Will Arma 3 have better mouse controls?

I'd personally like to see a separate sensitivity adjustment slider for both weapon down (turning with mouse) and when your weapon is up (iron sights/scope), similar to that of Red Orchestra 2.

I'm sure that's not too hard nor too much to ask for.

+1 :yay:

Ahhh lol. Just came back and read the responses to my post and also read my post again. I feel where you guys are coming from, maybe I should not of commented since this situation isn't affecting me.

I just loaded up the game for the first time 8 months ago, turned off smoothing and adjusted my mouse settings out of the game and never looked back. Guess it was just too easy. Sorry xD

Then they would have to cap mouse speeds, and what about arm/weapon inertia?

You do realize ARMA is supposed to be a sim right?

VBS2 is supposed to be a sim, ARMA 3 is supposed to be a game built on 21st-century FPS standards. ;)

Yes please do this CoD style so I can make some of these

This but without M2rine's sarcasm.

The cons outweigh the benefits of keeping negative acceleration. I'd sacrifice a bit of "realism" for a lot more smoother controls.

This, without irony... hopefully the release build for ARMA 3 is at least as "tight" as the E3 infantry presentations, though I imagine that ARMA 3 "gunplay" looking no better than ARMA 2's would have been pretty bad PR (in the sense of "what justifies a $50 new release?").

NA fixes???? = numerous?

:confused:

Or get rid of it. :j:

That would do more harm to addon makers than any good it would do for players who could just use key bindings.

If you keep ejecting when trying to turn on auto hover then just double tap \, that's why it is in the options! Take that out of the action menu sure, remove action menu, No.

I wouldn't remove the Action menu, it is very usefull, comprehensive and great for Addons

I'm okay with the action menu under the condition that it's treated secondary to the "default" context-sensitive actions (we somewhat have this with how the HUD in the middle of the screen will change and pressing Enter will result in performing the corresponding action), and so long as certain functions are either available outside the action menu or even are outright excluded from the action menu (so that we don't accidentally select them). Incidentally, I'd stick weapon switching on the list of "stuff that ought not to be in the action menu..." my preference is akin to the existing rifle/pistol switch key, plus a launcher key.

@chortles. I agree with that. Switching to sidearm or launcher really shouldn't be in the action menu.

On the topic of mouse controls, I would like to inquire as to what you all are using and what your settings are.. I have a Razer Mamba with acceleration set to 5 of 10 and DPI at 2800. I can't hit anything past 75 meters with a red dot M4. Do I need to turn down the DPI, tweak game settings, or just practice more? Thanks.

Just to check: is the "red dot M4" you're using SD or not? Also, are you just using the sight (right-click) or zooming in as well (right-click then hold right mouse button)?

ARMA 3 related: my still favorite ARMA 3 quote ever which seems to implicitly touch on mouse controls:

Bohemia has tightened up the shooting mechanics to make it feel much more like a traditional shooter when you’re on the ground; there’s a sense of responsive twitchiness to the infantry combat that ARMA has lacked before.

I right click to bring up the optical sight, and then hold the RMB to zoom. Using the M4A1 CCO and the M4A1 Holo, both un-suppressed.

Please! No built-in, forced acceleration and smoothing.

Personally, as a first person game player, I get frustrated to no end if the first person mouse performance is not right. I always look at the Quake games, how precise and effective the mouse performs. I understand that ArmA is not such a fast paced game and that there are realistic limitations to how fast you can turn and aim, but real soldiers/shooters are very accurate when it comes to actual aiming (placing sights on target) and any human can turn their head fast and look right where they mean to. These things should be given and not diminished by unjustified poor mouse performance. This is important.

Yes, I agree with Psychomorph about mouse controls. Counter Strike and Quake have excellent mouse controls that should be transferred to Arma. Even though a soldier can't turn his weapon as fast as a person moving his mouse, they have a much easier time acquiring and aiming at their targets. Precise mouse controls are required for CQC. Limited turning speed has a very little impact in normal engagement distances other else than creating delay and lag. Limited turning speed in CQC hurts the players reaction times and gets them killed in Arma. In real life, twitch shooting is essential in CQC. The mouse controls are why CQC is so bad in Arma.

but real soldiers/shooters are very accurate when it comes to actual aiming (placing sights on target)

Well that explains why they quickly one-shot so many enemies in combat.

Except no they don't.

Well that explains why they quickly one-shot so many enemies in combat.

Except no they don't.

They are quick to aim somewhere near their target, to actually hit it is harder.

However in A2 i am relatively slow to get my aim on the target, but then i am always dead accurate. Someting is off, it has always been a bit laggy (even with optimal settings) and to odd mouse smoothing/acceleration makes it hard to predict the movement you have to make with your hand.

Edited August 14, 2012 by NeMeSiS

As long as it doesn't end up playing like some shitty twitch shooter (I won't name them), I'll be happy.

Everybody relax, Arma3 mouselook is FPS standard. Smoothing/acceleration is optional, default off.

Now please disperse, nothing to see here.. ;-D

Bless your heart. Now, hopefully, I'll be able to hit something at 50 meters! My marksmanship is embarrassing.

Yes, I agree with Psychomorph about mouse controls. Counter Strike and Quake have excellent mouse controls that should be transferred to Arma. Even though a soldier can't turn his weapon as fast as a person moving his mouse, they have a much easier time acquiring and aiming at their targets. Precise mouse controls are required for CQC. Limited turning speed has a very little impact in normal engagement distances other else than creating delay and lag. Limited turning speed in CQC hurts the players reaction times and gets them killed in Arma. In real life, twitch shooting is essential in CQC. The mouse controls are why CQC is so bad in Arma.

Quoted with full agreement... though the E3 videos thusfar, in particular (even outdoors it's still CQC) have given me reason to hope, and that you should hope. :)

As long as it doesn't end up playing like some shitty twitch shooter (I won't name them), I'll be happy.

Don't you worry: I think that ARMA has a bunch of good lessons to learn FROM said twitch shooters, BUT I also think that BI has so far correctly discerned which are GOOD lessons (example: tactical pace as seen in E3-onward videos, shooting responsiveness) and which are BAD lessons (example: hitscan ballistics at ANY distance)... in any case, just for the game's ranges being so big, I think you'll have the right mix of "what can we learn and adopt while keeping what makes us stand out in a GOOD way". Take heart KeefehB! :D

(It comes off like a recognition that "speed kills, so reflexive shooting" at short distance but that the margin of error and thus the need for greater accuracy at distance remains intact... the fabled "can handle both distances well" while using a single parabolic ballistics model.)

Everybody relax, Arma3 mouselook is FPS standard. Smoothing/acceleration is optional, default off.

Now please disperse, nothing to see here.. ;-D

BRING OUT THE ANTI-PITCHFORKS/TORCHES BARRICADES!

Still, thank you very much Vespa for explaining, I look forward to this being demonstrated at E3! :)

P.S. No one should complain about the lack of aiming deadzone until you see definitive proof that it's explicitly not in ARMA 3 at all as opposed to merely turned off like is possible in ARMA 2.

They are quick to aim somewhere near their target, to actually hit it is harder.

However in A2 i am relatively slow to get my aim on the target, but then i am always dead accurate. Someting is off, it has always been a bit laggy (even with optimal settings) and to odd mouse smoothing/acceleration makes it hard to predict the movement you have to make with your hand.

I think it was maturin (or was it?) who posted a video where he turned 90 degrees, positioned his aim over an enemy ~200m away and one-shot him - all under 3 or 4 secs. Now how many regular soldiers will be able to pull that off IRL?

If anything this thread is still in its "why this game no play like BF3" stage. No matter how lighter BIS makes their weapons - complaints will still exist until even M107 will have the precision and weight of a BF3 pistol - since M4s in ArmA2 don't really have problems with inertia. They are pretty easy to aim with if anything.

Edited August 14, 2012 by metalcraze

I think it was maturin (or was it?) who posted a video where he turned 90 degrees, positioned his aim over an enemy ~200m away and one-shot him - all under 3 or 4 secs.

And this is something i would like to see gone, i prefer quicker but harder aiming, so pointing your weapon near someone is faster, yet it should be harder to actually hit him, no more 100% accuracy rates.

Currently killing people is easy, but incredibly unsatisfying, shooting isnt fun or realistic. Its the worst of both worlds.

But the discussion is kinda pointless after Vespa's post, we will see how it turns out.

metalcraze, didn't that video use the ARMA 2 crosshairs? That has specifically addressed by BI by now, unless the video was "aiming through a red dot sight with aiming deadzone disabled".

Turning fast and raising the weapon quite fast, but I imagine that I would be trying to aim through the sights at 200 meters.

And this is something i would like to see gone, i prefer quicker but harder aiming, so pointing your weapon near someone is faster, yet it should be harder to actually hit him, no more 100% accuracy rates.

How would you describe "harder" aiming? (All I can think of is the mouse sensitivity debate that sometimes does crop up i other FPS' over precision vs. speed, i.e. when using a sniper rifle instead of an assault rifle.) And "pointing your weapon near someone is faster, yet it should be harder to hit him" at what distance?

Currently killing people is easy, but incredibly unsatisfying, shooting isnt fun or realistic. Its the worst of both worlds.

I look forward to this being remedied thanks to Vespa's advice (more like intervention).

Allways happy to explain.

About shooting accuracy - I admit things are still a bit on the too much precision side, but its our goal to make accuracy and firefight lenght more reallistic. But it is sometimes tricky, if you want to avoid frustrating mechanics, like bullet spread or mouse speed cap.

Recently we introduced linking of weapon sway with turning, so thats one step.

I see there is still discussion about aiming deadzone - I can assure everyone it is still functional like it always was, we just didn't show it on videos as Jay doesnt use it (me neither).

Good stuff Vespa :bounce3: Keep improving Arma CQB and infantry gameplay!

And this is something i would like to see gone, i prefer quicker but harder aiming, so pointing your weapon near someone is faster, yet it should be harder to actually hit him, no more 100% accuracy rates.

Currently killing people is easy, but incredibly unsatisfying, shooting isnt fun or realistic. Its the worst of both worlds.

Oh but I agree about killing people being too easy. That's why I want breathing system from VBS2 in ArmA3. Even more arcadey America's Army 3 has it.

But what I'm not in favor of is the sentiment of "make it like Quake and Counter-Strike" (aka "why this game no play like BF3").

And you see - weapons should have weight. Pointing M107 shouldn't be as fast as pointing M4 or AK47. I mean the only difference between weapons in those 3 games is the amount of damage they deal and dispersion. In CS M249 weighs as much as a pistol. Turning and aiming with such a bulky weapon shouldn't be easy in any way. In fact since ArmA has real ballistics instead of dispersion-hitscan like those games making all weapons easy to aim will greatly hurt the gameplay if not turn it into reflex fragfest.

But the discussion is kinda pointless after Vespa's post, we will see how it turns out.

With VBS2 breathing system hopefully. If there always will be some weapon sway (apart from when holding breath - for a limited time of course) - there will be no need to make weapons too "heavy".

You will turn fast but aiming will take skill, patience and calculation. In VBS2 or AA3 sway is not enough to make weapons imprecise within 50m but it makes all the difference 100m+.

And of course sway shouldn't be like random convulsions which is what ArmA3 currently has - but a realistic figure of 8.

Edited August 14, 2012 by metalcraze

About shooting accuracy - I admit things are still a bit on the too much precision side, but its our goal to make accuracy and firefight lenght more reallistic. But it is sometimes tricky if you want to avoid frustrating mechanics, like bullet spread or mouse speed cap.

[...]

As frustrating mechanics as trying to move about quickly while carrying a heavy weapon and trying to fire it accurately? :rolleyes: