Vehicle Interiors - Feedback

[M. Glade 524]

Small addition - animations for commanders hand clicking buttons/display and driver (ex. switching to thermals, turning on lights, fire smoke etc)

[SuicideKing 233]

3 hours ago, Beagle said:

I really don't see any advantage over the 2D layover in what you show me there.

These are waaay better. 2D is too restrictive and has a narrow FOV. If you're operating in an urban environment or with infantry running around, the spatial awareness is really useful. Driver's job is to drive, true, but that tiny 2D viewport is inadequate for the purpose. This isn't hypothetical - I'm saying this based on 2 years of community play with almost exclusively vanilla (and occasionally modded) vehicles.

 

1 hour ago, teabagginpeople said:

This may be quite a disliked opinion understandably so . but if you are keeping both views. why are you not locking the new interiors behind the dlc paywall?  it will sell way more dlc and can hardly be called a dick move? correct me if I am wrong I think it would be fair enough? 

No, it really wouldn't be fair. If it's a vanilla vehicle, it should be completely accessible to all who've payed for the base game. If it's an Apex vehicle, all those who paid for Apex should be able to see the interiors. Moreover, it will encourage people to purchase Tanks DLC imo, since they'll get a taste of the amount of work that's gone into them. Locking interiors behind a paywall is a sure-shot way for BI to lose goodwill.

 

(It'll also lead to potentially different experiences within the same vehicle, which is a terrible idea for MP).

[Strike_NOR 898]

10 minutes ago, M. Glade said:

Small addition - animations for commanders hand clicking buttons/display and driver (ex. switching to thermals, turning on lights, fire smoke etc)

Firstly,

and I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, what exactly are you trying to say? You are being very unclear here.

 

Is it a suggestion? Is it a feature report? 

 

Start your post by saying "I would like to suggest....." or "Something that would improve the experience....."

 

 

Secondly,

It is not a "small" addition at all. You are talking about a completely new animation for each operation, for each position, in each vehicle. The buttons are not in the same place for each tank or position, so that means on average 1 animation per switch in the game.

 

No other vehicles in game have this, so it would break consistency as well.

[en3x 209]

1 hour ago, ice_age0815 said:

 interiors why you guys need this ?

 

For the same reason hunters have interior.

 

For anyone else interested in a question why do armored vehicles need interiors, I made small reasearch thread over here.

[M. Glade 524]

10 minutes ago, Strike_NOR said:

Firstly,

and I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, what exactly are you trying to say? You are being very unclear here.

 

Is it a suggestion? Is it a feature report? 

 

Start your post by saying "I would like to suggest....." or "Something that would improve the experience....."

 

 

Secondly,

It is not a "small" addition at all. You are talking about a completely new animation for each operation, for each position, in each vehicle. The buttons are not in the same place for each tank or position, so that means on average 1 animation per switch in the game.

 

No other vehicles in game have this, so it would break consistency as well.

 

You really think I'm saying put the fucking skeletons fingers between each groove and button? No.

 

A simple hand gesture with already available animations to move in the general vicinity of a button isn't very hard and is done by RHS with one of their jet models. So what if its not in the other vehicles? Armored vehicles haven't had interiors but every other vehicle did, now they're getting one, problem? 

[en3x 209]

So in regards to feedback, about interiors. Now that I have experienced the feel and look I realized that the most important thing is view on the outside.

 

What I mean by this is how much can you actually see through the slit when you driver/command or perhaps even gun.

 

So first thought I got from this was ETS or euro truck sim adjustment of the seat. So you can customize how front or back, how high or how low your

"seat" will be. When I say seat, in their case is basically your view adjustment.

 

[Beagle 684]

1 hour ago, SuicideKing said:

These are waaay better. 2D is too restrictive and has a narrow FOV. If you're operating in an urban environment or with infantry running around, the spatial awareness is really useful. Driver's job is to drive, true, but that tiny 2D viewport is inadequate for the purpose. This isn't hypothetical - I'm saying this based on 2 years of community play with almost exclusively vanilla (and occasionally modded) vehicles.

Im Saying this based in 12 months delaing with Armoured vehicles...the current 3D vieports of the marshal are way off and don't provide the necessary view. The blocks are way to far from the drivers eye. In such restrictive interiors only Cameraus could help. The 2D port in the marshal is really better overall compared to the narrow single slit.

[Strike_NOR 898]

On 12/16/2017 at 6:34 PM, M. Glade said:

You really think I'm saying put the f*****g skeletons fingers between each groove and button? No.

 

No need for foul language or rage. That's exactly what I think you were saying, because like I said, you were being very unclear.

 

What you specifically asked for is : "animations for commanders hand clicking buttons/display and driver (ex. switching to thermals, turning on lights, fire smoke etc)"

Which does sound like: an animation for clicking individual buttons for different systems, including : display screen buttons, lights, smoke launchers, etc.)",  and not how you said afterwards : "A simple hand gesture..." "... in the general vicinity of the button".

 

I don't think you fully appreciate or understand the complexity of animations, and the variety of control panel placements for each vehicle, even for a "simple hand gesture".

 

Besides, it would look like the player "used the force" to manipulate the vehicle.

 

Seeing that the pedals, steering wheels and side-stick for turret controls have been animated, you do, in my opinion, come off as rather ungrateful and demanding.

 

 

[en3x 209]

Strike is indeed right. Animation system in arma is indeed very complicated and old, so the simple things sometimes aren't that simple to implement.

[Alwarren 2767]

I am happy that interiors will finally get added. I had whined about the lack of them in Alpha and was generally laughed at because it would "mean only one tank per side, do you want that" (and look what we got). I applaud this addition, it makes multiplayer tank crews so much more immersive.

 

What I don't get is why the gunners have no viewscreen. The only way for the gunner to actually aim is by using the 2D view. Gunners should have a screen or periscope like the commander.

 

It's too bad that the control point actions from Take on Helicopter have never been ported over. It would be cool to be able to use cockpits and interiors of vehicles like in DCS or TkoH.

 

[Alwarren 2767]

28 minutes ago, en3x said:

Strike is indeed right. Animation system in arma is indeed very complicated 

 

It's not very complicated actually. It's just not very good. It's high time this gets replaced, and if Arma 4 is based on the Enfusion Engine (which I suppose is a given) it will benefit from the improvements like IK. As it is now, animations are extremely static, since they have no point of reference in what they animate. For example, animating a simple reload for a weapon is a singular horror. Not only must you redo the animation for every weapon variant that has a slightly different configuration (for example, different position of magazine, different position of cocking lever etc), the same "flow" of animation on the weapon (i.e. when the magazine is removed and reinserted) must fit both the standing and prone animation. That leads to pretty awkward animations (also try going prone from third person view, hit reload and stand up...).

If the animation was able to reference the magazine position and support IK, reload animations could be widely reused. Alas it doesn't.

[x3kj 1247]

2 hours ago, Beagle said:

Im Saying this based in 12 months delaing with Armoured vehicles...the current 3D vieports of the marshal are way off and don't provide the necessary view. The blocks are way to far from the drivers eye. In such restrictive interiors only Cameraus could help. The 2D port in the marshal is really better overall compared to the narrow single slit.

So is this a problem of modelled interiors in general, or a problem of the marshals driver position design? The answer is the later. There is no 2D equivalent to the gunner or commander cupolas and the 3D optics in the marid are simply and plainly superior to 2d letterbox as example. I showed you that you can adjust your camera position. I see no reason why i should spend any more energy trying to show you the benefits of a new feature you apparently chose to dislike before actually fully trying it out.

[ProfTournesol 956]

 

I knew you BIS guys were on the right side of the force.

[lionhawk123 20]

Really liking this so far!

 

The commander seat and especially the gunner seat on the Gorgon are really awkward, since they can't actually see outside of the vehicle without turning out or using optics. Is there no way to give them a periscope or two? I know it's not on the model, so you'd probably have to get a bit more "creative" about how to add that in. But currently the interior of the Gorgon is totally going to waste because it doesn't really add anything to the gameplay for commander/gunner.

[mistyronin 1181]

Really impressed about what we know of this DLC. It’s going to be another huge step forward.  

 

As someone already mentioned, what would really kill it is to add few interactive buttons like in Take on Helicopters. Then it would be a totally immersive experience. 

 

And if I can give a suggestion, being able to open doors and hatches to get in and out would also be a really nice touch. Even if it’s just an automated feature.

 

I just hope BI keeps all the Arma 3 features in a future sequel (FFV, vehicle interiors, helicopter advanced flight mode, ViV, etc.)-and please with a modern or historical setting, no more pseudo-futuristic experiments-. Then it would be a dream come true. 

[snakeplissken 96]

Thanks BI

 

[mistyronin 1181]

After testing the interiors a bit more, I’d like to comment few areas of improvement:

 

View modes switch. 

There should be a way to switch the MFD view modes without using the 2d-view: day, night vision, thermals and info. Adding the info mode in all stations allows a useful feature for those players that don’t use PiP. Adding the other modes in the gunner stations allow a non-2D view playing, which allows bigger immersion.

 

To add extra simulation, keybindings could be assigned for each type of view mode to allow fast switching (like in real life):

- B for switching between day mode and info.

- N for night vision mode (or control + N to allow also nv googles)

- M for thermals

 

Zoom mode 

Ability to zoom the MFD view. Maybe using alt+mouse wheel or using keys. 

 

Raise head

Most games that have a certain degree of tank simulation allow you to raise your head towards the periscopes -to allow different angles- and even unbutton slowly -to keep your head protected-.

 

That’s usually achieved with a mouse wheel movement. If there are engine limitations, another solution is to have a 3-step unbuttoning. First step at periscope height, second step hatch opened few cm enough so the crewman can see the exterior saftely -that’s how many tank commanders manage a tank in RL combat-, and a third step full unbuttoned. 

 

Map / GPS / BFT

Finally, another view mode with a map / gps would be welcomed. Many modern vehicles use a Blue Force Tracker or similar. That would allow a bigger immersion, as players don’t need to have a gps spawned over the screen.

[Sgt. Strongest Military Ever 19]

Is there any way to switch the pip in the Marshall and Gorgon gunner screen to be the turret camera instead of the azimuth info? I apologize if this has been covered earlier in the thread.

[Redphoenix 1540]

5 minutes ago, mistyronin said:

After testing the interiors a bit more, I’d like to comment few areas of improvement:

 

View modes switch. 

There should be a way to switch the MFD view modes without using the 2d-view: day, night vision, thermals and info. Adding the info mode in all stations allows a useful feature for those players that don’t use PiP. Adding the other modes in the gunner stations allow a non-2D view playing, which allows bigger immersion.

 

There already is - it's right CTRL + N.
Check if you have it set-up in the controls (should be under General) - It's just called "Night-Vision" - So it could slip the eye easily. The tooltip should be different tho.

[mistyronin 1181]

7 minutes ago, Redphoenix said:

There already is - it's right CTRL + N.
Check if you have it set-up in the controls (should be under General) - It's just called "Night-Vision" - So it could slip the eye easily. The tooltip should be different tho.

 

I totally missed it. Danke! 

[Sniperwolf572 758]

1 hour ago, mistyronin said:

Raise head

Most games that have a certain degree of tank simulation allow you to raise your head towards the periscopes -to allow different angles- and even unbutton slowly -to keep your head protected-.

 

Not sure if you're aware, but you can already do this somewhat. Not sure what the defaults are, but CTRL+Numpad numbers can move and lean the head around in most vehicles. For example, head is down and to the left observing the top of the hill or head is slightly up and to the right, checking if there's anyone near the rock. They're under "View > Move Head ..."

[FoxFort 341]

This brings a fond memories of OFP CWC which I love! Thank you BIS !!!

[xxgetbuck123 945]

1 hour ago, Sniperwolf572 said:

 

Not sure if you're aware, but you can already do this somewhat. Not sure what the defaults are, but CTRL+Numpad numbers can move and lean the head around in most vehicles. For example, head is down and to the left observing the top of the hill or head is slightly up and to the right, checking if there's anyone near the rock. They're under "View > Move Head ..."

 

Works well with trackIR as well. 

[x3kj 1247]

With the camera movement, I noticed the camera movement (viewing around in free look) gets really jittery if you move the camera position to much away from original position. It's not new, but now it has more than ever relevance.

[en3x 209]

16 hours ago, Alwarren said:

 

It's not very complicated actually. It's just not very good. It's high time this gets replaced, and if Arma 4 is based on the Enfusion Engine (which I suppose is a given) it will benefit from the improvements like IK. As it is now, animations are extremely static, since they have no point of reference in what they animate. For example, animating a simple reload for a weapon is a singular horror. Not only must you redo the animation for every weapon variant that has a slightly different configuration (for example, different position of magazine, different position of cocking lever etc), the same "flow" of animation on the weapon (i.e. when the magazine is removed and reinserted) must fit both the standing and prone animation. That leads to pretty awkward animations (also try going prone from third person view, hit reload and stand up...).

If the animation was able to reference the magazine position and support IK, reload animations could be widely reused. Alas it doesn't.

 

Good point, I remember watching Kiory streaming his animation worflow for L85 used in british army, and changing IK with values in text file seemed really arhaic.

 

Still the reason I claimed about complicated system is this mention about animation system being like giant spider web right now, its connected to so many things,

and its really cumbersome to work with. It was in a sitrep from longtime ago I'm sure.