Will Bohemia finally improve ARMA's PVP to attract New Players?

[katipo66 94]

I'm not sure. Does DayZ compete with CoD?

Maybe part of the issue is the various definitions of the word 'compete'. I'm taking it like direct competition in the genre of online FPSs. The part of that genre that taps into the kill/eat/repeat gratification loop that's been exploited in ever more refined ways since quake deathmatches or Counter Strike. I think perhaps comparing DayZ to CoD is more like the way jet engines compete with piston engines, or wheels compete with skids or what have you. If we're simply talking about indirectly influencing the market share, or online bandwidth usage of certain other games, simply out of application or popularity, that is more possible. I don't think that it's possible to really get the same thing out of both games, taking BI's previous games as an example.

No, of course im not thinking in terms off competing directly with COD/BF, the example was given as some people assume that BIS need not provide any type of PVP option because off reason a,b,c.

If they were to provide some option then the last thing i or i imagine anyone here would want is for it to look/smell/feel like anything close to other mainstream shooters.

Thats my interpretation, the fact that the words BOHEMIA/COMPETE/COD/BF/ are in the title will obviously allow for all sorts of definitions fuelled by emotion.

[max power 21]

Not even by emotion. If I'm looking for a fast paced arena style deathmatch with perks and bling and all kinds of crap, without a moment's break in the action to think, frankly ArmA 2 doesn't even register. I recently played a deathmatch style PVP arena mission with some people and it still turned into a sort of tactical hide and seek game. I used to play Counter Strike all the time- the most recent FPS game I played was BC2, and in my memory those two have much more in common than ArmA has with either of them. This isn't an emotional reaction, it's just the truth. A lot would have to change with ArmA 3 to give the same kind of experience. I'm afraid most players would not abandon the adrenaline self-injection site long enough to appreciate the depth of gameplay. I think the most likely thing that ArmA 3 PVP could do is provide a stepping stone for players who are sick of / not really into the whole intense kill streak style gameplay but still want to play something tactical and immersive, in terms of sucking money out of those franchises in a direct way, or turning around fans.

[LockDOwn 0]

How can you even dare to compare Arma that is aimed at realismk and teamwork with those generic FPS?

Easily, I just did.

For some reason many continue to think I am for removing the realism. I am not.

AGAIN....

I am for keeping the game AS IS!! I suggest that if you want to get rid of the empty server issue and appeal to millions of more gamers and thus more revenue, ADD ON online MP PvP elements like those offered in COD and BF3 with an ARMA twist!! It is win win for everyone!

[batto 17]

I would replace CoD in title with Rainbow 6 (till the Raven Shield) & Counter-Strike (for good team-play). CoD is just antoher Quake derivate in "realism" clothing with annoying unlocks. It has game-mode similar to CS too, but the game is still more unrealistic than CS and known mainly for deathmatches IMO.

Edited May 10, 2012 by batto

[whiskeytango 11]

I think I prefer the Arma 3 threads on BF3's forum a lot more than I enjoy the Bf3 threads on the A3 forums...

[pathetic_berserker 4]

If I'm looking for a fast paced arena style deathmatch with perks and bling and all kinds of crap, without a moment's break in the action to think, frankly ArmA 2 doesn't even register....

Hmm my experience has been a bit differnet. Before the OGN servers got battered simultaneously by flood, earthquake and GFC we would often have spontaneous PvP sesions that moved very fast with heaps of chaos, or better, decided to play a bit of PvP after a long serious CTI to wind down, only to get addicted to the quick bursts of adreneline and play on till the wee hours of the mornng. Maybe it would have been better if the discusion was purely one about possible ArmA PvP modes and missions, and folks tried to avoid any mention of the competition. Reality is ArmA wont be able to compete on a marketing, or no' of populated servers basis, as the others are cross platform, and marketing and bling iswhere much of thier development money goes. What it can compete with is the shear level of enjoyment and satisfaction you can get from PvP, to the piont where ArmA3 owners shouldn't need to own a BF or COD title to get thier fix.

[Ch3v4l13r 1]

There is already a PVP mod (PR) which is a AAS type mod( which is similar to BF conquest mode) out there which gets about 60+ players a day. Although 60+ players everyday is pretty good it doesn't suggest that having a working PVP in ARMA will make the game a whole lot more popular. I think the biggest problem is that a lot of people simple dont have the time and energy to play a ARMA type game. A lot of people after a hard day of work just want to turn their brain off and do something simple which doesn't require them to do a lot of planning and thinking.

[james2464 176]

I think I prefer the Arma 3 threads on BF3's forum a lot more than I enjoy the Bf3 threads on the A3 forums...

can you link us to these threads?

[Bee8190 10]

I don't see the point. BF3 and COD's player base are largely playing on consoles. Trying to atract those players towards a PC exclusive game is pointless.

You are probably focusing on the PC community's. Unfortunately they're not that big, if they even still exist, so please explain why BIS should use valuable time and resources, that can be spent on important features, to create a gameMODE that competes with 2 full GAMES so they can get maybe a couple of 100 more sales?

Not really. Also i don't think anyone has bought a game, and perhaps upgraded their PC, just to play a certain MP gamemode.:confused:

I think you underestimating the gamers, there's plenty of gamers having PC and console(s) too. Myself I bought X360 just to play forza motorsport (only) and friend got PS3 just to play GT5 and few other games. That said, I hate consoles to my bones core but there is no racing game out there like GT5 or FM fo PC's. (fuck you marketing)

So I'm not sure what ''valuable'' , re-payable resources do you mean but the said game modes are IMO what's missing really. That said, players spend lots of monies on HW & SW and good fun, established missions might as well see some reasoning behind getting the game.

Edited May 10, 2012 by Bee8190

[whiskeytango 11]

can you link us to these threads?

I think the thread was deleted =(

[NoRailgunner 0]

Lets say BIS will include 1-2 pvp missions just for the CoD/BF crowd - how long will it take before we will hear from this crowd that they got bored and that the game sucks? How many of them incl. OP do/will make their own missions or can be bothered to do something instead of moaning, crying and trying to show that its an "win-win for everyone" if BIS will do all the pvp missions/maps?? Would it be bad if BIS mission designers create something new and challenging using more than ~200x200m 'shoebox'/'kill' arenas?

[maddogx 13]

Lets say BIS will include 1-2 pvp missions just for the CoD/BF crowd - how long will it take before we will hear from this crowd that they got bored and that the game sucks? How many of them incl. OP do/will make their own missions or can be bothered to do something instead of moaning, crying and trying to show that its an "win-win for everyone" if BIS will do all the pvp missions/maps?? Would it be bad if BIS mission designers create something new and challenging using more than ~200x200m 'shoebox'/'kill' arenas?

You talk as if "they" would be some kind of separate community of clueless idiots who couldn't make a mission to save their life.

However, I submit to you that any group of people - even the poor retarded BF3/COD players you seem to despise so much - could produce a couple of mission makers to keep things interesting. I'm also pretty sure the old and new communities would be much more homogenous than you think, not such an "us vs. them" situation that seems to be perpetuated by the current "core" Arma community.

[batto 17]

Lets say BIS will include 1-2 pvp missions just for the CoD/BF crowd - how long will it take before we will hear from this crowd that they got bored and that the game sucks?

Eh? Next day? Never? Who cares? Stupid question really...

How many of them incl. OP do/will make their own missions or can be bothered to do something instead of moaning, crying and trying to show that its an "win-win for everyone" if BIS will do all the pvp missions/maps??

I guess none of them. Problem? Games are bought to be played. Supporting modifications just take ARMA to antoher level of greatness but it doesn't change this simple fact. And IT IS win-win for almost everyone. Once ARMA will get more attention more mission makers will appear + more PvP fun time + more $$ to BIS (=> more devs, ...). What's so hard to understand?

Would it be bad if BIS mission designers create something new and challenging using more than ~200x200m 'shoebox'/'kill' arenas?

Are you calling R6:RS maps "arenas"?

Edited May 10, 2012 by batto

[NoRailgunner 0]

Again why should A3 try to "copy" other games - just for the sake of profit and to attract the mainstream crowd? Why are many players do only join servers with 20+ playing? Like I said there is nothing wrong to include 1-2 simple pvp missions but BIS should continue to create new missions that are different + challenging from what one can play in most/all shooters. I don't think that BIS is in desperate need of attracting anyone just to pay their bills or that they suddenly got greedy and going to sell small pieces of content via DLCs....

[batto 17]

Again why should A3 try to "copy" other games - just for the sake of profit and to attract the mainstream crowd? Why are many players do only join servers with 20+ playing? Like I said there is nothing wrong to include 1-2 simple pvp missions but BIS should continue to create new missions that are different + challenging from what one can play in most/all shooters. I don't think that BIS is in desperate need of attracting anyone just to pay their bills or that they suddenly got greedy and going to sell small pieces of content via DLCs....

No one (at least me) wants ARMA to copy CoD/BF and turn into simple shooter, unlocks, perks, ... Lack of this crap and focus on realism would make ARMA different in this market segment. But 1-2 missions is not enough given the variety of PvP styles.

Profit increase & company growth is natural, isn't it?

[Dragonshot 1]

It's an affront to one's dignity to even mention those games on this forum. This is a serious sin.

[Leon86 13]

It's an affront to one's dignity to even mention those games on this forum. This is a serious sin.

why? battlefield is pretty good actually, doesnt feel finished yet but neither do arma games on release. Not everything has to be a milsim.

[celery 8]

why? battlefield is pretty good actually, doesnt feel finished yet but neither do arma games on release. Not everything has to be a milsim.

I think he was being sarcastic to underline the ridiculous hatedom shared by some people on the forums.

[Leon86 13]

well the posts on this page arent too hateful

[Dragonshot 1]

Not everything has to be a milsim.

As a gamer who spends countless hours inhabiting the avatar of a elf, warlock, pilot, soldier, etc. I would like to point out that it was meant as a joke. :D

[LeeManatee 4]

just add domi, insurgency, evo, proper cti and some tvt missions avaible in vanilla.

thats all.

with these gamemodes on start you will keep new people on hook.

this is how i got into arma 1.

just polish stuff to make it a bit more easy ( only interface of missions ) and bam. win-win for everyone

for some people here game started with editor. for me it started with mp.

Edited May 10, 2012 by n7snk

[celery 8]

just add domi, insurgency, evo, proper cti and some tvt missions avaible in vanilla.

Aren't those going to be ported by the community a week or two after release in any case?

[AlexVestin 24]

Aren't those going to be ported by the community a week or two after release in any case?

Most surely will get ported. The multiplayer community will build itself in no-time. BIS can just sit back and watch us do the rest =)

[Reuben5150 2]

can you link us to these threads?

A lot get locked or deleted but here you go-

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-3/1476944-would-bf-vets-happy-if-bf3-were-more-arma.html

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-3/1476910-imagin-if-we-could-have-maps-bf3.html

Lots of comments spread thoughout the Bf3 forum basically saying "can't wait for ARMA3", many people have lost hope that BF3 will be "fixed" and many people realize Battlefield as it once was is gone, thanks to Dice's new target audience.

Originally Posted by stardouser19

It would be nice Bohemia could make a Battlefield Middle Ground mode. I tried to go on their website suggesting TO BOHEMIA to do that kind of thing but their forum moderator, who I don't even know if he is a paid employee, kept locking the thread saying that a request to Bohemia made no sense, and suggested that I make a thread asking for a mod scenario to be made. But I wasn't talking about that, and he couldn't comprehend the need for a request to Bohemia, so I just gave up.

Edited May 10, 2012 by Reuben5150

[PuFu 4599]

I guess none of them. Problem? Games are bought to be played.

What's so hard to understand?

Wrong. For a lot of us around here, Arma is for the gaming industry what Lego is for toys. Surely you can play with the made things, but i always found it better to build your own, and create your own scenario...