update bringing new 'one save per scenario' mechanic??!?!

[St. Jimmy 272]

I used only checkpoints from the beginning anyway so I don't really care.

[froggyluv 2136]

If people want fear in their lives, get married or get a mortgage, but when I play ARMA I want to enjoy it. For a military "sandbox" experience BIS is trying very hard to force us into something we don't want, and is the same thing that has been holding the series back since the start.

Recent versions of the Alpha have messed with the awesome movement animations that brought the controls into the "21st Century" to quote Dsylexi.

Meh, I have both and if I could ragdoll some of those RL challenges -perhaps you'd be correct! For some the joy comes directly from being challenged in SP by designed rules. Of course one could always say -"just don't use the save". That can lead to sloppy SP level design as eventually any level or scenario can be beaten by unlimited saves and that I don't find memorable. And back to my chess analogy it'd be like saying you can move any piece anyway you want -just try to stick to the traditional movement rules :p

For SP (or any fun game really) I like a game to set certain parameters and than ask me to beat them. Anything else leads to sloppy design such as leaving AI accuracy up to us -I don't want to guess, I want a tightly calibrated enemy to face as well as game design.

[Rydygier 1317]

Idea of limited saves always was very bad idea to me due to the effects, that it brings in my case. For some perhaps such thing may improve immersion, gives another trill or something. As for me, if I'm remember correctly, this was main reason why I threw away OF demo and never bought OF itself and "deleted" whole series from my mind for years. Why? Because I use games to get some immersive fun, for entertainment. If I'm shot eg 20 minutes after I used my-only-precious-save, so forced to repeat whole this 20 minutes again, it is not funny at all. It is only annoying. If this repeats several times for same situation (exactly the case for my OF demo "experience"), this means, that I, instead for fun, wasted all this my precious free time for serious pissing off myself. And for what? So with time I learned for my "mental hygiene" just not to buy/play games constructed that way.

As for A3 I see no problem however, if such thing will be implemented. There should be numerous ways to bypass this plague, where adjusting recruit difficulty level should be the best way. So all this limited saves crap will remain only small issue easy to fix, I hope.

[metalcraze 290]

Why place unnecessary restrictions on players and mission makers that everyone with ARMA know-how is going to be able to circumvent anyway (just play SP on recruit with custom difficulty settings)?

So what's the problem?

The only ones who'll have to suffer under this - and suffer they will, because one save that cannot be over-written (!!) is plain silly - are the newcomers who won't know any better.

Suffer by being forced to play the game the right way? Poor newcomers being forced to think about their every step and approach everything carefully instead of savescumming ArmA game. Poor newcomers won't find Recruit difficulty setting. Preposterous! How did OFP sell its 2 millions without even having recruit difficulty?

Those poor newcomers even though there seems to be a lack of 2013 people complaining about this.

Edited May 23, 2013 by metalcraze

[zapat 56]

And let's not forget what SP and saves are best for:

if you have 2 hours to play, you play a nonstop MP session. But if you want to play in 20 minute chunks (eg. because you have a family and you can only steal those minutes) SP is becoming your friend, using saves and loads, so you can actually play through a scenario.

On the other hand a missionmaker can disable saves: why not leave this decision to them?

Another idea: if we could check computer time from within the game, we could build sophisticated savegame systems, which detects if a reload (punish the looossser!) or a new game session happened.

[chortles 263]

Suffer by being forced to play the game the right way? Poor newcomers being forced to think about their every step and approach everything carefully instead of savescumming ArmA game. Poor newcomers won't find Recruit difficulty setting. Preposterous! How did OFP sell its 2 millions without even having recruit difficulty?

Those poor newcomers even though there seems to be a lack of 2013 people complaining about this.

Sounds like a dispute with the very idea that there is a right way to play Arma... personally, as someone who uses "ACE" as a pejorative, I vote for "not sober". :lol:

Ironic that you bring up "a lack of 2013 people complaining about this" when literally the entire thread so far is people who's been on the forums before 2012 -- and a join date of March 2013 isn't proof of how long someone has actually been playing Arma -- but then again I've mainly been seeing the 2013 people in other threads (and not just the "new to Arma" threads) and frankly I wouldn't be surprised if many of them are just unaware of these "realism ideology" arguments (thanks Bad Benson for the term!) being a thing on these forums, but:

Before some of you will think "zomg it will be too hard" think "all missions will be balanced with one save in mind" which means less reloads needed actually.

This is exactly the thing that I believe that BI will not succeed at. ;)

Seriously though, it was a far better and more legitimate defense of this change than anything your second post said, and were it not for the aforementioned lack of confidence I might actually accept this reasoning. :p

Nevertheless, I am interested in what exactly is meant in the SITREP by "automatic checkpoints".

If people want fear in their lives, get married or get a mortgage, but when I play ARMA I want to enjoy it.

I like you a lot all of the sudden. :D

Recent versions of the Alpha have messed with the awesome movement animations that brought the controls into the "21st Century" to quote Dsylexi.

See my sig. ;)

For some perhaps such thing may improve immersion, gives another trill or something.

You're getting it, but I'm wondering if we're both in the category of "there's literally no way that BI can 'immerse' us so we're always conscious that we're 'just' playing a video game and therefore there's no tolerance for 'obstacles for immersion's sake'"? For what it's worth, as I've said before, TV and movies don't do it for me either.

That can lead to sloppy SP level design as eventually any level or scenario can be beaten by unlimited saves and that I don't find memorable.

Whereas my position is "if one is bad at mission design, no 'save game slot' limit will protect their players from the mission maker being bad at it in the first place." :p XCOM: Enemy Unknown handles it in a preferable way, even if that was implemented because it was turn-based. Likewise, for me what makes a level/scenario "memorable" in a positive way instead of a negative way... is something that probably wouldn't fit in a single level or scenario.

And back to my chess analogy it'd be like saying you can move any piece anyway you want -just try to stick to the traditional movement rules :p

Whereas my position is "screw that, I'm not playing chess and I sure ain't playing Montignac, if I wanted anything like that I'd be playing XCOM: Enemy Unknown or Jagged Alliance 2... oh wait, I play 7.62 - High Calibre instead!"

I am more concerned about story in a campaign, but frankly I find little chance of the "first-person military game" genre actually supporting "a good story", and I don't see any reason to believe that the devs here can make one, whether or not the devs are consciously trying to draw on Operation Flashpoint: Resistance. I can get engrossed in a story, but it sure ain't gonna be the way that video game devs have been making them, and I have no real confidence that "oh hey we're going to draw on a guerrilla theme like in Resistance" is going to be a formula for getting around my "resistance to immersion".

This should not be misconstrued as a defense of AAA shooters' single-player stories; my remarks in the Splinter Cell: Blacklist thread should tell you just what I think of them... though there it's less "the plot is so laughably bad that it breaks immersion and reminds me that it's 'just' a video game" and more "I have to play it as 'just' a video game because otherwise I'd be too busy going 'fuck Tom Clancy-branded plots'." ;)

P.S. As an example of a story that I actually enjoyed despite not getting immersed, I cite Sleeping Dogs.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Chortles

[Rydygier 1317]

You're getting it, but I'm wondering if we're both in the category of "there's literally no way that BI can 'immerse' us so we're always conscious that we're 'just' playing a video game and therefore there's no tolerance for 'obstacles for immersion's sake'"? For what it's worth, as I've said before, TV and movies don't do it for me either.

As for me there is no chance, so I forget for long, that actually I'm playing a game here, such state is an abstraction to me. However this is also not quite indifferent, if game is trying to be more or less "immersive", so I preffer games, that are trying to mimic (un)reality in given aspects (not necessarily in terms of visuals, eg hex-based strategies are fine too), than these by definition highly abstract, like tetris and such. I can every moment remember, that I'm only playing the game/watching the movie, but it is cool and speak well about the game/movie/book if I'm able just to play/watch/read it without such self-reflection any minute (for books this seems to be mainly question of commitment of imagination, for movies - identification, and for games - interaction, which can be most powerful factor IMHO). Some measure of "causing immersion effect ability" could be how fast time is running out when I'm "immersed". BTW noted, that if you start to create own book stories/game scenarios, it is far harder for even partial immersion when playing/reading anything, as you become then too conscious, "how author has done, so it is immersive, and how I would do same thing", you can't help yourself with such analyzing/comparing "mechanics behind" approach. Even worse, when you are reading/playing own creation. For example I'm nearly unable to be anyhow immersed when trying to play with my Hetman mod, and rarely I play it anyway. That's because in such case I'm all the time in "analyze" mode, so I look for the bugs, weaknesses, mistakes, or checking, how given feature works in given situation. Then this is even no longer playing, rather only testing. Knowledge about hidden mechanics is big immersion killer.

And, a propos, this way we are back on the topic. Another immersion killer for me is annoy, because I'm forced to repeat big part of the scenario many times if it is hard, and saves "meanly" limited. This is straight against reason of playing to me.

From the other hand I have no problem with eg moving back in chess. I wouldn't do it, cause then I know, that I'm cheating here, doing something against the rules (no longer playing proper chess in fact), so my "victory" would be futile and devoid of any satisfaction. Difference is reason of playing. I play chess to win accordance with the rules of the game, to prove myself. I'm not playing Arma-like games for such reasons however. Here it is more about experience the interactive story, where I'm the one, who decides about rules of dealing with any challenge I encounter.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Rydygier

[chortles 263]

As for me there is no chance, so I forget for long, that actually I'm playing a game here, such state is an abstraction to me. However this is also not quite indifferent, if game is trying to be more or less "immersive", so I preffer games, that are trying to mimic (un)reality in given aspects (not necessarily in terms of visuals, eg hex-based strategies are fine too), than these by definition highly abstract, like tetris and such. I can every moment remember, that I'm only playing the game/watching the movie, but it is cool and speak well about the game/movie/book if I'm able just to play/watch/read it without such self-reflection any minute (for books this seems to be mainly question of commitment of imagination, for movies - identification, and for games - interaction, which can be most powerful factor IMHO). Some measure of "causing immersion effect ability" could be how fast time is running out when I'm "immersed". BTW noted, that if you start to create own book stories/game scenarios, it is far harder for even partial immersion when playing/reading anything, as you become then too conscious, "how author has done, so it is immersive, and how I would do same thing", you can't help yourself with such analyzing/comparing "mechanics behind" approach. Even worse, when you are reading/playing own creation. For example I'm nearly unable to be anyhow immersed when trying to play with my Hetman mod, and rarely I play it anyway. That's because in such case I'm all the time in "analyze" mode, so I look for the bugs, weaknesses, mistakes, or checking, how given feature works in given situation. Then this is even no longer playing, rather only testing. Knowledge about hidden mechanics is big immersion killer.

And, a propos, this way we are back on the topic. Another immersion killer for me is annoy, because I'm fored to repeat big part of the scenario many times if it is hard, and saves "meanly" limited. This is straight against reason of playing to me.

From the other hand I have no problem with eg moving back in chess. I wouldn't do it, cause then I know, that I'm cheating here, doing something against the rules (no longer playing proper chess in fact), so my "victory" would be futile and devoid of any satisfaction. Difference is reason of playing. I play chess to win accordance with the rules of the game, to prove myself. I'm not playing Arma-like games for such reasons however. Here it is more about experience the interactive story, where I'm the one, who decides about rules of dealing with any challenge I encounter.

Welcome to me and video games. ;)

I find myself in agreement with most of the rest of the post above that last line -- but again, I don't find "one non-override-able save slot" an immersion-killer since video games don't immerse me enough anyway, so instead of "playing the game the allegedly-right-according-to-metalcraze way" I'm just going to look for workarounds or play online.

"Analyze" mode is my default reaction to media consumption, Arma included, and it's actually the attitude that I took into watching Zero Dark Thirty, which was admittedly the only movie that I watched in a theater for years now... oh wait, that level of "external analysis" is why I went, in order to do so while watching the movie during the early limited release! Ironically, that has only further ruined Hollywood movies for me, while reading The Ravages of Time has ruined superhero comics for me. :p

[metalcraze 290]

and a join date of March 2013 isn't proof of how long someone has actually been playing Arma

People use the silly defense "newcomers will be confused" for whenever they want something dumbed down in ArmA no? So where are all these confused newcomers?

And yes the right way to play ArmA is to use your brain. If you do something that makes you die it means you should try a different approach, which unlike in 95% of other games is viable in ArmA, not save/reload until you will break through the problem by repeatedly bashing your head on the wall. If one hates ArmA3 gameplay so much he can't stand another 20 minutes of trying out something new - then why play ArmA in the first place?

Thanks to console games people seem to think that "sandbox" is not just a feature but a type of game where you live out your power fantasy by being a superhero with the game never trying to challenge you in any way whatsoever (see all those TESes, Just Causes etc). But the lack of said challenge or - on the contrary - enemy spam, because missions were made with savescumming in mind, is what made ArmA2 campaign crap. There's a reason why only Cold War Rearmed kept coming to every new ArmA iteration but you won't ever see finished remakes of any of A1/A2/DLC campaigns.

Edited May 23, 2013 by metalcraze

[chortles 263]

People use the silly defense "newcomers will be confused" for whenever they want something dumbed down in ArmA no? So where are all these confused newcomers?

These days more likely consulting YouTube for how-tos, or (also more likely) on other message boards... I still remember that complainer from the Steamworks discussion believing that the BI forums were representative of the majority of the Arma player base. :lol:

what made ArmA2 campaign crap.

Whereas I thought it was because at launch Arma 2 was so bad that Harvest Red got a reputation as unable to be completed without cheat-coding past the bugged mission.

There's a reason why only Cold War Rearmed kept coming to every new ArmA iteration but you won't ever see finished remakes of any of A1/A2/DLC campaigns.

My personal joke is it's because Cold War Crisis was a fluke while A1/A2/DLC were more indicative of what BI's actual capabilities are (and I distinctly remember you being rather pessimistic about what BI-made SP will be like ;) as well stating that key OFP devs had left while Arma 3's in the hands of devs behind the very campaigns that you didn't like) and because certain people are attached to the "1980s Cold War gone hot" setting. :p

Again, as I stated, seeing as there's a workaround anyway (Recruit with custom settings) whether or not this was a good call comes down to whether BI can actually "get it right this time"... your prior post didn't give me much reason to believe so. ;)

Unrelated: Oh good grief this is the second time that I've seen a bug from dev branch made it to the stable branch!

[Kemeros 1]

Agreed. However I do think they should scale it a little. Expert level should have 1 save slot, while Veteran should have 2.

This would be better imo.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Idea of limited saves always was very bad idea to me due to the effects, that it brings in my case. For some perhaps such thing may improve immersion, gives another trill or something. As for me, if I'm remember correctly, this was main reason why I threw away OF demo and never bought OF itself and "deleted" whole series from my mind for years. Why? Because I use games to get some immersive fun, for entertainment. If I'm shot eg 20 minutes after I used my-only-precious-save, so forced to repeat whole this 20 minutes again, it is not funny at all. It is only annoying. If this repeats several times for same situation (exactly the case for my OF demo "experience"), this means, that I, instead for fun, wasted all this my precious free time for serious pissing off myself. And for what? So with time I learned for my "mental hygiene" just not to buy/play games constructed that way.

As for A3 I see no problem however, if such thing will be implemented. There should be numerous ways to bypass this plague, where adjusting recruit difficulty level should be the best way. So all this limited saves crap will remain only small issue easy to fix, I hope.

You could just have used the savegame cheat, or the 'delete savegame' method. Also, you usually encounter a checkpoint every so often. Usually just after you completed an objective, sometimes just before, if a lot of traveling was requited for instance, so no important progress was ever lost.

The problem with multiple saves is that missions may be build around them, which usually leads to less interesting missions with less thinking required. Though i see no reason not to include it in the lowest difficulty, which it apparently is going to be, so there should be no complaints anyway.

[daze23 1]

hmm, I make most of my SP missions with being able to save at any time in mind. I guess I'll have to learn to use save-points, but IMO they kinda dictate the pace of the mission, where I prefered to leave that up to the player

[metalcraze 290]

Again, as I stated, seeing as there's a workaround anyway (Recruit with custom settings) whether or not this was a good call comes down to whether BI can actually "get it right this time"... your prior post didn't give me much reason to believe so. ;)

Yes I'm myself is pessimistic about ArmA3 campaign being in hands of people who made PMC and OA. But the fact that they will be forced to make every single mission with such balance that only one user savegame will be enough - is a very good sign. This means they want to improve.

Of course it can go the other way too - like us getting a bunch of 20 minutes long missions so easy you won't have to save at all - but all I want is a good, long SP campaign that I can finally enjoy playing tactically and not "hoo-ah let's jump into a tank convoy riding the country side and kick some ass!" of OA or "cinematic experience" of ArmA independent-minded AI breaking every linear script of PMC.

[mr burns 132]

hmm, I make most of my SP missions with being able to save at any time in mind. I guess I'll have to learn to use save-points, but IMO they kinda dictate the pace of the mission, where I prefered to leave that up to the player

Yeah i remember very well how good this works! Playing Fallout3 for some hours straight, forgetting to save the game (it´s just so goddamn immersive), getting chewed up by rocket launcher wielding super mutant, and finally being reminded i should have saved more often. Let´s do the same shit i did for the past 3 hours again!

Effect: Whenever that happened i got super cautious (not of the game, but of myself), quicksaving every few minutes or so, until it got all immersive again and made me forget the tedious non gamey task it 'forced' unto me.

Keeping your save awareness up destroys immersion.

There´s up- and a downsides to each, limited & unlimited saves.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Yeah i remember very well how good this works! Playing Fallout3 for some hours straight, forgetting to save the game (it´s just so goddamn immersive), getting chewed up by rocket launcher wielding super mutant, and finally being reminded i should have saved more often. Let´s do the past 3 hours again!

Effect: Whenever that happened i got super caucios (not of the game, but of myself), quicksaving every few minutes or so, until it got all immersive again and again made me forget the tedious non gamey task it 'forced' unto me.

Keeping your save awareness up destroys immersion.

There´s up- and a downsides to each, limited & unlimited saves.

I had that in Morrowind, once. After that i just started quicksaving every 5 steps and after every action, even if i jumped off a building and would fall to my death i would quicksave out of habit.

It did take a bit away from the game though, nothing with bad consequences would ever happen since i could just reload my quicksave. (Unless that was in midair, 200 meters above the ground :p )