What's everyone's opinion on the campaign? (spoilers)

[skyace65 19]

With the DLC expansion coming next year, and possibly a new campaign especially considering it's location. I just wanted to see if we could get a consensus on what everyone did and didn't like about the campaign

personally

Likes

-the feeling of scale with the conflict.

-the way missions move the story forward. The first one of survive was done fantastically with how it shows the NATO forces systematically being taken out. and a small detail you don't notice till later, Millers group arriving at Maxwell.

-most mission feels very different from each other with what you need to do. Using a Drone, setting up an ambush, stealing a car

dislikes

-lack of resolution to the story. all we get is a medium ending(status quo) where we find out nothing, and a bad ending (game over) where we find out nothing. And I'd call Game Over a bad ending because even though Miller gets the earthquake device from CSAT, the earthquakes still happen so there was most likely a second one.

-Some characters just weren't recognizable enough. Playing though Survive again I can more easily recognize the difference between say Alpha and Charlie leaders, but first time through I could barely tell. I'm not saying each character needs an arc or something but making them a bit more distinct would be nice.

-Lack of explanation, stuff like the drones where you're given no instructions on how to use them, there's nothing in the VR courses, and nothing helpful in the field manual.

-lack of civilians, I get it in survive, but the fact that there weren't any at all in adapt or Win really ruined some of the immersion.

-no real large scale missions. It's always Kerry being stuck with some small part of a mission even once NATO shows up. Want to lead tanks against the airfield? Too bad you're taking out the AA guns.

also one last small gripe, but is it just me or does something seem off with Kerry's voice acting?

despite what I dislike I still managed to get a lot of enjoyment out of the campaign and if they could fix that stuff I think Bohemia could end up making something amazing.

[Jona33 51]

I definitely enjoyed, sure the story can be a bit dodgy, win could do with being longer. Just don't think too much about the story and it's all good. :D As to your last negative point I'm actually quite glad they did it that way, nothing would have irritated me more than Kerry suddenly becoming the ultimate leader of everything, or becoming a tank driver or a helicopter pilot (I even find it slightly irritating in Game Over that Kerry can suddenly fly helicopters). I've seen various people complain about Kerry's voice acting but it seems alright to me, I'm certainly no expert but it seems basically fine. Still not as cool a character as Adams though.

[somesangheili 111]

I thought Survive was the best, some decently fun and interesting missions there, and Adapt was alright until you were given command of a squad, and then you were suddenly sent on these ridiculously hard missions (Kerry + 4 guerrillas up against a company of high-tech soldiers) I know that you were only just a small cell of guerrillas and you had to be stealthy and smart, but the jump from being part of a squad to leading a squad was a little too much for me. My favourite mission in Adapt would be the one where you raid an AAF outpost, due to Kerry being part of a much larger assault force.

Win was a little bit short and I agree that some of the missions needed to be more of a larger scale (company vs company perhaps?). I disliked the mission where you are given a UAV, it was good at first but then the AI kept getting stuck around the town, there was confusion and it ended up in a big mess for me.

I think it's a shame that they left so many things about the story unanswered

[reforger 30]

I agree with all of you that Survive was the best part of the campaign. The atmosphere was amazing. Adapt and Win were nice too. The missions were always different and you really felt like a little soldier in a big operation. Only this "Crossroad to one man army Kerry" was a bit disturbing. Also there should have been more big combined operations in Win. In many reviews they criticised that you were not able to drive a tank or to fly a plane. I do not think so. It would be a big logical issue if the riflemen Kerry starts to drive or fly. A change of the protagonists would be bad too. I want to have a protagonist I can identify with. The story was not the greatest but it was ok. Even if you did not find any answers at the end you can explain it to yourself.

I hope my english is not too bad.

[rübe 127]

A change of the protagonists would be bad too.

I'm pretty confident that there are multiple ways this can be approached in a sensible way. For example think of the movie "starship troopers": an introduction part to introduce a group of friends, that will diverge into different directions, and you get to play all of them, while you'll meet your friends *accidentally* further down the story. Each part/chapter of the campaign could have been dedicated to one guy of such a group. Jada, jada... :)

Or one could try to tell the *same* story multiple times, from the viewpoint of a different character. Granted, this could be tricky to pull off properly, since what happened earlier (different outcomes?) needs to happen too later, from a different perspective.

And so on... :D

Btw. I liked the campaign too. Most annoying thing however was the fact that those stupid ammoboxes were full/unusable all the time, and the guerrillas too stupid to find some more boxes to put my sweet loot in it. :936: *grrrrr Such a silly plothole! :cool:

[drebin052 323]

I enjoyed it overall but it didn't feel like a proper campaign. It felt a string of showcases instead of proper missions linked together, and wasn't as immersive or long enough like A2's Harvest Red.

-Lack of explanation, stuff like the drones where you're given no instructions on how to use them, there's nothing in the VR courses, and nothing helpful in the field manual.

Unless you're playing on a higher difficulty, the Instructor (toggled by H) will always show up to help you out. Usually Miller or whoever is in charge of the mission will also give you advice over the radio on what to do as well.

-lack of civilians, I get it in survive, but the fact that there weren't any at all in adapt or Win really ruined some of the immersion.

There were a few civilians in Win. At the start of Moral Fibre you can see some civilians being arrested by NATO troops when you drive past the first checkpoint, not to mention that they are apart of a plot-choice on whether or not you call in the artillery on the disabled Kuma (although mentioned only).

But apart from that, you're spot on for this one. A guerrilla-oriented campaign with no civilians being involved at all? It would have been far more believable if you had to get information from locals about CSAT/AAF patrols for instance, or they could help sabotage enemy supplies. You could even have informants who would try to sell Kerry and the FIA out by leading them into ambushes and whatnot.

is it just me or does something seem off with Kerry's voice acting?

"Wait...what the hell?" ;)

[scottdog 10]

I didn't understand the story at the end, is it suppost to be told in a later campaign?

[haleks 8212]

I didn't understand the story at the end

The story at the end is that BIS didn't have time nor money to make a proper ending.

[Wiki 1558]

the story at the end is that bis didn't have time nor money to make a proper ending.

lol :)

[scottdog 10]

Same as the arma 1 campaign? had a twist at the end but didn't continue.

[CyDoNgr 28]

So an island of 100k ppl (according to arma3 lore) decided to attack NATO :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay:

[major_barnes1987 33]

So an island of 100k ppl (according to arma3 lore) decided to attack NATO :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay:

An island of 100k ppl who's backs supporting a superpower.AAF were confident about CSAT got their backs so they weren't afraid and go on the offensive.If CSAT wasn't there to provide much more than support,the AAF would've been just an insect on NATO's boot.The AAF though is more than a challenge for the FIA and that's what you get for the most part of the story,it's you and FIA against AAF mostly.

Well what i liked about the story is the setting.Because i'm from Greece and unlike the Limnos/Altis people i would've been proud if the developers were using my homeland to create a campaign that tells a story witch is close to the true situation of my country.

I also liked how the story progresses and it's length especialy if you complete side missions in scout.I like how the gameplay stay true to the name of each episode.In survive you survive mostly,in adapt you adapt to less weapons and equipment and in win you win step by step.

I like the political + sci fi mix,i like how Miller's character

and his brits were fought alongside the greeks of the FIA.It's their island too you know.It belongs to the Brits but also to the Greeks who live there too.And both groups knew that and respected each other.I mean NATO and CSAT would never understand.And later on Miller's reveal as a black ops guy for Brits was a nice touch because it gives you a big WTF feeling throughout WIN episode.The endings were a little letdown but if the new campaign is ralated to this i'm ok with it.You people say the endings left you with so many questions but left me with only one....Is Miller a good guy or a bad guy?I don't want to ask more questions i just want to see waht will happen in the new campaign.

So i'm waiting to see big things in the next campaign but not too unreal.Things that look real and answers that makes sense.

[svarun 16]

Survive and Adapt were great! Win was a bit of a letdown...

We need answers! Who is Miller and is he really UK black ops? Did he start the war on Stratis?

What ending is cannon? What was the situation at the airfield in "NATO" ending?

Argh! Come on Bohemia, you made an interesting story-line and then you just dropped the ball.

Continue the plotline please.

[reforger 30]

Survive and Adapt were great! Win was a bit of a letdown...

We need answers! Who is Miller and is he really UK black ops? Did he start the war on Stratis?

What ending is cannon? What was the situation at the airfield in "NATO" ending?

Argh! Come on Bohemia, you made an interesting story-line and then you just dropped the ball.

Continue the plotline please.

I totally agree with you. There were too many questions at the end. Sadly I think there will be no answers in the upcoming expansion. Because they build two endings they cannot continue their actual story. I am very sure that they will place the story shortly before or at the same time like the escalation on Altis.

[skyace65 19]

So an island of 100k ppl (according to arma3 lore) decided to attack NATO :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay:

It's implied Miller had something to do with it. But again we don't know what since no answers.

[war_lord 934]

Was anyone else annoyed by the "Black ops unit" traipsing around in really distinctive uniforms? The whole point of Black Operations is to maintain a low profile.

[2nd ranger 282]

If you were to start listing all the military inaccuracies in the campaign then you'd be at it for a while. It begins with minor infractions like characters calling sergeants 'Sir', and culminates in the task force commander waiting for a newly-made sergeant to show up and lead the final assault on the AAF. Most things like that have to be chalked up to 'because it's a game', really.

[inlesco 233]

If you were to start listing all the military inaccuracies in the campaign then you'd be at it for a while. It begins with minor infractions like characters calling sergeants 'Sir', and culminates in the task force commander waiting for a newly-made sergeant to show up and lead the final assault on the AAF. Most things like that have to be chalked up to 'because it's a game', really.

Hopefully, someone someday will post a complete list of military inaccuracies in the entire CAMP, so BIS can learn :D

So, who's up for the challenge? I mean, not to mention the most stupid tactical decisions by Miller like getting away in boats through an ocean with CSAT jets in the skies.

I mean, plain open in the ocean... Bare nuts.

[FoxFort 341]

MAJOR SPOILERS !!!

 

 

I thought the Campaign to be an average. Nothing worth remembering. And I didn't like ending. What was that. So you decided not to help Miller and you bomb AAF you win it's over, medals bla bla. But if you decide to help miller, you capture that device and suddenly CSAT counter invasion is in process and you're S** out of luck. So my question is. How come entire NATO force on Altis didn't had someone else to guide bombing at the same time you were driving device. And if CSAT counter invasion was in process, shouldn't you encounter CSAT counter invasion force as you were finishing the bombing AAF? If CSAT decide to fight back then destroying last weak AAF force wouldn't not stop them.

 

Lame endings, rushed. 

 

Now "Operation Flashpoint: Resistance" had excellent campaign, I've finished it a 5+ years ago and I still remember few missions. Damn what a good game.

[HunterFalkner 0]

I've got just an idea, you see, the laptop in the research lab was saying that some file was missing since Febuary 27th 14:00 (anyone remember operation that happened that day?), what is more there were more Air Conditioners of Doom (the earthquake devices, ill call them ACoDs later) in the dome (that could explain the last earthquake, the only problem was that researchers were already dead when we took the ACoD on the truck), everything in the lab was taken out, conditioner was ready to move on the truck when we enter the first time, the containers were empty, there were some top secret files, which we can't unfortuanately study due to Kerry's hands beeing unable to handle anything apart of guns and launchers. When we call miller and he refuses to come and pick Kerry up, Falcon's last transmission includes some CSAT language (or i'm wrong) so my guess is that Miller was cooperating with CSAT to get the device, so that may explain why he knew that CSAT counterattack would happen (stealing the device is also a good excuse to start that attack, so honestly those are just lucky guesses).

 

We need some programmers, especially Linux programmers to tell what the log on the laptop actually tells us and I guess it could help a bit.

[drebin052 323]

 

 

When we call miller and he refuses to come and pick Kerry up, Falcon's last transmission includes some CSAT language (or i'm wrong)

 

The invasion happened because the device was stolen by Miller. And no, that wasn't Farsi being spoken on the radio; that was another one of Miller's men talking even though it's hard to hear due to the gunfire and static.

 

Hence why the counter attack by CSAT doesn't occur if you choose to ignore James and follow your orders. Also, if Miller was cooperating with CSAT then he wouldn't have needed to help the FIA or sabotage the NATO invasion. Nor would he lose all of his men during the final assault on the facility where the device was hidden. Everything was done to buy time for Miller in order to find the device's location.

[HunterFalkner 0]

Yeah, i was considering that he might have made a deal with CSAT command or something, but yeah, it's rather crazy guess, I think that researching what the computer log was all about would help (hey they didn't leave it without reason, right?)

[2nd ranger 282]

That's just the default image on the laptop, dude. It doesn't mean anything.

[war_lord 934]

I think it's clear from the branching endings that CSAT doesn't care about Altis, the invasion was all about getting the device, which is implied to have been a joint British-Altian project. In the ending where Miller fails to get the device, CSAT extracts it and thus gives up on Altis. The second wave only happens in the ending where Miller gets the device and CSAT are left to assume that it's still on the Island.

Millers team had been hiding out at Camp Maxwell since before the British withdrawal, thus the Ghosthawk flying away from the camp in the intro. The British want the device covered up and back in their hands, without the Americans having knowledge of it. That's why the (American) NATO forces on Stratis have no record of Miller or his dealings with the FIA, he's British black ops.

It's quite possible, and implied, that Miller engineered the AAF turning on NATO to give him an opening to seize the device. That's why most of his team are absent for much of the first campaign, they're off looking for the device.

[reforger 30]

I think it's clear from the branching endings that CSAT doesn't care about Altis, the invasion was all about getting the device, which is implied to have been a joint British-Altian project. In the ending where Miller fails to get the device, CSAT extracts it and thus gives up on Altis. The second wave only happens in the ending where Miller gets the device and CSAT are left to assume that it's still on the Island.

Millers team had been hiding out at Camp Maxwell since before the British withdrawal, thus the Ghosthawk flying away from the camp in the intro. The British want the device covered up and back in their hands, without the Americans having knowledge of it. That's why the (American) NATO forces on Stratis have no record of Miller or his dealings with the FIA, he's British black ops.

It's quite possible, and implied, that Miller engineered the AAF turning on NATO to give him an opening to seize the device. That's why most of his team are absent for much of the first campaign, they're off looking for the device.

In the main points I agree with you. Miller started the war to get an opportunity to steel the device. I think he placed a charge in Kamino, because the first radio transmissions came from there and Kerry can see the explosion when he arrived at the Hunter wreckage. So everyone thought that the other side attacks him. MacKinnon (leader of TF Aegis) knew this and tried to stop the explosion, with the result that Miller killed him with a mine.

 

To get the device Miller made a deal with the FIA: We get the device and you get a war which ends the time of the actual altian government.

 

The only point I see different is the origin of the device. I think CSAT created the machine and tested it on Altis. Why the altian government should protect a CSAT base in their country, when CSAT steeled an altian-bristish device? And why the altian government kicked out the NATO from the main Island Altis (that was written in the prologue), when they work with them?