tacticalnuggets

I'm not seeing much of an argument for why Bohemia ought not make enfusion backwards compatible with sqf. Its not like they are planning on adopting another companies engine, unless I am mistaken because i've been out of the loop for many months. It would seem to be worth it. Many platforms, languages, and frameworks do this as legacy support. And I'd wager Arma/OFP deserves the title of a platform.

Agreed. There obviously needs to be major improvements and innovation to release a new flagship title. But there is a precarious situation BIS must deal with that other developers dont have to deal with. Its what makes arma games so unique, and that is its abnormally massive number of mods and community content.

I disagree. The users should read through it, so they don't have to search around the internet for mod statistics, or manually find the kinds of reviews their recent titles are getting. I never said they would "automatically" be backward compatible. I stressed that the process can indeed be involved, but the point is that its possible. And continued backward compatibility for users like the CUP crew is exactly the problem. The CUP crew have poured years of effort into their imports. I would stress that the shear volume of content played a role in the length of the effort. Some stuff does indeed require too much effort to bring forward compared to its pay off, but the point is its possible to do. You have heavy hitters like the CUP crew and thousands of other mods out there, some with years of work like CUP. There is inherent value here. By stripping away that value, people are going to feel the burn. Its not a matter of legality but a matter of how people will react when it finally dawns on them just how much value has been lost. And in most games, there always seems to be some triggered fanboy out there, ready to throw a tantrum as well. But we are smart enough to be above these means of argumentation, are we not?

I have a lot to discuss here. As always, my criticism is out of love for the ofp/arma series; nothing cant be solved. I wish I could sum it up in a few words but the general conclusion from most of what I am about to say is this: If BIS does not come up with plan to deal with the old community content properly, in their next flagship milsim sandbox, then BIS will probably die as a company. Assuming their next milsim sandbox is based on the enfusion engine, then their needs to be a plan for the enfusion engine. Arma 3 has kept backwards compatibility towards its older games. For instance, all the mod scripts, mod assets, and game assets are able to be imported into Arma 3 without having to do rewrites. Often, there is the need to update deprecated functions, asset compatibility configurations, and refactoring in order to import stuff. But the main point is that none of this was insurmountable, and as a result a lot of community content has built up. In fact, there is now over 17 YEARS of community content. In fact, there is so much content that in order to calculate it you would have to be a scientist specialized in the field. In which case, the only way I am going to attempt to come up with an average and uncertainty range on the number of mods is if I get paid. But if you insist on some kind of number, Arma 3 alone has over 57,000 mods on its steam workshop; that's not counting the thousands who run closed communities, create mods for themselves, or just want to be independent. The number of non-steam workshop mods could exceed that number. But again, Arma 3 is 5 years old out of 17 years of mods. So while the steam workshop and independent mods consist of what has been made or imported into Arma 3, there is still the potential aspect to get into. There is over 12 years of un-imported content that can still be imported with the will and capacity to do so. I cant throw out a number at this point, but if I have to say something, I'd say that the amount of community content is astronomical relative to most other games. Community content is what forms the backbone of your flagship titles, BIS. If this community content is not properly handled in your upcoming flagship title, you could create the biggest blow back you have ever seen, ruining your company and its customer base. I agree that from an individual perspective, a fresh start sounds appealing. But in this case, your going to remove the very soil you plant in, and your game crops wont grow anymore. I think the biggest indicator is the current "death spiral" that I cant help but point out. I do not want to start a rant fest, but as other community members and youtubers have pointed out, your most recent titles are getting mixed feedback, and you have built up a list of these titles. There is a lot of alpha phase monetization going on, while the games themselves are struggling to get out of alpha and seem to be failing overall. I do not know what kind of profit you guys are making off of your products, but I cant help but think that you guys are exhibiting a pattern of "lets try this. lets try this. lets try this", knowing that you need to push something out that people like quick or your not going to be around for that much longer. But one may wonder why you guys are not just dumping more money into your next flagship if you have gotten much better reviews for your previous flagships. I think its because you KNOW that you have hit the wall, and that dealing with the community content in your next flagship could destroy you, and so your company is afraid to deal with it immediately. Instead, you are willing to gamble with these new premature titles until you can come up with a solution. Which could be ok, but there is a temptation. A lot of company employees would rather play it safe and cash in on these situations. Sure, the company might be done and ready to close, but at least the current employees can get their paychecks before we are done. Employee morale is a huge factor that tends to make these periods of waiting for solutions death spirals. I have more to say, but I need to stop for now.

UPDATED! VERSION: v1.2.10.9 DOWNLOAD: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B61D4bNCvEl9ZVZkdl80eTRvcjg STEAM WORKSHOP: https://steamcommuni...ion Menu System

I, among many others I know, will expect both passive and active protection systems (in tanks) to be a standard for their third but unofficially fourth iteration of Arma. And if the tank dlc does not adequately include these protection systems in tanks, I will be extremely disappointed and dock -75% to my rating of it on steam. This is not operation flashpoint; this is not arma 1 or 2; this is ARMA 3. Its been almost 18 years, almost two decades, since they began making a military simulator game. Electronic warfare and active protection has been more relevant than EVER in this day and age. If you are worried about balance, make a script command that turns those systems off, so you can keep the missions out there consistent if need be. But I can tell you that the majority of the community wants those systems. Scratch that... NEEDS those systems. Tanks are pathetic right now. They are only slightly better than the IFV's in terms of being effective, and almost exclusively rely on the the absence of competent air power (anything, including pawnees, can obsolete 80's era tanks). To say that air power is always dominant is not an argument, its an excuse for not putting more effort in the game. Another important point is electronic warfare and protection systems make the game more intellectually stimulating. Tanks have become much more than a low-brow rolling chunk of metal with a cannon on it. Especially in the sense of conventional war. Pure armor is becoming less relevant with the prospect of other rising military powers. Its only natural to recognize its importance for an accurate military simulator.

Unfortunately that would cause MP to be not so fun, as you would lose control of your gun (but i guess that is subjective in general). This was mainly created for issues with context, so if there was a lot of interactive objects really close together you could tell them apart. But you can also open doors, climb ladders, and other stuff instantly, as well as scroll open doors. Might wanna check it out if you have not tried those things. But I understand what you are saying.

I'm pretty sure this problem was never ment to be, but as it stands I am getting no missile warnings or radar data for incoming missiles in the Tigris or other AA vehicles. I think it could be a bug, but i'm not entirely sure.

So in an AA vehicle, the radar is all chopped off for me. Also, the center of the radar is the big vehicle icon and its resolution makes it hard to tell which way the vehicle is pointing sometimes. Is there a way to adjust the size/position of the radar?

They were using a bugged script in their door config statements, so I fixed it an renamed it lol

UPDATED! VERSION: v1.2.10.8 DOWNLOAD: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B61D4bNCvEl9ZVZkdl80eTRvcjg STEAM WORKSHOP: https://steamcommuni...ion Menu System

UPDATED! VERSION: v1.2.8.7 DOWNLOAD: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B61D4bNCvEl9MjE3TjJtYndZQjQ STEAM WORKSHOP: https://steamcommuni...ion Menu System

Looks like I fixed the issue while still keeping the original functionality.

You are absolutely right, but its an important variable for a few reasons. The variable is computed such that the menus attached to a class containing a massive object, are still cached into the system, and keeping it cached rather than detected by some function every frame is more efficient. (because the cache scans every 0.5 seconds) The other reason is that if somebody adds their own custom class based menu, the distance they use could exceed the default of 20 meters. Fortunately, buildings/structures in door, ladder, and hatch detection are separate from this. But somebody could attach a menu to the class of a house. The idea was to keep each pass of caching in objects (scanning) at the most minimum distance possible, as I believe the worst case performance impact is proportional to the cube of the radius scanned. I should have some kind of fix by Saturdays update. If I cant make anything work by then (still keeping RTMS_GetMaxDistance), I will just use your first solution.

UPDATED! VERSION: v1.2.8.4 DOWNLOAD: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B61D4bNCvEl9QU95X3c1UnNOQzA STEAM WORKSHOP: https://steamcommuni...ion Menu System