Up to my Old Tricks again: God like powers of Vision

[white 1]

i personally like playing an military simulator like i was playing tomb raider, this way i dont even have to buy the new tombraider to get a modern feel out of it.

[liquidpinky 11]

People know that. They all know it hurts competitive/serious pvp, but they keep denying/bringing up all these stupid excuses you can see throughout this thread because 3rd person "looks cool".

The fact thay this ammount of players is actively CHOOSING to sacrifice proper gameplay for a "clever use of game mechanics" (or exploit) makes me fear for the future of ArmA.

Some of us don't give a shit about competitive PvP however, so let us have our fun while you scream and rage at your monitor as someone just killed you (at least you can blame that they were using third person if your ego isn't up to taking the hit).

The options are there because everyone has their own idea of fun, ARMA is about the army but not about being regimented like actually being in one.

[spaceBeluga 10]

Some of us don't give a shit about competitive PvP however, so let us have our fun while you scream and rage at your monitor as someone just killed you (at least you can blame that they were using third person if your ego isn't up to taking the hit).

The options are there because everyone has their own idea of fun, ARMA is about the army but not about being regimented like actually being in one.

I just edited my post. It hurts *any kind* of pvp imho.

edit: I don't know what's up with these people saying that suddenly ArmA is not a simulator anymore.

Edited March 16, 2013 by spaceBeluga

[Dallas 9]

I don't know if your definition of simulation and ArmA is too narrow or if you simply forgot that your definition is not mandatory for other ArmA players. And what's this competitive PvP is it like the world series of PvP, with an Olympic or a Continental ruleset? Are we talking the official European ArmA ladders or are we talking any server in ArmA 3?

I think you'll find that a lot of people are defining simulation, ArmA and PvP more liberally that you do and while it's clear this is unacceptable to you, that people can enjoy playing ArmA with third person enabled, maybe this thread is simply a way to deal with the unavoidable. It relieves some frustration calling us cheaters and exploiters, but if you think you somehow can shame us or BI into adopting your narrow definition, we have a twelve year headstart.

You do not get to dictate how other people administrate their servers, you can join their servers and complain about it and then they can kick you.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Dallas

[upredictable 10]

^ I aprove this!!:)

[-=seany=- 5]

Woah, 21 pages. Did anyone mention that you can turn 3rd person off?

Personally, I hope it stays in this game until the end.

[white 1]

people just like to play it tomb raider style, deal with it.

but i agree third person view sucks on immersion, noone ever comes near me without me being aware because of it. even with walls on the way.

edit.:

fps too low? its a simulator!

take off third person? its not a simulator its a game!

Edited March 16, 2013 by white

[chortles 263]

edit: I don't know what's up with these people saying that suddenly ArmA is not a simulator anymore.

Maybe it's because people are more willing to speak up without fear of ostracism, and because a bunch of the people who say that either genuinely believe it or didn't get into Arma for the so-called "simulation" aspect in the first place?

I don't know if your definition of simulation and ArmA is too narrow or if you simply forgot that your definition is not mandatory for other ArmA players. And what's this competitive PvP is it like the world series of PvP, with an Olympic or a Continental ruleset? Are we talking the official European ArmA ladders or are we talking any server in ArmA 3?

I think you'll find that a lot of people are defining simulation, ArmA and PvP more liberally that you do and while it's clear this is unacceptable to you, that people can enjoy playing ArmA with third person enabled, maybe this thread is simply a way to deal with the unavoidable. It relieves some frustration calling us cheaters and exploiters, but if you think you somehow can shame us or BI into adopting your narrow definition, we have a twelve year headstart.

Oh hell, +1 to this Dallas.

Personally, I hope it stays in this game until the end.

Also +1 to this.

[dsi24 12]

People know that. They all know it hurts pvp, but they keep denying/bringing up all these stupid excuses you can see throughout this thread because 3rd person "looks cool".

The fact thay this ammount of players is actively CHOOSING to sacrifice proper gameplay for a "clever use of game mechanics" (or exploit) makes me fear for the future of ArmA.

Agreed, it's really sad when people are actively fighting to keep an exploit in a game.

[spaceBeluga 10]

It relieves some frustration calling us cheaters and exploiters, but if you think you somehow can shame us or BI into adopting your narrow definition, we have a twelve year headstart.

A good post until this part, then your ego kicks in and messes everything up. Twelve year headstart? Wat? Is that a competition of some sort? Is there a league of oldest OFP/ArmA players out there that I don't know of?

Read my posts on this thread. My main problem with 3rd person is that it became a trend and now everyone thinks this run and gun is what the game is about.

Quoting a comment I wrote recently on reddit when being told to join a server with 1st person settings:

"I know mate, I just worry that my favourite playstyle will get hurt by all this. A server with vanilla/realism settings is already getting hard to come by. I fear Bohemia will start catering to this new audience (most newcomers come to ArmA because of the sandbox aspect only) and eventually changing the game. I don't understand why people don't feel bothered with the fact that because of 3rd person, everyone can use a feature in a way that is clearly not intended for this kind of gameplay given the context of the game (milSim, realism). Giving you an ability that you shouldn't have when playing with other people turns into a broken mechanic. It's a simulator, you are supposed to have to walk to a corner if you want to take a look, instead of using the camera to check your surroundings without exposing yourself."

---------- Post added at 09:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:54 PM ----------

Agreed, it's really sad when people are actively fighting to keep an exploit in a game.

I don't want 3rd person removed, I'm just trying to show WHY it hurts pvp gameplay. It dramatically changes how you should behave in the game.

Edited March 17, 2013 by spaceBeluga

[White_Hat 0]

This "discussion" is hilarious!

...are you aware that TPV is a "choice" that can be turned off on PvP or any other servers!?

TPV has been in Bohemia games since OPF and it´s never been a problem in PvP because "serious" servers have turned it off!

So leave it be as it is and let ppl play the way they like to play!

[dsi24 12]

This "discussion" is hilarious!

...are you aware that TPV is a "choice" that can be turned off on PvP or any other servers!?

TPV has been in Bohemia games since OPF and it´s never been a problem in PvP because "serious" servers have turned it off!

So leave it be as it is and let ppl play the way they like to play!

It's a problem now because the CoD crowd has come in with DayZ/Wasteland and has flooded the game with PvP servers with this exploit enabled. The number of people who realize PvP is better without exploits like this are far fewer than the people who will use any exploit they can get their hands on to get a leg up, and actively fight to keep those exploits available.

[Dallas 9]

The twelve years refers to the way third person view always have been an optional part of BI games, although I probably designed it to be provocatively misconstrued. :)

BI has learned a lot throughout the development or their different titles, they've always had decent critical success, however last year's DayZ they relived the same public success as OFP had back in 2001. DayZ delivered massive amounts of sales, without changing the game or the mechanics fundamentally. I believe it was more than adding zombies to the formula, most of the youtube videos and twitch streams that drove the sales revolved around the intensity of player encounters and zombies mostly served has comic relief. The ArmA series always had a reputation of being too complicated and with clunky controls, it still was in DayZ, but DayZ also showcased everything loyal fans keep coming back for. The same complexity creates depth and it comes with a massively detailed game world. When other games use "sandbox" as a sales pitch, BI actually delivers one.

ArmA 3 is enjoying increased interest, both because of DayZ's success, but simultaneous ArmA 3's showcase missions generated a lot on it's own at different game conventions in 2012. I don't feel they are changing anything radically, but over the years the threshold for admission has appeared too high for new players, especially in an industry busy removing anything that can be considered difficult from their games, so no casual player is left behind. While BI say they've smoothed some of the kinks out, it's still clear that figuring your controls out is something of a science. A big difference is that this time BI has decided to iron out the game in a public alpha, instead of doing it after it's release like with ArmA 1/2, which reflected on reviews. With the Alpha release, we're primarily seeing a very excited gaming press, imagine if this excitement continues after the official release.

I think it's obvious that with the Alpha's broad appeal, we'll see a large new group of players and to me it's perfectly natural that many of these players will chose to begin their journey with most of the optional features enabled. Some, maybe many of the them might never chose Expert difficulty, but I don't have a problem with that, for me ArmA was always best on well administrated servers, where active admins or passwords would keep griefing and cheating to a minimum.

Third person view isn't a new thing BI has thunk up to sell more games, but because there's a whole lot of new players, many servers will have third person enabled. I understand why it's annoying, when it seems impossible to find servers with third person disabled, but rather than removing a feature, which is both popular and always been part of the game, I think a better solution would be to add difficulty settings to the server filters. In DayZcommander you were able to filter servers for all the traditional stuff like players and ping, but also for nametags, crosshairs and third person.

I think that's the way to go, filter content, not remove.

It's a problem now because the CoD crowd has come in with DayZ/Wasteland and has flooded the game with PvP servers with this exploit enabled. The number of people who realize PvP is better without exploits like this are far fewer than the people who will use any exploit they can get their hands on to get a leg up, and actively fight to keep those exploits available.

I say again... an optional feature... not a cheat...

Edited March 17, 2013 by Dallas

[dsi24 12]

I imagine the posts about third person are because people finally see a chance to get their say in during the alpha period. Most just want something as simple as putting it in the easymode difficulty levels (because, lets be honest, the exploitable features that third person has make the game much easier).

Third person isn't a "cheat", what you can do with third person is an exploit. (Well, I am assuming BIS didn't intend for people to have the ability to see through walls and trees, hopefully that's a safe assumption)

[chortles 263]

iOGC's got both crosshairs and third-person disabled, for anyone looking for a first-person-only server.