When is this game going to be good?

[WalkerDown 1]

which leads me to think you started with A3.

Your thinking is wrong then.

But you seem to be pretty pessimistic on the game.

I was very optimistic at the start, then I started to smell what were happening... I tried to raise my criticism, but I were replying by the "it's alpha!" horde. Now the "it's alpha" era is finished and the result is under our eyes. I'm not "pessimist", i'm afraid of having loosing the hopes for a game with this such potential, especially after I've dedicated 80% of my playing time to this serie it in the past years (and i'm still running my 2 arma2 servers + 2dayz servers + 3 arma3 servers).

Of you take a look Arma 3 does many things better than Arma 2.

It does (some) things better than ArmA2.. but it does many other things worse than it. I would have expected a better product overall, but today it's not... this is why I "suggested" to wait for the next year to see if they makes anything good.

[zukov 484]

How many of the COOP servers running are running missions that came with the game? I've played this series multiplayer since 2009, and I think I have played official Bohemia Interactive missions maybe 3 or 4 times, coop or non-coop. Thing is, ARMA is a sandbox game, and the reason there is more COOP is because people tend to play COOP missions more than PvP. That's not BIS fault, both options are available, it's up to the players to make scenarios.

There is one single reason to why ARMA has such longevity, community content. The fact that there is less PvP content is due to the fact that only a minority prefers PvP, or at least a minority of mission makers prefers PvP.

Just look at Project Reality for ARMA II, being a great mod focused on PvP. I loved it and it offered solid gameplay... It died rather quickly, because the ARMA PVP scene is sadly to small. Again, not BIs fault, the game supports PvP just fine.

i disagree the PVP part is small because the game modes made by BIS aren't enjoyable

when you join in game have a awful lobby

don't have squad system

don't have class system

don't have spawn system

the entire game is a mess, with different UI

Huge maps small number players

etc etc

[almanzo 144]

i disagree the PVP part is small because the game modes made by BIS aren't enjoyable

when you join in game have a awful lobby

don't have squad system

don't have class system

don't have spawn system

the entire game is a mess, with different UI

Huge maps small number players

etc etc

I've had the coolest PvP experience ever in ARMA II with Rolling Thunder (http://www.rollingthunder.unit19.org/news.php) a 50 vs. 50 tank battle. No other game could do that.

The lobby: The lobby is costomizeable, and you can join the side you want. What roles are available are up to the mission maker, so it has little to do with the game. I could agree that the server browser is really bad, but that is an entirely different story.

Squad system: Again, depends on the mission maker. I've played both Coop and PvP with functional squad systems, and the game supports it. It's very well documented in the wiki how to do it. Have you ever tried Project Reality btw? I think it's exactly what you are looking for.

Class system: What are you talking about? In part, ARMA III is the first game in the series with a less rigid class system, where regular classes have been somewhat turned into multi-classes, but they are still quite distingushable. Go into the editor and place a unit, there are over 10 unique classes!

Spawn system: Yes it does, in fact it has several spawn systems. It's all documented in the wiki.

Huge maps: Well, duh... What did you expect, your playing an ARMA title. Everything you complain about can be found in Battlefield, and is far from what ARMA is all about. PvP doesn't have to be arcade to be PvP. There are thousands of concepts for PvP in ARMA, it all comes down to the community. The engine supports it superbly, it's all up to the mission makers to make what they wan't to play. Thing is, most of the talent in the community prefers either single player or Coop.

As I said, not one of the official coop missions give the kind of quality that I'm used to when playing with my clan. We make everything ourselves, using modules, scripts and the editor. We have a squad system, a class system, a spawn system and we are usually between 20 and 40 people each mission night where everybody cooperates.

This is a example of one of our missions:

[NeuroFunker 11]

i disagree the PVP part is small because the game modes made by BIS aren't enjoyable

when you join in game have a awful lobby

don't have squad system

don't have class system

don't have spawn system

the entire game is a mess, with different UI

Huge maps small number players

etc etc

i see now, then you probably should go play battlefield then. Arma is a different game.

[Harzach 2507]

i disagree the PVP part is small because the game modes made by BIS aren't enjoyable

when you join in game have a awful lobby

don't have squad system

don't have class system

don't have spawn system

the entire game is a mess, with different UI

Huge maps small number players

etc etc

So stop playing poorly designed missions. Arma has all of these things if the mission designer implements them.

[Minoza 11]

i see now, then you probably should go play battlefield then. Arma is a different game.

So, as a solution to bad design decisions you propose playing BF instead? I sure hope that BI doesn't share your attitude.

So stop playing poorly designed missions. Arma has all of these things if the mission designer implements them.

You'll probably understand why not everyone is too happy about their online experience being solely in hands of random mission designers.

Edited September 9, 2013 by Minoza

[Dovafox 10]

i see now, then you probably should go play battlefield then. Arma is a different game.

What a waste of posts, you could have stayed with 1337 posts.

Why the heck are people like you so negative? It's his opinions and you tell him to play BF because he has his opinions of game modes?

[Smurf 12]

So stop playing poorly designed missions. Arma has all of these things if the mission designer implements them.

Yes, IF! If it gets implemented, if it works as it should, if the mission designer know how to do it. Too many thing on the back of those mighty creatures called "mission designers".

Even worst is to not have standards for these things that are used a lot in many missions, you have to figure out yourself how to do the same fucking thing over and over again.

i see now, then you probably should go play battlefield then. Arma is a different game.

Please, stop this type of atitude. Arma and BF are way different games and the general Graphic User Interface (GUI!) in Arma is shit, specially for PvP. Anyone who disagree with that is

a) either playing Arma for too long and think its fine because he (after so much time) can manage to use it;

b) not from this planet and isn't aware of every other game ever made that have working things.

Shameless promotion:

I encourage to discuss these issues in here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?158503-ArmA-Multiplayer-and-humans

Because I fell like these problems are seriously maiming the MP part of the game that could be SO MUCH better.

[almanzo 144]

So, as a solution to bad design decisions you propose playing BF instead? I sure hope that BI doesn't share your attitude.

No, the problem there is that everything he requested actually is IN THE GAME. He is right about one thing, the lack of good PvP missions out of the box... The thing is, there is no good Coop missions out of the box either... The showcases are there to show features.

and before being accused of being a fan boy, read up my last point in this very tread. There are a bunch of stuff in AIII I am very, very dissappointed about, but I can't sit still and just look at people who requests things that are allready there.

edit: Oh, and just wait for it:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?163550-Tactical-Battlefield-A-PvP-Gameplay-Modification&p=2495040#post2495040

Edited September 9, 2013 by aLmAnZo

[clifdenhill 1]

Yes, IF! If it gets implemented, if it works as it should, if the mission designer know how to do it. Too many thing on the back of those mighty creatures called "mission designers".

Even worst is to not have standards for these things that are used a lot in many missions, you have to figure out yourself how to do the same fucking thing over and over again.

Please, stop this type of atitude. Arma and BF are way different games and the general Graphic User Interface (GUI!) in Arma is shit, specially for PvP.

I agree the reason some ppl are here is to play a great arma game not go back to playing battlefield because when the community brings up legit problems with arma some ppl just don't wanna hear it.

[Harzach 2507]

You'll probably understand why not everyone is too happy about their online experience being solely in hands of random mission designers.

What are you looking for? TDM? CTF? The same boring game modes that have been played out ad nauseum by every other game out there? Arma allows us to move past all of that. If you don't like what the community is producing, join the effort and help make things better, rather than sitting idly by and complaining.

[zukov 484]

What are you looking for? TDM? CTF? The same boring game modes that have been played out ad nauseum by every other game out there? Arma allows us to move past all of that. If you don't like what the community is producing, join the effort and help make things better, rather than sitting idly by and complaining.

in alpha and beta and on final release, we have not even those

[Smurf 12]

What are you looking for? TDM? CTF? The same boring game modes that have been played out ad nauseum by every other game out there? Arma allows us to move past all of that.

Yep, to Wasteland, Life and Domination (and similar) while everything else went downhill. Great.

The much enhanced control\animation is a hope to bring back the PvP people.

Edited September 9, 2013 by Smurf

[NeuroFunker 11]

in alpha and beta and on final release, we have not even those

say what? Ive played simple TDM missions from alpha on, i was telling this you, at our "this game is not for pvp discussion", now you say there are none? I'm sorry, but do you ever try to open the server browser?

[scaramoosh 10]

Who says it has to be standard online FPS modes? They could have constructed something original, instead they've done nothing.

[Harzach 2507]

Who says it has to be standard online FPS modes? They could have constructed something original, instead they've done nothing.

Well, no, but what have you done other than complain?

[Minoza 11]

It is perfectly ok for people to complain when it's justified and backed with suggestions on how to improve. You can't expect community doing developers work.

Edited September 10, 2013 by Minoza

[Harzach 2507]

It is perfectly ok for people to complain when it's justified and backed with suggestions on how to improve. You can't expect community doing developers work.

There is no justification for complaining about community content.

[Minoza 11]

People are complaining because of missing official content.

Edited September 10, 2013 by Minoza

[Smurf 12]

People are complaining because of missing official content.

Or modules\templates\UI for things used often on them like squad management, "who is riding with me in the vehicle" and more.

[metalcraze 290]

The much enhanced control\animation is a hope to bring back the PvP people.

Ironically the fact that ShackTac gets their PvP fix from Project Reality for BF2 among almost total absence of PvP servers for the past 6 months says a lot about how successful that attempt is.

But hey at least BIS took soldier movement to a ridiculous extreme ruining it in many ways.

Changes made in ArmA3 made it perfect for Wasteland and completely inferior for everything else it seems. Is PvP fun when everybody is a one man army with superhuman abilities?

Edited September 10, 2013 by metalcraze

[Smurf 12]

Ironically the fact that ShackTac gets their PvP fix from Project Reality for BF2 among almost total absence of PvP servers for the past 6 months says a lot about how successful that attempt is.

FFS!

Yeah, they dropped a not released game (and more incomplete when PR videos were made) for a mod, entirely based on PvP (and they done it VERY well), in development for 8 (EIGHT!) years! On it's launch! OMG! ARMA 3 IS RUINED!

One-man-army cases are less frequent from the little I saw on the MP, whereas in A2 you could take 2 main weapons, a luncher, ammo e whatnot. But "OMG it SPINS!", fair enough, but it's a trade that I would take anytime. And it still can be tweaked!

A2 movements didn't had inertia, aiming was mostly shit and CQB was inexistant. It was just bad but I guess some of you got too used to that to let it go huh?

Why are you still in the A3 part of the forums when you don't want to like the game?

[NeuroFunker 11]

FFS!

Yeah, they dropped a not released game (and more incomplete when PR videos were made) for a mod, entirely based on PvP (and they done it VERY well), in development for 8 (EIGHT!) years! On it's launch! OMG! ARMA 3 IS RUINED!

One-man-army cases are less frequent from the little I saw on the MP, whereas in A2 you could take 2 main weapons, a luncher, ammo e whatnot. But "OMG it SPINS!", fair enough, but it's a trade that I would take anytime. And it still can be tweaked!

A2 movements didn't had inertia, aiming was mostly shit and CQB was inexistant. It was just bad but I guess some of you got too used to that to let it go huh?

Why are you still in the A3 part of the forums when you don't want to like the game?

i guess, he is trying, to overconvice the people here with his negative opinion. Why else he would be here, on so much hatred arma 3 forums then?

[icewindo 29]

He may have voiced it abit differently/softer but I see myself in the same boat.

Why do I bother with 20fps in MP, hackers and (compared to PR) bad public MP when I can just boot up PR. I and a buddy are doing just that. Sure, there's organized ArmA events for coop and PVP which will play far better, but still there's the performance issue. And sometimes you don't want to wait for an event.

FFS!

One-man-army cases are less frequent from the little I saw on the MP, whereas in A2 you could take 2 main weapons, a luncher, ammo e whatnot.

Yet you can carry like 30+ mags for your assault weapon. Something seems wrong with the carrying capacity and it doesn't seem to bother people as much as me.

edit: Sorry, I was wrong.

It's 69 mags.

http://s7.directupload.net/images/130910/4qviswk3.png

Edited September 10, 2013 by Icewindo

[-ghost-tf 12]

whereas in A2 you could take 2 main weapons

Nope, you cannot.

fair enough, but it's a trade that I would take anytime.

Opinions.. :)

A2 movements didn't had inertia, aiming was mostly shit and CQB was inexistant.

A2's movement was not perfect, and had alot of issues but it was certainly better then what we have now (IMO), making the new system also shit :P

Why are you still in the A3 part of the forums when you don't want to like the game?

If he didnt care, he wouldnt be here.