An Honest Review

[ProfTournesol 956]

Why the "quotes"?

Because "people would like to" or "the community wants" doesn't mean much.

The fact that this is optional is better for everybody.

Agreed.

Edited December 31, 2013 by ProfTournesol

[armilio 14]

Why the "quotes"? Arma series has always been niche, ACE takes it even further. The fact that this is optional is better for everybody.

Yes, but... where is ACE for Arma3? probably this is the big problem. With ACE many people don't complain about vanilla, because don't play vanilla anymore.

[Deadfast 43]

Yes, but... where is ACE for Arma3? probably this is the big problem. With ACE many people don't complain about vanilla, because don't play vanilla anymore.

That's a question only the ACE team can answer. In any case, if you cannot stand A3 without ACE then you'll just have to play A2 with ACE. I realize this may sound like a weak argument but remember that this is what you'd be doing anyway had BIS decided to implement all ACE features into A3 since the game would still be in development at this point.

[armilio 14]

That's a question only the ACE team can answer. In any case, if you cannot stand A3 without ACE then you'll just have to play A2 with ACE. I realize this may sound like a weak argument but remember that this is what you'd be doing anyway had BIS decided to implement all ACE features into A3 since the game would still be in development at this point.

I'm not talking about me, i play Arma3, is a good game anyway. I talking about community. If you say "well, Arma3 is a 'standard sandbox foundation' where you can add on mods as you like", if these mods (and modders) stop working...what remain? only foundation? is a good system until community is happy and work like employees of bohemia. Is not a critic, but it is the reality. Without a single team of modders (example, ACE modders) many old-fan of Arma remain dissatisfied, and play Arma2 and not Arma3 like you say. So, sadly, is not 'better for everybody', at least not always.

P.s: In all honesty, ACE is very old mod. The "must have" features of this mod was implemented by simply fans. I don't think to implement feature like weapon-resting is a big problem for the software house that created the game. Also Red Orchestra have this feature in vanilla version, for example.

Edited December 31, 2013 by Armilio

[GReeves 10]

Got to agree with above. If the ACE team can manipulate/ recode/ whatever ARMA2 then surely the company that developed the game could figure something out for this game.

[Deadfast 43]

P.s: In all honesty, ACE is very old mod. The "must have" features of this mod was implemented by simply fans. I don't think to implement feature like weapon-resting is a big problem for the software house that created the game. Also Red Orchestra have this feature in vanilla version, for example.

The problem is establishing what a must have feature is, not everybody will agree (though weapon resting is probably the rare case where everyone would).

[chortles 263]

Yes, but... where is ACE for Arma3? probably this is the big problem. With ACE many people don't complain about vanilla, because don't play vanilla anymore.

Directly quoting NouberNou on Reddit: "ACE3 is happening. ACRE2 is happening." You'd have to ask 'im for anything more specific than that.

In any case, if "ACE" is merely standing in for "realism mod"... my position is that that's already been effectively done (if not outright superseded) by TMR Modular Realism.

[kireta21 13]

Other problem is perfomance thing. Since tons of stuff in ACE is script powered, it takes more precious CPU power, not to mention things start getting clunky if perfomance drops significantly, like immersive scopes or tank FCS that can load up to several seconds.

Inb4 "buy better PC lolz"

[GReeves 10]

The problem is establishing what a must have feature is

Let me help you.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?169862-Weaponrest-get-it-in-even-if-AI-cant-use-it

One hundred and thirty voters said they wanted weapon resting and a bipod system. I think that's a must-have feature.

[progamer 14]

Other problem is perfomance thing. Since tons of stuff in ACE is script powered, it takes more precious CPU power, not to mention things start getting clunky if perfomance drops significantly, like immersive scopes or tank FCS that can load up to several seconds.

Inb4 "buy better PC lolz"

I would love for BI to add some hardcore Milsim options to the game like they added arcade options. Or even the proper engine support for realistic features. People seem to forget/fight against things that could make the game a lot more realistic and don't seem to realize they are not forced to use those options.

[roshnak 41]

In any case, if "ACE" is merely standing in for "realism mod"... my position is that that's already been effectively done (if not outright superseded) by TMR Modular Realism.

ACE is far more comprehensive than a simple realism mod, which probably leads to some of its divisiveness. TMR doesn't address half the stuff that ACE does.

The problem is establishing what a must have feature is, not everybody will agree (though weapon resting is probably the rare case where everyone would).

Weapon resting and firing from cargo positions are things that people have been clamoring for since Operation Flashpoint. They're also things that are answered with "We'll see" every time a new Arma game is announced.

People seem to forget/fight against things that could make the game a lot more realistic and don't seem to realize they are not forced to use those options.

If you're going to say stuff like this, you are really going to have to come up with specific examples.

Edited January 2, 2014 by roshnak
their there they're

[Nicholas 5]

like they added arcade options.

What kind of "arcade options" did they add?

[Harry_Flashman 1]

Ha ha, no, it wasn't.

I can explain the difference in 30 seconds. One is supposed to be realistic, one is not. Alternatively, Arma is trying to be an open-ended military simulator with extensive sandbox elements and a great deal of user content creation, BF is trying to be a highly structured, balanced, competitive multiplayer game that delivers a cinematic experience. Are you honestly telling me you can't tell the difference between Arma and Battlefield almost immediately? Anyone with even a modest amount of experience with video games can do that. Do you think you would have a hard time trying to explain the differences between DCS and Ace Combat?

First of all, why, in your opinion, are BIS just now deciding they want to get a slice of the action FPS market? I said it before, Battlefield 1942 was released only a year after Operation Flashpoint, and has been more popular than the Arma series throughout it's entire lifespan. Arma is a niche game and BIS knows it. They've never tried to capture that market before.

Second, what is it that you think makes Arma 3 more casual? Improving the interface and making the movement feel less janky doesn't mean that BIS is trying to compete with Battlefield, it means that they are improving their game.

"One is supposed to be realistic...." - I suppose Arma 3 is a bit more realistic, but not by much. Still takes many shots to down an AI, choppers are easy to fly, you can run/jog indefinitely, swim underwater in full gear - need I go on. OK, if I'm totally pedantic I'll admit that Arma 3 is a tad - a smidgeon - more realistic, but not by much. Also, if you reread my post you'll see that I was referring to the "lay person" (or casual gamer) not the hardcore Arma fan.

As for why BIS would want to entice CoD/BF players to the franchise: I told you already (think I even monetized my answer), but will say it again - sales and profit.

[roshnak 41]

"One is supposed to be realistic...." - I suppose Arma 3 is a bit more realistic, but not by much. Still takes many shots to down an AI, choppers are easy to fly, you can run/jog indefinitely, swim underwater in full gear - need I go on. OK, if I'm totally pedantic I'll admit that Arma 3 is a tad - a smidgeon - more realistic, but not by much. Also, if you reread my post you'll see that I was referring to the "lay person" (or casual gamer) not the hardcore Arma fan.

As for why BIS would want to entice CoD/BF players to the franchise: I told you already (think I even monetized my answer), but will say it again - sales and profit.

Reread my post more carefully. You haven't addressed any of my points and your understanding of game mechanics is shaky at best. You cannot run indefinitely. You slow down as you get more tired and your aim becomes less stable, this has been a feature since Operation Flashpoint. Until the armor simulation was implemented, it took a relatively realistic number of shots to kill an enemy, and even now that aspect is being worked on. Helicopters fly more realistically than any game that is not a flight sim.

You appear to have missed my description of someone who can tell the inherent differences in Arma and Battlefield as anyone with even a modest amount of experience with video games.

BIS has never attempted to lure players away from Battlefield in its entire decade plus history of making video games. The question is why did they decide now to enter that market.

I don't think you know what pedantic means. Pedantic is what you are being in a desperate attempt to continue to defend your ill supported claims.

[MissionCreep 12]

The problem I have with ACE (which I have used before) is I don't want to have to re-learn all the key mappings for all the commands or new keystrokes to invoke commands that I am already used to. That's the main reason I went back to Vanilla. I didn't want to have to go through another learning curve.

[Tonci87 163]

I´ll too will be writing a review, but I will wait until the full campaign is released. Until then I consider this game to be in (extended) Beta.

[Harry_Flashman 1]

No need to make this personal, Roshnak - that's uncalled for. I did address your claims, and I continue to stand by mine. And the question you keep asking has been answered at least twice before by me. They want to make more money and they've finally got a product that looks and feels much more up-to-date and slick than prior versions of Arma, and can therefore now credibly lure away a small portion of gamers from some of those "competitive" platforms. Note the use of inverted commas/quotation marks - that's where you and I disagree, amongst other things. BIS does NOT need to make the product more complex and simulation-oriented (modders will add that as need be), they need to focus on making the product pretty, accessible, fun and as immersive/tactical as possible without solely appealing to the tiny sliver of the gaming population that bought/played Arma historically. THAT's what will make BIS successful, and ensure the title lives on. Of course, this is my opinion and you're welcome to continue to disagree and argue that what they really need is a competitor that they don't have today, and to make the product far more technical and simulation-oriented off-the-shelf - neither of which will happen on any material scale (in my humble opinion).

[tinemem 11]

The question is why did they decide now to enter that market.

what type of people played games in the late 90s and early aughts versus what type of people play games today? as the market opens up, there is more and more types of people playing games, and generally, as with other forms of art and media, those who lack completely the ability to appreciate complexity are the more common types. so advanced ai, simulation, and realism, etc become less prioritized as time goes on...and whackamole, chest high walls, dubstep become the norm.

game companies must broaden their consumer base if they ever want to sustain their business, much less expand it. the side effect is that more games franchises belonging to niche genres will gradually become mainstreamed/dumbed down. this only happens to big names, like arma, ghost recon, splinter cell, hitman, etc because they need to sustain their expanding company. so they need to always raise the bottomline. while some(generally newer) franchises are suffering minor side effects, but keeping tradition strong, see red orchestra 2. some never suffer from this problem (dcs series) because they know they cannot compete with action game #45453, so they use other methods to generate increased income, like higher prices, nickle and diming(sorry to say, but this is true. dcs charges you 60 dollars for one flyable aircraft, and if you want to enjoy optimization, and multcore support, you need to buy their new map). i'm not saying bis needs to be more like either examples. but if they continue down their path of trying to please too many types of players at once, they risk pleasing no one instead.

it really is all about money in the end.

[roshnak 41]

No need to make this personal, Roshnak - that's uncalled for.

At what point did I make anything personal? Also, you did not provide an answer to my question, but tinemem did. Furthermore, what BIS needs to do to be successful was never a topic of discussion.

the side effect is that more games franchises belonging to niche genres will gradually become mainstreamed/dumbed down.

Arma hasn't become more dumbed down, though, and no one has offered any evidence that it has been.

Also, the titles that you are talking about that have been dumbed down were created by development companies that were bought by huge megapublishers with a long track record of making their game as appealing to as many people as possible at the cost of game complexity. Only after they were bought off did the nature of the games begin to change.

Edit: I see it now. I corrected your use of the word pedantic. I'm sorry, the only way someone could confuse Battlefield and Arma is if he or she completely ignored game mechanics and I don't understand why you insist on arguing otherwise.

Edited January 2, 2014 by roshnak

[GReeves 10]

The problem I have with ACE (which I have used before) is I don't want to have to re-learn all the key mappings for all the commands or new keystrokes to invoke commands that I am already used to. That's the main reason I went back to Vanilla. I didn't want to have to go through another learning curve.

Off-topic but I have to defend one of my favorite mods :) I don't really know why you have a problem with the keybindings -- in fact, I don't see why so many people gripe even about the keybindings in ARMA2 vanilla. It took me like one night of messing around to figure out all the new keys, and they weren't really that different from any other FPS games out there. Sure, there's more to sort through, but it's not like we're using the number keys to walk and shooting with Backspace or anything crazy like that. ACE only adds a few new essential keybindings (Interaction menus, deploying weapon) and the rest you rarely ever need.

[MissionCreep 12]

Off-topic but I have to defend one of my favorite mods :) I don't really know why you have a problem with the keybindings

I think it has more to do with the fact that I am quite old and have too many other things to remember.

[GReeves 10]

This game is starting to get good, guys. I'm actually looking forward to a switch to ARMA3 after we finish our next campaign in A2. With these three mods (and a few others that don't affect gameplay like weapons & vehicles), I am having a great time just playing around in the editor. With the following addons the AI actually react to fire, drop with just one or two shots at the most, etc.

forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?171382-NATO-5-56-and-7-62-adjustor

forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?161738-Fire-Fight-Improvement-System

www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=21785