Singleplayer Beginner Confusion... BIS, right direction but still way to go :(

Hi,

I was wondering why the heck the markers on the singleplayer campaign, indicating where to move, who to attack etc. do NOT STAY for longer than 20 seconds.

However, you can press ESC or open the map and return to the game, and the markers will reappear but fade again.

I mean, BIS come on... You do so much to make the game more beginner friendly and then you leave in such weird behaviors a QA guy should be able to point out easily in playability & usability tests.

I mean, I am a new guy, I get thrown into the game, right into the action. Cool start up scene and everything. I havent played 2 minutes and already am confronted with negative experience:

1. My commander orders me to move to X.Y. but the indicator doesnt stay long enoug on screen to know where he wants me to go.

2. I am assigned a target, same prob as above.

3. There is incoming transmission (story based script) that is totally mixed up with my soldieres reports. Why not mute the soldiers commands for as long as a story audio is running?

4. And finally still the old idiocy of "Enemy soldier at 11 o clock" and all those relative positions to yoru own position, when you have absolutely NO CLUE where your leader is pointing at, and therefore you are totally lost and just ask yourself: What? Where? 2 oclock relative to what?

I remember a clock in, erm, Arma1 I think? It was on the bottom left. Where did it go? At least put a marker on the HUD so we know where 12 o clock is.

5. My mate says: "4: Need cover".... Alright, I would really like to help that ppor bastard, but how the heck to I find out who No.4 is?

6. Why is it impossible for a trained soldier to slowly move around a corner and steady his weapon aim? Close quarter combat is still to clumsy. I press SHIFT to slow down and use 'a' or 'd' to strafe while looking down the sights, and my gun is bopping up and down, back and forth like being held by an epileptic soldier. Slow TACTICAL movement with constant eyes on target should really be possible, somehow. Your animation ist just totally overdone. It feels wrong and it is.

I am again (as I was with Arma1 and Arma2) stunned how a game developer cannot find this flaws when playtesting there own game. Seriously. This is the 4th generation of your game (not counting VBS)... You have all the shiny stuff in there, masterpiece of open world fun.

Yet you miss such most basic things.

I just cant comprehend.

The #4 in your post has been addressed. The clock indicator is back in the AO and it can be enabled in the difficulty settings.

The rest of your comments though are absolutely dead on. Unfortunately there is very little situational awareness in Arma/AO. This sad fact forces the players to go "Rambo style" instead of using the proper tactics. It's shame... I would certainly hope that BIS would put a lot more focus on the situational awareness tools in their next release.

Peace,

DreDay

1 and 2. It's an option in the game difficulty (edit your difficulty or lower the level).

3. True.

4. There is the clock, but it's now in the right side, instead of the left side.

5. Bah, the "need cover" and "covering!" are automatic messages with the idea of make the players feel more inmmersed in a real war, with soldiers shouting orders, etc. The soldiers usually work in tandem between themselves, and even if you were to cover him, he wouldn't be capable of noticing it, there are some limits on how good can be the AI. It's the same reason the AI is not capable of making a reasonble voice order for contact or movement. "Move to that tree at 11 o'clock". myself: Yeah, there is a fucking forest at 11 o'clock, which tree bitch.

6. CQB is the weak point of the game, yeah.

yes, the disappearing waypoint markers are a Difficulty option. i noticed that when i was playing the random Kill House mission in the Armory; the next waypoint kept disappearing and i had no idea where to go next and couldn't complete the mission.

i couldn't figure out why the waypoint would disappear, until i remembered i had edited the Difficulty settings for minimal on-screen help. :rolleyes: :o

Fading waypoint indicator influenced by difficulty choice? Is it intended? Sounds like a bug. I mean, whats the reasning behind this?

Fading waypoint indicator influenced by difficulty choice? Is it intended? Sounds like a bug. I mean, whats the reasning behind this?

I dont know the reason behind this, but I know I like it the way it is (eg: fading). I think it keeps me more immersed having to actually look at the compass and GPS sometimes.

Fading waypoint indicator influenced by difficulty choice? Is it intended? Sounds like a bug. I mean, whats the reasning behind this?

I see it as this: It pops up so that you know where to go and then fades to not kill the immersion. It gives you enough information that you should be able to figure out where it wants you to go. I would mark on the map before it fades and then use your compass/gps whatever to get there.

Fading waypoint indicator influenced by difficulty choice? Is it intended? Sounds like a bug. I mean, whats the reasning behind this?

Well, in real life you don't have magical waypoints in you eye vision...

Most of the "difficulty" settings don't raise the difficulty, it's more a series of realism settings.

Fading waypoint indicator influenced by difficulty choice? Is it intended? Sounds like a bug. I mean, whats the reasning behind this?

It is a choice, as pointed above, some people like it better with fade, others don't... To each is own, and BI kept the choice open. You cannot bash them for this.

I personally have no problem with moving with eyes on sight (3D sights makes for slightly better aiming while walking, btw). They based their animation on recording a soldier movement doing this, so yeah, quite possible the weapon moves like that, in fact. You're quite exaggerating with your "epileptic soldier" blabla. There's nothing difficult aiming in motion. The "gun on a glide" of all others FPS isn't there, it's 1 of the specific of this game since the beginning, and I like that.

The bad point in CQB if you ask me is still collision detection. You get irrealistically stuck in nearby objects, at times to such a point you cannot even "un-stuck" by going away. you need to move the gun down, up, whatever, try everything, before being able to leave a simple room corner, just because there's a table near the corner..... totally killing the CQB

You probably made the mistake of thinking the game was mass playtested :D

I get the impression that the only people who test these games are the team to be honest, its usually the random bloke at home who does things a different way, and causes stuff to bug/crash/act wierd.

6. Why is it impossible for a trained soldier to slowly move around a corner and steady his weapon aim? Close quarter combat is still to clumsy. I press SHIFT to slow down and use 'a' or 'd' to strafe while looking down the sights, and my gun is bopping up and down, back and forth like being held by an epileptic soldier. Slow TACTICAL movement with constant eyes on target should really be possible, somehow. Your animation ist just totally overdone. It feels wrong and it is.

I am again (as I was with Arma1 and Arma2) stunned how a game developer cannot find this flaws when playtesting there own game. Seriously. This is the 4th generation of your game (not counting VBS)... You have all the shiny stuff in there, masterpiece of open world fun.

Yet you miss such most basic things.

I just cant comprehend.

Agreed. CQB in Arma2 is such a let down. The soldier's spasms when slowly walking with raised sights is insane.

Fading waypoint indicator influenced by difficulty choice? Is it intended? Sounds like a bug. I mean, whats the reasoning behind this?

It is absolutely intended. Some people prefer to play with none of these 'cheating' visual indicators on, whatsoever. However this often isn't possible, because the instructions provided by the game are too vague for you to know where you're actually supposed to go without having the marker. This is mostly a problem of not having two-way communication, i.e. in real life if you weren't sure what was intended you could ask follow-up questions. If they tell you to target a man at 2 o'clock and you can't see him, you could say you can't see him, and they could provide a better reference. However games are a long way from being able to do that.

So, there is a balance required. But as you noted, if you forget where you're supposed to be going, you can just hit escape twice and the markers will pop up again so you can reorient yourself. Or perhaps adjust the difficulty/realism settings so they don't disappear at all, if that's possible.

Permanent map info & permanent way-point info, on/off maybe.

Some times its interesting to play (some missions) without any info whatsoever.

Well, in real life you don't have magical waypoints in you eye vision...

Most of the "difficulty" settings don't raise the difficulty, it's more a series of realism settings.

This is a silly argument. In real life you can always ask other squad members to point you to the location that you are supposed to go to.

Here's how this works in the game right now. You are involved in a deadly firefight. Your squad leader tells you - "Go to that tree", the way point flashes for 3 seconds or so. The waypoint is in the opposite direction from the enemy that is currently engaging you. Your options within the 3 seconds are - kill the enemy that is trying to kill you or turn around 180 degrees to find "that tree" and die... This is not realism... these are are just the cumbersome game mechanics :(

Peace,

DreDay

---------- Post added at 12:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:19 PM ----------

But as you noted, if you forget where you're supposed to be going, you can just hit escape twice and the markers will pop up again so you can reorient yourself.

I did not realize that. This does help quite a bit!

Peace,

DreDay

This is a silly argument. In real life you can always ask other squad members to point you to the location that you are supposed to go to.

Here's how this works in the game right now. You are involved in a deadly firefight. Your squad leader tells you - "Go to that tree", the way point flashes for 3 seconds or so. The waypoint is in the opposite direction from the enemy that is currently engaging you. Your options within the 3 seconds are - kill the enemy that is trying to kill you or turn around 180 degrees to find "that tree" and die... This is not realism... these are are just the cumbersome game mechanics :(

Peace,

DreDay

---------- Post added at 12:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:19 PM ----------

I did not realize that. This does help quite a bit!

Peace,

DreDay

Whether it's a silly argument or not doesn't matter as people have said in this thread you can turn it on permanently in the advanced difficulty options. So just do that and stop complaining about it. :)

As for the OP's points, I agree the radio chatter is problematic, but I think it is much more realistic that you cannot just look down the ironsights and still hit targets downrange while strafing COD style. Think about how difficult it would be to do this.

By the way, strafing is not tactical. No one in combat does this. They get to cover, lean out from behind it (not many games give you this option).

I have found a truly tactical approach ... using a base of fire for suppression while employing a flanking maneuver works much better than "Ramboing" as you suggests the game forces you to do.

LOL the arguments in favor of fading markers is just ridicolous.

In RL I have MANY MANY more things that arent simulated in this game. Situational awareness in Arma was always TERRIBLE and it still is. If I am told where to go, I will "forget" that info?? If I am told where to attack, I will forget that also???

This is the most stupid excuse ever. Sorry, no offense meant. Its just a really poor excuse for a terrible beginners experience. The first minutes shape the impression of a game. Realism is good. Feeling artificially constraint is not.

And just for the record: Every time you press ESC and leave the menu, also everytime you leave the map, the indicators reappear and fade away again. So it really looks like an oversight.

Besides that: What is up with that right mouse button target assign. Every newbie will go like "WTF did just happen"?

He sits in his abrams, right clicks to zoom in, as to see the horizon better (something you do constantly, as this game is about pixel shooting, and therefor you really need the magnification), and all of a sudden the abrams gunner blasts away that friendly hummer right in fron of you....

Why?

Because "assign target" is at the same key as "zoom in". Which makes sense in other situations, but doesnt in this one. Also: If you wanna use the "assign target" properly, you just cant, because there is NO target reticule to aim with.

Seriously now, how do you justify a fundtion that assigns a target to your gunner, that is sharing its key with "zoom in" and if tried to use properly, doesnt even have a target so you actually dont know what you assign. Are they expecting you to put a dot on your screen?

For THREE generations that stupid system has not been touched. Its like a hit in the face. Its like they dont wanna improve the usability of their game.

And those thigns are just the most obvious things.

RMB on zoom

either lock on wrong target

if wanna use as itnende, no crosshair

anyhow: press righht click with intention of zoom: friendly in center and AI kills it.

wtf?

Well, if you need non fading markers, then just change the difficulty? I really have a problem with text in the middle of the screen, so I have them fade. But I naturally want them there briefly so I at least have a clue what is going on. And, if you need them, doesn't that mean that you have already forgotten them? This isn't about your avatar forgetting info, this is about yourself wanting a decluttered screen.

Your avatar actually forgetting information, or when updated information haven't been received in a while, is indicated by the extended map info by fading markers. It's not an indication of memory, but an indication of how accurate the information about i.e. a unit is. If strong, chances increase that he is where marker says he is. If weak, he might have repositioned, so be careful.

The game has A LOT of controls. Shared controls like these are bound to produce faults like this. I don't like the Target and Zoom in sharing the same button. Also, I'd like to be in control of my breathing, so even hold breath is not shared to zoom in/scope button. Also, I like to be in full control on when I actually reveal enemies to my units (I tend to be always better than my AI if autospotting is turned on, or I accidentally reveal a unit), so even the reveal button was rebound. But now you'd get so many buttons its hard to remember them all, and even harder to learn for a new player. A couple of "freak accidents" like that will encourage him to check out the key bindings and try to fix it. I know, not brilliant, but keeps the starting up better, since it's impossible to setup a grand system that will satisfy all.

I dont need non fading markers. I just point out (from a QA playability-test perspective) why this is not the way to present the game in the first mission to a new player.

Furhtermore, as I said, the markers reappear when you enter the menu or map. Probably an injection of ultra-mem. Get your dose today, it refreshes your memory instantly! :P

In RL, as someone already said, I can talk to my squad leader. I can ask for orders. All you "pseudo realistic fanatics" have no clue what realism means. All you do is fight for different qualities of abstraction of reality. There are so many things going on that are nto simulated, that it really makes me smile when I read stuff like that. No, a marker is not realistic. A fading marker even less. Though whats most unrealistic is beign thrown into a world of lifeless AIs that cannot respond to your problems. And thats exactly why there are interfaces. If we had super-AI you d be talking to your PC instead of clicking on buttons.

Why not? Don't the box say "the most realistic...."? To some that would indicate the least amount of screen help available. And when you start, don't you get an option to choose difficulty? A completely new player to the game concept would most likely choose the lowest difficulty, get to know the game, and try again later at harder and harder difficulties. Or at least try a lower difficulty option if it turns out to be too hard.

Consider that Esc Esc sequence you asking your leader for an update then, and him providing the answer. We do if we forget. And that is without having first to turn them on, back to game to see it, then back to difficulties, turn them off, and back to the game again. Seems like a fairly good implementation of "simulated communications". And, that's what extended markers are for as well, to "show" you what your avatar knows about, again - due to lack of communication protocols.

What if we play without any AI? How about a mixed coop with AI AND humans? Sometimes we don't want that "AI help" since we rely on human skills alone, and then we CAN rely on communications. And, btw, afaik you CAN give oral commands to your AI and many prefer this input method. We're still bitching on BIS so that we can get rid of that magic scanning ability, that does serve some purpose if you're having AI (but only then), but we sometimes would like to disable regardless.

I use plenty of help all the time, but only with AI. But I know what I'm getting myself into if I switch to expert level. But for us, expert is mostly reserved for complete AI less experience.