- User Since
- Dec 14 2013, 10:07 AM (533 w, 20 h)
May 10 2016
Gas canisters usually don't explode when shot.
The stance adjustment in Arma III is brilliant. It would be great, especially for first person servers.
I agree with this suggestion. Also add batons. They will have a high chance of knocking people out without causing much damage, and have a change to break bones if you hit a player's legs.
I think the reason BI will never directly implement a mod into the game is because mods are often script heavy, while BIs own stuff is coded directly into the engine.
I have the same problem, also G35 headset.
Helicopters aren't simple machines. Lose focus for a second and it will roll over and kill you.
In the flight simulator Digital Combat Simulator (DCS) you can fly a very realistic simulation of both the UH-1 Huey and the Russian Black Shark. Both require controller input when taking off or else you will crash withing seconds.
You can trim it out (calibrate the center of the controller input) to avoid having to do this though, something that is not present in ArmA.
While I'm not sure about the Orca, some helicopters don't take off straight up without input from the pilot. In other words, it might be intended for you to counter the backwards movement.
(Not up or down voting, just stating the possibility of it being intended).
Yes, I would also like this to get fixed.
Those "markings" are explosive cords that would shatter the canopy before ejection. The Harrier need this since the pilot might have to eject while in a hover where no wind resistence can help the canopy get out of the way before the pilot is ejected.
The A-10, or A-164 does not need these explosive cords, so adding them would feel unrealistic.
Not down-voting, just stating some facts.
As far as I understand, the Macer missiles are based on the real-life AGM-65 Maverick missiles, which are usually not laser guided (There are laser guided versions I think, but most Maverick missiles are video/camera-guided)
Confirmed. This has to be fixed.
Upvoted. It is very annoying when trying to design certain missions.
I'd rather use the push-to-talk (or ACRE, in my case) and scream/swear/complain myself.
The less noise your character makes, the better.
It makes for good roleplay if you play with friends/a community.
(Not downvoting, just saying).
I'm not educated in aerodynamics or anything similar, but isn't torque also produced by the fact that the center of lift and center of mass aren't in the same place on the aircraft?
This needs to be fixed. Upvote.
Freexavier, 3D artists do not fix many of the issues that ArmA 3 suffers from.
If we assume the adapted male to female model would have full combat gear on, I'd reckon that you'd get away with it.
Women do move in a different way than men due to slightly different bone structure (and probably other physical reasons too), but as a compromise, I guess that you could get away with that too.
The problems start appearing if the model is wearing lighter gear or common clothes (as civilians). It would be quite noticable.
A lot of assumptions in those money calculations.
I doubt that it would take a programmer (or whoever manages the configs), who has worked on ArmA every workday for many years, to implement another 3D-model into the game. I'd guess there would be a lot of copy-pasting and switching out different lines here and there to reference different models, rigs, animations and textures.
The artist would not change the male models. They would make new models from scratch (Believe me or not, it would be easier). An artist would be needed for the 3D model itself, probably another for the textures, and a third (and probably fourth depending on how they work), for a animation rig + animations.
Keep in mind that Bohemia use motion capture, so they don't sit and hand animate everything for a million of hours.
Bohemia did a lot of motion capture for DayZ Standalone earlier as well. I doubt the don't know how to do it efficiently by now.
This is where the heavy work is required.
Voice actors would have to record a whole soundboard ( "Enemy" "At" "8 o'clock" ) and so on.
That config and script-part... What? Keep 5 people busy for a month? Are you real?
It takes minutes to reconfigure items in arma for new additions to a mod. Even if you have to go around the, actually not so large, assortment of items and equipment in ArmA, it would not take 5 people a month.
As for QA, they would check for animation bugs. It's a new model, not a entirely new character code.
Game development is expensive, but I think that you are imagining the most expensive possible case.
Keep in mind that this is for a new graphical asset. Doing this will not take time away from making the game more stable at it's core.
Sure, there are a lot of extra work to adapt all the gear for the new female model, but that would apply to a mod anyway. They could start with a basic set of gear, and expand on it as they go.
Now that Tanoa is about to be released, I'm sure there are a lot of available graphics artist anyway.
"due to the fact that it is already implemented by a mod, why should BI care then?"
You can say that about everything in ArmA. Mods fill the game to the brim with content. Bohemia can implement things that mods can't though. Like the weapon resting system and sling loading (sure, those were in mods too, but they looked horrible).
But Bohemia also has artists that do assets. So it's mostly a question of what asset prioritize, not if you're going to make something or not.
Why should they make campaigns or missions if there is an editor available? The people who make those are getting payed too! There are even voice acting, and A TON of custom animations for the campaign, and most people doesn't even bother with it at all! (I did, and I actually liked it). What an outrage!
"more or less wasting money to implement the same a mod already did?"
Again, bipods and sling loading. They just made it look prettier. It's the same thing. They even borrowed a programmer from VBS, if I recall correctly, to do the code for the sling loading. Something which wouldn't be required for just adding new 3D-models for a character. They are not exploring new ground by implementing a new 3D-character model like they did with bipods and sling loading, or even the fire from vehicles function.
What should they else be doing? The most important thing would be new terrains. Imagine how much stuff there is on Tanoa that is new? Do you really think that making a female playable model would be such a big deal amongst that ton of fully textured 3D-models that they just made for the expansion?
"in arma is a ton of stuff still to be added and researched fe. how to improove the performance on multi-core systems"
How would making 3D-models and implementing them even slow down the improvement of game perfomance? Game engine programmers do not (necessarily) implement assets into the game.
I'm not putting a gun towards the heads of Bohemia and telling them to make female models. I asking them if they can, and have time for it.
Again, yes, there are a lot of resources required to make a female playable model, but not in the entire scope of the whole ArmA project.
Bohemia has no publisher, and as such, they get to keep all that sweet money they make.
Also, keep in mind that 9 women do not create a baby in 1 month. Just because they "sacrifice" one 3D artist to do a new human model, doesn't neccesarily mean that <Insert thing you think is more important> gets done in a less timely fashion.
Edit: I should really stop feeding the trolls though, as someone above mentioned. Wasting my time here.
X39: You're a good lesson on how to not get your point across, calling people in this thread retarded SJWs, and then proceed to teach them an alleged lesson about game design.
Yes. There would be a lot of work required. I like how you made a list of three points that say the exact same thing, just using different words to pad that list.
There are female arma players. I can't phantom the cave you must live in. It must be nice. Oh, wait. You meant that you don't know any female arma players, therefore there are no arma players?
Your only real argument is valid, that it would eat resources, sure. If you think about it, consider this feature-request as just that. A request if Bohemia has time. In the end, it's up to them.
Freexavier, since there are script commands that can set a certain identity, face, voice and such on characters, I'm sure you'll be fine.
You guys are not even trying anymore. That is just straight up trolling.
To be honest, I think some of you make this more of a problem than it would really be.
Advantages of having female player models in ArmA:
• Diversity amongst civilians, story scenarios in missions, and even soldiers.
• Female players can play their own gender if they so wish. You go on about male players using female models as being a bad thing, yet right now, female players must play as male models. Isn't that hypocritical?
Disadvantages of having female player models in ArmA:
• Would take a great deal of resources for Bohemia to create that could be otherwise spend on gameplay feature issues.
The whole "people will take advantage of this" is not a REAL problem, nor a valid argument against implementing this as a feature, in my opinion.
Right now, I don't think female player models should be a high priority issue to fix, but if Bohemia find time and resources, they should, yet again in my opinion, add it to ArmA III.
disc: Thanks you for your very supporting and sarcastic rows of text. I see how you are totally seeing my point and staying on the subject as well. Those word you put in my mouth to twist my message is also appriciated. Always is. Now all the fine people here can, in an even easier and mature fashion, get what I'm trying to say. Such a nice community we got here.
Why not add nuclear bombs while were deep into this discussion? They are realistic. Why not add gibbing of soldiers when they explode. People do that in real life! Oh, and what you wrote on child soldier. Why not? I mean, as long as the community here wants it to be added to ArmA 3. Haven't seen much talk about it though, so I guess not.
Oh wait, this is a suggestion thread on whether people want to add female 3d-models to the game, like in Arma 2, or not. I guess staying on the subject could be a good thing, so never mind. We can return to our fine discussion about child soldier when there a dedicated issue where most people seem to like them addded to a game like ArmA. See you then!
I want to also take the time to thank all of the hilarious sexist jokes above. Especially those "Get back in the kitchen" and 'bouncy boobs' ones. They are really cracking me up! I'd love to show it to my female friends, but they simple just don't understand our inside jokes here in the ArmA community. Shame.
nmdanny: Don't be so narrow minded. There are several countries that allow women in the same roles as men in the military. I know you said "most", but here in Sweden women would not necessarily be such a uncommon view in infantry combat. Even if there are less women than men in infantry teams, that is not a reason to NOT include them.
ArmA is supposed to be a sandbox game. I don't see why some want to put restrictions on what we can do with female models. (Like the "They can't carry weapons or don't aim as well as male models). As a mission maker, I want to do whatever I want with what I got available. I can put my own restrictions up if I want. Don't force that stuff upon me.
Not all missions are military oriented either. One can be very creative with the editor. Several of my missions revolve around unorganised groups of "people with weapons" that don't follow military protocole... because they are not in the military.
I understand the limited resource thing. But there is no REAL argument why female models should not be included if the time and resources are/will be available.
rogerx: I'm going to respect your opinion and apologize. I did not mean to try to change your look on the matter, but merely ment to discuss it, because I disagree with you.
Anyway. You have your opinion, and I have mine. Let's leave it at that. No hard feelings.
I upvoted this feature request because I think it would be a nice option to have when making missions. That's all I'm really trying to say.
rogerx: Guts aren't generally splattered in ArmA.
Anyway. You can just avoid putting women in your missions, or just don't play missions where you have to kill women if you want. The thing is that other people than you might want the option to use female models in their missions. Adding women to the game doesn't mean they'll be in your face with it. It's up to the person making the missions.
Why do you keep mentioning sex? This isn't about sex. Do you honestly ever thought that this feedback request was from a guy, wanting female in the game for sexual arousing reasons?
It's about the possibility to use female models for players and npcs in the mission editor. There were female civilians in ArmA 2. Did it pain you so much?
Laqueesha and Goblinbutt are speaking the truth. I don't know why some think people here want women in the game for some kind of sexual reason. There are women in real life (both military and civilian) and ArmA should reflect that.
With rogerx's logic, why would we want realistic ballistics for bullets in ArmA when we could just pick up a gun in real life?
Female models do belong in Arma III. Hopefully they will be added in the future, as it would do great things for the sake of variety.
I'd like water on windshields in vehicles as well, including aircraft.
One should be able to engage a parking brake kind of feature with a key-binding instead of the auto brake.
Damage indicators should be removable through the difficulty settings.
Vehicles like cars and such need visual inspection to check tires. It's pretty obvious if one is damaged while you drive. Fuel can be checked on the fuel indicator inside the car. The engine could make some noise when damaged.
As for aircraft like helicopters and airplanes, they usually have a pretty thourough set of status indicators inside the cockpit, which is a great excuse to exclude the hud-indicators as well.
As for the HUD-status indicators, they should have a range between 0-100% and colored thereafter. 100% - White, 50% yellow, 0% red. The colors mix in between.
There are so many variables and examples. The point is not that 'eject = safe'. The point is, if there is a situation where the conditions are right, you should have the option to bail out. That's the point. Not all situations can be handled by the book.
You, again, give a very specific scenario here. What if you're not in a helicopter that requires you to 'walk to the back of the chopper'? (for example, the hummingbird)
I agree, that if it would be added, there should be a risk, if you use the eject feature in certain conditions (high velocities, violent spinning etc.)
Autorotation is cakewalk in ArmA. That's not the point.
SilverDude. Helicopter have trimming (In modern helicopters at least). Releasing the cycle will not reset into neutral position. A pilot can release the controls of a helicopter and the helicopter will not change a thing.
"I peronally would rather crash and die by keeping the helicopter stable for the passengers to bail."
Why do you give such specific examples? What if you are alone in the helicopter?
Please, please stop giving the troll/abuse argument as a reason against it. It's not valid in any way.
There is such a large amount of ignorance in this issue. Don't say that a pilot definitely can't eject when he sure as hell can.
I don't think people here actually want an ejection seat for the helicopters. I don't. When I say eject, I mean like ArmA 2 eject. Not ejection seat eject.
Dr_Death, this is among the text you will find on the first page of the official ArmA 3 website:
"Experience true combat gameplay in a massive military sandbox."
Go check yourself.
ArmA III, where the private ranked grenadier in a squad can take the cycle and collective of a helicopters in hands and suddenly fly a helicopter, but can't exit the helicopter once it's a centimeter above the ground. Huh.
Even in DCS, the most realistic flight simulator commercially available, you can eject from helicopters with ejection seats, and bail out of helicopter which don't have.
Also, the eject features was useful to exit the helicopter to switch seats with another player.
"but helo pilots are not given parachutes"
Not all ArmA scenarios are by-the-book military operations though.
As a response to NodUnit's post:
If you are worried about such things, the eject feature should just be a toggle-able feature in the editor, so the mission maker can decide.
I myself only play with a community of players that I know. I know no-one will bail out to troll, and I don't want public servers full of trolls to inhibit an eject (or bail out) feature for "my kind" of ArmA players.
I upvoted this issue because of the following reasons:
- No matter what, there's nothing stopping me in real life from jumping out of the pilot or copilot seat of a helicopter. Common sense or not. I want the option.
- Not everyone follow military/pilot/common sense protocol. I've made and played several missions that features "Civilians with guns" instead of trained personnel.
- Hovering with a helicopter and jumping out will not get you shredded by the rotor blades.
It's not a question about what you are supposed to do as a pilot. It's about having the option to do it.
I want this as well. The Hummingbird/Pawnee could use some tweaking, as the 6DoF feels very sensitive and hard to control, but other than that, its great!
6Dof for all vehicles! +1