arigram

Interiors are definitely very complex and they do seem to require as much if not more work as the vehicle modelling. Games that have modelled the interiors, either tend to feature one or two vehicles (aircraft or tanks, for example) or take a long time to get it right and announce it as main selling point. There are some thoughts specific to Arma 3: - Armaments and vehicles will be less in quantity than previous installments but they aim for higher quality. So far we have been shown one vehicle of every kind for every side, so I doubt that there will be more than one tank or attack helicopter or APC per side. - Helicopters, aircraft, cars and APC have featured detailed cockpits and cabins as they had before, meaning only heavy armored vehicles like tanks and artillery usually miss those. Tank interiors are the most complex to model, even more so than aircraft cockpits, because of their multiple geometry and levels. So, it means that resources have to be dedicated specifically for two tank interiors, perhaps one artist working just on these. - If there are two tanks (even if they have external variations), they would be the Merkava, which will need a realstic recreation of an existing interior and the fictional one that can be made to look like anything. - With the Merkava, the modelling should be detailed and look realistic but the fictional tank can have a more simplistic layout and can take less time to create as "difficult" geometry and texturing can be simplified. - I would not mind at all, if all "closed" vehicles such as tanks, artillery and APC have simplified geometries and textures with no decorative details but with all the functionality present (including important working monitors, buttons, levers and lights), as long as the textures are good looking. They well could look "Tron-like", that is, old-school CGI like (without flurorecent lights of course), as long as they keep a convincing geometry. For example, there is no reason to include every fire extinguisher, sign, button and bolt, if the interior is modelled to the base shape of the vehicle with the seats, stations and monitors in realistic places, like a modeller would have in the beginning of the vehicle design. - Further refinements can be added in DLC, including new vehicles, completely modelled, as it has been shown with Arma 2 and TKOH: e.g. the Leopard 2 with Greek/Spanish/German forces. - Viewports or external view monitors can just show the external world as normal and RTT-needed stations can be controlled by graphic options, so the driver could still be able to drive the vehicle from the general interior view and choosing not to follow the gunner's perspective if performance is needed. - There could be a system to easily incorporate third-party modded interiors without needing the original exterior model, so BI or modders can easily add or refine the geometry and textures. Weapon customization and a new system for incorporating mods has been confirmed so it well be another module.

Please BI guys, don't listen to people who have never been in the Mediterranean sea and dare to think they know how it is. First hint: its not an "ocean". Where others care about the authenticity of bolts and screws, I care about the environment.

The Arma way is giving the players the environment to make their own memorable stories and forcing movie-like directed storytelling for the sake of bringing in a larger crowd from linear shooters has been mostly unsuccesful. I believe the largest contribution of Rocket's experiment apart from internal engine improvements has been the verification of the value of free-form gameplay and a brutally challenging environment that inspires players and respects their creative thinking that has been the heart of Arma. Minimum direction that inspires players to explore the environment and the solutions to the problem by themselves while being challenged by the realities of surviving should be the approach.

Lemnos

Thank you for being so prompt in verifying my worries. Also, thank you for this most amusing post. I did actually laugh out loud, "mate".

That may be so but all are entitled to their opinion, whether is perceived as being wrong or not by others. You may well see it as an overreaction and could well be used to cover other more important affairs, as I have mentioned myself before, but discussing it in a civil and respectful manner was the point of my heated request. I did touch upon the subject on a dead thread dedicated to the island and tried to present a balanced viewpoint, but I did not want to take it in further as I don't expect a discussion to remain respectful and mature for long. Like I said, one may object to the objections, but I object to the way those are voiced. Its a game forum and all here want the game to come out so they can play it, I don't expect anyone to agree with the concerns of the Lemnos inhabitants. I only request a certain level of respect and civility to other human beings, even though such request could well be at vain.

I suggest you are more respectful to people that actually inhabit the lands that you will be waging virtual war on. There are valid reasons to object a full and very detailed recreation of someone's homeland, especially when it is considered an important military stronghold in the area. I have mentioned that before in the forums and did ask people I know whose opinions on these matters have weight and their reaction was of varied degrees of concern. You may not have knowledge of the local affairs and cannot understand the sensitivity of the matter, as to you, up there from your mighty castle, they are just "silly people from a small island" that should be grateful for the digital tribute, but that attitude only betrays your ignorance and childish arrogance and your words don't do you any favors. Many Greeks may well welcome the digital reaction of Lemnos with excitement, as I have, but do not ignore the opposing voices if you don't understand the reasons.

I does look very attractive and more fun presented via live gameplay than just media shots. The engine also manages a good atmosphere and the feeling of an alien planet and the visual effects are quite satisfying. The UI and commanding of the units looks easy to use and intuitive to learn. I also like the vehicle design all the little animation details. Maybe I should mention that I play the original Carrier Command on my Amiga when it was a new revolutionary blockbuster hit that everyone raved about. Never really got the hang of it back then, so maybe this time around, I should give it the time it deserves. Congratulations Bohemia on reviving successfully and with dignity a classic, that other companies would easily destroy (as seen by the latest swarm of remakes).

My understanding is that the player will command a smaller group in the campaign, not in general. Probably meaning that Warfare-like RTS elements and large group management will not be present as missions in the singleplayer campaign because many complained about it in the previous games, not the ability to do so is removed.

I am not sure if it would be possible that a graphic setting I would have liked to see is regarding the amount and duration of particles, so smoke can be thicker, plumes can be longer, boat wakes can have a more realistic length, etc .

Thank you PurePassion. One gets the feeling that BI really see Arma as a developer's sandbox and a challenge to fit as much cool stuff in as possible with their budget limitations.

Just to make something clear: - The Cynical Brit video tells all about Arma 3 in Gamescon, there is nothing else to add?

I am personally happy that at last we get a wheel that looks almost round and is not made up of eight triangles. Considering that is one of the main things you have to stare it, I was always annoyed to see in many games that they didn't bother with a bit more definition.

In the future, every toilet seat will be just like this one:

There are a few things on my secret wishlist, mostly having to do with enhancements in the way infantry operates, but lately I made public my dissapointment in regards of the rendering of the terrain and I wanted to touch upon it a tad more, without being tiresome. The rocky cliffs of the Greek landscape is not only a recognisable and distinct feature (also found in other Mediterranean locations but not as extensive) but plays an important role in warfare tactics. Much of the Greek coastline is inaccesible by land due to the sharp angled cliffs that necessitate either ropped assisted rock climbing or an approach by water. That means that they form natural "fortifications" in the sense that invaders by the sea will need to climb up using rope and defenders can use the cliff to their advantage as if they were atop castle walls. That also means that even a stealthy approach from the sea has to be better planned than just coming out of the water and walking inland. I wish BI can form these cliffs either as terrain features or placed as special rocky models. A few rocks here and there in a softly slopping terrain, might be realistic in certain places but not all of Lemnos meets the water gently. Same thing for hills and mountains, good places for guerilla to retire or operate if their hillsides are not accessible by vehicles and infantry would have to climb up. That also means that such terrain features would necessitate a climbing animation and maybe some special code as something like that is not present at the moment in Arma, save for ladders. If rappelling could be included, that would raise the realism even to higher levels and in my opinion add much to gameplay tactics. If I was a defender, I would most certainly place my observation post or base next to a difficult to access cliff and limit the approaches by the enemy. If I was an attacker, I might take the hard way up if I was forced to or wanted to surprise the defenders. The Greek Army trains specifically for this terrain feature. Warfare in Arma so far has been relatively flat. Even the mountains of Takistan didn't pose much of a challenge. Arma in general has been a "flat, open terrain" warfare environment. This picture is from another island, but it clearly demonstrates what I am talking about: And this is in action: http://i.imgur.com/ZphE3.jpg These snapshots are from around the coastline of Lemnos. http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/40042391.jpg http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/40042368.jpg http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/15313260.jpg http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/26385943.jpg

I took screenshots from the Cynical Brit video interview at the point of comparison between real snapshots and virtual recreation of the island. 1. 2. 3. My commentary? Number 2's recreation doesn't match the photograph due having far less vegetation. Its not that they have to be perfect copies (after all, it will be in the future) but it looks much duller without that rich environment. Number 1 and especially Number 3 highlights a terrain engine limitation that I was afraid of: the hills are smooth and curve softly down instead of having harsh rocky cliffs of sharp angles. Unfortunately its a common trait of the Greek island landscape and (at least for those in the know) lose much of the authenticity of recreation. Its one of the distinct features that I compare to other landscapes around the world. I don't see any micro-terrain variations. It seems that the terrain resolution is similar to Arma 2.

For one thing, I didn't see the enemy firing back or even aiming towards the player, just running away or sitting like ducks, so that may be a hint...

Btw, the village at the end of the video is called Kaminia, at the eastern part the gulf of Moudros (the one we keep seeing where the airport is) http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/photos/medium/23610342.jpg https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-TluFCUhaXhk/TXQSdvc3bMI/AAAAAAAABZY/wz2uDfjwuh0/s1600/oles+009.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/el/1/1c/%CE%9B%CE%97%CE%9C%CE%9D%CE%9F%CE%A3_%CE%A7%CE%99%CE%9F%CE%9D%CE%99%CE%91_2006_033.jpg Maps: http://i.imgur.com/IYc7m.jpg http://i.imgur.com/GWT7q.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaminia,_Lemnos

That seems to be the biggest problem BI has to deal with when implementing features: that AI has to have them as well. More than once I've read/heard on an interview that the obstacle to a character ability was the AI as they not only had to be able to perform similarly to a player but be able to think about doing it in a believable and tactical manner as multiple individuals while interacting with one another. If you have a tunnel and order the AI to move in a 2 dimensional manner, will they be able to use it? Will they all be able to use it or some will travel the distance above ground? Will they queue? Can they recognize the tactical advantage/disadvantage of choosing one path or the other? What of their eyes and ears confined in a tight underground space? What if an AI becomes claustrophobic? And so on...

I apologize for the apparent lack of patience, but as online gaming new sites are flooded with Battlefield 3 details and console game releases, I felt a slight disappointment. Granted BI doesn't have the weight of the big industry boys...

So... BI exhibits their new work on a supposedly important convention and we still haven't gotten any report from it? I understand the forum members who attended as they have their own life priorities ahead and its not their job to even mention their attendance, but I am surprised no PR or journalism professionals devoted their time on it.

That makes sense. Maybe BI should bring out a Sim Zoo or Safari DLC or start making environment packs like the ones for flight simulators. But will they have time to come up with national army packs? Of course! BI can satisfy every whim and fancy, even the most obscure and silly ones!

Especially the deer that live at the citadel of Myrina.

I believe that the VBS underground structures and tunnels are models inserted in the terrain that connect with it through the updated code and function as if the ground was not there. In that sense, there are no holes in the ground, one doesn't dig through, there has to be a special 3D model defined as or placed underground. So, to make a tunnel or a cave, I guess one has to model the entrances and the walls throughout its length and place it on the map.

No, such detail isn't necessary if the animation can fill in. Different heights? Longer or shorter climbing animation duration. Different hatch shapes? The character doesn't have to grab the correct handle and do the correct opening procedure for the specific door, it can be a generic, quick animation like the Arma 2 reloading for example. Or, maybe the system can define where the character grabs from. Passenger sitting? One animation walking to the vehicle/aircraft, another for climbing and entering it, walking to the seat animation and sitting down. And so on. An improved animation system with PhysX and inverse kinematics can handle all that.