Arma 3: Community wishes & ideas- DISCUSSION

[akuna_matata 1]

Hello to all!

I'm a fan of BIS products since OFP. And since OFP there is one main thing that disturbs me. This is

"full-realistic" zooming that additionaly improving stadart zoom, when you look through the Optical sight.

I think that it is not suits such game, like ARMA. It's only my opinion. Sorry for my English. Hello from Russian fan's!

Edited February 1, 2012 by akuna_matata

[purepassion 22]

This additional "zoom" compensates for the limited FOV you have in the game ;)

Edited February 1, 2012 by PurePassion
I can't identify those new smileys :o

[gossamersolid 155]

The same argument happened for Red Orchestra 2. Long story short, the "zoom" should remain due to the fact that nobody wants to pixel hunt for enemies due to the FOV of games compared to real life.

[katipo66 94]

Much longer burning smoke periods for burnt out vehicles, all it needs is a whisper of smoke and maybe even small fire to give the illusion.

Also somehow have the ability too keep dead bodies around longer, for the whole mission would be better, I understand that dead bodies need to be removed to save CPU resources but I hate how bodies disappear.. How about an option that can enables them to sink more slowly over time, I think I remember reading about this somewhere.

[Smurf 12]

Also somehow have the ability too keep dead bodies around longer, for the whole mission would be better, I understand that dead bodies need to be removed to save CPU resources but I hate how bodies disappear.. How about an option that can enables them to sink more slowly over time, I think I remember reading about this somewhere.

Since you said this: Drag bodies like those we have in Hitman,Splinter Cell or Metal Gear Solid (the last beign the better IMHO) instead of "Hide Body".

[akuna_matata 1]

This additional "zoom" compensates for the limited FOV you have in the game ;)

I think that it is not an argument. FOV and zoom are too different things and cannot being compared

Pixel hunting is so bad, but non-realistic ~2x zooming without any gadgets is very beautiful.

[max power 21]

I think that it is not an argument. FOV and zoom are too different things and cannot being compared

Pixel hunting is so bad, but non-realistic ~2x zooming without any gadgets is very beautiful.

To turn the same argument on its head, the zoom compensates for the limited resolution of monitors. At maximum zoom, the horizontal field of view is what an average person would see of a box was over his head with an average monitor sized hole was cut in it an arms length away. The 'default zoom' is to mitigate the narrowness of the default FOV.

[looter 10]

Melee combat.

Thats right, I said it :cool:

[onlyrazor 11]

Melee combat.

Thats right, I said it :cool:

It's really only hard to pull off because it would probably be clunky as hell, not to mention the difficulty of sneaking up on an AI without the use of scripts. Things can change, I suppose, but for now, the argument remains.

[antoineflemming 14]

It's really only hard to pull off because it would probably be clunky as hell, not to mention the difficulty of sneaking up on an AI without the use of scripts. Things can change, I suppose, but for now, the argument remains.

Well, hopefully the animation system is revamped properly, with new, better, more fluid/less clunky animations, so that something like that wouldn't be clunky. And as far as sneaking up on the enemy AI, hopefully the AI awareness is improved, so that the AI don't act like they have eyes in the back of their heads.

[hobojoe 10]

will we be able to holster the hand gun

[looter 10]

will we be able to holster the hand gun

You can already create that effect with scripts, do you mean double-tapping control to holster/lower it or something? that would be nice. Not exactly top priority though.

[gossamersolid 155]

You can already create that effect with scripts, do you mean double-tapping control to holster/lower it or something? that would be nice. Not exactly top priority though.

We shouldn't have to script something, it should just work... like all the other guns.

[Choki 10]

please! Tell me that the videos of E3 are "alpha" stage in terms of sound and animations. From what I saw the in ARMA 3 is equals to Arma 2, except that now move hands with the steering wheel.

[purepassion 22]

they are pre-alpha in terms of everything :D

Sounds were most likely mostly placeholders and 90% of the animations were just normal A2 ones. (except Lynx reload and a few more reload anims)

Check the "Confirmed features" or the "my trip to gamescom" thread ;)

Edited February 5, 2012 by PurePassion

[Steakslim 1]

It was so pre-alpha, they didn't even have inventory pictures for most of the items in the demo itself.

[vonRichthofen 10]

I think that the biggest thing that needs improvement in the game is the general movement/control of the players unit. At the moment the best example of what I think would be best is RO2. However even better would be a mixture of RO2 and BF3, now I don't want the game to be another run-and-gun fps but to be honest the movement in previous ArmA games has been terrible and far from realistic. In real life you wouldn't get stuck in doors or just stand like a tard after you fall/jump down a ~1m drop. IRL it's easy to for instance lower your weapon while moving trough a tight space and you almost automatically do these procedures. In-game however you have to keep pressing buttons and that makes CQB a pain and much slower than it is IRL. It is also not only in CQB but movement in general, like running moving over small obstacles. Now I know that making it like it is in RO2/BF3 isn't completely realistic however the result would be a more realistic feel and would allow for a more realistic feel of the combat situation.

[DeclaredEvol 10]

Don't take me the wrong way guys, but I noticed the AI do not know exactly how to act in combat. It would help the experience of players if they weren't running around mindlessly in combat. There is also still too much fragment in speech, the whole... One.. Follow.. That Man.. at 2 O' Clock. That is what most people who have never played ArmA notice the most, and it be one of the most annoying things to hear during combat. Instead of fragmented in words, say it such as... Unit One, I want you to follow that man at 2 O' Clock... Got it? The Unit can agree with Roger that, but instead of fragmenting voice commands make them all one long smooth line of words.

As for the rest I am wondering about, Battlefield's particle effects and destruction is more realistic. I was amazed that ArmA 3 wasn't too improved along the lines of those things because it is DX10-11. Physics are a major role in something as real as ArmA because it gives a sense of war to the player. In the Unreal Engine 3.0 there is a fragment system where you can draw as many lines over an object and when the object receives damage at a certain sector it will break off. I also noticed a lot of bullets and explosions cause sparks which can also lead to more explosions and fires...

For all the better, the sounds of the weapons and impacts are one of the BIGGEST hits on a persons sense of safety. If you hear realistic gunshots from the distance you will realize that you need to find cover. When you hear faint and unrealistic gunshots, the user wont really budge. Not as a sound wiz or anything, but the bullets firing in front of units are loud and scary enough for everyone to drop to cover. The AI in the game simply just crouch or run, more than 90% of the time if there is cover or concealment they would 'need' to drop to prone. If they are in an open field, they'd need to head for the nearest cover as fast as possible... The AI's recognition of strategy is weak, they don't use tactical strategies such as the Peel, or forward maneuver. Or buddy systems, it would be a honor for me to buy ArmA 3 if these sort of things were improved or even mastered. Otherwise, I do not see much improvement over ArmA 2 and in some ways its just harder to enjoy. I was never a huge fan of futuristic weapons and vehicles, but if we inherited more intensive gameplay the point of buying ArmA 3 would be WAY more solid. As a last comment, the point of Directx10&11 are not only for performance... but for graphical enhancements such as object tessellation, destruction and bumping. A lot of the terrain and roads are still flat and boxy... but that isn't really too much of my concern. The gameplay is what counts guys...

Edited February 5, 2012 by DeclaredEvol

[Choki 10]

they are pre-alpha in terms of everything :D

Sounds were most likely mostly placeholders and 90% of the animations were just normal A2 ones. (except Lynx reload and a few more reload anims)

Check the "Confirmed features" or the "my trip to gamescom" thread ;)

Thanks!

DeclaredEvol AI is good, they must do many more things that a linear game like Battlefield 3. The other games are single AI whit scripts.

vonRichthofen. Agree, is like driving a robot. It feels limited and hard. because BIS games have scripted animations. Supposedly they are working to change and make more fluid animations.

[JSj 12]

I hope that ground vehicles will no longer have the cheating radar in Arma 3. I can accept it for aircraft, where it is a substitute for the missing targeting pods and other sensors, but since the thermal imaging sights got introduced to ground vehicles, there is no excuse for having the radar in these vehicles any more. Is there any information available about how this will be implemented in Arma 3?

Edited February 6, 2012 by Johan S

[DeclaredEvol 10]

Thanks!

DeclaredEvol AI is good, they must do many more things that a linear game like Battlefield 3. The other games are single AI whit scripts.

vonRichthofen. Agree, is like driving a robot. It feels limited and hard. because BIS games have scripted animations. Supposedly they are working to change and make more fluid animations.

Well I do have proof of the AI being almost 100% the same from ArmA 2. But to ignore that, I can show you something I found on Cryengine 3.0 that is incredible... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KWwk1jCyU0

[Tonci87 163]

Well I do have proof of the AI being almost 100% the same from ArmA 2. But to ignore that, I can show you something I found on Cryengine 3.0 that is incredible... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KWwk1jCyU0

Well to be honest, they acted pretty stupid once the fighting started!

[ProfTournesol 956]

Well I do have proof of the AI being almost 100% the same from ArmA 2.

Care to elaborate ?

[Smurf 12]

Care to elaborate ?

Gamescom video maybe? But that showed more A2 than A3 actually......

[ProfTournesol 956]

Gamescom video maybe? But that showed more A2 than A3 actually......

Yep, but judging AI from a pre alpha footage would be meh.