Disappointed with lack of Interactability on Tanoa

[galzohar 31]

Not having enter-able buildings is a big shame.

 

While it wasn't very pretty to have no furniture in Altis buildings, it was really much better than, say, Chernarus, where buildings simply cannot be entered.

 

No furniture takes away from the immersion and realistic looks.

 

No ability to enter takes away from being able to simulate a realistic combat situation.

 

The Altis approach was much better I would say, considering the reasons for me and most people i play with to buy this game in the first place.

 

Besides, not being able to enter a building can be argued to be even less immersion and less realistic looks than having the building enter-able with no furniture.

 

Overall, I think the approach they took for Tanoa is an absolutely horrible idea, making the not-so-great situation we had on Altis much much worse on Tanoa.

[dmarkwick 261]

Well it's always going to be something. For some people it's the performance cost of All The Things. For others it's the lack of enterable buildings. For others it's the lack of furniture. It wouldn't matter whatever BIS's approach is: this thread would exist in some form :/

[BL4DE 91]

Why DX12? Would it not be better to developed for Vulkan? Vulkan being multiplatform we might finally get native Linux Arma 4? And they work more or less in similar ways?

[dmarkwick 261]

Or indeed DX12.

[galzohar 31]

Well it's always going to be something. For some people it's the performance cost of All The Things. For others it's the lack of enterable buildings. For others it's the lack of furniture. It wouldn't matter whatever BIS's approach is: this thread would exist in some form :/

 

Of course, but at least with enter-able buildings the gameplay would have been better, so more people would be spending time playing and less spending time complaining. So while not perfect, it would make the situation better :)

 

Does Tanoa actually perform better than Altis? For some reason, I highly doubt it.

It seems more like a manpower issue (as stated by BIS) than performance, at least in most cases. They specifically said that they make buildings non-entrable so that they don't feel like they have interiors missing, which really is just making things worse than they were on Altis.

[BomosBoy 13]

Of course, but at least with enter-able buildings the gameplay would have been better, so more people would be spending time playing and less spending time complaining. So while not perfect, it would make the situation better :)

 

Does Tanoa actually perform better than Altis? For some reason, I highly doubt it.

It seems more like a manpower issue (as stated by BIS) than performance, at least in most cases. They specifically said that they make buildings non-entrable so that they don't feel like they have interiors missing, which really is just making things worse than they were on Altis.

+1

Also (i cant stop complaining about it) the skyscrapers looking just awful, especially the blue one. The windows are not destoryable and the hole building makes no sense because you cant enter a single room and it dosnt look realistic as the white/red skyscraper cause the windows are just a texture with a reflecting shader. Its not fitting in the cites...

[chrisb 196]

I won't be playing on Tanoa, certainly for the time being. But I went into have a look around.

I think there may be enough buildings that are enterable for it to be interesting. I put down a group using the GL5 mod near some buildings, but they didn't garrison, as they usually would do. Now that may have just been at the point on the island that I was located. I haven't looked around, only really one town area, so it may be different elsewhere. But the buildings were enterable, but the ai didn't recognise that.

 

I have heard from people on other community forums that the ai is fairly woeful on Tanoa. But I couldn't say myself, if that is the case or not. The players saying these things are players that use and build ai mods, so I sort of think that it maybe the case that ai are not suited to the new island as much and its more steered towards MP (pvp).

 

But regards buildings, from the small town I looked at, there seemed to be enough that were enterable, based on BI's usual standard. It wouldn't be hard to get ai into buildings, of course in the right positions could be a problem, especially if they are to do that by themselves with little input from the player/mission designer, plus patrol through built up areas etc using all enterable buildings, outhouses and so on.

 

 

Edit: Just went into Georgetown and put a few groups down. Synced to the groups were the GL5 'Defend' module. Provided you place them very close to buildings, they do garrison, although its not very good, but they can do it.

[funyun 12]

As much as that may seem rude, I have to agree with you. It seems like it would have been a better use of time if BI fixed the things you listed and many more. Don't get me wrong, I love Tanoa, I play everyday , but I feel as if it was not as necessary as the back end stuff that people complain about on a daily basis.

 

 

You still cant walk up stairs while crouched!

 

This and many other obscene problems still exist after years of 'development'.

 

Also, some of the buildings on Tanoa seem scaled wrong, like the ATC towers, which are barely bigger than a life guard beach tower.

[kremator 1065]

^^ this ... getting into and out of buildings when you aren't directly perpendicular is also difficult!  DEVs need to have a good look at this.

 

I've also AI getting stuck in the airport buildings and NEVER returning to formation.  Finally what is the deal these closed doors ... at least have the decency to REMOVE THE DOOR HANDLES !!!

[funyun 12]

^^ this ... getting into and out of buildings when you aren't directly perpendicular is also difficult!  DEVs need to have a good look at this.

 

I've also AI getting stuck in the airport buildings and NEVER returning to formation.  Finally what is the deal these closed doors ... at least have the decency to REMOVE THE DOOR HANDLES !!!

 

 

I really do wonder if BI gives a shit, there is no reason for a doorway to be almost too small to get through. 

 

Opening a door while standing anywhere near its swing still results in you clipping into it and getting stuck.

 

They have been making this game for 10yrs, and still can't manage a functional door? :blink:

 

APEX is the apex of meh DLC that is surpassed by 90% of the modding community.

[dragon01 902]

Really, they should take some lessons from Take On: Mars. It's a bit peculiar game as a whole, but some things like doors, vehicles and interactions in general are vastly superior to ArmA. Maybe the next game in the series could use a better engine capable of doing those things the way TOM did.

[das attorney 858]

Some of the trees on Tanoa are seemingly indestructible and can't be knocked over.

[RoF 240]

Some of the trees on Tanoa are seemingly indestructible and can't be knocked over.

 

They are new type of tree to help stop deforestation.

[badluckburt 78]

Some of the trees on Tanoa are seemingly indestructible and can't be knocked over.

 

It's called hardwood for a reason ;)

 

I guess they do it for performance reasons, being able to deforest Tanoa would be epic though :D

[dav 22]

I don't understand the logic creating a map that has so much heavy vegetation on such an engine. Now don't get me wrong the map is wonderful and of course I support BIS but I don't agree with the logic behind releasing a map that in itself is incredibly demanding. Now I personally play Arma 3 at 2x DSR in order for the visuals to look crisp so one could argue if I played at a lower resolution all would be fine but then it looks washed out and jaggy. I would have preferred a brand new desert map personally. 

 

Regarding the intractability I would rather that Bis built a few large structures that were intractable as opposed to multiple city like areas that are a system hog and not even enterable. 

 

I 'face palm' Tanoa due to its over indulgent nature within such an engine but I am enjoying it nevertheless. 

[gordonbay 10]

That's how they do things, release an ok unfinished game costing same price of a great finished game and wait for modders and feedback.bistudio lazy programers slowly finish the game. I still remember when i bought arma 2 and 3, it was unplayable, i had to wait 6 months to play a real mission, without crazy bugs or hackers.

[dmarkwick 261]

That's how they do things, release an ok unfinished game costing same price of a great finished game and wait for modders and feedback.bistudio lazy programers slowly finish the game. I still remember when i bought arma 2 and 3, it was unplayable, i had to wait 6 months to play a real mission, without crazy bugs or hackers.

Then you must be unimaginative to the point of offensive. A huge amount of people get out of ArmA what they put in.

[neofit 65]

Then you must be unimaginative to the point of offensive. A huge amount of people get out of ArmA what they put in.

Sure, let's blame the player. I can't rush into a building when being shot at, it's not because half of Tanoa isn't enterable, it's just my imagination.

[dmarkwick 261]

Sure, let's blame the player. I can't rush into a building when being shot at, it's not because half of Tanoa isn't enterable, it's just my imagination.

That's the thing that makes this unplayable? You can't possibly get any gameplay out of this because you cannot rush into every building?

 

I'm not saying it's all perfect. But I'm not going to grab one single thing I cannot do & dismiss the entire game because of it. There's simply too much other stuff I CAN do.

[zoog 18]

I don't understand the logic creating a map that has so much heavy vegetation on such an engine. Now don't get me wrong the map is wonderful and of course I support BIS but I don't agree with the logic behind releasing a map that in itself is incredibly demanding.

Is it so demanding, really? I have a PC which is more than 3 years old, an i5 4670K and Ati Radeon HD 7870 (the graphics card was €200 at the time), and it runs very smooth on Tanoa with high to very high settings and 5000 view distance. So I think that's very decent to have good performance on such a large scale jungle map with a mid-range PC from 2013.

[badluckburt 78]

I don't understand the logic creating a map that has so much heavy vegetation on such an engine. Now don't get me wrong the map is wonderful and of course I support BIS but I don't agree with the logic behind releasing a map that in itself is incredibly demanding. Now I personally play Arma 3 at 2x DSR in order for the visuals to look crisp so one could argue if I played at a lower resolution all would be fine but then it looks washed out and jaggy. I would have preferred a brand new desert map personally. 

 

Regarding the intractability I would rather that Bis built a few large structures that were intractable as opposed to multiple city like areas that are a system hog and not even enterable. 

 

I 'face palm' Tanoa due to its over indulgent nature within such an engine but I am enjoying it nevertheless. 

 

The logic behind it is that they wanted to try something new. They've toyed with a Pacific / jungle environment before but never released one. I only wish they had boarded up the doors of non-enterable buildings. It's just a few more polygons and it would go a long way to kill the annoyance it causes people so BI, could you update the non-enterable buildings pretty please? :3

[icewindo 29]

Well and here we have one more reason why focusing on exterior in arma makes more sense. The interior AI is not that great. Without proper interior AI, what use are detailed interiors?

 

So instead of improving the indoor AI which has been nearly the same since OFP you remove enterable houses...

[BNNMaster 2]

Looked through the first posts and can say: am disappointed.

 

People imagining that BIS reworks a already released map (even if it was only a BETA back then), is crazy.

 

Making nice looking, colonial-type buildings which then feature 2 doors to, apparently, 12 hypothetical rooms, which arent enterable (why ofc, "hypothetical rooms"), and the only thing you can enter is the garage and the first floor stairway, ..... yeah why not.

 

The most interesting thing is the new rendering thing which causes LOD shifting and slightly "pixelated" AA transitions when you look around (for all my AMD buddies with the LATEST AMD drivers), was done so players get at least some FPS on Tanoa. Now we have sort of playable FPS thx to non-enterable or "badly made" buildings and the new rendering setting, but ground objects like little shrubs and the likes pop in and out as you come close, or transition in LOD badly.....

 

Some guys made videos [in BETA state back then] about how great the Island is and surely the little things like unusable buildings and such will be fixed most likely. Now where are the voices stating that "it'll be done". Again we have to take it "as-is" because BIS owns the market. Yes, they own the market, because come on.

 

That new "Squad" game with it's BF-like gameplay, BF itself, or CoD or even CS, they are in NO aspect a MIL-SIM, like ARMA. So, yes, there is really no acceptable alternative to ARMA. Or then tell me how in the hell is it realistic if you snipe at someone and you see their shots arcingtowards you with a smoke trail like a FFAR, that's scenes from BF - that just taken as a very short but good example of "realism" - get shot by a sniper in ARMA from 2km, you will fall over head first and seconds after your squad hears a slight, distant "bang".

I fear the devs very well know this "market domination", and that is why it is as it is. It's not like an issue of them not being a AAA Studio. Quite contrary. It's more an issue of "they have to take as it is". Let me quote some german politician pretty lately: "if you [citizen] do not like it here, you can always move". Like telling someone who is paralized and whos wheelchair sqeaks and creaks: "well it you can't stand it, learn to walk". Very bitter and dark humour? Well, so it is when yet another "new functionality" messes up ARMA.

[dmarkwick 261]

You know what map does have almost 100% enterable buildings? Altis. But, not much in the way of forests. There, people moan about furnishings, seriously. Or, performance, which is more pertinent. I guess what Tanoa brings is a different focus - vegetation. I guess what we could deduce here is that there is maybe some trade-off to be considered here, and that mission makers should use the appropriate map for the intended scenario?

Just a thought. I know the purpose of this thread is not to provide reasonable justification :)

[froggyluv 2136]

You know what map does have almost 100% enterable buildings? Altis.

 

 Damn you and your truthful logics!

 

 True and good point. Being probably the biggest town crier on enterable buildings here I actually think they did a really good compromise. The towns do have more flavor variety wise and there are enough enterable buildings to make things interesting. Sounds trivial but id like a 'jimmy door' sound when you try and open a locked buillding so that the building still feels alive rather than a dead prop -little things like this add up.

 

As much as i loathe that campaign style choice, Tanoa really was and continues to be better far better than ever expected.