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

[[frl]myke 14]

I guess with your link you would like to point to this:

We recommend using 2 GHz machine, with 512 MB RAM and a 1 Mbps upload network bandwidth.

Good luck hosting a 64 slot server on such a server.

See how smart I am? I can argue without knowledge.

Obviously.

Btw, thx for the wedos link. Sadly i don't speak that language at all but i've managed to roughly figured out a few things myself. You refer to virtual servers and i highly doubt those low-cost offers could handle a ArmA 2 server, let alone A3.

My choice there would be here: http://hosting.wedos.com/cs/dedikovane-servery.html

4 cores and 8GB Ram = 104€ Cena/měsíc

If you set up less than 64 slots (let's say 20 slots max) you could take a Dualcore Xeon for 79€ Cena/měsíc

[xeno 234]

I also knew nothing about dedicated A2 servers.

That's your problem :)

Xeno

[batto 17]

@[FRL]Myke: Sorry for sending you link in foreign language. You clicked dedicated servers, not virtual servers. Virtual servers are cheap. My config:

60 GB HDD, 2 GB RAM, 2 CPU = 180 Euro per year (145 for companies).

I believe that's enough for 2-8 2-4 mediun & small (CQB) games with max 32 players (without AI, not much vehicles). Isn't relaying messages the only thing that game server does?

BIS can affrod it and I'm not even mentioning future revenues that will come from increased popularity thanks to PvP.

[[frl]myke 14]

Isn't relaying messages the only thing that game server does?

Not exactly, on a server also runs the full game although without graphic output. So server specs should be at least what is recommended (not minimum required) to run the game.

@[FRL]Myke: Sorry for sending you link in foreign language.

No biggie.

You clicked dedicated servers, not virtual servers.

Yep, figured that out. Was my purpose to send a link to dedicated servers, not virtuals.

You clicked dedicated servers, not virtual servers.

Aye, but they are not meant to host a dedicated server unless you can use most of the CPU time. Virtual servers are good for website hosting and similar things. For dedicated gameserver hosting they're not powerful enough.

[Dingo8 1]

Isn't relaying messages the only thing that game server does?

No, much more; Intensive stuff like server-side AI too.

As far as I know, the availability of resources on virtual servers can be quite unstable, and hence is often unsuitable for game servers.

[batto 17]

OK. I thought server just relay events or state and all processing is done on clients. You seem to know better. Still, arguing that BIS cannot afford it while community can seems stupid to me.

[[frl]myke 14]

Still, arguing that BIS cannot afford it while community can seems stupid to me.

It is not. There are several ways to have a dedicated server online. A clan/squad might ask for a monthly fee from their members to pay server rent. Often enough, said server is chosen powerful enough to host 2 dedicated server at the same time: a closed for clan/squad purposes and a open public server. It might also be that some generous members just offer such servers without asking for any fee at all.

Some other servers might be hosted at home, a "old" PC fulfilling the task. In such cases, the owner of the server usually doesn't ask for payment (although it does cost electricity and bandwidth). Hell, if i ever upgrade my Wifes Dualcore, i'll probably would set up myself a server.

You see, there are many ways how the community can "afford" deddicated servers.

For BIS it would be a completely different calculation. Server cost month, regardless if rented or own serverfarm. At some point it wouldn't be affordable for BIS anymore so they just pull the plug....and community sits there without servers.

I admit, i see the short-time benefits of BIS driven servers but i think on the long term, leaving it to the community is the better solution.

[noubernou 77]

OK. I thought server just relay events or state and all processing is done on clients. You seem to know better. Still, arguing that BIS cannot afford it while community can seems stupid to me.

You realize that multiplayer games for the last 20 years have a majority of the time been hosted by individuals/groups, and not by the companies that make them right? Its pretty common, and usually a way better solution.

[Flash Thunder 10]

So the gist of the thread is to include Capture and hold type missions on disc that are PVP focused and balanced as so.

Arma will never be competing with those franchises, the hardware required is still pricey. Consoles are plug and play PC's are more difficult.

People are spoiled with latest games that are heavily tested for bugs, the second someone runs into a bug in Arma they will flip.

All you can really do is spread Arma around word of mouth works and tell them to have patience and learn the game and not get frustrated after the first session.

Got another one of my friends to buy Arma 2 CO because I showed him my missions at my house and let him play through it. :D

[PuFu 4600]

Gain is customer satisfaction by 24/7 running servers. During my A3 spamming one guy ranted that he wanted to play CTI in NA but there is no server with good ping. He's just another guy that threw A2 away. It all depends on good will of community. Customer satisfaction is best ad. Another gain is that BIS could place ads in PvP servers. In Counter-Strike on certain maps there are billboards where admins can put ads. It's not intrusive, it's part of map in fact.

You obviously have no idea about running a business, at least not in this line of work

And please don't lecture me on cost of running servers. You live in the past. Today you can rent virtualized servers (in teh cloud) for much less money than 100 Euro. Today you can get 2 CPU server with 512 MB RAM and 15 GB storage for 50 Euro PER YEAR.

I am the one living in the past. Take a big deep breath of your own smelly post please. Now that you've done that. Do you own your own A2 server? I bet the answer to that is no. Well, my clan and i do, it is a quad core xeon collocated in UK, it's about 35 pounds/month.

Have you ever rented a A2 game server? I know i did, it was the cheapest i was able to find, around 110$/month with not so much bandwidth.

So before you stretch you fingers, get your shit straight son.

You seem to know better. Still, arguing that BIS cannot afford it while community can seems stupid to me.

That is because you are ignorant, and obviously have NO fucking idea what you talk about.

[zoog 18]

I like the idea of stock PvP game modes in Arma 3 and a server browser to view PvP servers/missions. PvP can really work, look at A2: Project Reality and AAS (although I never played AAS myself). If something like Project Reality (or a simpler version, so just a mission with same kind of parameters) would be an official gamemode I can see how it will be played more, even if its just by the regular Arma customers. IMO the focus has been too much on SP and coop in previous releases, time to give attention to the PvP element as well and see how it turns out.

Hell, you could even make a persistent soldier/character PvP system with stats like total games played, total games won, top 3 favorite weapons etc. (NO I'm not talking about unlocks, kill counts or whatever!). Make it possible to friend with other characters and see who is playing where like the BF3 webbased server browser. Easy to join your battle mates in PvP matches. Central clan/squad system where clans/communities can present themselves and clan/squad/community members can join with automatic adding tags (instead of the squad url etc). Because there are also lots of good features in "those" type of games which moves technology forward. Arma feels more like being in the stone age if you think about how there is no friend system, no basic persistent soldier info (just for the fun), etc. Really, not everything from those games is your worst enemy.

Edited May 16, 2012 by zoog

[gossamersolid 155]

You realize that multiplayer games for the last 20 years have a majority of the time been hosted by individuals/groups, and not by the companies that make them right? Its pretty common, and usually a way better solution.

This batto guy reminds me of the console community in BF3 right now. EA/DICE are ceasing a lot of their servers and players are in an uproar complaining that THEY have to host dedicated servers if they want to play.

I'm just laughing because EVERY PC gamer that's been gaming since the late 90's has no clue why the console players are bitching. We've ALWAYS had to host our own servers, game companies don't have anything to do with that.

The ignorance of this generation I tell ya...

Hell, you could even make a persistent soldier/character PvP system with stats like total games played, total games won, top 3 favorite weapons etc.

This won't happen because as soon as there are persistent stats globally, there are people that abuse the rank system and then it becomes worthless. Trust me, it will happen. Then everybody will whine about it.

Make it possible to friend with other characters

This is a good suggestion. Have some sort of BIS Account associated with the game. You could have a friends/favourites list in the server browser and such. This could also help prevent people from getting online with duplicate UserIDs/Fake CD keys because they'd have to authenticate with BIS' auth server first.

[batto 17]

This batto guy reminds me of the console community in BF3 right now. EA/DICE are ceasing a lot of their servers and players are in an uproar complaining that THEY have to host dedicated servers if they want to play.

I'm just laughing because EVERY PC gamer that's been gaming since the late 90's has no clue why the console players are bitching. We've ALWAYS had to host our own servers, game companies don't have anything to do with that.

The ignorance of this generation I tell ya...

I suggested that BIS could have some official servers where they could present their state-of-art PvP stuff to promote PvP. Read official as owned by BIS and not the only way to play MP.

[gossamersolid 155]

I suggested that BIS could have some official servers where they could present their state-of-art PvP stuff to promote PvP. Read official as owned by BIS and not the only way to play MP.

It's not realistic for them to do this. Servers cost a lot of money and they'd have to have multiple geographical locations hosted to give the best gameplay experience to all players. Plus then they'd have to hire administrators or get staff to administrate the server because anybody who is anybody is aware that there will always be people out there to ruin others' multiplayer experience.

[matty1053 10]

Compete for what?

ARMA is a whole other genre.

You guys are kinda stupid to say "compete with CoD and BF".

ARMA doesn't have to compete, it's just better and good.

[bohica 1]

Will they FINALLY make on online mulitplayer that will compete with those titles? As of now their game is far above those two. However I don't understand the business decision to not even try and compete in the lucrative online PvP multiplayer? They leave it up to random individuals with low populated servers. PLEASE try. You have the game, just build it!!!

But they have!! Just play deathmatch and you cabn have a stupidly small map where you rush around like a blue arsed fly trying to get kills before you get killed.

Cheers Bo

COD is for n00bs

Counterstrike is for COD wannabees

[katipo66 94]

Classic....

Maybe read the whole thread and not just the title.

[batto 17]

ARMA doesn't have to compete, it's just better and good.

But they have!! Just play deathmatch and you cabn have a stupidly small map where you rush around like a blue arsed fly trying to get kills before you get killed.

Exactly. Unlike other PvP games this (and CTF) is the only small PvP thing that stock A2 can offer. I personally don't like deathmatch (it's fun for max. 1 hour even in Quake). CTF is fun but there could be much more team PvP modes. It still sucks hard in many ways. There is no per-PvP-mode scoreboard so all I see is who has most kills. There is more flaws in CTF which I'll put on wishlist thread soon. The PvP needs much more love. It's just too obsolote right now..

Counterstrike is for COD wannabees

You better learn history first kid.

Kudos to you Celery (played your DMs for first time in last 3 days)! You're the right person in right place.

Go play Celery games and explain to me why it's perfectly possible to spray MG and do random kills and why 10 players in small DM map run around and shoot around like in CoD and have fun? Why it's possible if ARMA is just milsim only played by serious mature players?

[zoog 18]

It's not realistic for them to do this. Servers cost a lot of money and they'd have to have multiple geographical locations hosted to give the best gameplay experience to all players. Plus then they'd have to hire administrators or get staff to administrate the server because anybody who is anybody is aware that there will always be people out there to ruin others' multiplayer experience.

IMO it's not unrealistic, BIS makes money from the franchise. It's just a matter of priorities. Administration and updating can be done by specific community members just like forum moderators are also voluntarily helping out (AFAIK), so BIS only has to pay for hiring the servers (make it 5 EU, 5 US and 5 ?? servers). I think the increased revenue from Arma 2: CO sales since DayZ could probably even cover these expenses. They could do this for the first 6 or 12 months after release. Raven Shield did the same thing, there were a few official EU and US servers for at least the first year (or even longer)? Yes, it costs money, but so does the development of the game. You just have to look at it as an integral part of the game development and marketing strategy.

[Janez 530]

It would be really nice to finally have simple 3/5 flag domination in small perimeter that works well with AI too. There is something like it in A2 but its not working that well tbh.

And on a side note, I always thought CWR and Arma was always about play the game how you want and not CO-06_NoRespawn_MustTS_CleanSweep only.

[gossamersolid 155]

Counterstrike is for COD wannabees

Ummmmm nope.

Counterstrike came first and doesn't play like COD at all...

[Jansku 0]

I don't know how many of you had the priviledge to take part in original OFP competitive clan vs clan leagues, cups and tournaments. Only person i recognize by username here is Celery who for sure were there with his bunch of Mercs and who was part of team scandinavia when we won team USA in the world cup finals:p Man those were the days. Since that there has been a void what comes to competitive realistic fps games.

When first ArmA was released, everyone was hyped about it being ofp with improved graphics and gameplay. Unfortunately with ArmA the clan vs clan side of the franchise deteriorated and vanished allmost completely. Now after so many years of waiting that perfect game, ArmA III has caught my eye and my hopes are up again.

So Celery as i see you being a part of the dev team now, what is your take on it? Do you think it is possible to return the glory days with AA3, where the game was actually playable from mid range to cqb capture the flag matches and where pvp/coop communities existed side by side without problems.

[celery 8]

Do you think it is possible to return the glory days with AA3, where the game was actually playable from mid range to cqb capture the flag matches and where pvp/coop communities existed side by side without problems.

Some of it depends on whether people want to give pvp another shot, but I'm quite optimistic when it comes to the game's own assets and features. :)

I still cherish our pan-Nordic victory.

[graill 10]

Suprised this didnt get locked.

Arma cant be compared to the simplistic play of the arcade shooters, which is everything except Arma. People that buy games like BC2, COD, BF3, want instant gratification and the simplistic gameplay, there will always be a market for those console ported games, you cant get away from it, most folks to afraid to enlist in the real military, whatever reason they use, depend on these sims for a brief taste of what they never will experience in real life,hence their popularity.

With the advent of the Zombie mod Arma has gained a huge new following which is great. As long as the gameplay is kept "realistic" and Bis does not go the route of the arcade shooters they will remain the elite in terms of a military ground sim.

[zoog 18]

Arma cant be compared to the simplistic play of the arcade shooters, which is everything except Arma.

This thread isn't about copying game play or "dumbing down" Arma or simply comparing it to the more arcade shooters. It's about the player vs player element in those games that might work within the realistic setting of the Arma verse if BIS puts extra effort/focus on the PvP aspect right at launch of Arma 3. Mods like Project Reality actually do work in the Arma setting. But it's not easy for people, years after release, to download a mod to get some kind of PvP experience similar to BF3 (in a general sense). Stuff like this could be implemented officially right at launch to get an active PvP scene.

Edited May 19, 2012 by zoog