Campaign show-stoppers

[hit-man 0]

Hi,

i don't care for any little bugs in the game and don't want to start another bug-list here. I just like to have your opinions on my personal "show-stoppers" when playing the first missions of the campaign:

1) Enemy AI don't act realistic. They detect you and react instantly and all shoot like expert riflemen with sniper-rifles.

2) AI-teammates don't act realistic: As in mission "Sanitary Operation", the "highly trained" soldiers just walk straight up the mainstreet until contact and get shot one after one ? They don't seek cover or show any sign of strategy. (By the way, Bravo-team never attacked the city, they kept waiting close by ?)

3) Level-design / Realism is to be improved:

- in aux-mission "Sniper+Convoy", you are forced like a WWII-sniper to climb up that tower and are trapped in a restricted,

very small AO, otherwise you loose the mission.

-in aux-mission "Hotel", i just closed on the hotel, not one shot fired, when all objectives got ticked off? I looked at the building and saw the officer dead on the ground ?

4) You start nearly all missions with time-pressure, what i think is not realistic. As the player could use "time-acceleration", we could have some more minutes before the enemy shows up.

What dou you think ?

[Guest Ti0n3r]

I agree on all your points. I think poor mission design is a big part of the problem. Hopefully QG will be better in terms of realistic missions, since there is no hope left for the ArmA campaign if you ask me ._.

[hit-man 0]

Yes, today, i would say, the mission-design is taking the fun out. Technically, with the latest patch, imho, ArmA looks very nice and runs fast and stable.

Yesterday i realized that none of the campaign-missions end properly ?

[Cormega 0]

Same here, I just played the "Battlefield" mission, where you play as the SLA and we went thru and liberated the town, but my Team leader kept freaking out and going prone, eventually i realized I could just run to the next waypoint in the base, and got the Mission Complete message... I noticed the AI acting very strange, WHY?

[hit-man 0]

Yesterday, the mission when the marines arrive, in the mission-plan were just no links to the map ? I had no idea where i was when the mission started ?

It seems to me, that when they made the master-dvd of the game, they took any beta of the campain by mistake ?

Isn't it tough ? When i wouldn't know that we, the community, can create fantastic missions with it, i would simply send the game back to my dealer!

[CanadianTerror 0]

Quote[/b] ]-in aux-mission "Hotel", i just closed on the hotel, not one shot fired, when all objectives got ticked off? I looked at the building and saw the officer dead on the ground?

I had that happen the other day.

What gets me is bugs like that make it through all these patches.

I mean, didnt someone actually play the campaign when they made it?

[Acecombat 0]

I agree on all your points. I think poor mission design is a big part of the problem. Hopefully QG will be better in terms of realistic missions, since there is no hope left for the ArmA campaign if you ask me ._.

But the question still remains. Why is this game so buggy? I thought BIS would have learnt something from the OFP era. But it seems the beta testing just didnt happen maybe they were just hurrying the product out for reasons i dont know considering the fact that we kept hearing about delays before the release and all and talks of Quality before Early release .

I was thorougly disappointed after going through ArmA. I was all hyped up but the game has disappointed on several fronts. It has the potential but this is not the way it was meant to be showcased and brought to the world. Once again sales will be lost due to a poor 1st release, even if Queens gambit comes out and is blockbuster in terms of quality and all ...

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Yeah you're right about sales being lost due to the poor first (European) releases. But it was the same with OFP (where I live at least). I think I was the only one I knew back then who bought the game the day it came out. All my other friends got it + Resistance around the time of its release, mostly due to the good reviews.

If QG is as good as Resistance was back then, maybe it will make up for the sales "lost" when ArmA was first released. I've got hope

[hit-man 0]

I guess everbody knows that the companys have a financial pressure to release the games. But in every business quality is the only thing that matters. Maybe some people learn their lesson now.

Even if it seems so, i still cant believe that the campaign was not properly tested by some non-BIS players. I still wonder (and hope) if there isn't any other technical reason for the many bugs ?

Some mor little things that are strange:

-With my M4 only, i rarely see the enemy early enough when i'm advancing. Shouldn't binoculars be standard equipment ? But day or night, i always got my NV-goggles ?

-When i change to move "slow" / walk, my breathing gets stronger like i'm running

[ColonelSandersLite 0]

I guess everbody knows that the companys have a financial pressure to release the games. But in every business quality is the only thing that matters. Maybe some people learn their lesson now.

I've heard this a lot. However, it's strongly implied that if BIS didn't release when they did with the game in the state it was, it wouldn't have gotten released at all. In life, your often presented with a major obstacle and circumstances negate any of the ideal solutions. Anyways, here's one interview where that was said.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=164427

Particularly these lines:

Quote[/b] ]

DEVELOPMENT HELL

Spanel: We released the game before Christmas in eastern and central Europe. The reason for this was simple: we ended up on our own with regards to everything. We're not a big company, and we had to release in order to get some income, it's as simple as that. There are sometimes not many choices you can make, it's either 'do something or do nothing'. We're completely independent developers and we didn't find a way to agree with any big publishers. A year ago, nobody believed in the game at all.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Its all a bit like having your teeth pulled.

I mean I'm thankfull that the game was released, and the patches so far have made great improvements, but you'd think after selling a few they'd find a moment to fix some of the more glaring mission problems.

After deciding to give the Campaign a go today I went through all that hit-man pointed out earlier but finaly gave up when in the battle of Somato I'm supposed to command a squad at night, and I'm the only one not equiped with NVG???

not to mention No2 who replies roger to every command but remains glued to the spot.

I'm done with pulling out my hair. I think I'll stick to MP and community made stuff.

[hit-man 0]

I'm nearly finished with the campaign and at least there were two missions i really enjoyed. After all i think we all can still believe in the game and what we can make of it. But if you can say that the campaign is "the game" you buy, then the "level-designer" should be fired. IMHO the bad campaign-missions have less technical failures to be patched, than just a lot of stupid mistakes in the design! And this after the whole experience with OFP ?

Anyway, i look forward to our own privately made missions in the future.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

I finished the campaign a couple of days ago... Damn the ending was confusing

[Sevan 0]

I've said this before in other threads about the campign.

the campign is very dissappointing. the chief reason being highly unrealistic mission design.

[Beagle 684]

So called "realistic mission design" could be quite boring.

It's like in most combat flight sims or Tank Sims, where the player get' at leasts 100fold the action a real pilot would face in his whole career.

Just remember: in vietnam a lot of the regular army soldiers never scored a confirmed kill...like in WWII oder Korea and on and on...!

After Completing ust the single missions you have kills counting like:

18 Officers

124 Riflemen

29 RPG soldiers

22 x Ural

7 T-72

16 BMP2

7 Shilka

2 UAZ MG

etc.

"Realistic" would be something like 2 BMPs, 1 T-72, 1 Shilka some trucks and 15 men....for a whole lifetime career as Infantrieman.

Why ?... because ArmA A.I.won't surrender, retreat, flee or desert.

They will not even take cover when fired upon or just put in the reverse gear on their Vehicles.