Minoza

Same here, can't understand why this was done...

Didn't they say they would focus on quality over quantity? It's not that I'm complaining, but I think that 2D overlays just don't cut it anymore. Personally, I'd be fine with less vehicles that have interiors modeled, and if finances allow it, add more over time. Of course, I can't speak for the whole community, but it is one of the top requested features for a long time.

^^Looks interesting. :)

Interestingly, I on the contrary experience this in Arma 3... few places around Stratis airbase give me that issues, maybe related to certain types of grass, dunno... and that's without ATOC because it's a fps killer for me when using scopes, PP affects it as well but not nearly as much as ATOC. Issues go away when AA is completely turned off (I keep it at x4), but it's not worth the visual loss plus 99% time it doesn't happen.

You would quickly aim down the sight just to find out that your bullets are spraying all over the place. I mean that's how it worked back than. Not really what I'm hoping for.

Simulator for sure is a game as well, but a game doesn't need to be a simulator.

Arma 2 was indeed marketed as utimate mil sim, but it never was that, at least not without mods. Arma 3 isn't marketed that way, but more like "it is what you want it to be".

Actually only a portion of Arma players want a simulator, and they have mods for that. Arma is a game, and it should stay a game. Of course, weapon inertia should be a part of it considering it affects basic gameplay in already described ways.

^^What about basic functionality? I mean players learned to use in-game voip, what would really change if ACRE like system was implemented? They would still press CAPS or whatever their binding is to talk, only difference is they wouldn't need to press anything in order to talk to a guy next to them. Is it really that complicated? I find it even simpler than having to switch chat channels... Of course, they would have to learn a few bits if short-mid-long range radios were implemented, but I don't think it's a problem as long as the game teaches you how to use that stuff. Don't underestimate newcomers, most of them are aware that Arma is more complicated than other shooters and they actually do expect complexity to some extent but the problem starts when game doesn't teach you how to use all the stuff in it. After all, you can still use TS if you don't like that, they could probably retain voip as it currently is as well along the suggested system.

Can the poll title be modified maybe? I'd totally vote for "ACRE-like system" which wouldn't be dependent on TS.

You missed my point. Also, it is a game, not a reality, it tends to simulate stuff from reality to some extent, but at point where I get frustrated by it I want it to stop. I don't want my explosives to magically appear, (which they actually do right now anyways so I don't get what you mean by that), I actually want to keep contextual stuff only for actions that will not clutter my interface. Explosives could be as realistically "found" through graphical UI like popular "radial menu" suggestion which would pop on key hold or press, it wouldn't make it any less real than it currently is. This is of course just one example, the point was to make room in context menu for stuff like interaction with environment, vehicles etc. and keeping you safe from not accidentally blowing stuff up. I'd be more than happy to have my primary weapon and all its sub-functions on number "1" for example, side arm on "2" and so on... Same could go for explosives, press and hold number, choose desired explosive with scroll (retaining mouse aiming even while selecting). If you want to detonate, equip detonator... Simple, fast, safe and accurate! In the same time, you could choose to switch to command menu which would disable those shortcuts while commanding. I can't believe someone would actually want his action menu cluttered as it currently is because it makes him feel more realistic.

I +1 this as well.

Is there a ticket for this feature request?

One thing that I was always curious about, why is weapon selection done in contextual way anyways? What's wrong with how games usually do it via numbers? If it's because of command menu, I'd simply ignore commands as long as tilde isn't pressed which would then automatically open command menu and assign numbers to corresponding commands. You could still exit command menu and have numbers back for weapons selection.

I still think that system needs serious revamp. It is horrible most of the time, having tens of options (engineers with explosives as example) which I need to scroll through each time I want to do some action... Different priority for those options doesn't really solve the issue, they tend do appear and disappear when you don't want it to occur, as you stated in your example. Is there a ticket for this?

Here's a tip, try looking with your eyes towards shiny surface while under direct sun, look for sun reflection. Ideally, look for windows and try to "bring" the reflection near the edge where wall starts (best to do this when sun is low). You should clearly see brights going over the edge, on the wall, it might not be as pronounced as on camera, but it's there. Of course, games usually try to simulate the camera, instead of eyes, often exaggerating it to make it appear more... dunno what really... shining cows?

Is the MHQ part of a mission or did I just run into custom version? Basically it completely ruined my experience as a transport pilot. Hated it in Arma 2 Domi as well, hopefully it's not part of this one.

^^That. It is simply something you do not want AI to do, it would break a lot of stuff. If he has orders to get somewhere, you expect him to make that a priority, stay alive and get there.

^^4.8" :p

And this one: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=3505

^^That's what I'd like to know as well.

No they shouldn't. I don't want one for all texture, we already have that. I will keep repeating this over and over since people seem to not understand what exactly the issue here is. Read Nord's posts until you get it.

That was my first thought but this part confused me: Would you like to clarify whether this was PSed or you did something else there?

While I always welcome high res textures, what I'd like to see even more, and I believe the rest of the community as well, is diverse detail textures. That's the main issue atm. and that's what Nord's suggested system is all about.