Bouben

AI is still not keeping their heads down when enemy armor is around and end being massacred in few seconds. They should freeze completely and stay prone and then seek cover crawling and not running around like mad chickens... And why are AT gunners unable to fire from prone position again? In combination with AI's inability to take AT weapons from fallen mates this behaviour really sucks. I also think that tank spotting skills should be toned down. Too precise in my opinion although I underestand that with thermal vision it is really easy to track an infantry. --------------- And guys, please vote for this AI bug. Thanks. 0013952: An AI unit refuses to engage a distant target when ordered to or runs far away http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=13952

Yes I agree it is problematic. I am not in the lead of the company so it is definitely hard to tell. Fair enough.

Physics of tanks and their pathfinding need serious improvement. Tanks are sliding around like in OFP days and look embarasing in action. You can't feel their mass. They also accelerate instantly. I also hate their fast aiming turrets. Too fast and precise against infantry IMO.

Well, but they consume money making new content and that money could be spent on programmers fixing the engine and gameplay.

Valid point maybe (I don't care that much for quality of textures, accuracy of models etc. so it is hard to tell), but even without addons ARMA 3 is perfectly sufficient content-wise ("all" types of combat units are there - the rest to discuss is just... I would say a matter of preference and visuals and taste, but the point is you can make all kinds of missions with them). I agree there should be more planes for fans of flying but other than that there is no need to give it a priority. What needs priority is engine, bugfixes and improvements of gameplay mechanics IMO. Because without it you could have just a great looking unit viewer... So to sum it again, if development of content stopped now (after the planes) and BIS would concentrate only on engine, bugfixes and improvements of gameplay mechanics for another few years I would be a very happy customer/player/fan.

This. This.

I think the amount of content is absolutely sufficient (there is not "One soldier, one gun and one jeep"). The AI capabilities are on the other hand absolutely insufficient. Same goes for physics and GUI. Quality models can be made "easily" by modders. Engine fixes, core AI fixes and gameplay changes not.

I guess I am the minority here, who cares mostly about vision of improved gameplay mechanics with each game release rather than the quantity and variability of content. I would kill for BIS devs concentrating ONLY on gameplay mechanics and engine fixes for several years and leaving content development behind. That would be the best thing to ever happen with this series. Shame it is not going to happen as I watch this discussion...

I have great FPS in A3. It runs much better than A2 and with higher details too on the same computer.

I completely agree. There is so many really important features yet to be implemented in to the game.

I think it is much smoother than in A2. Even when zooming in on medium details.

I absolutely don't get why is it so important for people to have such unimportant lines of text in the game...sorry.

No, your hands shake too (depending on muscle fatigue, psychical condition and so on).

Don't be stupid, guys. The problem is not that there are many servers with game modes you do not like. The problem is that there is not enough servers with game modes you like. Nobody takes no one's place. If there's somebody that wants to run a PVP super-hardcore-milsim-listen-to-my-orders-talk-about-different-ammo-types-wank-in-a-tank-server then he will simply run it and you can play there. If there is not such a person then too bad. Simple as that.

I agree with you. There are real world examples of various normal/armored vehicles coming from the same basic parts with only slight modifications. I have no problem with it at all. I would rather have 2 similar tanks with perfect physics and believable gameplay than 20 tanks that are only different in terms of visuals and behave like toys.

Yes I was many times in situation when I really needed to drag my injured mate to cover and could not. Ambient combat would be great too.

I personally have no problem with the sway. The game is at least more challenging and needs some skills. That is good for me (and I am not a hardcore player).

For me, the content is not really that important. The gameplay mechanics and bug-less funcionality is what I except to be the most important when I pick a game. The AI, the tactics, the speed of movement, the fatigue and the weight system, the physics - that are the most important parts of a good milsim game. Visuals and quantity of content are not (not that they are not important at all). I personally could not care less if the assets are visually similar (or almost the same) because they fulfil their role - a tank is armoured and hard to beat, a car is fast and good for recon, a soldier is a soldier. What assets do for gameplay is what matters to me. Just my two cents. PS: I have never used every single unit in past OFP, ARMA games although I play mainly for the editor part of the game... PS2: Of course I would not mind more variety of the models, but I wish that BIS will not make it a priority. There are much worse issues with the game now.

I am not waiting for the full game. I am waiting for the full patched and well-tweaked game but only if they don't make it another BF3. So after like two years from now, I may start thinking about buying it. Till then I will stick with A2.

Yet with ECP the driving AI in OFP was absolutely perfect. I mean, even armor units in combat were rock solid. You told it to move forward against an enemy and it would fucking go simply forward without any bullshit pirouettes around and just straight rolling over the trees and fences. Nothing you could see in A2 to date. Fuck! It drives me mad when I realize what could have been done with the AI in the last 12 years and what would do it for the game. Damn it. Really.

Anyone has a problem with AI moving through buildings in towns generated by the module? It happens to me very often lately.

Actually, you get extra HP too. It is called "Extended armor" if I am not mistaken...

I am, too, for gradual transparency and other great techniques to be used to help us simulate better ambushes, camo/stealth based on skill and so on. But only after the ground issue is solved in the first place.

Is it really a problem to make LODs that would blend with environment? I mean, we have low quality ground textures now in ARMA 2 when observed from the distance = low quality ground textures from OFP. What is so problematic about making textures of LODs that would blend with it better? What prevents us from changing colour of distant LODs? LODs can be primitive as in OFP if it does its job.

Guys, seriously, why is everyone neglecting the fact, that the ground texture is THE problem? I mean, this camo-in-the-distance issue was pretty much solved in the old OFP 10 years ago. To be more precise, it did not existed. I finished CWC campaign recently and units was masked really well in the distance. Just make the ground textures cluttered as in OFP and units textures of a similar color tones and the job is done. And I mean it. There is absolutely no need for all this engine rewrites and performance killers. You are making it too complicated. The model's textures and the ground textures will do the job if they are similar (that is the point of the camo anyway isn't it?). Just look at the vanilla OFP. Done. Period.