IndeedPete

I doubt this would make sense for a three year old game. But we'll see, I read they want to share their road map for the coming year soon.

That is because DayZ is built on a different engine, on Enfusion. As far as I know, they completely replaced RV with Enfusion during DayZ's development. And that's also while the game has been and still is in Early Access for three years or so.

I believe there is. For example, we were using scripted EHs to check if the player has the correct radio(s) once he closes the Arsenal: [missionNamespace, "arsenalClosed", { _baseRadio = player getVariable ["STAF_BaseRadio", ""]; _addRadio = player getVariable ["STAF_AdditionalRadio", ""]; if ((_baseRadio != "") && {{(toLower _x) find _baseRadio >= 0} count (assignedItems player) == 0}) then { player linkItem _baseRadio; }; if ((_addRadio != "") && {{(toLower _x) find _addRadio >= 0} count (items player) == 0}) then { player addItem _addRadio; }; }] call BIS_fnc_addScriptedEventHandler;

BIS_fnc_playVideo can be used to play an .OGV file during a mission. However, videos tend to be rather heavy on hard drive space, increasing your mission size. I'd rely on scripted cutscenes like zagor64bz linked. AFAIK players can't do anything while the cutscene runs.

No need to defend VR. I don't doubt its technological value and that it will have some impact on gaming or entertainment in general. If that should be a priority for the next Arma title and put above other features, I don't really know. I'm just trying to determine whether it would be fully feasible for a game like Arma 3. All the first person games I've seen for VR either relied on teleporting or were on rails. Or had very slow, gradual movement. And as already said, 30 minutes of playtime is often not realistic in a game like Arma. Especially in larger co-op sessions. Not to mention the performance aspects already brought up. It's already hard to make a game run at X+ FPS on many hardware combinations. I have yet to see that working reliably with user-generated content. "Basically bad coding and implementation." Do you have anything to back that up? I'm genuinely curious if and how it's solved as nausea seems to be a problem with VR since its beginnings in the 90s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_reality_sickness Keep in mind that I don't mean nausea in general, I mean the specific side effects people got from experiencing fast movement in first person VR.

Might be. Still, what about the movement-induced nausia people experience in VR FPS?

Ah, no, I haven't tried VR yet. Closest thing I experienced was some prototypic 3D stuff back in ~2010 on the CeBIT trade fair. But as I said, there's no real incentive for me to buy a device myself. Partly because I already spend way too much time on the computer and I feel having a monitor attached to my face wouldn't be beneficial for my eye sight. And partly because it's all still in a very early stage. I'm sure there will be technical improvements over the coming years and maybe they will even be able to sort out the nausia problems. Aside form that, I really only play Arma 3 at the moment and that already runs like a dog, especially on Tanoa. 20-40 FPS are just too little for VR applications. Maybe Enfusion or its successor will provide high enough FPS, who knows. But you are right, both VR and traditional display technologies do not necessarily exclude each other. Though other things to consider are Arma 3's various control schemes which might require special input devices for VR. Especially with mods, remembering all the key combos can be a challenge. I imagine it just gets worse when you can't see your keyboard in VR.

Two bombs went off in Dresden: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/27/europe/bombs-attacks-germany/ Funny, I bet if these were suspected Islamic terrorist attacks, people all over Europe would now get live streams and live blogs.

I hope not. I'm getting sick from 3D movies already. And the current VR solutions didn't really catch my attention so far. Plus there's still the problem with people getting nausia from walking in VR. As Arma is infantry-centered, players spend a lot of time on foot. Unless there's a better solution it will be down to either teleporting or the "empty 4x4 m room cleared of objects" and full-body VR. It would make sense for helicopters and other vehicles though.

Hey, no, not at the moment. I'm too busy with other stuff.^^

It might also be related to the clunky commanding menu. Which really, really, really, [...], really needs some love. I agree though, AI pathfinding is a bit wonky on Tanoa.

Yes, but they again do that in the worst way possible. "Oh look, a random drone, with a UAV terminal inside the cargo, what a charming coincidence!" Not to mention that taking the whole island doesn't make the slightest sense in the narrative and it doesn't even remotely fit the special forces nature of the CTRG. Scouting the whole island, identifying enemy positions and assets without being noticed - I could very well live with that. In fact, that would be believable in the SF context and make sense from a story perspective. CWC might not have such a playground mission, but it doesn't really have to in my opinion. If I want this kind of silly sandbox experience, I can do that myself within five minutes using the editor. CWC might just be better at hiding its repetetiveness. To be fair, every game is somewhat repetetive in mechanics and content. But when I get served just seven missions, I expect some variety. As you said yourself, CWC missions are rather short, probably to keep the complexity at bay or maybe even for narrative purposes. And if it was re-made today, one could probably get away with less but more complex missions. But overall, you got all sorts of infantry action, vehicle-based combat, and even some airborne missions. Apex Protocol has just infantry gameplay, that tiny ride in the LSV aside. And only one type of infantry gameplay - silent Rambo. The lack of vehicle action was something I criticised in the East Wind already, but at least there were some parts where the player got to drive a car, especially in the patrol ops. Or the chance to get an APC in Bingo Fuel. I don't find any of that in Apex Protocol. That (and the terrible always-on MP environment with respawn etc.) is why the gameplay gets mundane so quickly. I was already bored and annoyed at the same after taking the second objective of the first Apex Protocol mission. For me, that doesn't really occur with CWC. And I played a couple of CWC missions just a few weeks ago. Aside from the cheap voice actors and the outdated presentation, it was still really good fun.

I think that complaint was voiced partly in response to the advertised replayability. And partly due to the lack of asset usage / mission types. While there is indeed a lot of repition in both CWC and Resistance (countless ambush missions...) they overall offer more variety. Apex Protocol didn't even try to hide its repetetiveness. The first mission was literally go to location X and kill Y number of enemies, then repeat. Same for the fifth or sixth where the player has to clear the whole island. It's not bad per se to have some of these missions - if there's an interesting narrative to follow. But to be fair, I was guilty of skipping some of Resistance's convoy ambush missions as well. There were just too many.

Some random SF-ish operators in prototypic MARPAT Jungle uniforms on Tanoa: Mods used: RHS, Road Runner's 6094s, Direone's Static Animations, Mission Enhanced Littlebird, Task Force Radio, Custom Re-Textures

I think the same. The whole holding animation is totally weird. With the left index finger right below the muzzle. Now, I have no idea about guns in real life but I'd imagine firing it like this would burn your fingers in no time.

I'm curious, how much per line / chunk of text?

I do own Apex. :rolleyes:

Two of the three things you named I personally don't care for and the third one literally comes with its own maps. We have some clanmates who didn't buy Apex and they just can't join a Tanoa mission. Their decision, their money, their problem. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Anyway, it's going off-topic, let's just follow deputy moderator benson's advice. :)

I think his main point was the value proposition. For many people, Apex just offers Tanoa because they don't care for the new assets or the co-op campaign. For them, it boils down to the question: "is Tanoa worth 35$?". And even if it's a really cool terrain, I'd say that alone is not worth the full price.

Your scenario there sounds pretty specific. I don't think that would require built-in AI behaviour but more of a waypoint or script function. It should be possible already to have an AI group stalking another group without engaging. That would just be a modified hunt script. I agree with the underlying argument though that Arma 3's mechanics can naturally be improved in so many ways. And yes, the unit flinching is awful. It's more fun to fight against enemies without body protection, like the Syndikat guys. But it's getting off topic here...

March 1992, somewhere in the Balkans. Mods used: CUP Terrains, Podagorsk, RHS, Leight's OPFOR Pack, Direone's Static Animations, and custom uniform re-textures in TTsKO Summer and M81 Woodland.

I've recently played around with no-NVG night missions for my clan. And it really all comes down to date, time, overcast, and density of vegetation, trees and such. Last weekend, we played a mission on a date with full moon, starting at midnight, no overcast, on Utes, so rather low vegetation. We rarely had to use our flashlights because the moonlight was bright enough. Of course, it's harder to ID targets, we had one friendly fire incident - but that was part of the fun. On another day, we played Tanoa, full overcast plus fog, shortly before sunrise. We couldn't see shit, even with flashlights attached, leading to our MG gunner actually falling down a cliff: Again, it was all part of the fun, and the overall challenge. I don't feel it's too dark or too bright - it all depends on said conditions.

To be fair, AI behaviour can be controlled through scripting. It's just that most mission makers, myself including, don't bother fiddling around with the AI skills, behaviours, and formations. It's already possible to have special forces going stealthy and precise, or underquipped and untrained insurgents shooting badly. It's mostly in the hands of the mission creator. Though I must admit, the different group behaviours and the flat group system in general could use some love. But that's going off-topic... I like the Thief comparison as well. And I see why these games are gameplay-wise superior. It's just that the market seems to demand all that generic hollywood crap for some reason. And devs got to eat too. Still, I'd kill for another S.W.A.T. The last part from 2000-something was the perfect complement to Arma. What Arma lacks indoors S.W.A.T. 4 delivers, and vice versa.

Good day, first off, I'm a rather mediochre texture creator. I've started taking on this hobby maybe one or two years ago. Modelling is not on the agenda (yet?). When it comes to Arma 3, I'm still more of a coding person. Most of my image work is based on simple re-textures where I can always use and reference the original models and textures. Thus far, I've been using GIMP 2 and managed to take apart and recolour a large part of Arma 3's vanilla assets, plus some community-created stuff. However, while I'm slowly making progress in quality and complexity of my textures, GIMP has been becoming a pain in the ass to use. Probably because of growing image sizes in higher resolutions and with more details / layers, it frequently crashes and is generally very slow - it's just outdated and as it seems the original developers discontinued their work on it. Long story short, I'm looking for alternatives to migrate my projects to. I've picked up the Photoshop trial and thus far I'm happy with the overall performance and the accuray of its selection mechanisms. Not so much with the UI, the out of the box resources, and the vanilla keybindings. But the worst thing from my perspective is the monthly subscription fee which I feel doesn't make that much sense to afford for an amateur like me. Their pricing feels a bit off for non-professional users and older versions of PS / CS are not sold anymore as far as I know. I could use the mighty power of my student ID and they're currently offering a discount for the first year though. So, what are you (professional) guys using to craft textures and is it free / worth the money?

Some vintage uniforms for my clan. M81 Woodland (Or something along those lines, not sure if the sample is accurate.) Chocoloate Chip Coffee Stain Mods used: CUP Terrains, RHS, Leight's OPFOR, Direone's Static Animations, and my clan's private mod set.