Why are much more people playing Arma 2?

[minimalaco 30]

why ? because arma3 sucks!

[Westonsammy 1]

Just checked steam, ArmA 3 has peaked, on a Monday, at 22,542 players and is the 21st most played game today.

Don't know if your results are just an exception, would recommend grabbing a lot more info before making a post like this which invites the pessimists and malcontents to come out.

You also have to keep in mind that ArmA 2 is naturally going to have more players, as the game has tons more modding content and more owners than does ArmA 3 (Not to mention that most of those playing ArmA 2 are playing it for DayZ; and about the same number if not more are playing life and wasteland as on ArmA 3)

Edited February 25, 2014 by Westonsammy

[.kju 3245]

a3 player stats: http://steamcharts.com/app/107410#1y - includes SP+editor too though

for a2 the steam stats don't help much as steam is not required to play

[DRACUS 18]

Arma 3 Still incomplete.. so much.. its sad and now they are making 1 DLC "ZEUS" (..zzzzz..) Dont work on factions, we dont have planes, we dont have some simple features like Use bipod of your weapon, attach satchel to vehicles(its on 1 video, and i dont see it yet ingame), bugs everywhere.

If they make a DLC with all stuff of ArmA1/2 that will be awesome! but.. they make DLC"ZEUS".

[doveman 7]

I don't really understand this complaint about the "futuristic" settings. I haven't seen anything particularly futuristic, like robots, laser guns, etc. The vehicles/aircraft seem to be fairly contemporary, so I just don't get it.

I do seem to get worse performance with A3, in MP at least but still enjoy playing it, as I find ArmA2's graphics look very dated in comparison now, although I still enjoy playing that as well. I think it mostly comes down to more mods and missions available for ArmA2 and although TFAR seems to be a good alternative to ACRE for example, maybe it lacks some features at the moment that the servers that use ACRE rely on.

[sektor 2]

I don't really understand this complaint about the "futuristic" settings. I haven't seen anything particularly futuristic, like robots, laser guns, etc. The vehicles/aircraft seem to be fairly contemporary, so I just don't get it.

You just can't get immersed with these guns and uniforms on a paradise island. Game looks great imo, but doesn't have charisma.

[tortuosit 486]

Not surprising. Regrettably, the numerical BY FAR biggest part of the public MP community is Zombie, Wasteland and Altis Life folks. If you take those away from both ArmA versions, I think you get comparable results. ArmA 3 is not bad. Lacking content. ACE. And the greek setting does not get that much love by the players as Takistan/Chernarus. Also lots more (native) maps for A2.

But don't get me wrong. I think A3 will develop slowly, but steadily.

[arotished 10]

maybe in a year more people will switch to arma 3 because arma 3 for now is very buggy and unstable

But does BIS focus on this part? Seems like Zeus is their main focus (which IMO is a terrible idea)

[doveman 7]

You just can't get immersed with these guns and uniforms on a paradise island. Game looks great imo, but doesn't have charisma.

Well we've got A3MP now, so you've got no excuse anymore ;)

[eXpouk 10]

But does BIS focus on this part? Seems like Zeus is their main focus (which IMO is a terrible idea)

Not sure where people get this idea from but its been stated numerous times that only 2-3 staff are working on Zeus.... The rest are busy with other A3 related things.

[soldia 1]

@Tonci: Most servers in ArmA are public-warfare-life-whats-o-ever. I'm pretty sure that the majority of event-based communities like the Brig or us are much more into A3 than the average.

The stability argument is definitely not true. A3 is as stable as A2 now and much more stable than A2 a few month after release. Future setting, yes it is a bit disturbing. But, for example, you can play with M4s and AKs with the help of Mods if you want. The new outfit-flexibility is pretty cool and adds a lot of possibilities for mission makers. The only thing that really crushes my immersion in A3 are these holiday-style islands. They are pretty detailed and look great, no argue on that. But it always reminds me of my last holiday on a greek island and in countless situations I was holding a position in one of those little towns on the beach and I imagined the picture of a nice bar or restaurant, live music and the local youth cruising through the city with their scooters. It's not an environment suitable for war. But as soon as a new Visitor is released by BI it won't last long until the first wonderful Islands will be created. (And no, A2 maps in A3 are not an option...)

I still play A2 some times and I love the variety of options I got through all these Mods. But every time I enter CQC in A2 I wish to have the actual battle in A3 with all those smoother animations and stances and so on.

Some of those new BIS-functions are pretty helpful for mission makers and addon creators. JIPing is a easier than in A2 (though still pain-in-the-**s, but that's an hardcoded issue) and the better implementation of debugging/camera functions helps a lot.

Just my 2 cents.

[doveman 7]

There's other little annoyances, like not being able to see your gear from the briefing screen, that I'm sure make some people say "why?" and go running back to A2.

[soldia 1]

There's other little annoyances, like not being able to see your gear from the briefing screen, that I'm sure make some people say "why?" and go running back to A2.

Tried that (haven't tried it because we don't use the briefing-inventory)?: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?168092-Map-and-Briefing-team-inventory-fix

[doveman 7]

Tried that (haven't tried it because we don't use the briefing-inventory)?: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?168092-Map-and-Briefing-team-inventory-fix

Yeah, it stopped working quite a while ago due to some update or other.

[Mr. Charles 22]

Better optimization? Is it a joke? Arma 2 is still not running fluidly for me even on lowest details, while Arma 3 on medium details and with native resoultion runs just fine.

I have contrary reports with people running ArmA2 on their calculator potatoes (by the name of MrBurns here on the forums)

[j4you 10]

On Saturday evening I took a look at some statistics and I was quite shocked to see the following:

People playing Arma 2 -> Over 22000

People playig Arma 3 -> a little over 12500 (almost everything on Altis Life Servers)

On a Saturday Evening...

Situation right now:

People playing Arma 2: 8570

People playing Arma 3: 4970

Why?

http://arma2.swec.se/server/list

Hi

ArmA III it's a title so different about the preview edition,somebody love it and somebody else see it too much user friendly and poor about Sim Gameplay.

In effectly also the DnA developer saied about ArmA III "Arma is still a game to us. A sim-game, but a game" and continue whit..."There is no definitive balance between authenticity, realism and fun that suits every persons"...so depend how you wont enjoy your game.

Besides they have been said so many half true about ArmA II and ArmA III,and some people become mad if you try to criticize this product!

But Anyway!

My personal opinion it's, if i think whic is the best SIM-Game FPS...ArmA II, and the best Tactical-Game FPS....ArmA III!

Perhaps the answers they are inside this...circle!

Ask to them an evolution of ArmA II in ArmA III is virtually impossible, and if they wanted to develop that idea in this title, they would take the longest way and tortuous to make it happen...it seems pretty obvious!

**

My preferences,for example....it's follow just the Sim Way..always! :)

Regards

Edited March 10, 2014 by j4you

[Xalteva 10]

For me,A3 is just another game not a true evolution of A2 ... but i prefer tha arma 2 setting !

[arotished 10]

Not sure where people get this idea from but its been stated numerous times that only 2-3 staff are working on Zeus.... The rest are busy with other A3 related things.

Haven't seen any official update since Adapt was launched and it I dont think it had "performance" increase notes. Kinda strange since Adapt campaign is so buggy that they havent even released a hotfix for it.

Its months and months since I saw any specific performance optimalization notes. Okey, I don't care to study the patch note, all I need to do is to start up the a mission Altis on AUTO-DETECT setttings, turn my mouse and after 5 seconds I can tell if its still crap or playable.

[Tonci87 163]

little over 12k? this is why peak today was 22k?

http://savepic.net/4711091.jpg (112 kB)

Keep in mind that Steam statistics also include people playing the game in SP, messing with the Editor, or simply having the game running in the background. The statistics I provided only count people playing in MP.

@Soldia One might think that, but our group hasn´t played Arma 3 for more than a few hours due to lack of content and features.

Regarding the furure setting: The setting is not bad! The roblem is that BIS either took it to far, or not far enough. Do you really believe that every single piece of equipment in use today will be replaced by something else?

E.g. M1A1-> Merkava. That plus the lack of content.

About stability: Arma 3 is running rock stable for me.

Edited February 25, 2014 by Tonci87

[arotished 10]

My personal opinion it's, if i think what the best SIM-Game FPS...ArmA II, and the best Tactical-Game FPS....ArmA III!

s

Project Reality makes ARMA look like poo....cant wait for the next Project Reality which is gonna be a Standalone powered by FrostBite (thats how a game engine should be like)

[j4you 10]

Its months and months since I saw any specific performance optimalization notes. Okey, I don't care to study the patch note, all I need to do is to start up the a mission Altis on AUTO-DETECT setttings, turn my mouse and after 5 seconds I can tell if its still crap or playable.

Hi!

Sorry, but i think, then you are speaking about the console games and not the PC titles,because if you realy wont to exploit to 100% your game,you need always spend some time,more or less,to adjust or set, the best way for your spec. hardware.

Now,if you tell me then in ArmA it's become a little bit excessive...you right,but to be optimize just in one mouse click,especially in the simulation games,...i think then it's a myth to dispel!

I'm not saying whit it that ArmA III is an example to take as a reference,no way!....but there is not need to looking for new complain !:rolleyes:

Regard

Edited February 25, 2014 by j4you

[MavericK96 0]

Project Reality makes ARMA look like poo....cant wait for the next Project Reality which is gonna be a Standalone powered by FrostBite (thats how a game engine should be like)

I think you mean CryEngine 3.

[RSF TheCapulet 59]

Project Reality makes ARMA look like poo....cant wait for the next Project Reality which is gonna be a Standalone powered by FrostBite (thats how a game engine should be like)

Cryengine, not frostbite. And they've got years of development ahead of them (Just ask 0A.D. how quick crowd sourced development moves along). It's more than likely that PR: A3 will be released long before PR standalone is.

Woops: I'd pretend I was ninja'd, but it was posted a day ago. Shoulda read a bit further. lol

[Mcgloin 10]

I don't like the CSAT side with this Futuristic Weapons and the Ifrit....

Arma 2 has more Content (Jets,Big Airplanes, Static Weapons etc.)

Arma 2 has no Futuristic Content like the Commanche/Ifrit/MX Weapons etc...... Why the Commanche ? why not the AH-64 ?

I like booth games but Arma 2 a little bit more, because the Modern Weapons and other content.

[sorophx 25]

Project Reality makes ARMA look like poo...

but they can't be compared. Project Reality is small scale warfare, it's also PvP-oriented. Project Reality holds you by the hand the whole time and shows you where to go and what to do, Arma is the complete opposite.

I play Project Reality when I feel like shooting other players in the face, but for actual tactics I usually turn to Arma, because playing against AI is a lot harder