Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tonci87

Why are much more people playing Arma 2?

Recommended Posts

OP, I would think that the disparity of the ages of the two titles would account for some of the numbers you see. The longer something is on the market, the more people will have access to it (you will see more 2010 model vehicles on the road irl than 2015, for example).

It does speak to the quality of arma 2, to see so many people still playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I've been playing AA2 on and off for the past 5 years and bought AA3 v1.12 on disk a couple of weeks ago, it runs fine via Steam and has just auto-updated itself to v1.14.

Here are my first impressions of AA3, so please correct me if I'm wrong about some aspects-

1- AA3 is a semi-fictional game with semi-fictional units on semi-fictional maps set in the future, which means we can't simulate current 2014 warfare because there are no Abrams or Bradleys etc, which will disappoint a lot of people.

Perhaps future mods for AA3 will give us 2014 units?

At the moment I'm having fun playing with the futuristic units, and I hope the novelty doesn't wear off too quick.

2- The visual "feel" of AA3 is not as good as AA2 (in my opinion) because there seems to be too much of a "fisheye" effect, and when we zoom in, the zoom step is too severe. What's needed is an "intermediate" zoom step.

Maybe the config files can be somehow tweaked to achieve it?

3- When you're the tank commander in AA3 the AI gunner won't fire the main gun on his own initiative even if a target is under his nose; he waits for you to order him to fire, by which time you, him and your tank might be dead. There's an AA2 mod to make him fire (called AI_gunner to use all weapons) but I can't get it to work in AA3.

(Incidentally when you're the tank's 'Player as Driver', the AI gunner WILL fire the main gun on his own initiative, but you only get a frontal 180-degree external view. Being commander is better because you get the full monty 360-degrees.)

4- More observations about AA3:-

Terribly sloppy formation-keeping by the AI tanks in your platoon, they race off doing their own thing, accidentally crushing friendly infantry before eventually deciding to rejoin formation.

Flares fired at night are hopeless, they don't light anywhere up.

Tracers are too wimpy and weak, you can hardly see them in daylight.

The distant terrain haze is too blue, it needs to be greyer.

Shot-down aircraft sometimes bounce along the ground for a short distance instead of disintegrating.

Vehicle engine sound is too soft. If we turn the speakers up to hear it, we get deafened by nearby gunfire.

Let me stress all the above are not necessarily criticisms, they're simply observations; I'm having fun playing AA3 at the moment and am wearing a smile on my face bigger than a wave on a slop bucket..:)

Edited by PoorOldSpike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flares fired at night are hopeless, they don't light anywhere up.

Tracers are too wimpy and weak, you can hardly see them in daylight.

There was a point early in the alpha where the flares were perfect and the tracers were brighter.

(sorry for going off topic - I just forgot all about it until I read those two items)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess I must explain or dumb it down.

Instead of 'dumbing it down', how about simply writing something intelligent that is based in reality, rather than your generalised presumptuous drivel.

BTW, Ever heard of paragraphs? They have a lot to recommend over the TLDR style walls of text?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that guy's a troll with 11 posts - don't bother to read/reply guys.

this is an interesting thread

---------- Post added at 04:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:33 PM ----------

i'm interested because we are considering the mechanics of importing unsung vietnam mod into arma 3 at the moment.

I'm still not sure that the code base for it is stable enough to allow conclusive debugging.

we don't want a burned out team because they can't debug their content development, because the game engine keeps changing.

it's GOOD that BIS continue to develop the engine/game shell BUT without decent documentation of changes, it's confusing and very difficult to manage.

e.g. you put in a new missile tracking system or airburst shells or AI cargo behaviour etc and it doesn't work, so

a) is it my vehicle config, or eventhandlers or scripts, or maybe the inheritance for that vehicle?

b) is it the mission itself confusing client/server variable values

c) BIS has changed the result returned by some code in your script without telling you (on a daily basis)

d) voodoo and you will never get to the bottom of it

my experience of working in A3

a 20% - in our control to diagnose/fix

b 10% - in our control to diagnose/fix

c 60% - NOT in our control to diagnose/fix

d 10%

c.w. working on unsung in A2

a 60% - in our control to diagnose/fix

b 38% - in our control to diagnose/fix

c 0% - NOT in our control to diagnose/fix

d 2%

you get the idea anyway, from a developer POV it's very hard to make the move to A3 with A2 content - i mean both missions AND mods.

it is possible, i'm not saying it isn't and evidence out there proves that it is. it's just been VERY hard work up to date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
got access denied...

only if you follow the link. Try copy & paste the url, or go to the addres bar and hit return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
got access denied...

Just refresh the page. And WTF is that? I thought the croatian M-95 had a weird design but this thing is totally crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a up created 30 tons CV90 - with remote controlled weapons station and useless stealth technik for old b-band radars ^^ waste of money: D and you see them easy miles away

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That´s what I think too. I think getting the German Puma might be a lot cheaper and better. As it is it tries to fit a middle role between MBT and IFV. I doubt that this will work well since it is too big and too slow to be an effective IFV. On top of that it lacks an autocannon wich is essential for supression (one of the main roles of IFVs). It can´t compete with MBTs either since it is not armored enough and too slow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why this thread is still going.

DayZ. DayZ is the answer to the question.

I'm only half kidding, but historically when a new iteration of a longtime series comes out, it takes a long time for it to reach the same player numbers as the previous iteration. That's just the way it goes, for multiple reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure why this thread is still going.

DayZ. DayZ is the answer to the question.

I'm only half kidding, but historically when a new iteration of a longtime series comes out, it takes a long time for it to reach the same player numbers as the previous iteration. That's just the way it goes, for multiple reasons.

Can't say I'm surprised, especially when DayZ standalone isn't even stable-to-the-extent-that-Arma 3-is (however much you believe that to be, imagine even lower) and doesn't have public modding support... so if someone was a fan of an A2 mod instead of "vanilla" DayZ and that favored mod hasn't had an Arma 3 version yet, then CO remains the only way for them to go.

That, and A2/OA/Combined Operations have been over the course of 2013 priced much, much lower than Arma 3 was even in alpha (much less its 40% discount sales which were close to the alpha price). Crucially, at times A2/OA, CO, at one point even Arma X -- much less Arma 2: Complete Collection -- all individually plummeted to "impulse buy" pricing.

EDIT: \/\/ I said "that favored mod" for a reason, Breaking Point is its own thing. \/\/ ;)

Edited by Chortles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what world you live in, but playing arma 3: 19,668 - Playing Arma 2:4,564 just check steam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know what world you live in, but playing arma 3: 19,668 - Playing Arma 2:4,564 just check steam

Luckily ArmA 2 isn't a steam exclusive game so there's no way to establish the real figure of how many people are playing ArmA 2 which are not bound to a steam account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luckily ArmA 2 isn't a steam exclusive game so there's no way to establish the real figure of how many people are playing ArmA 2 which are not bound to a steam account.

I doubt that there are 15k more people playing ArmA2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you guys consider http://www.gametracker.com/search/arma2/? to be an accurate representation of server population? I don't think steam charts are accurate because I often launch arma 2 without steam, which I must say is very nice.

If so it does indeed look like there are more people playing Arma 3 at the moment. But a lot lot of people still playing arma 2 . Also it looks like altis life is by far the most popular game type for Arma 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been an Arma fan since Operation Flashpoint. I can't believe what a step backward Arma 3 is. The AI and command of your own troops is atrocious. The path finding (never a strong part of Arma) somehow manages to be much worse. I feel like I had better control of my troops playing Brothers in Arms on my PS2. How could you have come out with a game that not only does not fix what players were telling you for a decade was broken, but make the problems worse? I figured I'd give the game a year to get the bugs shaken out. I guess that wasn't long enough. I'd like to have my money back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure why this thread is still going.

DayZ. DayZ is the answer to the question.

I'm only half kidding, but historically when a new iteration of a longtime series comes out, it takes a long time for it to reach the same player numbers as the previous iteration. That's just the way it goes, for multiple reasons.

ArmA II had higher player numbers than ArmA after just 3 months...but hats was because it was the better game, which A3 is not. When A2 came out in 2009 it nearly had all that the OFP community ever wanted out of the box and OA brought the tiny rest that was missing...In the first days after A3 was anoucned we though it would be a similar step forward, but it simply is not and in some aspects its a step back for those that are looking for a modern day realistic battlefield sandbox simulator.

A3 turned out to be more of a unwanted child.

Edited by Beagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Different strokes for different folk. Clearly ArmA 3 has been a critical and financial success for them so far, and I'm of the opinion it's the best of the series.

Also, we have very different memories of the A2 launch. Do you have a source for those player numbers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry folk, but honestly, i dont care about how many gamers in this moment they are playing in ArmA III or II,this is not the point.

The sad truth is then ArmA III is not, and will never be , a development to take a step up from previous editions in Sim-Mil way ... quite the contrary,and this has disappointed many old players about this title.

The reason about it cant to be summarized in a few words, but if we take away the new graphics texture and effects, and a few other small steps forward in some circumstances, see improved animations of the postures player and the fix mouse acceleration...for example , it remains only a great emptiness feeling around it if compare whit ArmA II.

And i speak not of the brilliant idea of the BIS's arsenal renamed for not paying royalties , maybe arsenal it's a word too....big:rolleyes:, much less a map devoid of navigable rivers ,even to use those poor Scuba Divers who do not know what to do all day, or the lack of any form of simulation wounded effect after hit , or the azimer-myocardial effect that you notice after a slow run after only 100 mt whit just a assault rifles that weight about 3.5 kg,or the lack effect on the ballistic wind,or the lack about any AA Battery to counter those.....UFO toys,or opening the Pandora's box,in reference to Steam doors and the content about all the childishness then come out!...and not continuous otherwise it takes too many pages.

ArmA III User-Friendly -Sandbox it's a mix about inaccuracies , badly optimize mostly in MP,poor context, and even accompanied by indifference to the demands presented by old customers or community,and all this, it's really unacceptable as well as disgraceful,if we seen their request for help from us as if we were them beta testers, and personally,having regard to the advantages obtained right now....they are only a waste of time for the poor deluded who still believe it!

So....why there are still several people who play whit ArmA II?

Because imperfect as it is also the ArmA II, still gives the emotions and feeling, that ArmA III, and his time in the future whit that nanosuite uniforms style, can not even remotely match.

In a nutshell ..... It's not credible and not convincing!

In fact,not in case,about 75 % gamers in MP,they play in Altis Life-Wasteland-Breaking Point....and this does not mean ArmA fans, but just Casual Gamers funs,and it's so different for us,but not for them!

But since BIS still holds a monopoly about this type of FPS,and this is our bad luck even hopefully not for much,so either you adapt, or you come back after 1 years for check if there is something nice news...see ArmA II DLC or expansion!

If this will happen at that point all the controversy associated with this title would be resolved without reserve, with the happiness of both factions about New Generations and Veterans ArmA Gamers.

And do not tell me that it is a difficult solution to implement because it would be a lie!...If they wanted to make it....of course,but that's a topic for another thread.

Also the nice thing i've noticed then when anyone criticizes this title there is always somebody then answer whit the same excuses,like:

1) This title is still in WIP, and also ArmA II, when was came out, it was not perfect!

In this case, you do not want to understand then the disappointment about ArmA III, it's not related just to the issues,and poor optimize,because we know and hope,that BIS will try to fix and optimize it!

Unfortunately, instead,the problem it's the essence and spirit of the game itself....and even though it might be correct 100%, that is ..... and that will remain!

You can not ask for an apple tree that ripe lemons! ... Right?

Regardless of my criticism about ArmA III i still have to thank BIS for all the years of fun that i spent with the previous editions from Operation FlashPoint to ArmA II.:yeahthat:

Rgds

Edited by j4you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am 100% in concordance with your view man.

something like unsung vietnam content + A3 = new expansion that would rock the freakin world...

immersion, history, realism, balance, excitement, clunky old tech, mud and sweat and blood, the alienness of the terrain and enemy, asymmetric warfare... that's what i love in arma when it can be made to work, and currently there's nothing in A3 for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×