ARMA3 needs better ACCESSIBILITY for players to meet, chat and play out of the box!

[nodunit 397]

LOL that is what the OP was trying to get at the whole time... I guess sometimes it's hard to express yourself over a computer text? :cool:

Moreso many in the community assume that accessibility means more mainstream.

[5LEvEN 11]

I agree, MP does need something for friends, favorite servers. It would make things so much easier...

[SPC.Spets 21]

I can see friends playing Arma2 with Steam already, but thanks to the update I dont have to use Steam anymore, I dont like steam at all

[mrcash2009 0]

Moreso many in the community assume that accessibility means more mainstream.

Maybe the thread should be re opened with a different title and then stripped to 4 posts that say we need a lobby in MP etc and then merged into feature request topic :)

Or:

i always said that MP browser needs:

favourite servers - basic thing...

favourite players/friends...

easier filter settings

etc.

But even then, the one button click to join is pretty far away :rolleyes:

[avibird 1 155]

Moreso many in the community assume that accessibility means more mainstream.

How did you ever get that I wanted the gameplay or the command systems to be Easier or less then what it is from my first post. DON'T ASSUME you know what happens when we assume!

It is very hard to build a network of players in ARMA2 the way it was back with OFP days. I don't know about ARMA1 because I was playing the ELITE version then. I just feel warfare/dom kills the whole feel that I had with OFP.

If I was a new player who just found this game I could see why players would not get into this game because of the lack of accessibility to just play and find good host rooms.

Most of the vet players from OFP days are in locked rooms with friends playing. Who is around to teach or show the new blood HOW and WHAT this game is really all about.

DOM modes are a joke. Objective - Take a town that has maybe 1 squad of inf and some light vechicals around with a group of guys all doing there own thing. The two guys in the choppers on your team take out the armor 1500 meters away so you are left with 8-10 troops. town is Captured lets move on to the next so on and so on ect. FUN!!!

WARFARE yes in concept is great. A player vs player mode that is not just a DM or sector control. If you always had rooms with 64 players all the time it would be great. I don't like respwans or what ever weapons/vechical you want missions but that's just me. Most WARFARE games have less then 10 players and most of the players are doing there own thing. No real teamwork no real planing no real strategy required to play warfare.

Hope you understand I am a hardcore old time player that loves the game for the teamwork and strategy. If I gave you a chopper in a mission there would be multiple AA units to take you down so the inf would have to take out some of the AA units for you to support mission/inf. The inf would have limited AT rounds and there would be multiple armor units so you would need the chopper to assist in the mission. Everthing is link together as team. You could not complete a mission if one person was off. If the AT guy missed the armor. The armor would roll on your squad and lights out because everyone did not have a AT.

I know people still play like this but You can't find players like this with the current system. No I Don't want to join a clan and have to meet at the airport at 1500hrs for jump training or practice driving a tank in formation! I just want to play the fucking game when my wife says I can:butbut:

Better ACCESSIBILITY for players to meet,chat and play right out of the box. This is my goal for ARMA3. Thank you!

Edited June 18, 2011 by AVIBIRD 1

[Phantom Six 25]

Yeah. I'm sick of playing domination all day too. I wish I can find more open coop missions at rooms. I can find a few servers at times that r open (I'll bookmark those with addon sync) and play it but I wish there were more open rooms. My friend and I usually play in a lock room as well mainly cuz he's not very ok with random ppl joining because we had some ppl mess it up for us (maybe that's why ban or kick button is there). I prob would like to have more open rooms out there with real coop

[Macadam Cow 1]

Every day we're using more and more complex stuff (Cellphone, computers, cars,...) and in the same time we want them to be more and more user friendly.

In 50 years you'll give some coffee, a filter and a coffee machine to a teenager and he'll say "wtf m'I supposed to do with this ? So what ? I need to be a bachelor to make some coffee now ??? Where's my one click coffee machine ?"

I'm not sure the "always simpler" attitude is actually helping us. Specially when it is associated with the "always faster".

Soon or late people will have to understand that complex system/machine/game/.... requires a minimum of learning.

When I've first played OFP I was 13. I had discovered video games few years before, internet was something completely new to me, just like computers. I couldn't understand a single word of english and anyway most of the informations/documentations weren't available.

So I'm always a bit concerned when I see a 15 years old teenager coming here and claiming the accessibility sucks, that it is too hard to install mods and addons, that he can't find any tutorials,...

The guy is born in a "computerized" environnement, he was using the internet at the age of 4, started playing video games at 5 and had his first cell phone at 8.

He's really familiar with all those stuff, he actually never lived a single day without them.

Old people usually simply admit it's too hard for them to understand something while young people always think it was badly explained, they always think it's someone else's fault.

Well I'm sorry but I think these kind of people are dumb. And making things always simpler will not help them, to the contrary, it will allow them to think they're right and many other people will follow the same path.

It's too complicated for them ? Ok no problem, about 99% of the game market is made of "simpler" games that will perfectly fits what their looking for.

[Innomadic 10]

What did you expect when you mixed "CoD", "BF", "accessibility" and "should be in Arma"

[avibird 1 155]

Every day we're using more and more complex stuff (Cellphone, computers, cars,...) and in the same time we want them to be more and more user friendly.

In 50 years you'll give some coffee, a filter and a coffee machine to a teenager and he'll say "wtf m'I supposed to do with this ? So what ? I need to be a bachelor to make some coffee now ??? Where's my one click coffee machine ?"

I'm not sure the "always simpler" attitude is actually helping us. Specially when it is associated with the "always faster".

Soon or late people will have to understand that complex system/machine/game/.... requires a minimum of learning.

When I've first played OFP I was 13. I had discovered video games few years before, internet was something completely new to me, just like computers. I couldn't understand a single word of english and anyway most of the informations/documentations weren't available.

So I'm always a bit concerned when I see a 15 years old teenager coming here and claiming the accessibility sucks, that it is too hard to install mods and addons, that he can't find any tutorials,...

The guy is born in a "computerized" environnement, he was using the internet at the age of 4, started playing video games at 5 and had his first cell phone at 8.

He's really familiar with all those stuff, he actually never lived a single day without them.

Old people usually simply admit it's too hard for them to understand something while young people always think it was badly explained, they always think it's someone else's fault.

Well I'm sorry but I think these kind of people are dumb. And making things always simpler will not help them, to the contrary, it will allow them to think they're right and many other people will follow the same path.

It's too complicated for them ? Ok no problem, about 99% of the game market is made of "simpler" games that will perfectly fits what their looking for.

I have no clue what you are saying or smoking but WOW! I never said make the gameplay simpler I never said make the game controls easy and simple to command AI units. I want the game not so fucking hard to log on and find players who want to play the game as you do!

What did you expect when you mixed "CoD", "BF", "accessibility" and "should be in Arma"

Yes I asked the Moderator out of control aka wolla to change and remove BF/COD. My point BF/COD yes different game but it is easy to find games to play. I know different. The old GR had so many different game modes online but it was still easy to find the type of game you wanted to play anytime.

Edited June 18, 2011 by AVIBIRD 1

[Primarch 10]

I have no clue what you are saying or smoking but WOW! I never said make the gameplay simpler I never said make the game controls easy and simple to command AI units. I want the game not so fucking hard to log on and find players who want to play the game as you do!

Yes I asked the Moderator out of control aka wolla to change and remove BF/COD. My point BF/COD yes different game but it is easy to find games to play. I know different. The old GR had so many different game modes online but it was still easy to find the type of game you wanted to play anytime.

I don't even understand what you mean, you can always join a game and there will be people willing to co-operate with you if you ask. This is not like CoD or Battlefield as you require teamwork to have fun in the game. This is the reason it filters out people who do not wish to play as a team.

Also, what do you mean by logging in?

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Steamworks. Will solve accessibility.

[Innomadic 10]

Yes I asked the Moderator out of control aka wolla to change and remove BF/COD. My point BF/COD yes different game but it is easy to find games to play. I know different. The old GR had so many different game modes online but it was still easy to find the type of game you wanted to play anytime.

That is because CoD/BF have a setlist of gametypes and maps where there is no deviation. Every game is a combination of the setlist and the maps bundled with or added as (crappy) DLC a month after release (i.e too soon). With Arma you have Domination here, Warfare here, VTS here, ACE I44 there, Iron Wings over there...there are just too many gametypes that cannot be covered by a simple search engine.

Add to the fact that many servers are clan servers, and you have a precedent for many an unwanted player joining mid-game and ruining the game at the time. Since there are few popular public game modes, perhaps a detailed list of the most played mission types published on a forum would be better, since you would simply grab a word to filter the server list by, leading to the game you wanted?

I just don't see how searching by type of mission could work with Armas diversity.

[spec_ops_sniper 0]

I did not know if i wanted to respond to this thread, i am absolutely disgusted in the community right now.

AVIBIRD did not come in here saying "plez make call of duty", he was simply suggesting that finding games be more easier and accessible and in some ways simplified. this i do not agree, i think the current system is somewhat fine thouhg some improvements would be nice.

Why is it that every time someone says " accessibility " when refering to finding multiplayer the entire community comes in droves and instantly goes on a " go play cod" or " this isn't console" rampage. nowhere in the OP was there ANY mention of changing gameplay.

He simply suggested that it should be easier to find games.

If you don't understand a post do not reply, at least ask for some clarification

[Innomadic 10]

Why is it that every time someone says " accessibility " when refering to finding multiplayer the entire community comes in droves and instantly goes on a " go play cod" or " this isn't console" rampage. nowhere in the OP was there ANY mention of changing gameplay.

Because every time a dev has said "we're making it more accessible" in reference to more than one feature, we ended up with CoDs, BF's and OFP:RR's *shudders*

To say this community is twitchy at the mere whisper of "accessibility" with reference to CoD is an understatement.

[Windexglow 10]

Because every time a dev has said "we're making it more accessible" in reference to more than one feature, we ended up with CoDs, BF's and OFP:RR's *shudders*

To say this community is twitchy at the mere whisper of "accessibility" with reference to CoD is an understatement.

So by that logic, the best game is the least accessible game.

[Innomadic 10]

So by that logic, the best game is the least accessible game.

No, thats not logic at all, thats evidence by experience, for example CM decides to make OFP "more accessible", we get those abominations. Rainbow Six is nothing like its former self, neither is Ghost Recon. So many times the word "accessibility" has been flung around and resulting in truly astonishingly bad games.

Now apply that experience with "accessibility" and "Arma" and see what reaction you get.

[spec_ops_sniper 0]

Now apply that experience with "accessibility" and "Arma" and see what reaction you get.

I think we need a new word that doesn't imply effing the game up.

[Przemek_kondor 13]

No, thats not logic at all, thats evidence by experience, for example CM decides to make OFP "more accessible", we get those abominations. Rainbow Six is nothing like its former self, neither is Ghost Recon. So many times the word "accessibility" has been flung around and resulting in truly astonishingly bad games.

Now apply that experience with "accessibility" and "Arma" and see what reaction you get.

OFPDR was not more accessible (than even OFPCWC) in terms we're talking about here which is not the gameplay but MP (no JIP, standalone servers).

[nodunit 397]

...

Are you one of they who jump on the idea that people are trying to turn the game into call of duty or battlefield when certain terms are brought up? If not then my quote did not pertain to you.

Edited June 18, 2011 by NodUnit

[CarlGustaffa 4]

How about stop playing those dom/evo/warfare stuff and start making real deal mission for both COOP and PVP?

Back in the OFP days I play on COOP only server that content 80% of user made mission from silly ones to hardcore stuff, people just stop playing these type of mission now adays basicly because of those EVO thing.

Although even if I'm a coop player, I have issues with how these missions are played. But still I'm mostly a dom player. Why? Because the mission works with few issues, is pretty dynamic in nature, and doesn't require a hefty load of people to be played. Don't give all the blame to the missions themselves, it's the players who's been replaced since OFP. We installed hundreds of missions on our server, and I've yet to find a single one that is tuned well to our numbers (2-3, 5 on a very lucky day), that doesn't fill the server.rpt or is otherwise riddled with bugs. But even if they did work, they're simply not dynamic enough to promote replays. So if Dom isn't perfect, it's the most perfect for us. The few times we've opened up the server for public, it turns into mayhem and stupid players. I've played well organized Dom too, and it rocks as everything well organized is as long as mission is ok. But most of the time it's unorganized chaotic mayhem - mission played is irrelevant - they'll ruin anything. And the few things I've suggested to force restrictions onto players to more than suggest teamplay, I'm yelled at.

"Start making real deal missions"? The time spent on Dom is beyond comprehension I think, time most of us doesn't have. And to get that level of dynamics run smoothly takes a severe amount of programming skills, not to mention a comprehensive understanding how of the game works. Making complex missions for multiplayer filled with custom features isn't a trivial task. What is a commonly asked for feature in upcoming Arma versions? Dynamic campaigns. So everyone like dynamic missions. And so do I. Also in multiplayer.

So the biggest problem is the players themselves, not the mission. All we can hope for is penalties for those who doesn't play properly in a team added to all the popular missions, so it becomes painful to be an idiot. Or people will flee to the servers that are easiest to remain stupid on. We have possibility to use variable respawn times - use it. Sure there are times when it strikes unfavorably, like affecting us - but we're the patient ones, are we not? If not, we're just as bad as the stupid ones.

As for your second paragraph; no I didn't stop because of EVO thing - which I played about three times in Arma1 and never since (just not my style, have nothing against it as such) - but because hardcore tends to be too hardcore (been killed by alt tabbing idiot one hour into the game one too many times). I'm looking for good games, so I'm actively avoiding silly.

And no we are no Cod kiddies, we are all around 20-25 years.

And basicly the only game i am playing since 10 years is the OFP line.

So basically, you started out in Arma as a "Cod kiddies" (would make you 10-15 at the time)? See how that works? :D Anyhow, age doesn't determine it, but gaming maturity/style. Not all 10-15 year olds play like a "Cod kiddie", and there are certainly well grown men who plays far less experienced than I would have wished for and expected from them. Although older, I did come from a similar place myself into OFP - namely teambased tactical competitive Unreal Tournament (but I've since then lost my speed, lol). OFP didn't suck me in immediately, it took time. A long time. Eventually I could appreciate the danger and slower pace. And now I'm slower than most :D

You really think that CoD and BF players are willing to play coop? :confused:

Back on track - "accessibility".

* The game has already undergone changes to strive away somewhat from realism in order to make it more "accessible". JIP was a major advancement as you can join at any time allowing persistent missions, but made making MP missions even more difficult. New engineer capabilities aren't realistic at all, but I wouldn't loose them as they make the class more important. I was combat engineer, and all we did other than mine stuff and building stuff was blow things up - not fix them ;)

* After having performed "Basic Training", you should be well on the way of being a soldier. But outside training and into the actual campaign, new things, even complex features, should be explained more in detail as you go along, as long as some "enable tutorial tips" switch is enabled.

* Tonnes and tonnes of 1 man servers (incl. our own) tell me something; too much restrictions on servers on what mods are allowed to use (if at all). I'm sorry, but I prefer playing solo on a locked server than playing without my favorite (sound) mods.

* The builtin difficulty system scares people off (myself included). I simply cannot stand being forced to have crosshairs enabled. It would be much better if server set a maximum aid for any given difficulty option, rather than force it on us. Being a coop player, sure the server could have it enabled, as long as I was able to turn it off locally for myself. The same idea would apply to new things that might come, like TOH'ish helicopter flight model. Many seem to like the idea that we should have the idea to max out that setting. Did they miss the line "the developers are still learning to fly and find it extremely frustrating"? If I'm a competent pilot, the server could dictate a relatively low skill requirement which I could override and a newbie quickly get into, or it could set a high skill requirement and completely shut out the newbies.

* Some sort of cross server messaging could be a nice "accessibility" thing, but hacker spamming would be something to worry about. Logged in admins (not voted) could request aid by sending messages to other server. It could be a special ingame object to view the messages, and a time and length limit on the messages sent to avoid spam. The idea is to better support "better than Dom/Evo/WF" servers. Like "Server xxx needs help on a tactical realism based mission, starting in about 5 minutes". Most of my time in Dom is just for killing time, and JIP'ing into hardcore missions can be hard as you tend to get no information on anything that is going on. Getting back to base in my Dom session, I see the notice, and change server. So, not based on friends, but global events. Also, since I know only a logged in admin can send, there is a chance the game will actually be admined and controlled to obtain some level of team play. That have some persuasive power.

Accessibility in my view doesn't automatically mean dumbing things down.

@OP:

1. Like Warfare and Armex? And typically, high class/complex missions like Dom/EVO (never played btw)/BWF shows up pretty quickly after game release. What missions are more accessible than these?

2. Not denying that cheating is a problem, but we lock because 90% of the people joining isn't there to teamplay. They only want to run and gun.

3. We tried ingame chat. Didn't help. Many of the people don't respond to either verbal or written requests. They're there to blow shit up, not talk. Even simple things like "Ok, don't chat, but stay close to your teamleader" doesn't seem to be picked up. Nope, they're off with a chopper to somewhere. A new superhard flight dynamics wouldn't help a bit, they would just move the crash site closer...

And quite frankly, I don't get the anti console thing. I know console only gamers that play much more mature and tactical than oh so many of the Arma players. But I'm not only speaking of the "run & gun", but also of the general maturity, like spamming with user sounds or filling the radio with endless garbage. The platform doesn't make the player, the player does.

It's funny really. The game needs more players. The obvious place we're getting the from are the other shooters (I think Sims 3 players will stay put where they are), and then we tend to push them back to their game rather than help them adopt? As I said, I came from Unreal Tournament, and starting to like OFP didn't happen overnight. Now I'm an utter fanatic though, I admit :D

[tacticalnuggets 24]

I someday hope some of these game "sophisticates" will one day wake up and see how ridiculous they are being when they want the game to be unpopular. Some how, most people dont like massive worlds where they can go anywhere they want. Some how, most people dont like having a massive battle on that massive world. Some how, most people dont like realistic graphics and the adrenaline of being so fragile.

Some how, this community will fully awake to the stupidity they continue to perpetuate. That is the only some how I believe in. I have hope for you community, its never too late to wake up.

[Zipper5 74]

It's a unique style we love that we don't want to give up for the sake of popularity.

[tacticalnuggets 24]

It's a unique style we love that we don't want to give up for the sake of popularity.

How about you try articulating what your point is. How exactly will making the game more accessible give up its unique style?

[User2010 10]

I agree with the poster, BIS needs to focus on polishing an already good game which is arma2 then jump the gun and release more eye candy with the same flaws. Since Arma3 is on its way at least there a chance to put extra emphasis on UI and polish the multiplayer aspect of the game with focus on PVP.

A large percentage of people would really enjoy a realism based FPS but the the need to fiddle with arma and the almost none existent PVP community really brings it down.

[Zipper5 74]

Some how, most people dont like massive worlds where they can go anywhere they want.

Some how, most people dont like having a massive battle on that massive world.

Some how, most people dont like realistic graphics and the adrenaline of being so fragile.

Sorry, but I read that as "give up everything that makes ARMA unique and it will be popular." Or was there some other, philosophical/metaphorical meaning behind that? I thought it was pretty clear. :rolleyes: