funnyguy1

First the AI that could handle it, than the deformable terrain. I have'nt seen (apart from maybe just one short clip) the new AI yet, so...

I thought about such thing many times, and to be honest I still can't stop thinking about it. It's a good idea, but: VBS2 is simply too expensive, ArmA as a game is just ok ArmA is not ok, because it doesn't have the missionmaker-friendly real time editor for creating missions on the fly. 12 pc with arma and rlt editor with admin + head tracking + 3d glasses, other games maybe...that would be cool

It's just a seriously upgraded ofp, so if you liked the first game, you really shold give ArmA a try. Besides, you can always read the "wow, arma rox" and "wow, arma sux" topics...

It's all kewl untill you realise how much more power it would require from your pc. I mean, of course It'll be nice to have such feature, but my pc is somewhere between the minimal and the recommended system specs for ArmA 2, and it has serious difficulties running ArmA on normal details with a couple of mods, that, I think, I bought this game for, and there's no way I'm playing it without them (well, sometimes it's hardly playable).

I was wondering what's so great about the dynamic destruction, and do I really need it. Well, maybe when 100% of buildings will be enterable, and the AI will own in CQB. And it's not gonna happen in ArmA 2 I think. from the arma 2 - building destruction blog entry Hard to do and CPU demanding: Â What they did for ArmA 2: So, if they added static debris after the destruction, and gave the AI ability to recognize it, it'll be a perfect alternative for dynamic destruction. In other words, if they'll tweak this system for ArmA 3, they'll have more cpu power to use on physics and AI. Besides It's kinda like with the enterable buildings. I bet the majority of gamers wouldn't have their rigs ready to enjoy playing in a dynamically destructable environment, and personally, I preffer having a 3/4 of buildings being destructable the arma2-way, than 1/8 of them being destructable dynamically. What I'm trying to say is that we don't need the dynamic destruction yet. I mean, it's not that necessary. What we do need is a decent (dynamic maybe?) destruction of vehicles, proper simulation of human body injuries and better physics.

You know what I wan the most? Fallen trees blocking not only mine view...argh

I still haven't seen my most-wanted feature...the new AI. Imho it's pointless to relase movies that show only shlightly upgraded ArmA. Good to see there's a progress though, but well, it's kinda obvious. anyway, good luck BIS!

Amen...with it's AI, and gfx the only thing I need to enjoy it out of the box is a realistic campaign. No super evil characters and war heroes, just a decent and realistic one... Vehicles could be better though.

The reason is your Mom probably not being as rich as the marines. No offense man. It's just that your post is just as funny/constructive as mine imho.

Kinda weird, but this topic clearly shows that some ppl simply don't know what a trully dynamic destruction is.

As many of you know, BlackFoot Studios, are creating their new project relying on what their community says, and it really doesn't matter if they really have any influence in the developers' work, or whether it's just a marketing thing. "Do not build your community around a game...build your game around a community" In spite of being a good marketing slogan, certainly attracting new members and potential customers, it might really be a helpful sollution for developer like BIS. It might be useful, unles a developers doen't want to waste time on things other than creating their product. They can just make the game and then sell it after all. There's no need for such kind of "help". In OFP/ARMA genre of games, however, the community could point the developer in the right directions, by expressing thoughts and wishes e.g. in polls. Official "what you think about it" poll would be much easier to controll and exchange info than countless and chaotic posts/topics sorrounded by tons of spam and pointless discussions. I'm talking here about, "you prefer A or B", "compromise between C or D", "we can't do A, but whe can do B or C" kind of polls or topics, where developers could ask the community about certain things, and get their answers. Sure, I know that certain things can't be just voted by the community and are strictly developer or publisher-only. Besides it would be naive to think that any developer will adjust his work, or even some part of it to community's needs just because the community want's it. I dare to say, that even if it would only concern mission and campaign design, or some really minor things, everyone would beneffit from it, and some things could be sorted out together with the community. Somebody could say that BIS customers aren't only the people from biforum. Does it matter? Every arma/ofp, or arma/ofp friendly site could make the same poll and then share it's results with bis. I'm not really sure, what the community itslelf thinks about it. Moreover, would be cool if a dev expressed his opinnion about it, as it would require better communication between devs and community for sure.

...and they've already said that it's one of the main reasons why they've given up the DD. Besides, deforming the surface in built up areas would be much more complex than in the open, and I think you're confusing terrain deformation with DD when it comes to CQB.

If you're from Russia, you might get your house destroyed by a drunken tunguska driver...or whatever it was.

What do you need deformable terrain for if AI doesn't know how to handle it? I don't know whether harder to implement than DD of buildings, but AI lacks the knowledge/sense of the terrain (I mean the surface), and one of the reasons they abandoned DD for ArmA 2 was the AI. Well, of course it could be implemented without AI knowing how to handle it, but that wouldn't be the same fun, would it? On the other hand though, if it's similar to DD of buildings there should be a way to implement some kind of a workaround just like the destruction system in ArmA 2. I don't work for them, so I don't know. It's quite low on my wishlist to be honest, as you usually don't blow the ground up, rather the buildings and enemy's hardware. Which means it would serve mailny as an eye candy.

My girlfriend, who studies film, enlightened me recently concerning that one. I don't want to start a debate about the political correctness, but the Ku Klux Klan case is complicated in that particular example.

Seconded. I've played only a demo of it long time ago, but I admit that it was quite scarry.

Seconded, as everything in that post. I say no to ragdoll everytime I see a topic with ragdoll in it. Ragdoll vs death anims is like the fully dynamic destruction system vs the system from ArmA2 case, the only difference being the bigger need of the dynamic destruction than ragdoll...

Exactly...ppl used to talk about how hl2 was realistic in terms of dynamic destruction, then what else, crysis or something...that's neither fully dynamic nor necessary imho.

Yeah, AvP2 is one of those games that are really scary and atmospheric, have nice plot, and stuff, bu also roxx in MP. edit: Don't forget the neverhood. I've played The Suffering on PC, quite atmospheric, but not that good.

1. Silent Hill 2 ftw (atmospheric/scarry), SH3 was nice too, but 2nd was the best 2. OFP - After Montignac (scarry in a rl way/atmospheric) 3. Mafia (atmospheric) 4. Max Payne (atmospheric) 5. AvP 2 (scarry) 6. Fahrenheit (really amospheric and quite scarry) 7. SWAT4 - Fairfax Residence mission nice vid - spoiler 8. Blair Witch Project 1: Rustin Parr (the only one I've played, and was quite scarry) 9. Morrowind (atmospheric) 10. Stalker (atmospheric) 11. Gothic 1 (worth playing, quite atmospheric) 12. Freespace (the first one was quite atmospheric) 13. Diablo 1 (well, back then...) 14. Evolva (quite atmospheric) 15. Hitman (every part had a couple of really atmospheric missions) GR and R6 series are high on my list too.

I'm tired of reading shinraiden's lofty speaches, just as I'm tired of myself trying to be a moral authority. Suma said they might take a glimpse at this thread, so please solve your personal problems by pming each other. What about deleting the unnecessary spam (this post as well) from this thread and focusing only on important things (for this particular thread).

Here's a couple of suggestions concerning generally the gameplay and mission ideas. * lengthening firefights, significant increase of contact distance, and utylising air support (not everything is doable with an m16) - free acces to available support (e.g. CAS and arty), less action, more tactics. Slower gameplay. If the AI can hide, and use suppressive fire, then let them use it. Missions should be constructed in a way that will allow the independent AI to behave in a dynamic and unpredictable way (the longer AI stays in cover, the longer the firefight is, and the more fun we have). apache in afghanistan (CAS vid) Notice how long did it take, and they didn't even see the enemy. mission ideas with examples where possible, to inspire missionmakers: * reckon/arty on enemy AA possitions, bombing enemy armour, bunkers, strategic buildings (spotting targets, giving coordinates, lasing etc), generally not a DIY thing. * maybe after talking to civis, they could contact you with the resistance forces, and then (like in ofp) some blufor specops could penetrate deeper behind enemy lines with the resistance troops (obviously they know better "what and where") * would be cool if in AT missions, you could command an AT team with a deployable AT system, deploying where and when you want example1 from CM:SF example2 from CM:SF * another example - armor is much slower than racing MBTs from arma, but it seems much more deadlier example3 from CM:SF

Let's face it, not every building will be enterable. I think that 50% is enough to have a nice fun. It's a pure speculation though. If AI is gonna use them properly, there will be user created maps filled only with enterable buildings sooner than you think. Besides, look at my previous post.

I'd say Empire Strikes Back! Thx for the translation k@voven. I want an early version of the AI then. No, seriously, I'd like to have such smart AI even if it made the campaign unplayable...

Those aliens are freakin' scarry! Thank you ppl!