Is ARMA 3 a serious game ?

[DancZer 65]

E.g.: Kerbal Space Program, BeamNG Drive, Arma, etc.

[jw custom 56]

Just like the rest of millions player who doesn't like the "type of seriousness" of Arma 3

 

You just keep going on about what ArmA 3 and seriousness means to you like its the same for everybody <_<

[IndeedPete 1038]

Sadly, the English wikipedia article about serious games has a few remarks. If anyone's willing to dig up more scientific sources feel free to share them.

 

But based on this paper, a serious game can be considered as "a game designed for a primary purpose other than pure entertainment". I would argue that Arma 3's main purpose is definitely entertainment and I would argue the same for mainstream (e-sport) games like CS:GO, Battlefield, etc. America's Army on the other hand seems to be more of an Advergame and thus could be considered serious, but I am by far not an expert in that area.

 

Edit: Ninja'd by danczer.^^

[inlesco 233]

Fact is that if you are talking about game machanics, you need to learn something from ANY game. The fact that you can read a 3d compass on a map (which you might be dumb if you werent able to read it before) doesn't mean the game is serious.

Yep, I'm comparing with E-sport, are you saying that it's not serious? And what you see it's not "FUN", it's satisfaction. 

And yes, these are my opinion. Just like the rest of millions player who doesn't like the "type of seriousness" of Arma 3, which is a community factor, not a game factor, and that's what freaks me out

Watching your hostility towards Arma and its community in general, let me ask you a question - why bother posting here? You aren't in for an objective discussion, you're in to state your truth and dismiss others'.

 

See, I understand e-sports is exciting to watch and participate at due to nature of matches (fast, adrenaline pumping, etc.), but e-sports is mostly based on tournaments and cash prizes. People work hard for this, sweat their best in the field.

 

Now, compare the statistical CS:GO gamer to Arma's - which one is more serious? It doesn't even matter. Statistically, most CSGO sessions/matches are not that serious. It's just people having fun spraying laser AK74s at the others with zero teamwork.

 

You should define the kind of 'seriousness' you talk about. Is it 'tactical seriousness' or smth else? Sure, tactical seriousness in fast-paced arcadish PvP / TvT environments is possible.

 

Now, TVT / PVP in Arma certainly exists, you just need the right community. I very much enjoyed watching this, for ex:

 

[ProfTournesol 956]

Reminds me of the never ending "Is ArmA 3 realistic" discussion.

[DancZer 65]

Watching this i really miss that Arma don't have a replay too. :( I would be much better to look around in spectator mode with general: pause, play, fast-forward etc. buttons. :(

[froggyluv 2136]

Reminds me of the never ending "Is ArmA 3 realistic" discussion.

 

 Or the neverending "Is Arma a sim?" one...

 

 The answer always lies in:relative to what??

 

/

[war_lord 934]

So does babylonjoke just have 435 posts about how much he hates arma and anyone who plays it?

[cosmic10r 2331]

Well the question is framed incorrectly...

 

Instead of asking "Is Arma a  'Serious' Game"?, one should ask "What would I learn from playing Arma"?.

 

Therefore it doesn't become an immediate comparison with other games but focuses on what Arma offers as well as acknowledges there are many different things to learn from many games. For instance, I learned I'm not a great gardener in Viva Pinata. 

 

As pointed out , many  games will take you as far as you want to go although I do think Arma  opens this door a little wider then most games for a number of reasons including its versatility.

[war_lord 934]

Any game is as serious as you choose to make it. Fundamentally games are for entertainment, but even looking at the simple game like Pokemon. It's played by everyone from 12 year olds to guys in their 30's who spend their free time making charts and graphs mapping out how to make your Pokemon unbeatable. The power of Computer games is that it's the only true interactive media, it's what you make of it.  

[KeyCat 131]

Yep, I'm comparing with E-sport, are you saying that it's not serious? And what you see it's not "FUN", it's satisfaction. 

 

 

Not at all, I'm sure it's serious in it's own way but IMO you are comparing apples with oranges.

 

Anyway, we are all entitled to our opinions and personally I don't play A3 with a realistic mil. training in mind (already done my service) but I do what I'm told if someone in the squad takes the role as SL.

 

My main goal is to have fun and experience teamwork. Doesn't matter if it's PvP (try TacBF if you haven't) or co-op's with friends.

 

/KC

[bad benson 1733]

 

"What would I learn from playing Arma"?.

 

 

that would actually be a good question. and i honestly think that the whole compass and map thing is a bit of grasping at straws. even going back to first playing the ofp demo i never felt like arma/ofp was even trying to teach me the things in it. i have zero recollection of a section explaining the compass and its use (yes it should be common knowledge but still). and i can think of countless games with a compass, so i don't know about that.

 

i mean i was never a big player of the campaigns. for me it was always right to the editor so maybe i missed those "serious" campaign sections. so if anyone knows some those might be actually useful to the OP.

another example could be zeroing. sure communities could teach it to eachother but to my (limited) knowledge the game itself makes no effort and there's a big chunk of players who just absorb the important stuff, that btw is not exclusive to arma (bullet drop, recoil, compass what else?), and then go onto just playing the frikkin game lol.

 

i always felt that those aspects were just there. but maybe that already qualifies it. that would kind of mean that every sim out there has the purpose of eduction. not sure if that's really the full meaning of it though.

 

i think i can recall watching some kind of documentary and one example was a training program for cops (arcade like shooting range thing). i always thought that what makes a game a "serious game" was the primary focus on education/training for problem solving. i don't see that in arma (maybe VBS but that came after ofp and was based on it). but that might be just me and my lack of campaign hours over the years ;)

[instagoat 133]

I used OFP to learn driving back when I was getting my license. Does that count?

 

Arma can theoretically be used for everything VBS can be used for, minus replay function (though you could probably hack something together with coordinate recording or something), which includes stuff like traffic control, arranging garden furniture, planning air spraying operations and coordinating them, firefighting procedures, chess, land navigation, animal observation, tree counting and if you are bored, building stonehenge from tanks.

 

Arma's flexibility enables it to fit into almost every niche, and while it probably does nothing superbly well, it can be decent at it. For example, why not make a nuclear strike style action helicopter game? Or maybe a side scrolling shooter? I would think stuff like that can be made possible, somehow. On the other side, a simulation for managing a refugee camp on the syrian border, where you have to manage water, food, medical supplies, personell, security, pay and fend off bandit attacks and deal with air strikes and such.

 

Arma is everything, so it can be serious, it can also be not serious. All depends on the creator in question.

[DancZer 65]

Let's be serious! It's a 

 

:D :D

[semiconductor 309]

No, it's just a sandbox game albeit somewhat complex one. Yeah, one can make it sort-of-serious by calling himself a "Team Leader" and walking around with friends in a wedge formation but anybody can do the same in Minecraft.

[bad benson 1733]

I used OFP to learn driving back when I was getting my license. Does that count?

 

Arma can theoretically be used for everything VBS can be used for, minus replay function (though you could probably hack something together with coordinate recording or something), which includes stuff like traffic control, arranging garden furniture, planning air spraying operations and coordinating them, firefighting procedures, chess, land navigation, animal observation, tree counting and if you are bored, building stonehenge from tanks.

 

Arma's flexibility enables it to fit into almost every niche, and while it probably does nothing superbly well, it can be decent at it. For example, why not make a nuclear strike style action helicopter game? Or maybe a side scrolling shooter? I would think stuff like that can be made possible, somehow. On the other side, a simulation for managing a refugee camp on the syrian border, where you have to manage water, food, medical supplies, personell, security, pay and fend off bandit attacks and deal with air strikes and such.

 

Arma is everything, so it can be serious, it can also be not serious. All depends on the creator in question.

 

in terms of capability i tend to agree but that then kind of begs the question what do you define as "arma". i mean non of what you described is vanilla arma. hence my point that it's more about what people use it for and especially add to it (arma + something). and besides the driving part, most of what you describe (the stuff i took seriously  :P ) requires additional code and content or a lot of the human element i described (role playing doesn't have to be a bad word, it's exactly what happens at fire fighter/police/etc drills when certain guys play the wounded and scream a lot and stuff).

 

i know we've gotten used to this large spectrum of mods and missions and the fact that this community basically makes the content it plays itself but i don't see when and where arma/ofp ever tried to be educational on its own. i think people are just throwing VBS right in there when they talk about arma just because the tech side is so similar. VBS actually does all that stuff. gives you all kinds of modules to train certain procedures. arma just doesn't.

 

to me personally we are blurring the lines of what "the game" actually is. by modders, in some cases, it's often treated more like an engine than a game. and then if you go that far you can take many modern engines (those with great tools especially and physics) and do the same kind of mini games you described in them. does that really make them "serious games" in the sense of the word?

 

i'm not trying to put down arma. i agree it can be all kinds of things under certain circumstances. but i think at it's core it's "just" a large scale combined arms shooter. and i also think that "arma people" (and i count myself in) have the tendency to elevate arma (and themselves as its players) to something it really isn't without their own imagination and commitment.

 

again, yes there are hints of it in there but all you have to do is dissect the exact differences between arma and VBS and you will see the difference between a so called "serious game" and a game.

 

i mean in the end, depending on how flexible you are, it's all semantics. but then again. isn't that exactly what this thread is about?

[babylonjoke 22]

You just keep going on about what ArmA 3 and seriousness means to you like its the same for everybody <_<

 

Well if you are not close mindend you should hear all other opinions then. Or you just want your way of thinking? If you like to talk about it it's ok. otherwise just  ignore my comments.

 

Watching your hostility towards Arma and its community in general, let me ask you a question - why bother posting here? You aren't in for an objective discussion, you're in to state your truth and dismiss others'.

 

See, I understand e-sports is exciting to watch and participate at due to nature of matches (fast, adrenaline pumping, etc.), but e-sports is mostly based on tournaments and cash prizes. People work hard for this, sweat their best in the field.

 

Now, compare the statistical CS:GO gamer to Arma's - which one is more serious? It doesn't even matter. Statistically, most CSGO sessions/matches are not that serious. It's just people having fun spraying laser AK74s at the others with zero teamwork.

 

You should define the kind of 'seriousness' you talk about. Is it 'tactical seriousness' or smth else? Sure, tactical seriousness in fast-paced arcadish PvP / TvT environments is possible.

 

Now, TVT / PVP in Arma certainly exists, you just need the right community. I very much enjoyed watching this, for ex:

 

 

That's what pisses me off, "you need the right community". What the hell does it even mean? I mean already the fact that I need a community to play a game doesn't make A3 itself "serious" . Are you by any chance saying that I'm right saying that it's the community which makes a game serious?

Now, "seriousness" for me is anything where you focus on a common goal against something that challenges you (for sure not dumb AI).It's where you apply concrete tactics and teamwork in proper gameplay situations. OP is talking about game mechanics, that's a whole different thing. I'm not comparing CS:GO to Arma 3 by any chance, A3 unders ome aspects it's FAR superior. I'm comparing CS:GO community and teams with A3 ones, pointing out that what you call "arcade game shooter" can be as equal (or even more) "serious" as Arma3.

I can make Arma 3 look like a freakin joke if I want. "Seriousness" it's a player thing, not a gameplay feature, do you unerstand it?

On which basis you make these statics btw? The open Arma 3 MP-PVP community it's so small that making stats it's just useless.

 

So does babylonjoke just have 435 posts about how much he hates arma and anyone who plays it?

Not your business. I've spent enough money for this game and I have all the rights to give my bad feedback on the forum, for reasons that I'm not here whilling to explain you (like millions).

Right now I'm complaining about a large community portion, and giving my personal opinion about "seriousness",which since you mostly are closed minded, fail to understand.

[sniper pilot 36]

So let me ask you then babylonjoke, why do you play ArmA? If you are so unhappy why are you even here and not playing CS:GO? Stop wasting your time, life is short.

Edit: guess someone already asked you. Didn't read your entire post, yeah you did pay money for it and you do have the right to give poor feedback.

But I guess now that we know that there is no real practical end game for you, we can move on and stop wasting our words on you...

---

Next!

I am with the camp that you can make ArmA what you want; from super military role playing infantry simulator to har har zombie apocalypse demon jumping shoot em up. That's the beauty of it.

[St. Jimmy 272]

Right now I'm complaining about a large community portion, and giving my personal opinion about "seriousness",which since you mostly are closed minded, fail to understand.

I think the confusing part here is why are you voicing that on this topic? The word serious has a meaning in this topic and it doesn't mean how seriously you can play the game but it means can the game educate you. You're giving examples of CS:GO that actually doesn't have anything to do in the category of "serious" games no matter how tactic the game is.

 

Also many serious games are like that you actually need to play it right to get everything out of it. Nothing stops you playing rFactor (a racing sim) like a banger racing game just like nothing stops you playing Arma like a run'n'gun game but you can play both of them very seriously especially when you get in a group. That's how just many sims work so saying get in a good community is a good point because in there you can learn a lot more.

 

You're basically talking off-topic here. You should be talking about how the Arma itself doesn't actually try to teach/force the player to learn much about real life tactics and skills or use them much.

 

I think many here agrees that Arma 3 tries to be entertaining game first with some added depth of seriousness that can be expanded by the player/community almost to the level of mil-sim or you can even go to the full opposite way.

[chrisb 196]

Its all down to the players, but the game that wins out in the end, for me, plus gives the most satisfaction, is the one that gives the most varied content for the player to use. Can't think of any other game that does that as well as this series for this genre. However, then you have to look at which one in the series is the best for that. That all comes down to personal choice and what content is available for which version. That is a whole different argument. ;)

 

Is Arma 3, or any other game, a serious game.. not sure.. lets see who's playing ! and is it being played the way I/you like, because serious, is far too wide of a subject to say who is, and who isn't, right or wrong, we all play differently. Its an impossible thing to answer.

 

Oh, and I would add, I enjoyed that video. (live shoutcast, that is)  :)

[babylonjoke 22]

So let me ask you then babylonjoke, why do you play ArmA? If you are so unhappy why are you even here and not playing CS:GO? Stop wasting your time, life is short.

 

I  don't play Arma anymore and I don't own CS:GO. I'm taking part of a discussion, welcome to Forums!

 

I think the confusing part here is why are you voicing that on this topic? The word serious has a meaning in this topic and it doesn't mean how seriously you can play the game but it means can the game educate you. You're giving examples of CS:GO that actually doesn't have anything to do in the category of "serious" games no matter how tactic the game is.

 

Ok, then from now on I'll add "seriousness" as synonim of "educational *ETC*" in my vocaboulary 

Now I'm curious to know where this topic goes, and what have you all learned from Vanilla Arma. 

[cosmic10r 2331]

The problem is that serious will be defined differently by different people and quickly becomes a moot argument as you are really only comparing PERSONAL definitions of "serious".

 

The real division is the difference between capacity and execution... ie... what Arma is capable of and what people use it for. 

 

I like Arma because you CAN learn small unit tactics from it if that's your thing. You CAN learn some degree of map reading from it. You CAN learn how many apples is too many when collecting apples on a life server. You certainly can learn scripting and one thing Arma has done has refined my workflow lol....

 

People USE it for many things and this makes it versatile over other games which is not to say it is more "serious" then other games... as there are plenty of "casual"  Arma players and plenty of "serious" arma players... 

 

The beauty (and sometimes limitation) is that it does many things well but no thing perfectly.... 

So the real benefit is that it can fit many moulds depending on what the player wants... 

 

I have to admit it is odd to post in a forum for a game one doesn't play... don't know where one finds  the time to waste for that... but anyways... to each  their own so to speak...

[chortles 263]

again, yes there are hints of it in there but all you have to do is dissect the exact differences between arma and VBS and you will see the difference between a so called "serious game" and a game.

Alternately, "games for training" versus "games for entertainment", or differentiating between "commercial and serious gaming" as Bohemia Interactive once put it (page 23). Other than that, you've hit the nail on the head!

@KalpaGunarathna: By your definition of "serious games", no: "ARMA is an entertainment game", while VBS3 is a "serious game" powered by a derivative of the engine behind Arma 3. There was also previously a Personal Edition offered for VBS2, but now VBS3 is sold only to military/government/commercial organizations as well, as specified by both a BISim dev and a product page, with VBS2 PE licensees being offered an individual upgrade to an Academic Edition.

[chrisb 196]

I think OP you would be better to look at Kerbal Space Program or Space Engineers, these are games that can be used to teach and indeed are in some places. VBS is a training tool that can be used as a game, not a very good one it has to be said (game I mean). So vbs comes from the other direction.

Arma isn't that type of game, you couldn't learn anything other than social skills in interacting with others really. I wouldn't want an Army to go out and fight for 'real', based on the fact they had played Arma. Your really in the wrong games forum, you might be better off in the VBS section, although as said, that isn't a game first, its a training tool, that is or has been, used as a game in some circles.

 

I understand what your question is, but its just in the wrong place. There are many ways you can use the word serious, I think you are using it in the literal sense, therefore coming to an FPS games forum, isn't really going to find you an answer. On the other hand, if you want to know if players play the game 'seriously' then that is a different thing.. no..

[jw custom 56]

Well if you are not close mindend you should hear all other opinions then. Or you just want your way of thinking? If you like to talk about it it's ok. otherwise just  ignore my comments.

 

"My way of thinking"... did you even read my replies... i'll repeat just for you:

 

'serious' doesn't mean the same to everybody.

 

Do i think ArmA 3 is serious, yes when i want it to be. Do i think that someone running around in underwear with a rocket launcher is serious, no. Do i think it's necessary to have someone screaming out orders to make this game serious, no.

 

 

That's what pisses me off, "you need the right community". What the hell does it even mean? I mean already the fact that I need a community to play a game doesn't make A3 itself "serious" . Are you by any chance saying that I'm right saying that it's the community which makes a game serious?

 

Who the hell said you need a community to play ArmA 3 :huh: