Arma 3: Community wishes & ideas- DISCUSSION

[antoineflemming 14]

antoineflemming relax and wait till "its done"!

The A3 campaign is set in 07/2035 - 10 years after Iranian Forces invaded Limnos. Enough time to restore vital + important structures and to build new defensive positions/fortifications or even (re-)build military production line/R&D....

Now the storyline so far

So one could imagine that there must be something very important to find or its just another suicide mission to distract/slow down the enemy....

But it clearly says Limbos has many scars from the battles. The idea is that the island is battered and that it hasn't recovered. A fraction of the population remains. There aren't going to be nice greek homes and a beautiful untouched island. It's supposed to look like a war zone. That's clear from the info. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying that they aren't going to implement it. Just that I hope they keep the ww3-everything battered feel as it is important to the story.

[maddogx 13]

But it clearly says Limbos has many scars from the battles. The idea is that the island is battered and that it hasn't recovered. A fraction of the population remains. There aren't going to be nice greek homes and a beautiful untouched island. It's supposed to look like a war zone. That's clear from the info. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying that they aren't going to implement it. Just that I hope they keep the ww3-everything battered feel as it is important to the story.

Of course parts of the island will look battered, some villages will be partially or completely destroyed etc., but the point is that not every inch of the island has to look like it got bombed to shreds. Some areas may be simply deserted, but since no battles took place there, there will be no severe damage.

I expect that, when opening the island in the editor, most of the buildings will be intact, thus leaving the level of destruction open to the mission designer. The campaign will be a different story though. Just because you saw some intact looking villages in some of the videos doesn't mean the island will look pristine in the campaign.

[Cripsis 10]

There aren't going to be nice greek homes and a beautiful untouched island. It's supposed to look like a war zone.

It won't look like the scene of a nuclear holocaust, the footage I have seen shows a nice mix of undamaged, partially damaged, and completely destroyed houses and buildings.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Like mentioned earlier and in other threads - this can be done by mission design. Just imagine you would like to create or play a mission/campaign before the invasion.... Better have some more design/creative options instead of getting bored by hardcoded maps. :)

[antoineflemming 14]

Like mentioned earlier and in other threads - this can be done by mission design. Just imagine you would like to create or play a mission/campaign before the invasion.... Better have some more design/creative options instead of getting bored by hardcoded maps. :)

That's what I'm hoping for. Yeah, it should be left up to the user in the editor, but in campaign it should definitely be some destruction. But, yeah, not every inch, but a good portion.

[Cripsis 10]

At 0:50 significant damage to part of a town can be seen.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Arma3official#p/u/5/Sd--YYBNFx0

[LeMask 1]

I think that the game should be more about the use of "warrior skills" rather than "technology". I see a lot of a nice toys in the list of available items... Commanche helicopters and more... That's nice.

But I dont need all this stuff is it's not properly added to the game. Do less with more quality please.

I prefer an old M16A2 against an old well made AK47 with proper sights than all the armories of all video games in the world...

And please please, the guns have to be as close to reality as possible. Guns have to jam. Overheat. Break maybe? at least the vulnerable parts like the sights...

You cant maul an enemy with grenades and machine gun fire... And then retrieve brand new equipment from his body. Come on.

And I dont like the idea of being able to change the weapons addons ingame... Maybe at base in the armory... But in battle? How many soldiers go to battle with the whole sopmod kit in their backpacks? Give them the ability to take off the sights... And that's it.

You have the choice between iron sights/carrying handle, CQB sights, Assault sights, Sniper sights... Pick one. And you can take it off in battle... But good luck aiming with a gun without iron sights...

[djfluffwug 10]

I put in my idea of implementing occlusion culling into the community wishes and ideas section. I would like to see peoples views on this.

What is occlusion culling?:

Occlusion culling is a method that detects if polygons are out of view. If the poly's are out of view, it will then not render them.

What is the point of occlusion culling?:

The point of occlusion culling is to reduce the amount of wasted GPU and CPU processing by only rendering what needs to be rendered in the scene.

If occlusion culling was implemented, the CPU and GPU load would lighten quite a bit.

[wolffy.au 9]

That's what I'm hoping for. Yeah, it should be left up to the user in the editor, but in campaign it should definitely be some destruction. But, yeah, not every inch, but a good portion.

First mission of the PMC Campaign - Zargabad is all destroyed. The function is BIS_fnc_destroyCity. That functionality is already there in A2OA:PMC.

If occlusion culling was implemented, the CPU and GPU load would lighten quite a bit.

Didn't someone say there was a voting area already? If you can link me to your Occlusions Culling suggestion, I'd vote for it.

[Cripsis 10]

The point of occlusion culling is to reduce the amount of wasted GPU and CPU processing by only rendering what needs to be rendered in the scene.

The technicalities of CG lighting go far beyond my comprehension, but what's the hidden problems with this method? Surely there must be some kind of catch? :confused:

[maddogx 13]

The technicalities of CG lighting go far beyond my comprehension, but what's the hidden problems with this method? Surely there must be some kind of catch? :confused:

There is: most occlusion culling algorithms are so computationally heavy that they produce negligable performance benefits, or even have the opposite effect. Just like "deferred lighting", "64bit" etc., occlusion culling is not some magical thing that can simply be slapped into the engine so that we can recieve free bacon.

Edited November 17, 2011 by MadDogX

[Cripsis 10]

There is: most occlusion culling algorithms are so computationally heavy that they produce negligable performance benefits, or even have the opposite effect. Just like "deferred lighting", "64bit" etc., occlusion culling is not some magical thing that can simply be slapped into the engine so that we can recieve free bacon.

Thanks for explaining. :)

[djfluffwug 10]

Exactly what MadDogX said.

But, the word that should be highlighted in his post is Most.

If an algorithm can be implemented that is computationally light, then we would have success.

My first suggestion would be to increase the culling cell sizes to it reduces the amount of computation needed to cull while keeping the poly's lower.

Even if we had giant cells (50 metre cells), it would reduce poly's while having a relatively light computational load.

Also, are all cores on the CPU's fully utilized in ArmA? If not, occlusion culling could be fitted in.

---------- Post added at 20:08 ---------- Previous post was at 19:08 ----------

Added a dev heaven ticket.

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/26406

---------- Post added at 21:25 ---------- Previous post was at 20:08 ----------

Okay so dwarden has cleared things up for me. Aparently the engine is already capable of occlusion culling so no progress will be made on this.

[avibird 1 154]

I don't know if this has been said in the 14 pages but a working high command function that goes multipe levels deep with all the commands that work.

Edited November 17, 2011 by AVIBIRD 1

[onlyrazor 11]

I noticed the "walkable vehicles interior" post on the wishlist thread. Going with the "it's doable in VBS2 so it's doable in Arma 3" sentiment, it is possible to walk around in large, spacious vehicles such as helicopters, visible

. With that being said, if it were properly implemented in A3 it would make me very happy.

[wolfbite 8]

I hope stealth is a well thought out implementation for vehicles (Since the x-35 and commanche are in the game) instead of either A;Just not appearing on radar or B:Having no difference to standard aircraft.

They should have it so that when the vehicles are at a certain angle from a radar source like the belly of the lightning facing flat against the radar (within a certain angle range) that it should appear more visibly that say broadside frontside on.

Harder to pick up when flying low

Flicks up on radar when gear is down/Bomb bays flick open wings are loaded with ordanance etc

Hope this makes sense I rushed this a bit :P

[maddogx 13]

I hope stealth is a well thought out implementation for vehicles (Since the x-35 and commanche are in the game) instead of either A;Just not appearing on radar or B:Having no difference to standard aircraft.

They should have it so that when the vehicles are at a certain angle from a radar source like the belly of the lightning facing flat against the radar (within a certain angle range) that it should appear more visibly that say broadside frontside on.

Harder to pick up when flying low

Flicks up on radar when gear is down/Bomb bays flick open wings are loaded with ordanance etc

Hope this makes sense I rushed this a bit :P

Makes perfect sense and I fully support these ideas. :)

[FallujahMedic -FM- 867]

Makes perfect sense. Just have to remember that vehicles will have to ditch their generic "radars" first. That way only ground to air or air to air radars will be able to detect them.

[wolfbite 8]

Makes perfect sense. Just have to remember that vehicles will have to ditch their generic "radars" first. That way only ground to air or air to air radars will be able to detect them.

Yeah I gotta say I really hope the radar has been redone to have specific detection cones instead of the plain 360 uber radar we have atm. and ir ecm implemented.. I think they could be recreated pretty simply and would greatly add to the immersion for aircraft without having to make it to hardcore flight simmy

[TacoGrease 1]

Thanks Maionaze, so more units:

SWCC

SFOD-D

USAF Pararesque

SOAR (Nightstalkers)

24 STS

ISA (Intelligence Support Activity)

SAD (CIA's Special Activities Division)

Ugh... if you ask me I want the whole US SOF :D

Would be so stoked to see the 160th :)

It would also be legit to see Delta, the SEALs, and USAF Special Tactics operation together, like in real life.

Given the presence of a civilian population, it seems like Army Special Forces (the Green Berets) would seem fitting as well.

Being new to the forums (and therefore having only been able to consume a handful of posts in my times here thus far), what is the community's feeling toward futuristic tech? I mean, the storyline for ArmAIII is set in 2025, so theoretically that could make for some pretty cool additions, depending on the community's and BI's desires. Basically, if I'm looking for that, should I just go play Ghost Recon? (even though Future Soldier looks pretty...muddled)

For example:

Bell Hybrid Tilt Rotor (or something similarly inspired):

Boeing Airborne Laser (ABL) - which would by 2025 likely be available on platforms like the B-1:

US Navy X-47B UCAV (or even a sixth generation fighter like Boeing's F/A-XX concept):

Lockheed HULC Powered Exoskeleton:

Concept Helmet (though I do love the OpsCore):

Big Dog (for really rough terrain):

Scan Eagle (Small, Swarming Drone):

Optical/Active Camouflage (Metamaterials-based): Picture defeats the point :P

MH-X "Stealth Hawk"

Or again, should I just go play Ghost Recon? :P

[PrivateWolf 10]

Canadian army, dont forget the C7A2's with the C79 Optics, Can't call a C7A2 as a canadian army service rifle without it!

And also add the NAVY SEALS so it opens a world of possibilities to make servers about infiltration at night.. or spec ops missions

Just a suggestion.. but I strongly support TEH CANADIAN ARMY!

Edited November 19, 2011 by PrivateWolf

[onlyrazor 11]

Could you people just tell me something. How is it you people constantly want the SEALs when this game already has a special task force comprised of

, with the SBS and probably the SEALs in them? The main character is an SBS operative, not unlike the SEALs. There's really no necessity for them in the vanilla game, or at least the DLC-less version of the game :p

[-Coulum- 35]

Canadian army would be awesome!

[Maio 293]

Being new to the forums (and therefore having only been able to consume a handful of posts in my times here thus far), what is the community's feeling toward futuristic tech? I mean, the storyline for ArmAIII is set in 2025, so theoretically that could make for some pretty cool additions, depending on the community's and BI's desires. Basically, if I'm looking for that, should I just go play Ghost Recon? (even though Future Soldier looks pretty...muddled)

Or again, should I just go play Ghost Recon? :P

Hey Senior Taco. The majority of the active forum community has nothing against the future setting.

The action is actualy set in 2035 :)

The new ghost recon is a story driven FPS by the looks of it. ArmA 3 is a sandbox with an built in editor. My personal opinion is that ArmA 3, due to it's flexibility in terms of gameplay (SP and MP) and it's editor is better than Future Solider.

Be sure to check the confirmed features thread ( as of now) for more info. You can find a link to it in my signiture.

P.S. the steath hawk is just bad ass :D

[TacoGrease 1]

Hey Senior Taco. The majority of the active forum community has nothing against the future setting.

The action is actualy set in 2035 :)

The new ghost recon is a story driven FPS by the looks of it. ArmA 3 is a sandbox with an built in editor. My personal opinion is that ArmA 3, due to it's flexibility in terms of gameplay (SP and MP) and it's editor is better than Future Solider.

P.S. the steath hawk is just bad ass :D

My mistake on 2035, then. That opens up even more possibilities

And yes, GR is definitely story driven (which is kind of a minus, I think) as compared to the sandbox nature of ArmA, but GR is the only game I can think of that really integrates near-future systems.

From what I've seen, however, ArmA III looks to change that.

I've definitely checked out the confirmed features/vehicles/weapons/systems thread, but because I had not seen any of things I mentioned I thought I'd post them here :)

The airborne laser would make for some impressive Close Air Support :P

And yeah, the Stealth Hawk looks pretty lol.

------------------------------------------------------

Has there been much talk of active camouflage?