Jump to content
daveallen10

Disappointed with lack of Interactability on Tanoa

Recommended Posts

I don't usually make "complaint" posts, so I'd like this to be purely constructive criticism. Having played the Tanoa map (while realizing it is in Dev Branch) I am a little saddened by the lack of ability to interact with the environment on Tanoa. Everything feels like a static prop. I don't know if anyone else got this impression either.

Some specifics:
-Buildings, including village homes don't have interactive windows. Most windows are partially close so the ability to fight from buildings is diminished. Many windows (other than shatterable glass windows) are bugged and act like walls when you try to shoot through them (and enemies cannot see through them even though you can see them)

-Many buildings are non-enterable or have most areas blocked off. It feels a little lazy and limits the use of buildings.

-Most buildings and material have no destructability . Many do not even show bullet decals (a bug ticket is in for this)

-Many tree types are indestructible which feels extremely weird when you hit it with a tank, for instance. Trees continue to be indestructible to even the largest bombs in the game. 

-Most props are indestructible or unmovable. 

-Many "vehicles" such as the dozers and some ships, are just props.

 

-Vehicle damage and destruction models are very poor. Cannot shoot headlights or windshields out of some vehicles.

 

-Vehicle-in-vehicle - while I applaud the effort in getting it in, feels very rushed and hacky. 

 

Just generally, I'm a little sad that we continue to get maps that are so static. The map is cool, but it feels like the limitations of the engine (and the resources of the team) are really starting to show.

 

EDIT: Having played extensively on the most recent dev branch, the expansion generally just lacks a lot of polish. The map and jungles are really good, some of the vehicles are really good. But it doesn't feel like we've taken a lot of steps forward. Not to mention the lack of large scale improvements that we desperately need like improvements to physics, AI , damage/bullet decals, explosion effects, wall clipping, floor clipping, everything clipping. 

  • Like 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-Many buildings are non-enterable or have most areas blocked off. It feels a little lazy and limits the use of buildings.

 

I am fairly (guessing here :P) sure that they will get opened up upon initial release.

 

 

-Many "vehicles" such as the dozers and some ships, are just props.

 

As for this, I think they are there to show it is abandoned, as the story is that the island has fallen into chaos, so it was done on purpous to set the atmosphere. Also do remember this is an open-world military tactical shooter, so I don't think bulldozers are needed anyway.

 

~ Railgame1

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Pufu's link

 

https://dev.arma3.com/post/sitrep-00117

 

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.

 

I agree with all of your post Daveallen10. The visual quality of the foliage, terrain, textures, props are all amazing; the layout of the road network/trails and building placement is solid. However I don't think Tanoa comes near the standard of interaction and detail that we saw with Operation Arrowhead which is quite unfortunate. I absolutely understand the amount of effort it takes to design and create interiors for all of the buildings and how expensive it is to render a building with ~50(?) polygons versus an enterable building with an order of magnitude more polygons, furthermore the AI in Arma is a great deal more effective in the open and i have yet to see a really convincing performance by the AI in urban areas with many enterable structures. That being said try to find some combat footage or accounts of fighting where structures, particularly in small hamlets, are treated as solid polygons rather than something to be cleared or as a defensive pillbox.

 

I don't reasonably expect the large buildings in Georgetown to have interiors, but i think there's a good case to be made that in the smaller villages all buildings ought to be enterable. To BIS's credit this is  more or less the case as far as i've seen but there are some exceptions that bother me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I feel the same way. Especially after the big difference going from Chernarus to Takistan, and the amount of open buildings that game had. This feels like a step back from that for sure.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Tanoa is fantastic but I would have really liked to see more enter-able buildings as well. I think that might be my only real disappointment. It has an Arma 2 kind of feel to it because of that. Even simple ladders going to the roofs of the bigger buildings would have been nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just from my POV I understand performance maybe an issue to consider so I guess if that is the case fair enough not all are enter-able, but as they mentioned in the statement having empty buildings makes it look a bit odd so the buildings that are enter-able on tanoa it would be nice if they were populated with furniture inside to give the island a habitability like feel, hopefully there is a way to do that without significant hampering performance.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually like it this way,in Altis you had a village with 20 open houses that looked the same with 2-3 different interiors as "diversity".Many towns and villages felt like those practice grounds for armies or airsoft communities.One of the main reasons why I haven't touched Altis since 2014 and rely only on terrain\island mods.A mix of closed and open buildings strikes a far better balance for me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually like it this way,in Altis you had a village with 20 open houses that looked the same with 2-3 different interiors as "diversity".Many towns and villages felt like those practice grounds for armies or airsoft communities.One of the main reasons why I haven't touched Altis since 2014 and rely only on terrain\island mods.A mix of closed and open buildings strikes a far better balance for me.

 

Personally I feel you're doing yourself a huge disservice and that Altis is one of the best ARMA maps out there due to it's diversity and overall quality.

 

Also I'd much rather have a bunch of enterable houses which are empty then static objects I can't get into.

Anytime I go back to a map like Sahrani or Chernarus I get so frustrated when I'm taking fire and can't simply take cover in a building because it's not really a building it's just a prop.

 

I get why they've done it, and I know it's probably the "right" decision, but it's still a shame

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...having empty buildings makes it look a bit odd so the buildings that are enter-able on tanoa it would be nice if they were populated with furniture inside to give the island a habitability like feel, hopefully there is a way to do that without significant hampering performance.

 

Agreed. It reminds me of one of those brand new ghost-town-cities in China where no one works or lives.

 

 

 

Also I'd much rather have a bunch of enterable houses which are empty then static objects I can't get into.

Anytime I go back to a map like Sahrani or Chernarus I get so frustrated when I'm taking fire and can't simply take cover in a building because it's not really a building it's just a prop.

 

This. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree, and I don't mind the lack of furniture in Altis at all. It would have been nice, sure. But the issue here is that buildings actually plays a HUGE tactical part in CQB. Having to clear them is one thing, but they also provide cover and as hiding spots. Planning to clear a town in Tanoa will be horrible, as you have to either know each model by heart in order to know what buildings are enterable and wich ones isn't, or you'll risk running into some very unpleasant surprises. Legging it to a building for cover, only to find that it's not possible to enter it is horrible. That, and the fact that these buildings lack so many windows. The shutters should be interactive or not present imo, as they reduce the usefulness of buildings quite significantly, and this is quite frankly stupid.

Furthermore, from what I've seen so far, alot of, if not most of the multistoried buildings that ARE enterable, only has the first floor enterable. We use two story buildings all the time as base of fire and as observation posts in my group. In Tanoa most of these buildings are simply useless.

Unfortunately, this makes the map less useful and quite booring. The tactical potential of being able to use buildings is MASSIVE in a milsim like environment, that this is what we get is quite dissappointing. 

Oh, and it's quite weird to add a map that is so forest heavy considering how insanely superhuman the AI is in forests. I'm very dissappointed in Tanoa thus far, even thought it looks great!

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"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..."

 

Frankly, I think this quote describes the whole Arma 3 experience. Not having the resources to polish an otherwise awesome game. 

 

Except wait, they definitely do have the resources, especially with massive pre-order sales and pricey DLC. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, I think this quote describes the whole Arma 3 experience. Not having the resources to polish an otherwise awesome game. 

 

Except wait, they definitely do have the resources, especially with massive pre-order sales and pricey DLC. 

resources doesn't always mean money. It can also mean people, time etc. And you obviously have no idea about a game studio the size of BI monthly expenses...pricey DLCs? really? have a look over DCS if you wanna talk pricey

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Well Ive barely scratched the surface of Tanao so just going off what Im reading here -it seems like building fighting is just not a priority to BI -and thats a shame. I can think of no major conflict in which troops fortified in houses hasnt played a major part -its just a part of war. Now ive read extensive and very thorough explanations of how much work goes into making interiors - but why then are we going backwards in accessability rather than stay even with Altis? Seems they went back and redid Chernarus for DayZ to expand the buildings so its only natural for us to ask, why not us?

 

 Many fans have been asking for better interior AI behaviour ie. Clear/Defend etc.. and while this hasnt occured, we have had success in some modders giving us tools to better work with buildings -but now your taking away from that as well?! Please rethink this decision BI, we love the Island it is a masterpiece, but urban fighting needs to at the very least not go backwards.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remeber the days (OFP-ArmA1)when you was lucky enough to come across maybe 1 that you could enter... we survived than, we'll survive now. Anything  to help performance in the overall picture is a good thing.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's always disappointed me a bit that BIS go to such extraordinary lengths with environmental fidelity, making environments that look real and populated, only to baulk at the final step of making the actual dwellings look anything other than abandoned. I'm sure part of the reason that so many people enjoy the multitude of desert/middle eastern and central asian themed maps is that the houses are enterable and furnished.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remeber the days (OFP-ArmA1)when you was lucky enough to come across maybe 1 that you could enter... we survived than, we'll survive now. Anything  to help performance in the overall picture is a good thing.

thats 15 years ago though... If we went by your philosophy we would all be playing in the VR map, I don't know if you've noticed, but performance is great in the VR map...

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. I must admit though that I was a little disappointed by the fact that alot of the smaller buildings aren't enterable, and some that are only partially enterable, despite being no bigger or more complex than most houses on Altis. That's actually my main complaint - that some two-room houses only have one room that is enterable. That and the rowboats. I've wanted playable rowboats since Arma 2, thought we'd get some in Apex when some appeared on Black Element's site a while back. Now it turns out they're just props :( 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, building where made simple because of performance, that's approved, but at least a good destruction visuals of those buildings is in order. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, building where made simple because of performance, that's approved, but at least a good destruction visuals of those buildings is in order. 

 

I prefer no destruction, no ruins, and interiors with no furniture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, keep in mind that APEX has so much content other studios (except for, probably, CD Projekt RED) would release it with a label of a new franchise game altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer no destruction, no ruins, and interiors with no furniture.

 

 ...and you hate sexy ladies, pie, kittens and beer at parties...

 

 

 

  :P

 

 I cant fathom why but to each his own I guess..

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

×