Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Arma4'.
Found 3 results
lato190 posted a topic in OFFTOPIC - Games & Gaminghello, first of all, im tired of all these "what do you want in ArmA4" , "what setting you wish for arma 4" topics. i mean it has been over 3 years since the release of ArmA 3 (alpha) and ArmA 3 will get support for the next 2 years. There was no single evidence or a single word from the BI devs about ArmA 4. One of the BI dev even said this: so please stop all these ArmA 4 rumor topics, we dont know what BI plans next. Maybe they will move to dayz, maybe they will create something new. What is confirmed is that they will work on the new engine and dayz is still in alpha which need also some work. Now the next thing is why i am against a new arma title: BI puts so much work into ArmA 3 and will get support for the next 1-2 years, it would be a waste to stop the support and suddenly announce a new arma. Lets not forget all the mods out there and the big community. Look at arma 2, most of the mods there and the game itself is basically dead. almost no one plays the awesome RHS russian force mod for arma 2 or the cold war mod. almost everyone moved to arma 3. it would be sad to see this happening again since we have even bigger, better mods with a larger community now. Imagine if a new arma comes out, some big projects that are in progress have to be ported to the new arma or it release would be when arma 3 community moved on. Technically, ArmA 3 offers so much that we dont really need a new arma just for some new stuff. features can be released as free platform update and content as DLC. it would not be worth creating a new arma just for content and featurewise arma is rich. I mean this game offers already so much. Some people are annoying with theyr "can arma 3 have realistic waterwaves please" , "can arma 3 have breakable wings on planes please" , "can arma 3 have physics destruction like battlefield please" , "can arma 3 be like VBS please". GUYS BE HAPPY WITH WHAT ARMA OFFERS TO YOU! YOU WONT SEE THAT IN ANY OTHER GAME! And too much realism = bad for gameplay = less fun. Most of those complex and arcadish features people are wishing here arent really needed in arma, so technically it isnt worth creating a new arma for features/content and graphics in arma 3 are awesome aswell. Graphics also doesnt count, people even play ofp or bf1942 nowadays. A new arma would basically destroy current mods/modders/community, it would be annoying for some modders to port the mods again to make theyr work & ideas into something worth just my 2 cents.
Hi guys, A friend and I have been talking about this quite a bit recently. The only criticism he had about the game was the setting. He felt it was a weird choice to set it slightly in the future he felt it was unnecessary and led to some weird weapons and vehicles. To an extent I agree with him BUT I don't mind It as much. We came to the conclusion that we hope the next one is set in the present day as technology and weapons seem to have come a long way since the arma 2 days and we would enjoy it more. Thays just our opinion. My actual question is what was the developersâ€™ reason for the semi futuristic setting? Do we know anything at all about the future of arma? (Next game etc.) Thanks.
This thread is about what I could see Arma 4 being. I am open to theories etc. Arma 4 would be running on either Unreal 4 or rewritten from the ground up engine wise and otherwise. The engine would use either Vulkan alone or support switching between Vulkan and DX12. Vulkan would be the ideal choice as it is truly cross-platform. The engine would be coded to support subterranean heightmaps and features as well as ponds and flowing water/rivers/waterfalls. The game would be written for Linux and Windows side by side as BI has essentially shot themselves in the foot by not keeping the Linux beta client up to date with the windows client as well as not having Battleye on Linux. This move has stunted any appeal the Linux community has for Arma 3 as they are by en-large, unable to play on the vast majority of Arma 3 servers. The engine would use AMD GPUOpen (or whatever they call it) technologies instead of the Nvidia Gameworks crap as Nvidia's technologies they provide seriously cripples anyone's hardware that is not Nvidia. The engine would use a different Physics engine other than PhysX. something like Bullet for example which is multi-platform. The engine would make use of OpenCL for heavy number crunching tasks. The netcode would be seriously reworked to improve network latency and efficiency. Arma 4 would continue to have the modding tools and community. If the engine was changed to Unreal 4, Vulkan and DX12 support would already exist. As would Linux and Mac support out of the box. The UE4 modding tools are exceptional and vast. Arma 4 would keep the day/night cycles and all the realism features but would add in many of the features found in the similar product known as VBS3 such as the flowing water, rivers, ponds, large models (eg; Royal Navy's Type 45 Destroyer which has full ship walkthrough and fully functional). Arma 4 would replace the aging VON system with an actual radio based system like what ACRE2's omnibus system is where the game server comes with the comms server included and each client automatically launches the comms client. some of the VBS3 features that would be ideal are the procedural snow accumulation which could tie into a rainfall system that links to the water table. This would allow there to be tides etc. Arma 4 should be the ultimate version of Arma.