reclusive7

Well then how about, as adults and stuff we stop jerking eachother around? Deal? PS changed my sig to fit in with the herd, happy now?

Are you just going to lurk my comments. "New around these parts" oh yeah my join date to these cancerous forums, yeah that's indicative of how long I've been supporting BIS, yep got me there, you're so smart it amazes me, you must be super popular and awesome here on the BIS forums, you should get a medal.

Talking about the game and your argument for what makes the game better or fun when adding this ultra realism, not about your military status or considerations for re-enlistment, I'm a Vet too whoopity doo dah doesnt make either of us any more or less relevant than a bus driver or a teacher, who's screaming USI now. Thanks for the CoD comment btw, I'm sure you're the first to ever use it, stereotypical fanboish behavior, I dont agree you are a CoD/DayZ/BF/____fill in generic half assed shooter here. I'm against adding the ridiculous features that DayZ has, DayZ is trash. CoD is horribad too, why would anyone want anything from either of those in Arma is beyond me, I've been that way a long time, but somehow as I said in my sig, not agreeing with the "herd" gets you labeled that way by guess who? Fanbois and apologists like yourself. And for the comment in my sig challenging BIS to bring their editor up to par with the rest of the competent industry, it's simple they either need to say "dear fanbase we're leaving the editor in shambles as is, and will not be making improvements to productivity or accessibility" or "dear fanbase we're going to provide you with the tools you need to fix our screwups and fill the void with good quality content we're unable or unwilling to provide outright, you're welcome, and thanks for helping us keep our franchise alive", doing that would end all the damn debating about what they should or shouldn't do in regards to the editor. So again what about all this ultra realism is making Arma3 the king of the series? What about it is adding fun and gameplay value that isn't a chore but is enjoyable?

Could be a superiority complex, novices or those who game for fun not as part of their profession rely on content creators to keep their games current/fresh/alive, a better editor like many of the modern developers provide(with plugins that work with Maya/3DS/Adobe Products etc, and excellent support by way of accessibility and improved productivity) would render many of these superior beings to an equal level and may be shown up by "noobs", maybe that's the issue. I find it strange that absurd features have made it into the dev cycle and take away resources and seldom is it that someone takes issue with that, but when someone suggest what's being suggested here, is met with such irrational opposition, very confusing.

Individual channels w/ sliders would be nice for audio options, driving/flying inside vehicles in 1st person makes it awfully hard to hear either your 3rd party voip(Teamspeak/Mumble/etc), and the breathing is far too loud when fatigue sets in. The ability to mix the audio to user preference would be great.

there are also ticket(s) for it in the tracker, add to them or expand on them. But yeah it's irritating.

Yeah let's start saying "it's a beta bro/dude" just like during alpha, that wait and see attitude will get you the same result as Arma2, [?]'s for item placement still in there to this day, not fixed, ignored. Some of you need to wake up and smell what you're shoveling when you make these ridiculous excuses as though you have some sort of financial stake in BIS' future, it's sad really. At least in A1 and A2 you could use the 3d editor so long as you knew the hoops to jump through to export it to work in the 2d editor. If they can't manage to put a competent and modern editor at this point in Arma's evolution then idk if they even can or are willing to try. Perhaps they need to outsource to a dev that can do it. REF: just about any decent sdk or editor out there for hints on what makes a good developers kit/editor. ---------- Post added at 03:08 ---------- Previous post was at 03:02 ---------- The average user is not going to jump through those hoops. If you're willing to pay 30 for a 3d editor, why not buy a game that comes with one outright? Silly consumer.

My issue is that the visual effects were nauseating, there's a way to disable by placing a script into the init field of the unit, however this should either be based on difficulty level, a toggled option via server options/config or local game options/config, or simply done away with altogether(what I'd do), restricting sprint distance, or rate of travel would be far better than these visual effects that use both system resources and time/resources to implement such things. When realism goes wrong, as it often does. How far are those of you bringing all this technical data that pertains to reality into gaming willing to go to add this much realism? What about any of these things make the game better or fun? People want hyper-realistic graphics, Crytek makes Crysis series, which yeah cool story but it doesn't encourage you to play more unless you're into the tacked on MP, game is realistically pretty to look at but falls short of being a fun game that encourages more play. Realism does not = magically delicious super fun time, I'm sorry but it doesn't. I've always liked gaming because it's not reality, it's fun(when done right), if I want a idk Park Simulator, I'll simply bypass the game and just go to the park in reality. Bringing reality in terms of physics is great and does enhance gameplay, but lets look at a horrible example, idk how many of you caught Dean Hall bs'ing his way through interviews like idk a month or so ago around E3, he stated allegedly, that they had spent time and resources researching and gathering data on how often one must hydrate or how quickly one dehydrates in all these different scenarios and temperatures, night time, day time, etc. Now what about that sounds like it adds gameplay value or a fun and enjoyable aspect to the game? My opinion, absolutely nothing valuable for gaming, it's a waste of time and resources.

Fire Bad! Change also Bad! Me not like change to mah Arma! Me get angry now! RAWR!

It's the FUTURE lol, I love this way of defending creative choices by the devs, it's very dismissive and avoids any debate.

If someone regardless of gender meets all reqs of an MOS, and completes their training regardless of combat/support role, then they have earned their place to thrive in their career and job classification, you speak as though being a female is a handicap or disability, I've served alongside females both enlisted and officer, and the bottom line is they're soldiers, doesnt matter what's between their legs, what matters is that they are willing to serve their country in whatever capacity they are allowed. Females have been serving as MP's since before the ban was lifted on women serving in combat roles in US Armed Forces(we're a little late in comparison to other nations, seems to be a trend), you think MP's didnt see or fight in combat? ^Is not the point of this thread, but I'm responding to the debate(s) from the example given as it's something I feel needs to be looked at. It's funny that this is a game/milsim, ok you with me so far? It's a GAME, not real, mkay? And this is a work of fiction set in 2035, I've heard the excuse of "creative license" and "it's the future" for the content we've been presented with thus far. But when someone brings up the idea of female character models in a GAME, that is FICTION people get all ticked off and their worst side comes out, someone even brought up female pilot models because ffs females have been flying combat missions for awhile now, and even then people flip out "Oh no something could change I dont like it, RAWR!", so someone can only come to some conclusion that if people make excuses for content that is there already and rationalize it being ok, but arent open to female models/characters at all, that it's not about realism, or creative license, or "the future" it's about something else entirely. BTW You skipped over the rest of the OP, read into what you wanted to read into, and reacted the way you reacted, you've not taken into account that this is about how people are using/abusing feedback tracker, treating it like facebook comments instead of bug/feedback reporting and responding to issues as "I'm on system setup X, and I'm having issues with this as well" VOTE UP or VOTE DOWN, instead it's "Ur a noob VOTE DOWN" "My rig with manufacturer X works just fine, your rig is junk VOTE DOWN" "I'm insecure and girls are dumb hurr durr" "poor fps???? what game r u playing, its smooth as silk for me playing all maxed out nah mean playa VOTE DOWN", like really dude did you not read what was originally written? The example given was because it proved the point, shall I pick a handful of feedback issues with the same crap going on in them, you dont have to look far. Anyways I'm done w/ this thread, requested that it's locked because this isn't constructive, and people are wanting to debate the example issues topic rather that the problem with how the issues are handled.

That sig is there because I keep seeing people pull random statistics out of thin air on reasons why no female on earth should even be considered to serve in combat in real actual life. Plain and simple the US is just now lifting the ban from back in '94 regarding women in combat roles(infantry, SOCOM), there are plenty of nations allowing and making use of women in combat roles, read up on how many women have served in combat and their accomplishments in their military careers, and those patriots who've fought and died for their country. And even with all that, people flip out over the mere suggestion that there be female models/mocap/audio/textures/etc as a vanilla feature in A3. I overlook plenty of nonsense, especially on the good ole BIS forums, I've avoided this place like the plague until I had to create a forum account here, why? Take a look at this "community" and all the "wonderful" members it has, that's why. There are better outlets for information regarding Arma than BIS forums, and there are plenty of reasons for that as well. IDK if it's all the animosity DayZ users have garnered, the hate for new people joining the ranks of Arma, or what the issue is, but this community hardly fosters a welcoming feeling, to anyone without thousands of posts with a long standing "Join Date"(who gives a @#$%, really), people dont like change and it shows. A lot of people here would fit in PERFECTLY at the BF3 forums @ EA lol, and that's nothing to be proud of.

And you got to that conclusion how exactly? Idk what you're trying to say it's not making sense. I dont like facebook at all tbh.

There are plenty more examples @ Feedback Tracker, but that one in particular is wrank with horse#&*$ spewing from ignorant internet tough guys, and overzealous fanboi's. There needs to be a way to report issues/feedback/notes, with the feedback example given there are over 600 notes in there, nobody NEEDED to say most of what's been said in there, VOTE DOWN VOTE UP simple. Instead we have a publicly available area full of this garbage that any gaming journalist can stumble upon and portray this "community" as being bigoted and exclusive to the male gamer, yeah that's some good press to help BIS out...good job. Hell imagine if there were no black avatars to choose from and someone suggested that textures/faces/models/characters be added, and the same type of reaction occurred.

Feedback - Information about reactions to a product, a person's performance of a task, etc., used as a basis for improvement. Feedback is not Facebook, the "Notes" section of Issues presented during FEEDBACK(see definition above) is not a place to add "comments" as though you mistakenly thought you were on someones facebook page, this is a place for notes relevant to the issue(s) in question(eg: "I can confirm ______'s textures are not rendering", "A work-around for this issue is _______, however this is a bug that needs fixing")<--pretty simple right?! Plain and simple version: Don't agree with feedback given? Then Vote Down on the issue. Don't waste your time or anyone's time for that matter, on pointless comments that are laced with insults, personal opinions about someone on the internet you don't agree with, or repeat something that's been said over and over again, use the FILTER, the FILTER is your friend. Here's a perfect example: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=1658 of how someone with legitimate feedback expressed their own personal feedback on ArmAIII, which is now filled with ignorant BS from this "community" of "human beings". §1) No Flaming/Flame-baiting/bigotry <- forum rule, is this not applicable here or via Feedback Tracker? On a side note, we're all supporting the continued development of ArmA III in some way shape or form, be it, personal experience with A3 and giving feedback on that experience or experiences, $fundage$ to BIS, or simply trying to break the game and find everything wrong with it that you can- in order to help buff all the bugs out by the final build. All feedback is equal from user to user, it's BIS's call whether feedback is taken or bound for the trash can in the end.