Most important annoyance ARMA 2 must get rid of

[wamingo 1]

When you are in first-person view on foot and your soldier in on the side of a mountain, make the camera bank as if looking from eyes !

I'm not a mountain climber but generally I think when walking on a slope you don't bank.

It could be a design decision, meaning the fixed view is chosen to make a better gameplay, but it could be very interesting to see how a camera from eyes would be. Leaning and rolling would change obviously, and even aiming would be at an angle?

Some very interesting effects could be made with such a feature. Shooting even running could have some extra feel to it.

Perhaps arma3 eh.

pretty much every vehicle in OFP/ArmA is running on hamsters

+1

To BI: The rollercoaster vehicles (tanks esp) is bad mmkay?

Can't we have a physics minded person tell us what's missing here? Is gravity too low, what is it?

[Rawr 0]

As my terrible hangover is fading I realized that what I wrote here earlier this day was nothing but nonsense..

If possible, feel free to delete this post

[Vultar 0]

A real A10 cannot lock it's missiles onto targets that are behind it. So the limitation in ArmA aircraft that only allows you to lock targets in front of you is a small step towards realism

Huh, are you sure it is impossible to lock on targets behind in A10 in ArmA? If so, how am I doing this?

@Celery

Quote[/b] ]every vehicle in OFP/ArmA is running on hamsters.

You killed me with this one.

_

About bugs and glitches, I spotted bug even on forum's text space... I hope Arma2 will show everyone that BIS and bugs have nothing in common.

[Lou Montana 101]

When you are in first-person view on foot and your soldier in on the side of a mountain, make the camera bank as if looking from eyes !

Eeeeeerm... ok, I forgot to say that this point was about when lying, you see arms parallel to the floor, but your head is totally straight, vertical. What would be nice, a half-bank (as you correct the body axis by twisting your neck IRL, but not totally)

Sorry for the reactions generated

edit : what you said about the slope in front of you generated an idea in my wrecked mind... or at least gave a logic of programming your idea.

When you are on a plain ground, horizontal axis (the one back -> front) is horizontal to world, ok. BUT, if climbing a slope, the same, not making it parallel but half or quarter parallel to the slope you climb, because IRL you are able to move your shoulders back to see upper the mount, and not aiming up and only seeing from under your arms (what a mess, though)

Here, what i wanted to say ^_^ (not the "A" figure, sure you'll fall x-)

[DaneDK 0]

Get rid of the muffled sound in areas with structures, it doesn't sound right. It just sounds like the player put on some ear protection.

I would love a dynamic sound engine but i doubt that's gonna happen but that weird muffle aint the way to go.

And get rid of the disableAI not working after saved game

[max power 21]

Get rid of the muffled sound in areas with structures, it doesn't sound right. It just sounds like the player put on some ear protection.

I would love a dynamic sound engine but i doubt that's gonna happen but that weird muffle aint the way to go.

And get rid of the disableAI not working after saved game

I disagree. I think the effect can be enhanced and refined but I 100% disagree to remove it.

[zinc 0]

I'm not sure what it would take to flip a tank (probably quite a lot), but I'm tired of seeing them upside down while travelling from A to B simply by colliding with an object or another vehicle enroute. Also, large motorized columns are completely disorganised when setting off from a start location, this often results in several destroyed and abandoned vehicles eventually littering the roadside.

The AIs 'problem solving' skills for vehicles really needs examining. To illustrate the problem, I once setup a road block on a narrow coastal road using another vehicle, when the enemy tanks got there, they simply drove off the cliff and into the sea.

I also setup a road block on a narrow pass, the huge column of tanks just stopped and did nothing. Surely tanks would either push obsticles out of the way, or completely blow them to smithereens in these cases?

AI on bridges, this still causes problems in my missions.

I understand that vehicles in Arma 2 will be using both sides of the road to get around (hurrah!, but does anyone know if the units on foot will still use the middle of the road, or the grass verges on each side of the road as they should?

I'm asking, because I'm tired of soldiers on foot getting squashed under the wheels of friendly vehicles.

It would be nice to have a large mix of different units (armour, light, and foot soldiers) all travelling together, and arriving at waypoint B with no losses enroute.

[Maddmatt 1]

I understand that vehicles in Arma 2 will be using both sides of the road to get around (hurrah!, but does anyone know if the units on foot will still use the middle of the road, or the grass verges on each side of the road as they should?

The AI soldiers' strange attraction to the middle of the road is IMO a huge flaw. Civilians do it too. It makes no sense to me, the road is for vehicles, not people. I would get arrested or killed if I did that in real life!

I was hoping for it to be addressed in a patch

I remember a mission with a huge group of enemy infantry attacking a town, they all ran in one long line down the middle of the road. It looked ridiculous

It doesn't usually seem to happen so badly, but when it does it just looks terrible. Sometimes in urban combat they seem to forget about everything else, go to the centre of a road, and just run along it like a retard

I think AI men should be programmed to avoid the road unless crossing it. They should use pavements though, or walk along the side of the road when not in combat.

In combat they should stick to buildings and cover, the road is a dangerous place in combat.

[DaneDK 0]

Get rid of the muffled sound in areas with structures, it doesn't sound right. It just sounds like the player put on some ear protection.

I would love a dynamic sound engine but i doubt that's gonna happen but that weird muffle aint the way to go.

And get rid of the disableAI not working after saved game

I disagree.  I think the effect can be enhanced and refined but I 100% disagree to remove it.

you are right but the effect is bad as it is now, so i vote either a hefty refinement or removal

[Pulverizer 1]

Get rid of the muffled sound in areas with structures, it doesn't sound right. It just sounds like the player put on some ear protection.

I would love a dynamic sound engine but i doubt that's gonna happen but that weird muffle aint the way to go.

And get rid of the disableAI not working after saved game

I disagree.  I think the effect can be enhanced and refined but I 100% disagree to remove it.

you are right but the effect is bad as it is now, so i vote either a hefty refinement or removal

It's a good thing in theory but it's just overdone like the HDR lighting. Maybe they could restrict it to terrain only. And only use like 20% of the effect with objects like bushes and little buildings.

On HDR, the amount of light hitting the eyes needs to be calculated some other way than only from what's visible on the screen. If you zoom into a dark area and back, everything gets bright for a while. If your head stays still, the lighting shouldn't change based on zoom.

With a real field of view, you'd see the sun all the time in your peripheral vision. You would get used to a bright day and not be blinded when you accidently turn so that the sun comes visible on the side of the screen.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I'm not against HDR, in fact I like it. But you make a very good point. It should change on direction and azimuth only, not field of view based on zoom. Maybe optics could reduce glare thuogh.

In fact, I'd like to see this expanded to that it also takes into account aspect ratio. The HDR level should be the same on both 4:3 and 16:9 displays somehow. Maybe also glare from the sun?

[max power 21]

Well, even if it stays the same I hope they don't remove it.

[Col.Flanders 0]

-(This one is a long shot but for me it would make such a difference) TRackIR: Get rid of x+y axes when I go to ironsight view or give me the option to lock my head movement. I still want to lean but I don't want to look around since I am looking through the ironsight after all. (Arma demo had that perfect).

You can do this yourself, by mapping TrackIR "Pause" (TrackIR profile) to any key you wish. You might even map it for the same key you use for iron sight (e.g. right mouse button).

That should work, but I haven't tried it, as I've mapped "center" to one of my mouse buttons.

[EDIT]

...I forgot you still want to lean  

When I think of it, maybe this really should be a feature of the TrackIR software itself. The ability to disable only selected axes with a hotkey.

As for the topic, I want to remove the fact that you can't run nor sprint while even slightly in a TrackIR lean (I have to keep pressing 'center' all the time). Basically I want run/sprint to automatically cancel lean, TrackIR or not. [/E]

Hi sk3pt,

I have put numerous requests on Naturalpoint's boards for them to implement "on the fly" single or multiple axes disable/enable. I referenced the Arma problem in this regard.

I think this could come in handy for specific situations in other games/sims too.

I was told they would look at implementing this in a future software release. Fingers crossed.

[DaneDK 0]

Well, even if it stays the same I hope they don't remove it.

I hope they do  

But you can wish in one hand and crap in the other..

The hdr lighting aint an immersion issue for me so i'm not gonna comment on that but proper sound is.

[mattxr 9]

Well, even if it stays the same I hope they don't remove it.

I hope they do  

But you can wish in one hand and crap in the other..

The hdr lighting aint an immersion issue for me so i'm not gonna comment on that but proper sound is.

i dont no why threads like these apear lol, there just full of opinions of what some want and want others dont lol..

Wait and see what happens, then complain lol.

[DaneDK 0]

Well, even if it stays the same I hope they don't remove it.

I hope they do  

But you can wish in one hand and crap in the other..

The hdr lighting aint an immersion issue for me so i'm not gonna comment on that but proper sound is.

i dont no why threads like these apear lol, there just full of opinions of what some want and want others dont lol..

Wait and see what happens, then complain lol.

we are all waiting to see what happens but the person who created this thread wanted arma players opinion, i just wrote what i feel is important.

[max power 21]

But you can wish in one hand and crap in the other..

What in the hell does that even mean?

[DaneDK 0]

But you can wish in one hand and crap in the other..

What in the hell does that even mean?

Sorry about that, i guess not everybody has seen the grumpy old men movies, but that's ot so i'll just stop here

[funnyguy1 0]

Fallen vegetation not blocking AI's vision, and strange behaviour of wheeled vehicles'. Imho, they should really reconsider the vehicles' in ArmA2. That's not adding features, but revising the existing ones. MBT's should be the ultimate killing machines on the battlefield, not jumping, easy to take down,

wriggling, rc cars. That probably due to the AI of drivers. Moreover, default engagement ranges should be much bigger than the ones from ArmA, tanks rushing into action at full speed, colliding with objects and eachother is something really funny to look at. On the other hand, mission makers should avoid throwing MBT's randomly into missions just to increase the difficulty.

[Alex72 1]

About looking backwards in A/C's. in ArmA1 TrueHeadMovement made that better. Look at pilots in real life when they dogfight/fly past targets, they twitch their bodies and turn their heads so they can look back fully. With the mod it made it much much better. But in ArmA2 i really hope we can turn our heads as much as possible to look backwards/upwards/everwhere-wards