Mirudes

Creative Director Jay Crowe: We have really realistic weapon modells and they have bipods on them, then we don't do another -like weapon resting- this is a discord between these two things. . . ARMA 3 - E3 2012 Stage Demo. Gamespot video on YouTube (Time: 20.07) From the 3rd minute on he is talking about the fact that ArmA3 is going to be a game with a high amount of simulation in it and so on. From the 14th minute on he is saying something like: By the way: The name of the author and of the book is: Bogost, Ian. Unit Operations: An Approach to Videogame Criticism ‘Simulation fever’ is a chapter in that book, and if I have understood him right, Jay Crowe believes that the player accepts or rejects a simulation, caused by the fact that when you have one part of a feature simulated, you automatically desires the connected (or opposed?) parts of the same feature. That is bugging me now: When they are going to realize a feature, are they really thinking first if they have included all possibilities for that feature? Can someone give me other examples with already realized features? Like volumetric clouds, brakelights, Picture-In-Picture (PiP) or flickering heat? The given example with the Bipods - connected with the (still missing) feature of ’weapon resting’ is from Creative Director Jay Crowe.

Do you know which persons have the biggest interest in anti-cheat measurements? It's not the players. The players only expect it to work. Do you believe that it is a good idea to talk about [Anti-Hack] here in the wilderness, with everybody, posting the name/IP of your server, while BattlEye isn't even released in the beta-stage? Did I get that right? Actually without the signatur-checking? If those cheaters don't have financial interests, they will do it for a achievement and try to break down the barriers. They will be able to improve their code on your server in real time. And when they fail, they will try to beat down your server.

Did you just say the Debug-function in ArmA3 is slowing the game down (stuttering?) and probably crashes it, just by writing crash report logfiles? Wait -- are you serious? Let me even lough louder. This is another bug (reported and so far unanswered here) and it is probably already used by malicious cheaters: - Hackers can slowdown and probably crash a server with a faked error. -- This will bring the logfile to the border of its capacity. ---The hackers might use this leak also to cover their traces. This is actually a task for the developers. It isn't a good idea to create security relevant logfiles as a plain text on the clientside. You could find a way to encrypt it or transfer it in realtime to your servers. How about a "no debug"-parameter?

[QUESTION] Will Beta release have BattlEye? SITREP #00017

Generally spoken, a global ban can be handled from every AntiCheat Tool. The disadvantage of BattlEye is that it is optional, the server-owner can deside if they use it or not. The term "global ban" is used by BattlEye: BattlEye Support VAC, the anticheat engine used by Steam, is using the term "permaban". http://www.vacbanned.com/static/informations Thanks for the release of BattlEye in ArmA3 (Beta) today, good luck to $able!

Thank You!

Just think twice - what would you do at the place of Steam? Let's say that the BattlEye is going to start a mass-ban at the release day. All the players are at least Steam-customers, too. Imagine this shitstorm. On the other side is BIS - with a successor of ArmA2, known as the Cheaters paradise, in a beta stage, multiplayer without any anticheat protection. Reputation is already lost... Do I have to tell you that the Steam-employees are already active here in this forums, they have financial interests and will not be surprised by any circumstance. When I read the vague statements from the officials here, both from BIS and BattlEye, I would say it would be better to say nothing at all. They better have news according to BattlEye in the next sitrep that's coming tomorrow. :Bullshit: <- Meant to be a Bs-smilie.

Cheers, mate! Probably another program is still needed to hide the manipulated PBO-files. Here again the warning: These hacks are often infested with Trojans! Once you get a hidden process, other viruses can also hide!

I've posted on this topic already here: Where is the difference to Proving Ground for ArmA 3? What's MOBILE Proving Ground?

Oh, the irony! YOU are using a /troll-tag here. Here is a posting from $able, a BattlEye Developer:

I would like to have a keyboard shortcut for this. When it was assigned, the menuitem "touch off bomb" could disappear! Edit: The VTS Gesture commo rose looks really nice!

Try to solve this problem the other way round: When a player has a special gear, he becomes a class, he shows up in the menus as a "Sniper" or "AT-soldier" and is from now on limited.

On one hand you are right...just saying. ;) I would like to do a test with another mouse as a controller in my left Hand!

Do you want to reply now to your own misquotes? Dude, go and see a doctor! There is something wrong with you!

Do you need suggestions or do you want some cheese to your wine? :rolleyes: I wonder who even needs a total balanced game? Me not! The PvP-players? As before said, they can create a modification for this purpose. PvP can play a return match. Another suggestion: Each side uses the same equipment, only the camouflage is different. Another suggestion: Use randomness. If the developers will make it balanced, neither of us will be satisfied.

I also think, drum mags used to be shown when it is used. Same goes for the holster - the gun used to be in there, when it is in the players equipment. I would also like to see smoke grenades on the avatar. Did someone say knifes for divers? :rolleyes:

Yes, that is plain truth. But however, the beginners are looking for predefined Ammocrates, respawn-modules for enemies, vehicles and players. Nowadays the players are affected by heavy scripted missions (Domination, Warfare, Wasteland) and simply believe that all the features are in-built in ArmA. But it is not. The user-made scripts are solid ingredients in the most successful online missions. The amount of user-made functions is growing. In fact, this makes it beginner-unfriendly like never before. What if the mission editor could be extended with those addons? I remember, when I was playing a multiplayermission, when one was buying units or static defences, one had a construction menu for fortifications, barricades and sandsack-walls. The building-preview was very precise, one could place the items flawlessly. Such a Editor-mission would give you also the possibility to switch to a enemy, move it to your liking (height, position, direction) and switch back to the "mission maker-avatar". After that, the mission should be stored automatically. I don't have a suggestion how this can be used in the ArmA3-Mission editor, but it could clearly solve the problems how to set the sandsackwalls and how to find the proper height of the units. One could even use this technic to put some scubadiver-suits into a boat or to equip a unit.

Domination, Evolution, CTI, Warfare - will ArmA3 at least have one similar official game-mode? Or just only Sector-control? :butbut:

This is not quite correct though. In the ArmA2 mission 'Insurgency' the balance of power is checked in the game. It is possible to kick players automatically when one side has become disproportionately strong. This should be a proposal for a basic function in ArmA3: A setting that (with an adjustable tolerance in percent) prescribes to have equal numbers of players on all sides.

The location of the sniper could be revealed after the first shot through the simulation of a smoke cloud.

The possibility to use a 2nd window --or just a splitter-- side by side, is another great idea. I believe that it should be feasible to be context-sensitive, capable to use drag&drop and extendable through user addons (like the Editor-Updates or the before mentioned templates).

Are you trying to derail this thread?

MulleDK13 is telling us on YouTube how to get access to the hidden 3D editor in ArmA3(Alp0r). I have to admit - that is really a nice idea. By using the very limited 3D-Editor of ArmA3, having a button with "Preview in 3d editor" - whow!

Are you going to post this in every thread? Where are we supposed to reply now? The link is dead: (Fixed that for you) http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Arma-3-PC-236876/Specials/ArmA-3-Beta-Test-Benchmarks-1076533/ Thanks for the Google translation of the german PC Games Hardware: Graphics card benchmarks and Optics Comparison. The given graphics say: (The diagrams are in english):rolleyes: A Geforce GTX 660 runs on: Image HIGH DETAILS Average: 44.1 FPS (frames per second) Minimum: 41 Image ULTRA DETAILS Average: 27.1 Minimum: 24 Nowhere it says "It crashes all the time". It proves that the graphics adapter is running.

Bump! Any news on this: [QUESTION] Will Beta release have BattlEye?