Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
progamer

What's up with new players not wanting the game to be realistic anymore?

Recommended Posts

(i.e. certain mods' gameplay mechanics, like SMK Animations) were inspirations for some of Arma 3,

Inspiration? You do know that Smookie (SMK) made the animations in A3... right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i came to arma for a few reasons.

1) it's open source, so the community makes it what they want.

2) it's not a mindless point and click, like COD, BF, and pretty much everything else under the FPS genre these days...

3) it's as milsim as you want it to be.... the game gives you the tools to go light or go full in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's called mainstreaming. basically, the only people who were interested in games used to be nerds and geeks, aka the smart guys. then games became popular and "cool" and companies began finding ways to make games appeal to not just nerds, but normal people as well. but this wasn't enough, so now they've gone "full retard" so to speak, and are targeting the clinically braindead like the call of duty and battlefield types.

with all this dumbing down going on, collateral damage was bound to be inflicted upon games like red orchestra 2 and arma 3. afterall, if you aren't able to "broaden your user base" ie dumb your game down to moron levels, you cannot make a decent profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a bit of an assumption about people down-voting so-called "realistic" features on the tracker. I've down-voted plenty of these. But it's my personal preference in that I'd prefer a game that requires you to think and perform in a thoughtful and tactical manner. Hyper realism can ruin the experience by making it over-complicated to perform simple actions, or they're ultimately a waste of time to implement because a largely insignificant feature adds nothing to the gameplay. The feedback tracker is full of these (over 15,000 tickets and most of it junk (or dupes), according to my personal taste), made worse by virture of people treating it like a forum instead of its intended purpose.

So, do we have statistical evidence that newer players are typically calling for less realism (whatever that really means), or is this purely anecdotal? Not everyone who votes provides a comment, which is justified since - as I mentioned before - it's treated like a forum where a dissenting opinion can often lead to personal attacks. Are you able to tell how many older players up/down-vote compared to newer? Is this even important compared to the virtue of the idea and the justifications made for or against it? I just don't see anything solid here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has gone on way too long...

There are newer players and older player that hate realism and newer and older players that love realism, with the realism players being generally larger. Arma 3 incorporates a bunch of ACE 2 feature into the vanilla game. On top of this mod can take the game whatever direction the player wants.

Edited by ProGamer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it's called mainstreaming. Basically, the only people who were interested in games used to be nerds and geeks, aka the smart guys. Then games became popular and "cool" and companies began finding ways to make games appeal to not just nerds, but normal people as well. But this wasn't enough, so now they've gone "full retard" so to speak, and are targeting the clinically braindead like the call of duty and battlefield types.
Lol this stinks of eliteism you have no idea how gaming has progressed. Gaming is much broader than the narrow child like analysis you have offered up here.
with all this dumbing down going on, collateral damage was bound to be inflicted upon games like red orchestra 2 and arma 3. Afterall, if you aren't able to "broaden your user base" ie dumb your game down to moron levels, you cannot make a decent profit.
Nothing has been dumbed down in a3. Why do the users of the forum have to put up with something so false and clearly designed to troll. Anyone who has played arma3 knows there have not been any major changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the problem isn't the idea of modeling futuristic modelof warfare. The problem is that the futuristic model that we've been given sort of sucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A problem I see is that some people downvoted some stuff and one comment I saw I thought was stupid... saying something about "let BIS be creative about having automatic loaders". If its a model of the Merkerva tank, might as well go all the way through with it instead of have it missing a few features... I thought its the future, not the past where you make a dumbed down version of a tank *sarcasm*. A futuristic model wouldn't just strip down such that something once have.

Merkerva missing 60mm mortar (didn't go the whole way through with the models)

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=15641

Commander guns (I remember tanks in Arma 2, all the battle tanks have a commander gun)

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=14264

That'll be some of it. It'd be nicer to have some tanks that are more proper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it's called mainstreaming. basically, the only people who were interested in games used to be nerds and geeks, aka the smart guys. then games became popular and "cool" and companies began finding ways to make games appeal to not just nerds, but normal people as well. but this wasn't enough, so now they've gone "full retard" so to speak, and are targeting the clinically braindead like the call of duty and battlefield types.

I find it ironic since the "nerds aka smart guys" you refer to used to be majorly into games like marathon, quake, duke nukem etc etc. Then you harp on the people who may like battlefield and call them "clinically braindead". I personally enjoy battlefield. That said, there's a time & place for certain activities/games (for me). Just because one enjoys a game that you do not doesn't make them any less of a person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread has gone on way too long...

There are newer players and older player that hate realism and newer and older players that love realism, with the realism players being generally larger. Arma 3 incorporates a bunch of ACE 2 feature into the vanilla game. On top of this mod can take the game whatever direction the player wants.

Well you started it... :p If you want it closed, ask a mod to close it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BIS sadly already caters to casual players as evidenced by Battlefield-like balancing of armies, health regen-style medic system and the horrible first campaign episode with unkillable team leaders handholding you on rails.

And yeah much like OP my expectations for ArmA is to play a different shooter. I can always play BF & Co for arcade dose since DICE & co do it a lot better than BIS.

But nobody does what OFP/ArmA1/ArmA2 did.

Hopefully ACE mod will save ArmA3 from being a mediocrity stuck between two totally opposite camps that it is now.

Arma 3 incorporates a bunch of ACE 2 feature into the vanilla game.

Sadly it does not.

But ArmA2 did.

Arma 3 recently: No more realism. Arcade is better. Fix this. Go buy VBS. Realistic is not fun. Battlefield does it better. Realism is bad. Arma shouldn't be realistic. Down vote realism! Bis should balance the game.

This is true. People who say such feedback/responses are not numerous haven't read these here forums at all.

Edited by metalcraze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread closed upon OP's request. If you wish to continue discussing, please do so in the appropriate threads. Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×