Boring campaign

[Kovorix 0]

After countless hours of playing ARMA 3 and thinking of the campaign and the campaigns of the previous titles I thought "Why is it allways the same?". It was allways: The americans are going to leave and the enemy thinks it is a great idea to attack now because they sure won't come back. And then the heroic soldier fights off the evil forces of evilness. Kinda boring.

It also happens so fast in the first mission you drive your HEMTT and a few seconds later ongoing war, instead of putting some story first. When you look at the prologue it had very little action but it was so good in telling the situation of the island, why not more of it?

 

I wish some more realistic scenarios for a new ARMA or DLC. It doesn't need 100% action, when you want pure action you can play cod or bf. Some missions even without action like some humanitarian aid, driving with a food convoy to give it to the civilians or just some patrolling while listening to some background story.

 

This is just my opinion if you have another one feel free to say it.

 

 

 

[zimms 22]

On 4.8.2017 at 6:04 PM, Kovorix said:

Some missions even without action like some humanitarian aid,[...]

 

 

 

 

Hm... how you like them oranges?

[drebin052 324]

On 8/5/2017 at 2:04 AM, Kovorix said:

The americans are going to leave and the enemy thinks it is a great idea to attack now because they sure won't come back.

 

Except "The americans" get almost entirely wiped out by the end of the first mission and the remaining survivors all but bite the dust as well at the end of the first chapter. They also suffer heavy losses when they return and don't get to steamroll the "bad guys" even in the final chapter; "The americans" pretty much get their arses kicked throughout the entire campaign.

 

So I'm not quite sure what your gripe is here. The East Wind is nothing like your stereotypical "Yanks save the day" story compared to Operation Arrowhead or even the first ARMA.

 

Quote

And then the heroic soldier fights off the evil forces of evilness. Kinda boring.

 

Kerry didn't win this all by himself; he was just a cog in the machine with the FIA and the 111th. Obviously some missions were one man army'ish but that's the nature of Arma still being a game.

 

Quote

It also happens so fast in the first mission you drive your HEMTT and a few seconds later ongoing war, instead of putting some story first. When you look at the prologue it had very little action but it was so good in telling the situation of the island, why not more of it?

 

The intro video presents you the backstory behind the current situation already. You don't really need much to tell you why TF Aegis were withdrawing from Stratis. As for the sudden transition into conflict, since you've already played the Boot Camp prologue you should already know why the fighting started. It didn't just happen out of the blue.

 

Quote

I wish some more realistic scenarios for a new ARMA or DLC. It doesn't need 100% action, when you want pure action you can play cod or bf.

 

Not all of the missions in The East Wind were "100% action"-packed.

 

I recall quite a few slow paced and stealth missions in Adapt like Bingo Fuel or Within Reach where you're supposed to avoid combat. And then there's the Patrol side missions in both Survive/Adapt of course...

 

Quote

Some missions even without action like some humanitarian aid, driving with a food convoy to give it to the civilians

 

People complained about this very aspect back in Harvest Red with the Manhattan mission and it's exactly why such COIN missions will not make a comeback.

 

But you'll be happy to know at least that the new Remnants of War campaign included with the Laws of War DLC has the humanitarian aid-style missions that you're asking for.

 

Quote

or just some patrolling while listening to some background story.

 

Why on earth would you want a mission where you patrolled from point A to point B with zero action like in a real-life military operation? Such non-action based missions are not "fun" in real-life and would be even less "fun" in-game...

[Kovorix 0]

20 hours ago, drebin052 said:

 

Except "The americans" get almost entirely wiped out by the end of the first mission and the remaining survivors all but bite the dust as well at the end of the first chapter. They also suffer heavy losses when they return and don't get to steamroll the "bad guys" even in the final chapter; "The americans" pretty much get their arses kicked throughout the entire campaign.

 

So I'm not quite sure what your gripe is here. The East Wind is nothing like your stereotypical "Yanks save the day" story compared to Operation Arrowhead or even the first ARMA.

 

I didn't said it was otherwise, I just said it was the same scenario as in previous campaigns of ARMA.

 

Quote

The intro video presents you the backstory behind the current situation already. You don't really need much to tell you why TF Aegis were withdrawing from Stratis. As for the sudden transition into conflict, since you've already played the Boot Camp prologue you should already know why the fighting started. It didn't just happen out of the blue.

 

Just waiting a few days and they are gone wasn't an option, right?

 

Quote

Not all of the missions in The East Wind were "100% action"-packed.

 

I recall quite a few slow paced and stealth missions in Adapt like Bingo Fuel or Within Reach where you're supposed to avoid combat. And then there's the Patrol side missions in both Survive/Adapt of course...

 

Those "patrol" side missions were complete uninteressting they did nothing for the game itself.

 

Quote

People complained about this very aspect back in Harvest Red with the Manhattan mission and it's exactly why such COIN missions will not make a comeback.

 

But you'll be happy to know at least that the new Remnants of War campaign included with the Laws of War DLC has the humanitarian aid-style missions that you're asking for.

 

Manhatten was one of the best missions. You had freedome to choose what you want to do first and in which order. But I understand that most people can't play a game when there is no guidline that tells you what do.

 

Quote

Why on earth would you want a mission where you patrolled from point A to point B with zero action like in a real-life military operation? Such non-action based missions are not "fun" in real-life and would be even less "fun" in-game...

 

It would be a way of telling some backstory of events where the player wasn't involved. But yeah everyone has other aspects of what fun is.

[lexx 1391]

Just waiting a few days and they are gone wasn't an option, right?

AAF didn't initialized the attack. It was a false flag operation by CTRG. So "just waiting a few days" is a bit of a stupid argument.

[drebin052 324]

48 minutes ago, Kovorix said:

Just waiting a few days and they are gone wasn't an option, right?

 

Like I said, if you played the prologue campaign and bothered to listen to the narrative then you would have known why the AAF "suddenly" attacked. The reasons behind the attack were even more obvious once you finish Adapt/Win as well.

 

Quote

It would be a way of telling some backstory of events where the player wasn't involved. But yeah everyone has other aspects of what fun is.

 

That's what the AAN news reports, intermission cutscenes, and chatter between NPCs throughout the base hubs (Camp Maxwell, FIA camps, Stratis Airbase) are for. And there are plenty throughout all three chapters.

 

Having a mission where you ride in an MRAP for the entire duration without doing anything is very poor mission design when you could have just delegated such dialogue to a brief cutscene...

[Stalkermaster2015 60]

I'm sorry but Manhattan was one of the worst missions they have ever made. It seemed cool at first but due to the sheer size of the map and what you had to do it was stupid and not fun at all.  It required sheer luck to have things go the right way for you.

[dragon01 902]

Actually, the sheer size of the map was what made it interesting. It didn't require luck (unless you counted bugs that it, unfortunately, had aplenty), just good planning. It felt dull at times (especially if you planned something wrong), but at the same time really authentic. It really felt like a real military operation. I wish there were more COIN missions like that. There were things that could've been done better, of course, but overall, it was very good.

[Swan-UK 2]

I'm trying to find a decent action packed campaign where this guy is trying to find campaigns that evolve around driving around aid trucks...sorry but why do you want to patrol on a game from point A to point B with zero action?

That being said I do agree with him about the campaigns - I for one am looking for a good campaign that uses the british army, sick of playing as the yanks all the time, A2 BAF campaign was actually pretty good - I don't know but the developers got extremely lazy with these campaigns we have now.

[pvt. partz 248]

Quote

I wish some more realistic scenarios for a new ARMA or DLC. It doesn't need 100% action

 

Since you asked, there are plenty of great missions that aren't your typical "run n gun" if I understand your wish list

1) Pilgrimage (with numerous ports to other terrains)

2) Ravage (just the mod)

3) Escape (played via Ravage)

4) Patrol Ops 4

5) Dynamic Recon Ops

6) Laws of War (as mentioned above)

 

Should keep you busy

 

[wipman 1]

I like the ArmA3 campaign; but it could be better and there could be more. The AI that you're with it always go running to all the waypoints, but as you've to go running too... you don't gonna be able to shoot because, as since the OFP... for some damn reason the character always have a huuge weapon sway, it's as if your soldier never been had trained to aim and shoot with a rifle; also you don't see any of the DLC addon weapons, equipment, vehicles or clothes on the campaign, in the same way that you never see a 7.62 suppressor for the damn EBR (that thank God that at least we've it). I think that there should be a campaign as long as the main one that incorporates all the military DLCs, they know what they can do with the Karts DLC... but i won't say it this time so i don't get a new bann this many years after; they could also make campaigns for the tree main factions with their perspective on the conflict, allowing us to also take all the roles, army, Marines, cavalry, heli CAS & Transport and air too so we could have some dogfighting but overall alot of plane CAS and ATG missions for the three factions that make us see the progression or regression on each of the three factions. But over all, all with much more cutscenes that give some more life or personality to the camapaign and campaign's characters; i don't even look at the map's grid... i just go to A to point B and do the thing and then go to point C, i don't really care for Kelly or Miller, they're not James Gastowsky... they're kinda plain and cutscenes could fight that as they did on the OFP; hell, even the Queen's Gambit had more interesting cutscenes than the damn ArmA3 campaign, the gameplay is good enough IMO but it's plain in terms of characters, the presentation of this ones and also without the DLCs content appearing in a not mandatory way but being there and allowing you to use 'em if you've the DLCs... will improve alot the main campaign; that as i've said... IMO there should be one long campaign for each faction showing their part on the conflict, their weapons, units and vehicles and their real value in terms of efectivity on the battlefield.

[giuppo 1]

Hello,
I come a bit after the battle but i finally bought Arma 3 with a good PC recently and i wanted too to express my feelings about the BIS campaigns.

 

I discovered OFP in 2001 and enjoyed its gameplay and campaign (Cold war crisis, Red hammer and Resistance): A new way to play and very immersive stories, they were simple but complete enough, easy to understand who we played, where, why etc. The missions and progression were well balanced, a mix of "simple" and harder objectives to learn the game, how to play. And we took time to know the differents characters, their stories and evolutions, even feelings. And Cinematics helped a lot for that! And how great they were! How to not remember the presentation of James Gatowski getting in the Blackhawk, und next the Alarm in the base for the briefing? it was very immersive.
I'm maybe getting old, but i would say that i'm from this generation of players, for who Cinematics were like an Award at the end of a game, a link between stages, a way to understand the story etc.

 

I got next Arma 2 directly, (never played Arma 1 Armed Assault). If the first campaign (I've forgotten the name) was interesting, I was a bit suprised how short it was: 8 missions if I remember well. And NO cinematics, I mean, only with the charater's eyes.
What should I say about arrowhead? A joke? 1 mission for each: 1 for infantry, 1 for spec ops, 1 for tanks etc... and good bye! (I even don't talk about bugs, it's not the topic here).

Same feelings for the DLC, i got only 2: The British und PMC. Too shorts und just some "videos" as immersion. And i even don't remember the British one.

I was a bit disappointed about BIS, i had the feelings that they focused only for the Multiplayer. Fortunately the community has been here.

 

And now I'm playing Arma 3 since few weeks, i'm playing all the campaigns and SP mission, (I'm currently not over with Tac-Ops).
And i must say that i'm still a bit disappointed/frustrated about all the campaigns. No cinematics, and i must say that it was not easy for me to understand what are we doing here, and against who? And why? The very short and (only one) video at the begining doesn't help a lot.

And i don't understand the interest, in the first and second part of the main campaign, about the "Camp-breifing" between each missions: Briefings exposed are exactly the same we can read before to play the mission, word for word...

 

The game is a bit too "fast" too i think to learn correctly all the new possiblilties of gameplays (to take time to discover all the differents weapons, vehicles...). OFP did it perfectly. Here is: Make your choice and do it yourself.

I don't know if i must start with SP missions or campaign.

 

BIS, Is the guy in charge of cinematics gone with Codesmasters?

You can offer us great things, All missions are well done and nice to play, with challenge, and Special mention for "the Laws of War": it has been very pleasant to play: No cinematics but so many details (objects, actions of the characters... I have appreciated the "ambiance" of the civil life during flashbacks) and very immersive.

And on other side: I just finished the Tac-Ops campaign on Malden: Great missions, but only Pictures to introduce the background?? Why? short in time before release? 

 

Well that was my opinion: It is still a pleasure to play after 20 years, but a part of this is missing: Cinematics and the progession in the learning of the game play.

Please, do not neglect the cutscenes, the staging and the context for a better immersion ad understanding of your campaigns.

 

Thanks

 

Edited March 7, 2021 by giuppo
English Corrections and more details