Campaign Episode 2: ADAPT - Feedback thread ** SPOILER WARNING! **

[rehtus777 10]

Has anyone encountered this bug: When I leave Gori to go on a side mission, the "Patrol" balloon pops up telling me that I'm leaving the base and that I will be "Scouting". I then go forward and the Altis map appears and it acts like it is going to load something, but them it goes back to the main Campaign Page where you see "Survive" and "Adapt"....it just defaults back to the main menu. What gives? I've seen other videos on youtube and the game goes into "Scouting" mode once you leave the base, but mine defaults back to the main menu. I tried it in Vanilla as well and it still defaults back to the main menu.

Edit: I fixed the problem. Here is why I was having the problem: I went to the next main mission after Bingo Fuel.....I stopped part way through that mission and saved it. Then when I came back to the game at a later time and went to Gori in the Adapt Menu, I decided to play a side mission instead of finishing the new Main Mission.....it would keep creating the same "crash" bug on the side missions. IOW's, I could see the new mission below Gori, but I wanted to go back and do some side missions while leaving the new main mission on hold. To fix the problem, I just "Reverted" (instead of Resume) at Gori....it deleted the next "main mission." I then put in a side mission and now all is fine.

Edited January 26, 2014 by rehtus777

[trent 14]

Good campaign. Like the story line.

Few problems.

I have lost allot of soldiers. They just stay still when you have to retreat. Or they will still engage and fight. Even when I order disengage, hold fire. Nothing will seem to make them retreat.

also the weapon pool. Nothing saves. Bingo Fuel was annoying because of this. I didn't have NV Goggles. So I revert to mission before (breaking even) to steal some from dead enemy's. Finish mission. Put them in the containers. Do briefing. Bam. Everything i collected gone. Helmet. The AAF Chest protector i use for armor. All gone.

Gear can't be saved. Only guns. Was annoying to ditch a lifesaving helmet for a bandana every mission. I use this

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=18757

to spawn NVGs if the mission takes place at night.

[almanzo 144]

I started playing this as I do with every other ARMA campaign, wanting it to be good. There are two reasons for this. One: I know that ARMA is the only game capable of catering to my needs in regards of gameplay, and two: Cold War Crisis really showed the potential for storytelling and immersion the engine is capable of providing.

In my review of Survive, I was much more positive than I am going to be now. The main flaw in ARMA III (and every other ARMA title really) is not as apparent in "Survive" as it is in "adapt", and that is AI. The main reason it's not as apparent is basicly the fact that you are commanding units. AI was a pain back in OFP as well, but far from as much as they are today. I think the reason is that they where simple compared to ARMA I, II and III. If you told them to follow, they followed. If you told them to hold fire, they held fire, if you told them to copy your stance, they did. They where able to keep up and keep formation, and they where able to leg it where needed.

They where not, however, able to take cover and cover each other and do advance and secure manuvers. To be frank, as it is today, where you can't force your subordinates out of combat mode, I'd prefer the old AI. They could even drive better (though where more likely to collide), but at least they where able to keep up. AI is also the main problem with the enemy. Insane abilities to spot and shoot, sometimes impossible to kill (I played through the entire "adapt" using either machine guns or the marksman rifle, still having trouble dropping enemies without having to spend several bullets. The worst part is the enconsistency, some guys go down with one bullet, others take three to four.) Same goes with weapon handling, compared to ARMA II and OFP it's horrible to shot, as the recoil is unpredicable and simulated in an odd fashion, the fact that they still haven't fixed the TrackIR scope issue (http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=10373) doesn't make it better.

My take on this is simple, when the AI is so stubborn and unpredicable, you shouldn't have to rely on them. Being commanded results in less issues than having to command them, and while the AI is being fixed, rely less on them.

As to the story, I liked "survive" alot. The voice acting was reliable and the characters somewhat believable. Very glad to get ridd of the super macho idiot soldiers from ARMA II. However, the "Adapt" part of the story is simply so comfusing and so riddled with inconsistencies and unrealistic events that it really breaks the immersion. On an island completely under control of an enemy force, someone is actually able to sustain a base in an old factory building, having weapons lying on tables, maps out in the open and even stationary guards and patrols around the perimiter? And not only that, the enemy is having road blocks and assets within walking distance of your secret base? It just didn't do it for me, I am sorry.

I would love to see conventional war. Be in the shoes of a frightened 20-something year old who joined the army to make ends meet and that all of a sudden finds himself in a war zone. Read his diaries, get to know his comrades, feel his emotions, share his fears, share his joys, get a glimpse of how he copes with boredom, with anxiety. Instead we get an artificial storyline with unbelievable characters and "suprising" plot twists. I am one of those people who didn't really like ofp "resistance" that much due to mission design. However, even with the limited resources they had back then, the characters made sense. That where family guys, being pissed off and afraid due to the invation, risking their lives to liberate their country. They didn't want to fight, and they also didn't act like they where military geniouses, they used common sense, and they did mistakes.

As much as I wanted to like this campaign, I didn't. Survive showed some positive signs, but adapt ruined it for me. I know you have worked hard, and I know you do want to provide us with good singleplayer content.

Next time you make a campaign, take inspiration from real war stories, especially first hand litterature like the band of brothers books and so forth. Show us real human emotions, not superficial characters like your recent games. A story about human beings in a horrible situation, not some hollywood story that doesn't make sense.

That being said, I still think arma is unique and it's still my favorite game. I still prefer ARMA II over ARMA III due to both the feel of the maps and the content provided but that is simply taste and preference. I like the engine improvements in ARMA III, but I miss alot from "the old days".

[daze23 1]

That's Miller and CTRG.

well I wouldn't say it so matter of fact, but that's my theory too. it's also interesting that Miller seemed to waste no time blowing up Mike 26

[SPC.Spets 21]

How do you make the Side Missions? I tried to go after finishing the campaign and replay Gori, and every time I left the camp the game just close to the campaign menu

[zimms 22]

I think you cant do the side missions if you 'Replay' a mission, since a scouting mission would be a whole new mission and the mission you are replaying simply ends as soon as you leave the camp.

[rehtus777 10]

@aLmAnZo

I think you're too overly critical.... you're trying to mix "total" reality with a Video Game.....it's not realistic. The Dev's have to keep in mind "balance" within the game and this isn't easily done. Also, we are limited to a small Island (Side Note: don't they use Islands so they can limit the land and surround it with water? I mean, look at Chernarus or Takistan, once you go outside the borders, it looks stupid and goes on to infinity; but if you have an Island surrounded by unlimited water, it looks more realistic. Also, its easier on the CPU / GPU / HDD). So, we have this fairly large Island with limited room.... the territorial gains and loses aren't going to be too realistic (Or course, in WW2 when Patton and Montgomery invaded Sicily, it had battle lines and etc). We must keep this in context. As for Gori, I'm sure in 2035, the Russians or Chinese would have given the Iranians full Satellite photos or reconnaissance of the Island hour by hour..... I agree with you there, the factory base is hokie.

With that said, you still make some valid points. The Campaign could have been researched better and been closer to reality....but again, I think they are limited by the Engine they are using. Also, I agree with you about the AI..... I'm using bcombat right now and it helps some.....give it a try if you play "Adapt" again.

Anyway....I'm enjoying it and I'm not trying to be overly critical of the Campaign "logic". It's like watching a Hollywood War Film....you could tear it to pieces when it comes to reality, but we need to just sit back and enjoy it.

BTW, "Band of Brothers" is one of my all-time favorite Movies / Mini-Series..... too bad someone doesn't make a Video Game today with the modern engines about the 82nd or the 101st on D-Day to the end of the war.

Edited January 26, 2014 by rehtus777
grammar correction

[TruckTurner 10]

I'm not sure if this is a bug or not, but when I move to meet with Orestas at the beginning of the Exit Strategy mission in the Adapt Campaign of Arma 3, they just shoot at me and I'm not quite sure how to let them know that I am a friendly. Any comments?

[bonchie 39]

I'm not sure if this is a bug or not, but when I move to meet with Orestas at the beginning of the Exit Strategy mission in the Adapt Campaign of Arma 3, they just shoot at me and I'm not quite sure how to let them know that I am a friendly. Any comments?

You must be bugged somehow.

When I played it they never fired on me and I walked right up to them.

[USTF 10]

Discussing the storyline...

well I wouldn't say it so matter of fact, but that's my theory too. it's also interesting that Miller seemed to waste no time blowing up Mike 26

IMHO, even being former UKSF the Miller's team would hardly get any support from NATO such as helicopters (if it actually was the the CTRG team that landed at camp Maxwell during the 1st "Survive" mission) if he was any kind of a hired contractor no one in NATO knew about. Getting an Army helicopter, running a team of Brits who are clearly (former or active) SF, being an SBS (former or active) himself, being able to set a link with the Altis FIA? Besides, he has got NATO on Altis after all. Guess it's all some kind of a complicated operation aiming to get NATO forces on Altis.

p.s. just kidding - it would be interesting to find out that it was the Miller's lads who had blown up McKinnon and Kamino Base. Hehehe.

Personally I quite enjoyed the campaign. Maybe 'cause I didn't much think about the logic of its storyline. Sure there are some things that are questionable, but being unable to change anything I just played through it. Aye, it's annoying losing every NVG you've got, losing your bergen and so on. Also I thought we would be playing as Miller, not some lad from infantry. Not a problem, anyway.

p.s. never faced a problem with Orestes being hostile. I played with a ton of modes (VTS, bCombat, JSRS, TMR, TPW etc) - still nothing. He was much more friendly than Miller, no doubt.

Edited January 26, 2014 by USTF
updating the post

[TruckTurner 10]

I'm playing with the 15th meu mods added...I'm thinking of restarting without them added. Maybe that's my problem?

---------- Post added at 20:13 ---------- Previous post was at 19:51 ----------

So now that I've disabled the 15th Meu pack, now when Orestes arrives it's like he doesn't even see me. He just sits there and there's no dialog exchange. Really odd I'm not sure what to do and I really want to finish this campaign.

[USTF 10]

One thing I forgot about. The introduction to the FIA commander scene starts with Miller and Kerry walking and talking. They are suppossed to be walking and talking (and even stopping a few times with animation), but there's a bug - Kerry's the only one moving. Miller's stuck at the beginning. It worked only once when I saw the animation working properly.

Same goes for the first appearance at camp Maxwell in the 1st episode. Lt. James talks to Kerry standing in front of the camp gate while Kerry moves inside the camp. It never worked properly.

Any suggestions?

I'm playing with the 15th meu mods added...I'm thinking of restarting without them added. Maybe that's my problem?

---------- Post added at 20:13 ---------- Previous post was at 19:51 ----------

So now that I've disabled the 15th Meu pack, now when Orestes arrives it's like he doesn't even see me. He just sits there and there's no dialog exchange. Really odd I'm not sure what to do and I really want to finish this campaign.

Have you tried to disable every mod you use? Not that it looks like to be the reason though.

[froggyluv 2136]

One thing I forgot about. The introduction to the FIA commander scene starts with Miller and Kerry walking and talking. They are suppossed to be walking and talking (and even stopping a few times with animation), but there's a bug - Kerry's the only one moving. Miller's stuck at the beginning. It worked only once when I saw the animation working properly.

Same goes for the first appearance at camp Maxwell in the 1st episode. Lt. James talks to Kerry standing in front of the camp gate while Kerry moves inside the camp. It never worked properly.

Any suggestions?

.

BCombat running? There are alot of problems with the mod and cutscenes especially camp based ones at this time but he's working on it.

[almanzo 144]

snip

Hi man, thanks for the response. I would like to start with asking wether or not you have played Operation flashpoint? My point is, they was able to pull it off pretty remarkably in OFP. If you don't have it, download "Cold War Rearmed2" for ARMA II, I enjoyed it immensly, despite the AI problems that AII introduce. The fine details, the chit chat, the emotions. Despite having below avarage voice acting, they are more believable characters than ARMA III.

OFP had it's inconsistencies and unrealistic story elements as well, but it felt authentic. Realism isn't a goal, authenticity is, and I feel "adapt" falls a bit short.

I don't think the limitations is due to the size of the islands or beyond the scope of the engine, again OFP pulled it off. It remains one of my favorite games to this day. It's all about giving the characters life, to make them genuine and not generic. Now, I am not saying that it's easy, only that it's possible.

My main reason for giving feedback such as this, is because I think ARMA III provides the best engine ever to portrait a authentic story that can explore the horrors of war. I did start a campaign on my own in ARMA II, but had to give up due to lack of mission making skills. However, I think it was doable, it just requires research. And there is alot of current conflicts to take inspiration from, for instance Libia and the civil war against Gadaffi.

That is my main issue. I think ARMA III's capabilities for good story telling are gone to waste, I do whole heartidly believe that it's possible to make great epos with the technology ARMA III brings to the table. An epic campaign would do wonders, but now I feel any hope of that is lost, as I did with ARMA I & II. OFP did it, and so did all of the expantion packs, even Red Hammer. One memory still stuck on my mind is how a senior officer lectures a soldier who are stoked to see combat, responding to him that he has no idea about what he is talking about.

[froggyluv 2136]

Hi man, thanks for the response. I would like to start with asking wether or not you have played Operation flashpoint? My point is, they was able to pull it off pretty remarkably in OFP. If you don't have it, download "Cold War Rearmed2" for ARMA II, I enjoyed it immensly, despite the AI problems that AII introduce. The fine details, the chit chat, the emotions. Despite having below avarage voice acting, they are more believable characters than ARMA III.

OFP had it's inconsistencies and unrealistic story elements as well, but it felt authentic. Realism isn't a goal, authenticity is, and I feel "adapt" falls a bit short.

I don't think the limitations is due to the size of the islands or beyond the scope of the engine, again OFP pulled it off. It remains one of my favorite games to this day. It's all about giving the characters life, to make them genuine and not generic. Now, I am not saying that it's easy, only that it's possible.

My main reason for giving feedback such as this, is because I think ARMA III provides the best engine ever to portrait a authentic story that can explore the horrors of war. I did start a campaign on my own in ARMA II, but had to give up due to lack of mission making skills. However, I think it was doable, it just requires research. And there is alot of current conflicts to take inspiration from, for instance Libia and the civil war against Gadaffi.

That is my main issue. I think ARMA III's capabilities for good story telling are gone to waste, I do whole heartidly believe that it's possible to make great epos with the technology ARMA III brings to the table. An epic campaign would do wonders, but now I feel any hope of that is lost, as I did with ARMA I & II. OFP did it, and so did all of the expantion packs, even Red Hammer. One memory still stuck on my mind is how a senior officer lectures a soldier who are stoked to see combat, responding to him that he has no idea about what he is talking about.

Think your just being bit by the nostalgia bug. OFP campaign is also stuck in my memory as classic but much of that was a brand new type of gameplay coupled with some really quirky storytelling and voice acting. The dialogue was just so strange and innocent example: "I spy with my little eye something starting with the letter G..." -hilarious by todays standards but would most likely be ridiculed en mass as well. Kinda reminds of PG movies from the 80's like Ghostbusters or Time Bandits -funny and innocent with decent story where as nowadays there needs to be an F-bomb and CGI explosions every 3o seconds to be cool. Those times are over.

That said, I'm actually invested in the story of Arma3, much more than I ever would have thought and find much of the voice acting compelling though could do with a few less f-bombs in just the casual conversation.

[2nd ranger 282]

OFP characters and dialogue were laughable, certainly not "believable" or "genuine". I'm starting to think everybody who says that hasn't played the OFP campaign in many years.

Voice acting and dialogue in A3 is the best it has ever been in the series, but there are still some pretty cheesy lines and at the moment I'm not finding the story or characters very compelling. For example, Stavrou could have been omitted altogether. He serves the same purpose as Miller in Survive, and if Miller had continued in that role, nothing would be amiss, because they are basically the same character. In fact, if you had been driving Miller around instead of Stavrou and actually gone through a mission with him, you might feel some connection to him other than 'guy who gives the briefings'. Maybe this will change in 'Win', now that Miller is a little more enigmatic.

I guess it's not easy to make a player character interesting or identifiable in a FPS game. I'm struggling to think of any exceptions. You either have the player be mute and just let other characters do the talking and be the interesting ones (Half-Life, COD etc), or you give the player dialogue, which can be counter-productive. I feel disconnected from the experience if Kerry says something lame that makes me roll my eyes.

I guess a compromise would be Metro 2033. The player character says nothing during actual gameplay, but his thoughts and feelings are communicated on a more expository level during 'diary' segments before each mission begins. That was at least one area where Flashpoint felt more immersive, because you had diary entries in the briefing (presented in a handwritten font by the very cool notebook which I wish they hadn't removed).

[antoineflemming 14]

Think your just being bit by the nostalgia bug. OFP campaign is also stuck in my memory as classic but much of that was a brand new type of gameplay coupled with some really quirky storytelling and voice acting. The dialogue was just so strange and innocent example: "I spy with my little eye something starting with the letter G..." -hilarious by todays standards but would most likely be ridiculed en mass as well. Kinda reminds of PG movies from the 80's like Ghostbusters or Time Bandits -funny and innocent with decent story where as nowadays there needs to be an F-bomb and CGI explosions every 3o seconds to be cool. Those times are over.

That said, I'm actually invested in the story of Arma3, much more than I ever would have thought and find much of the voice acting compelling though could do with a few less f-bombs in just the casual conversation.

Well the F-bombs aren't odd or off. Maybe you're not around people like this, but most of the people I know swear/curse in everyday language. And, especially for US soldiers, that's very commonplace.

[SPC.Spets 21]

I think you cant do the side missions if you 'Replay' a mission, since a scouting mission would be a whole new mission and the mission you are replaying simply ends as soon as you leave the camp.

No way! seriously? I left those mission to finish the main ones first. I was thinking to do those later :s

[rehtus777 10]

That is my main issue. I think ARMA III's capabilities for good story telling are gone to waste, I do whole heartidly believe that it's possible to make great epos with the technology ARMA III brings to the table. An epic campaign would do wonders, but now I feel any hope of that is lost, as I did with ARMA I & II. OFP did it, and so did all of the expantion packs, even Red Hammer. One memory still stuck on my mind is how a senior officer lectures a soldier who are stoked to see combat, responding to him that he has no idea about what he is talking about.

I hear ya..... but I still believe that the Real Virtuality 4 Engine is behind the times to pull off realistic story-lines. One example: When the players talk, the movements of their mouth looks like games I played over 10 years ago - like a ventriloquist dummy. In most modern games today, the mouth movements look real, but in the ArmA III Campaign it does not look good. Also, the movement of the soldiers around the strategy table looks "mechanical" / Stiff ...not too life-like. But, when it comes to game-play and the movements of the soldiers / environmental eye candy, I'm quite pleased (as long as I'm using certain mods, of course).

No, I've never played the OFP campaign.....I got the game for free last spring because I bought the supporters edition. I loaded the game up once, played it for about 30 minutes and I couldn't stand it. The ArmA 3 game mechanics have spoiled me.... for that matter, I can barely play ArmA 2. The game mechanics drive me nuts now. :p I have to use All In Arma to play it anymore. But I first played ArmA 2 during my Honeymoon phase of the series and have fond memories of the Campaign / Scenarios.

As for the Campaign Story: Sure, the CSAT roadblock only being 1 km from the Gori (factory) is not realistic.....and you've pointed out several other good points. Maybe they should have put the camp back a little further from the front lines and hidden in a small forest area with camouflage all around.....I'm not sure why they used the factory that is exposed near the front lines out in the open? They should have studied more on guerrilla tactics and how they operated on certain Islands.....that 'hit and run' tactic, while being well hidden from the enemy. Like I said before, the story tells us that China and Russia are still fully operational, so that means those reconnaissance planes and Satellites are still up and running.....which calls for more 'civilian clothing' and well hidden positions by Kerry and company. One other thing, the lack of people / civilians / women is disturbing.... I don't have the TWS mod on, but why should I have to use it? We should see more people on the Island? Again, the old Engine they use is not efficient and it bogs down most computers when you add too many AI and this handicaps the story.

In the end, it's still not a bad campaign....IMHO, it's pretty good (ignoring some of the hokie things like Gori and etc). I'm enjoying the story line and the small side missions (even though Kerry needs his squad with him).

Edited January 27, 2014 by rehtus777

[almanzo 144]

Think your just being bit by the nostalgia bug. OFP campaign is also stuck in my memory as classic but much of that was a brand new type of gameplay coupled with some really quirky storytelling and voice acting. The dialogue was just so strange and innocent example: "I spy with my little eye something starting with the letter G..." -hilarious by todays standards but would most likely be ridiculed en mass as well. Kinda reminds of PG movies from the 80's like Ghostbusters or Time Bandits -funny and innocent with decent story where as nowadays there needs to be an F-bomb and CGI explosions every 3o seconds to be cool. Those times are over.

That said, I'm actually invested in the story of Arma3, much more than I ever would have thought and find much of the voice acting compelling though could do with a few less f-bombs in just the casual conversation.

Partly, sure. But it's not the whole story. I totally agree with you that some of the dialogue in OFP is quarky and weird, but the main thing is that it's an attempt to create real people. The characters in OFP are not your usual hardcore soldiers who live to serve, but regular joes with regular human emotions like fear, anticipation, boredom.

Remember that mission where two soldiers are betting about wether or not their promised day off will be abrupted by fighting? Just one example.

The quality of the voice acting is of course better in ARMA III. However, I found it satisfactory in "Survive", but felt it unconvincing in "Adapt". It's limited to military chargon, I can't recall knowing anything about Miller after playing through an entire campaign with him. I don't know how he reacts, how he thinks, how he feels, what he likes to do... Nothing. There is no investment in the characters in the campaign, none at all. I would like to connect with the character I play on a human level, right now he could just as well be a robot to me, he has no feelings at all.

The story in on it self is ok, despite it's inconsistencies and flaws. It's the characters I would like to see some investment in.

[Tonci87 163]

One thing I didn´t like:

I decided to hand over the fuel truck to millers guy and was quite surprised that Stavrou didn´t say anything about that during the next Briefing. I would have expected some kind of argument between Stavrou and Miller.

[txalin 2]

One thing I didn´t like:

I decided to hand over the fuel truck to millers guy and was quite surprised that Stavrou didn´t say anything about that during the next Briefing. I would have expected some kind of argument between Stavrou and Miller.

+1

And i expected that dialogue because in the end of the mission resistance blame you for not giving them the fuel truck

[maturin 12]

No way! seriously? I left those mission to finish the main ones first. I was thinking to do those later :s

You should be able to save your completed save file manually, then revert to Gori and start scouting.

[msy 22]

There is a defect for ARMA series CQB like mission with it's AI. Elite Warrior side mission for example:

1. You are near the mission, then you detect the enemies in the house from the map however you can't see them from your sight.

2. You can see the enemies behind the window, But they won't shoot you even you fire at him for a warn.

3. You fired and make some noise but the other enemies won't move to search and destroy.

4. It is more like a killing house training where you are shooting the paper targets rather than a CQB where enemies is active and movable.

My suggestion:

I really don't like to see I came to a mission just to shoot static paper taget, even in killing house training there is movable target...

Edited January 27, 2014 by msy

[Lobstris 10]

+1

And i expected that dialogue because in the end of the mission resistance blame you for not giving them the fuel truck

I think there is a problem with how the results of that mission get carried over.../

In a later mission (the one where you've got to get to the boat to go to Stratis - forget the name) Kerry makes a comment about the number of enemies, Miller responds to the effect of 'well they would be less organised if you'd have let us kill the head' - even though I did give the fuel truck to Miller's guy, and had seen a large explosion shortly after. On the drive in the driver of the vehicle moaned about how little fuel the rebels still had. Hmmmmm, both victory conditions of the 'Bingo Fuel' mission (i.e. give truck to Miller's guy or give to the rebels) appeared to be assumed to be false.