Arma 3 - APEX - NEWS and SPECULATIONS

[graemeshute 218]

mitrail Cant agree more. At least we can do something other then passively waiting. They did roughly show...what was it Blue Pearl harbour? But that was a month ago give or take. I secretly hope for waking up on say Friday. See some Social media message. Live Stream Saturday. 30 minutes into it Lord Bounce says oh yes the Island is green. Check it out yourself how green it is. Its live on Dev now. Pow! Much like EDen.

[mistyronin 1181]

And a large part of us Misty really only care about stuff that goes Boom-Sorry.

Although I'm aware MilSim is not for everyone, but the military interaction with the civilians has always been an important part of the OFP/Arma series, you just need to check the former games or read what the BI devs and even BI's CEO say about the subject (heck they actively collaborate with the Red Cross in that subject):

http://www.rferl.mobi/a/red-cross-games-call-of-duty-international-law-war-crimes/25131545.html

Marek Spanel doesn’t agree. Spanel is the CEO of the Prague-based video company Bohemia Interactive and says its top-selling "Arma" computer military games are so realistic that many governments use them to train soldiers.

"These games are used by many different military organizations across the world, so in the United States, Australia, United Kingdom, basically across all the NATO countries because they recognize this to be a very efficient method of training people," Spanel said.

That’s probably one reason why the Red Cross asked the company to join its campaign. Bohemia Interactive Creative Director Ivan Buchta says he didn’t hesitate.

"We realized that some players just went to the game, took the gun, and just fired at everything that moved," he said. "So we felt that this was just not right and we introduced a simple yet very intuitive mechanism [so that] if you do this, and there are any friendly troops around you, they will attack [you]."

So unfortunately for you (and the "large part of us" you claim to represent). the Arma devs don't only focus on making things go boom, that's why we have CoD or other similar games. They also add partially the civilian side of warfare.

More food for thought:

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2013/09/29/shooting-noncombatants-arma-iii-will-result-shrug/

[FoxFort 341]

Although I'm aware MilSim is not for everyone, but the military interaction with the civilians has always been an important part of the OFP/Arma series, you just need to check the former games or read what the BI devs and even BI's CEO say about the subject (heck they actively collaborate with the Red Cross in that subject):

http://www.rferl.mobi/a/red-cross-games-call-of-duty-international-law-war-crimes/25131545.html

So unfortunately for you (and the "large part of us" you claim to represent). the Arma devs don't only focus on making things go boom, that's why we have CoD or other similar games. They also add partially the civilian side of warfare.

More food for thought:

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2013/09/29/shooting-noncombatants-arma-iii-will-result-shrug/

It's a damn video game, 99% of us will not go kill,rape anyone in real life after we finish playing ArmA 3. Because it's a GAME not a real life, sometimes during MP match and we have to take control of some town, I just use MLRS and level that place. It's a game and it should stay a game not a real life simulator. If they want to put it in VBS, that's ok. Most of players in A3 are more serious players and not just hyped up kids who shoot at anything that moves. 

As for "We realized that some players just went to the game, took the gun, and just fired at everything that moved" if you haven't done it in at some point in ArmA series you are a liar. 

[graemeshute 218]

Trust Misty to find some Article on the Morals and Video Games. That is RHS for you. Well versed. But I see its written 3 years ago. I doubt we will see any of this now. Perhaps Anita may finally have the evidence video games cause misogyny and Violence. But! I couldn't have said it better...same article

 

Drinking_with_Skeletons • 3 years ago

I'm not sure having other soldiers fire at you represents a realistic response. It seems more likely that fellow soldiers might be disgusted, but are likely to be part of the same culture that would encourage you to fire on civilians to begin with. War crime decisions are only ever made after-the-fact, and very rarely involve judgements passed by individuals who were actually involved in the action.

I also think that the system described would make it nigh-impossible to distinguish between intentional killing, panicked misinterpretation of the status of the civilians (particularly true in a game in which you have a lot of rebels/insurgents/etc. who aren't immediately and obviously distinguishable from civilians), and collateral damage. I think there's a place in games for discussing the difference between a soldier gunning down civilians in cold blood and killing civilians who seemed to exhibit all the characteristics of modern-day freedom fighters/rebels/etc., but I don't think the Red Cross would actually want that distinction to be made.

 

Again apart from the the Friendly AI suddenly blowing your @ss away if you do intentionally kill a Civ. They just feel like souless drones. I don't feel anything for AI units. Perhaps ArmA 4 will have personalities etc. I also don't claim to represent anyone. My preferences are different to yours. But RHS development seems pretty focused on-military. If we are to argue for a Moral system then where do we draw the line feature wise. POW's? Torture of suspected  OPFOR or NATO sympathizers or terrorists in game. Abu Ghraib? Guantanamo? That may be an entire game in itself with more complex AI needed. I am not apposed to this. But the system doesn't allow for this rich Hearts and Minds dynamics.

[Antilochos 106]

I would like if they bring in women. Of course we need more attention for the civilian part and women (and more divers people; now every civilian looks like a soldier and potential treath), but also as soldiers. Especialy being a futuristic setting, it seems to me that women in the army is a more common thing.

Is there a reason why they only have like one model (I mean, is it hard to create different models)?

 

And I like it when you can get knocked unconscious by explosions or because of heavy wounds. That gives some great tension in the middle of a fight.

[Guest]

Women are very frequently requested, it was one of the issue that was the most discussed on the feedback tracker (RIP). The reason why their should be women is obvious (their presence in the army tends to increase and  of course for civilian ambiance), but I would be very surprised to see them in Arma 3. It would require a lot of new assets (clothes, mainly for civilians, but voices too, and the average difference of size could need to rework animations...). IMHO, they will not be seen in Arma 3. Maybe for the future.

[FoxFort 341]

Women are very frequently requested, it was one of the issue that was the most discussed on the feedback tracker (RIP). The reason why their should be women is obvious (their presence in the army tends to increase and  of course for civilian ambiance), but I would be very surprised to see them in Arma 3. It would require a lot of new assets (clothes, mainly for civilians, but voices too, and the average difference of size could need to rework animations...). IMHO, they will not be seen in Arma 3. Maybe for the future.

Who says that they need to be women with big butts and tits (like in most RPG games :D ), most women in army are opposite of big B and T. So in this case just new model of head and arms, no need for new animations.

[mistyronin 1181]

I would like if they bring in women. Of course we need more attention for the civilian part and women (and more divers people; now every civilian looks like a soldier and potential treath), but also as soldiers. Especialy being a futuristic setting, it seems to me that women in the army is a more common thing.

Is there a reason why they only have like one model (I mean, is it hard to create different models)?

I would love it too. But I have the (irrational) strong feeling that BI won't add them in APEX.

Actually women are quite common in combat units in Western countries. When I served in 2000s women were about 15-20% of my infantry unit, and in non combat roles they were up to 30-50% (for instances in the sapper units).

 

Who says that they need to be women with big butts and tits (like in most RPG games :D ), most women in army are opposite of big B and T. So in this case just new model of head and arms, no need for new animations.

I've seen women of all sizes and shapes serving, but those in combat roles usually they tend to be more "strong" shaped and less feminine.

[Guest]

Who says that they need to be women with big butts and tits (like in most RPG games :D )

Not me!

It's just that seeing the same T-shirt and shorts on 100% of men AND women in civilian characters would be... boring. However heads could require to be reworked. By "size" I was talking of vertical size, which are usually around a 5-10cm difference.

[graemeshute 218]

I would like if they bring in women. Of course we need more attention for the civilian part and women (and more divers people; now every civilian looks like a soldier and potential treath), but also as soldiers. Especialy being a futuristic setting, it seems to me that women in the army is a more common thing.

Is there a reason why they only have like one model (I mean, is it hard to create different models)?

 

And I like it when you can get knocked unconscious by explosions or because of heavy wounds. That gives some great tension in the middle of a fight.

I think its a huge over sight to not include women. Not towing the Anita Sarkeesian SJW narrative here but Germany and Israel have had Women in active combat roles for donkey's years. The US is piloting this. With now two women passing Ranger school. This is used alot the oft term Homo island as there are no females on Altis or Stratis. One big Spartan bromance. Perhaps a further 6 months development period is needed for Apex. I cant say what they planned and hoped for when sketching out Apex. Women? More Civvies. Better Story. Higher poly models. How many things go Boom. 

[FoxFort 341]

I've seen women of all sizes and shapes serving, but those in combat roles usually they tend to be more "strong" shaped and less feminine.

True, but for ArmA one simple female body model of same height as a man with same body type is not a problem. After all this is about what you have of equipment and playing in 1st person. So being 100% correct with body shape means nothing. After all, every man model in the game has identical height, body shape (athlete) only different skin color and head/face model. There are no slim guys or big gym guys also no fat people. Because it doesn't really matter, point is to shoot not to walk naked. I would be happy if they just remodel current man model, slightly bring out chest area(only when wearing T-shirt and not to much to force them to make new models of body armors), new face models and that's it.

[lato190 55]

According to the last SITREP all the playable content models (vehicles and weapons) are done. They won't add more new stuff. From that point on they are focusing on setting them in-game, sounds, configs, etc.

Good. I think it wont be a problem to show them to us then? I mean only some of the content. Release is less than 2 months away and they already sell APEX, so it would be good for them to show us some of the content they have finished.

[Guest]

 

Said expansion has meanwhile passed an internal Alpha milestone for the Sandbox. That means the assets are being finalized towards Beta, with Levels Of Detail, detailed textures, etc. They are being prepared for encoding, animations and sounds. Milestones are also a good time for our team to align priorities, dependencies, resources and the overall progress.

Sitrep 151.

"That means the assets are being finalized towards Beta", they're not actually done. They're maybe visually presentable, but not usable as they're not encoded (at least that was last week).

[Wiki 1558]

I just hope we'll get some news about Apex (content, new features, infos about the campaign or the SP showcases/missions...) in today's SITREP!

[lato190 55]

I just hope we'll get some news about Apex (content, new features, infos about the campaign or the SP showcases/missions...) in today's SITREP!

 

yes, its really about time to show us something.

[Guest]

We all hope soo...

Something like a vehicle each week up to the release could be nice.

[Kydoimos 916]

 

I just hope we'll get some news about Apex (content, new features, infos about the campaign or the SP showcases/missions...) in today's SITREP!

 

I'm like a kid at Christmas! :D

[Guest]

I'm like a kid at Christmas! :D

It's even better, it's the same thing each week!

[Alwarren 2767]

I just hope we'll get some news about Apex (content, new features, infos about the campaign or the SP showcases/missions...) in today's SITREP!

 

Considering they are working on Mocap's for the campaign already, a lot of the content and systems must be finished or at least approaching finalization. It's high time something gets mentioned, the silence is starting to annoy even me. And I am not easily annoyed

(voice of Sgt. Conway in the background... "Yeah, right...")

[en3x 209]

There is something else I'm interested.Do you think that Switching weapons on the move, difficulty overhaul, decluttering

action menu core features of apex platform release?Or are they "road to apex" kind of deal?

[Guest]

Apex is not just the expansion, it's a state of the game too (if you didn't check up to now, you should take a look at the translation in your language).

The "road to apex"-labeled content maybe land in stable before the release. IMO obviously.

[chortles 263]

We know from a SITREP that weapon switching was meant for v1.58 but otherwise the rest seems to be #RoadToApex stuff.

[papanowel 120]

I just hope we'll get some news about Apex (content, new features, infos about the campaign or the SP showcases/missions...) in today's SITREP!

 

You are saying that every single week :bored:

[Wiki 1558]

You are saying that every single week :bored:

Because if we stick to the deadline they gave, it's in 2 months.

And so far, I've been disappointed every week.

I mean, the game is supposed to be out in 2 months and we know almost nothing about it. :(

Just like Doom:

The game is released in 3 weeks, and we know nothing about it so far.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Well, we don't know "nothing" about it, rather we don't know enough. Bohemia is known for probably the most vague title releases out of any game company in existence. I think this can be blamed on the fact we are treated to a state of constant development of a game. They said they were ready to share some info, but they confirmed weapons systems will not be mentioned. I think for good reason. I want them to really do well before announcing what kind of military hardware we get to experience that could provide a new element to the game entirely. This excludes ULCV's and VTOL's, both of which we had in Arma 2, and as such is not that big a deal.