to each their own and stuff?

 

i personally don't get the appeal of RP stuff either but no need to resort to such hostile elitism...oh wait...this is the BI forums....nvm :rolleyes:

[mamasan8 11]

@mamasan8

It's still your preference. You can play the campaign with the current fatigue. It's bit slower but you can. If you can't cope with that running 2km in AO in Domination or those gamemodes then try demand transport that gets you closer or deal with it. If you need to carry so much weight that it takes you jog 2km in 30min then either you're doing something wrong or the coop in the server isn't enough good. If you don't like any kind of fatigue then as you have seen there are plenty of servers that suits you. Transport to the AO in those mods can sometimes take a freaking long time because of bad luck or AA threat is so big that it needs to be eliminated first. I guess you leave the server also then?

As far as I see, all you are proposing are workarounds when that problem doesn't even initially have to exist.

 

The reason I like mods is that that gives me a possibility to sidestep all the "features" BIS introduces.

 

I like OFP/Arma for the tactical shooting part, not the tactical walking part. After all, it's called a First Person Shooter and not a First Person Walker.