Posts posted by dmarkwick
I found, for my own preference, that turning down accuracy but allowing for high awareness gives a good play experience.
As for the do-they/don't-they AI experiences, as always a solid repro is the best evidence. Anecdotal evidence is not nothing, but it's also not useful, if you have time then setting up a scenario that displays the problem and putting that scenario up for download by others (or, a written precise step-by-step setup) will do far more revealing the problem than anything else.
Regarding grass - clutter has long been a problem for lots of people, you can level the playing field somewhat by disabling clutter, at the expense of visuals.
AI shooting players that are hidden - very variable in terms of anecdotal tales here. AI will remember where you were seen, and also what direction you were going when you were seen. They can also hear you. Don't be surprised to be shot behind a bush when you think you're hidden, you can only achieve hidden status by not being seen in the first place, and keeping quiet 🙂
AI shooting through terrain - never seen this personally. A repro is the best way to go here. As mentioned before, there's a possibility of AI regarding low-terrain fidelity vs the player seeing high terrain fidelity, but I've never seen anything like this personally.
On 8/24/2019 at 2:40 AM, jeza said:
So here is my query, licensing starting off with EA don't pay what they did before made a big song and dance about it for weaps and vehics ect same for activision granted their huge corporations, but then you look at any number of lower budget shooters e.g. squad, ground branch , ready or not ect, they are fine and previously OFP,. armed assault and A2 were fine (although I think they had license for trijicon and colt), so I likely am missing a trick but I don't know why this would be an issue? Secondly A4 mod support will fix it...if the above is correct then why would you do something the core community would not want i.e. 2035-20** stuff why not go back to what worked with previous, by what worked I mean bog standard M4/L85 , AK/type1**.... as if we had a choice I think most of us would rather that than current (not that is bad). Those are my main questions about A4 aside from the typical 'when' 🙂 .
My two cents anyway tear apart as you wish 😛 .
I think licensing has become an issue over time, so the older titles assumed a fair use but it became stickier :) Large companies are a lot more savvier now when it comes to monetising their very name. I'd guess before they were happy for their stuff to be represented, or did not care about a small issue of video games. Now video games are big money, and game technologies mean a more accurate and hi-fidelity representation, lawyers start to sit up :)
As to why BIS take the future route, well perhaps they don't want to just make the same game over & over, and want to create original content. I'm sure they have their own ideas they'd like to develop, and I seem to remember that OFP "became" OFP based on an originally sci-fi concept, so maybe that's always been their eventual passion project. Yes real-world content worked in the past, but those games are still available and quite playable :) and for the most part can be ported in. Mod support can give most people their real-world fix, that's what I meant by 3rd party content :)
While most of these types of game are all trying to get a portion of the widest demographic, it amounts to battling for a thin slice of a fat pie. It's only a matter of time before some developer sees the opportunity to cater for a smaller demographic, and get a fat slice of a thin pie. This is where ArmA comes in 🙂
ArmA has always been a sandbox, and it's the mods that make it a mil-sim IMO 🙂
For the future, it's probably going to remain that way. Not-quite-real-world hardware but allowing for 3rd party real-world hardware. This is the most likely continuing situation simply because of licensing. I know you can recreate items and give them faux names, but at some point it's better to own your assets totally I guess and not have to dance around the legalities.
As long as A4 has mod support, and support for easy importing of <A4 mods, things will be good.
I'll be happy to get a new map, and some new assets, and with it the inevitable tweaks, fixes and features of the Arma engine. This stuff doesn't pay for itself, and ArmA 3 is getting on a bit now so engine development won't spring up out of the ground. Most everyone who will buy Arma 3 has already bought it.
Will I play the campaign? I've never played one yet, so I base the decision to buy on the other stuff. I'm looking forward to it. If all the buildings are enterable I'll be happy 🙂
I recently bought a Pimax 4K VR headset, ostensibly to play Elite: Dangerous, but but actually I am playing nothing but Project Cars 2 :)
Each time you see certain buildings or areas, you remember times of extreme drama you experienced there.
Certain bush LODs at a distance look a bit like a soldier with a gun. But you're suspicious anyway, just in case.
You put a few extra rounds into any dead body you see, because you're not sure whether or not one of your addons simulates recovery.
19 hours ago, AlbayKilic said:
I open host new map
and fps giving 50-60 fps
As the game progresses the FPS is starting to fall.
after about 15 minutes fps is 30-20
it wasn't like this before.
8 months before that was good
I play 9 hour and still fps 60 did not change.
I've noticed for a while now that looping scripts will degrade in perfomance over time. I have custom smoke effects that initially look pretty nice, but degrade after a while. This is in a DAC mission which also has scripts running, for the first 20-30 minutes it seems fine, but after that it degrades, so DAC controlled units stop responding and smoke loops get stuck.
Often during the making of missions I'll use the floating camera function, and I notice that when all the other functionality degrades, trying to call this function results in a delay before it happens, so I will call the camera function and nothing seems to happen, and maybe 2 minutes later it suddenly executes. I think there is some script scheduling issue over time.
5 hours ago, Beagle said:
I played OFP mainly for the editor and mods but it was not until ArmA II that I really got hooked and began "wasting my life on it". When I finally visited Usti nad Labem (Chernagorsk) for real, I not only felt right "at home"m but also realized what detail BIS put into that gaming world....only 5 minutes into the czech rebublic not far from Hřensko, I "ran into" a Praga Truck and soon after, the exact same Tractor as in ArmA 2 sat there in Malšovice/Javory just like in the game, continuing to Hradek Blansko gave a good overview over the whole area that was in game, and it was very strange feeling to know the sight, and every road already from the game.
I currently live in the Czech Republic. Years ago when I played ArmA 2 I wondered if the "real" Chernarus was really as crumbly as the game made out.
Turns out, it is every bit as crumbly 😄
24-30 fps is not too bad for Arma 🙂
As ever, settings can help. Not so much visual quality, as generally Arma is CPU dependent in this regard, but object distance etc could help.
Mods & mission design too affect fps hugely. What you can look at to get a feel:
Single unit somewhere on altis, nothing else going on, what is your fps?
Vanilla mission from the stock game, same thing.
Make your own missions, varying from very simple to quite crowded.
Fiddle with the settings in each of the above, do you notice what settings are most effective?
21 hours ago, stburr91 said:
I understand that you probably cannot answer this question, but I'll ask anyway.
Will the new Enfusion Engine address some of these issues? Is that within the scope of development of the Enfusion Engine?
If I'm correct in my current understanding, the Enfusion engine is not improving AI meaningfully, it's really more about animations etc. It's good enough for zombies, basically.
I first encountered the Arma series with the original OFP when it was first released, as I was looking for something to play that was like Battlefield 1942, but more so. I initially took the game back to the store after a game-breaking perceived bug, which later turned out to be caused by my keyboard after the same bug appeared in another game. I re-purchased and didn't look back. It not only replaced BF1942 DCS but opened up whole new areas of gameplay.
I'm apparently one of the few people who actually liked Arma (1) on release, mostly because it made use of my TrackIR but also because Silola upgraded his excellent DAC scripts to Arma. At the very end of that game's life just before Arma 2 came out I started to experiment with scripting, and continued that into Arma 2 culminating in the release of a few well-received addons. I do less scripting now in Arma 3, just a couple for my own entertainment, but I still enjoy DAC in a solo environment.
Sins Of A Solar Empire: Rebellion free until 18th. I don't know much about this game, but some people really like it.
Well, I've seen stupidity in AI behavior, and I've seen stupidity in human-player behavior, I'd be hard pushed to favour one over the other :)
AI, while not perfect, is acceptable IMO. There's the possibility to tweak it, mod it, and use numbers to give appropriate levels of challenge in non-PVP gameplay. I don't do too much online play, I just like to pootle about in my own scenarios. Changing stuff around and adding randomisation gives me surprises and keeps me entertained :)
I'd say having AI in ArmA is pretty much a must, will it be perfect? No, but are human players perfect? No, so choose your stupidity and play within it :) I get huge enjoyment out of the AI.
That solution won't stop the units from moving slower, it'll just stop you hearing the report :)
I'd suggest lowering the spot distance of the units, or adding some fog.
I only play SP, and really only my own SP missions. I seem to have a different outlook than those expressed here. For me, a mission I make has to be replayable by me, the mission creator.
I do this by introducing a very basic player goal against a randomised background noise. I use tools like DAC to create randomness within limits, so for example I'll have a central area controlled by DAC with all kinds of randomised patrols and enemy. I then either use DAC to move another opposing force through that area, or maybe manually do that part.
For my own team I'll often have a base team of some size (8, say) consisting of the most important group types (AT, AA, Machine gun etc), have two of each. Then each unit will have a 50% chance of spawning at mission start. In this way I have a different makeup of team members to think about. Sometimes no AT will spawn at all, other times I'm short of AA or machine guns, or medics or whatever. It makes me approach the same mission in different ways.
If the enemy and friendly forces are all similarly randomised (which you can do with DAC) then I also don't know the positions, number, and makeup of the AI entities.
I then give myself some simple goal within this chaotic environment, and every time it's a different experience.
Add to this randomised weather, fog & time of day etc,, plus the idea of selecting everything & just moving it all around the map I can play the same mission 50 times before moving on.
I'm happy to see regular large updates to this :) over time it may come up to what I was expecting to see, this update seems to address a huge problem for many people. Myself I'm not big on MP survival games etc, but I'll certainly look forward to more work being done on working ecosystems :)
3 hours ago, charliereddog said:
Lol. The documentation is more a user guide. It's not documentation of the code. Sadly :(
We've just set the same mission running without a HC and will check to see if DAC has stalled when I get home. If so then it points to a problem with the way our HC works. If not, well I guess we are back to square one.
I don't use a HC at all, just nuts-simple SP missions I like to pootle about in. I'm pretty sure that about a year ago I could call the camera function easily, first time and straight away each time, but recently I can't after a certain amount of complexity has built up. This is also noticeable in smoke scripts that I have where they still emit (#particlesource), but don't update their parameters (which are altered via script over time). I run these scripts concurrently in a DAC environment, each script monitoring and affecting a smoke source. If DAC/my scripts/all the other 3rd party scripts are being subject to some new(ish) script scheduling process then I guess this could all add up.
Until now I assumed it was my computer getting old and ArmA becoming more complex. But yes I suspect some scheduling issue now.
11 hours ago, charliereddog said:
And it's just happened again. Mission was running for about an hour and then boom. Everything stopped moving. I deleted most of the units and some respawned at camps, but it crapped out again shortly thereafter and even deleting those didn't respawn again.
Looks like DAC is no longer stable enough to do what I want it to do which is a massive shame as I used to love it back in the day and I'm desperate to move away from ALiVE.
Yeah real shame, if not for this DAC would still be my most-used addon/script suite.
I suspect there's been some script scheduling change that's done this, very often I will try to spawn a camera from the console and I can wait up to 20 minutes before the script runs and I get my camera, if ever. That's the most visually obvious symptom of this for me.
As has already been discussed here, an extreme fear of public speaking can be best sorted out by initially visiting a doctor. He/she will refer you to a behavioral therapist or hypnotist.
Other than that, if you wish to gradually increase your exposure to public speaking you can start by only speaking when you have some game-related information to say. Like your current position when asked, your current status, and enemy call-outs. You can't get into any imagined trouble by just doing this, and over time you will feel more comfortable saying other stuff.
On 25/05/2018 at 2:15 AM, ineptaphid said:
I feel it is appropriate for him to be remembered by our community for his years of reviews and first impressions videos.
I guess I could hear it in his voice recently though. He had that weakened timbre that happens in these occasions.
I was down in southern Czech Republic over the weekend for a wedding, and I met a bunch of Czechs down there who were on a hilltop lamenting exactly this. I knew he had cancer but that was when I heard he had died. I always enjoy his reviews and am sorry this has happened to him, and of of course his family & friends.
On 5/11/2018 at 2:17 PM, ThatArmaDude said:
Hello there, I was wondering if anyone knows how to set up the G Cam mod to function with a controller? I have tried changing every part in the Arma 3 controller section but it does not work. I ended up extracting the G Cam Pbo and found a keybind section, however, I do not know how to add the analog sticks or buttons over to that config file. I barely could find some virtual codes for a normal keyboard and even those dont actually match up with the default keybindings of the G Cam config file.
Here is a part of the default config:
// Camera Move Front ( default : 17 )
#define KEYMOVEFRONT 17
// Camera Move Back ( default : 31 )
#define KEYMOVEBACK 31
// Camera Move Left ( default : 30 )
#define KEYMOVELEFT 30
// Camera Move Right ( default : 32 )
#define KEYMOVERIGHT 32
// Camera Move Up ( default : 16 )
#define KEYMOVEUP 16
// Camera Move Down ( default : 44 )
#define KEYMOVEDOWN 44
// Camera Move Straight Front ( default : 3 )
#define KEYMOVESTRFRONT 3
// Camera Move Straight Back ( default : 45 )
#define KEYMOVESTRBACK 45
Does anyone have an idea on how to do this? I would really like to have smooth analog controls while using G Cam for those nice shots. Any help appreciated!
Try changing the Buldozer control assigns.
AI can see through tree tops?
in ARMA 3 - GENERAL
Could it be some variant of the Boomerang technology? i.e. some on-vehicle doohickey that analyses sounds through a ring of microphones that can give a reasonably accurate location for incoming fire?