#3840845 - 09/23/13 02:26 PM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: Jayhawk]
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 357
gatordev
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 357
|
The only things that really bug me at the moment are the lack of a single player campaign (to be fixed soon), and that they still haven't removed the "pistol bug" (AI get's "stuck" when switching to sidearm), which has been present since the first Arma.
I'll have to keep my eye open for this, but have you actually seen this happen? Yep, twice so far, albeit in user-generated missions, not in the official showcases. Interesting. I ran a little experiment where I put 4 dudes in a Blackhawk armed only with their M9s. The Blackhawk had M4s in it. I had each one get out and grab a M4 via the inventory option and all of them transitioned to the M4. Then I had a couple of them shoot each other via the "Target"/"Fire" commands and they all used the M4. I didn't switch between them, though, so I'll keep an eye open for it.
|
|
#3844221 - 10/01/13 03:04 PM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: Tyco]
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 164
Polarwolf
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 164
Reutlingen, Baden-Württemberg,...
|
And I could also say that there are people like you that have a very odd concept of "realistic" or "realism"! There's nothing "realistic" or "realism" about the Mi-48 (that mix between Mi-28, Ka-50 and Mi-24) or a Comanche in front line service..
I really dont understand why people have such a hard time with the Mi-48? Combining the combat ability of a Havok with the functionality of Hind makes perfect sense, and from a Russian perspective realistic. I would not be, at all, surprised if there was a concept design for something similar to the Mi-48 kicking around at Mil. Except that the Russians gave up on the Concept of the Air Assault Helicopter more than a decade ago? Look at it, there are no Hind replacements designed and no Hind replacement is ordered. Only old Hinds get replaced by newer ones. As that Helicopter would be less maneuverable than a pure attack helicopter, and couldn't carry as many troops as a Utility Helo. It's a compromise. Another question would be, if that thing could actually fly IRL, and that's the first time I ever had to ask that concerning Arma. And if you'll have to ask yourself that question, the believeability of the Concept is shot. Ok it's a helo, so it's mainly up the the rotorblades to keep that thing flying. But the fuselage has a big impact on the Flight characteristics, and what I'm asking myself is: "Could that thing being flown in a tactically viable manner? Or would the flight characteristics kill the bird in flight testing already?" They're asking you to make a suspension of disbelief here, something never before done in Arma. The Cobra, we knew it can fly, like the Hind, the Havoc, the Apache, and even the Comanche, we know that it can fly. There is proof that they can fly in the real world. The Mi-48? Not so much. Also has the OKB Mil ever designed a Koaxial rotor helicopter? Calling that thing Mil, when koaxial's are universally associated with Kamov is a bad design decision. Oh and another thing, the Mi-48's flight characteristics don't feel like a Koaxial rotor helicopter, but rather like those of a convential Helicopter with one Main and one Tail rotor. I know this might be bordering on necromancy, but I thought he should know on what some of the objections to the Mi-48 could be based, or are based in my case.
What Comes before a Good simulator landing? The Bad ones!^^ If you keep your humor, you will make it through the darkest of valleys.
|
|
#3844466 - 10/01/13 09:17 PM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: redpiano]
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 500
TankerWade
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 500
Portsmouth, NH
|
But it looks really cool and carries like, a bunch of guys into combat.
Got a sweet gun in the front too.
Everybody gets everything they want. I wanted a mission. And for my sins..they gave me one.
|
|
#3844898 - 10/02/13 06:09 PM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: redpiano]
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 298
Apocalypse31
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 298
|
Going back to the original posts' sentiment. I will say that for me Steel Beasts 3.0 has been an absolute ArmA killer. Since it's release, I've probably logged 2-3 times more playtime in SB than ArmA.
The SB mission editor is the best I've seen in any game and doesn't require a PH.D to produce missions - even highly complex, scripted missions.
I've been playing ArmA since OFP (1999) and the editor still blows my mind; Why is it so difficult to create even a simple mission. A good number of features in the mission editor don't work correctly, and haven't since ArmA 1.
"But what about graphics?" you say! The new graphical improvements for SB 3.0 are simply amazing and although they're not nearly as detailed as ArmA 3, they work.
Rangers Lead the Way
|
|
#3844940 - 10/02/13 07:16 PM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: redpiano]
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 664
near_blind
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 664
|
If BI charged $145+ for Arma, I would expect the editor to be streamlined while possessing ALL the things.. As it is, I'm pretty pleased with the return on my $35 dollar investment.
Off to greener pastures
|
|
#3844987 - 10/02/13 08:09 PM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: Apocalypse31]
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 500
TankerWade
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 500
Portsmouth, NH
|
That does sound great! So in SB you can place playable infantry assets, playable helicopter assets, and playable aircraft assets, all very easily?
How about missions where a spec ops team sneaks into a FARP and destroys fuel trucks with Helicopter gunship support? Is it just drag and drop? Is there a wizard that leads you through the process so anyone can do it?
So you are saying that you can create playable combined arms PvP missions that include infantry roles with different loadouts, Helicopter roles with different airframes types and missions requirements, and air components covering both air to air and ground attack, all playable, on both sides, with multiple different objectives, all fairly easily in the editor? That sounds fantastic!
Please.
I am glad that you are having a fantastic time in SB 3.0 and it does look very cool. But they are different games right? They are vastly different in scope and purpose aren't they? You're not thinking different kinds of fruit, at all?
I mean, if we are going to talk about features that are missing in Arma, is SB 3.0 really the game to compare it to?
Maybe I need to go down to the SB forum and constantly ask when I am going get to carry a rifle in game? I wonder what the response would be to that..
Everybody gets everything they want. I wanted a mission. And for my sins..they gave me one.
|
|
#3845055 - 10/02/13 09:47 PM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: Tyco]
|
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 49,716
Jedi Master
Entil'zha
|
Entil'zha
Sierra Hotel
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 49,716
Space Coast, USA
|
Polarwolf Im not sure that the Russians have given up on the concept of an air assault helicopter. I suspect the current budgetary constraints of the Russian military prevent an real replacement for the hind being made. Look at the KA-50s and the MI-28s. They were designed in the 80s and are really just being introduced into service in any kind of numbers.
That being said, I agree with you completely that it should have been at least named a Kamov and not a Mil and that the in-game handling characteristics feel completely unrealistic. Well, given the upheaval in the Russian aerospace sector post-Soviet collapse, I don't find it that odd that in a couple of decades the two might have enough cross-pollination of designers to get coaxial designs out of Mil. As for handling, nothing in OFP or Arma that flies has ever felt "right" to me. The Jedi Master
The anteater is wearing the bagel because he's a reindeer princess. -- my 4 yr old daughter
|
|
#3845110 - 10/02/13 11:16 PM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: Tyco]
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 164
Polarwolf
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 164
Reutlingen, Baden-Württemberg,...
|
Polarwolf Im not sure that the Russians have given up on the concept of an air assault helicopter. I suspect the current budgetary constraints of the Russian military prevent an real replacement for the hind being made. Look at the KA-50s and the MI-28s. They were designed in the 80s and are really just being introduced into service in any kind of numbers.
That being said, I agree with you completely that it should have been at least named a Kamov and not a Mil and that the in-game handling characteristics feel completely unrealistic. Well true, they might've not fully given up on the concept. As for budgetary constraints, well I'm sure the russians are facing them as much as the others. As you see with in the recent upgrading they are doing to their forces, a lot of old machines get modernized, while the newer ones only arrive in small batches. As for the Mi-28 and the Ka-50/52, well I think the reason they are introduced now instead of a newer model, is that after the upheaval of the ninties, they have finally matured and the russians don't want to waste the money invested into those projects. Well choosing the Ka-52 over the Ka-50 is the sensible approach imho, as the Pilot of the Ka-50 would've been really task saturated. Well, given the upheaval in the Russian aerospace sector post-Soviet collapse, I don't find it that odd that in a couple of decades the two might have enough cross-pollination of designers to get coaxial designs out of Mil.
As for handling, nothing in OFP or Arma that flies has ever felt "right" to me.
The Jedi Master
Well, you're right Jedi Master, no aircraft in Arma, be it rotary- or fixed-wing has ever felt quite right. And Kamov and Mil sharing designs is definately a posibility. However, I distinctly remember BIS talking about how they wanted to bring the Arma FM to Take On Helicopters's level. Now nothing like that happened, I see a definite improvement over how they handle compared to Arma 2 OA, but not even the slightest difference between two fundamentally different helo Types. If BI charged $145+ for Arma, I would expect the editor to be streamlined while possessing ALL the things.. As it is, I'm pretty pleased with the return on my $35 dollar investment. So if we payed more we could expect a better editor, near_blind? Let's see, I bought my Arma 2 Copy used (25 Euros), OA new (35 Euros), BAF and PMC (21 Euros), ACR (Another 10 Euros). That makes around 91 Euros for Arma 2 OA, if I would've bought it new that would've been 111 Euros, another 25 for Arma 3. Hence, by your logic, we would deserve a better editor. I don't see much change in it, compared to the Arma 2 editor. Scripting for example is still to be done outside the editor. BTW don't get me started about the DCS editor, and it's triggers. The way they handle that, is definately worse than Arma, much worse. Just to show that Arma, and a lot of other games of today, especially sims aren't as cheap as the first glance seems to suggest. (Examples: FSX+Addons, Trainsimulator 2013-14 , X-Plane+addons, DCS World) BTW, the Arma 2 Addons were worth their money, as all the content could be used in multiplayer and to make new missions. Especially if I compare the Arma DLCs to a lot of other games DLC's. Steel Beasts is afaik pay once and get all the updates. For that, 145 Dollars/Euros (115 at the moment) would definately be fair.
What Comes before a Good simulator landing? The Bad ones!^^ If you keep your humor, you will make it through the darkest of valleys.
|
|
#3845308 - 10/03/13 11:21 AM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: Taosenai]
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 164
Polarwolf
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 164
Reutlingen, Baden-Württemberg,...
|
Who the heck wants to write complex scripts inside a video game's editor text box? I'm using a proper development environment with syntax highlighting, autocomplete, Vi-style key commands, regex find and replace, Git/version control integration, etc. to develop for Arma 3, and thank goodness for it.
I can't imagine having to work within the confines of a game's editor. Simply dreadful.
Well for one thing I wrote this in regards to the days when Arma 2 didn't like to alt-tab too much, when it often lead to a crash. Several other sims have that problem too, DCS isn't too happy if you do it for example. And I meant the scripting option not for complex scripting like mods, but rather for small simpler scripts that are needed for mission making. Small stuff like the ammo box scripts and such. Not the complex ones. It also would be nice to save the scripts as templates and you'll just klick on, say "ammo box" and it would copy the script into the mission. Same for complex scripts, write them in your programm, import them into arma, save them as template in the Arma editor, and the next time you'll need them, you simply klick on the template to import it. Like the templates in Lightroom. Using templates would streamline mission editing. BTW I know that it is possible to keep scripts as templates, by saving and copying the script files. The Idea is just an idea towards streamlining the process and making it a bit more comfortable. The way it is handled right now is already better than some others, the way triggers are handled in the DCS Editor is worse. There you'll have to build the trigger-chain new every time! Let's not get started on the Editor/Dispatcher of the Trainsimulator/Railworks, the dispatcher is bloody stupid and the AI non-existant. So these are just a few ideas for improvement. Edit: A friend who has been making missions told me that he would also like something like a graphical editor for the loadout instead of scripting the loadout. His main problem where the new attachements. Something like this: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=15766If the community made something like this, why can't Bohemia?
Last edited by Polarwolf; 10/03/13 11:35 AM.
What Comes before a Good simulator landing? The Bad ones!^^ If you keep your humor, you will make it through the darkest of valleys.
|
|
#3845318 - 10/03/13 11:49 AM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: TankerWade]
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 298
Apocalypse31
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 298
|
That does sound great! So in SB you can place playable infantry assets, playable helicopter assets, and playable aircraft assets, all very easily? Yes How about missions where a spec ops team sneaks into a FARP and destroys fuel trucks with Helicopter gunship support? Is it just drag and drop? Is there a wizard that leads you through the process so anyone can do it? Certainly possible. So you are saying that you can create playable combined arms PvP missions that include infantry roles with different loadouts, Helicopter roles with different airframes types and missions requirements, and air components covering both air to air and ground attack, all playable, on both sides, with multiple different objectives, all fairly easily in the editor? That sounds fantastic! I would say that SB is closer to a true combined arms game than ArmA. Yeah, the infantry is crude, but they're working it. But they are different games right? They are vastly different in scope and purpose aren't they? You're not thinking different kinds of fruit, at all? Lets be serious, SB's infantry are probably just as bad as ArmA's tanks.
Rangers Lead the Way
|
|
#3845456 - 10/03/13 04:19 PM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: redpiano]
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 763
Punisher5555
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 763
Cleveland, Ohio
|
Any clue on when we can download mods via Steam like we do with missions?
3 Samsung 27" LED Monitors powered by a Zotac 4GB 680GTX. Set at PCI Gen3. 5760 x 1080 resolution. MSI z68a-gd80 (g3) motherboard Ivy Bridge 3770k 3.5Ghz 32GB RAM (all .pbo's loaded into a 12GB RamDisk) TrackIR4 zboard merc keyboard Saitek X-52 stick/throttle/pedals Logitech MOMO racing wheel/pedals Razer Deathadder 3500 black mouse Sony receiver for 5.1 surround sound. 5 speakers and powered sub-woofer.
|
|
#3845509 - 10/03/13 06:18 PM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: Apocalypse31]
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 245
Tyco
ArmA3 Mission Maker
|
ArmA3 Mission Maker
Member
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 245
Westerly
|
I would say that SB is closer to a true combined arms game than ArmA. Yeah, the infantry is crude, but they're working it.
I think you may be off the mark with that statement. Don't get me wrong I enjoy SB. Armor combat is one of my favorite things. SB is amazing in that regard but it is not even close to what ArmA is able to do. In SB I bet you have never had to unbutton in the middle of a city so that you can talk to the infantry that has approached you to plan your next move (I believe that may have actually happened between Tankerwade and myself). You have never seen a FAC call in coordinates and lase a target for a player flying CAP overhead. Yes SB offers combined arms but, it is only really on one level; Tanks. ArmA's combined arm has players sitting front and center for every aspect. It is truly alive with individuals' decisions effecting everything. It may not be the perfect simulation but it is pretty darn good.
|
|
#3845744 - 10/04/13 03:30 AM
Re: Not feeling it with ArmA 3 anymore.
[Re: redpiano]
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 298
Apocalypse31
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 298
|
I gotcha. Both games have some significant shortfalls. Personally, my hunt for the most balanced combined arms game continues...finding relative joy in Wargame: Airland Battle, although not a hybrid and no mission making abilities. :-(
Last edited by Apocalypse31; 10/04/13 03:31 AM.
Rangers Lead the Way
|
|
|
|