Infantry FPS Control

[Cyan_Knight]

I am aware that this might be a bit of a challenge, but if there was a way to enable First Person control of an infantry unit, similar to that of the manpad, only with improved actions and movement animations. That would probably bring even some Arma 3 players to this game and enable an entire new form of simulation especially with the Apache's capability to hunt around trees.

[Jascha]

And add battle royale!

That would probably bring some players from Warzone. Or maybe even from Fortnite!

(/sarcasm off)

Seriously. Let DCS be DCS and ARMA be ARMA. If you want to play "tactical" FPS, there is plenty to choose from. No need to turn DCS into a jack of all trades (master of none). It is an exceptional product because it excels in combat FLIGHT simulation. CA is just a gimmick.

In short: a terrible idea.

[Callsign112]

DCS World is great... no doubt about it. But sometimes I wonder if narrow mindedness isn't part of whats holding it back from becoming something even greater.

[3WA]

17 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

But sometimes I wonder if narrow mindedness isn't part of whats holding it back from becoming something even greater.

Lol, ya think?  That's been happening for YEARS.

After years of debate on here, I get the feeling DCS never plans on improving the ground.  I wonder what ever happened to that Battlefield group who posted on here?  They had some very interesting plans for DCS.  Maybe they just couldn't do it in the end.

Eventually, people like you and me just may have to move on to get what we want, and use DCS only for flight sim.

Edited July 24, 2022 by 3WA

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

If DCS moves into ground combat, it'll be AFV simulation, not infantry.

[Callsign112]

Well eventually you might be right, which makes me wonder why you haven't done that already if that is how you feel? The fact that DCS will attract a lot of people only interested in flying is understandable. Although I must say I am a little surprised how many don't seem to realize the benefit they would experience as pilots if all aspects of DCS were improved.

But as a community this is just something we all have to navigate. I am certain ED as a company is aware of all the things we would like to see, but it doesn't hurt to keep reminding them what those things are. 

And I agree with @MiG21bisFishbedL, I think their forte is in developing the systems pilots/soldiers/seamen use. We do desperately need better more capable Ai infantry though.    

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Having better AI behavior for infantry would be ideal. Especially if ED were to move into the direction of ground vehicles and we were to get something like a BMP or Bradley.

[draconus]

On 7/24/2022 at 7:57 PM, Cyan_Knight said:

I am aware that this might be a bit of a challenge, but if there was a way to enable First Person control of an infantry unit, similar to that of the manpad, only with improved actions and movement animations. That would probably bring even some Arma 3 players to this game and enable an entire new form of simulation especially with the Apache's capability to hunt around trees.

Well, the fully fledged FPS game it will be not because of feasibility and technical problems (needs a lot more quality and objects on the ground, buildings' interiors, huge task and resource hog) but...

if to just throw the basic FPS stuff it could work the same as CA is now - meaning not full vehicle sim. I mean the code is right there. Ejected pilot can walk around now (even works in VR) - just add running, crouching and lying down. It is simple camera movement. Animations for soldiers are already there. Shooting/aiming reticle is already part of CA, so are binoculars or NVGs. Add some comms options, obviously changing weapon (if available), grenade throwing, embark, disembark on vehicles (No, no tank main gun shooting! You're just a boot! But you can change unit it's CA) and it would be cool. I'd totally play it

[WinterH]

This just won't die will this...

No, adding basic infantry controls won't make it even a rough equivalent to ARMA, including the first one from 2001, and it won't entice any ARMA player to jump ship, or even try DCS just because.

And adding anything more than that is both out of scope and even at times counterproductive for DCS. Being able to lean or switch weapons won't make ground level detail look any better, nor will it make building interiors modeled. Without which it'll remain nothing more than a novelty to joke around with when bored. And making ground level textures and details and object density as good as an FPS as well as makin building interiors modeled is anathema to having a well performing flight sim that covers huge swathes of land while still performing well. Look at 90 percent of user complaints about DCS, do they tend to prefer it to perform better or allow them to be GI?

What's needed to really much improve ground war experience in DCS is giving ground AI a huge overhaul instead. Like soldiers having loadouts portion of such an FPS can be helpful, ie give most infantryman the ability to use and anti tank weapon etc. And to make the "RTS" control aspect of ground units with combined arms module much better too.

Let FPS games be that and flight sims be flight sims is the answer here and no, it's not coming from a place of narrow mindedness. It's more from understanding huge differences in priorities of the genres and the fact that engineering anything is often an art of compromises. Also any effort that'd be put into a tacked on FPS experience here would be effort not put into making ground AI much better than it is, which is something that's really needed.

[Callsign112]

On 7/26/2022 at 3:01 AM, WinterH said:

This just won't die will this...

No, adding basic infantry controls won't make it even a rough equivalent to ARMA, including the first one from 2001, and it won't entice any ARMA player to jump ship, or even try DCS just because.

And adding anything more than that is both out of scope and even at times counterproductive for DCS. Being able to lean or switch weapons won't make ground level detail look any better, nor will it make building interiors modeled. Without which it'll remain nothing more than a novelty to joke around with when bored. And making ground level textures and details and object density as good as an FPS as well as makin building interiors modeled is anathema to having a well performing flight sim that covers huge swathes of land while still performing well. Look at 90 percent of user complaints about DCS, do they tend to prefer it to perform better or allow them to be GI?

What's needed to really much improve ground war experience in DCS is giving ground AI a huge overhaul instead. Like soldiers having loadouts portion of such an FPS can be helpful, ie give most infantryman the ability to use and anti tank weapon etc. And to make the "RTS" control aspect of ground units with combined arms module much better too.

Let FPS games be that and flight sims be flight sims is the answer here and no, it's not coming from a place of narrow mindedness. It's more from understanding huge differences in priorities of the genres and the fact that engineering anything is often an art of compromises. Also any effort that'd be put into a tacked on FPS experience here would be effort not put into making ground AI much better than it is, which is something that's really needed.

Narrow mindedness would be calling CA a "bad idea"!

I liked drac's last comment because I think he was pretty accurate in pointing out the realities of the current situation.

But my own preference would be for ED to stay focused on keeping players in vehicles/aircraft, and use a more capable Ai infantry to populate the battle field to the desired density of attacking/defending the real players.

 

 

[exhausted]

On 7/24/2022 at 12:57 PM, Cyan_Knight said:

I am aware that this might be a bit of a challenge, but if there was a way to enable First Person control of an infantry unit, similar to that of the manpad, only with improved actions and movement animations. That would probably bring even some Arma 3 players to this game and enable an entire new form of simulation especially with the Apache's capability to hunt around trees.

Great idea!

[Apocalypse31]

First person control for infantry would be AWESOME. 

 

Digital

Combat

Simulator

[8bitman]

Hey I'm currently working on this project... It quite odd as the walking animation for the m4 and ak soldiers is separate. But. Right now the goal is to make a walking 50 cal. If any one has any knowledge pls contact me!

[3WA]

Best of luck man!  ANY FPS at this point is more than welcome!

[BoomBoom]

Has to happen sooner or later.

Edited October 26, 2022 by BoomBoom

[Tenebrae Aeternae]

On 7/27/2022 at 7:49 PM, Callsign112 said:

Narrow mindedness would be calling CA a "bad idea"!

It propably was a bad idea. I don´t know if many people actually use it regularily? Although, i suppose answer to "how many bought it" determines if it was a good or a bad idea. I´ve found it a fun occational pastime, while waiting for other aircraft to finish their stuff in a Liberation campaign, but that´s about it. It´s just too barebones to justify spending time with it instead of flying, as one would expect.

I´d love some real improvements for ground AI though, especially to make chopper stuff more fun.

Arma is a bad comparison btw. It´s a great, fun game, but it´s not superb in anything.. and they have been at it for 20 years. Arma is one of those games, where everything is more or less a compromise to make it work as a whole (and some things are a compromise because ancient game engine, but you know..).

Edited October 26, 2022 by Tenebrae Aeternae

[Grodin]

32 minutes ago, Tenebrae Aeternae said:

It propably was a bad idea. I don´t know if many people actually use it regularily? Although, i suppose answer to "how many bought it" determines if it was a good or a bad idea. I´ve found it a fun occational pastime, while waiting for other aircraft to finish their stuff in a Liberation campaign, but that´s about it. It´s just too barebones to justify spending time with it instead of flying, as one would expect.

I´d love some real improvements for ground AI though, especially to make chopper stuff more fun.

Arma is a bad comparison btw. It´s a great, fun game, but it´s not superb in anything.. and they have been at it for 20 years. Arma is one of those games, where everything is more or less a compromise to make it work as a whole (and some things are a compromise because ancient game engine, but you know..).

 

I think ArmA is great comparison. DCS and ArmA are the leading simulations in their own area (Flying for DCS, Infantry combat for Arma). Surely ArmA is not superb in everything, just like DCS, however given some mods it is by far the best combined arms infantry sim out there. Many armed forces use it for training. And just like DCS it does not do well outside its main focus, flying planes in ArmA is like driving cars in DCS. Game engines in both titles have evolved so much over time theres barely anything original left now, yet in a way it is still the same old engine (sort of..).

 

On 7/24/2022 at 11:06 PM, Jascha said:

And add battle royale!

That would probably bring some players from Warzone. Or maybe even from Fortnite!

(/sarcasm off)

Seriously. Let DCS be DCS and ARMA be ARMA. If you want to play "tactical" FPS, there is plenty to choose from. No need to turn DCS into a jack of all trades (master of none). It is an exceptional product because it excels in combat FLIGHT simulation. CA is just a gimmick.

In short: a terrible idea.

Arma and warzone/fortnite could not be further apart. They have as much in common as ace combat and DCS. Warzone and fortnite have totally different target audience, Arma is a sim.

 

However i think there are many much more important improvements to be made before this should get any priority. Only potential i see for first person contol would be for immersion, walking from supercarrier briefing room to the deck and climbing to the cockpit for example or to perform a walk around before flight - i think this would offer more than a very simplified infantry combat extension to CA. Maybe after the AI and performance issues have been fixed?

[3WA]

3 hours ago, Tenebrae Aeternae said:

Arma is a bad comparison btw

I agree that Arma is nothing great.  There is another "World" simulation in pre-Alpha on Unreal 5 coming out.  I won't mention it's name here, but it aims for DCS sim level aircraft, while also introducing sim vehicles and FPS.  Tech is moving on from Arma.

[3WA]

3 hours ago, Grodin said:

Only potential i see for first person contol would be for immersion, walking from supercarrier briefing room to the deck and climbing to the cockpit for example or to perform a walk around before flight

The problem with FPS in DCS is the ground is just not there.  The terrain is just too simple.  As are the buildings.  The trees are decent though.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

More to an infantry unit than just rifles, an infantry unit is a collective entity, command and control at every level, etc. etc. 

Asking for infantry in DCS is beyond just giving you a first person view. A lot more.

[Zanimoniak]

If the community wants CA to have FPS capability then the least ED can do is make it possible for the community to create mods to make this a reality. This way ED can be productive elsewhere while creating potential for an FPS. Similarly for Sea combat where players can control ships and submarines. All that's needed is some modification to the game engine from the side of ED, so that the community can create mods allowing it to happen.

[Andrew8604]

On 7/25/2022 at 11:30 PM, draconus said:

Well, the fully fledged FPS game it will be not because of feasibility and technical problems (needs a lot more quality and objects on the ground, buildings' interiors, huge task and resource hog) but...

if to just throw the basic FPS stuff it could work the same as CA is now - meaning not full vehicle sim. I mean the code is right there. Ejected pilot can walk around now (even works in VR) - just add running, crouching and lying down. It is simple camera movement. Animations for soldiers are already there. Shooting/aiming reticle is already part of CA, so are binoculars or NVGs. Add some comms options, obviously changing weapon (if available), grenade throwing, embark, disembark on vehicles (No, no tank main gun shooting! You're just a boot! But you can change unit it's CA) and it would be cool. I'd totally play it

I think this is a good idea.

Also, the option to lead 1, 2 or 3 other AI ground troops, somewhat like a flight of 4 aircraft.  And a commands menu (or key mapped) to command your AI soldiers into different formations and set fire control (ROE).  Also, to be able to equip yourself and those AI soldiers in ME with:  Main weapon:  rifle, squad automatic weapon (BAR, M60, M249, RPK, etc.), pistol, RPG, etc; quantity of ammo and grenades; up to some maximum weight.  Ability to board an APC or utility vehicle (like a Jeep), and a helicopter, of course.  Ability to sit in one of two passenger spots at the door on the UH-1H or other helicopters, (your AI units will occupy other seating spots on the helo as well) and be able to fire your main weapon from the helicopter...such as hand firing your M60 to help out the door gunner, or if there is no door gunner.  AI soldiers should be smart enough to duck to the ground if under fire but not so skilled as to be able to down a Huey from 500 yards with an AK-47 or -74...as they can pretty much do now.  I think it would be a lot of fun in MP...if it can be done.  4 MP players could pretty effectively command a small 16-man platoon, deployed on two Hueys, for example.  ...AI Hueys or MP player piloted Hueys.  The lead squad could have a two-way radio and comms with other MP aircraft or ground units, and able to call in AI artillery fire or airstrikes or airlift.  Or they could be deployed in 4 Willy's Jeeps.  Which is another thing...make the Willy's Jeeps a little more detailed with working gauges and an optional tunable radio transceiver in the back and whip antenna, and optional 30-cal or 50-cal on a post-mount...and a low gear that can climb modest grades!  Right now, you have to turn around and back up the "ramps" to cross some bridges. LOL

Right now, it seems that AI soldiers and AAA open-mount gunners cannot be "suppressed" with high volumes of small arms fire, machine gun fire, artillery fire or close air support fire.  They won't duck and stay down for a moment.

It's not going to be perfect.  The ground is not that detailed (unless the ground could be highly detailed in the local area of a foot soldier).  It likely can't be done with more than a couple platoons at a time.  Maybe just enough to go find a downed pilot and get him to an LZ and get everyone out?  But it would still be pretty cool, I think.

[Butcher868]

CA need more functions and more Love!
DCS stands for Digital Combat Simulator and that means in my Opinion a good Tank, Truck and Infantry gameplay, too!

So ED do your Job for CA! I am a big fan of your planes and spend a lot of money for DCS. But CA was worthless!

[Hobel]

Am 17.4.2023 um 13:34 schrieb Butcher868:

CA need more functions and more Love!
DCS stands for Digital Combat Simulator and that means in my Opinion a good Tank, Truck and Infantry gameplay, too!

So ED do your Job for CA! I am a big fan of your planes and spend a lot of money for DCS. But CA was worthless!

Basically yes, CA still has a lot of potential and some details could be worked out, but what do they expect from tanks or vehicles?
 

As an example, what more can you do with a Sa-15 than what I show in the video, basically all the functions are there and I am able to reconnoiter and shoot down aircraft.

the same with the tank and APC.
Multiple zoom levels, IR, laser rangefinder and an automatic fire solution what else do I need?

 

PvP Gameplay

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by Hobel

[Harzach]

Arma is frequently referred to as a "walking simulator." The most popular terrains are the smaller, more highly-detailed ones.

DCS terrains are orders of magnitude larger than Arma terrains, with a fraction of the elevation mesh resolution. 

Altis is Arma's Caucasus. Here is an accurate comparison:

 

One of the larger Arma terrains sits comfortably inside a 3x3 grid square box.

The vast majority of Arma players don't want this, and I would wager that a decent amount of those who think they do would change their mind pretty quickly.

Improving AI is always welcome, but let's not waste any time on this pipe dream.