bad benson

oh ye good point. there's also some great tricks to achieve fake cloud shadows to keep it performance friendly. you basically use an animated procedural texture on hte terrain mesh. perlin noise or something.

sorry. i honestly didn't bother to read the whole thread. just stumbled upon this. those ladders would still be nice though to have some roof to roof sniper battles ;) i wish every building in this game had roof access.

i'm wondering this too. also some suggestions for possible compromises. if you, quite understandably, decide to make them not enterable at all, please make sure to add ladders to the buildings that lead to the roof. that alone can make them a lot more interesting an useful. another simplification could be making a very simple hallway with stairs that leads to only one of the balconies or maybe just one floor that could be enterable but very simple. in general i wouldn't waste time on making it overly detailed indoors for the simple reasons that AI can't handle it well, indoor movement is annoyingly clunky in arma and it would eat more performance. having atleast one elevated position though could be a great compromise. just my thoughts.

what makes you think that? just wondering.

what exactly is the problem? are te links broken? iirc i uploaded this to the workshop too, so there's an alternative if that's the case. although i'm pretty much sure that the armaholic links should work fine. anyways. there will be a re-release once i have a new pc so people can download this plus the signature and server key files from the workshop too. my old one broke though so i'm writing from a very old mac laptop at the moment. means i can't really do anything to the files for a while. need to save some money for a new machine first. the reason the thread is quiet though is due to there being nothing else to say. the addon was finished quite a while ago. and there's only so much you can discuss about a simple texture replacement addon like this ;)

the new jungle vegetation of the expansion terrain will hopefully give this mod an extra push. i'm happy for you guys since it potentially means the engine or atleast the new assets will be tailored more towards what you guys are trying to achieve here. exciting times.

oh wow! i love the colour palette and the distant tree lods and the water reflection (finally!) and the detailed terrain mesh (strip mines). so much green! just what i wanted. good stuff all around. i guess we're getting dense jungle after all. now i'm kind of annoyed by the fact that it's quite a while until we can get our hands on it ;) not a fan of the whole hype thing anyways since it kind of takes away the surprise and waters down the excitement over time. but i get that E3 kind of plays a role here too. so for me personally this little leak incident doesn't really make a difference. i hope it's intentional and if not that the person responsible doesn't get spanked too hard ;)

yea good point. also considering the performance implications of a dense jungle or even some dense jungle areas, it'll probably be more of what you described. that and major AI changes being less likely overall.

oh that reminds me of something semi ontopic. increased global specularity of materials when it's raining. tbh i would already love just the terrain materials looking wet for a start. it's way better than nothing. rain just feels way too dry. i want to feel like i have to go inside or seek shelter under a tree when it's pouring. i actually have been playing with a scripted solution to this that overlays a transparent polyplane that adapts to the ground. it looked pretty cool but it failed in terms of performance because it had to be totally hacky. meaning it was an object that follows the player. and i think the combination of updating its position and thus having to rerun the ground adaption algorhythm a lot was too much. so a less hacky straight forward solution would be awesome. even if it's just the possibility to access the terrain material spec values for modders.

you bring up some good points. i also think that AI would need some type of tactical adjustment in terms of suppression (do they even suppress at all?). i mean in a jungle it would probably be a more common stradegy to unload on some bushes after having spotted enemies close to them. the AI would need to be aware of that tactic to not be at a disadvantage while ofc avoiding scenarios that make people think they can see through vegetation. i think i have seen it happen some times but i think it was more some type of AI inaccuracy while seeing you through the bottom of a bush. hard to say since i haven't taken a closer look at AI in a while. all that would ofc be considering that plants have proper penetration values to avoid stuff like the bullet proof bamboo like high grass on Altis.

lol i realise that. i was talking more about visual feedback combined with/controlled by physX. for example the way the chasis gets pressed downwards when doing a quick start (if htat is even possible in arma) and when braking seems either too subtle or maybe it's the reaction speed of the "animation" being too slow. i know suspension stiffness is a big factor too so it might be just the configs. and probably also the weights. not sure if BIS just uses real weights and trusted it to feel real. it's jsut a simulation/model anyways so that is not always the best solution. probably the easiest to keep under control though. fixing that alone would probably already fix what i'm talking about though. another thing is lack of a handbrake (afaik) which doesn't allow really harsh stops or drift like maneuvres. it's like all vehicles have too much electronic helpers which makes it all drive like family vans. i think that's not so hard to "fix". seems more like the implementation was done in a very safe way so you don't have to deal with extreme situations or additional control schemes. or maybe i'm overestimating what physX can do out the box without extra code. anyways. i don't want to distract any more from the specific issues (tickets) that have been raised.

in case that was directed at my post: that's not what i meant. it's more about separating the menus rather than the buttons based on context. for vehciles for example you could still use the same button as for doors etc. obviously (it's how i do it in EM and i'm sure DoctorSheep and others do it very similar). it's all about context sensitivity. for explosives i personally think it's a must though to have them separated for obvious life threatening reasons ;) again one can look to mods which basically have always taken the task of prototyping anyways. AGM, ACE etc have a self interaction key in addition to the main universial interaction key. that's already one big cut in the middle to organise actions better. the menu for self interaction could have the bombs in it (might already be like that in AGM, ACE). same goes for the weapon change. it's not so much about small details and personal preferences but the main principle of structuring the GUI based on common sense applied to what actually happens when you play. having everything in one list and then also having to select every entry after another in a dictated order is just bad. it's like having to navigate a website with WASD or similar to main menus in some games ported from consoles. i mean i get the appeal (for the devs) of doing it all in one menu on paper but 14 years of field testing have shown that it's deeply flawed. blowing yourself/others up by accident and switching weapons while you wanted to open a door are only the extreme examples.

you can try this for real time preview ingame. https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/setObjectTexture that should help you get a better idea of where things go. you could add some neon guidelines to the textures and then preview them ingame to see what's up too. to help it not looking too flat you could open the normal map and take one of the rgba channels (can't remember which one) to get ome kind of a cavity map that you'd then multiply over your colour scheme. that's more useful for uniforms probably though.

i dunno. considering the amount of stuff that is still in the changelogs (even inventory icons and stuffs) and BIS' history, i'd say alpha is just a label anyways. look at arma 2 and how long they kept working on the game, very slowly getting it into a playable condition after "release". it's almost like BIS are the original inventors of the early access model. release first, finish later (?). i mean you could see it as a good thing (long term support) but to me it's more like making you sick and then selling you the meds. so i always had a hard time praising them for it. but who knows. maybe it's all going to be fixed a few months before arma 4 gets announced :p on general physX. i'm still kind of baffled by how similar the vehicles feel to arma 2 to be honest. i mean i didn't expect extreme action movie physics from arcadier games but it doesn't really feel like an upgrade. maybe i need to compare side by side. i've never really felt the acceleration in arma. it feels like the game is doing way too much automatically or something. maybe something with the gears. are there even gears? i wanna stomp down the gas pedal and see the material fight the unleashed forces. but somehow even with physX it all feels painfully static. almost like a train. but it seems there are more concrete issues than just the "feel" of it.

i think mods and other games should be used as an example. i get the argument that there are many actions to be performed. but that doesn't change the fact that the scroll menu is a bad "solution". there are already two or more examples on the Stratis airport do illustrate why it's just broken. go up to the ladder of the control tower. turn to the door opposite side of it and you will see the ladder action. turn to the ladder and you will see the door action. same in the building next to the tower. there are several doors close to eachother. they are a perfect example to show that it simply does not work by design. wrong method. it tries to be context sensitive but it fails. ----------------------------------------------- i and others have made features in our mods that simply erase those problems using very simple (basically...if you ignore the hacks needed because of engine inaccessibility) common sense methods. here's a great example: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=27077 ----------------------------------------------- someone said proximity would be a problem. proximity is a really bad criteria/method anyways. atleast if it's the only data used. most games and most interaction mods for arma use ray casts to catch the exact action you want to perform. that easily solves the problem of doors/hatches and ladders and any other simple triggerable animations on static objects. these should all use the same context sensitive button same as in pretty much every other game. ------------------------------------------------ more complex things like specific vehicle seats should be procedurally arranged (in other words context sensitively filled with items) in a menu that comes up when you use a universial button (or another way) to engage vehicle interaction. i personally don't care if the icons are 3d as long if it works and is not clunkier because of it. ------------------------------------------------ bombs could be done via an actual triggering device that is used like a weapon. if you have more than one bomb it could have it's own HUD/GUI that highlights the bomb in question in the 3d world so you can trigger it by aiming at its icon. or it could give you a chronological list of the bombs in the order you placed them similar to how it's done in the scroll menu now. the key point though would be that it's a specific isolated menu for that purpose only same as the vehicle menu. in general i think those isolated menus should be clickable arranged buttons. in arma there's always lists being used (scroll menu same as the AI command menu). and even worse you actually have to scroll all entries instead of selecting one of them directly. the latter could either be achieved via holding a button and clicking them or holding a button and navigating using the mouse much like the well known commo rose method. ------------------------------------------------- these are just my thoughts but actually i think this is a common sense and "state of the art" approach that should be a no brainer. GUI is yet another thing that arma does differently. in a pretty bad way.

i'd like to know too. a link to the source would be great. this is one of the things that could improve the game a lot overall since you are constantly confronted with the scroll menu when playing.

oh that's nice! i bet you could already do similar stuff using procedural textures as layers inside your material. not sure how capable it is in arma though. so far i only used it for water stuff. i tend to agree. although i think it needs to be done right. i like how it's done on arma 3 trees but the specularity intensity needs some slight tweaking imho. although it could be a certain species they are trying to depict that has really shiney leaves. i remember dwarden mentioning though that the feature was used in arma 1 too (on trees) and wasn't very popular. too bad.

you mean like arms clipping into mag pouches and stuff, right? i dunno. i've never noticed. but i also barely used the arsenal so that's probably why. ;) and yea i get your point. totally agree with it. although i have to say, in line with the OP, that some of the stuff about turning (slow prone turn and missing turn anims) would be relatively easy fixes that should be possible without having to overhaul everything, as in arma 3 instead of hypothetical future armas. still don't see it happening though.

ah ok. misunderstanding then. because that's not what's happening in that picture. totally get what you mean though. 1. yes, and that won't change any time soon. requires a serious overhaul. 2. yea, nothing indicates otherwise. and even if there is a check for indoors happening somewhere, it's pretty clear that AI don't utilise that knowledge.

that was kinda my point. sorry if i wasn't clear. i have no problem with sliding feet whatsoever. as i have said before. it's a symptom of common methods to get more responsive controls (player controller > animation). arma more than ever is not that different to most shooters. so yes, exactly! what's the point of still doing it like that, if there's no benefit and only drawbacks?! about the gear. i think arma does a solid job when it comes to clipping, if you consider the amount of gear items the animations have to work with. before you show me a really extreme example i'd say that it's by far less worth looking into than how characters move. the latter is right in your face all the time. the former is only noticable from close examination, ironically :p it's just your personal pet peeve.

not denying what you said about AI looking silly at times. let's just say it can happen ;) but what i see on that picture looks more like a problem with the reload gesture. is that by any chance an addon weapon? did you try with all vanlla weapons? without trying to go into too much detail. what you see there, to me, looks like the AI using the upright reload gesture instead of the prone one. notice how the spine has an angle as if he was standing up (due to the gesture mask including spine bones). and the absence of the left hand on the weapon makes me almost 100% sure that he is reloading in that picture. don't get me wrong. the gesture system is flawed as is but this looks very extreme thus me assuming it's a modded weapon that might miss proper reload gestures for each stance. i've never configged those myself but having worked with the gesture system i'm almost certain that several gestures for each main stance (stand, crouch, prone) for one weapon are required to get something atleast decent looking due to arma using upper body masking instead of a dynamic IK based solution.

both are actually connected though. the robotic look and unrealistic movements being possible are both due to nothing happening under the hood except anim playback and blending. the examples you give there describe very well how not capable the anim system is. procedurally changing animation playback speed is actually already in the engine though as can be seen by anims being slowed down by fatigue (well known slowmo effect). and when you control a rabbit you can also see it, when it accelerates/deccelerates like a vehicle and the anim plays slower or faster accordingly. it's by far nothing to brag about. same as IK it's just uninspiredly dropped in there and not being put to good use. reminds of how physX was "implemented". but it's there. -------------------------- why does arma feel different? because it's more clunky. is that a good thing? i don't think so. i mean due to the much softer transitions arma 3 already feels like a worse version of most shooters out there (and btw looks more like CS:GO than bf4 with all the ice skating happening now). i can't see arma 4 (?) moving away from that direction. there's nothing sim or complex about arma character movement like for example the momentum and leaning into turns you can see when he sprints in that unity video. --------------------------- @il_padrino: i could totally live without anims like that, if basic movement was improved instead. i feel like the animation data itself was never the main problem. and it's even wasted effort imho. although this reminds me of another very outdated thing. getting on ladders and into vehicles is really bad too. the transition is nonexistent. for getting in and out of vehicles the screen even blends to black shortly to hide the fact that you basically just teleport. by being able to procedurally move the root bone you could make smooth getting into vehicles and even things like climbing happen in a proper way. i think the player controller itself needs to be revamped/redone too. this could help fixing the horrible way the character "interacts" with terrain and especially objects "physically". but fuck all that, right? only epilepsy inducing arcade games do that shit :p

he is indeed. he deserves a lot of credit for what he did there. it's very simple but also very powerful. just how it needs to be. i'm glad it helped you. maybe this thread will show some more people the value Map Builder has for mission makers eventhough it was initially created for terrain making.

good job! when it first started i went into aware mode a little :D which is a good sign. i loved the crispness of it eventhough it's such a brutal sound.

i wouldn't care if it wouldn't mean a lot of restrictions in terms of modding. not being able to edit the character models' functional lods killed a lot of past ideas of mine and i'm sure the same is the case for others. and the fact you still can find arma models on shady websites only shows that it's doing more harm than good since locking stuff down only hurts the wrong people. yea i agree. i think they should be much more shameless in terms of porting in the future. i'd rather have older but more fully functional vehicles than have them desperately copy paste weapons and turrets between factions to create some fake sense of variety. it's totally illogical. btw. that hind is sexy!