Healthy ArmA 3 Discussion

**viper1986** · 04-14-2012, 07:02 AM

So, I could not find another ArmA 3 related thread to discuss what we thing about ArmA 3 and all the things we want or actually expect to get done correctly in ArmA 3.

1. Not a fan at all about the opfor being Iran. I feel like these day's picking country's that are seen as the "bad guys" makes the game tacky. Maybe it's to make the game have two militarily equal forces with it always coming down to the United States and someone else. I would think that these day's they would just make the game more global friendly in that neither side is identified by country and that more customization is added so that different country's can enjoy the game more. I would like to point the boys to Medal of Honor Warfighters to see how they have adopted this idea.

2. What strategic importance is Greece to Iran? Again I feel like they built a game around picking the largest stories to have been part of the past 3 years.

3. A UI that is intelligent and removes the task bar and selecting different options. Reduce the number of key commands and add the intelligence into the action key dependent on what your near. For instance, if your standing infront of a door, the only option available is open/close. If you by a vehicle you really only need 2 commands and they are to get to the gear or get inside the vehicle. Once inside you can you can use the number pad to switch between driver and gunner. If the driver seat is occupied to get slotted into a passenger seat.

4. I hope that there is a sufficient upgrade to the AI. It would be nice to see them actually use buildings as cover, lean out around corners and actually know how to keep a formation while going through cities, fields, streets, buildings, etc. This would be nice so you don't have to edit these settings in the editor.

**Athanasa** · 04-14-2012, 07:18 AM

As I've said multiple times... ragdoll physics. I hope there's some limit to it, or we'll end up with Bethesda style ragdolls flying off into the sky.

"COMMAND BRAVO. REQUESTING MEDIC AT OUR LOCA-- SCRATCH THAT HE FLEW INTO THE SKY. OVER."

**Hablos** · 04-14-2012, 07:26 AM

1. Agreed. I never understood why there must be a "bad guy". Why not have two sides that both have realistic and believable objectives without condemning either of them as bad? No side in armed conflict throughtout history have ever believed themselves as the "bad guys" after all.

**LowSpeedHighDrag** · 04-14-2012, 01:14 PM

Woof reminded me of AA years back where no matter which side you played it always showed as BLUFOR.
Clever in many levels.

I suppose they wanted to sell using content.

Looking forward to it nevertheless.

Sent from my phone

**ChiefBoatsRet** · 04-14-2012, 09:58 PM

I just want it optimtized better with cool new stuff and maps. I don't play the single player missions so I don't care what they dreamed up for that. I am sure it will be fine for most and the haters will continue with their part. I guess we will see when the community beta comes out, I will buy it to help support BIS because I think they have supported this game so well.

**Balfa** · 04-15-2012, 09:24 PM

Originally Posted by viper1986

1. Not a fan at all about the opfor being Iran. I feel like these day's picking country's that are seen as the "bad guys" makes the game tacky.

Who says the US are the good guys? I haven't really played arma single player much, but I played the hell out of single player on operation flashpoint and its expansions. When I was playing the society campaign, the US definitely want the good guys

However, I get your point. I just like to point out, when the opportunity presents itself, that there's more than just an americentric point of view.

Sent via Crapatalk 2. Please excuse the typos.

**AdeptAbyss** · 04-15-2012, 09:45 PM

yeah problem is, its not good guy vs bad guy here, its America vs another country.

Problem is people always jump on the America is the good guy saving the world from the bad guy band wagon. In the BIS world maybe Russia is actually the good guy and America is bad, and remember this is a BIS world, its close to the same as the real world but a little different for better story writing

but anyway that aside for it shouldn't have any affect on the game anyway.

I'm hoping they improve the animations, movement of infantry etc, and of course better flight mechanics

**Dredge** · 04-15-2012, 10:12 PM

Wonder if they will ever fix the AI voice? Enemy MAN at....200..HUNDRED..meters

**Athanasa** · 04-15-2012, 10:18 PM

So tempted to make missions where you flip around traditional BLUFOR and OPFOR... but I think some people might get offended, somehow.

**AdeptAbyss** · 04-16-2012, 12:34 AM

Originally Posted by Dredge

Wonder if they will ever fix the AI voice? Enemy MAN at....200..HUNDRED..meters

Fix?? thats a feature!

**Andy** · 04-16-2012, 01:32 AM

1. I like to see they are going to build in good Physics (with PhysX), and I'am really happy about the "Live Texture rendering". The ragdoll stuff and the new weapons-system also looks very nice.
But I hope they maybe change the desgin of the "Scroll-Wheel-Menue", because sometimes its really hard to "hit-the-right-thing". Maybe something like a "wheel" with all the options?
Also it would be awesome if they could add more working instruments into Vehicles and planes/helicopters, so you could actually use them when flying. Maybe they could even build in some working "Start-up" switches like in "Take-On Helicopters".

2. I hope they improve the AI and make them "more intellegent", so they could use the world as dynamic cover, moving in proper formations etc.

3. Hopefully they are going to make a nice Campain. I haven't ever played ArmA 2 Singleplayer, but from what I heard its not very good.
Maybe they could build in some more fractions like Germany, France, Britain etc.

4. The Animations could be improved, but for me its not that important, because the animations are okay in ArmA 2.

I'm really looking forward to ArmA 3, and I hope the ACE/ACRE mods will be available for ArmA 3, too xD

PS: Oh yeah, they really need to change the AI-voices.

**Balfa** · 04-16-2012, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by Athanasa

So tempted to make missions where you flip around traditional BLUFOR and OPFOR... but I think some people might get offended, somehow.

My point is, have you ever considered that not flipping the roles might offend some people? It's crazy how blind societies can sometimes be to the concept that a world view different to their own is even possible.

Sent via Crapatalk 2. Please excuse the typos.

**Athanasa** · 04-16-2012, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by Balfa

My point is, have you ever considered that not flipping the roles might offend some people?

Definitely. But for all it might offend some people, most seem to take the view of, "That's just how it is" and don't try to change it... Tempted to make one where BAF invades Chernarus or something (simply because I can legit use BAF rather than US forces because I am british, and so people can't take as much offence... right?).

Thing is, if you start flipping stuff around, you've got to be VERY careful you don't step on toes. For example, people see it as perfectly acceptable to have patrol missions etc where you sweep villages for insurgents etc as 'BLUFOR'. But if you flipped it around and played as the insurgents fighting (in their view) to defend their village, suddenly it can get offensive. I'm still dancing around with my words for this, trying to be polite.

**AdeptAbyss** · 04-16-2012, 04:48 PM

I kind of feel that people need to relax a little and remember its a game, if you don't like the idea of fighting x army using y army don't play that mission, there are plenty of people who don't care about shooting pixels and would rather not lose out on playing a certain army or way just because someone got upset.