[Game] ArmA 3, for real

[The Masta]

Originally Posted by Razvanss

When you advance with a game....1,2,3 or 4 you must bring some new futures not anly the graphichs or vehicles.....from the videos this I can only call it a MOD!!!

How about you judge the final product and not an alpha?

[Cyper]

Originally Posted by Borkac

everything

With other words; you don't have a clue what's bad with the game since you can't explain it.

Originally Posted by Borkac

Arma 3 GamesCom Presentation part 8 - YouTube
look at the shooting lol so bad

Well, Its going to be the most realistic wargame game you can get your hands on. No other games can match it in terms of realism. The military simulator VBS wouldn't exist unless operation flashpoint / arma wasn't developed. Its as close you can get unless you would buy VBS2 or any other military simulator.

[Xendance]

I don't understand why they have to make the ironsight wobble while walking thing so extreme. It doesn't look like that in real life because your brains can compensate for it :|
In the vid it just looks annoying and makes me sick.

[Rak]

Originally Posted by Xendance

I don't understand why they have to make the ironsight wobble while walking thing so extreme. It doesn't look like that in real life because your brains can compensate for it :|
In the vid it just looks annoying and makes me sick.

But, it is only an ALPHA!!!111 . . .

Seriously, we all know the final game will be exactly like above video. That's how BIS works. Improve graphics, add some gimmicky features that nobody will use and don't touch the gameplay issues.

Though, to their credit they introduced reloading while running for ArmA 2. Now, that was an incredible step forward for a 2009 game isn't it?

[mrPuma]

Originally Posted by Rak

But, it is only an ALPHA!!!111 . . .

Seriously, we all know the final game will be exactly like above video. That's how BIS works. Improve graphics, add some gimmicky features that nobody will use and don't touch the gameplay issues.

Though, to their credit they introduced reloading while running for ArmA 2. Now, that was an incredible step forward for a 2009 game isn't it?

i think they`re been focusing improving they`re engine on the course of arma 2 develompent, not so much on gameplay changes. i think we see plenty of those in arma 3. btw the engine is coming along nicely, many bugs have been fixed in the 1.60 update not to mention preformance increase. and people have reported 100+ human players on 1 server working really well.

hats off to BIS for driving the PC gaming to whole new levels

[LugNut]

I always find it amusing how people expect ARMA to play like the linear, shoebox game they are used to, and criticize it because it is not. It's a huge freakin realistic environment, you can do whatever you want, find the "gameplay" mod that suits you, make your own gametypes if you are so inclined. Try it. Like it, hate it, whatever, just don't expect it to play like another FPS. It's not the same animal.

[Xendance]

Originally Posted by LugNut

I always find it amusing how people expect ARMA to play like the linear, shoebox game they are used to, and criticize it because it is not. It's a huge freakin realistic environment, you can do whatever you want, find the "gameplay" mod that suits you, make your own gametypes if you are so inclined. Try it. Like it, hate it, whatever, just don't expect it to play like another FPS. It's not the same animal.

Wishing it had better weapon handling is not the same as saying I want it to be a linear shoebox game.

[Cyper]

Well, depends on how you criticize I guess.

Because some consider the weaponhandling in BF3 as good. But these opinions rarely comes in terms of realism but from how practical it feels. Has nothing to do with arma. So without an argument to why, criticizing doesn't really tell much. What makes good weapon handling? What has to be improved in the current one? - or rather, what makes the weaponhandling realistic because that's what is important. Realism is priority one.

There is so much that goes into arma that other games completely miss. Despite the somehow clumsy movements this is mostly because the game uses realistic motion captured animations. How the game is built is totally different from any other games. Stuff like weapon discharge effects, sounds effects, accurate tracer ratio, accurate starscape, variable sea states, accurate moon phases (and how it affects visibility at night), simulated pupil reactions (for instance; when you look into a light source) proper weapon modelling and range etc, proper speed of sound modelling (for instance: you can see an exposion before you hear it) and sound occlusion (which makes sound be affected by the surrounding landscape).

Then there is a lot that goes into that. Bullet drop is for instance dependent on the caliber, and you have to calculate muzzle velocities (how fast the bullet travels when it leaves the gun and how much speed it lose for each meter). The bullet impact is also modelled, and how the ricochet occurs is regarding of surface (grass, stone, concrete etc) and the angle of the impact.

The you have the huge maps with 10,000km draw distance, and rendering of everything that's in it, aswell all set waypoints, the AI:s ability to be autonomous while you play, changing weather, and often huge amounts of NPCs, vehicles and all that. I can't imagine myself how much that goes into all of it. I do realize that it must be incredible hard to work with a game like that since everything has to be tested. And before anyone say that these things are not important, these are the things that the community care about. Even with all this its not enough and thats why increased realism mods like ACE exist.

There is no wonder arma is filled with bugs. What I hope most for with Arma 3 is that they manage to decrease the system requirements as much as possible and really push away a lot of bugs and glitches which will occur. Because there is no doubt the whole arma series is far from perfect. But I respect that. Operation Flashpoint: Cold war Crisis was released back in 2001, and it was far more innovative, bigger and way more advanced than Battlefield 1942, despite the fact that 90% of the game was created by a bunch of roughly 10-12 guys. BIS doesn't have the same economy as Rockstar Games, Activision or any other huge company and thats about it.

[Murphy]

I'm glad the game simulates moon-phases, because when I'm stumbling about in my soldier-mech and I struggle for 15 seconds just to get through a door and then I shift back and forth behind a window constantly just to get a semblance of a clear view through it I can then notice how things are (accurately) two lumen brighter because of the moon phase!
I can't turn on the lights in the room though because there are no light switches. But the moon is accurately bright!

Now that's what I call a simulation! Sure, players can't really aim through or over cover and it takes a few frustrating tries to reposition yourself so you can look past a tree while prone, but should they fire anyway the riccochet is going to bounce off concrete with 47.3906 joules less than off metal!
They can be glad about that while they're stuck in the tree trunk when they want to get up again.

[Xendance]

Originally Posted by Cyper

Well, depends on how you criticize I guess.

Because some consider the weaponhandling in BF3 as good. But these opinions rarely comes in terms of realism but from how practical it feels. Has nothing to do with arma. So without an argument to why, criticizing doesn't really tell much. What makes good weapon handling? What has to be improved in the current one? - or rather, what makes the weaponhandling realistic because that's what is important. Realism is priority one.

I think BF 3 has more realistic weapon handling than ArmA 1 and 2. I haven't really analyzed my opinion but it seemed (I'm not talking about damage/accuracy mechanics, just the way weapons seen to handle) closer to what it was firing an RK-62 in the finnish defense forces.

[mrPuma]

ahh forget it guys, you have clearly decided what you think of the game, so ill just let it be

[Flogger23m]

Originally Posted by Xendance

Wishing it had better weapon handling is not the same as saying I want it to be a linear shoebox game.

This. BIS makes some improvements, but they are pretty poorly done and really not that good. For example, moving while reloading was added into ArmA 2. That is realistic, but who can sprint while reloading a belt fed MG in 2 seconds?

The animation and ragdoll system will probably be similar. They will probably fix the "switch to a rocket launcher, but switch to a pistol, then back to the rifle, and finally to the rocket launcher" bug and maybe tweak some running animations but I am going to assume the weapons will still have no animations. The ragdolls might exist, but they will probably be of the quality of CS:S where a grenade sends a body flying through the air.

I hope they make large changes for ArmA 3, hence why they are delaying the game more. But I have strong doubts. BIS has a habit of taking more than they can chew.

The quicker they drop the "war/battlefield simulator" marketing phrase and admit the game is infantry based with vehicles thrown in, the better off we will all be.

[Rattler]

My main concern is the game optimization. If they optimize the game this time, I may get it.

[[Mad_Murdock]]

Originally Posted by Flogger23m

but I am going to assume the weapons will still have no animations.

Is this really so gamebreaking for people? I am not judging or anything, but ive played ArmA2 with ACE for as long as its been out, and after a little while i didnt even notice this anymore compared to what the game has to offer. Like Cyper said, there is so much there that "weapons have bad animations" seems like the utmost form of nitpicking to me.

[Flogger23m]

Originally Posted by [Mad_Murdock]

Is this really so gamebreaking for people? I am not judging or anything, but ive played ArmA2 with ACE for as long as its been out, and after a little while i didnt even notice this anymore compared to what the game has to offer. Like Cyper said, there is so much there that "weapons have bad animations" seems like the utmost form of nitpicking to me.

For a 2012-2013 game I'd say it is a pretty big lacking. To put it simply, anti tank soldiers have an unrealistically high rate of fire which unrealistically makes them more effective against armor than they should be. For a simulator, this needs to be corrected. Even BF3's anti tank soldiers have a more realistic volume of fire against vehicles...

And that was just one example. I can go on and on, squad control menu, AI, mission editor, ect.

[LugNut]

i didnt even notice this anymore compared to what the game has to offer.

Arma's not perfect, far from it, but it does so many things right that other games don't even attempt, I can put up with the things that are odd or broken. The isn't another game/sim that provides a more realistic long range infantry combat experience.

You never know, maybe BIS is finally getting that the fact that the only way to break out of their narrow market is to improve the most glaring, off putting issues for most people. Optimization, crappy MP experience out of the box and complexity. We'll see what they improve with A3 once a beta is released.....

[luciferintears]

Originally Posted by Xendance

I don't understand why they have to make the ironsight wobble while walking thing so extreme. It doesn't look like that in real life because your brains can compensate for it :|
In the vid it just looks annoying and makes me sick.

it was probably a design decision to ensure that players dont run around shooting people; it slows the game down.

sometimes you got to put in unrealistic features to end up with a more realistic outcome.

[Apos]

http://www.arma3.com/report-in-animations-interview/

Arma 3 - 'Stratis' Teaser - YouTube

[Heisenberg]

Nice graphics, but why do they should off 3rd person animations? Like that's the real issue with ArmA

[Pvt.pile]

Like that's the real issue with ArmA

I know this has been argued and discussed to death on these forums and the BIS forums but am I the only that doesn't give a fuk about the 3rd person animations?