Bohemia Interactive please comment on whats hindering you to introduce Ponds to Arma3

[St. Jimmy 272]

i agree but please dont derail the topic, its about map COMPABILITY and we want to hear a statement on the issue so lets not fray the subject please!

p.s. for anybody unaware what we have been missing out for more than a year now, multiply the awesomeness of the following by 100, thats what you have been missing out:

(watch fullscreen, HD)

:butbut:

I can't remember did the clouds look that good in alpha but then got changed what we have now? The cloud system seems to have nice potential.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

:butbut:

I can't remember did the clouds look that good in alpha but then got changed what we have now? The cloud system seems to have nice potential.

Yes. It did. It's ok now, but it could be a ton better.

[sgtsev3n 12]

:butbut:

I can't remember did the clouds look that good in alpha but then got changed what we have now? The cloud system seems to have nice potential.

not only that. look at the red building. the clouds are covering the sun yet on the buildings you can see sun shadow.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

I can bet you money, if BI really were going to use the pond features, in that video the ponds would work perfectly. And it should though, there has to be a fix for those glitches.

[fabio_chavez 103]

not only that. look at the red building. the clouds are covering the sun yet on the buildings you can see sun shadow.

the video was made to demonstrate a problem with dropshadows...

[devilslayersbane 28]

Has anyone considered that the a2 ponds don't work right because of physx? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the A2 (and A1) way of making ponds was making them a vehicle, yes? Well, that would mean that to work correctly in arma 3 it would need some sort of physx values to corres-pond to it. I'm aware this doesn't fix blatantly fix the waterline-bug, but it could help give some insight.

[haleks 8212]

Maybe, but an honest answer from BI to a politely asked question would give us even more insight.

And then we can stop waisting our time waiting for a fix...

[devilslayersbane 28]

Yes, an official response from BI on why ponds don't work well with arma 3 (when both VBS and DAYZ have inland water, but neither have physx) would be really awesome and show just how awesome BI is at making sure their community is happy (This statement is a subtle hint).

Satire aside, ultimately it's not an intensely pressing issue and while even I would love to see some inland water go into that empty lake at the Xirolimni dam, it should be noted that it ends up being just more on BI's probably already massive plate. There's talk of a 64-bit executable and new DLC. It's likely we won't see a fix for this until either A: the expansion(s) come out or B:well after the expansion(s).

[fabio_chavez 103]

it's not an intensely pressing issue

You are wrong, it is a central and important issue, for various reasons, you are missing the point completely, i neither want to state the obvious nor do i want to repeat points that allready have been made but if you have a game highly dependent on user generated content like arma, you want to offer a frame of support that gives peoples reasonable means at hand.

This is not merely a missing feature or a minor bug, its about tons of terrains beeing broken, thats obviously a very pressing issue indeed.

Edited September 17, 2014 by Fabio_Chavez

[milosv123344 37]

This is arma 2 engine , (watch 2:00, and 2:45). So yeah they can make rivers and ponds and fixes if they wanted to bother.

[Alwarren 2767]

Yes, an official response from BI on why ponds don't work well with arma 3 (when both VBS and DAYZ have inland water, but neither have physx) would be really awesome and show just how awesome BI is at making sure their community is happy (This statement is a subtle hint).

VBS is an entirely different company, so I fail to see why you would bring it up here.

DayZ has, as far as I am aware, its own physics implementation (I believe it was the Bullet engine, not sure), which might or might not be in the stable branch already (I haven't bothered with it in a long while).

And yes, keeping a community happy is a good way to sell DLC, so it is in their own interest.

ultimately it's not an intensely pressing issue

Says who? Tell that to the people that intended to port over their islands from Arma 2 and now have to find out that all of their inland water needs to be replaced by... nothing. As I already pointed out, there is only so many times you can play through the campaign or the showcases before things get boring. This game not only depends on User content, user content is this game's LIFEBLOOD.

And that's not even the worst part. This thread asks for a comment on the why's and if's, but apparently, not even that five minutes of explanation is worth a developer's time obviously. The way it is handled is by closing their eyes and hoping it goes away.

[bad benson 1733]

it's pretty pointless to argue, if this is pressing or not. you could downplay every single bug, if you compare it to CTDs and multiplayer performance etc. i will never understand why people make these kind of posts in these kind of threads. everyone knows that no issue is the only issue. stating that just for the sake of it is pure wise assery. i mean i get the appeal of playing the bystander throwing in cheap comments like that acting like you're the only one with proper perspective on things. it's still pointless and a cheap move.

things might not change immediately but neither is there harm in being vocal about the issues you care about nor has it been proven pointless. while BI have their own agenda the past has shown that they care and listen. of course you can't expect them to take things like this pond issue into account since it's mostly affecting user made content. they indeed have a different focus (the base game). that makes it all the more important to make them aware of it.

you don't care about ponds or several terrain classics being bugged and limited by this? fine. move along. don't be a douche :p

[smokedog3para 365]

Got to agree A3 stock terrains has got boring and old already, if no more terrains got ported or made for A3 how long would those 2 stock maps last before it gets too boring to play them anymore.

So yes its a must to get this sorted for future lifespan of the game out of all the addons terrains is what keeps you coming back as it changes the whole game a new terrain atmosphere environment, and to have so many f*****g hours down on my arma2 terrains seems like a bit of a f**k you from bis from my point not being able to forward port with no issues.

BIS the community terrains are the life blood of your game you give us the 2 fingers to the guys that keep you earning and keep the game always evolving and being interesting.

Come on would be nice to get an answer before we move to another engine i don't have the patience to wait years for fixes. kind of gets depressing having tools that don't work and being left with them broke that constantly breaks your shit every update it should all be user friendly and easy to use not a pita, were expected to enter the comp with tools that refuse to pack terrains ffs sorry but its got to be said

[sgtsev3n 12]

This is arma 2 engine , (watch 2:00, and 2:45). So yeah they can make rivers and ponds and fixes if they wanted to bother.

i ask myself why a military simulation which is supposed to be used for training (and not for entertainment) needs such a high quality graphic and such features.

[gatordev 219]

i ask myself why a military simulation which is supposed to be used for training (and not for entertainment) needs such a high quality graphic and such features.

If you've ever used a commercially-produced simulator for actual on-the-job training, you'd understand that end-user buy-in is important. If it's not believable, then the end user isn't going to take it as seriously. It's still a sim, no matter how expensive it is, but it's the little things that help make it more realistic.

[Defunkt 431]

i ask myself why a military simulation which is supposed to be used for training (and not for entertainment) needs such a high quality graphic and such features.

VBS never used to be much of a looker but I suspect BIA has twigged that visuals as much as anything else are behind their clients' dalliances with the Cry Engine offerings.

[miketim 20]

I wonder, has anyone tried making new ponds? Ie: tried to make new ponds, to be compatible with a3( opposed to the old ones from a2), or is something in the engine making the very concept, the very fundemental way that ponds work simply break?

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

I wonder, has anyone tried making new ponds? Ie: tried to make new ponds, to be compatible with a3( opposed to the old ones from a2), or is something in the engine making the very concept, the very fundemental way that ponds work simply break?

I actually want to see this now. Expect not the way Arma 2 did it. If someone can make a pond mod that looked amazing, and like an actual pond. But not an official mod, but a demonstrator, so BI can still fix it in their Engine.

[tpw 2315]

I wonder, has anyone tried making new ponds? Ie: tried to make new ponds, to be compatible with a3( opposed to the old ones from a2), or is something in the engine making the very concept, the very fundemental way that ponds work simply break?

According to this post there is some fundamental problem with the water shader and multiple pond objects.

On the other hand, there is the occasional map such as Takistan where the ponds seem to work (more or less).

[smokedog3para 365]

I have been trying for over 6 months now to get some working pond\river tiles i have a few prototypes but they look the part and don't freak ai out, but its not true water you can swim in ai will lay down and shoot from the river bed, also it seems the wet suit allows you to swim through pond tiles in a3 after someone posted a demo of it on yt.

[Varanon 892]

Just to dispel the "Only mods use ponds" myth, take a look at these screenshots:

Reservoir in the central part of Altis: view map view

"Lakes" at the southern tip of the main part: view map view

If you cross check with the real location, you'll see that there is water on these locations.

[takelmeifter 10]

see, i look at those screenies and i just think that inland water would completely change altis for the better. those locations would look amazing with river/pond water

[krycek 349]

Go tell that to female civilians, shotguns, horizontal freefall speed during halo (only 55km/h? come on BI!), ambient civilian modules (which made civs have conversations in OA!), ambient animal modules, first aid and battlefield clearance modules, tractors, buses, motorcycles, bicycles etc.

Maybe we will see some of it added in the near future, but as of now, I doubt it.

Hah,this brings me a slight deja vu of EA with their Sims where they strip everything back to zero only to sell them later as dlcs with every new title in the series.

In my case I was already bored with Altis since last year so I was hoping they would actually at least say they're working on a fix in the near future.

Lately they seem to forget that their games are kept aflot by mods and not by their "outstanding diversified content and AI engineering".

[seba1976 98]

Lately they seem to forget that their games are kept aflot by mods and not by their "outstanding diversified content and AI engineering".

In the past, maybe, but now, I think their games could make it without mods. In my opinion it's scripting (and the game modes and missions that comes out of it) what makes the franchise so interesting. While the most glaring mistake they're doing would be not fixing the game breaking bugs what are all over the place, while adding more complexity to the problem adding things like ZEUS, realistic flight model, fatigue, and weapon inertia, only to have hundreds of new bugs to hunt down in every patch.

[devilslayersbane 28]

In the past, maybe, but now, I think their games could make it without mods. In my opinion it's scripting (and the game modes and missions that comes out of it) what makes the franchise so interesting. While the most glaring mistake they're doing would be not fixing the game breaking bugs what are all over the place, while adding more complexity to the problem adding things like ZEUS, realistic flight model, fatigue, and weapon inertia, only to have hundreds of new bugs to hunt down in every patch.

I completely agree, however, you also have to remember that people expected most of this to already be there. Not to mention, Arma 2 vets (and arma 1 vets) will tell you that Arma 2's initial release was relatively disastrous compared to arma 3's. Even without the campaign, and subsequent content releases, Arma 3's launch was super smooth and really awesome. What did people complain about then? Content and Features. Now that they're adding Content and Features they're getting complaints about playability. BI can't win. Bugs will always be there. It's a sandbox game. If you expect a sandbox game to not have bugs...let me know when you find one.