Armed Assault so far....

[xnodunitx 0]

i don't understand why a reload anim is so important? in game, i don't watch myself or the other soldiers reload the weapons

if people want the real life, this is easy a lot of armies need guys.

Arma is just a game, and not intended to be the real life.

Same reason the community fought for hell and high water to have a moving trigger finger, what a waste of time that was.

[dslyecxi 23]

Quote[/b] ]if people want the real life, this is easy a lot of armies need guys.

It's amusing to see comments like this show up. If I wanted to be in the military still, I would have reenlisted. I didn't. Now you're telling me that I shouldn't desire realism in a game that is meant to be a realistic combat simulator, that such requests is excessive? Haha.

Quote[/b] ]My point was that it seems trivial gameplay wise, its not about possibility, its more about practical use.

Just because you don't think you would use it does not make it a "trivial gameplay" element.

Quote[/b] ] When i play Arma i dont consider reloading out of cover or walking and shooting with the sights up. Im talking no respawns, full veteran mode where a bad move can be the last one.

Good for you, I guess? I play ArmA, like OFP, pretty seriously, so if your "full veteran mode" comment was supposed to illicit some kind of "Oh, wow! You're hardcore!" response, you're not getting it from me. When I play I very frequently find situations where being able to move while reloading would be useful. Again, you miss the point - moving during a reload would allow a person to get out of the way of unexpected enemy contact. I'm sure you have been surprised by an unexpected enemy even when reloading behind what you thought was good cover. That's one of the situations such a feature would be able to address.

Quote[/b] ]Same reason the community fought for hell and high water to have a moving trigger finger, what a waste of time that was.

I'm pretty sure I know the reason why the animated trigger finger was introduced, and I'm almost positive it was not because of any forum commentary about it. I also am sure that it was not something that took long to put in. In any case, your comparison between being able to move and reload with having an animated trigger finger is a bit off-target. One is eye candy, one has practical gameplay ramifications.

[churnedfortaste 0]

Quote[/b] ]It's amusing to see comments like this show up. If I wanted to be in the military still, I would have reenlisted.

Just out of curiosity, how long were you in the military for? and did you see any action?

[Sennacherib 0]

Quote[/b] ]

It's amusing to see comments like this show up. If I wanted to be in the military still, I would have reenlisted. I didn't. Now you're telling me that I shouldn't desire realism in a game that is meant to be a realistic combat simulator, that such requests is excessive? Haha.

just one thing. if you want a simulator buy the VBS series. and let the ignorants that we are play at a game.

Quote[/b] ]that such requests is excessive

yeah really excessive, why not the possibily to clean the weapons, clean the shoes etc. my military service was enough real for me, now i just want to play a game. it's all.

i prefer that BIS improve some stuff in the engine, or the possiblities for the mods. (1 crew in a vehicle for example).

[dslyecxi 23]

Quote[/b] ]just one thing. if you want a simulator buy the VBS series. and let the ignorants that we are play at a game.

Oh look, another amusing comment from you. You're on a roll.

Quote[/b] ]yeah really excessive, why not the possibily to clean the weapons, clean the shoes etc.

I see that your preferred form of discussion involves heavy use of wild hyperbole.

Quote[/b] ]my military service was enough real for me, now i just want to play a game. it's all.

If you just want to "play a game", why would you be looking towards something that purports to be a realistic wargame like ArmA? You're contradicting yourself.

[Sennacherib 0]

Quote[/b] ] You're contradicting yourself.

lol, you can be also really funny. my reply is no: because like i said, i don't need the vehicles, choppers, planes, etc. One thing interests me the engine.

Oh look, another amusing comment from you. You're on a roll.

thx, I try to be funniest in this forum

[dslyecxi 23]

Quote[/b] ] You're contradicting yourself.

lol, you can be also really funny. my reply is no: because like i said, i don't need the vehicles, choppers, planes, etc. One thing interests me the engine.

You're not even here for the game, just the engine/mods, am I understanding you right? So basically you're the last person on the planet who should be commenting about ArmA's realism or focus?

[churnedfortaste 0]

you know what is funny, arguing on the internet.

[dmarkwick 261]

Actually, although I can work around no reload-while-moving, one thing I cannot work around is the grenade system. I can't do a thing with 'em unless the target is at a pretty narrow range distance. I cannot reliably pop a 'nade through a window for example. Or roll one under a vehicle or simply drop one while running.

I guess we all have our little pet projects

[Kite 0]

I'm getting the game next week (US) and I can't wait.  I understand the shortcomings of the game but only from the demo.  My frustration comes from my own inexperience.  ArmA's gameplay experience for me can be wrapped up into a nice tiny package with a bow:  Tension.  The game will deliver just like it did for me in OFP.

I'll throw in a few complaints just to make things interesting.  

- In the demo at least, the sounds of vehicles do not seem to match their distance ( a far away BMP sounded like it was just around the corner).

- the Infantry experience (aiming, moving, climbing ladders, entering and exiting vehicles) feels very jerky.  Almost every action feels like it's performed in a studio, not necessarily as one might expect it to be done (you know, urgently).

If you haven't seen the article Dslyecxi wrote about Infiltration, please check it out.  You can find the link in his signature.  It covers a lot of what I wish ArmA could include, even if the game engine had to be less pretty or lower polygon.  Namely, grenade aiming and weapon collision.

*** To Dislyecxi:  Your Infiltration article brought back so many wonderful memories of playing INF years ago.  I miss that game.  Think Beppo would have time to make an ArmA addon?

[max power 21]

Not sure how heavy the new C1s are tho. They I believe are the M4 Canadian counterpart. I could be wrong about the name. Been outta the loop for over 20 years.

The diemaco counterpart to the m4 would be the c8.

[xnodunitx 0]

Quote[/b] ]Same reason the community fought for hell and high water to have a moving trigger finger, what a waste of time that was.

I'm pretty sure I know the reason why the animated trigger finger was introduced, and I'm almost positive it was not because of any forum commentary about it. I also am sure that it was not something that took long to put in. In any case, your comparison between being able to move and reload with having an animated trigger finger is a bit off-target. One is eye candy, one has practical gameplay ramifications.

While your reason is very valid, I was commenting on a reason as to what the important of Seeing the character reload, pull out the magazine and put in a new one, not reload on the move.

[Nicolas Eymerich 0]

I think ArmA is very good.

In my opinion, the best improvemnts are in the Ai,

in Graphics, and in Scripting feature.

Although the military campain has been a little disappointment for me, i think the most beatiful thing in Arma (which is, to be honest, the one important thing) is the editor.

Just like it was in flashpoint...

[Heatseeker 0]

Arma is the best platform ever, hands down.

Yes, i've read Dslyecxi's interesting infiltration article and i see tactical quake or tactical UT deathmatch lol. That mod deserves its credits but even good old OPF is a dream come true compared to that stuff.

Reloading on the move could save your ass... in a deathmatch.

Its something that can be abused like the ordinary FPS game, (players straffing left and right while reloading so that latency makes them harder to hit). Arma is still a game and what works IRL will not work here the same way.

Soldiers dont go to combat alone, if you apply that in Arma you shouldnt be gunned by opfor while you reload your rifle, in cover .

I think its very easy to achieve a considerable level of game 'realism' in a small CQB shooter, the developer doesnt have to consider anything else... but Arma is a really huge game with a whole diferent focus.

I already find the vehicle simulation area to be lacking compared to the infantry aspect of the game but its still quite aceptable.

I can consider Arma the ultimate combat sim not because you have an animated trigger finger or can perform a tactical reload on the move but because of what the whole package has to offer wich is way above every other game's scope and capabilities.

Challenging gameplay, tactical freedom, sea, air and land interaction, combined ops, etc...

Arma kicks some serious ass, just like that .

[4 IN 1 0]

still the running reloading thing..........

really cant ppl give idea that works in a balance way?

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

I agree with your ranking...but the rest...

You can always say your mom is the best that exists - because usually you don not have a 2nd mom.

But if you redo the ranking with some expectations:

- did you got daily 5 times ice cream?

- did you got any present you required?

- was she 11 of 12 month a year on adventure holidays with you?

How does the ranking looks like vs this unreal perfect mom?

[avi13 0]

Umm, when i think about what ArmA has improved for me in gameplay from OFP back in 2001[or was it 2002?huh] not allot comes to mind, but:

Better graphics, slightly cartoonish but ok.

More then 1 turret per vehicle.

Ironsight not locked - this is biggest change for me.

Better multiplayer interface

Bad stuff:

The whole damage model system, while its acceptable that if you shot someone 20 times in the leg he'll die, its not for tanks, these OPFOR jeeps with the gun on em..forgot the name - when one attacks a US Tank from behind, before the tank can turn its big gun at the jeep hes already smoking dust and exploding - yes that fast, realistic?perhaps - I have yet to experience that IRL but when you can do it to the front of the tank in the same ease its just shitty damage model system.

Animation system - cant reload on the move, the animation of magazine coming out and in the rifle, generic reload animation for all guns..you get it

Crappy multiplayer squad system, look at stuff like BF2:Project Reality, thats how it should have been done in ArmA[Not pointing fingers at the mission-makers, it should have been default by BIS]

But overall I love this game, nothing can replace it.

[kid 0]

I'm not sure why everyone keeps fixating on the realoading issue.

Sure, in theory, it could be very helpful, and yes, a true combat simulator would give you all the choices of real life, but, with great respect to Dslyecxi, it just seems far too much of a hassle for the given gain.

Reloading on the move would mean your weapon bounces somewhat. You might have to look at it to do it properly, loosing situational awareness. You will probably need to slow down, and then there are the aspects that are impossible to model in a computer game such as doing three things (getting the mag in the right spot while moving, watching the ground [the best soldier in the world can trip on a rock] and watching the enemy) under enemy fire.

How often would a soldier drop the mag? how often would the rest of the possibilities happen? If BIS gives in to the pressure, there would simply be a slew of more complaints about the level of tweaks that need to be done (not THAT slow, fewer mag drops, I can do it in RL) etc and each would probably bring it closer to the arcade idea that all simulated characters need to be modelled as elite soldiers who have had decades of training and have seen combat countless times, bringing their expertise to a completely different level.

Sure, some people might be able to leap over a low wall while reloading under heavy fire, and not drop the mag or trip or just whack into a low branch, but I sure as hell can't, and I'd rather my character be modelled closer to the average human, frankly.

In short, if characters are able to reload on the move, I don't think it will stop there. More difficulties (and realistic innacuracies) will arise from the fact that people can now move while reloading.

It does get in my way sometimes, but not often. I learn to plan around it, and I accept it as one of the necessary limitations to keep the game realistic not in the letter of the law, but in the spirit.

I don't fight alone, and my team mates know when I am reloading so that they can cover me while I do so and I tend to reload before I hear the dead man's click.

This brings the issue to nothing more than a mild annoyance. Something one only notices when one forgets to get to cover, at which point I'm more annoyed at myself than at the game engine.

Similarly, firing from the littlebird could be done in RL (or sniping from the blackhawk) but then the possibility arises that both are turned into weapon platforms, which is hardly realistic. Can the engine properly model the difficulties of firing from a flying chopper? not in my mind, it can't. Not while there is no air resistance at all, for one thing.

Against humans, I'd be dead miles before I reached the drop zone thanks to the inherent weaknesses of the littlebird, so I wouldn't have a chance to kill them as I land, and I'd frankly rather not take advantage of the incredible stupidity of the AI by landing a littlebird within easy firing distance.

Now, this post may come across as defending BIS. Not really. I think it is pretty shocking that they give us a half-baked game that the community os supposed to flesh out, and I think there are many, many problems that should be addressed, but splitting our attention from the important stuff towards such problems as reloading while moving is, in my mind, quite counter-productive.

The AI is by far the biggest problem in ArmA. Their strategy is utterly non-existent, their macro tactics aren't bad, they do try to flank and encircle you, which is great, but the micro tactics are as shoddy as it gets. They are shot at, they get down, even if they are 2 cm from perfect, full cover. A large armoured wave of Abrams rolls in, they get down. Sniper fire, they get down. A human has no trouble with clearing a street off AI by himself, from behind cover, because they just get down in the ONE PLACE where there is no cover, the middle of the street, and they stay there. They reload in full view of the enemy, they use RPGs against infantry (and consistently miss)

And the fact that they see right through bushes and leaves hardly helps.

man, those guys piss me off!

The other priorities in my mind are

-proper damage modelling (both humans and vehicles, shooting someone's toe of 4 times won't, in fact, kill him)

-no more non-destructible items (bus-stops are the bane of my existence when fighting human players)

-proper inventory system (and I do mean proper. I've seen suggestions that each man should be able to carry 60kg!!?)

-rocket weapons fired from prone position (I don't know how much they weigh, so I don't know how possible it would be to fire it standing up)

-better ground collision detection (does an AT rocket drop immediately after leaving the tube, and if so by how much?)

-new grenade launching system, for small throws and also perhaps underhand rolls. In theory there should be three, a throw, a lob and a roll, each measured by the amount of force applied.

-better flight model (my kingdom for proper rudder)

-easy walk for urban engagements (it's annoying that walking tires you out every bit as fast as sprinting your butt off)

I'm sure there is more, but that's it for me today.

It's important to think of the limitations of the engine and general computing power when requesting changes.

For example, the stamina system. It only models cardiac work, so sprinting tires you out, yes, and sprinting with a lot more weight would also tire you out, were it implemented. Then again, muscle fatigue is not modelled, nor can it ever be. Your character will never suffer from impaired cognitive reasoning thanks to that 2km sprint with 25kg of gear, not will it hurt to keep supporting your weapon, so it is most definitely NOT, in fact, more realistic to have a soldier able to carry as much as in RL.

I feel the same way about firing from choppers or reloading while moving. We'd be obeying the letter of the law, but not the spirit, due to the limitations inherent in all computer games and current technology.

I think it was in the Brothers In Arms forum that someone once said: "it's not accurately realistic, but it's realistically accurate"

/rant

[Heatseeker 0]

Arma is a great leap forward. Just look at some of its early footage and compare with how it turned out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSYJY93Ibdk

Can you understand how much was done in a very short development period, where money actually was an issue...

There are many improvements to be found, a few from top of my head:

Smoother engine, graphically up to date and capable of handling alot more going on, that alone is a fantastic accomplishment considering the scale of this game.

The new sound engine, in OPF sound could affect performance alot and the amount of sounds played simultaniously and quality was very low.

The fatigue model and whole animation are new, we can now crouch walk but this position will get you tired fast, if you hold your sights for long you also get a penalty. Free aim is now very smooth and not jumpy anymore, you can lean and perform combat rolls.

Colision detection has improved drastically, the game is solid.

Multiple turrets and new vehicle classes, wheeled APC's and cars with mounted tube launcher.

New damage model, goodbye cardboard effects.

New special effects, rotorwash dust, explosions, etc.

More animated vehicle parts? I.e. UH60 tail wing and landing gear.

JIP and a whole lot of new scripting comands.

Water that doesnt kill, better boat interaction, waves depending on weather conditions.

Better a.i. and larger unit groups (12+).

New inventory, you can now carry a more realistic amount of gear.

Compared to other game series Arma is a very generous sequel. Once the new editing tools arrive we will be in heaven here, support is top notch so far (patches) and we even got some quality free content .

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

@ Heatseeker:

You compare as I said before with its predecessor and the non existing competitors.

I compare with state of the art without considering shortage on money and hence staff.

And for the features you mention:

Quote[/b] ]

Smoother engine, graphically up to date and capable of handling alot more going on, that alone is a fantastic accomplishment considering the scale of this game.

Here I agree, even if they need to get the streaming as such under control. Not the best, but solid.

Quote[/b] ]

Colision detection has improved drastically, the game is solid.

Here I totally disagree, there are much older titles doing this 1000 times better -> more real. I would rather say it is the worst I have seen. It improved slightly til 1.05 but is still odd.

Quote[/b] ]

New damage model, goodbye cardboard effects.

I totally disagree, it improved compared with OFP, but years behind competitors. Maybe the capabilities are in the engine, but not used, missing:

- general destructible glass in buildings

- more sensitive spots at vehicles (optics, radar dishes, ammo compartment)

- the strange way buildings collapsing

Quote[/b] ]

New inventory, you can now carry a more realistic amount of gear.

A more generic approach based on physical RL parameter would have been better. It would give modders more freedom and offload BI from reacting on every tiny request to change something in the inventory management.

ArmA 1.05+ is my OFP 1.98 with decreased reliability (maybe OFP 2.32, but then I would conflict with Codemasters :-)

[wolfsblut_ 0]

@i&c

The more i read from your new friend Dslyecxi the more i love him too

Sometimes i feel like him when he says sentences like this one... "The fidelity of the infantry movement model and related issues is of a massive priority. It is the foundation of the game itself. Anything done to it to improve it will pay off huge dividends."

or

"Infantry is the core of the game - everything else, and I mean everything, is there to support the infantry."

I very dislike the situation that from the point of FPShooter-View ArmA has many many many many bugs and glitches.

Anyway ... and what about Heatseeker? Is this another new "friend" of yours?

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

?? no, we just see the world with a different view and try to convince the other that we are right. The usual game.

[sanctuary 19]

*** To Dislyecxi: Your Infiltration article brought back so many wonderful memories of playing INF years ago. I miss that game. Think Beppo would have time to make an ArmA addon?

Beppo could not simply make an addon, as he couldn't stop at doing just this task, instead he would recode the whole game

[dslyecxi 23]

Quote[/b] ]Yes, i've read Dslyecxi's interesting infiltration article and i see tactical quake or tactical UT deathmatch lol. That mod deserves its credits but even good old OPF is a dream come true compared to that stuff.

You're a fool if you believe this. Infiltration has a slew of features that would be a godsend to have in ArmA. Your ignorance is showing quite clearly with this latest batch of comments from you.

Quote[/b] ]

Reloading on the move could save your ass... in a deathmatch.

Already explained why it would be useful in various situations, if you choose not to read or ignore them, that's on you. You're wrong, in a very fanboyish way, and you're using fanboy tactics to try to prove it. ."olol DEATHMATCH god we don't need those stupid features only lamers would use them". Typical fanboy crap.

Quote[/b] ]

Its something that can be abused like the ordinary FPS game, (players straffing left and right while reloading so that latency makes them harder to hit). Arma is still a game and what works IRL will not work here the same way.

Oh, give me a break.

Quote[/b] ]

Soldiers dont go to combat alone, if you apply that in Arma you shouldnt be gunned by opfor while you reload your rifle, in cover .

Once again you aren't actually addressing the core issue but are instead trying to justify it with tactics, which is completely irrelevant.

Quote[/b] ]

Reloading on the move would mean your weapon bounces somewhat. You might have to look at it to do it properly, loosing situational awareness. You will probably need to slow down, and then there are the aspects that are impossible to model in a computer game such as doing three things (getting the mag in the right spot while moving, watching the ground [the best soldier in the world can trip on a rock] and watching the enemy) under enemy fire.

How often would a soldier drop the mag? how often would the rest of the possibilities happen? If BIS gives in to the pressure, there would simply be a slew of more complaints about the level of tweaks that need to be done (not THAT slow, fewer mag drops, I can do it in RL) etc and each would probably bring it closer to the arcade idea that all simulated characters need to be modelled as elite soldiers who have had decades of training and have seen combat countless times, bringing their expertise to a completely different level.

If we applied this same logic to other areas of the game, every infantry feature would end up being a "tremendous hassle" and never would have been implemented by your logic. You're really over-complicating this, and when you're literally fighting against how reality is, you're in a losing battle.

Quote[/b] ]

Sure, some people might be able to leap over a low wall while reloading under heavy fire, and not drop the mag or trip or just whack into a low branch, but I sure as hell can't, and I'd rather my character be modelled closer to the average human, frankly.

Do you want the game to be modeled around an "average human" or a "trained soldier"? I know my answer. I don't know if you've served, but you are making points and using examples that make it seem like you have not, and thus you're over-exaggerating the discussed topic (reloading while moving), taking it to extremes, and trying to use that to make your point.

It's frustrating to see some of the apologist explanations for why a clearly missing feature is "ok" to not be present. If it weren't for the engine limitations that prevent this from happening, this conversation would never happen, because it would already be a feature of the game and you guys wouldn't have to sit around trying to justify why it wasn't there to begin with.

The same can be seen with binoculars. What kind of lame excuses are you going to shovel at me when I say that you should be able to realistically move with your binoculars out? It's the same principle. Animations for it are not present, and while it may be possible (binos are easier to do than reloading due to how it would be animated), it's not there.

As to the question about ArmA being modded by Beppo, I think he'd be more interested in working with a different engine like the Crysis or Unreal Tournament III one. I personally would rather he concentrate on one of those engines and not ArmA - I think that a lot of the cool features he could potentially implement would not be half as neat (or even possible) in ArmA.

[4 IN 1 0]

why we keep going round and round and round