Co-op Campaign: APEX PROTOCOL

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Wow such venom for the coop campaign.

Am I the only one who actually enjoyed it? I especially enjoyed the little conversations during the intro videos for each mission.

Probably the only part I didnt enjoy was the final battle but otherwise the rest was great.

Actually one thing Id love to know is how they got consecutive missions going when hosting the campaign. Im in the process of designing and building my own coop campaign and would love to know how to do sequential missions or even, if possible, branching campaigns.

[.kju 3239]

My advice: You guys should move on. There is lots of other good content out there, or most make their own anyway.

@ Variable and Varanon

You guys misunderstood my point. I do agree that BI should make playable content. They have the funding, manpower and the skills for it.

However by this moment it should be really obvious and clear that BI followed a different approach, path and goals than some liked to see.

From the overall focus of APEX, the promotion and the communication approach, the responses from Zipper, pettka and others on the initial community response,

to what they have decided to adjust and this OPREP (its framing, language, content, message, etc) they continue to follow it and don't consider it a failure.

My point is in the end you should acknowledged that this is what they do. They have their own perspective and measure of success. That's to be accepted I'd say.

To their credit some things like the presentation is said to be pretty good, the voice acting (not the texts though), and indeed it allowed them to

push some modules, functionality and engine features along the way. Finally they are doing some limited adjustments at least too.

That said what I would have liked to see is a more frank and confident approach and response.

Like "these were our goals and our target audience, this is what we have achieved, we acknowledge

these failures and this is what we will do, and this not because of these reasons".

In addition for a change it would be nice to see a shift of strategy for the next DLC/expansion/A4

to make players, community and modder input and constant interaction the prime focus.

It is surely more interesting to try every time something new, try to realize your next vision and so on.

However to build upon and improve what you have done well and is known to be popular does work too.

Finally while the interaction is very challenging, yet BI has stepped into it already at least,

it is also very rewarding and can push the result to higher levels as modding shows.

[teabagginpeople 398]

I read the oprep. And fair play it was peppered with honesty. And honestly is appreciated.

Here's mine. For me there shouldn't be in there the word vision. Vision to be what exactly? generic as fxxk?. This really takes no vision at all. harsh but for me true. Hey if that's your aim you got the lay up it was all net baby. Congratulations.

Campaign is designed be simplistic.A pick up easily, put down and forgettable easily piece of work. that's the core of it. It's what you aimed for and achieved. Wouldn't Any fluffing of it now be pretty much wasted time and resources and back peddling on your "vision".

at this point Moving on, or making another showcase with what you have perceived to have learned might be fun.

[Stalkermaster2015 60]

There aren't any.

There is, apparently the new revive system is in the works for the AI hence why they were missing from the Sp side.

I wouldn't make a big deal about it but Dwarden went out of his way to shut my negative criticism of the campaign on steam down by telling me it would come. Hence why I want to know when these changes are coming.

Here is his response

note

the thread OP posted before the APEX was even released

also there are known AI bugs (fixed or being wip to be fixed soon)

some can be seen in DEVELOPMENT branch changelog

so, it hopefully gets better next patch

With the top comment, he is referring to the fact I posted that discussion the 3rd day that the campaign was in the development branch for "testing"

[R3vo 2652]

I am actually wondering if it's still worth to put more time into improving the campaign. I mean, most of the players who were interested in the campaign have most likely already played it and there is no second chance to make a first impression or so I heard...

 

Wondering what you guys think about that.

[en3x 209]

Agree mainly because for myself I don't see playing campaign again.Patrols will be the same with same placement, mission have that simplistic design without replayability

so I don't feel like playing it again.Thenen again I'm not target demographic here.

[IndeedPete 1038]

I am actually wondering if it's still worth to put more time into improving the campaign. I mean, most of the players who were interested in the campaign have most likely already played it and there is no second chance to make a first impression or so I heard...

 

Wondering what you guys think about that.

 

Well, I wouldn't. But then again, I was on the forefront of criticising it. Someone who already liked the original might actually welcome the improvements. Not sure how big the crowd might be though.

[R3vo 2652]

Agree mainly because for myself I don't see playing campaign again.Patrols will be the same with same placement, mission have that simplistic design without replayability

so I don't feel like playing it again.Thenen again I'm not target demographic here.

 

 

Well, I wouldn't. But then again, I was on the forefront of criticising it. Someone who already liked the original might actually welcome the improvements. Not sure big the crowd might be though.

 

I would replay it if things like unit placement would change and player decisions would actually matter, so the ending of the mission can vary. But since that wasn't mentioned in the SITREP I don't believe it's part of the improvements.

[bars91 956]

Pretty much agree with 3 previous posts.

I like justified challenge, legit mission design, unpredictibility, good story and authenticity.

 

So i'm obviously not the target demographic for Apex  ;)

[Stalkermaster2015 60]

I would replay it if things like unit placement would change and player decisions would actually matter, so the ending of the mission can vary. But since that wasn't mentioned in the SITREP I don't believe it's part of the improvements.

Yeah because replayability was one of the things they stated would be behind the fact that the campaign was short (ie 4-5 hours) for most part. I really hope we don't have to wait another 2 or so years before we get another campaign that can be completed in Sp or Co Op or just one or the other and goes back to the roots rather then another test of moving towards a certain demographic that alienates a portion of the crowd.

[lexx 1331]

Guess the replayability part was more about the player changing their tactics, and not the player doing always the same and expecting different results.

 

Maybe I'll replay the campaign again some day. Probably will do it solo again then, though, which... well... yeah.

[petek 62]

Got to be honest .... as it stands I have no intention of going near the campaign again (for pretty much the same reasons covered above).

[R3vo 2652]

Guess the replayability part was more about the player changing their tactics, and not the player doing always the same and expecting different results.

 

Maybe I'll replay the campaign again some day. Probably will do it solo again then, though, which... well... yeah.

 

Why the heck would someone use different tactics if the amount, the placement and the armament of the enemies is always the same?

[Guest]

On my side, I will probably replay it, but not before a while. Maybe before the release of new content or a new game, when the hype will start to rise again.

[bars91 956]

Just going to leave this here:

 

[teabagginpeople 398]

Good video bars. Hoping more bi devs will take time to have a look see in this thread . I know one or two would of been fans of the original thief. Might give some further insight into the feelings some players of this game are trying to convey.

[R3vo 2652]

Just going to leave this here:

 

 

Thanks for that video, alot of truth in it!

[froggyluv 2130]

 THAT^^^^ is exactly what im talking about when complaining of dress up vs functionality. All units in Arma perform the exact same yet people want more dress up barbie soldier fare -i just dont get it. Must be my age..

 

 Thief was and is a great game as was Swat - innovative time in gaming

[IndeedPete 1038]

To be fair, AI behaviour can be controlled through scripting. It's just that most mission makers, myself including, don't bother fiddling around with the AI skills, behaviours, and formations. It's already possible to have special forces going stealthy and precise, or underquipped and untrained insurgents shooting badly. It's mostly in the hands of the mission creator. Though I must admit, the different group behaviours and the flat group system in general could use some love. But that's going off-topic...

 

I like the Thief comparison as well. And I see why these games are gameplay-wise superior. It's just that the market seems to demand all that generic hollywood crap for some reason. And devs got to eat too. Still, I'd kill for another S.W.A.T. The last part from 2000-something was the perfect complement to Arma. What Arma lacks indoors S.W.A.T. 4 delivers, and vice versa.

[froggyluv 2130]

To be fair, AI behaviour can be controlled through scripting. It's just that most mission makers, myself including, don't bother fiddling around with the AI skills, behaviours, and formations. It's already possible to have special forces going stealthy and precise, or underquipped and untrained insurgents shooting badly. It's mostly in the hands of the mission creator.

 

 

 To a point but military behaviours go way past simple accuracy skills and changing into Stealth mode. Garner it'd be pretty tough to create an observer or stalker squad that could successfully follow another a squad with eyes on target but not engage until say another flanking squad showed up. Snipers taking high ground and maintaining lethal distance instead of charging only to pistol up -that sort of thing. Next up is damage system -if everyone just flinches on non-lethal shots only to return fire with a supposed math disadvantage -mission makers cant do a whole lot to make that feel better. Theres simply alot they could do function-wise to give more of a "now this is the right tool for the job" kinda feel as is mentioned above.

[IndeedPete 1038]

 To a point but military behaviours go way past simple accuracy skills and changing into Stealth mode. Garner it'd be pretty tough to create an observer or stalker squad that could successfully follow another a squad with eyes on target but not engage until say another flanking squad showed up. Snipers taking high ground and maintaining lethal distance instead of charging only to pistol up -that sort of thing. Next up is damage system -if everyone just flinches on non-lethal shots only to return fire with a supposed math disadvantage -mission makers cant do a whole lot to make that feel better. Theres simply alot they could do function-wise to give more of a "now this is the right tool for the job" kinda feel as is mentioned above.

 

Your scenario there sounds pretty specific. I don't think that would require built-in AI behaviour but more of a waypoint or script function. It should be possible already to have an AI group stalking another group without engaging. That would just be a modified hunt script.

 

I agree with the underlying argument though that Arma 3's mechanics can naturally be improved in so many ways. And yes, the unit flinching is awful. It's more fun to fight against enemies without body protection, like the Syndikat guys. But it's getting off topic here...

[St. Jimmy 272]

Played it through with two friends with the difficulty improvements. I don't really see much of a replayability, except one or two missions. Things were pretty balanced and good fun with friends. Of course couple more missions would've been cool. Well now they're hungry for more 3-4 player coop missions/campaign :P Maybe we will play the Arma 2 campaign together next :D

[evromalarkey 150]

Am I the only one who is kind of dissapointed that if you play solo, you are kind of alone wolf in your "own team"? I didn't play the whole campaign yet, only the first mission - but it's really huge drop in authenticity for me, when I suppose to have team and yet I am alone.

 

I really don't understand why you can't have AI's in your team like in Arma 2 campaign. Anyone else agrees with me? I made a ticket on feedback tracker - https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120393

[OMAC 254]

Am I the only one who is kind of dissapointed that if you play solo, you are kind of alone wolf in your "own team"? I didn't play the whole campaign yet, only the first mission - but it's really huge drop in authenticity for me, when I suppose to have team and yet I am alone.

 

I really don't understand why you can't have AI's in your team like in Arma 2 campaign. Anyone else agrees with me? I made a ticket on feedback tracker - https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120393

 

You most certainly are NOT the only one who feels this way.  There are many, many posts expressing the same sentiment.  Here's one from a few days ago.  Here's another.

[bars91 956]

Am I the only one who is kind of dissapointed that if you play solo, you are kind of alone wolf in your "own team"? ...

 

There are pages of posts burried somewhere deep in this tread, speaking of this evil that has plagued the campaign.

 

People call it... THE RAMBO TEAM (heavy orchestral theme commences)