official complaint to BIS

[raedor 8]

@boecko (to clear the crossposting you started): I never stated that the bugtracker you set up is going to be accepted/used by BI.

[boecko 0]

@boecko (to clear the crossposting you started): I never stated that the bugtracker you set up is going to be accepted/used by BI.

Haha ,

last time i checked the BIKI "bug tracker" isn't used by BIS at all. It's used by the community.

I should discuss this only with people who have actually submitted bugs to the list and you're not one of them. Maybe you don't like the handling, eh?

[4 IN 1 0]

@boecko (to clear the crossposting you started): I never stated that the bugtracker you set up is going to be accepted/used by BI.

Haha ,

last time i checked the BIKI "bug tracker" isn't used by BIS at all. It's used by the community.

I should discuss this only with people who have actually submitted bugs to the list and you're not one of them. Maybe you don't like the handling, eh?

am i getting wrong here? i think the biki one is being used by community to report bugs instead for BI to keep "tracking" them, for this part i dunno if BI have fixed most of the issus within that list nor i could say that they dont take a look into it

[max power 21]

The Biki bug list does get used by the BIS staff. In fact, they recently made some changes to the priority definitions to better suit their needs.

[boecko 0]

@plaintiff1

you mean the reformatting? oh yeah.

Radio Yerevan was asked: "Is it true that BIS fixes all bugs on the list with the next patch?"

Radio Yerevan answers: "Yes, but it's not the list you talking about."

Bye

[max power 21]

Yes, yes, we are all aware of the sour grapes.

I was referring to Suma's edit of the talk page on the 18th of January decreasing the priority of CTD's due to scripting. The BIS team has been in contact with us directly aswell.

edit:

To clarify, I don't mean that they use the Biki as a bug tracker, just that they look at the list every once in a while. 4 in 1 is totally correct about the role it is intended to serve.

[whisper 0]

@boecko (to clear the crossposting you started): I never stated that the bugtracker you set up is going to be accepted/used by BI.

Haha ,

last time i checked the BIKI "bug tracker" isn't used by BIS at all. It's used by the community.

Like, if my reading comprehension didn't fail me, BI staff wrote in this very thread, BI has an INTERNAL bug tracking tool they don't want to open to public.

De facto, Biki, and any porential public bugtracking system, would only be used has a list compiled by users to report issues to BI. Nothing more.

So yes, BI use the list. Just not in a visible manner.

After that BI would have to do all the mapping to their internal tool. which explains their reluctance to change atm because they are working on more urgent matters.

How many times this will have to be repeated?

[smellyjelly 0]

I played the demo and a few things that should be fixed:

1. When I walk up to a wall, my player should automaticaly put his weapon back. It's annoying struggling to turn around because there isn't enough room.

2. Movement needs to be a bit more exact. When I stop pressing "W", my character needs to stop walking, and right at that moment.

3. Sort of the same, but when running and going prone. Sometimes it happens right when I press "Z", which is good, but other times he still runs forward a few feet before falling to the ground.

4. In multiplayer, settings like shadows, gamma/color correction need to be set server side, if it isn't all ready.

5. The AI needs to look straight when I'm driving a tank or car. It's annoying when there are enemies far in front of me, but the gunner doesn't notice because he's facing the cliff just a few feet towards my left.

[MAA3057 0]

Is it me or does the rifle look like it is at the hip of the soldier in first person view? OFP was the same way, but I think VBS1 was spot on in the first person view. It actually looked and felt like the rifle's buttstock was against the models shoulder.

[smellyjelly 0]

I'm not sure about that, but I did notice that when I look up the weapon goes in, and when I look down, it goes out. Not really I problem, but it looks strange.

[Chris Death 0]

I played the demo and a few things that should be fixed:

4. In multiplayer, settings like shadows, gamma/color correction need to be set server side, if it isn't all ready.

Shadows being set server side will cause a lot of people

not taking part then due to performance problems.

There's a huge frame rate drop down for a lot of people

with mid-end systems with shadows enabled.

~S~ CD

[Kevlar2007 1]

I must admit the Arma is the worst game I ever bought in last time. All games I had before were also buggy but they were playable. Arma is first game I must still wait to be made playable for more then a month. Sure it has great potential but still most things that were made new in Arma in comparison to OFP is graphic and other things that could bring real change in gameplay and make a leap ahead are left over. I think BIS made to many things for eyecandy and concentrate on wrong things, even a old OFP bugs are reintroduced and game is made unplayable for most midrange systems. There are many things that could lead to this but most are to be traced to wrong developers decisions, incompetence, lack of testing and proper QM.

What left is big frustration and endless waiting for patches and disappointment.

Sorry for wining around but please bring the new patch out BIS so I can finally play the damn game as it should be played, please.

[MAA3057 0]

I'm not sure about that, but I did notice that when I look up the weapon goes in, and when I look down, it goes out. Not really I problem, but it looks strange.

That's normal. It feels more realistic because of the models manipulation of the object at hand. When looking around, it makes sense for the rifle to have some movements because of the arms independent movements. Games like AA were weird because of the rifles unusual stiffness (zero movement) when walking, looking, peeking, and squating.

I am limited to posting accurate screenshots since I don't have ArmA yet, but I am judging from videos and screens I have seen. Here are some pictures comparing ArmA to VBS1.

ArmA

VBS1

I made sure I positioned the rifle as accurately as possible; it was tough due to minimizing. The rifle in ArmA tends to lean to far to the right. It seems as if it is at elbow level and at the side of the body (Half-Life 2 style). As where VBS1 has the more natural buttstock-to-shoulder feeling (Rainbow Six 3 style).

VBS1

This picture is positioned so that the model is looking straight forward to give you a general idea of how it should naturally look. Remember in OFP1 when you could only see the tip of the M16 at certain points of movement? It was scary.

This is just an idea/suggestion and not a demand  

[smellyjelly 0]

I understand the issue of performance with shadows on. But maybe there should be like an "ultra low" setting, where Armed Assault would use the cheapest shadows for only buildings and fences. I don't know, it's not a big deal though.  

Yea, I'll admit that VBS1 looks better. Hopefully that'll be fixed in the next patch, or whenever BIS has a chance.

---

I'm sure I'm the only one who thinks this, but I think the health system needs to be tweaked.

Leg: When shot in the legs our character shouldn't be able to walk. This was done fine, except we could still stand, that needs to be fixed. Perhaps the left/right bottom of the screen should also turn a light shade of red to indicate that we've been hit because I often find myself going into 3rd person view to check and make sure. I'd say four hits here max until we die. Of course stronger weapons would take less though.

Arm: When shot in the arms our accuracy should decrease greatly except when prone, and the recoil should increase a little to a lot, depending on the power of the weapon being shot. The mid-sides of the screen should lightly turn a shade of red. After three shots in the arm we would die.

Chest: After being shot in the chest once our character should automatically fall into prone position. We wouldn't be able to get up or crawl around much. The accuracy of all the weapons would be somewhat decreased. The whole screen would slowly start to turn red, from the outside towards the center, eventually going faster and maybe the transparency fading in and out for extra effect. After about ten to twenty seconds, when the screen turns full red, we'd die. All of that is assuming we are only shot one time, (possibly once before if it was a pistol), because anymore hits and we'd die.

Head: Finally, I'm at the head. This would be a one shot kill. The screen would quickly fade to red as we suddenly fall to the ground.

I don't know, that's how I feel it should be. I'm still a bit of a noob though, and I'm not expecting this to actually be added.  

[4 IN 1 0]

I must admit the Arma is the worst game I ever bought in last time. All games I had before were also buggy but they were playable. Arma is first game I must still wait to be made playable for more then a month. Sure it has great potential but still most things that were made new in Arma in comparison to OFP is graphic and other things that could bring real change in gameplay and make a leap ahead are left over. I think BIS made to many things for eyecandy and concentrate on wrong things, even a old OFP bugs are reintroduced and game is made unplayable for most midrange systems. There are many things that could lead to this but most are to be traced to wrong developers decisions, incompetence, lack of testing and proper QM.

What left is big frustration and endless waiting for patches and disappointment.

Sorry for wining around but please bring the new patch out BIS so I can finally play the damn game as it should be played, please.

its quite subjective, since most thing did work on my low end machine i really cant say that it is the "worst"(well i have been playing many "games" worser then this and i can tell you that you haven't seen it all)

yes, there are many bugs, but is it unplayable for all of us? not really, atless for me

[MAA3057 0]

AA (America's Army) did a fine job on the hit effectiveness on soldiers when it came to general health, but not specific points of impact (of what I am aware of). The fact that you slow down significantly and even bleed to death kept some online games very tense. I am not sure how much more or less damage can be taken on a leg compared to an arm since the only way to test it would be on LAN with a friend who is willing to let you, or an extra computer. I know that head shots are one-hit-kills though as they always tend to be now-a-days.

[Heatseeker 0]

AA (America's Army) did a fine job on the hit effectiveness on soldiers when it came to general health, but not specific points of impact (of what I am aware of). The fact that you slow down significantly and even bleed to death kept some online games very tense. I am not sure how much more or less damage can be taken on a leg compared to an arm since the only way to test it would be on LAN with a friend who is willing to let you, or an extra computer. I know that head shots are one-hit-kills though as they always tend to be now-a-days.

Health bars or artificial acuracy (CEM) should not replace simulated effects. I strongly dislike graphic HUD bars and the likes and the fact that injury makes you slow like granma but using the same stance/anims is a no go for the army.

The effects should be "virtually experienced" by the user. The way you "drop dead" due to blood loss in game is quite silly. If you loose too much blood you pass out before your vital organs call it quits?

Better localised damage effects is what we need.

One in the head = death.

One in the chest/back = bad injury, slower movement and decreased acuracy.

Two in the chest/back = death.

One in the left arm = small injury, less acuracy (more sway).

One in the wright arm = same as above.

One in the leg (either) = limping! Less acuracy in a position other than prone.

One in each leg = crawling, even less acuracy in a position other than prone.

Combos = mixed effects, multiple wounds = RIP.

Arma is just missing the limping anim, it would be much more worthy than the silly kung-fu anims .

[MAA3057 0]

Limping anims would be really nice and a good replacement for a slow walk. Rainbow Six 3 (PC) did an excellent job on this. When mentioning the AA soldier's health after recieving shots, I didn't mean to add the health meter that appears on the HUD, I just meant that the soldiers in ArmA should be effected when wounded in others ways then just unsteady arms and the inability to walk (which are both good where they are). Of course AA didn't show any gore on a wounded soldier due to the risk of the mature rating boosting up one level. Instead, you'd see powder like puffs of red from every shot recieved.

[max power 21]

There's a lot more to gunshot wounds than that. There's all kinds of different structures to damage and wounding effects... there's different kinds of wounding based on the velocity of the projectile and its make-up... For instance, if you get shot through the humerus with a rifle round, all points outwards of that wound would be paralysed. There wouldn't be any accuracy about it, you simply wouldn't be able to shoot. You should physically be able to sustain enough damage to your legs to have them sawed right off without dying. There's nothing about getting shot in the legs that's going to kill you immediately.

On top of that there's the psychological experience of getting shot and wounded behaviour... some soldiers may fall down from it, some may not fall at all.. some may not notice they have been hit at first.... some may become enraged, others may sit tight and wait for medical assistance.

I think the highly simplified way BIS does it is fine. Getting shot is costly enough. I mean, I think this is much more realistic than the way they handle medics, but I'm not sure if I've heard any complaints regarding them!

Does this conversation really belong in an official complaint thread, though? I think not. I think a much more constructive use of this interesting topic would be to hammer it out as an addon suggestion.

[smellyjelly 0]

Since I brought it up, I'll make a new topic and add some of my new thoughts.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

10 more days until the "release."  Still have my unplayable Czech Sprocket download version and no word if the "patch" will have a fix for MP.  

Lets revise. According to BIS there is no issue, according to IDEA games they are working on it, and according to Softwrap its not their problem.

Can't wait for the release of Game2!

[Hostilian 11]

Well, I returned my German download version for a refund.

I hadn't played it after the first week - due to the annoying bugs - so I thought I had a right to do so.

I wasnt getting any benefit buying it early, so I thought I would return it and wait for the UK version - saves having to patch it too.

When the UK version is released, I will see what the general opinion of the game is, and if good I'll buy it.

If things don't look promising I will probably go back to OFP.

#C

[zinc 0]

i'm getting sick and tired that for EVERY new game i purchase i also have to purchase new hardware to be able to run it at a level of detail even remotely similar to the one advertised.

Makes you wonder if some software developers take a 'back hander' from certain hardware developers. especially where graphics cards are concerned.

[baddo 0]

A game should be designed so that when better and better hardware become available, the game only gets better and better. More graphic detail, more detailed physics (for visual effects) etc.

If you start a game development project now, what kind of hardware would you target? Not at all what is sold today, but what is sold when your game is finished and published, also the game should be able to improve when better hardware becomes available as I already said. How will you make a correct guess what kind of hardware will the end users have when the game is published, is a good question.

I'm playing ArmA demo 1.03.5116 on a very low-spec system compared to what most people tell on these forums, and I acknowledge the fact that the game can't be run on nice graphics or on nice frame rates so I don't complain. I'm happy because the game will get even better in the future when I get better hardware, it is already now enough to impress and make me want to play it.

Baddo

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

A game should be designed so that when better and better hardware become available, the game only gets better and better. More graphic detail, more detailed physics (for visual effects) etc.

If you start a game development project now, what kind of hardware would you target? Not at all what is sold today, but what is sold when your game is finished and published, also the game should be able to improve when better hardware becomes available as I already said. How will you make a correct guess what kind of hardware will the end users have when the game is published, is a good question.

I'm playing ArmA demo 1.03.5116 on a very low-spec system compared to what most people tell on these forums, and I acknowledge the fact that the game can't be run on nice graphics or on nice frame rates so I don't complain. I'm happy because the game will get even better in the future when I get better hardware, it is already now enough to impress and make me want to play it.

Baddo

Comment removed.