Built in Revives in ArmA 2!?

[-Variable- 0]

Quote[/b] ]In wich missions of campaign the player could switch to another character? How many campaign missions did you play?

All of them.

Quote[/b] ]Beside that its not bad story design if you only don't like this optional switch feature. You could play without switching if mission designer has done it right .

Open your eyes there is nothing that bad if player/mission designer have the choice - to use it or not.

The last mission in ArmA campaign, for example, just sucked, mainly because of the built in expectation to hecticaly switch between the mission characters.

Quote[/b] ]Instead of magic revive it would be nice to have better medic stuff like "timed" bandages, sth like morphine, stretcher and proper drag animation.

I think I agree with you, but what would the morphine and the timed bandages do?

[Hawke 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]Beside that its not bad story design if you only don't like this optional switch feature. You could play without switching if mission designer has done it right .

Open your eyes there is nothing that bad if player/mission designer have the choice - to use it or not.

The last mission in ArmA campaign, for example, just sucked, mainly because of the built in expectation to hecticaly switch between the mission characters.

Actually all missions sucked, and the more i think about it the more i think thats why the missions were so hard because BIS actually expected the player to just switch the character rather than reloading/retrying.So "teamswitch was not forced down your throat"....doesn't really look like it's true, although you could remove any key-bindings. And as ofpfroum mentioned, it will be even worse with revive as a mission designed for revive is very unlikely to be accomplished without it just as a coop for 30 players can not be done by just 1. That will completely ruin the SP part of the game. Some of you will probably say "F*** SP i buy it for the engine and to mod it" but the SP campaign and missions are part of the game, a part you pay for too. If they hadn't wasted time on that part they could have further deleveloped the engine . So since they WILL create a campaign they should try to make it worth the(=our) money.

[moricky 211]

If they hadn't wasted time on that part they could have further deleveloped the engine

Mission designers working on campaign could hardly develop engine, that's programmers' job.

[Balschoiw 0]

I´m also not very happy about the "revive" option. What sense does this make in an "as close as it can get" - military simulator ? Even if a soldier is revived in real life it certainly doesn´t mean that he can jump on his feet, grab a gun and fight on. So it´s simply unrealistic nonsense to have such in a game that claims to be close to real life and adverts itself as a close to reality gaming experience. For me Arma was the first step into the direction of an arcadish game to get more mainstream customers and Arma 2 seems to be the next.

The one-mission-one-life was a very refreshing thing for me when OFP was released and still is as it makes people act more carefull. If they get killed they have to watch the rest of the show from gulls perspective. Fair enough for me. Why they plan to implement something like an unrealistic revive-feature is beyond my understanding but as it seems the Arma community is already very different to the OFP community when it comes to aspects like this, so it´s the mainstream that BIS places their focus on. Not my kind of game then.

[gonk 0]

revive is like 3rd person... don't like it don't use it.   I hate 3rd person because it is not Real... so I don't use. easy...

Revive might help force ppl to play co-op better.  Knowing that if you don't help your team mates and not run off on your own trying to do it "rambo" style as you will be left out to dry.  I hate score hogs... ppl with frag points in their eyes.  I hope they turn off scoring and kill counts altogether.

[dale0404 5]

I hate score hogs... ppl with frag points in their eyes.  I hope they turn off scoring and kill counts altogether.

Now theres an idea.

[rundll.exe 12]

I hate score hogs... ppl with frag points in their eyes.  I hope they turn off scoring and kill counts altogether.

Now theres an idea.

this is already possible in Arma now by a simple server command.

About the revive: I dont like it for serious coops. Its the one thing that makes OFP and Arma so attractive: when you get shot at, you know it might be the end of the mission for you. So you really focus on cover and stuff.

On the other hand a proper implementation for the less realistic missions like deathmatch or ctf, it could be a fun addition. Should be selectable by the mission designer if you ask me.

Just make sure we can turn it off!

[Hawke 0]

If they hadn't wasted time on that part they could have further deleveloped the engine

Mission designers working on campaign could hardly develop engine, that's programmers' job.

Could just fire the guy(s) since there is no longer a need for him/them and hire a coder

I recognize that some people still don't get it: A mission designed to use revive can not really be done without it, unlike 3rd person view it's no take-it-or-leave-it-deal.

[whisper 0]

Or a mission not based on revive feature is simply easier with revive (see it as a savegame) and normal otherwise?

We do not know, but it's way better to refuse any change an case it could, duh, go wrong, you know...

[-Variable- 0]

Or a mission not based on revive feature is simply easier with revive (see it as a savegame) and normal otherwise?

We do not know, but it's way better to refuse any change an case it could, duh, go wrong, you know...

whisper, you are still refusing to see our point although it was explained carefully, with many explanations. we are just arguing that a mission that was designed using revives and /or teamswitch can't be the as realistic and immersive as it would without. As long as it is just an option in MP it's just fine, but it will probably badly affect the SP campaign.

[whisper 0]

So instead of warning of the danger, it's better to drop the idea altogether, just because "it might be used badly"?

Scripting engine can be used badly (and is used badly in case of hacking) but is one of the top feature of ArmA.

Ofc I don't think built in revive will be that awesome for the game, but refusing it just on the argument of "it can break missions if used in a wrong way" is not sensible in my book.

[-Variable- 0]

So instead of warning of the danger, it's better to drop the idea altogether, just because "it might be used badly"?

Scripting engine can be used badly (and is used badly in case of hacking) but is one of the top feature of ArmA.

Ofc I don't think built in revive will be that awesome for the game, but refusing it just on the argument of "it can break missions if used in a wrong way" is not sensible in my book.

That's not what we have argued. ANY mission with revive or teamswitch will lack the atmosphere and the realism this game pretend to have. So it's not just a feature that might be used badly, it's a feature that if will be implemented, will ruin the SP campagin.

[NoRailgunner 0]

The SP campaign can't be that worse only because there is an feature that is optinal. Like "endmission" or crosshair on/off it should be up to the player himself to use it or not. Maybe it helps if you change this revive and switch keybinding? Maybe BIS make it work default in cadet mode but not in veteran...

For revive in MP it could be better to have an more important role for medics. Without some medicine and bandages from medic player will die faster from injuries - no help, no revive, no respawn. If its possible to take him out from combat zone to medical centre/MASH its possible go/drive/fly back to combat area. For ArmA 1 have look into Norrin's sqf revive script

[Heatseeker 0]

I think BIS idea for the campaign is to have a squad/team of strong unique characters and they dont want them to be lost as easily as your squadmates in OPF and Arma did.

Remember how many times sgt. Berghoff and the other characters died just to return in the next mission? .

There are not many options to overcome that situation, they cant create thousands of unique characters and all their dialogs .

[Wolfrug 0]

This sounds like a wonderful idea! Know why? Let me explain, from a scripter/mission maker's point of view:

In OFP, when an AI went to "getDammage = 1", i.e., !alive, i.e., dead, this AI unit could still be "revived" simply by setting its damage back to something less than 1. However if you tried the same with the player character, you got to see your avatar prance about "alive" while the "you're dead" quotes fill up your screen - in short, it didn't work for the Player. When yer dead, yer dead.

In ArmA, the "when you're dead, you're dead" also applies for normal AI units: you can't revive them after they're dead any longer, it's impossible (the blood will disappear from their uniforms sometimes, but that's it). If a unit goes below the magical threshold, that unit is lost. Maybe a result of the teamswitch implementation, I don't know: point is, dead units stay dead.

But this revive feature clearly is capable of breaking this ENGINE LIMITATION. Now when a unit is no longer alive, it isn't necessarily dead forever. You may argue endlessly about the ups and downs of this in vanilla ArmA, but admit it : this will be used by modders to great effect.

For instance: someone makes a mod in which all units have even less "hitpoints" than they have now, meaning they almost always go down with one hit: since most people don't tend to keep running after getting shot, unless it's a very glancing blow. After that, a script can determine if the hit was fatal or not (head, torso vs arms, legs), and dependant on that, allow for a revive - maybe only within a certain timespan (to account for bloodloss, shock etc.). Now, the revive might only be accessible to medic-types, or might only work in certain areas, or with certain objects (such as a M.A.S.H tent); in some cases, the revive might even be completed automatically, if for instance it was just a question of an arm or leg wound, and the unit in question happened to be carrying bandages. In some implementations, maybe the "revive" only allows the unit to survive, not to function in combat afterwards: sort of like a seagull mode, except without being dead!

Or maybe you're less into realism, and more into playability: so you're creating your Sahrani Life II game, and you want cops to be able to beat civilians into submission. Clever use of eventhandlers and the revive function would allow weapons that deal out "blunt" damage that only "stuns" people as opposed to killing them, upon which they can be manhandled as necessary.

Or you're creating your average SP, story-based mission in which there's an NPC that, since you're too lazy to change your story to get around it, can't be allowed to die. Endless revive to the rescue!

Etc etc. Basically, if this is a hard-coded feature, it's nothing short of a blessing, much like teamswitch. In MP in particular I can imagine it being useful, but likewise in SP. Anything that lets you fix the AIs idiotic little mistakes ("oh, oops, I wasn't supposed to stand up into the line of fire!") is good. And as someone said: co-op campaign, anyone?

Wonderful news.

Regards,

Wolfrug

[trunkz jr 0]

revive is like 3rd person... don't like it don't use it.   I hate 3rd person because it is not Real... so I don't use. easy...

Revive might help force ppl to play co-op better.  Knowing that if you don't help your team mates and not run off on your own trying to do it "rambo" style as you will be left out to dry.  I hate score hogs... ppl with frag points in their eyes.  I hope they turn off scoring and kill counts altogether.

Thank YOU!! Just like he said, many ppl didn't like the 3rd person so they just disable it, well let them add revive and if you dont like it, then don't play on that server.

[The_Captain 0]

Also, we don't have any details of how they will implement 'revive'.

1) Will 'unconscious' units be invulnerable?

2) Will all "kills" turn revivable units unconscious, or will some ordinance kill outright (sabots, LGBs, headshots, .50 caliber bullets, HEAT shells, etc)?

3) Can 'unconscious' units die if they are not revived in time?

4) Will revived units return to full health/mobility?

Revive could be a LOT more or less gamey depending on how BIS revive follows the above conditions.

Personally, I'm hoping units are only sometimes able to be revived (other times simply killed), can be killed while unconscious, will die if not revived in time, and do not return to full health without a medic.

What I *don't* want is certain units simply falling to the ground and play some stupid "writhing" animation even when hit by a TOW missile, and going back to full health when I wave my hands over them.

I hope revive is mainly a feature to improve survivability in small arms fights, not a type of 'invulnerability'. I would like it to be a 'limbo' state between alive and dead, so units who are hit with small arms rounds or caught in part of a grenade blast can be returned to the fight.

[whisper 0]

So instead of warning of the danger, it's better to drop the idea altogether, just because "it might be used badly"?

Scripting engine can be used badly (and is used badly in case of hacking) but is one of the top feature of ArmA.

Ofc I don't think built in revive will be that awesome for the game, but refusing it just on the argument of "it can break missions if used in a wrong way" is not sensible in my book.

That's not what we have argued. ANY mission with revive or teamswitch will lack the atmosphere and the realism this game pretend to have. So it's not just a feature that might be used badly, it's a feature that if will be implemented, will ruin the SP campagin.

Not if you build the mission exactly like when you don't have revive capability and leave it completely optional.

Implementation example :

- add a difficulty parameter in cadet/veteran config leaving the option to have revive on or off

- when revive is on, medics have possibility to revive under certain conditions, etc...

- you make missions exactly like in OFP, those with revive on will have easier life, and that is all

You want strong characters in campaign sotryline? No issue

You want a copycat of OFP campaign? No issue.

Where is the gamebreaker here?

Conclusion : it's completely possible to implement a revive feature (that overcomes current limitation as put brilliantly by Wolfdrug) without touching to SP campaign implementation

[-Variable- 0]

Not if you build the mission exactly like when you don't have revive capability and leave it completely optional.

If thisa is the case then- great. I would then have no objection to it. However, I'm pretty sure that this won't happen. at least some of the missions design will certainly be affected by teamswitch and revive scripts as long as they will be available. Let's hope they won't...

[Hawke 0]

HAHA, most of you still don't understand it. This "mature", "intelligent" and "sophisticated" community surprises me every day.

No sense in keeping this discussion alive, better do something useful with your time Variable.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]No sense in keeping this discussion alive, better do something useful with your time Variable.

If it doesn´t make any sense for you, simply go away. Easy as that.

As for the discussion, if we have a revive system there will be no limb-system, right ? Would be kind of funny to see how splashed apart units are stiched back together on the fly by a field medic

I´d say if revive is implemented it simply has to be implemented as reasonable as possible. Any large caliber hits on a body or bomb drop on top of their head should send the player to Nirvana, no matter what. It would be so stupid to have a revive feature that is always available, no matter what killed the character.

Imho they have to restrict this feature for small arms fire and rifles, but nothing bigger. It would be so ridiculous to see one getting shot at with a 120mm heat round just to be reanimated soon after. When I think about it there are 1000 different kind of deaths that would look so ridiculous if revived.

Just think about helo-crahes, troops run over by tanks, flying troops that are hit by RPG, or soldiers that get a LGB on their helmet.

What would that look like ?!?

You have a village that is partly turned to dust and a soldier that wipes of the dust from his uniform and walks straight out of the ruins ?

Come on...

BIS should make a difference between dead and dead. Noone can revive a road-pizza. Unless they´re going for a comical shooter they better think twice on how to implement such before people fall of the chair backwards because of the laughter.

[whisper 0]

Let's hope they won't...

That's the point, let's hope they won't, and more : let's ask they won't, if not already too late

Instead of crying for removal of the feature.

As for Hawke, plz read before posting.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Quote[/b] ]No sense in keeping this discussion alive, better do something useful with your time Variable.

If it doesn´t make any sense for you, simply go away. Easy as that.

As for the discussion, if we have a revive system there will be no limb-system, right ? Would be kind of funny to see how splashed apart units are stiched back together on the fly by a field medic

I´d say if revive is implemented it simply has to be implemented as reasonable as possible. Any large caliber hits on a body or bomb drop on top of their head should send the player to Nirvana, no matter what. It would be so stupid to have a revive feature that is always available, no matter what killed the character.

Imho they have to restrict this feature for small arms fire and rifles, but nothing bigger. It would be so ridiculous to see one getting shot at with a 120mm heat round just to be reanimated soon after. When I think about it there are 1000 different  kind of deaths that would look so ridiculous if revived.

Just think about helo-crahes, troops run over by tanks, flying troops that are hit by RPG, or soldiers that get a LGB on their helmet.

What would that look like ?!?

You have a village that is partly turned to dust and a soldier that wipes of the dust from his uniform and walks straight out of the ruins ?

Come on...

BIS should make a difference between dead and dead. Noone can revive a road-pizza. Unless they´re going for a comical shooter they better think twice on how to implement such before people fall of the chair backwards because of the laughter.

I smell zombies..

[maruk 80]

To give you more insight, let's stick with the following terms from now on that are more representative to our vision in this particular area for gamplay in ArmA 2:

- Injury Simulation

- First Aid

- Battlefield Clearance

Wording I used about reviving is a little bit confusing (despite in the context it really was primarily describing first aid system). And yes, this is primarily approach we use in the campaign because of our focus on coop gameplay.

[whisper 0]

Thanks for clarification, though "Battlefield Clearance" is still obscure to me