sqb-sma

I believe we're all agreed there. But the apparent movement of the gun will be hugely increased with the zoomed FOV. It's this (combined with the sensitivity issue) that makes people thing there's too much recoil when in reality it's very good, perhaps slightly on the low side even. You should have to move the mouse to reposition the gun and get the next shot on target, an experienced player can do this quickly and effectively, putting many shots in a small grouping, a worse player will struggle. In reality the gun's recoil when looking down a 6x scope and firing unsupported (shooting a mosin) at around 150m the target is completely lost, but muscle memory brings it back into view. With the weapon supported the target was barely visible in the blurred area at the edge of the scope.

I agree that the armour is slightly odd. It really shouldn't take 3 shots to damage a littlebird. Using a 40mm MGL I used up 40 rounds before a ka60 exploded... which is bemusing. Meanwhile LAVs explode in 2-5 hits! However... vehicles already carry ammo and gear in the back by default, depending on the type of vehicle they carry different things. The LAVs carry missiles and ammo whilst the kamaz carries FAKs.

I haven't tried shooting it with GLs or the 40mm cannon yet, but one AA missile completely disabled (i.e. it exploded into fire and the rotors stopped with the crew all dead) one in multiplayer yesterday. That's actually fairly unrealistic, AA missiles rarely do huge amounts of damage, especially shoulder launched, they often explode in proximity rather than with a direct hit and damage unique areas of the aircraft, I'd prefer to see the pilots get a chance to autorotate to safety rather than being immediately killed.

Added 3 new images to the IMGUR album. http://imgur.com/a/X6qka#0 First three images are new, taken in the beta. Sorry for the odd colour balance, had to work around f.lux.

Great idea and awesome pics, just some comments :) I think there's too much noise in many of these pictures, if you do add that sort of noise perhaps "iso noise" would be a better choice, rather than monochromatic noise, in many of these pictures the noise has been used to draw attention to the clear parts of the picture, giving it an awesome "wow!" factor, but it detracts from the overall picture, perhaps blur would be more suited? Very cool bokeh style in some pictures, and this one: http://mordeaniischaos.deviantart.com/art/Littlebird-Cockpit-376073051?q=gallery%3Amordeaniischaos%2F44058949&qo=13 is fantastic!

Can confirm this, CBA leads to double up of some objects, radio messages and scripts. With the boat two boats with drivers spawn in the same place, with you on the bottom one. The radio messages double up and eventually all events fail, explosions no longer progress the night mission and the last two radio messages repeat indefinitely. CBA reliant mods also seem to fail, VTS weapon resting does, which is my main concern. That mod is a must have.

Regarding the law, I think it's cable guided? Re: RPGs, any rocket with a tail fin will be deflected IN to the wind direction, any rocket with no fin will go WITH the wind direction, and any rocket with a fin at the front will go WITH the wind direction at great haste! This is because the fins change the orientation of the rocket whilst the effect of the wind on a finless rocket will be purely on the direction of the rocket (with a negligible effect on orientation).

Yes, this seems to be the way to go. Automatic weapon resting with no loss in sensitivity (otherwise it would take control away from the player) if the weapon is held relatively still near cover for x.x seconds (0.5 seconds perhaps?), if weapon is rested it can be deployed (bind a control to it, much like shift+space in ACE2 or Ctrl+Space in VTS' weapon resting, which doesn't work in the beta! GRRRR) which plays an animation and takes control away from the player. The animation doesn't have to be good, it could just be a shake like in VTS, nor does the rotational point of the weapon have to change a la Ro2 but I think this really must be implemented. Just a funny note, in the "supports" showcase the introductory picture shows the soldier "resting" his sniper on the wall (in reality just looking over the wall), of course trying this in mission the sway is too high to shoot out to 350m, the minimum infantry distance at that area. The sniper in the mission also has an always stowed bipod. It's as if the mission was designed with weapon resting in mind but... it's just not there!

Hmmm, very good animation. So the players movement vector "seeks" the aim vector with acceleration based on the difference. I like it way more than the default model, but I'm still not sure if I'd use it. Currently the movement controls are "absolute", wasd ALWAYS means forwards, left etc etc from the viewing direction, making movement (theoretically, in practice rifle collision, player collision and slight amounts of lag disrupt this) absolute. You can still aim off center, just by using W+D and looking to the left, it achieves a similar thing to your idea, whilst still keeping movement absolute.

In reality I see a streak when sitting next to someone firing tracers, it does depend on the angle and the proximity (best surmised by the angular velocity), it's just another element of motion blurring which does happen in real life (look at the road next time you're in your car). Last time we went out shooting I brought my laptop with me and attempted to recreate the blur length. Anyway, long story short I found the "frame time" for the human eye looking at a high contrast scene at night was between 220 and 400 frames per second. To put this in perspective the shortest frame time from which the human brain gathers useable information is 1/220 of a second, which corresponds to my minimum. I do think that in desirable circumstances the eye can determine differences of motion far higher than this (according to my horrifically error ridden experiment, maxing out at 400 "frames" per second at night). I'm not sure if it's different during the day time, as I can't recreate it with tracers.

I don't use free aim because if I turn it on slightly then my ENTIRE VIEW lurches up to 90 degrees and then back down, like a ship on a heavy ocean swell. Obviously that's not playable. Disable trackIR and it works "as per advertised", which I still hate because you can't turn your body at all as seen in the above video.

I still can't believe this ISN'T a feature yet. Being unable to shoot your MG because there's a perfect wall for resting it on but oh, oh no if you try and shoot over it the recoil is far too much.... what the hell!? Battlefield 3 (arguably an extremely arcade game) has this, Red Orchestra has this, so why doesn't *the* milsim have it? This should be a core feature, like being able to sprint or having helicopters, it should be part of Arma.

Yeah, I've noticed (and attempted) that as well. I'd much prefer at least 24, hopefully 32, bit FP-HDR, even on normal there's some problems currently.

The ocean can be blue without being purple. In fact I'd prefer for the water to be more blue, not less, there's too much red mixed in. See the lighter blue portions of this pic: http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2012/04/Arma3_screenshot_stratis_1204_03.jpg, I want a deeper version of that for the rest of the sea.

As far as I'm aware that is and has always been the case. They don't think that the joy of the game should come from the gore, but rather from the gameplay, which I respect (though I wouldn't mind gore, Ro2 seemed to take the opposite approach and the gameplay was... subpar). Mods have been adding excessive gore to Arma since... OFP I guess, or was it Arma 1 that had the mod where people would explode into pieces when hit with the grenade launcher?

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you, and I haven't played Arma because I just got back from traveling through Turkey, Greece and Italy (luckily left Turkey before any unrest). I noticed the colours were completely off in Arma, the purpleness was probably the most incorrect thing, the contrast I don't really mind (we're aiming for something that simulates human eyes more than a camera, which will always have more contrast when displayed on a screen). Now whenever I boot up Arma I just can't help but notice the colours don't look right at all, it's quite distracting. I didn't take the pictures for that album, it's just what came up when I google the topic, but it does show the colour differences I noticed quite clearly. The game does have some camera elements in it though, which is what makes this very weird, when the scene gets too bright you get colour mistakes rather than an increase in intensity, which is what a camera CCD does, as well as bloom (though point bloom is gone, I do wish point bloom was in for the splendid camera viewer, or toggleable).

http://imgur.com/a/RRdXi Look at this album, Ok, pics one and two, notice the water, instead of emerald blue it's dirty purple in game, that's really weird, no place has water that colour. Pics 3 and 4, the sky is completely incorrect, it's also too purple, you can see that in the water as well. Pics 5 and 6 were taken at a different time of day, unfortunately. But the sunset shots later on really show how there's too much purple in the sky and water, it's crazy. In the last few pictures, you can see that the terrain is too dusty/grey (not yellow enough) You can also see in all these pictures there's very, very, little contrast in the game pictures. I think the sunlight is just not bright enough for the system to adjust the HDR and make the shadows look dark. This is partially because when you select conditions with more clouds the sunlight is reduced by a %. So even if there's one or two clouds in the sky not blocking the sunlightthe sunlight becomes 50% as bright as it should be. This is really unfortunate. The shadows are also very very faint. There's a bunch of colour problems here, which I'd love to solve, but because the problems change massively at various times of day and some materials are affected more than others. It's quite a frustrating issue. I like to solve this kind of thing by taking a screenshot, making it very blurry and tiny (200px-200px) and then identifying issues with colour.

Yes, you can do this with vierio currently. You have to use a "dominant eye" however, which is slightly more clunky than the IZ3D method, but it achieves the same thing, using left eye offset you get perfect alignment in the right eye with the left eye... off to the left ;)

Man, just another topic that's solved by the Rift. Been trying out some shooters with it and finally shooting with both eyes open in a game is... well... real. Using my hydras as the weapon it's amazingly immersive. Can't wait for rift/hydra support in A3.

Arma's AA (not the post process AA (PPAA), the real AA) will always be better than card AA or injected AA. If you can force the game to run SSAA then that will be the best, but also kill your computer. In terms of injected AA, injected SMAA will always give better results than injected FXAA (which is only marginally better than a gaussian blur).

It's not crap, TrackIR is leaps and bounds better than non-trackIR gameplay, and it is a better solution (gameplay wise, the Rift will still triumph where immersion is concerned) than the current Oculus dev kit. However if the PPD is increased on future Rifts then trackIR will quickly become old news. Source: I have both.

I recall something similar in Arma 2, make sure CCC/Nvidia is not overriding the game's AA.

Just one note, the full moon sky brightness is far too bright, it should be more like the current half moon sky brightness. We had a full moon not too long ago and the blueness of the sky was barely discernible.

Ok, working partially in Arma 2. No 3D, headtracking is slightly odd (LOTS of drift in A2, more than in museum of the microstar even). Looking VERY good though, I'd love to see some official support. Also, my dream would be to get my Hydra working with this, then we could get what feels like a real gun in the game, but that would be hard to do animation wise.

They can delay as much as they like, we've already got an alpha on our hands (and A2 + mods), I'm content to wait for a better final product than to be let down on final release.