Arma 2's mechanics make dayz lame

[{-Baron-} 6]

So your blaming the engine for the animation files?

Your process of deduction is faulty, mi amigo. Nearly everything is unnecessarily tedious, including opening doors, managing inventory, jumping over things, placing barriers, climbing things, etc. That's aside from the terrible animations and all the glitches themselves. Granted, when RV3 was created, I don't believe they foresaw its use in a game like DayZ, so obviously, unpolished aspects of the engine have been highlighted by their more prominent usage.

That being said, it's astounding to me how steadfast y'all are to defend the clunky engine.

I play DayZ because I see its potential, and as of now, it's the best option out there for anyone looking for such a realistic survival game. When everyone rushes to defend fixable flaws, they're merely limiting the potential DayZ has.

Edited August 14, 2012 by {-Baron-}

[strangere 9]

I'm not merely talking about the keybindings. Can you honestly tell me that RV3 isn't clunky?

I don't think that a lot of problems that people have is because of engine. But because of Arma 2 needed more polish (work).It's not engine fault that doors breaks your legs etc. Arma2 =/= engine

Wtf is command mode? I sure as hell have never used/heard of it

Did he meant

Edited August 14, 2012 by Starngere

[gizm0 96]

Your process of deduction is faulty, mi amigo. Nearly everything is unnecessarily tedious, including opening doors, managing inventory, jumping over things, placing barriers, climbing things, etc. That's aside from the terrible animations and all the glitches themselves. Granted, when RV3 was created, I don't believe they foresaw its use in a game like DayZ, so obviously, unpolished aspects of the engine have been highlighted by their more prominent usage.

That being said, it's astounding to me how steadfast y'all are to defend the clunky engine.

I play DayZ because I see its potential, and as of now, it's the best option out there for anyone looking for such a realistic survival game. When everyone rushes to defend fixable flaws, they're merely limiting the potential DayZ has.

Well to be honest I don't seem to find anything clunky besides using custom sounds. I mean granted I've spent a shit load of time working on a training scenario for my group. So I may have grown used to the controls, and even managing AI team members which I'm glad is binded to space for quick access.

also I love doing calling in fire missions(artillery)

Edited August 14, 2012 by Orthus

[Dankine 377]

No dude, you aren't making sense by having that shitty attitude towards things.

Yeah, help the engine. As in try to improve upon it, make it better, make it less glitchy and such an overall POS.

None of which you can do unless you go work at BIS. Whinging on the forums about the engine is ultimately pointless.

[Lepryy 54]

Your process of deduction is faulty, mi amigo. Nearly everything is unnecessarily tedious, including opening doors, managing inventory, jumping over things, placing barriers, climbing things, etc. That's aside from the terrible animations and all the glitches themselves. Granted, when RV3 was created, I don't believe they foresaw its use in a game like DayZ, so obviously, unpolished aspects of the engine have been highlighted by their more prominent usage.

That being said, it's astounding to me how steadfast y'all are to defend the clunky engine.

I play DayZ because I see its potential, and as of now, it's the best option out there for anyone looking for such a realistic survival game. When everyone rushes to defend fixable flaws, they're merely limiting the potential DayZ has.

This guy hits the nail on the head right here guys.

Why do people DEFEND a crappy and clunky engine!? It's like "This game is glitchy as hell and I like it that way! Please, rocket, don't improve it at all, just keep it like a piece of shit!"

But you also made the point of how when this engine was coded, the devs had no idea of DayZ and what it would need to work at full potential. And how we are forced to play it because it is the only realistic zombie apocalypse game out right now.

[Lepryy 54]

Exactly, that's why we go to the forums and ask rocket to help us enjoy his game, since he works at BiS.

And also, this game is an Alpha right now. We are here to provide tips and feedback to make this game better. So that's what we're doing. But some of you guys are against that I guess?

[gizm0 96]

This guy hits the nail on the head right here guys.

Why do people DEFEND a crappy and clunky engine!? It's like "This game is glitchy as hell and I like it that way! Please, rocket, don't improve it at all, just keep it like a piece of shit!"

But you also made the point of how when this engine was coded, the devs had no idea of DayZ and what it would need to work at full potential. And how we are forced to play it because it is the only realistic zombie apocalypse game out right now.

Rocket is working on the Arma 3 engine and will most likely have direct access to the arma 3 engine, instead of modding a game already built from the older engine.

I mean compare APB vs other Unreal 3 games. having full engine access is a hell of a lot different than just being a mod.

Edited August 14, 2012 by Orthus

[strangere 9]

Your process of deduction is faulty, mi amigo. Nearly everything is unnecessarily tedious, including opening doors, managing inventory, jumping over things, placing barriers, climbing things, etc.

That being said, it's astounding to me how steadfast y'all are to defend the clunky engine.

Bad opening door -Not engine fault it was just done lazy in Arma 2 because you almost never used it.

Clunky inventory - Not engine fault, people made mods that makes inventory better

jumping over things- Not engine fault, again people made mods that makes jumping better you can climb etc.

placing barriers- there is better mechanic in Arma 2 it's just not used in Dayz

Again Arma2=/=engine

[Dankine 377]

Exactly, that's why we go to the forums and ask rocket to help us enjoy his game, since he works at BiS. And also, this game is an Alpha right now. We are here to provide tips and feedback to make this game better. So that's what we're doing. But some of you guys are against that I guess?

No, you're bitching about the engine. Which is pretty much a constant.

I'm all for suggestions and improvements for the game, but it sounds like you don't know the difference between the engine and the game it is running.

[kozzy420 39]

Nope, ARMA2 has more satisfying combat then any other shooter on the market imo.

I also love the realism to, Id way rather DayZ standaloen be on teh new ARMA3 engine then COD or BF3 engine to be honest.

[dsi24 227]

The scroll-wheel interaction system is easily the best scaling and context dependent system I've ever used. Imagine if this game used BF3's terrible "press 1 button to pick up guns and complete mission objectives!" system, "here bro let me revive you... woops picked up your gun let me put it back down and try again... woops... woops..."

The only clunky thing about arma2 is the movement, and that is fixed by mods and will be fixed in arma3.

[Lepryy 54]

Rocket is working on the Arma 3 engine and will most likely have direct access to the arma 3 engine, instead of modding a game already built from the older engine.

I mean compare APB vs other Unreal 3 games. having full engine access is a hell of a lot different than just being a mod.

And this is really really good, but for now we can focus on the issues the mod has.

[Lepryy 54]

The scroll-wheel interaction system is easily the best scaling and context dependent system I've ever used. Imagine if this game used BF3's terrible "press 1 button to pick up guns and complete mission objectives!" system, "here bro let me revive you... woops picked up your gun let me put it back down and try again... woops... woops..."

The only clunky thing about arma2 is the movement, and that is fixed by mods and will be fixed in arma3.

Not too good when you got 50 zombies on your back and you have to quickly open that door on the firehouse then get hit 500 times trying to open it, then when you do open it, it pushes you to the side because you were on the wrong side then you have to.... yeah.....not too good of a system.

[Lepryy 54]

Nope, ARMA2 has more satisfying combat then any other shooter on the market imo.

I also love the realism to, Id way rather DayZ standaloen be on teh new ARMA3 engine then COD or BF3 engine to be honest.

We aren't really focusing on combat here anymore though.

[gizm0 96]

Not too good when you got 50 zombies on your back and you have to quickly open that door on the firehouse then get hit 500 times trying to open it, then when you do open it, it pushes you to the side because you were on the wrong side then you have to.... yeah.....not too good of a system.

So not being able to tell which way the door opens isn't really a fault against the interaction system or even the engine but merely the textures and models.

[dsi24 227]

Not too good when you got 50 zombies on your back and you have to quickly open that door on the firehouse then get hit 500 times trying to open it, then when you do open it, it pushes you to the side because you were on the wrong side then you have to.... yeah.....not too good of a system.

User errors here:

1) You got chased by zombies

2) You're slow at using the system (pro-tip: if the door opening icon appears you can just click middle mouse, no need to scroll)

3) You opened the door while standing on the hinged side

I don't understand, do you walk through the door when you fling it towards your face in real life?

[Lepryy 54]

User errors here:

1) You got chased by zombies

2) You're slow at using the system (pro-tip: if the door opening icon appears you can just click middle mouse, no need to scroll)

3) You opened the door while standing on the hinged side

I don't understand, do you walk through the door when you fling it towards your face in real life?

User errors here:

1) How is it my fault zombies can hear my blood flowing from 300 yards away and aggro on me?

2) Shouldn't have to be "slow" give me button to press (ie. "press "E" to open door")

3) When you're in the heat of the moment, you cant really tell which side is which. And even when I'm not on the hinged side I'll get swung over because the door still decided to latch onto me.

[dsi24 227]

User errors here:

1) How is it my fault zombies can hear my blood flowing from 300 yards away and aggro on me?

2) Shouldn't have to be "slow" give me button to press (ie. "press "E" to open door")

3) When you're in the heat of the moment, you cant really tell which side is which. And even when I'm not on the hinged side I'll get swung over because the door still decided to latch onto me.

1) Stealth

2) This is literally no different from "press 'E' to open door", instead of 'E' you press 'Middle mouse button'

3) So you couldn't control yourself and blame the game, got it.

[gizm0 96]

User errors here:

1) How is it my fault zombies can hear my blood flowing from 300 yards away and aggro on me?

2) Shouldn't have to be "slow" give me button to press (ie. "press "E" to open door")

3) When you're in the heat of the moment, you cant really tell which side is which. And even when I'm not on the hinged side I'll get swung over because the door still decided to latch onto me.

1) are you standing,crouching,prone and what speed were you going, also any cover/concealment?

2) bind it to "E"? I mean its not like controls are locked to their respected keys. But than again middle mouse is still quite easy to press.

3) never seem to have this issue even with editor placed gates

[bazbake 456]

Arma II's physics and interaction systems are very good (although claims that no one else has leaning or free look is nonsense).

Arma II's movement, inventory, and damage systems are bad and they should feel bad and the devs should feel bad.

• Oh, you have a pistol? Guess you can't check your inventory without taking a knee.
  
• Oh, you have a pistol? Yeah, you can't put that thing away.
  
• Oh, you have a pistol? You thought you could kill someone with that?
  
• Oh, you were running 3 minutes ago and now you want to go prone? Well, let's just give you a running start.
  
• Oh, you want to salute? I suggest you stand up first so you can keep your balance.
  
• Oh, you want to move a gun to your backpack? How about we put all of the ammo in there for you...oh, you wanted the gun too? Well, it's gone, but at least we put the ammo in before figuring out if you had room to put the gun in!
  
• Oh, you want to throw this object? Well, don't hold it to charge, just aim really high and wait for 10 seconds while you animate a glass throwing motion.
  
• Oh, you want to lower your weapon? Well, you can't do that prone...stand up first and THEN we'll let you point your rifle away from the thing directly in front of you.
  
• Oh, you want to use a flashlight? Let me think about that...mmm, nope, give me some more time...no, not now...okay, maybe...no...no....okay, now you can use your flashlight.
  

But as long as you never want to do anything from prone or do anything that is not shooting someone in the face, Arma II is effective.

[bazbake 456]

Doublepost!

Edited August 14, 2012 by BazBake

[martin_sonderegger@bluewin.ch 141]

Arma II's physics and interaction systems are very good (although claims that no one else has leaning or free look is nonsense).

Arma II's movement, inventory, and damage systems are bad and they should feel bad and the devs should feel bad.

• Oh, you have a pistol? Guess you can't check your inventory without taking a knee.
  
• Oh, you have a pistol? Yeah, you can't put that thing away.
  
• Oh, you have a pistol? You thought you could kill someone with that?
  
• Oh, you were running 3 minutes ago and now you want to go prone? Well, let's just give you a running start.
  
• Oh, you want to salute? I suggest you stand up first so you can keep your balance.
  
• Oh, you want to move a gun to your backpack? How about we put all of the ammo in there for you...oh, you wanted the gun too? Well, it's gone, but at least we put the ammo in before figuring out if you had room to put the gun in!
  
• Oh, you want to throw this object? Well, don't hold it to charge, just aim really high and wait for 10 seconds while you animate a glass throwing motion.
  
• Oh, you want to lower your weapon? Well, you can't do that prone...stand up first and THEN we'll let you point your rifle away from the thing directly in front of you.
  
• Oh, you want to use a flashlight? Let me think about that...mmm, nope, give me some more time...no, not now...okay, maybe...no...no....okay, now you can use your flashlight.
  

But as long as you never want to do anything from prone or do anything that is not shooting someone in the face, Arma II is effective.

- That is actually a problem in ARMA and I hope the inventory management gets better in ARMA3.

- Also a problem. It's possible but you have to "put it away", switch the weapon back and forth and then it's ok. It's stupid.

- ARMA2 is a military simulator, I doubt you one-shot a fully geared soldier with a 9mm if it's not directly in the face. But it hurts and knocks you back, which is does in-game.

- I don't get that.

- I've never seen soldiers saluting while not standing up.

- To be fair, the backpack thingy isn't in ARMA2 per se, but I still hope inventory gets better in general.

- I've seen worse, but i've also seen better. It's not really that hard, takes a little bit of practice.

- You are prone, how can you lower your weapon even more?

- There is nothing like that intended in ARMA2, hence the strange work-around we've got right now.

All in all stuff that is the result of the mod beeing not quite what ARMA is made for or bad inventory design which has to be fixed anyway in ARMA3.

[louist 163]

What do you hope to achieve through "speaking out" though?

I suppose the hope would be that someone in a position of power would come across it and note that some people feel that the engine is, in at least some ways, outdated and archaic, and that some people believe the engine's limitations are becoming increasingly noticeable and obstructs both creativity and immersion.

While the OP's dickish tone worked overtime to undermine his own points, there isn't anything inherently disrespectful in voicing displeasure in an engine. ARMA 2 felt awkward and outdated when it was still young, and with a mod like DayZ pushing it to it's very limit, it's downright painful at times. I'm still plying DayZ, and I still enjoy it much of the time, but there's no denying that long-standing engine limitations and bugs are a huge detractor.

There's no guarantee the next iteration of Bohemia's engine will overcome these issues, but we won't know until it's here, and Rocket is, for obvious reasons, sticking with it.

Edit:

On the upside, I'm confident we may well see some engine updates that the devs had not considered before DayZ became such a hit.

Edited August 14, 2012 by louist

[dallas 5195]

Infantery sim, not much use for a sidearm, when you mostly rely on your primary.

DayZ without ArmA = Left4Dead

[strangere 9]

long-standing engine limitations and bugs are a huge detractor.

Most people complain about engine when talking about things that can be easily changed or fixed when you have access to engine code. Dayz isn't limited because of engine limitation. Dayz is limited just because they don't adjust the engine but just mod the game. Yes there are clunky game mechanics but that doesn't mean that the engine is bad you can have great engine with bad game mechanics.They just need to be polished that didn't happen with some game mechanic in Arma 2. Most problems will be fixed in standalone. Btw standalone is going to be VR engine.

Again Arma2 =/= engine. Just look up Carrier Command: Gaea Mission its strategy game build on VR2 (Arma1 engine)

Edited August 15, 2012 by Starngere