Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Westonsammy

What would you like to see worked on next in ArmA 3?

What feature/fix would you like to see worked on next in ArmA 3?  

649 members have voted

  1. 1. What feature/fix would you like to see worked on next in ArmA 3?

    • Damage Modeling (Body armor, Shrapnel Simulation, ect)
      111
    • Sound
      99
    • AI
      99
    • Medical Systems
      59
    • FPS/Performance
      181
    • Vehicle Simulation (Interiors, Driving Models)
      67
    • Editor/Zeus
      11
    • Modding Tools
      22


Recommended Posts

- good parametric civilian life? I know Altis has a lot of house, parametric distance spawnable civilians?

Problem: Hardly any civilian assets. When I think about the endless debate about female soldiers, and see that we don't even have female civilians, it makes me kind of angry (mildly put).

So, civilian assets would be needed. Different clothing styles (not all guys in shorts), different genders, police officers, businessmen/women, beach life, tourists, this kind of stuff. What do we have? Men in shorts.

Kind of disappointing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have 3 normal sound mods now. We have a bad and medium mods treatment system. But we do not have the mod system damage, simulation fragments and bullet-proof vests. This should be done by developers.

1 Damage Modeling (Body armor, Shrapnel Simulation, ect)

2 Medical Systems

3 AI

4 Modding Tools

5 FPS

6 Vehicle Simulation (Interiors, Driving Models)

7 Editor

8 Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that FPS/Performance and AI are both areas that BIS should have tackled much earlier in the A3 dev cycle. Having to have them listed as things we want added now after release of A3 is a bit of a let down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VEHICLES! Fix those damn canons on the helicopters, impossible to use on the move, nothing like A2. On the move meaning 50kph orbit, range 1.5 clicks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Problem: Hardly any civilian assets. When I think about the endless debate about female soldiers, and see that we don't even have female civilians, it makes me kind of angry (mildly put).

So, civilian assets would be needed. Different clothing styles (not all guys in shorts), different genders, police officers, businessmen/women, beach life, tourists, this kind of stuff. What do we have? Men in shorts.

Kind of disappointing.

Agreed with this. Civilians need a dedicated helicopter platform of their own, a medical van because, well... there's a hospital with a HELO pad, and the civilians have a rescue boat... No vans to get anyone there, and no helis for medical evac... To put it blunt, they need things. Medical uniform, rescue unit perhaps, with their own assets. Example, Civilian>Rescue>Air (or) Civilian>Rescue>Cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I've voted for AI, a few days ago, what's actually on top of my list is something different:

Terrain features. And this includes how a player or AI can navigate/use the terrain (and thus touches lots of different aspects, including AI). I'm just starting to get the hang of Arma3 (with a playtime of maybe 10 hours so far), but still getting stuck on/in rocks is a bit frustrating (or not being able to walk on them, where the gradient would/should allow for it...), to say the least. Guess, I don't even have to mention driving (with regard to AI).

So it might be a bit "early" to demand more terrain features, as long as the basics still need to be improved. Separate objects not being part of the world are still very problematic, as it looks. Somehow I haven't seen a bridge (over a river or so... are there even rivers or something on Altis/Stratis?!) in ArmaIII yet - which is rather telling. That somewhat worked with AI in OFP, then completely failed with Arma2 - you just coudln't order anything over a bridge. Oh and those ponds... ugh..

Still:

  • floating waters: larger rivers (with strategic bridges), smaller streams. Swamps.
  • More and bigger rocks. Mountains, that is. Climbing. Imagine places reachable only by a single road with any kind of vehicle and other strategic consequences. And then caves and such, leading to...
  • Underground structures. Useable by players and AI the like. But well, first AI needs to learn how to act and play in indoor environments - underground or not - in general (and when to enter them and when rather not...).
  • Seasons. Different flora/fauna with respect to the date. Textures could be blended in some cycle. Some kind of "LOD" system for the models maybe, or simply a parts-model (e.g. gradually disable foliage in automn). And then snow. :3
  • Counting it to fauna: more work on civilians, which includes not only female models (oh come on!), but also behaviour (Arma2's civilian module was a good start, I guess).

That kind of thing is what I'd really wanna see. The huge environment of OFP is what originally attracted me to this game. But size isn't everything - we need more detail (and I really liked what these latest VBS videos, incl. rivers/streams and snow, have shown. So there is a chance :D).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe FPS/Performance is winning. People should understand that they can't (and don't need to) have 3000 object render distance and 5000 view distance.

As for my vote, I think sound should be improved, so I voted for it. I'm mainly talking about small arms sounds (which could be sooooo much better if the closure sounds were just removed) and terrain affecting sound.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pour moi, the order is:

1. Medical - I think a multi tier injury system would do wonders for the flow of the game. Having to stabilize one or multiple victims before they can be transported or move on their own, or just dealing with lack of supplies and having to prioritize would no doubt add dynamism to each mission, as well as to teach players a thing or two about consequences of war.

2. Damage - This goes hand in hand with nr.1 since it influences the state of the player after a firefight.

3. AI - Better urban navigation

4. Communication system - Something similar to ACRE or Arrowhead out of the box, for the sake of game pace and immersion.

Edited by Maio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't believe FPS/Performance is winning. People should understand that they can't (and don't need to) have 3000 object render distance and 5000 view distance.

But my view distance is 3000 and object render is 2000.

I vote for performance. Right now Arma only uses 80% to 90% of my 1st core, on my cpu, while the other 3 cores are at 30% to 50%. My gpu, which can boost up to 1150Mhz, is rarely utilized and is usually siting at 826Mhz core frequency with all settings on fullest. The game is severely cpu limited. My rig is in my signature.

I've made this observations using MSI afterburner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But my view distance is 3000 and object render is 2000.

Mine too, and I'm more than happy with the performance I'm getting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mine too, and I'm more than happy with the performance I'm getting.

I don't want to start an argument but making these claims like I'm happy with the performance I'm getting and I'm not happy with the performance I'm getting is the same as when people fight over if they can distinguish between 30 fps or 60 fps.

What I did above is shown you that Arma 3 is not utilizing our computers like it should therefore we are getting lower performance than we should. I can make a video or some screenshots of this if you do not believe me.

Again this is not about if you are happy with your performance but its about the game not taxing our pc's to its fullest meaning there is a lot more horsepower in my pc that the game is not using.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While the medical system is shoddy, I despise how weak bullets are against anyone with armor in this game. I seriously hope they fix the bullet damage soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was really hard to choose imo. For me it was between damage modelling and optimizations but I choose the former as the game runs well enough in it's current state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6. Vehicle Simulation

I think these images will suffice:

turretsandstuff_1.jpg

turretsandstuff_2.jpg

turretsandstuff_4.jpg

The best part about the current line of vehicles?

turretsandstuff_3.jpg

Don't forget the wonderful variety of static weapons either!

Sarcasm aside, I could understand the lack of time to refine the vehicles aesthetics back in the Alpha and Beta but it's already way past the release stage and the campaign has been out of the way for quite some time. Bootcamp is almost here, and Helicopter/Marksman won't be coming until late 2015. It's not like they have to model a completely new turret either considering there's already four different turret designs to use.

So...what's keeping BI from changing this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bootcamp is almost here, and Helicopter/Marksman won't be coming until late 2015.

Mmnope, Heli DLC comes this year, and since the expansion is slated for late 2015, the Marksman DLC will probably be before that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mainly play single-player the mission breakers are the AI not being able to drive and disobeying orders, and occasionally low FPS that drops to unplayable levels. After that are the annoying things such as the action menu and doors not opening, etc as well as the long list of places for your AI team mates to re-arm. While better sounds would be welcome that would be in my third category of improving immersion along with a better damage/injury simulation and medical/healing system. I agree that at this stage of the release cycle, my first category shouldn't be there, but you need the basics right before you can build on them. Then perhaps things wouldn't break so much when the game gets updated.

There are some brilliant mission makers/modders out there but, if they move on to something else/become ill/die, there isn't always someone to jump into their shoes and carry on. It would be good for them to have well documented tools and editors to use. Without third party content, this game would not gain as much attention as it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voted

Vehicle Simulation (Interiors, Driving Models)
based on the hope that it also included rotary and fixed wing inflight systems.

As i really feel this has been let down a bit in development. Not saying im expecting a sim..but to have a working TGP or a better navigational system on a island the size of Altis would be great to see. Having big hopes and anticipations for the Helicopter DLC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Priority should be Sounds, I don't believe there's a need to re-record every sound in the game, (unless their inaccurate in the first place) just beef them up a bit and make them feel more like they actually do in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1: FPS/Performance

2: FPS/Performance

3: FPS/Performance

4: FPS/Performance

5: FPS/Performance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have upvoted Damage Simulation since there was no option regarding stability and bug fixing. In my opinion there are still some bugs that have been present for a long time and they should be fixed first before adding new features (battleye client not responding, getting stuck in houses/walls, interaction menu...). I understand that Arma III it's ambitious and big and that integrating so many heterogeneous systems may lead to bugs but I am of the opinion that a polishing pass would provide much more benefits, in the long term, than the addition of new features. Just my 2 cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Priority should be a modern object-oriented lightweight scripting language such as Lua or Python, or at the very least Java as promised early in A3's development.

Acknowledging BI's finite resources, have BI expose more of the engine internals to scripters and (with a new scripting language) let the community work on fixing some of the harder problems such as AI.

Edited by [ZSU]Preacher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speed of the simulation is the part of Arma 3 which needs most attention in single or multiplayer.

- Arma 3 runs at just under half the frame rate of Arma 2 with 500 troops on the map (30fps v 14fps).

- Arma 3 graphics are at least as fast as Arma 2 graphics when there is only the player on the map. Arma 3 graphics are slow because of the simulation speed when there a lot of AI on the map.

- Put 700 empty vehicles on a map, parked nearby in rows, in Arma 3. Press preview and take minutes to initialise at 0 fps then runs at 4 fps. In Arma 2 with 2700 empty vehicles initialise in 3 seconds then runs at 10 fps.

- The slow speed of multiplayer is probably mainly due to the simulation speed of Arma 3 being half or less than Arma 2 on the same machine.

- The AI also shot far to accurately in Arma 3 with small arms, compared to how accurately the player can shoot. This was not a problem in Arma 2 where shooting skills were more balanced between player and AI.

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  

×