Disappointed with lack of Interactability on Tanoa

[mistyronin 1181]

I love that Tanoa actually looks like a place where people live, compared to Altis and Chernarus which felt ruined and abandoned. Just the layout and detail in the towns makes them look more like real, inhabited places.

+1

Altis and Stratis felt like barrens devoid of life, riddled with car carcasses and ruins. No commercial signs, no advertisements, 

Also the weird white domes and strange FOBs with weird containers didn't help at all. It was quite an immersion killer.

Altis was really limited for mission makers, as it could only fit Mad Max or Resident Evil kind of missions, while Tanoa allows any kind of plot. And if you need destruction you can just use few explosives, if you need wrecks or fobs you can easily create them with Eden. 

Luckily Tanoa is the perfect oposite. You can really feel like its a real place. 10/10 to the environment team. 

[heavygunner 179]

Frankly, if you really didn't like that the interiors aren't there, you should have raised your voice when it was announced MORE than half a year ago, not a month before a release. 

[teabagginpeople 398]

Even if you can live with the decision to have no entry building props for the number of reasons .

Why then with the few open buildings that are open add the static shutters to Windows that totally restricted firing positions from certain sides? Should be like the guards towers which you can open/ close.

[PuFu 4600]

would have most likely been just as useless to be fair

[Guest]

would have most likely been just as useless to be fair

Perhaps.

 

But, for me, being on Tanoa and knowing that I'm restricted in my movements (i.e. not being able to go in all buildings) is constantly reminding my that I'm just in a game.

[Jackal326 1181]

But, for me, being on Tanoa and knowing that I'm restricted in my movements (i.e. not being able to go in all buildings) is constantly reminding my that I'm just in a game.

I'm pretty sure being sat on your arse at a desk is MORE of a reminder though...

[FoxFort 341]

Frankly, if you really didn't like that the interiors aren't there, you should have raised your voice when it was announced MORE than half a year ago, not a month before a release. 

That is why BIS kepts us in "dark", until less then a month before release and now it's too late. 

[Jackal326 1181]

That is why BIS kepts us in "dark", until less then a month before release and now it's too late. 

No they didn't.

 

Our stance on building interiors has changed from the main game's terrains. In the broadest terms, fewer buildings will be fully enterable. You'll find more buildings that are partly enterable, and also some that cannot be entered at all. Kavala's hospital is an example of being partly accessible. There are various reasons for this approach. We all know that Altis had a great many enterable buildings, but they were void of furniture and felt suspiciously empty. We don't have the resources to solve this by producing top-notch varied interiors for all buildings. There is also performance to consider, which is helped by having more solid structures. This topic may be controversial, but we felt it better to be open about this at an early stage. We're still producing the final structures and experimenting with the balance, but it's quite clear not every building will have a full interior.

Source: This SITREP (dated August 2015).

[esfumato 75]

Frankly, if you really didn't like that the interiors aren't there, you should have raised your voice when it was announced MORE than half a year ago, not a month before a release. 

 

This thread is from a year ago

https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/183573-the-struggle-enter-able-buildings-vs-nonpartly-enter-able-buildings/

[-LUGER- 14]

Im bummed out by the lack of sandbox content we' re going to get, like weapons, vehicles and uniforms, a majority of the content is copy paste then re texture. The island however is pretty nice.  :)

[nodunit 397]

I get where they are coming from with the empty interiors, it lets the player design them around their mission preferences, but the part I don't get is the lack of items to populate said items.  It makes more sense to me to have furniture as separate from the house especially with the 3D editor cause now you can make it look like someone lives there with fans, tables, lamps, couches, chairs, rugs.

You can make it look like its been raided by flipping the couch and table, having the rug displaced and the lamp fallen over, etc, arrange it in a way that the furniture becomes an obstacle course for a poor mans barricade or fort, or you can make things really wierd and glue the furniture to the ceiling as if you're in some freaky anti gravity dimension, it all comes down to creative freedom of mission makers.

Perhaps the solution is to having a civilian themed DLC which includes female civilians as well as civilian-esque related things such as furnishing.

[St. Jimmy 272]

At least give us more access on the roofs please. Those big blue three story buildings are missing ladder to get on the roof.

 

Having those apartment buildings without any access on the roof is also bit lame.

 

I can deal with the less interiors because the towns really have a great living look on them. Just couple more roof access would be very welcome :)

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

Perhaps.

 

But, for me, being on Tanoa and knowing that I'm restricted in my movements (i.e. not being able to go in all buildings) is constantly reminding my that I'm just in a game.

 

have you ever fought in combat in an urban area?

 

every 2nd house is locked with shit piled in front ofthe door and family hiding in a room with daddy pointing an AK at the door. It makes perfect sense to me that many buildings would be pretty much inaccessible if people lived there.

[zukov 490]

At least give us more access on the roofs please. Those big blue three story buildings are missing ladder to get on the roof.

 

Having those apartment buildings without any access on the roof is also bit lame.

 

I can deal with the less interiors because the towns really have a great living look on them. Just couple more roof access would be very welcome :)

in eden you have an "emrgency stairs/fire escapes" that fit well in that building

 

[semiconductor 309]

have you ever fought in combat in an urban area?

Well, have you? ;)

 

daddy pointing an AK at the door

This daddy is either an actor in some dumb Hollywood movie about Iraq War or a moron of unbelievable proportions because the second he takes that AK he instantly transforms from civilian guy to a combatant. Trying to counter even a team of trained soldiers on active duty in a combat zone (who normally would ignore him because he is not a real threat) is practically a death wish both for him and his family as they will kill all of them (not because they're bloodthirsty psychopaths but simply to defend their own lives) without taking a second thought just because he had that AK. The last thing a civilian want in a combat zone is to became a threat to the soldiers.

 

buildings would be pretty much inaccessible if people lived there.

Last time I checked even the completely illiterate people weren't that dumb to live in a combat area. People don't live in a combat zone, they flee, usually to Germany. Moreover, pretty much any footage of urban combat from Chechnya to modern Syria or Ukraine shows an extensive use of civilian buildings most of which are damaged by artillery/tank fire.

 

It is the combination of streets and buildings which can be used as a cover/firing positions that makes urban combat uniquely intense and unforgiving, not the fact that a certain firefight is taking place at something marked as city on a tourist map so IMO mitrail has a point.

[Jackal326 1181]

Either way, hypothetical arguments about who has or hasn't fought in an urban environment or who does or doesn't barricade the shit out of their houses before fleeing or not fleeing are all irrelevant. None of it is going to magically manifest 3d modelled (and textured) interiors to these buildings.

[snakeplissken 96]

Now say that can not change, I think this is an exaggeration!

 

For in Chernarus map, how many homes was not editable, and after updating the game, it came to be editable.

 

In ArmA 3 can not occur the same, with some updating?

 

Two house that would be editable.

It would be useful for good style missions RainbowSix and SWAT.

 

 

[Jackal326 1181]

Now say that can not change, I think this is an exaggeration!

For in Chernarus map, how many homes was not editable, and after updating the game, it came to be editable.

In ArmA 3 can not occur the same, with some updating?

I'm not saying it 100% wont happen, ever. What I'm saying is expecting it to happen before initial release is entirely unrealistic...

The chances of it never happening are quite high though...

[kocrachon 2]

I really do miss open buildings. The only reason I wanted Eden so bad was to make placing units in buildings easier.... now I have no buildings to place units in with Eden. 

 

Honestly, I have no problem with the buildings being "empty". If they didn't want to furnish buildings, thats fine, it could even fall into the lore of it falling into chaos, people are fleeing and taking their stuff with them. As it stands, Im back to chenaruss style of gtameplay where everything is just going to take place in the woods because its the only way to really conceal enemies without them just hiding around corner after corner...

[domokun 515]

Last time I checked even the completely illiterate people weren't that dumb to live in a combat area. People don't live in a combat zone, they flee, usually to Germany. Moreover, pretty much any footage of urban combat from Chechnya to modern Syria or Ukraine shows an extensive use of civilian buildings most of which are damaged by artillery/tank fire.

Actually this is a common misconception. In most conflicts, large parts of the civilian population are either unable (financially or physically) or unwilling (patriotism or coercion) to leave. Check current affairs, recent news or contemporary history, e.g.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio

I think that reason most people don't realise this is because of the glamorisation of violence in mass media (Hollywood films in particular but also video games, FPS notably) and general disinterest in "collateral damage".

In fact it is one of the greatest challenges facing modern armies, i.e. they risk getting bogged down in COIN and/or peace-keeping.

I actually think that it would provide fascinating aspect to Arma but I appreciate that it is also riddled with moral pitfalls, not to mention require considerably resources to implement correctly.

[FoxFort 341]

Open but empty buildings works for me in A3. No furniture, no problem, you can move more easily across the room. What's the point of having apartment buildings if you can't al least use the staircase to get to the rooftop.

[acealive 8]

*edit* deleted the salty parts

 

Tanoa is a really great environment for gameplay regarding the verticality, the looks, the different terrains.

 

It's a great map yet if feels not completely finished to me, due to the many buildings that can not be entered. I hope this gets changed in the future.

Edited June 10, 2016 by acealive

[roberthammer 582]

I'd rather have no building than a building that one cannot enter.

I don't care if there is any furniture inside, but having to guess which building can be entered and which not and only finding out when running from fire and standing at the very door of a building is a no go.

Then rather no building at all. Same with Trees that cannot be destroyed when hit by a tank or any kind of wall that cannot be blown up.

I do not care about the engine technical issues with enterable buildings. it's 2016. Get it sorted out or just don't have the buildings there at all.

I hope some modder can take the Map File and make it better, if BI is not capable of doing so.

Tanoa is a really great environment for gameplay regarding the verticality, the looks, the different terrains.

Yet the interactability on the maps feels like 2006 not like 2016.

Not sure if I still consider 30 bucks for the map a good investment from my side, really sorry to say that.

It's a great map but if feels only half-finished to me.

You know having more types of buildings is better than having 5 buildings only that are fully open - like it's on Altis

 

and not all buildings are locked in Tanoa and somebody really overreacts to this

 

then again more fully modeled buildings = worse performance which RV engine got issues with it

 

Have a look at A2 Lingor map for example , it wasn't great because of buildings but because it was really well designed and atmosphere in it

 

Same with A1 Sahrani , still my favorite ArmA island

 

btw if Tanoa had less or no new buildings then surely somebody would complain about it , like always in the forums :P

[Von Quest 1163]

I'll go grab the cheese. What a wine fest!

The OP stated something about constructive criticism. This is nothing but whining. Where in the hell does BIS advertise a "mega-building-pack"? It's a NEW Map. It's playable terrain. Exactly as intended. Anything that adds to the game, adds to the game!

The average consumer can not afford a $10,000 super-computer to run a "perfect" map. And no company can afford to pay its employees for the 100,000 hours it takes to make that "perfect" map.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. It's that simple. The new Map and new water environment look FANTASTIC! It's not even officially released yet. Geesh! Whine whine whine.

3 pages of this nonsense. Lock this thread.

[froggyluv 2136]

 Geesh! Whine whine whine.

 

 Is it really whining to voice your unhappiness over a decided priority shift that although was expressed last year -seemed left open to final decision? Many of us here love CQB building to building battle as it just adds another full dimension to combat and although Arma will never be known as a Swat 4 , we also didnt expect the direction to go backwards. Again, Chernarus+ is a redux of the original with one of its main goals being to 'open up' the buildings abit -why is it so much for us to ask the same?

 

 For some reason, this aspect never gets any real comment from the devs -as long as Ive been here and it can get pretty frustrating. Arma 3 they decided to make underwater a priority -underwater..with the 1st new AI behaviour implemented since Arm2's AI ducking under fences -for underwater water combat (did I say that yet?). Thats boggling to the tac minded gamer as lets compare real world action building fighting to deep sea armed combat....its almost too silly to fathom. Of course what im referring to isnt just open buildings perse but the entirety of what can enhance urban and interior combat. BI refuses to advance or even comment really in this area (save the 3d editor) but now to take a step back with "Performance, priority, different goals, budgets, small teams ..." -why not give a nod to the urban combat lover? Why not "While we are sadly lowering the amount of empty buildings, we ARE addressing AI maneuvering, clearing, well thought out fighting positions form buildings that are open.." -there are countless areas they could help us -but they choose not too.

 

 So yeah, call us whiners while we voice our displeasure with this one but very important to us area. I still love the map, love the game, love the whole damn last year as far as Arma -but tac luvin building fighters that get a special thrill seeing AI taking pot shots from 2nd floor windows have been let down.