Official statement regarding accessibility?

[Retep 10]

While I do agree that Arma 2 obviously suffered from usability issues which turned a load of folk away, I do not agree that there were no "enjoyable" missions. I tend to play with the United Operations community, and on their servers I will be an air cavalry soldier raiding a VC outpost in vietnam (lingor), or a British soldier being ambushed by the IRA. In my own missions I have created, my TvT (PvP) missions feature: Government forces try to stop a cartel drug convoy reaching its destination, a rogue russian unit tries to assassinate the US President, PMC, British and Insurgent forces fight to extract an HVT from Zargabad, and more! (Those mentioned feature 70-80+ players).

What I want to see is the gap that currently separates those who just buy the game, join vanilla servers and get bored and those communities and servers that provide interesting missions closed. This should happen with the modding support, but more changes will be needed as well, I look forward to testing and suggesting in the alpha.

[Cyper 18]

While we have no official statement that's recent regarding "accessibility", as said, Jay and Ivan and Karel and I believe even Matt Lightfoot spent a bunch of time around E3 and Gamescom talking about what that means in the context of Arma 3... and

is probably a good example of what's meant by "accessibility according to BI" and "smooth movement" according-to-you.

As far as the crosshair though, the change was intentional and one of the devs explained that it was to actually eliminate the situation where the middle 'front sight' was so thin as to be more precise than one's actual iron sights... that's exactly why they got rid of the old crosshair.

Y'know, after Maruk said that the majority of Arma 2 players picked it up through Steam, you should have been aware that "the outside elements also will give their feedback"... and honestly? Ever since DayZ, BI has been listening to "the outside elements". If that somehow surprises you, I really, really do not sympathize with you about that.

Yeah, I saw that video earlier this morning, and that doesn't just make it more accessible it makes it more realistic.

However, there is most likely going to be complaints from most players regarding the complexity of the game. It will most likely be complaints about the games difficulty; aiming may be to hard, there may be to many controls, no progression system, no generating health....There must be a fine line to what sort of feedback that is worth to actually consider. Or is all sort of feedback valuable? I don't want outside elements to compromise the core of the game in anyway. But the uncomfortable truth is that these people have diluted many other great games. As I said to TWI about RO2: I'd rather see the game die than losing its formula and keep on living.

So what is it really that makes it impossible for this to happen to arma 3? I trust BIS, a lot, more than any other gaming company, but fact is that nothing lasts forever. Things will change for the good or the bad.

Sorry to sound like an elitist, but truth is that I am looking for a very particular experience in arma 3. Exactly like I did in RO2, Hitman Absolution, or Sim City.

[Winfernal 2]

Yeah, I saw that video earlier this morning, and that doesn't just make it more accessible it makes it more realistic.

However, there is most likely going to be complaints from most players regarding the complexity of the game. It will most likely be complaints about the games difficulty; aiming may be to hard, there may be to many controls, no progression system, no generating health....There must be a fine line to what sort of feedback that is worth to actually consider. Or is all sort of feedback valuable? I don't want outside elements to compromise the core of the game in anyway. But the uncomfortable truth is that these people have diluted many other great games. As I said to TWI about RO2: I'd rather see the game die than losing its formula and keep on living.

So what is it really that makes it impossible for this to happen to arma 3? I trust BIS, a lot, more than any other gaming company, but fact is that nothing lasts forever. Things will change for the good or the bad.

Sorry to sound like an elitist, but truth is that I am looking for a very particular experience in arma 3. Exactly like I did in RO2, Hitman Absolution, or Sim City.

The DayZ fanbase isn't complaining about the complexity of DayZ. This is what they enjoy, this is why they play it. This is why DayZ exploded. So i wouldn't be to worried about those "outside elements".

[metalcraze 290]

Well that isn't going to happen any time soon. In a way BIS is a hostage of ArmA. DayZ will only bring in profits once - zombie fad will not be here in a year or two.

And dumbing down ArmA to play like Battlefield or CoD won't work. Why? Because those games got a name and production values fit for those games. Cutting stuff out isn't easy too, especially when it's at the core of the game e.g. ballistics and aiming. ArmA: Black Hawk Down / ArmA: Conviction / ArmA: Vegas / ArmA: Future Soldier just won't be able to compete against heavy weights. It will be treated as a polish shooter.

So unless BIS will want to shoot itself in the foot like they did with Carrier Command they won't bury ArmA. Yes - had CC used RV engine with all the variety of units it can handle the outcome would've been entirely different.

Of course they can always do selective dumbing down that is enough to take away the charm from the game e.g. Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter or Splinter Cell Double Agent but I hope that won't happen.

Edited March 5, 2013 by metalcraze

[chortles 263]

However, there is most likely going to be complaints from most players regarding the complexity of the game. It will most likely be complaints about the games difficulty; aiming may be to hard, there may be to many controls, no progression system, no generating health....There must be a fine line to what sort of feedback that is worth to actually consider. Or is all sort of feedback valuable? I don't want outside elements to compromise the core of the game in anyway. But the uncomfortable truth is that these people have diluted many other great games. As I said to TWI about RO2: I'd rather see the game die than losing its formula and keep on living.

The idea that the DayZ fanbase can't handle "complexity" is insulting when you realize that DayZ is more complex than vanilla Arma 2, and as Winfernal said, that complexity (though "DayZ-only" fans may not realize that's more complex than vanilla Arma 2, just "more complex than anything they've played before") is part of the draw... early on, the sheer brutality compared to any mainstream shooter was part of the attraction!

One way to think of "the Arma concept" is "imagine if Battlefield 3 had been designed with hardcore mode as default and arcadey as the alternate mode, instead of the other way around"... :p

[Acecool 0]

Honestly, the way that Codemasters forced OFP ( I own all OFP and ALL Arma games, expansions and DLCs ) was the wrong direction. I wish I never bought red river... Codemasters has lost touch with their roots, they have lost their direction and they have forever lost my business.