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

[-=Borz=- 10]

Real men play against real men :) When having to choose between being a seagull on a server with JIP and not be able to enter the game at all (forced to wait in lobby for that matter), I would most likely not want to waste my time on flying around.

Well, maybe they can implement a system by which you can enter a shooting range (if you are alone) or a small PVP Arena against other players who are waiting after getting killed. This could stop automatically when the next game starts. Or just enjoy the privilege if being able to fly like a seagull and discover new ambush places for your next mission :)

Edited June 19, 2011 by -=Borz=-

[HyperU2 11]

If I'm a seagull I want the ability to crap on people. Getting an accurate CCIP for that would be a bit much I suppose.

[dmarkwick 261]

No, i believe it has something to do with great games ending up in the gutter in the name of accessibility. And i can completely understand why, Arma is almost the last bastion for quality and player freedom.

THAT is why people are jumpy at the term "accessibility", its not because they're on a high horse, they just don't want it to go down a route it can't possibly come back out of...

As you seem to be the most vocal mouthpeice of this miscomprehension brigade, I'll address you.

What great games that end up in the gutter do you refer to? I'm eager to see how you pin ability to use the software easily as the cause.

Edited June 19, 2011 by DMarkwick

[metalcraze 290]

Yet, I will join the server, wait for the mission to be over, chating/texting with other who are dead, then play for a few hours, JIP is good as long as you know how to add it(JIP as seagulls, how hard can it be?), which mission maker for some reason fail to do so now adays. And the most important thing you should damn well remember: Many people starts to love COOP back in OFP days through entering a public COOP server.

Real man play without respawn.

Don't forget that OFP was more unforgiving and much less accessible to newbies than ArmA. The tutorial was spread across all of the campaign, you couldn't glue a crosshair to the center of the screen, you didn't have all those magical indicators on easier difficulties helping you, rockets also had ballistics. At best it was just a map screen showing you units and an armour letting you to take one more bullet on 'cadet'. So obviously a "quality" of an average player was higher. Set ArmA to 'recruit' and you will be doing mass killing of enemies in no time.

(My OFP MP gaming started playing COOPs and some PvPs with friends on private servers then moved to playing COOPs with clans on private servers.

Although I've also played on public servers afterwards.)

That is not true, some people have put lots of effort to follow intructions and be able to learn a bit, but still find difficult to be able to play. We do not want COD kiddies either, but just want to be able to play.

And the only way for BIS to allow you to play easily is to disable or heavily nerf mod support.

Many server owners cater the game to their needs and playstyle through using mods that often change the game drastically. It's an integral part of the game. Without it ArmA isn't ArmA.

Obviously to disable cheating through mods admins are often forced to lock the server through a password or force a specific set of mods on you.

Obviously BIS will do nothing about the above - it will be a suicide for the game.

As for installing mods - it is indeed piss easy now in comparison to how it was earlier. Six-updater now services the most popular mods and installing them is a matter of a few clicks so I don't understand how can anyone spend hours on installing mods?

BF2, CoDs - they are easy to "access" and play because they have none of this freedom in mod support, they are not flexible like ArmA.

ArmA gives a lot of freedom in modding and as a side effect - the need to install mods, some being obscure - is a price everyone has to pay.

Tracking all of mods is impossible.

Edited June 19, 2011 by metalcraze

[-=Borz=- 10]

"As for installing mods - it is indeed piss easy now in comparison to how it was earlier. Six-updater now services the most popular mods and installing them is a matter of a few clicks so I don't understand how can anyone spend hours on installing mods? "

I tried to use six updater a long time ago and it was not a few clicks, and was still getting messages informing me of of lack of files from ACE when i was trying to play, therefore, I had to uninstall it because of that.

We know you are an addon-intalling guru, but just want you to know that adding mods is not easy for many people. And as customers we want to let BI know many of us struggle despite all the efforts they and some talented members of the community have made, which we appreciate.

[Daniel 0]

Yeah, SIX Updater is perhaps not the best example when you consider all the controversy that surrounded it. I know some people find it really easy, it still confuses the hell out of me. :p

[4 IN 1 0]

Don't forget that OFP was more unforgiving and much less accessible to newbies than ArmA. The tutorial was spread across all of the campaign, you couldn't glue a crosshair to the center of the screen, you didn't have all those magical indicators on easier difficulties helping you, rockets also had ballistics. At best it was just a map screen showing you units and an armour letting you to take one more bullet on 'cadet'. So obviously a "quality" of an average player was higher. Set ArmA to 'recruit' and you will be doing mass killing of enemies in no time.

(My OFP MP gaming started playing COOPs and some PvPs with friends on private servers then moved to playing COOPs with clans on private servers.

Although I've also played on public servers afterwards.)

Thats why you play the campaign first.

[Cookieeater 10]

-Mods need to be downloaded and installed in-game if the client does not have the mods that the server requires. Third party tools, yet friendly, are invisible to nearly 90% of the community.

-Remake the server browser and implement something similar to Source engine server browsers, with tabs for Internet/Favorites/History/Lan

If BIS implements this, I will be an extremely happy customer.

[krazikilla 5]

A lot of guys here seems like to have the attitude:

People who are too stupid / lazy to keep the game working, are COD - Kiddies and shouldnt play this game.

Thats wrong.

Even if the game is more userfriendly in keeping it up to date and running the mods, doesnt mean that all servers gets swarmed by rambo-kids.

Infact it does mean the more public servers gets maybe swarmed by them.

AND?

Lot of players, not just rambo-kids finally can play the game, and if they want they can search a community and join the more serious games.

Just as it is now, BUT with more players!

Sooo:

- Let the gamplay as complex as it is

- Make the Game-Aroundings more userfriendly, so non-IT gurus can also handle the updating and the Addons and are able to join nice servers.

- Give the possibilty with locked servers again, to keep the new gained customers away from serious games. They can join later by joining the community anyway.

Whers a disatvantage here?

Why people cant understand, that also average gamers, want to play this game in a serious way, without trying to get the game running for hours? :confused:

To bring my example again, i tryed 3 friends to bring to arma (all over 20 years, and non COD players). They were very much interested in the game but dropped it after a few days. NOT because of actually gaming, BUT because of all the things they had to do, to enjoy realistic gaming.

[Innomadic 10]

As you seem to be the most vocal mouthpeice of this miscomprehension brigade, I'll address you.

What great games that end up in the gutter do you refer to? I'm eager to see how you pin ability to use the software easily as the cause.

Ghost Recon, Rainbow 6, OFP, Splinter Cell, Forza 3 (small extent), GRID, F1 2010 to name a few.

And i think you mis-understand. Developers say "more accessable" and then the games themselves turn out to be another generic shooter. I'm not saying there should not be a more user friendly system to using the software, however it almost every case where "accessibility" has been the word of the year, its affected gameplay, not the menu systems.

THAT is what i'm referring to.

[avibird 1 154]

Ghost Recon, Rainbow 6, OFP, Splinter Cell, Forza 3 (small extent), GRID, F1 2010 to name a few.

And i think you mis-understand. Developers say "more accessable" and then the games themselves turn out to be another generic shooter. I'm not saying there should not be a more user friendly system to using the software, however it almost every case where "accessibility" has been the word of the year, its affected gameplay, not the menu systems.

THAT is what i'm referring to.

Stop all your masterbutation over the word "accessibility" you have know from the first few posts what I was asking for with ARMA3. Why to you go on stroking it STOP :cool: Like I said after 10+ years and how many games BOHEMIA did not sellout we are safe. Yes most developers sellout for the buck your right but this is not about that. Try to help I give some input how you think BOHEMIA can make it easy for players to meet/chat and play.

You can't be that close minded to see if you want to play other then WARFARE/DOM ECT it is real hard at times to find open public rooms to play in and meet players with the same mind set.

Try to help the Conversation of the topic and STOP masterbutation over the word of "accessibility".

My goal is for a setup/system that will allow players of the same mind set to meet/chat and play in open public rooms to help the community to grow.

Edited June 20, 2011 by AVIBIRD 1

[Leg 10]

Hey listen,

I've played OFP, Arma1, and now Arma2, and it's gotten more and more realistic.. OFP you technically get thrown out there as a lone survivor and fight for your life like rambo, taking out tanks left and right, and as it progresses along it becomes harder to do so in Arma1 through Arma2 to today. But I must say, everyone seems to love OFP! The reason why is because it's

small, simple, unique, and great

versus

bulky, computer demanding, filled with unneeded visuals

etc.

But the main thing is, in OFP I can find a server running a simple coop mission, and join some guys and play it, and if we fail then we can retry it. For some damn reason, it's a lot more enjoyable in simple ol' OFP (even though you can't even join a game while it's in progress cuz its old) to play coop and fun game modes, than it is in confusing, bulky, mod-littered Arma2. The players are also much more friendly in OFP, and you've never seen such a type of DM where people are sniping you standing up with G36's from 1000meters every time they turn a corner.. I can rambo as such on Arma2, but only because I know how OFP was, and I see a lot of people on Arma2 who just think 'Oh Its a simulator, I'm supposed to get shot and die and not be able to shoot 100 people', yet there I am , infantry soldier having the best fuckin time with my buds, 50 infantry kills, 5 tank kills, no deaths, etc..

Why? OFP's multiplayer was much simpler, friendlier, had a better smaller community, and was less just 'random people joining, dieing, getting shot, clutterish visuals and shit all over the damn place'.. Arma2 definately needs some kinda better base for 'coop', 'ctf', etc. and just simple vanilla Arma2, not having to join a stupid Realism Unit just to have 'fun' while playing coop, install 2GB ace2 + their custom mods, etc. and have them get shot up 'realistically'.. I sometimes fantasize having a DM match against 'realism unit' guys with all their mods and shit on, and see how they would like it! I'd have fun killing them while they think they're secure with their 'tactics' haha, but they wouldn't.. cuz they're just running in there dieing, you see my point? Yea. Need more 'vanilla Arma2', getting sniped in the face by elite AI is the norm, you don't need to tweak it so they fire 5000 bullets, miss all but one, and then proceed to fire at the corner you disappeared at. You can fuckin be a rambo squad if you weren't always tweaking the MP coop AI to be pussies, and still just using 'spam players into the zone getting killed' tactics like I've seen on all the normal arma2 coop servers: which is very damn unattractive btw.

Sry, I can type real fast so this is like nothing, but if you bothered reading, I'mma end my rant here..

Edited June 21, 2011 by Leg

[Innomadic 10]

Stop all your masterbutation over the word "accessibility" you have know from the first few posts what I was asking for with ARMA3. Why to you go on stroking it STOP :cool: Like I said after 10+ years and how many games BOHEMIA did not sellout we are safe. Yes most developers sellout for the buck your right but this is not about that. Try to help I give some input how you think BOHEMIA can make it easy for players to meet/chat and play.

You can't be that close minded to see if you want to play other then WARFARE/DOM ECT it is real hard at times to find open public rooms to play in and meet players with the same mind set.

Try to help the Conversation of the topic and STOP masterbutation over the word of "accessibility".

My goal is for a setup/system that will allow players of the same mind set to meet/chat and play in open public rooms to help the community to grow.

Dude i'm supporting you, i understand what you mean, i'm just sick and tired of people saying they're disappointed with the community for being so harsh. But the fact is people responded when BFBC and CoD were in the title, i'm trying to explain why people responded the way they did.

But if people are still going to go along that line, i'm going to keep bringing up this one until we all get over the fact that that is how people responded to the initial, and not the subsequent re-post of your intended point.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

It seems the issue is people cant ask for accessibility without (by association) blaming the community as a whole and complicating the issue.

It is the community that is to blame for all the awsome mods and the TS comm servers, and the 'boring' Dom and insuuregncy, and infact, all the servers available to play on. And it seems we are quite proud of it (note sarc')(wonder why).

At least the OP got a tiny bit closer to the mark this time by stating 'out of the box'. What he failed on though (and dont take this personaly AVBIRD 1 coz no-ones got it right so far) is that there is only one issue here and only one solution.

BIS run servers.

Now if you had started a topic on 'Why are ther no BIS run servers, can we have some please? Because...... You wouldn't have been looking at what is essentialy 17 pages of OT. But would would have opened a related, but different can of worms.

Edited June 20, 2011 by Pathetic_Berserker

[4 IN 1 0]

Its still a can of worm, and quite surely won't end well:p

Back On topic

Bi run servers, how much money would they need every month to support it?

Besides there is a point which most people seems to overlook: server admins

These people are the one who are there to restart mission, choosing mission, making sure everyone play IAW server rules, and kick muppets out of the window; which most public server are lacking.

[dmarkwick 261]

Ghost Recon, Rainbow 6, OFP, Splinter Cell, Forza 3 (small extent), GRID, F1 2010 to name a few.

And i think you mis-understand. Developers say "more accessable" and then the games themselves turn out to be another generic shooter. I'm not saying there should not be a more user friendly system to using the software, however it almost every case where "accessibility" has been the word of the year, its affected gameplay, not the menu systems.

THAT is what i'm referring to.

I see, then as you rightly point out yourself, you are choosing to misinterpret the thread and complain that ArmA3 should not become a different game. Perhaps we should maintan a policy of trying not to insist on dragging other people's misinterpretation of words into rather simple discussions? ;)

Accessible = easy to approach, reach, enter, speak with, or use. That's the online definition BTW :) I think we can all agree that ArmA could do with being more easy to approach, reach, enter, speak with, or use.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Funny that only few missions can "destroy" or "split" a community. Isn't it up to the server admins and people there to choose from a variety of missions? Blaming BIS or mission designers and not those lazy or overanxious players isn't the right solution. Better if you go an convince those people that there are more enjoyable missions free to download + play.

Btw 10 years is a long time and the new generation of players might not have the same mindset or gameplay preferences like old veterans.

"Accessibility" is just one of those trendy words which are used for diplomatic correctness in marketing.

"Userfriendly" sounds old-fashioned and points out that the product isn't so great for all people / easy to handle for everyone.

[mrcash2009 0]

*Sorry, ignore this post.*

[paragraphic l 2]

I think the community could also help by creating a better place to find a Community you'd like to play with. Not every group is a clan, nor does every clan have requirements to be and stay a member. If there would be a website commited to arma communities like, armaholic for addons, devheaven for developers, armastack for questions, etc.

I think that would help aswell as most described issues are made by the community in the first place, mods & addons, 'incomplete' usermade missions, lack of teamwork, VON vs TS etc.

I'll quote myself here to avoid repeating myself.

Could we help by creating a website or something where public servers and private servers can promote or something? Maybe having votes on what you want to see where? Having servers dedicated to one mission and if full having a second dedicated one? I dunno just thinking out loud here.

Official servers, either by BIS or by community could create a lot of opportunities to welcome new members, to keep a balance between different missions being played, etc.

I don't see this happening though, this community is vocal and doesn't like change. Servers cost money and big ones lots of time and effort.

---

Do public servers and their users make use of the vote mission option?

If the vote missions screen would just be shown after every mission people can show what they want to play in a democratic way... maybe causing more rotation in between types of missions?

[SPC.Spets 21]

I can tell, that the lack of accesibility you are talking about, is not the reason that this game is not popular as other games like COD/BF

I know many ppl that dont play this game for other reasons than accesibility. and they are: The game needs a good hardware, the game is slow (dont confuse, I like that way) too realistic, no autorespwan, no autohealing, not easy to learn, etc, etc, etc

Some people just want to join a server and start shoting/killing to see their frags and stats, those are BF/CSboys and we dont want them here!

[Przemek_kondor 13]

@Spets15: "We"? Means who exactly?

There is separate thread "Why this game is not more popular" (or something like that) for such discussion. Here we're discussing thing which affects also many members of _this_ community not only new players. I know few valuable players which have come from "quake and co." games

[demonized 20]

I can tell, that the lack of accesibility you are talking about, is not the reason that this game is not popular as other games like COD/BF

I know many ppl that dont play this game for other reasons than accesibility. and they are: The game needs a good hardware, the game is slow (dont confuse, I like that way) too realistic, no autorespwan, no autohealing, not easy to learn, etc, etc, etc

Some people just want to join a server and start shoting/killing to see their frags and stats, those are BF/CSboys and we dont want them here!

agreed.

and OT, the reason why most open public servers is running domination, insurgency or something similar is becasue thats the missions easiest to maintain over a extended period of time, even withput admins.

If you want proper coop mission play, you do wise to join a clan so you get away from the "public quick play guys/COD guys", because its them that keep domination etc alive, its the same jump in, quick fun, same stuff, but dynamic enough to be repeated over and over again.

are you willing to pay a admin to watch a 32 slot server 24/7? are you willing to pay 10 admins?

or 100?

being admin on a public server is a fulltime job, many that are admins on public servers, play the game 40% admin stuff 60%, usually.

It is no joke keeping up with a full public server.

i cant tell how many times ive played the same map on BFBC2 MP, but i still do it, when i desire such gameplay, also when that doesnt do it for me, i jump in on a public domination or insurgency server.

Not meaning to say anything negative about domination or insurgency at all, Dom is my favourite general MP mission off all time.

insurgency is a clear 2nd for me.

you cannot force good coop on a open internet game, it is simply impossible, you need friends or likeminded people gathered in groups to get that, and it often means a no public server or locked one.

only way to limit griefing or cheating or hacking is to limit the openess of the game, meaning less possibilty to mod, script or edit. wich is blasphemy to all.

for the VON or TS, i play alot of COD and BF online, and its no different.

most people on public servers are shy or use text chat, or simply doesnt give a rats ass since they are there for the quick fun.

as for the acessability, we have BI forums, also think there are twitter, facebook, and irc realtime chat. so that is kindof covered.

[-Luc- 10]

Hi,

Sooner or later you will end up buying it, I am 100 % sure mate ;) and you still have ~ 1 more year of temptations....

Maybe...

But I'll wait to see if something like CSLA come out.

Otherwise, ARMA 3 has little interest for me because the choices ​​BIS made.

Right now I'm more interested in Iron Front-Liberation 1944.

I prefer WW2 era rather the futuristic approach of ARMA 3.

Thank you,

-Luc-

[iceman77 18]

Not a real BF and certainly not a COD fan,but I agree with the op to an extent. That was one good thing during my month or so playing BF.At any time, I could hop onto a populated TvT server.Sadly, as phenomenal as the game's always been, it's always been up to the community to work with whats given to make such game modes, rent the servers etc. Arma is a double edged sword, especially for a PvP oriented player.There's the huge potential for consistent (daily) large scale, virtual TvT warfare (no AI). But the modability has scattered the various players into their own little worlds;Add to that most are DayZ/coop servers. The legit TvT is inconsistent, filled with novice scripters and map makers who can't deliver brilliance like the pros, so to most it's not an attractive scene. The days of brilliant scripters buying in with hard work & brilliant scenarios for the TvT scene are long gone. Karrillion,Zaphod,PvP scene,Celery come to mind when I think of these kinds of scripters/map makers.

BI should make legit C&H and AAS game modes.And I'm not talking about the current sector control. Seriously, give us a TvT game mode where you put true effort and intricacy into the UI/Dialog boxes and into the scenarios themselves. Yes, believe it or not, your average new player wants to see snazzy UIs & intricate scenarios. I guess this last sector control game mode was a start, but it still seems rushed/half done. The game has enormous, untapped TvT potential. Most of the people who actually like coop games (killing AI) are already playing the game. So what's left wide open? The TvT players market is left wide open. The only place BI could go is up, if they decide to make some outstanding TvT scenarios.Cause guess what? In the future, most of the BF/COD/DayZ players coming over to the game, are expecting some killer TvT. Whenever I go into a WF server, the new players always want to kill players, not AI. They get frustrated, troll, blow up bases, TK, troll some more and leave. Probably for good. /rantoff =P

note: To people claiming the pvp was always non-existent or not ment for Arma, you must have been deep into coops at the time. Or you must not have been around when there were several populated C&H/AAS servers going. Including organized campaigns & tournaments. Servers where you could in fact hop into for a few minutes, have a blast and then get off. That is all.

my2c,

David

Edited October 31, 2012 by Iceman77

[instagoat 133]

Didn´t read thread, just want to cause mayhem by going full semantics.

"Accessibility" is wrong. The word you´re searching for is "Usability"

Accessibility means to reduce entry and overall challenge so the lowest common denominator in the target audience can successfully use the product. Press A to win, basically.

Usability means to improve interface, mechanics and documentation so that the lowest common denominator in the target audience, while not being able to "win" right out of the box, can learn the product successfully and become competitive at it, WITHOUT degrading Gameplay, Difficulty, Complexity or Mechanics (!).

There is a massive difference.

If you wanted to make Arma more Accessible you would need to do the following for example: Increase running speed, increase Body-protection at all difficulty levels, remove features that depend on heavy documentation (Squad command, advanced Editor features, advanced Mission features, formations, etc), remove features that are difficult for players to grasp or alter mechanics so concepts that are hard to grasp become less important (ie not punishing players running around in the open), and basically adjust, throw out or add features until the entirety of the game is enjoyed by the majority of your selected target group (In this case, casual gamers with an interest in hard shooters, but not too hard pls).

Usability is completely different. Usability means that you explain what feature does what, and why, and what it is good for. You teach basics, move, stance, shoot. Then move up to simple cover vs concealment lessons. Then move up to advanced shooting, shooting on the move and specialised infantry weapons. Then move on to basic command (2 Units, you and one underling), etc, etc, etc. Usability also means that you have documentation on everything the players could ask questions about. For example, mil-dot scopes should be -explained by the game-, and not by dyslexcis (fantastic) book. Have some sort of ingame wiki, perhaps. You also need to teach players how to go about tackling objectives.

Most players today are not familiar with the concept of getting a goal, but no way to achieve it. The closest one gets to that are games like Skyrim or GTA, where you have a mission marker, and you´re free to reach it how you see fit (while secretly still being railroaded trough clever level design).

In Arma, people stand in a forest, get an X on the map, and then they are left to hang dry. Normal gamers do not know about reconaissance, military approach to terrain, employment of weapons, and most people also have no clue how to use the command interface to coordinate an attack with multiple vehicles, different weapon types against a multitude of different threat targets that all need different handling. I know how to use the interface and I can´t do it 90% of the time because the command interface sucks. That is the third important thing about usabillity:

Interface. The Interface needs to be intuitive, self explanatory (or well documented if it can´t be), and as shallow and narrow as possible. It also needs to be extremely reliable (this is important mostly for context-sensitive stuff.).

The Interface and backend for player interaction are also important because if players can hook up with each other (that is why I like steam, for example, I can just ask another friend who is in the same game.) and help each other out if they run into problems, and easily set up multiplayer games (there we get back to good mission and mission template design, and editor documentation.), share scores and missions with each other, as well as download addons (!).

That´s my take on the whole Issue. Hope it makes sense :I

Cheerio. Insta