NordKindchen

Wow Anachoretes you are going on my nerves again so badly. You seem to not undestand the point again and again and again. I think it has sth to do with the lack of your english language skill - no offense. I just hope that your trolling nature is forced by that. Anyway I will explain why I think this way of your posts: YES THERE IS A NEED FOR WHAT I POSTED. Why? BEcause it shows how it actually would look INGAMe. And thats a 1000 times better for camparisson than real life videos. On the other hand of course real life videos are needed to verify changes. BUT then again if youd looked at the link I posted youd had seen that there are abou 10 videos showing exactly what is needed + I myself posted several real life comparisson screens. So in the end: My "fancy fantasy based examples" are proof of concepts based on several real life screens. And thats a procedure frequently used in game development! OMG so ennoyed that I have to explain this to you... NEXT: There have been many many MANY examples that show that the CUREENT SYSTEM is not realistic. PLUS yes you can adjust the contrast in real life thermals BUT NOT THE WAY IT HAPPENS IN ARMA III. WHy? Because Arma 3 turns every heat sorce that is not a vehicle or player down. In real life you could only adjust THE OVERALL contrast meaning you would adjust the players and vehicles with it. NEXT: Well...its kind of crycptic again what you wrote here so Ill first explain how I undestood this sentence. CptObvious wrote that the lighting will not influence the thermal while the heat of the sun that warms up stuff will influence it. You say that the "problem is not linear" and either you want to address that the heat of the sun will warm up stuff not in a linear way (which is btw not that important and maybe not even true) or you want to say that the contrast adjustment that is needed to adjust the thermal in a right way is not adjustable in a linear way. Well if its the first case then its not an important aspect since we dont want to insert a realistic warming up system for the surrounding at this point. We want the thermals to better fit the real thing and most importantly: To not work as a gamebreaking texture hack as it is at the moment. The shown examples validate that the current "texture hack like" system is not realistic and ontop of that its not fun to just look through thermals and magically see everything without any possiblity to miss sth. If its the second case then: Yes contrast alone will not help BUT you forget that BIS allready tons down the contrast of the environment different than that of the soldiers and vehiclces. So of course they can turn this function off (as you can see - in the first seconds of looking through the thermals we kind of get what we want. Only after that the environment gets toned down) And after we turned that function off we can work with contrast again. So yes - contrast will help. I hope this clarifies things... @the forum community: What do you say? Does it make sense what I wrote? Greetings!

Indeed! And the current thermal implementation is not even realistic. Heres a big feedback thread over this theme. For example here are some quick comparisson screens I made. I am sure its quite obvious to see which thermals are the current versions;) If not then tell me and I will add headline to each frame Example_1 Example_2 Example_3 Added some more: Example_4 Example_5 [^] AS you see: A simple contrast adjustment could improve the FLIR a hell of a lot.

Posts like yours are the reason why so many people call this thread a flame war. I will line up with the others and wont respond to offending posts like this. This thread needs a more friendly tone.

MY point is that if the game actually tells me that I bullets just nearly missed me - I do want to get behind cover. The current system doesnt really tell me that. So basically adding those effects would help adding the suppression effect in its most natural way: You dont want to get hit - so you get in cover. That is what supression is. ANd that is what the current system fails to achieve due to visual and auditiv feedback. -------------------- On the other hand: I would like to have some kind of system integrated that simulatates supression Red Orechstra style. In Red Orchestra your weapon accuracity was not changed (not like in BF3 were random bullet spread gest added with suppression) but with each bullet that flew past your head your aim would shake away a little. If you think about it this sounds quite realistic. Just like you would shrug if sth flew very fast very close to you. Its a reaction of the body that is natural. But to find a way that pleases all I would be confident if only the visual part would be added.

As far as I can tell by having read the last 20 pages no one is against better visual and sound wise effects for supression. At the moment its hard to tell if you are beeing shot at and the supersonic crack you hear when bullets whistle by is not very fearsome. Adding a slight shake and better sounds when beeing shot at would most likely increase the immersion and would at the same time leave all the skills needed to react to the threat. But it would better bring over the fact that you are beeing shot at. And this will lead to a better and more realistic reaction of the player. While of course he will nevertheless have the ability to just lay down and shoot back. In conclusion: I think the games feedback when beeing shot at is just not remarkable enough. If the game tells you in a better way that you are beeing shot at then people will react as beeing supressed more often. And still gamers that dont want to get supressed can just ignore it. Obviously with the danger of beeing shot. Greetz Ps: If you jump to 2:15 you will see how Supreesion works in PR. Now if the suppression effects dont decrease your aim then you could fire back. The thing is: this kind of effects at least TELL YOU that you are beeing shot at. And one has to point out that the firing gun was a high caliber. Small caliber probaply wont cause that much suppression.

Maaan I would really love to see anything to validate Anachoretes Opinion regarding colours and graphics. All I see of him is complaining in barely understandable english. If you see your taste as the ultimative point of view I demand again that you show off something to validate it.

I like the bigger sun. Its not that Arma 3 needs to have the sun simulated perfectly. That may be sth for Take on Mars;) Its more important for the sun to look nice. And the bigger sun does a better job on that;) Greetz!

Well - it seems there are missing a few unfluences. For example the stance of the shooting person and if he is near cover/in a house (Obviously the current system handles someone shooting out of a 2cm big gap of a window the same as someone laying on plain field). Also the likeliness of detection should be dependable of the weapon optics of the searching AI. ------------------ New topic: Helicopters as the AH6 and the iranian transport chopper seem to spot targets way to fast. If you fly the iranian chopper yourself youll notice that its A: impossible to spot soldiers under your helicopter since you cannot look there. B: very hard to see soldiers laying on the ground when flying fast Of course attack chopper have their own gunner position with freelook so thats a different story. But for choppers without a gunner position the detection radius and angle must be adjusted. ------------- another topic: I found that in the night mission I was not engaged by enemy soldiers when driving the enemy transports. Is this because they look at the equipment as friendly and since they cannot see the driver they wont shoot or is it simply a bug? If its the first case I have to say: Great work! ------------------ AI soldiers that take effective fire and dont know the direction from where they get shot should at first try to find any near cover. If the enemy fire however is uneffective the current behavior of lying down and spotting is fitting. Greetz!

Jepp noticed that echo too. But to be honest - the way it is atm souds rather buggy and annoying. Echo is a nice thing but it needs to be adjusted badly^^

Is it possible to have both the Dev version and the vanilla version of the Beta accessable at the same time? BEcause its hard to confirm wether a big is only present in DEV branch if I cant acces the vanilla game... Thanks n greetz!

Mate I am fine with plp laying down on the ground for several minutes;) Its just that the animation is not the best. Greetz

It has a distance threshold. They only fall after a hit in a certain radius around you. At least thats how I understood it. Greetz

Tried it out. What I like: falling on their back and holding their stomach somehow fits. What I dislike: When they turn themselves on their stomach and retake their weapon. It doesnt fit and looks unimmersive=/ If he could just stand up back again it would look better. Also: The animation where he lays on his back sadly is not the best Ive seen. It loops a bit too fast and feels a bit too unrealistic. Of course thats not your fault since you just took it;) Ijust wanted to mention it. I am not sure but I think I found the way they felt towards their side when hit a bit better. At least it looked more fluently (if you just not happened to hit a whole bunch at once because they all fell over in the ecaxt same way;) ) Anyways: It goes into the right direction! Also that civilianz fall onto their stomach looks better. BUT sadly the animation (from BIS) is not the finest^^ Greetings!

Thank you!=)

http://www.pcgames.de/Battlefield-4-PC-238749/News/Battlefield-4-Mehrspieler-Modus-in-Gameplay-Videos-1081739/ This is how the HE shots from LAVs should look like

Wow I really like the idea behind this mod! Ideas for improvements though: Would it be possible for you to integrate different fall overs? Maybe the animation for leaning back and shooting that we had in the alpha is still accessable? Also - in the alpha you could be hit by a car and lay on the ground unconsciousness - that animation would fit even better to your system. It would also be nice to have the soldier lie on the ground gasping for air on their back. In Arma 2 ACE had this kind of animation for severely hit soldiers. They layd on the back like a bug and cryed;) Anyways: I am not asking you to develop any new animation since I know how incredible hard it is to build a satisfying animation. But maybe there are some usefull animations that you could utilize for your mod=) Great job! Greetz

If you guys want to improve your sounds and overall gaming experience -

Dear developers, I was thinking about the following since a long time. I was wondering how recource intensive the following would be: The enabling of shadow/gras rendering in a small area at a huge distance, when looking through a scope and only when looking throuh a scope. Something like this Only that the shadow and gras should only be rendered in the area of focus. That would require to disable the shadows in all other areas for that amount of time to reduce cpu load. I was wondering how much cpu recources this would cost? I believe you will get my point. Problem with Arma at the moment is that camouflage in the distance doesnt work at all when using scopes. INventing a system that cost effectively introduces shadows back at those distances will most likely solve this issue. Of course theres much different stuff to do before release - nevertheless this has been an important point to the community since a long time. Therefore my question Best regards!

Nice example of Abrams and Bradley shooting. Basically they shoot at a house like on a firing range. So I really dont hink its explicit material. Some AT shooting range stuff

Heysen! Glad to hear you look into some Stratis adjusted camos=) I tried it out again and verfied my data. Sadly the bug still stays. The sceleton is allways missing when loading your mod=( Greetz!

I agree with you;) Just had to dream...

I am crying when I look at the ground textures of RealTimesImmersive =(( Of course its not the mid range distance we are talking abuot at the moment. Still...so much detail=(

Also the Flir is very well made in RealTimeImmersive. And look at the groud textures....mhhhhhjamjam...

Exactly what I am saying!=) Also the "sand" (or more like round cluster of brown stuff that turns in cyrcles while flying up and down) that gets pushed up by explosions should be cut off completely. The way its made at the moment just looks bad - sadly. It would look better without it. And thanks at Euroslave;)

You are welcome Btw: I made a little mock up of what I imagine explosions to look like. Its a rough 10 minute sketch with photoshop so dont expect it to be hollywood;) but it delivers the idea: Here it is