arigram

Really nice job on the Steyr. How is the interior cabin and back modelled?

One of the first screenshots that showed an Iranian soldier being thrown by a blast had if I am not mistaken his weapon clearly separated from his hands , so as a separate object, why wouldn't it follow the same physical forces? So far it has been demonstrated that sea waves, ships, containers, cars and smoke react realistically. My guess is that all objects are subjected to PhysX rules, unless some are coded out on purpose.

Do you think that BI has the resource budget to have a complete modular and/or moddable UI? I seriously doubt that beyond key and controller reconfiguration and possibly some sort of TOH panel rearrangement, UI moddability will remain as present.

I think you guys have run this subject to the ground, without reaching consensus, there is nothing else that I feel could be explored further unless we hear from the developers themselves or until there is more practical testing during the community alpha stage. As long as controls are completely configurable, all sorts of input controllers are taken advantage completely, the UI can be re-arranged and at least basic HIGs and player opinions are put into practice, a solution will be found. There is no perfect control, sacrifices will be made, some people will be more comfortable than others. I wonder if Carrier Command lessons and possibly code (even if its another engine) is going to influence Arma 3. After all, why shouldn't it? The code itself could well be incompatible but the theory and practices of a sister project are valuable.

I for one, am against the idea of having the same keys performing very different actions. Using number keys to select weapons and accessories is one of the most common actions, especially during highly tense situations where their use would be a learned instinctual action of important -personal- gameplay concequences. Squad command can also be intense if you are micro-managing AI during a firefight or like to play removed-from-battle strategy. So, in this sense, the action has important -squad-level- gameplay concequences. These two approaches will be combined in a quick reaction situation but are of different mental processing. In short, they are not compatible actions and same keys should not be used for them. Even more so, if you are using the same keys for example to select vehicle positions or views. It is very much against Human-Interface-Guidelines. Having the keypad handling one thing and the top row number keys another, makes much more sense, the only negative being that it requires a keyboard with a numpad (for some time I used to own one without, so I can sympathise).

Another Gamescom gameplay presentation from GamersPlatoon:

My apologies, has the radial menu from Carrier Command: Gaea Mission been discussed? It looks quite usable and visually appealing.

I don't remember who said it, but it was on an interview eiher of Ivan or Marek about something inspired by Six Updater regarding a tighter and cleaner approach to mod intergration.

- physics effect all smoke it seems, including for example grenades - the loadout editor - better mod selection and intergration

You are most probably right. I am certain that the focus of Arma 3 right now is the new core engine features, such as the PhysX integration, animation system, new lighting and general stabillity and many minor features will be dealt upon when those are in good shape and there is enough time and will to invest.

The Game Jar interview with Bohemian head honcho Marek Spanel regarding all projects, from Operation Flashpoint to now (not just Arma 3): A couple notes regarding Arma 3: - The move to DirectX 10/11-Windows 7 is done more for engine stability reasons - Not really focused on DirectX graphical features (such as tesselation) apart from the improved lighting system - The Editor will remain the same but with new tools such as a loadout editor (most probably that means RT3D is not going to be worked on)

BIS developers have stated that features will be added to the alpha after its release to be tested by the community. The first release of alpha will happen when the testing platform includes the planned features and code status for testing and only the developers can judge when that state is reached, otherwise the testing won't be as useful. The alpha isn't just an appetiser of the main course and a vehicle to deliver wishes and complaints as impatient gamers see it. That's why very specific content will be presented for testing, in the beginning and later on and the better organized the process is, the more succesful the testing period will be. It doesn't matter -when- the alpha is released, it only matters that it is organized and not rushed, not unlike the whole development process. So, be patient. It will be done when its done.

And more of Ivan Buchta, with his presentation of the gameplay showcase for PCGames.de: We get a better glimpse of the claymore mine, but that's all in terms of new information.

The disconnection of the main weapon with the attachments is an important feature that will ease further development and present new gameplay approaches. No, its not important to be presented in a realistic manner in the core game as long as the system is there. Restrictions can be placed by mission and weapon/module designers and animations can be added in, but the system has to be there in the first place. Is it unrealistic perhaps to exchange modules in the middle of a firefight and not have the proper animations of the removal and placement? Restrictions can be scripted in, new animations can be created and the whole concept can be expanded further. If there is a limit of attachments in the present code, maybe that can be improved in the future, like with all other features. As long as the base system exists. If the code exists and its flexible enough it could well have other uses, maybe in relation to vehicles, or other objects, such as having for example weapons or gadgets in pieces that need to be put together before use or further interaction with objects in the environment. I do not know the code, but it could be made to bring up an inventory-like screen when interacting with an object (a vehicle for example) that let's say in the mission, misses a part which needs to be attached or a static weapon that can be "upgraded" with a new attachment or something of that sort. It well could be more than just exchanging scopes in rifles.