When is this game going to be good?

[dav 22]

There are a few views regards A3 and all should be able to say on the forum here.

There are many epic battlefields in A2 & indeed Arma. Altis is a stunning achievement, but there are other terrains that can give as much or more immersive game-play.

Alwarren is right regards the movement I would say, also I think the vehicles handle like a bowl of custard. The AI is pretty much the same stock AI we have always had but with tweaks, many that have been around for years but in mod/addon form. They are still incapable of being a realistic enemy without the further need to mod, nothing wrong with that, modding is great, but don’t blame players who think it falls short in some respects.

It may not fall short for others, but that’s only based on where they came from with A2 (if they played the series). However, others who have a really great A2 setup, realistic combat, credible enemy forces (AI), then of course A3 is going to fall well short, certainly in my eye's..

Its quite possibly the fault of us the players for wanting what we all independently imagined would be produced, when in-fact the game has gone in another direction, I feel, not others maybe. But it should be allowed to be said, if someone is un-happy.

Look, the game is what the game is, no changing that, its where it was always going to be, I’m sure.. Some are happy with the type of game it is now, some are not, that's life..;)

I would still have bought it, BI deserve the support, for its past and present projects.. Nothing against BI, they do what they need to, I would not argue with that.:)

___________________________

Edit:

One thing I would say is great, 'performance', its been a real surprise to be able to put this on my old A2 pc and watch it perform as well as A2, that's a positive improvement. Problem is I bought a new pc in anticipation of struggling..:(

Bashing a games development even if you justify it as a constructive point of view from a die hard vet who wants the perfect game is premature and irrational. The game has a team who thankfully know what they are doing. I'm not saying to be quite, I'm just saying there is a degree of over expectation on the dev team when none of us really know what happens behind closed doors. Give this game one year from now and I bet most of our demands will be met. But coming on whining like little babies to the Devs who create Arma is not productive for the forums, especially excited new players or people who want to understand its depth.

[Varanon 892]

A step back from Arma 2? Are you serious?

Yes, he is serious. And contrary to you, he can even put it to words with a few, precise points. On the other hand, you have no arguments at all, you just say it looks pretty.

These forums are full of criticism ? It's an open forum, and everyone has the right to say their piece. Alwarren's post was a pretty precise and to the point, listing exactly what he thinks breaks the game. I invite you to actually refute Alwarren's point with Arguments, not "dated engine" or similar unspecific words. If it's so great, then you should be able to write up something similar in it's defense. Pick the two best points to counter the two worst points Alwarren mentioned.

---------- Post added at 09:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:26 AM ----------

But coming on whining like little babies to the Devs who create Arma is not productive for the forums, especially excited new players or people who want to understand its depth.

So, it is productive to praise the game even if things aren't "praise-worthy" ? It's ok to say "What a great game" but not point out it's flaws ? For you information, criticism is sometimes a better service to the developers than mindless praise without any substance to it.

And the only one whining here is you, everyone else tries to lead a discussion. With arguments.

People, get it out of your heads that criticizing Arma 3 is a personal attack against you or the devs.

[WalkerDown 1]

Ask any developer out there if they ever seen in the history of videogames, a product passing by alpha to beta to release in a such time; they will laugh at you. Behind this, you'll find the reason of why this game has so many problems today, and why we have the forum full of criticism. Unfortunately there's nothing you can do now, we were warning you all about what were happening, but we has the same fanboys ready with the usual reply: "it's alpha..."; look now.. too late man. In some months this game will be history (in the real meaning of the word), and this time there won't be a DayZ mod to save us.

[dav 22]

Yes, he is serious. And contrary to you, he can even put it to words with a few, precise points. On the other hand, you have no arguments at all, you just say it looks pretty.

These forums are full of criticism ? It's an open forum, and everyone has the right to say their piece. Alwarren's post was a pretty precise and to the point, listing exactly what he thinks breaks the game. I invite you to actually refute Alwarren's point with Arguments, not "dated engine" or similar unspecific words. If it's so great, then you should be able to write up something similar in it's defense. Pick the two best points to counter the two worst points Alwarren mentioned.

---------- Post added at 09:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:26 AM ----------

So, it is productive to praise the game even if things aren't "praise-worthy" ? It's ok to say "What a great game" but not point out it's flaws ? For you information, criticism is sometimes a better service to the developers than mindless praise without any substance to it.

And the only one whining here is you, everyone else tries to lead a discussion. With arguments.

People, get it out of your heads that criticizing Arma 3 is a personal attack against you or the devs.

He clearly states in bottom line: Arma 3 is a step back from Arma 2. I disagree, I think his argument is flawed, because Arma 3 has better animations, better scope modelling, better radio comms, better location, better editor module systems, better dare I day graphics.

He also clearly critiques the inertia movement from one speed to the next, like for crying out loud talk about a wish list.

I would like weapon, uniform, gear selector in editor. I would like better fatigue effects carrying different payloads, I would like more variety in the weapon and vehicle systems however I think Bis have some catching up to do in some of these areas but making objective criticism? like you could do better. You should all try and make a game like Arma for all your knowledge on warfare instead of complaining about it. That's what it comes down to, it's not positive constructive critisism, it's going too far saying its a step back, it's an absolute insult to me as an Arma fan and not speaking for them but probably in my opinion the Devs too. Furthermore I don't need a "teammate" coming on in his defence.

[krycek 349]

A step back from Arma 2? Are you serious? Arma 2 is over, bar a few die hard vets clinging to its dated looking engine.

Arma was never about "zomg graphicz yo".If you think Arma 2 is abandoned you might be surprised.

ACO has plenty of mods,more developed default factions,plenty of different modded terrains/islands not to mention the multiple patches that fixed a lot of bugs(well except the AI).

True with time A3 will get more mods&patches but not everyone jumped 100% on A3 because has more shiny graphics and inventory customization or some pointless underwater stuff.AI is more or less still the same with exactly same limitations in some cases and it only had a bit of lipstick here and there.The cheap copy-paste content on some vehicles doesn't help either and this is here to stay because BI only adds new things but never redesigns what it's already done.Imo the only thing that's a huge leap forward compared to Arma2 is the drone system.

What good is a fresh coat of paint if under it are still 2001 systems,I played/designed enough sp missions to spot on sight behaviours that goes to OFP era.

[-ghost-tf 12]

So yes, Arma 3 is a step backward for me.

He clearly states in bottom line: Arma 3 is a step back from Arma 2. I disagree,

That is his own opinion, ofcourse you can disagree (last time I checked everyone was free to express his own opinion on the internet). But dont act like he just personally attacked you, he is not even bashing BIS like some other people do, he is actually listing valid arguments that back up his disappointment/opinion. If you are really "sick of all the whining" on these forums, then do us all a favour and start using your ignore button.

I think his argument is flawed, because Arma 3 has better animations, better scope modelling, better radio comms, better location, better editor module systems, better dare I day graphics.

You've got to be kidding me? You're saying his arguments are flawed while the only arguments you got is "The game has better visuals", what if I told you that its standard for sequals to have graphical improvements? Better editor modules while at the same time they removed the most important ones (ambient civs, ambient combat, first aid module, no gear load out in briefing) that arma 2 DID have. Yes radio comms have been improved and Altis is awesome, but Alwarren is talking about GAMEPLAY, which is a step back from arma2. He has perfectly explained why it is a step back.

Again, your opinion may differ, depends on your playstyle, for some people these steps back are a gamebreaker to them.

He also clearly critiques the inertia movement from one speed to the next, like for crying out loud talk about a wish list.

I dont consider something a wishlist if it was existing in arma2 and then "dumbed down/simplified" in arma3, valid point to complain about IMO.

I would like .... however I think Bis have some catching up to do in some of these areas but making objective criticism? like you could do better. You should all try and make a game like Arma for all your knowledge on warfare instead of complaining about it. That's what it comes down to, it's not positive constructive critisism, it's going too far saying its a step back,

Lmao, you are taking it to a whole new level. Instead of "Its an Alpha", "Its a beta", "Wait for post release" or "Mod will save the day/mod it in yourself", we now should "Make the game yourself".

it's an absolute insult to me as an Arma fan and not speaking for them but probably in my opinion the Devs too. Furthermore I don't need a "teammate" coming on in his defence.

Oh, well that explains everything.

[Varanon 892]

it's an absolute insult to me as an Arma fan and not speaking for them but probably in my opinion the Devs too.

Wait.. an insult to YOU ??? YOU are insulted if someone makes a constructive, critical post ? YOU are insulted ?

Aren't you taking yourself a bit too seriously ?

[spanishsurfer 58]

Maybe with the help of mods this game can be what many want it to be. They key is making players aware of these mods and even more important, making the SERVER admins aware so they can implement the keys so we can play these mods.

I've made a thread that does exactly this but I'd like community help on making more suggestions for good mods that do NOT effect the server only the CLIENT.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?163207-Essential-Mod-Keys-for-Servers

[Alwarren 2767]

I couldn't care about your religious beliefs, your unaware of the immersion, you are unimpressed in the massive face palm of a multiplayer, I get that, but don't have a go at me because I am heavily immersed in the tight single player. I'm sorry but your lacking immersion in the game, hence your list of complaints brother..

I am not "having a go at you" because of whatever you think I am having a go at you because you speak in general terms, and I don't agree with it. Speak for yourself.

---------- Post added at 16:07 ---------- Previous post was at 16:00 ----------

A step back from Arma 2? Are you serious? Arma 2 is over, bar a few die hard vets clinging to its dated looking engine.

What is your problem? The question was "does anybody consider Arma 3 a step back from Arma 2", and not only have I answered it, I have given a reasoning for it. You know, the type of stuff were you explain what you think, contrary to you that just uses unfounded buzzwords.

This is where it's at, if your so annoyed with the game maybe you should delete it instead of making a ton of points like you have it down to a "t",

I have paid for the game, and I wanted it to be good. It is not what I wanted to, so yes, I am pointing that out. Got a problem with that? Well,

and guess what? the Devs know what's wrong, they built the game didn't they?

Do they? They made these design choices deliberately, so I don't think the consider it "wrong"

Did you build it or do you think they are incapable of fixing the issues you have?

What the hell are you talking about?

I'm sick of all the whining on these forums, the game is in great condition compared to A2 which was a total mess for quite a while after its release. These forums are full of critique and its getting mind numbing, where's the proactive clan building? Where's the positivity for the epic battlefield that is Atlis. Instead it's " my body moves too fast considering I am carrying an RPG launcher", get over it.

I have another idea of the game than you. Get over it.

[dav 22]

We shall agree to disagree, you guys can just keep constructively beating the game down and feel clever about it. Arma 3 is better, saying it is a step back is a joke and a disgrace to the new Arma, Arma 3. A year from now you will look back and say yeah the futurist was right, we were moaning. Mark my words, secondary I don't take offence to the discussion rather throw my opinion on the table I know it's not for everyone's palette. We will agree to disagree, let's just leave it at that, I have said my piece and you have said yours, regards.

[Alwarren 2767]

I disagree, I think his argument is flawed, because Arma 3 has better animations, better scope modelling, better radio comms, better location, better editor module systems, better dare I day graphics.

Disagree all you want. Seriously. You can have your opinion. Mine is different.

Quitting this now, there is no use in discussing with the likes of you.

[zukov 490]

IMHO ARMA 3 is superior in all aspects respect Arma 2 , inherits some aspect that i hate in arma2 (MP lobby, lack on MP PVP features) so why this game didn't become "THE GAME", this platform is good for all tastes but is no easy to modding it. an example is ARMA OA the devs has tried to make small maps for a reasonable fps on line, But they didn't believe on this way

[dav 22]

IMHO ARMA 3 is superior in all aspects respect Arma 2 , inherits some aspect that i hate in arma2 (MP lobby, lack on MP PVP features) so why this game didn't become "THE GAME", this platform is good for all tastes but is no easy to modding it. an example is ARMA OA the devs has tried to make small maps for a reasonable fps on line, But they didn't believe on this way

Yes the multiplayer needs a massive overhaul. Agreed though its heading in the right direction.

[Fap 1]

I haven't bothered reading any of the comments except the ones that get sent around because they're so stupid it hurts, like, and I quote: "it's an absolute insult to me as an Arma fan"

The autism in that comment makes me want to wear a fedora and play with My Little Ponies. Seriously.

ArmA 3 is a huge step down from ArmA 2 when you look at the bigger picture.

From what pops into my mind when I think of ArmA 3, the only thing it offers over A2, is that you no longer sometimes die when you lie down next to/on a rock, some half decent ragdolls (still shit tons of bugs with it), some half-assed physics (vehicles not being able to flip, wtf is up with that?) and the graphics are quite an okay improvement.

These are the few things that actually spring to mind. There might be more that ArmA 3 improved on, but it's nothing I remember, so it can't be that great. I still prefer ArmA 2, it actually has content worth playing with.

/end rant

:edit:

Not quite end of the rant.

I remember tears of joy hitting my cheeks when I heard ArmA 3 was in the works. I saw gameplay videos, all the promises they made for the game, all the showcase videos, all of it. I actually thought it would be an improvement so far above ArmA 2, but instead they let all the promises be forgotten, skimp on everything and shit on the long time players. I understand that money is a big factor, but making a game so mainstream that you can't have interiors for vehicles, broken recoil, a huge lack of content and that the only thing you have to show off in terms of gameplay is a mod that most people refer to as "Waste of time land", I kind of feel betrayed, you made promises and you didn't keep them. I still bought your game though, and I'll still probably play it. But I'll be thinking "meh, this is not what I paid for" when I play it.

/final end rant

Edited September 5, 2013 by Fap

[shark-attack 2]

+1 with fap :pc:

I remember tears of joy hitting my cheeks when I heard ArmA 3 was in the works. I saw gameplay videos, all the promises they made for the game, all the showcase videos, all of it. I actually thought it would be an improvement so far above ArmA 2, but instead they let all the promises be forgotten, skimp on everything and shit on the long time players. I understand that money is a big factor, but making a game so mainstream that you can't have interiors for vehicles, broken recoil, a huge lack of content and that the only thing you have to show off in terms of gameplay is a mod that most people refer to as "Waste of time land", I kind of feel betrayed, you made promises and you didn't keep them.

Well said sir !

Edited September 5, 2013 by shark-attack

[SabotAndHeat 10]

-_-

...and all this before the game has even been released in its entirety.

[shark-attack 2]

Forgive me if i am wrong but this is a sneak peak of the release version (content wise), the version which has been sent for review to the gaming press.

I only hope they score it accordingly.

[still a massive fan of the editor]

Edited September 5, 2013 by shark-attack

[SPC.Spets 21]

join a team/community/clan, this is not call of duty you know?

EDIT:

I remember when Armed Assault (Arma1) came out, the first months it was unplayable, then 5 patchs later TON OF FUN in Evolution

I rememmber when Arma 2 came out, the first months it was unplayable and boring, then I joined a community, and they use ACE2, TON OF FUN in Coops and TvT

I remember when Arma 3 came out, the first months it was unplayable and boring with one little island and some stuff. Then they release ALTIS and stuff, TON OF FUN... and when ACE3 releases and JSRS and Blastcore UUHHH BABY!!

I dont remember when I first played OPF, but, I just remember I was crazy downloading every custom mission with my stupid 28kbps modem and my pentium 486 with 1Mb of ram and a 16mb video card, that was really a TON OF FUN!

Edited September 5, 2013 by SpetS15

[shark-attack 2]

lol

join a team/community/clan, this is not call of duty you know?

That comment has made my day. :cheers:

Edited September 5, 2013 by shark-attack

[fujix 11]

join a team/community/clan, this is not call of duty you know?

Oh god...

[fabio_chavez 103]

join a team/community/clan because its your fault the game is not enjoyable in multiplayer :D

[frederf 0]

A lot of "mature" games like ArmA, DCS, RoF, etc. are great simulations with amazing potential that's mostly squandered. In that sense A3 is a "bad game" in that it rarely achieves its potential.

Trying to join a vanilla A3 multiplayer game 9/10 times results in failure and frustration. I blame the community mostly making missions like "Domination" too popular which cater to the lowest demographic of players. It seems there is little to no trust and willingness to invest in the experience lest some bug or ne'er do well ruin it for you.

I found that most if not all of the BIS single player content is woefully bad in terms of acting and story, playing out like a bad B movie plot. The Warfare missions from A2OA were terrible in a number of ways. OFP CWC was quite good I seem to recall.

[progamer 14]

A lot of "mature" games like ArmA, DCS, RoF, etc. are great simulations with amazing potential that's mostly squandered. In that sense A3 is a "bad game" in that it rarely achieves its potential.

Trying to join a vanilla A3 multiplayer game 9/10 times results in failure and frustration. I blame the community mostly making missions like "Domination" too popular which cater to the lowest demographic of players. It seems there is little to no trust and willingness to invest in the experience lest some bug or ne'er do well ruin it for you.

I found that most if not all of the BIS single player content is woefully bad in terms of acting and story, playing out like a bad B movie plot. The Warfare missions from A2OA were terrible in a number of ways. OFP CWC was quite good I seem to recall.

Well then tell us what kind of mission would be better?

[suprememodder 11]

join a team/community/clan because its your fault the game is not enjoyable in multiplayer :D

if you have to join a clan to enjoy a game, then the multiplayer for that game has failed.

[Logan9773 10]

The biggest issue is I have a 780, 4770K, 16GB ram, installed to an SSD, an Asus D2X sound card and I'm only running at 1080p. However for some reason the game runs at 30fps and if I go into a town it's down to 13fps. The whole point of this new engine was to make the game fun better and it just runs worse than ARMA 2, even worse than Dayz. Every time I see the words "CPU Heavy" I run a mile because why would you go CPU heavy? GPUs are like 10 times more powerful and games like BF3 and Crysis 3 prove you can make an amazing looking game and have it running at 100+ fps. I'm sick of the excuses of it being a large island...... fuck all is going on in it and it's not all rendered at the same time. GTA V is a massive land mass and oh look that runs well on console hardware that's 8 years old at this point and it looks amazing as well. If I look at my hardware usage while I'm playing the game isn't heavy on anything, it's just poorly optimized. If you cannot make a game run well on top of the line hardware from today, then you've failed, buy an engine that actually works....

This whole game is a complete let down for me, it's failed to be quite honest and I see so many assets that were from ARMA 2, in fact the game looks like ARMA 2 with new lighting.

Totally agree man. Thats a good rig your running on. Its the shit engine thats over 10 years old. Time for a NEW ENGINE.