instagoat

He still should be able to contact them and provide ID, so they can recover his account. Name, Adress, that kind of thing.

This should totally be part of the vehicle pool. Gotta go with the flow. Contrary to the black ops 2 mech, this one would be REAL. Which is REAListic, no? (I am kidding, though it´d be funny troll move by BI to put a Wanzer like this into the game. And yes, apparently that machine is marketed for real, civilian and military markets.)

He has a point, though. The bohemia/codies split shot down OFP, not OF:DR. I think the problem is that Bohemia always lacked in the marketing departement: the best that´s happened were the forum based detective games (especially the one that led up to the Arma 3 reveal, for example.). Another problem was the, so far, average craftsmanship with Armed Assault, Arma 2, TOH (though it was better there) and now Carrier Command (with score averages below 7 both on Console and PC, which is not that decent of a score). There is some real talent working around the Bohemia games, unfortunately there are places where it is lacking, though what exactly is lacking can´t really be told from an outsiders perspective. Armed assault and Arma 2´s initial releases were slow and/or buggy, at least in the relatively high-profile release case of Arma 2 so buggy that they tarnished the reputation of the brand pretty badly. TOH was not the most stable game right at release, and its most important features weren´t working as intended (as the complaints by the irl helicopter simmer crowd on the forums testify to.). Patches fixed that eventually. Now Carrier Command is released, and while it runs extremely smooth, it has game design issues, some obvious shortcuts, AI problems and crashing/corruption issues again. DayZ -may- be changing that, but since it will be running on an RV type engine, I suspect it will be wonky at release too, especially with the ambitious goals the devs have set themselves. Same goes for Arma 3: even with the features cut back, the stuff they want to have in there is -still- big enough a change to cause serious problems (these problems likely already exist, causing the delays we have persistently been seeing since summer.). A lot of this is guessing, but I believe the leverage of a big-bodied publisher who has the capacities to not only sustain a large development team, but also Q/A, -as well as- MARKETING is not always a curse. Massive entities such as Valve (who are still independent and will always stay independent, according to Gabe Newell) have the money to do all those things themselves. All games they released, from half life up to portal 2 have been clean running at release, and engaging to the crowds. Other crowdpleasers like COD which really go for the lowest common denominator on the other hand are so prohibitively expensive to develop that even massive studios need large (brand owning) publishers to get them up to the standard people expect. Game development has become massively expensive, and the market is massively competetive. -Without dedicated, well focused, memorable and engaging marketing, especially with the tarnished reputation, Arma 3 will not be the rocket I as a fan would like it to be.- Maybe this is something the community could help take care of. Grassroots, guerillia type, unofficial marketing. I went off on a tangent here, sorry. Food for thought.

I agree, the game is barely a challenge right now. At the same time, the enemy carrier can capture Islands in a hurry (apparently even Islands where it isn´t present at, as mentioned in some threads and tickets on the CIT). It´s a bit wonky right now. A pity, because the core game is tremendously fun. To the point where I was daydreaming about it without noticing at first. As it is, it is "almost a classic". With a bit of work, it can turn into a proper classic already.

You mean CC (Carrier Command). I am talking about the Gamescom convention (GC) in Cologne that took place in August. I was there and played the Arma 3 demo, and talked with Gaia at length about various features of the game. So unfortunately, the painted sight reticules are going to stay, unless the devs have something up their sleeve that hasn´t been disclosed yet. I am doubtful, however.

GC demo had painted sights for holo/aimpoint sights still, I think this is an engine limitation and will not be changed.

-Blueprints in strategy: Randomly assign technology (depending on campaign settings at the start) and add new technology also randomized to neutral (preferred) and enemy islands on the map. -Improve AI: General better use of tactics and strategy. -Weapon dependent targeting reticules. Some sort of graduated sight to allow for easier aiming with ballistic weapons. Using them otherwise is too much hit and miss, otherwise. New technologies: Radio receiver for barque (Allows cancelling of deliveries), improved engines for barque/carrier, improvements for carrier (Armour, Telemetry range (such as temporary, 2 - 5 minute boost), heavier warhead for hammerhead (so it actually does damage). Change enemy carrier performance/strategy/tactics depending on his tech level. Add reconaissance data to islands, revealing where certain technologies are stored up the chain of islands. Players can then learn what the Ai prioritizes, and what kind of technology they need to win, and plan their global strategy accordingly. Overall, there is a lot of potential to make the campaign more interesting. In general, I think over time, it could be significantly improved: it´s a cool game right now, but there´s still headroom to be covered. Keep it up devs! Good job so far, despite the hitches, nooks and crannies!

Wow. This looks great, but should be in the gaming section. If they can manage to deliver what they have dreamed up, this would be one heck of a game for me. But, as far as I am concerned, everybody can make big promises. Peter Molyneux and John Romero have taught me not to take anything a bigwig games developer says for granted. That being said, I hope it´ll be great. The realistic physics alone would be wonderful. Add to that realistic weapons and ranges, and I would be the happiest space customer.

Has been decided against for stability and quality control reasons. They will probably have coop missions shipped with the game relating to the campaign, though. Pity, but it´s okay, at least for me, since I am not a multiplayer person.

I am getting the same thing. I am running an intel core 2 Duo, 4 gigs of RAM, winXP 32bit, and an GTX260 card. Takes about an hour or two before this happens, and is apparently not connected to doing anything in particular at all.

Changing equipment is fairly easy, you need the following commands: https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/removeAllWeapons <- To remove all weapons from the character. And then: https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/addMagazine <- To add Magazines (Has to be added multiple times, I think there´s also a command for adding multiple mags at once.) https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/addWeapon <- To add weapon. So, for example, it could look like this: (Post into INIT line on unit screen) removeallweapons this;this addmagazine"30Rnd_556x45_StanagSD";this addmagazine"30Rnd_556x45_StanagSD";this addmagazine"30Rnd_556x45_StanagSD";this addmagazine"30Rnd_556x45_StanagSD";this addmagazine"30Rnd_556x45_StanagSD";this addmagazine"30Rnd_556x45_StanagSD";this addWeapon"SCAR_L_CQC_CCO_SD";this addweapon"binocular";this addweapon"Nvgoggles" This will add a silenced SCAR, 6 magazines, a pair of binocs and NV Goggles. Classnames for all units and weapons can be found here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?73241-ArmA-II-amp-OA-Classnames-No-questions-no-discussion-here! I think there is also a list hidden on the biki somewhere. The M4A1 from Arma 2 does not have a flashlight coded in by default, since it is an Arma 2 weapons. This mod fixes this: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=11189 <- Also adds CQB sights to the M16 with the ACOG, for example. Similar mod out there that adds thermal sights to appropriate Arma 2 vehicles, too. Hope this helped a little. Welcome to the community!

The engine of carrier command is completely unrelated to RV, actually. I specifically asked this question at gamescom, and the devs also mentioned this before on forum threads. Nobody ever disclosed a name, though, apparently. It appears to be completely made in-house, though, just like RV. http://www.carriercommand.com/2012/03/community-in-command-questions-round-4/ Also mentioned in the first answer.

It takes quite a while for the CC to be reconstructed. Once it is finished, the Island will turn from green to blue (that´s how it worked for me, at least). Edit: Also I am slow McSlowlyson

Fun concept, however I think it´s not really saying anything. String theory is a neat Idea, but even the string theorists themselves can´t decide on what part of their Ideas are correct and which aren´t: mostly due to the fact that nobody has ever proven anything trough experiment and observation to the point where string theory was even established as a valid and functional astrophysical field. Right now, that´s all it is: tons of equations, and lots of scientists who don´t have a clue where they´re going. This about summarizes string theory up to this point. That said, what actually is wonderful is that the whole tying together between quantum physics and newtonian mechanics has now begun, with the discovery of the higgs-boson like particle at CERN. That will have implications for everyone, sooner or later, probably in the realm of quantum computing first and foremost. Exciting stuff :>

Last I heard the reputable news site The Onion reported that Arma 3 will only support two button controllers, and 16 bit EGA graphics. The first DLC will add support for keyboards. Also it will only run on the golden C64. But it will contain an editor. A custom main menu layout editor. That will provide endless fun! :>

One thing that strikes me is how quickly the AI can maneuver about, and how they can drive even trough dense patches of forest no problem. And then, on the open field, they get stuck on a single rock. I think, like with Arma, it´s a problem of consistency and repeatabillity. If I want to inflict maximum damage on an enemy, I don´t send walruses somewhere, I inch them forward bit by bit, and once the enemy is in range, let them flail about as they wish. I´m still very new (just got the game), so maybe the big hitches I didn´t see yet.

I am noticing the tracer mod turns tracers invisible on thermal sights. Is there any way to make them show up there again?

Problem with manhattan style missions is the sheer complexity. It was worked on for almost a year by a single person, apparently, and even then it wasn´t finished on release day. (It was probably the mission that was complained about most in the troubleshooting section as far as bugs went.) I´d rather have smaller, tighter OFP style missions that work every time, with a concise and interesting challenge and objective, rather than a big sandbox that doesn´t work half the time. Manhattan could´ve been a game in itself.

http://www.arma3.com/full/wp-content/gallery/blueprints/arma3_east_soldier_fullgear.jpg <- that´s how they look. Difference is, in the pic I ommitted the chestrig. Everything else is basically as in the game. :V Also niiiiice antoineflemming! Keep it up. Let´s see if we can bring this thread to size some, errybody :>

The problems with corporations exercising their power for the sake of profit and creating customer dependence are real, and I acknowledge those. But these are two different things: the benefits of GM seeds, and the malpractices of the people selling them. Cancer is a horrifying disease, and the prospect of getting it is a dire one, but starving is not nice either. However, starvation can be more easily adressed than cancer, and if there were any sensible policy regarding the employment of GM products in place, we would not see a lot of the problems that you describe. This extends also to sanctioned food products from europe, which are destroying local markets in africa, for example. However, wether or not GM seeds even -cause- cancer has not been answered fully. Contrary to claims of microwaves and mobile phone radiation causing cancer, though, I see some scientific basis, so I take this research more seriously than those. That said, the now emerging criticisms of the study shouldn´t be dismissed either: don´t make this about Ideology. I raised an eyebrow when I saw the particular breed of rats they used (which were initially developed to research cancer treatments, making them -heavily- predisposed to getting cancers of every imaginable type). With a more valid (ie, non-genetically predisposed organism) research organism, as well as test studies of other institutions without the political-ideological connections of the scientist who worked on the linked study to confirm the results, I would feel much more comfortable in accepting this. Right now, it is scaremongery in the face of a misinformed public, and someone is going to suffer, sooner or later. (Again, this has nothing to do with the tactics of Monsato & co, which are deplorable. Another good example is the united fruit co., which went as far as bribing the US government into overthrowing a foreign government that was acting against their business interests.) Not the research or the product should be limited in terms of regulation, bar establishment of how dangerous they actually are compared to conventional products. What should be regulated is the way these companies act abroad, to whatever degree international relations permit. One reason these companies can do as they please is because if they were cut short by the US/EU governments, companies from other places in the world with a more real-political approach would spring into the gap, with the same practices, and push the now harnessed western companies out of business. Unless there is some sort of unified regulatory and functional enforcing body, this will be hard to curb, outside of public relations work. Edit: And realize, Monsanto is under pressure from governments (germany, many other european countries, and the US as well I think) to prevent their products from ever "contaminating" the conventional crops. One reason why they are curbstomping anyone cross-breeding their crops in asia, and trying to make what they sell sterile, because under EU legislation every mixed crop is a legal liabillity. As long as we prosecute the "contamination" of "conventional" produce with "GM" produce, this problem will persist. Obviously another incentive for Monsanto is to protect their product, but to say that this is the entire cause for their actions is untrue. Assigning malice to everything a company does just because they´re a large and powerful corporation is distracting from the actual problems.

Almost expected a reply like this. Reading what I said, it´s a bit erratic and propagandistic sounding, but I stand by the gist of what I said. Every new product will have flaws. However, if the net benefit outweighs the drawbacks, use it until a better alternative becomes available. NOT using these products kills people, while using them will kill some of the people it saves now in the future. At the risk of sounding harsh, but I´d rather like to have people get a chance to live now even at the risk of getting cancer 20 years down the road, rather than dying from famine now. The opposition to GM products is a 1st world fad, where people can afford having such opinions. The larger part of the world, however, cannot afford such a stance in the face of persistent problems with feeding their people. This is especially true for large parts of africa, as well as the poor people in many other countries that can hardly afford expensive imported-grain based products. GMO products will need to be improved in the future, and their safety thoroughly tested, however, what we have right now is all we have, and I think that using it will do more benefit than harm. But in the end, History will show, I guess.

Excellent find. The full text of the study can be found here: http://research.sustainablefoodtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Final-Paper.pdf Good illustration of science at work. Now there´s to hope that neither the rabid anti-GM nor the rabid pro-GM people begin throwing either panic-fits or attempt to suppress the research. Now, people need to realize one thing. The world is NOT FAIR, there are NO EASY ANSWERS, and everything has GOOD and BAD effects. You could die of hydroxylic acid poisoning tomorrow. This is a question of cost-benefit. GM crops can increase the amount of produce to harvest trough resistance against adverse environmental conditions and pests. If people in countries with nonexistent infrastructure don´t have to suffer trough famine anymore, that´s a big step forward for them even if they now carry the risk of getting cancer earlier in life until either normal crops can produced in sufficient amounts, or GM crops with less health impact are developed. GM products are a marvel, same as stemcell research, advanced metallurgy, modern computing, organ printing and bionic limb replacement. I get -really- upset when people hold this up to obstruct human progress. Nobody ever claimed it was easy. Stop expecting easy answers. Wether you are against nuclear power, genetically modified crops, stemcell research, think that structured water is a be-all end-all solution to all health problems or that there is some such thing as free energy or cold fusion, it hurts our progress as humans. We have to accept that it is always an uphill struggle, and that sacrifices have to be made. I am on meds daily, without them, I would not be where I am right now. People always complain about the side effects (I get them too.), but people also never consider the complexity of the task at hand. To objectively and conclusively find out not only -what- works, but -why- it works and -where-, and how it can be improved and made less dangerous, if it is. GM products have the problem that genetics, aside from the bare bones of the language and techniques for deciphering the basics, is still a not very well researched field. Everything we do right now is hit and miss, but without trying, we will never get better. To try, we need large companies like Monsato to take up the ideas and -produce- them, so we can see the effect on a sufficiently large scale to make out wether something works or not. Neither the scientists, nor Monsato, nor the opponents are good or evil here. People that try to paint the issue as some such where there are such lines drawn, however, are. There is a difference between a healthy argument and blame-shifting/panic creation, and I am always afraid that discussions like this deteriorate to some level like that. Also sry, emotional topic for me, might not make sense entirely.

Not really a wish, but an inspirational Idea regarding weapons design. http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/08/30/t-worx-powered-picatinny-rail/ Powered picatinny rail, with one common battery in the buttstock for all accessories on the gun. Would allow for even slimmer, but still powerful accessories like lights, lasers and active sights.

Wat. Why would they ban a game where they are WINNING? The Chinese didn´t ban any of the failed OFPs either. Instead, they marketed it as "playing from the opfor perspective." :( Irans government. Your lack of humour disappoints me.

15 minute rush rush rush. Opfor sketch. Edit: Sorry mods, fuddled up the size. Checked it, now is 29kb on my screen. Hopefully it´s correct!