things that are still waiting to be added to the game which are confirmed...

[nomisum 129]

That's what I could come up with in some minutes, but sometime's you're so used to the weirdness, that you don't notice it anymore. And some of those things are pretty easy to fix I think (gui stuff, MP syncing etc).

sadly, you are SO right.

Sent from mobile

[Gattobuono 10]

That's not the question here. The question here is "who here thinks there are similar games where the AI performs better than in Arma?" There are probably a few, of course, but probably not of Arma's scale.

Speaking as somebody with about zero game development experience, I hope that they take five years after the expansion pack off and just work on reworking the engine(?) until they've stripped out all the junk code(??) and achieved glorious optimization(!).

Well I think it is the question for this simple reason: Arma modded has better AI than Arma unmodded. I'm currently using bcombat http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=23969&highlight=BCOMBAT which greatly improves the AI without any performance impact.

So what I'm saying in a nutshell is: If an unpaid modder can improve the AI in Arma why can't the game producers do the same thing. It's pointless arguing about what other games can or can't do if Arma itself can demonstrably be improved by mods such as bcombat.

Unless you play MP, which I don't (I have other games which do MP much much better) then AI quality is of VITAL importance to the enjoyment of the SP aspect of this game, and it doesn't matter how beautiful the scenery is.

[doveman 7]

- MP specific:

-- Horrors with inventory in briefings (was fixed in A2 mostly, in A3 it completely absent!)

-- The horrible interface for selecting missions, no way to put them in sub-folders. No unified way to select by game type/nr of players

-- Wrong order of lobby/briefing. How are you supposed to select a role, when you don't know what you're up to?

Yep, those three in particular really bug me. I've made a number of suggestions on the second point (as well as to deal with the problem of needing to select the required mods for a SP mission before launching ArmA and seeing the mission list). On the third point, I've been thinking for a while that it would make more sense to have a plain Join Server screen (no role section, just join and maybe a text chat box), then when a mission is selected the briefing is viewable and players can toggle between that and the role selection screen, once they've seen what the mission entails and which roles are likely to be most needed, or so that the leader can ask players to switch roles if people drop out, etc before the mission starts.

I can sort of excuse AI and performance problems are they're no doubt very hard to fix but basic interface/usability issues like this I find hard to excuse (it just took me four attempts to spell usability right, so I'm going to bed now!)