Arma is cool idea but doesnt work for me

[ginntonic 12]

I've given this game every opportunity to be good - and in the end, the fluidity of player movements sucks so badly its just not worth playing.  This game punishes players with good connects and rewards those with bad ones.  I remember playing SOCOM Navy Seals 15+ years ago and that game had WAY better fluidity and it was a console game.  I got my entire clan (just under 100 people from another game) to purchase Arma 3 thinking it was going to be our new go-to game and we all talk about the same issue as to why no one wants to play this game.

 

I realize some of this has to do with the servers and mods, but knowing that Arma needs to address this with some sort of mandatory fitness of sorts....or completely reward players with good connections.  I'm not saying this has to be the next Battlefield game - but putting so much into tactics without a solid engine for player positioning seem to be a disproportionate use of resources.

 

In conclusion id add that even though most issues are on other game servers, i have to say even the official Arma servers don't solve the issue.  Players and even AI are moon-walking, flying/sliding up/down stairs, walking away after being shot only to fall a couple seconds later, bouncing around the screen, and other things that make this game non-enjoyable to me and my friends.

 

BUT A GREAT IDEA and awesome depth.

Edited December 6, 2017 by R0adki11
thread tile altered to remove 'rage' elements

[ginntonic 12]

I just went to youtube and clicked on the first video i saw to illustrate the issue.  You just have to watch between 2:30-4:00 mark to see what i'm talking about.  I guess everyone just finds this "normal"..?

 

 

[semiconductor 309]

Your thread had a cool idea of pointing out areas for improvement but it completely sucks.

[ginntonic 12]

8 minutes ago, semiconductor said:

Your thread had a cool idea of pointing out areas for improvement but it completely sucks.

 

I realize its a bit of a rage-ish post but I can't be the first person to point this out - so they're either incapable of fixing the problem or refuse to thus far.  I came to the forums before purchasing Arma and I did see some complaints about the problem but I wish I had read a post like this so I could have been more aware how dominate in the issue is in game-play.

 

I even brought the issue up in the forums after I purchased the game and was told then by everyone it must be the servers I was playing.  Now, having played a lot more I realize the servers may contribute to the issue but the issue is systematic.

[semiconductor 309]

8 minutes ago, ginntonic said:

so they're either incapable of fixing the problem or refuse to thus far

Arma 3 made tremendous progress in that aspect compared to Arma 2.

 

Software development is slow and steady process, especially when you're dealing with 15 y.o. engine so it's unreasonable to expect those issues to be easily resolved. But the progress is being made.

 

And some problems can't be solved with our current technological level (you can't really make each blade of grass in Altis to be individually synchronized among all clients for example) and I assume that the issues you encountered were caused by people who did not realize that fact and tried to either run an overcomplicated mission with a lot of AIs/scripts and/or tried to run Arma on weak hardware. Arma handles small and medium coop missions (which are its primary scope) acceptably well but you won't get 60fps trying to simulate Battle of Kursk in Editor, yeah.

[Gunter Severloh 4063]

4 hours ago, ginntonic said:

the fluidity of player movements sucks so badly its just not worth playing.

Fluidity imo has to do with your keyboard layout, it also helps to play with a good set of gameplay mods that tweaks your sway, stamina, amongst other things.

If you really play the game for a bit in sp, editor, mp ect,. and adjust your controls as you go, the movement gets better as you do, keep in mind that arma games, especially

arma3 does have a high learning curve because of the controls.

4 hours ago, ginntonic said:

I remember playing SOCOM Navy Seals 15+ years ago and that game had WAY better fluidity and it was a console game.

Im sure it did but it also didn't have 200 controls to simulate various aspects of the game, comparing Arma3 to other games its not realistic you can see the differences but what is realistic is you

can compare it to arma2 to a degree.

For example, once in a while i like to play some old missions in arma2OA and host them in mp, even with my COWarMod which has many mods in it that changes some movement among

the many other things, in comparison I find arma3 to be way more fluid and solid.

       Arma3 unlike the previous games in the series needs time, people really need to get the full picture of what the game has to offer and what it is about, this aint no COD, BF4 run n gun game where

movement is fairly fluid, they all have their positives and negatives, really your trying to make arma3 play like a run n gun shooter when its ideally meant to be a real world simulation/shooter/strategy, and consider

its a sandbox which means you can do anything you want, this means you can code the game to your hearts desire, add anything new and make the controls how you want, its been done.

 

       The game needs time, you cant just play MP which is one aspect of the game either and call it the whole game, there are many factors in the picture that make a difference in how the game plays,

consider the hardware you play on, the servers your connecting too, the number of people, AI, scripts being run. Like life its never one sided, theres a ton of things always influencing something, people bitch

and moan about one thing and at the same time fail to realize the total complexity of what it takes to create, run a game like arma3.

 

Theres alot of great games out there, but Arma3 always brings me back, for some its not their type of game this is why its important to sit down, watch many reviews, talk with actual players, and see what

the game is all about, know what your getting into, dont be like a kid and think something looks cool and then just go and buy it only to be dissapointed because it dont fit in your style of gameplay.

 

Use a controller

I have a friend i play with in coop on my own rented server, he bought the game a few months ago, spent 2-3 weeks working on his controls, he recently hooked up his xbox1 controller and he loves it, he

plays BF4 alot has his own clan, and server for that, with the controller he says playing arma3 is almost like playing Bf4 except with alot more controls, hes still learning the game, and the key thing is,

he tried, he was willing to learn, and take the time to make it happen.

4 hours ago, ginntonic said:

Players and even AI are moon-walking, flying/sliding up/down stairs, walking away after being shot only to fall a couple seconds later, bouncing around the screen,

and other things that make this game non-enjoyable to me and my friends.

Thats called lag, i rarely if ever experience such issues, i mainly play coop with a few people, and we never have the issues, consider the location of the server, how many people are on it,

the mission, the scripts, whats happening in the mission, again theres many factors that are involved, you cant take an issue your having and twist it around and blame it on the game itself.

   

[ginntonic 12]

11 hours ago, Gunter Severloh said:

Im sure it did but it also didn't have 200 controls to simulate various aspects of the game, comparing Arma3 to other games its not realistic you can see the differences but what is realistic is you

can compare it to arma2 to a degree.

 

To be clear, I am not talking about fluidity of my own character in the game - its other charters which have the lag.  I understand, but id say part of game development is balancing the things you can put in a game vs the experience of the average player's system.  My system happens to be excellent, and I still have issues.

 

11 hours ago, Gunter Severloh said:

Thats called lag, i rarely if ever experience such issues, i mainly play coop with a few people, and we never have the issues, consider the location of the server, how many people are on it,

the mission, the scripts, whats happening in the mission, again theres many factors that are involved, you cant take an issue your having and twist it around and blame it on the game itself.

   

I can see how coop against AI would be massively better - but in todays world it should be expected people want to play PvP.   So you know i would agree with your comment about the variables of the server IF Arma's own official servers didn't contain the same type of lag issues.  To me, player movement (including enemy movement) should be the #1 thing to address in a game like this....but perhaps i am in the minority.

 

Being someone here said Arma 3 is running on a 15 year old platform that kinda makes sense now as to the reason. 

[Wiki 1558]

Cool story bro.

[Janez 531]

Sure but I am yet to see a large scale MP FPS that has bad connection proof "netcode". Battlefield 3 and 4 comes to mind and despite massive improvements trough out BF4's post launch development, there is still a lot of dusting and even rubber banding at longer distances.

That said, there is always room for improvement and Arma 3, for better or worse, is an endless WIP.

[lex__1 422]

21 minutes ago, Janez said:

That said, there is always room for improvement and Arma 3, for better or worse, is an endless WIP.

 

On 03.12.2017 at 8:50 AM, Gunter Severloh said:

its a sandbox which means you can do anything you want, this means you can code the game to your hearts desire, add anything new and make the controls how you want, its been done.

This could be said before the release of Arma3.
Now the presence of problems is broken by new problems, each new update solves several problems, but brings new ones, where they were not there before.
For this reason, people who can easily code and offer new missions, continue the WIP, get tired of this state of affairs.
It's like quiet water, on the surface of which WIP and sandbox, and underwater lives an alligator. Survive only those who know how not to wake the alligator.

[mistyronin 1181]

Odd, I’ve been playing Arma 3 since it was released, at least a couple times a week. And never seen those issues.

 

I tend to play in private servers of milsim communities. 

 

You should report any weird stuff you see in Arma’s official feedback website. Although as someone pointed out before, it’s a game working in an old engine, so don’t expect miracles.

[R0adki11 3949]

 

On 03/12/2017 at 2:31 AM, ginntonic said:

I've given this game every opportunity to be good - and in the end, the fluidity of player movements sucks so badly its just not worth playing.  This game punishes players with good connects and rewards those with bad ones.  I remember playing SOCOM Navy Seals 15+ years ago and that game had WAY better fluidity and it was a console game.  I got my entire clan (just under 100 people from another game) to purchase Arma 3 thinking it was going to be our new go-to game and we all talk about the same issue as to why no one wants to play this game.

 

 

And what is the reason, why none of your group want to play. Maybe if you having that issue, you should look to join a different group that does things differently.

Quote

In conclusion id add that even though most issues are on other game servers, i have to say even the official Arma servers don't solve the issue.  Players and even AI are moon-walking, flying/sliding up/down stairs, walking away after being shot only to fall a couple seconds later, bouncing around the screen, and other things that make this game non-enjoyable to me and my friends.

 

Well i have never experienced this sort of issue in any Arma game. It sounds like you have major issues with your Arma version, your PC or internet connection. As the things you describe are lag/desync issues.

 

 

[462cid 28]

I have not played an online game for years. But when I did, and I saw something strange, I played in SP and adjusted graphics to see if it was supposed to be strange. It was a really great first clue that the issue was the nature of the internet, or the program, or my settings.

 

In the case of the issues reported in this thread, even a guy who hasn't played online games in 12+ years can tell at a glance that the issues are pretty certainly "lag" related.; 'sliding' or 'warping' is a classic symptom. The 'walking away after being shot' is maybe the clearest clue.

 

To OP's point, I find it unreasonable that BI would attempt to put everyone on a level playing field regarding connection quality. This situation is, far from "rewarding" people with good connections, only possible by punishing those same people by downgrading their good connection speeds to that of the slowest one in the game: everyone has the problem then. Fair? OK. Fun for anyone? Probably not. The wisdom of making all customers unhappy versus a minority of them is not clear to me.

 

In 2017, catering to an online player base that is assumed to have poor connection speeds is frankly gaming suicide for the developer, logically. Who in their right mind is looking for a game that does not take advantage of the common good connection the majority of players who are serious enough to continually buy games DLC etc have enjoyed for years? My eighty year old Father has good connection speed; he doesn't even care. That doesn't solve the problem for those who do not, of course. But that situation has been in place since day one of online gaming.

[Tankbuster 1746]

On 03/12/2017 at 2:31 AM, ginntonic said:

Players and even AI are moon-walking, flying/sliding up/down stairs, walking away after being shot only to fall a couple seconds later, bouncing around the screen, and other things that make this game non-enjoyable to me and my friends.

 

 

I don't see any of this. I've been gaming online for decades and I'm familiar with all that you mention (rubber banding and warping were a constant issue in arma 2), but I haven't seen it in arma 3. I suspect your connection is to blame.

[lex__1 422]

In Arma3, this is organized better than it was in Arma2. Now I can play well with a big ping. Now, It increasingly depends on the quality of the server and the mission.

A weak server will not provide a good game, even with a good connection.

[chrisb 196]

I think the seed is 20yrs old now, well the initial work in all seriousness began back then. This is before the company was company, before even the name of the game was mentioned, only in code perhaps, maybe not even that at the start.

 

The series, for me and many others, is the ultimate in military gaming, no other game comes close, not even within radar distance. This is the only game to go too, if realism in military gaming is what your looking for (well as near as a pc can produce).

 

I don't like A3 much, but that is just my view, for me its still got to be A2 + all the dlc's and heavily modded.

One thing that this series has delivered on is game-play realism, if you have the right friends to play the game with, or indeed, play it sp (modded).

 

I don't play the campaigns, I never have, it wasn't why I got into the game in the first place. I/we just wanted something that could give us the excitement and enjoyment we got from the games we were already playing. The games we were playing back then and from the mid 70's were military/strategy board games, then board/pc games. We could build missions in those and build a whole military gaming world, it relied heavily on imagination, but we had plenty of that (still have).

Some pc games had tried, but none came as close as this series.

 

Then came along ofp, o.k. it was interesting, but not enough to pull us away from something we had almost, nailed ourselves too :/

But I watched with interest, tried to convince others in my circles, that we could do something with the editor of this game.

Anyway it took until Arma, to have my friends onboard.

 

That is when the true nature of this game started to really dawn on us as a group of friends and players. This was actually a pc game you could do more with than we even previously thought possible. Such so , that it replaced much of the imagination we had to use, to get that feeling from previous games. There it was onscreen, a full on military gaming world, of our own making (Editor).

We were and still are, blown away by that. Nothing comes close to that feeling in gaming and its all down to the editor for me/us. Not the campaigns or whatever else. Just that editor and the hours in there that I, and many of my friends, have spent, plus enjoyed every minute, even those frustrating ones.

The editor, where dreams are made.

 

The topic's title.. ' arma is a cool idea, but doesn't work'...................................

Well sorry, it works and delivers like no other game made in this genre, certainly for me and my friends and players I know. It delivers in, well.. 'bucket filled delight'..

 

Its a shame it doesn't work for you, but I can only put that down to the fact you may not have immersed yourself in the editor and made that world your dreaming about.

 

Yes, you have to forgive things, many things. But just forgive those things, every game has something wrong with it, there are no real 'perfect' games around. This series has more than its fair share of problems, I'll point many out... No, posts too long already.

 

But I/we forgave everything the game was bad at, because it was good at all the things we needed it to be good at. It excelled in so many things and to think its 20yrs or so for those at the start and coming upto 20yrs for many of the players that play (well not that far away).

 

 

Its not only a good idea, its a 'stunningly' great idea, that just won't really be matched again. I'm speaking from an A2 + dlc's standpoint. Others have thier own view and benchmarks. But most of us will agree, the game was a brilliant idea and even more than that, it was and still is, a game that stands alone, despite its flaws of which there are many. No other game comes close to this series, for me, from any genre.

 

It still stands the test of time. That editor, was a stroke of pure genius. (for me, the older editor, that is ;) )

 

 

Edit: Oh and just to add.. It isn't a game, its a hobby.. ;)

[ginntonic 12]

On 12/6/2017 at 3:37 PM, R0adki11 said:

 

 

And what is the reason, why none of your group want to play. Maybe if you having that issue, you should look to join a different group that does things differently.

 

Well i have never experienced this sort of issue in any Arma game. It sounds like you have major issues with your Arma version, your PC or internet connection. As the things you describe are lag/desync issues.

 

 

 

For those saying they've never experienced anything of what i am talking about  - are you guys simply playing the missions on your own computer?  That is certainly flawless, so what I am talking about here is PvP play on both Arma official servers and some of the most popular servers in the game.

 

There is a youtube personality who specializes in Arma 3 -  named "OperatorDrewski" - who claims about 2,700 hrs in Arma 3 doing all sorts of things.  He talks about the same issues I am talking about all the time and so I am a bit perplexed how this just isn't common knowledge that this game has these problems. This isn't just my computer.

 

Drewski just made a recent video comparing Arma3 to another game coming out and take notice what he says about the character movements starting at 6:00 into the video.  He even does a good job explaining in his comparison on why the issues with Arma3 exist.

 

 

In the video he says about the other game:  "coming around a corner and instantly seeing a US solider fully armed to the teeth with an M4 and sprang at him with my AK-47 its one of the most adrenaline pumping moments of any game i've played to date.  In Arma the combat is usually so awkward, and the moment is so awkward... firefights just lose that sense of deep immersion."

 

I'm not writing this to pump Squad - I dont know anything about the game, I dont own it.  I just think when this guy - who is famous for his Arma 3 experiance - is saying exactly the same things I've experience (as well as my clan) its very interesting.

[R0adki11 3949]

36 minutes ago, ginntonic said:

 

For those saying they've never experienced anything of what i am talking about  - are you guys simply playing the missions on your own computer?  That is certainly flawless, so what I am talking about here is PvP play on both Arma official servers and some of the most popular servers in the game.

 

 

I only predominantly play PvP and have been playing since OFP. Its not an issue i have seen or experienced in any previous BIS game or Arma3. But I may have not seen or experienced it as i play mainly on my community server which is a closed server for only members of the community, though even when I have been on a KOTH server i haven't seen it.

 

Quote

There is a youtube personality who specializes in Arma 3 -  named "OperatorDrewski" - who claims about 2,700 hrs in Arma 3 doing all sorts of things.  He talks about the same issues I am talking about all the time and so I am a bit perplexed how this just isn't common knowledge that this game has these problems. This isn't just my computer.

 

What ive seen of his youtube videos he plays on public over subscribed servers, which may have issues with desync and lag. High player counts on a poorly powered server will give all sorts of issues.

 

There are lots of factors at play when playing in MP, the specification of the server, your internet connection, the servers internet connection, the Arma3 netcode, your team members internet connection, opponents internet connection, your PC specification, distance to the server, your routing to the server, server location etc. All of these are factors in MP games and all have a cause/effect on performance.

[Rich_R 1087]

I've pretty much sat on the sidelines throughout this discussion but the inevitable comparison between squad and Arma will bring me in. Holding this as a standard Arma should aspire too is not fair as its comparing apples to oranges.

 

Squad has smaller maps, less to sync online

Squad usually has fewer players, less to sync online

Squad (to my knowledge) isn't using mod's which majorly affect gameplay

finally, I seem to remember someone posting a comparison of active players and Arma was by far more popular. Interesting considered it's so shitty.

 

That last point is really key. Rather than throwing in your thoughts on how terrible this game is or why 'Arma doesn't work for you', go find a game that is. I'm sure everyone here will respect your decision as much as they have your opinion.

 

After all, I don't stand outside a restaurant I dislike and persistently tell people walking in how much the food sucks:) It's good for them and it's their money.

[lex__1 422]

To derive the maximum pleasure from the game Arma3 it is necessary:
- one or several people who are well knowing a game script
- to create a mission the style of play satisfying yours and logic of a game
- powerful server
In this case you will be able to get rid of a set of questions which disturb you and to involve even more players in a game.
Game always attracted players, but not all paid to a game due attention. The understanding of mechanics of a game and management in a game, for most of players created a problem which can't be solved by someone, only the player, his desire to study it and to adjust management of a game.

 

After such approach, there will be no thought to compare the game Arma to any other game.

[chrisb 196]

I watched the video, well some of it. Not sure he really gets Arma...

 

As comparing Arma to Squad (I don't own squad, but did follow progress for a while).

 

Its like comparing an encyclopedia to a pamphlet. I'll let those that read work out which is which..

[ginntonic 12]

12 hours ago, Rich_R said:

I've pretty much sat on the sidelines throughout this discussion but the inevitable comparison between squad and Arma will bring me in. Holding this as a standard Arma should aspire too is not fair as its comparing apples to oranges.

 

Squad has smaller maps, less to sync online

Squad usually has fewer players, less to sync online

Squad (to my knowledge) isn't using mod's which majorly affect gameplay

finally, I seem to remember someone posting a comparison of active players and Arma was by far more popular. Interesting considered it's so shitty.

 

That last point is really key. Rather than throwing in your thoughts on how terrible this game is or why 'Arma doesn't work for you', go find a game that is. I'm sure everyone here will respect your decision as much as they have your opinion.

 

After all, I don't stand outside a restaurant I dislike and persistently tell people walking in how much the food sucks:) It's good for them and it's their money.

 

Dude...if you think my focal point was to compare Arma to Squad you missed the entire point (see my last statement).  I could care less what Squad does - the only point in posting that video was to bring attention to the fact this "Arma expert" was talking about the same issues I was presenting.  He just happened to be doing so talking about Squad.

 

The one and only question/comment I have is "why is Arma fluidity so bad at short to med range fighting"?...

 

to your: "After all, I don't stand outside a restaurant I dislike and persistently tell people walking in how much the food sucks:) It's good for them and it's their money."....  well, you might very well go on a forum (or Yelp) for that restaurant and mention you don't like the food.  Respectfully, your point made no sense, im not sitting outside Arma's offices telling people not to buy the game.  I'm on their forum they setup to discuss such issues.

[ginntonic 12]

11 hours ago, chrisb said:

I watched the video, well some of it. Not sure he really gets Arma...

 

As comparing Arma to Squad (I don't own squad, but did follow progress for a while).

 

Its like comparing an encyclopedia to a pamphlet. I'll let those that read work out which is which..

 

Please see my comment above.  I am not seeking to compare Arma - just pointing out the part of the video where it talks about the same issues.  However, to counter your example I would say a pamphlet today may have more useful information on a subject than an encyclopedia using 100 year old information.  Some have referenced that Arma 3 is built on a fairly dated engine which causes the problem I am describing.

[Gunter Severloh 4063]

On 12/13/2017 at 3:46 PM, ginntonic said:

are you guys simply playing the missions on your own computer? 

For your question, most of my gameplay is in the editor, hosted mp missions on my computer, and i also rent a gameserver for my group, and we coop vs AI.

 

All our missions are either custom built or from others but tweaked for settings, but aside that i never have once run into such issues, and what we do really cant compare to what your

playing tbh because for us its about 2-5 guys at a time, so fps is pretty good constantly. In arma1 and arma2 however again not really a comparison whole nother version of arma but i did sometimes

see the rubberbanding but that was due mostly to lag, and at the time i was running a lower end computer, and i found the game to be a bit more clunky if you will compared to arma3, arma3 by far imo

compared to the rest of the arma's in the series have very good movement, performance wise from my experience thats on the user's end, server, and mission related.

 

     So really i think the issues with fluidity, and or rubberbanding as its called when there is a lag is mission, and server performance, no one i play with has issues with movement fluidity, as i suggested

before fluidity of control can come down to how you allocate and use your controls, that itself is a game mechanic obviously.

[lex__1 422]

@ginntonic

If I understood correctly, I will put it in other words.
A lot of cares, around one game, in order to play it comfortably. Perhaps this causes the fluidity of the players. Can we hope that BIS will fix this, or not?

 

Yes, there are many worries. You just need to find or rent a server whose power will be proportional to the load in the mission. A good network connection of the server and its power will guarantee a low level of desynchronization in the game.
Unfortunately for most players, I hope, too, it's not for long, but so far the problem is this:
- additional knowledge is required
- additional costs are required
- additional time is required
There are no other options to improve the quality of the game process, except those that were offered in this thread.

 

This position lasts a long time. The game benefits from its originality, scale and flexibility of the playing field, this does not create complete fluidity of the players.