[Game] ArmA 3, for real

[Dietrich Graf]

I don't think so since afaik the minimum requirements is an i5.

Could be wrong though.

I don't have an i5 and most of the people I play with don't either. I can tell you OA plays much better than Arma2. Then again, it's probably because there is very little vegetation in OA.

Oh look, another ArmA bash-thread.

That sounds strikingly similar to the few OFP: DR fanboys that think it's the greatest game every produced and can't understand why people don't like it.

Since you have zero reading comprehension skills, no one is bashing the Arma series. They are proving feed back to BIS so that they can hopefully correct the features that are holding it back from being great.

 

[The Masta]

They are proving feed back to BIS so that they can hopefully correct the features that are holding it back from being great.

Wouldn't the BIS forums be better for that?

 

[SiC-Disaster]

Since you have zero reading comprehension skills, no one is bashing the Arma series. They are proving feed back to BIS so that they can hopefully correct the features that are holding it back from being great.

Doesnt sound much like feedback, more like raging, and overtly pushing on the negative sides and completely ignoring the many positive sides the game has (and which half of the people suggesting stuff seem to miss because they refuse to play online with an organised group).
Yes, the online play might be a TAD difficult to get into what with the mods and all. However, if you join a group you will only have to download a SINGLE mod most of the time, and getting mods to work is easy, especially after OA introduced a mod selection screen ingame.
Slight hassle, immense fun. But it's easier to be lazy and just rant about it, i guess.

 

[LemoN]

I don't have an i5 and most of the people I play with don't either. I can tell you OA plays much better than Arma2. Then again, it's probably because there is very little vegetation in OA.

Huh?

I'm talking about ArmA3 here, not ArmA2.

 

[Reise]

Am I the only one noticing the new clouds?

Wouldn't that be a treat if rain clouds actually rained on the area they sat over, and you could fly over/in them for cover. Not only that but they seem to look very nice to boot.

It's a small thing but it could bring some awesome changes to gameplay.

 

[Apos]

I've just found this, nice

 

[LemoN]

So, where's that located then?

 

[Zennousha]

Oh look, another ArmA bash-thread. "Bad AI, bugs, poor movement, hurrr hurr". Heard it a thousand times.

If you think having to stop for nearly any action is realistic and not robotic, you don't move around that often. I'm not saying people should shoot rainbows out their freakin' arse and fly over fences, but they shouldn't have to full on stop, and carefully tip toe over it as if their life depended on it.

tl;dr Quit arguing that anyone who didn't like the glaring issues of ARMA are cowadooty loving plebeians that hates realism. You're on a ****ing Red Orchestra forum for christ sakes.

 

[The Masta]

So, where's that located then?

Check the coordinates on the google earth screenshot.

 

[Pvt.pile]

Doesnt sound much like feedback, more like raging, and overtly pushing on the negative sides and completely ignoring the many positive sides the game has (and which half of the people suggesting stuff seem to miss because they refuse to play online with an organised group).
Yes, the online play might be a TAD difficult to get into what with the mods and all. However, if you join a group you will only have to download a SINGLE mod most of the time, and getting mods to work is easy, especially after OA introduced a mod selection screen ingame.
Slight hassle, immense fun. But it's easier to be lazy and just rant about it, i guess.

Sounds like alot of othere threads on here, I find it quite funny when ppl rage on games they havent played EVERYONE knows the problems with ArmA but its still alot of fun whether you play it with freinds or not. It does need a decent rig to be able to enjoy it though and the recommended and min spec are BS tbh.

 

[DraKon2k]

Doesnt sound much like feedback, more like raging, and overtly pushing on the negative sides and completely ignoring the many positive sides the game has (and which half of the people suggesting stuff seem to miss because they refuse to play online with an organised group).
Yes, the online play might be a TAD difficult to get into what with the mods and all. However, if you join a group you will only have to download a SINGLE mod most of the time, and getting mods to work is easy, especially after OA introduced a mod selection screen ingame.
Slight hassle, immense fun. But it's easier to be lazy and just rant about it, i guess.

How is it laziness? The game promised a great big SP campaign, but even the single missions are broken. ArmA1, despite being bug-ridden too, was much more playable and OFP even more. The game doesn't deliver what it claims at the back of the box and afaik I didn't accept an AGB prior to install that asked me to give up my real-life and join a military internet squad instead to walk down empty forest-streets with my squadmates and make it my top-priority in life to defend the game('s flaws) at every cost on an internet forum.

 

[SiC-Disaster]

Oh, how you love to exaggerate.

 

[Xendance]

Nope, you can reload while moving and changing stance, and keep looking over the weapon while changing stance as well. And you can quickly 'dive' towards the ground, hop over a fence, and you have three main speeds of movement, etc.

I stand corrected then. Now I have to reinstall it to check it out :F

 

[Flogger23m]

I stand corrected then. Now I have to reinstall it to check it out :F

In ACE you can no longer move while reloading the M240. I am guessing it is the same for other belt fed weapons. Reloading also takes longer than the rifles. It is a step in the right direction. Hopefully ArmA 3 can fix these little quirks in the default game.

In the default game you can sprint while reloading an M240. Not exactly realistic, and it throws the animations off.

 

[Dwarden]

DX11 is confirmed btw. [url]http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1933404#post1933404[/URL]

p.s. on weekend the OA avg playnumbers are several thousands online at once ...

anyway we are improving the game, so if you want provide feedback do it on our forums (public beta builds) or CIT (Community Issue Tracker)

 

[Flogger23m]

What I would like to know is if the 3D editor will be improved upon and integrated so we can switch from 2D to 3D on the fly. Many times I have thought I was placing structures on flat ground only for it to be hilly.

 

[I. Kant]

Agree. Since the editor/ moddability is one of the main selling points (always has been), it is only natural to expect a proper, robust editor, without having to download a set of community-made tools (some of them external).

On a different note, I have to give Drakon some credit. He does have a point about people crowding a thread about the newest CoDs/whatnots only to express a distilled disguist and the same people expressing righteous indignation when someone dares to enter a thread for a game they like/love/enjoy with somewhat valid criticism (and by "somewhat valid" I mean criticism that has at least a hint, a kernel of truth in it). Just an observation.

Lastly, while I shan't be able to play the game - not in the foreseeable future, at least - it'd be a blast to fly the Havoc... I've always wanted to pilot a flying tank like that, one way or the other. It was a Havoc I spotted in one of the screenies, wasn't it?

 

[The Masta]

It was a Havoc I spotted in one of the screenies, wasn't it?

It's a Mi28/Kamov mixture.

 

[Flogger23m]

Agree. Since the editor/ moddability is one of the main selling points (always has been), it is only natural to expect a proper, robust editor, without having to download a set of community-made tools (some of them external).

The other big change I would like is a loadout menu (think of Raven Shield or GRAW) integrated into the editor. Or at least some type of UI with a drop down menu. I am making "script" loadouts right now for my mission. It is not fun and really slows down the editing process.

Same for IEDs. It would be nice if we could just place them on a map, select an activation radius, choose who sets it off, ect. In the video I saw, you must copy/paste 3-5 different lines of script just to do this.

More GUI and less of the command line stuff in the editor would be great.

It's a Mi28/Kamov mixture.

Fictional mixture.

And Americans with FN 2000s, and what looks like C-More sights (don't think any military actually uses these). Odd choices.

With hope they will keep moddability and they can be replaced with proper weapons, and the fictional helicopter can be replaced with an MI-28... or KA-50.


Edit: We need a more finely tuned first person cover system like seen here:

YouTube - ‪smk's Competitive Gaming Animations - features 0.20 | Back to wall!‬‏

It looks surprisingly fluid in first and third person. At least for the AI. It would make them look less robotic (like they do in all games).

 

[I. Kant]

Ah, that would go a long way towards explaining why it looked a bit odd and cluttered with curious danglies.

I've been thinking about the whole future setting a bit and what the exact reasons behind this rather drastic change had been (given the outrage it is bound to cause and is causing already), you know, and I can't help but think that BIS have become the victims of their own success.
Allow me to explain: with the success of A2 and later OA (note - both of which already had made some forays into the real of fictitious weaponry; I'm looking at you XM8s and Scars) and with the whole engine/ simulation becoming more and more believable, I would reckon that BIS are forced to move away from realistic guns in order to preserve their military clientele.
Naturally, I assume that VBS is a more complete experience anyway, but they'd want to set off the real deal from a customer-grade product.
That, or the CIA told them not to make terrorist training simulators anymore. This is no jest, mind you.