EDcase

I know this is too late for the dev cylce but I just want to get it off my chest and maybe see how other people see it... Does anyone find the jittery or randomly rotating rotors and props of aircraft really annoying and unrealistic? [The AH-1 and MI-24 aren't too bad but the KA-50 has no blur at all. (I'm assuming that its still under development)] I think the problem is because BIS used video footage to match to but this is wrong as they look much more blured when viewed with the human eye. When filming prop or rotor aircraft most video cameras will use a high shutter speed when pointed towards the sky creating the sharper look of the rotors. If the camera man know what he's doing and has a pro/semipro equipment he can reduce the f/stop instead to maintain the blur seen with the human eye.

I can understand NaturalPoint being annoyed by the use or their API by FreeTrack in the past. But... Now that this API has been removed from the latest build of FT there is no reason why it cannot be incorporated as well as TrackIR. I will be very annoyed if there is any prevention of FT to be used so that NP can control the market.

Hiall, (EDIT: I think this should be in SUGGESTIONS section) (EDIT2: just realised that in the vid when flying the Hind time has been sped up so its not as bad as it seems) All the footage of ARMA2 looks amazing but I think the aircraft seem to pitch and roll too fast. (too responsive) http://www.armaholic.com/index.php?m=single&id=3806 I just saw the video of Hind flying around and it looks great but doesn't seem to have much weight or inertia as is pitches and rolls too quickly. I would suggest adding an ease curve to make the response start slower and gather momentum. (ie. pitch up or down would start slowly and then get faster. It should be slower when the aircraft is moving forward at high speed) Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGbSeUPjDok&feature=related Its not definitive because it may not be maximum limit but look at 2:40 Being an airshow the displays usually show off what can be done and the pitch down is still quite slow.

Thanks for the replies guys, Doomguy: I'll try and dePBO the mission to change the InitMission.sqf (It would be great to be able to set a viewdistance for the ground and a different one for air vehicles) awotter: You cannot change viewdist in video settings if its been specified in the mission. Kremator: Thanks but I just tried 'InstantViewdistance' and it doesn't work in this mission. (1.16a) Perhaps it works with the newer version but I don't want to loose the Bradley just yet Cheers

Hiall, Best warfare mission Using v1.16a How can I change default viewdistance? Cheers, Ed

What's the big problem with everyone saying ArmA should be this or that.... The reason why ArmA is better than all other combat games is because of its versatility. You can have large scale warfare or CQB with Co-Op or PvP... BIS has included some Co-Op and PvP missions that may not appeal to all but it gives an idea of whats possible. Â BIS's job is to make ArmA/II as good and stable as possible not create missions. THATS WHY THERE'S A MISSION EDITOR!!! As with OFP its the community that creates content that suits everyone.

Hiall, (EDIT: I think this should be in SUGGESTIONS section) (EDIT2: just realised that in the vid when flying the Hind time has been sped up so its not as bad as it seems) All the footage of ARMA2 looks amazing but I think the aircraft seem to pitch and roll too fast. (too responsive) http://www.armaholic.com/index.php?m=single&id=3806 I just saw the video of Hind flying around and it looks great but doesn't seem to have much weight or inertia as is pitches and rolls too quickly. I would suggest adding an ease curve to make the response start slower and gather momentum. (ie. pitch up or down would start slowly and then get faster. It should be slower when the aircraft is moving forward at high speed) Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGbSeUPjDok&feature=related Its not definitive because it may not be maximum limit but look at 2:40 Being an airshow the displays usually show off what can be done and the pitch down is still quite slow.

Great that lag is gone tho I did like the countdown and antidote elements. One question: Is it possible to make the zombies chase characters from larger ranges? I made a crowd of em surrounding a town with me in the middle but they just wander around and only attack if I get close. I did try with a Seek&Destroy waypoints too. To make em more difficult it might be good to have head shot kills ONLY. Cheers

Definitely splitting hairs Personally I don't care if the vehicles are accurate for the period or don't have the right camo or whatever. The MOST important part (and a very hard one) is to make all sides equal for PvP. That means matching vehicle and weapon lethality AND ease of use. Â Example: AH1 has gunner who can operate canon and target independently from helicopter attitude. Â The Kamov can only fire along its axis which everyone will agree is ALLOT harder. Â Currently in ARMA there is a bias toward the US force.

ARMA is unique at the moment and the only game I play. I'm looking forward to ARMA2 because it looks better and has improved AI path finding which lets down ARMA currently. OFP2 looks great if the screen shots are to be believed (I think they are representations of what Codemasters are aiming for) BUT we have no idea of how the game will play and THAT is more important than fancy gfx.  I'm sure they will try and capture the feeling of OFP so they may pull it off. One thing that is a BIG ADVANTAGE for ARMA2 is the modding and addon community. I'm sure everyone will agree this was a big factor that kept OFP alive for so long. I read somewhere that OFP2 may be closed to modding which will damage it in the long run if true. We'll have to wait and see... Whatever happens between the two, its going to be a fun end of year for us  Â

First off, thanks Myke for this great idea. The new version (2.1) seems to have much more visible jumps in VD than original when climbing in a jet. Â Did you increase the test interval? I presume the FPS test will add a slight load on CPU? Â The problem is these small CPU loads of all the scripts that run in many missions along with addons are adding up It would be interesting to include height above ground in the equation as some kind of multiplier so that if you are standing on top of a mountain the VD would be slightly lower than in an aircraft. Personally I would not want VD to drop below min even if FPS is low but I guess it could be ignored by setting min FPS very low like 1.

http://www.vuzix.com/iwear/products_vr920.html This is an early version and looks very promising. 3D AND head tracking in a small unit AND a decent price. Could ARMA be made compatible with the head-tracking ability so that when NVidia finally update their 3d drivers we can enjoy the FULL virtual immersion EDIT: apparently there is a script which ties the head tracking to TrackIR but obviously it would be better if ARMA supported it directly. Youtube use in Lomac: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZABh01HVIM As you can see from the video, the head tracking is a bit slow but he is playing Lomac, recording with FRAPS AND webcam ON A LAPTOP. Â In theory it should be faster/smoother than TrackIR because its using hardware encoding (like a joystick) and not CPU. The problem is that we have to wait for Nvidia to update their 3D drivers for the new generation cards. I think its a catch-22 situation. Â They don't want to spend the time and effort to write them because there isn't enough hardware to take advantage (3d lcd or glasses) ..and hardware developers/designers are having a hard time selling VR glasses because the 3D drivers only run on slow 7000 series cards. Â So they can't push the technology forward.

True but the text colour could match the channel

Lol, I didn't know that either... It makes sense but would be better if the marker was in the appropriate colour. (ARMA2 take note) Back on topic: BUG: Small thing but UAZ does not have GPS like the HMMWV. Suggestion: How about being able to create a motorcycle from the base in an occupied town?

Its probably too late but BIS should change the name otherwise alot of people will avoid it because of their early ARMA experiences.

It would be interesting to see something conclusive regarding this. I went by what the tech specs said, and those tend to be pretty revealing with regards to 3d goggles. edit: It's also worth noting that it's a 3DOF tracking system, as opposed to 6DOF ala TrackIR. Sorry, I was wrong about them using 2 DVI ports. Â Only 1 VGA DVI and 1 USB. I thought ARMA did not use all 6DoF? (Zoom not used?) Yep, for head-tracking TrackIR is still the best. I just checked NVidia site and they apparently have 3D divers for 8xxx cards now and they support the Zalman 3D LCD's

Yeah, thats true, the screen res does need to improve before it really takes off. If the eye views were offset vertically by 1 pixel they might simulate 1280x960 (similar to interlace without the flicker) But I guess if they did this it would be mentioned Its only a matter of time... (I'd say 1 or 2 years)

Hiall, Just wondering if there are any ex-military personel playing ARMA? If so, what's your background and how does ARMA compare with your experiences? Cheers, ED

Bodies don't move when hit by small arms so they can become static objects. There is no body collision ARMA anyway. If caught in a blast a body should disappear. If hit my large caliber it should break appart but that won't be happening in the game unless scripted later.

I'd like to be able to lean in vehicles to get better views, especially down left and right in helicopters. This would mainly benefit the KA-50 Kamov which is a little bit view restricted to say the least (also please,please make the glass more transparent. Its so hard to see though in ARMA) It would also benefit any air vehicle to be able to look down better. Â Thus give a bit more spatial awareness in the cockpit. The need for this in ground vehicles is a bit questionable but maybe you could lean over to avoid getting shot through the glass befor bailing out...? As I said, its more geared towards flying and I thought it shouldn't be too hard to implement...? Cheers

Fastrope would be cool but not essential. (I'd prefer to see BIS implement a good heli pickup of vehicles.) The burning bodies should be in as it adds to realism and shouldn't be that hard to implement.

Please reduce the window opacity of the KA-50. When inside its very hard to see out the windows. The view is already very restricted by the armor plates but everything outside is washed out too. I'd love to be able to lean to see better left and right but I'll put that in ARMA2 thread

Interesting... Thanks for replies guys. Of course a computer game will never come close to the real thing. I wondering more about how real battle tactics translate to the game. It must be pretty good since VBS is used for training.

I'd like to add my vote to the above and reduce the size of dust kicks mainly for small arms. The muzzle smoke seems a bit big too and causes whiteout on auto. That doesn't happen in real life...? I just want to say thanks for this mod tho. It really is a MUST for ARMA.

I know it won't happen but here's my vote anyway... (ARMA III ) I would like to see ragdoll type deaths. Â I'm sick of seeing the same death anims and poses. Â To get around the CPU hit perhaps it could be only used for instant kill situations (headshots) Also the ragdoll engine would only handle deaths close to the player so kills in the distance could be done with standard anim. People caught in explosions should dissappear (with optional gore or forced off for sensitive countries) Weapons would be useless so they can vanish too. Â Seeing flying bodies really ruins the realism. Â People outside a certain range would be blown back but not go flying 100m+. One way to handle the MP side would be for the soldier to drop their gear at the time of hit. Â (I know its not that realistic but I'd rather have that than fying bodies and I'm sure that most soldiers killed in action do not hold onto their weapon after death.)