What kind of gamemode BIS should develop next?

[inlesco 233]

So, it's been some time since End Game was released and it's a great choice for those who're looking for a solid TvT objective-based match. Most of my own End Game matches were quite intense, with some blind shooting / chaos involved, and I loved every second of it.

 

However, I find that BIS didn't market End Game properly. Fe., take a look here: http://imgur.com/a/D1TOm - those are results of various search queries for 'endgame' on Youtube.

 

You might notice that, fe., 'arma 3 endgame' results selection is kinda... disappointing, especially from a newcomers [to Arma] point of view. As we know, new players usually don't want to watch a 2 hour developer livestream because they're not sure what to expect because they don't know the developer itself or the game. Naturally, people assume it's a waste of time. 

 

What newcomers want --> a tight, varied and entertaining trailer / gameplay trailer instead of prolonged & vaguely described videos. So, there's no separate trailer dedicated to End Game by BIS on Youtube, no quick introduction video by BIS, just a Nexus trailer that only briefly covers what EndGame is about.

 

That's not how you attract new people to give your ambitious & cool gamemode a try. Unfortunately, you have to make the intro less of a rocky road. At the beginning, everyone needs some decent guidance, tips and no-bullshit information.

 

Marketing strategy of End Game failed to do that. AFAIR, there was no incentive to try out End Game unless it's you're above-the-standard curious. So, sadly, IMHO, it's just a matter of time before End Game dies out.

 

Now, onto the main question... What kind of an ambitious gamemode BIS should develop next? These questions pop in immediately:

• Should it be on a larger scale than End Game?
• Max players allowed?
• Focused on TVT, PVP, PVE, or... the good old Coop?
• Inspired by successful large-scale PVE / PVP gamemodes like Insurgency, Invade & Annex or Domination?
• If not, what community gamemode should serve as an inspiration?
• Or... Maybe it's time for an official Arma 3 Life expansion! (Game-dev is a business, after all!) (Just kidding :))

Your thoughts?

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

Warfare.

[OMAC 254]

Intense, story-driven SP. 

[chortles 263]

story-driven SP.

Confirmed in that the Apex campaign can be played solo--

Intense,

Subjective, and if you meant a SP-exclusive campaign though... doesn't sound like that's in the cards, not after The East Wind and Bootcamp performed that role (even if not to your satisfaction).

[OMAC 254]

As long as future playable content is intense, varied, and awesome in SP, and not always involving commanding AI squads, I could care less if it's also playable in coop. 

[inlesco 233]

As long as future playable content is intense, varied, and awesome in SP, and not always involving commanding AI squads, I could care less if it's also playable in coop. 

It could be that a story-driven, intense (and don't forget - it has to be lengthy, varied, with lots of content / different situations) costs much more a than proprietary MP gamemode like End Game.

 

What % of total A3 users have tried the main campaign, not to mention, completed it? I think Steam achievements might help you find that out. AFAIR, the numbers are depressingly low.

[yxman 90]

more coop stuff & warfare

[OMAC 254]

It could be that a story-driven, intense (and don't forget - it has to be lengthy, varied, with lots of content / different situations) costs much more a than proprietary MP gamemode like End Game.

I'm sure you are correct about the cost. You get what you pay for. End Game obviously has little long-term value. But SP scenarios, like those BI used to make years ago, don't have to be lengthy, just fun. A good idea and briefing can go a long way. Why not release an official BI SP (+/- coop) mission pack, as myself and others have suggested many times?

 

What % of total A3 users have tried the main campaign, not to mention, completed it? I think Steam achievements might help you find that out. AFAIR, the numbers are depressingly low.

If true, that is a terrible shame. But BI has their legacy of campaigns and scenarios back to OFP to consider, and I hope they continue that great tradition. 

 

I think an A3 version of Warfare would be cool also, as long as it is playable in SP and MP.

[St. Jimmy 272]

"Inspired by successful large-scale PVE / PVP gamemodes like Insurgency, Invade & Annex or Domination?"

 

If not that then:

 

Advance And Secure or similar

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Well End Game is pretty intense and competitive. Thus the next game mode should be just as intense and competitive.

[Wiki 1558]

Intense, story-driven SP. 

This ^^

And maybe ArmA 4 in modern context with new factions such as French army, Chinese army, Spanish army, German army, etc...

[froggyluv 2130]

 I'd vote the exact opposite of story-driven mode as to me that reads: Think up a lame plot and somehow encapsulate that into the Arma sandbox using any shortcuts necessary to tell that story.

 

 Story mode is the enemy of actual functionality and AI improvement. Example: If you need to keep an NPC alive, you make him bulletproof rather than make an actual engine level improvement between Green troops and Elite AI. Its simpler to rather allow him to absorb bullets while talking than dig deep into the AI to make actual distinction in how they would play out. If you need to keep the player within certain boundries, you simply attach a bomb to him when he walks outside said line and tell him he stepped on a mine -again rather than just allow the penalities play out naturally -like they did in the original OFP. Story Modes tend to keep the developers want to stay in a safe zone -one in which they can control the outcome. Hence why in all that urban fighting in the Campaign, we see no civilians and zero house fighting save the random bot.

 

Similar results happened in other games like from Bf2 with cool bots to Bf3 with literally bullshit AI that were merely actors that waited for Players to make their scenes. Personally I'd rather see them forgo the stories completely, as the best one was already told and its like asking a comedian who told already all his jokes to "make us laugh again monkee!". I'd love to see the series go the way of military strategy games with built in behaviours for class AI be it man, tank, AA, Air and let us create unlimited military scenarios. Ones in which a Repair crewman cant outsnipe a trained Marksman. Think about it -whens the last time you even paid attention to the class of an enemy troop? They all play out the same way. This is not the direction of a military game in which strategies are based off of type and quality of enemy.

 

 That said -I'm on a failed endevour I know because that is the far much smaller market and doubt BI actually has the desire to pursue a more hardened military thematic. Not when most servers are Life/Zombie anyways...

 

PS: I do appreciate the addition of HandleDamage for 'bulletproof' problem.

[fn_Quiksilver 1633]

I don't think BI should be in the business of scenario design.

 

Not commercially viable, given the incredible time investment community designers put into their free creations.

 

Instead I think semi-official support for established gamemodes and also a pathway for high quality lesser-known scenarios to become established. The official servers hosting community content was a start, but successful servers in A3 need admins and also a core community. I don't think there was a platform or facility for a community/admins on those servers.

 

 

If they did want to dabble in big gamemode ideas, I would suggest a high quality, tightly focused CTI gamemode. Altis is too big for CTI due to performance constraints.

 

Small-scale scenarios like End Game are nice, but sort of miss the mark. The A3 playerbase likes sandbox and combined arms (exception being the cops & robbers appendage)

[Rydygier 1304]

SP, that would properly utilize and emphasize strongest points of Arma. For me that means as usual non-linear, procedural, dynamic, open, replayable, customizable, explorative, supporting many different game styles/approaches, deep, challenging in rewarding not frustrating way. Basically along such lines, toward such goal I'm trying to make my own things most of the times.

 

I would like to see something fresh and surprising. For example, who said, we always need to be a soldier and that our main activity should be always the fight? Because it's military game, it simply must be that way? And no, I'm not telling about all this "pretend normal life" boredom at all. If that's the only possible alternative, then we're doomed to soldiering indeed, still I don't think so. But whatever the plot would be, if any at all, it should make me emotionally attached to the story and characters. So I would actually care, what is happening. While the story should be a servant of the gameplay rather than the opposite. 

 

When I finished official A3 campaign, I scored it pretty high, perhaps a bit too high, but anyway, even if it was at many points high quality work, as a whole it didn't seduced me, that kind of gameplay is just not where Arma shines to me. I mean except doing warfare in general and those dynamic side activities, which were merely a glimpse of something, that never truly happened. I kinda feel, it looks, as it looks because there was a conviction, so Arma, the military game require proper, solid, classical, military SP (mainly) linear campaign. Nope. Enough. Free your imagination. It's a sandbox for a reason. I'm convinced, there are many amazing new ways to play Arma, that we never discovered so far. 

 

Besides that I just hope, due to my own preferences, it will keep a healty SP-MP balance and will not turn too much toward MP, where the players are in the big part tasked with providing fun to each other instead of devs (so it may be tempting). 

[Wiki 1558]

I don't think BI should be in the business of scenario design.

 

Not commercially viable, given the incredible time investment community designers put into their free creations.

 

Instead I think semi-official support for established gamemodes and also a pathway for high quality lesser-known scenarios to become established. The official servers hosting community content was a start, but successful servers in A3 need admins and also a core community. I don't think there was a platform or facility for a community/admins on those servers.

 

 

If they did want to dabble in big gamemode ideas, I would suggest a high quality, tightly focused CTI gamemode. Altis is too big for CTI due to performance constraints.

 

Small-scale scenarios like End Game are nice, but sort of miss the mark. The A3 playerbase likes sandbox and combined arms (exception being the cops & robbers appendage)

 

Of course not, however about the campaign and SP missions, it should be nice that they keep story-driven scenarios.

For the rest, they can do sandbox.

 

But sandbox in a campaign or in SP - like what they tried in ArmA 2 doesn't work.

Who really enjoy playing warfare in a SP story driven campaign?

 

Besides, you can have a look at SP story driven scenarios and campaigns:

 

Resist, Deliverance, Operation Greek Fire, etc...

All of them are SP story driven and they ARE popular.

[froggyluv 2130]

Who really enjoy playing warfare in a SP story driven campaign?

 

 I did. Actually that was almost perfect tho they should have not just transplanted it without giving a campaign based gui etc so it did feel out of place. I liked the free roaming style of Arma2 story and then eventually going into full tactical control -to many that is very satisfying. And of course Story Based missions are more popular *cough Mass Effect* - most gamers like being told a story and being a part of it. Other prefer a looser plot line that can completely turned around, flipped and end in uncharted waters via some or full tactical control. A mission that can bend to that is the best in my opinion.