blackhart2012

I think you were right about the reloads, its probably a scripting thing that will come in the final stages of game development, and I'm sure its fairly simple to do as its a feature of every major shooter now, from Battlefield to CoD. However, I think you're wrong about the muzzle flash. Most real guns have the muzzle built with a flash suppressor by default as it does indeed get in the way and show your position. However, films aren't completely wrong. An un-suppressed weapon can have a very large flash. The only reason that in many videos you see of guns shooting the flash is very rarely seen has to do with the way a camera works and not the gun itself. Camera's shoot on average, 30 frames per second. This can of course be changed on some cameras, but 24 frames and 30 frames are the standard. If your camera takes 24 or 30 stills in a second, and the gun is shooting, the rapid release of heated gases from the end of the barrel won't always time up to be exactly in sync with the camera taking a frame. Plus, its hard to see a flash in broad daylight because the sun saturates the light from the gases.

I've seen a few posts about how to integrate new players into the Arma experience. Many of the suggestions involve creating a CoD or Battlefield similar experience that allows users to understand and right away enter the game. Personally, that's the opposite of what I want. Don't get me wrong, I loved CoD4, I still have nostalgia about Modern Warfare 2, Black Ops was fun, I enjoyed MW3, and I plan to buy Black Ops II. I play BF3 frequently, and the people who try to compare Call of Duty to Battlefield just because they are major titles, are to me very ignorant and unaware that they are entirely different games. Call of Duty is arcade, Battlefield is strategic. And I feel the same way about Arma and I love what I've seen so far about Arma III and all we are getting. Arma to me isn't a game like any other. And I want Arma 3 to be Arma, not CoD or Battlefield. I want Arma 3 to be what Arma 2 was at an all new level. Arma to me isn't a game to be played, its a game to be lived. It's the most accurate combat simulation game there is. I know many people will say that its just a game and if I can call Arma simulation I can call CoD simulation too, but Arma has always been different and I think we all want it to remain that way. Arma's dedication to a massive world spanning miles, realistic ballistics that Battlefield has tried to imitate, and of user generated scenarios is amazing to me. What I want from Arma 3 and what I think the majority of the community wants is more. We want bigger, prettier, more dynamic, and more realistic. We want to create maps and play in the armory, two of my favorite things. We want the hundreds of weapons and attachments. We want the mass of vehicles and we want everything we got with Arma 2 and then some. We don't want Arma to sacrifice its own niche to satisfy the CoD fan boys who just wanted a different feel of the same old game. We want Arma, to be Arma. Now that I've put aside all the praise talk, I do have some constructive critiques as a player coming off of Arma 2 and Operation Arrowhead, and I hope the comments will add to my own list of ideas. Weapons: I loved the armory, filled with absolutely massive amounts of guns. However, I did feel a little out of control with the load outs. I did say I wanted Arma to remain Arma, but I do think Arma can learn from other games. Practically every shooter out there allows personalization of your attachments. The best example I can think of is GR: Future Soldier's Gun Smith. Now, I don't mean I'd want something so in depth for the personal choice exactly, but I would like to be able to choose how my weapon functions. In Arma 2, all the guns were listed in strict setups with specific attachments predetermined on the gun. I want to be able to choose my optic, my underbarrel, my weapon stock, my barrel length, my ammunition, etc, before I go into combat. I think Arma 2 got part of the way there by allowing you to change the kind of magazine you were loading into the gun, but it wasn't quite there. I want more dynamic and hands on control of exactly the gun I'm using. If I'm going to risk my "life" on a gun, I want to know that in combat it's set up exactly how I expect it to perform and have all the functions that follow my attack strategy or play style. Character Personalization: I know that the past Arma games really didn't address this issue but I would love the ability to not only alter the gun my character uses, but perhaps the attire he is wearing as well. I want to ability to pick what kind of body armor he has, the helmet, if he takes a backpack or not, and I want this to affect my performance on the battlefield. Maybe I'm going into a stealth role where I need to be quick and silent. I choose a light vest and no backpack. My character moves faster and nimbler, but I don't have many spare magazines on me because of the lack of storage space on my gear, and I lack the proper armor for certain rounds. Maybe I'm going all out into a war zone. I choose a heavy pack, some thick armor with extra pouches. My character is more armored and harder to take down with lighter rounds, and I have plenty of ammunition to spare, but I'm slow moving, I tire from running very quickly. I think the ability to customize such things will help benefit player choice even more. And just a personal idea that I know might be harder to do, but would be interesting to see I think... choice of gillie suit materials for snipers. Perhaps in the AI there could be a percentage chance of an enemy spotting you depending on if you're moving or not in the gillie suit, and on how well your materials blend with the current surroundings. If you pick to use brush and twigs when going into a snowy area, the chances of getting spotted are almost 100%, but if you go with the same suit to a field your chances are only perhaps 5% or 10%. I think it would be good to do such things in addition to weapon choice to help show that combat takes alot of forethought and promote tactical planning before battle. Movement: I've seen the ability to change through a multitude of new stances and I love this so very much. Arma 3 allowing levels of ducking and the laid back shooting position, and the leaning even while prone, not only makes the game more realistic, but it allows more tactical use of your surroundings. I would however, like to see abilities to dodge better. I know that is a fairly open ended statement, but I want not only to be able to change stance, but to toss myself from the danger better. If a grenade is thrown at my feet, perhaps I don't want to have to stand up and sprint exposing my body to the line of fire. I'd like the ability to be able to dive. The best comparison I can think of is the Black Ops "dolphin dive". In Arma 2 I found myself shot down running from a grenade or blown away because I couldn't dive away from an incoming rocket while crouched. In a real firefight, no matter what gear I'm wearing, if an explosive is coming at me, I'm going to throw myself away from the danger. If it will create balance issues, perhaps such dives will cost a player with a slow recovery making it a last chance option that would only work well if there was cover close. But I would still like to be able to throw my body away from danger is certain scenarios. Map Creation: One of my all time favorite features of Arma 2 was the Editor. It was so dynamic with so many options and tools that it could create almost literally any situation, especially with its ability to create scripted events. However, because the tools seemed a bit, raw, it made it hard to create good missions without tutorials or months of learning. It was a steep learning curve that I shamefully admit I really didn't manage to overcome and satisfied myself with just creating large squads near each other to duel it out. The Arma 2 Editor tools were unrefined for those unused to scripting and game engine logic. I'm hoping that the Editor in Arma 3 will be more polished allowing easier creation of the amazing storyline scripted levels I've seen played and created online. Those are my thoughts so far on Arma 3. Just to sum up, I think Arma should be Arma, its a niche game with a niche audience but it excels in what it does and what it is, but I do hope to see new features that borrow from the good concepts of other titles on the market. Thank you for reading and I hope the comments will respectfully add to my list of constructive ideas.