View Full Version : Origin fail ...... best promotion for arma 3?
Since yesterday we see many of bad comments to origin
and many comments sounds like i dosnt buy bf3 because origin is needed to play
here in germany that topic was headlined on Spiegel.de (famous newspaper here)
http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/0,1518,794600,00.html
(at spiegel forums some users try to promote arma 2 already)
and the ratings on amazon is nearly one star only because origin
http://www.amazon.de/EA-Battlefield-3-Limited-Edition/dp/B004M17DVM/ref=pd_ts_zgc_vg_300992_2?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&pf_rd_p=246105527&pf_rd_s=right-4&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_i=301052&pf_rd_m=A3JWKAKR8XB7XF&pf_rd_r=11GY1Q0BZN27PE21J75Y
can bohemia use that fail or what can other devlopers learn from that?
TimRiceSE
Oct 28 2011, 17:39
how is that "promotion" for arma3? because a DRM sucks it doesnt mean that people are going to buy/play ArmA3... especially when Battlefield and ArmA are not at all targetting the same market of gamers...
In addition, its clearly some asshole forum who have decided to rape the ratings on amazon because they dont approve of Origin. not actual genuine reviews of the GAME...
Yeah same thing with the users rating of Cods and such on. On a lot of websites its often something near zero, but the game sells Million and counting..
And when a DLC containing a new weapon is released it always sells good.
How can you blame the game industry for pumping out clone titles and stupid DLC when its clearly such a good move for them?
After all, their main purpose is to make money, not to entertain you..
And if they can get rich by paying some modeler to make a new weapon or map.. Why not? /offtopic.
To answer the OP:
No, I dont think this will be that good for Arma.. The two games satify two different needs. The community went through this discussion a lot of times, also thanks to trolls that keep opening threads like "ShOulD I BuYzor ArMA or BAttflefieldzor 3? Convince Me Nao!1", so I wont say nothing more about that.
Tonci87
Oct 28 2011, 19:14
how is that "promotion" for arma3? because a DRM sucks it doesnt mean that people are going to buy/play ArmA3... especially when Battlefield and ArmA are not at all targetting the same market of gamers...
In addition, its clearly some asshole forum who have decided to rape the ratings on amazon because they dont approve of Origin. not actual genuine reviews of the GAME...
Well if Origin is neede to enjoy BF then... :rolleyes:
Dwarden
Oct 28 2011, 19:16
yet, over all the fail rumours and hate against Origin
the EA stated that around 5 millions users login to the service to play daily
which would make it 2nd biggest online distribution (with complex features) next to STEAM
in total user numbers it's probably now in top 5 or 10 ....
one of reason Origin is success is the title exclusivity and huge EA back-catalogue and actual-catalogue ...
the interesting paradox will arise in moment Activision, Ubisoft and some other publishers try do the same ...
it's known as too many choices paradox ....
Pvt_Ryan
Oct 28 2011, 19:19
Also, though I possess an irrational hate for all those programs like Origin and Steam, it really doesn't matter because most of the issues such players are having with BF3 are technical things that will probably be fixed or improved anyway. The kinds of players that will switch over to ArmA from BF (like myself, when ArmA 3 comes out) are those who are unsatisfied with the direction that the design philosophy of that series is taking, towards more "accessibility" and appeal to the casual masses. So yeah, this is irrelevant, I'm afraid.
Might be taken as a troll post, but it's not; Frankly, am I the only one thinking that if ArmA 3 would focus on large scale combined force battles, instead of Special Forces actions again, it could be a much better choice for a wider amount of gamers, also ones disappointed by BF 3 (those would probably complain about the setting, just like me :P) or searching for "more big battles".
i was thinking if you want to play a shooter with military setup you can chose between arma, cod and bf
and i read sales of cod on console 14 mio and pc 770k? because the dedicated server thing
and now came origin and many people say they wont buy battlefield
so your only choice is arma now
and arma 3 looks in videos much more comfortble then arma 2 it is
so i will hope best for arma
PurePassion
Oct 28 2011, 19:41
http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/I-dont-want-to-live-on-this-planet-anymore-meme.jpg
Money over everything.... FPDR
Might be taken as a troll post, but it's not; Frankly, am I the only one thinking that if ArmA 3 would focus on large scale combined force battles, instead of Special Forces actions again, it could be a much better choice for a wider amount of gamers, also ones disappointed by BF 3 (those would probably complain about the setting, just like me :P) or searching for "more big battles".
I also enjoy wider manouvers to be honest, especially from the commander point of view.
Beacuse thats the only way you can actually understand the situation.:) Even though not understanding totally the situation is part of the fun, according to a lot of people around here! (Meanging that you are just a soldier taking part in something bigger than you, and wich over you have no control)
But what I really want to say is that I dont really know how these kinds of big manouvers would be done in a 2025 environment or if they would even be possible. I know there is still need for boots on the ground, but not having air superiority would be a massive no-go I guess.
Assets are becoming a lot less forgiving.
I guess I'm going offtopic again.
Money over everything.... FPDR
Are you referring to the situation of gaming industry?
CarlGustaffa
Oct 28 2011, 20:10
Never heard of Origin until this thread (not kidding), and it scares me:
http://tos.ea.com/legalapp/WEBPRIVACY/US/en/PC/
and I probably would have failed to read the small text on the cover if I went to a store and bought it.
But I won't buy it, because its SP just seems to have no replayability whatsoever from what I've seen on lets plays, and its MP just doesn't appeal to me, and with no mod support there is no reason whatsoever (most important reason to "invest" in a game for me). Even if I was a "BF fan", this Origin thing, if I was aware of it, would have stopped me from getting it.
Oh well, this is EA, I quit supporting them ages ago, along with many (not all) of my friends. Ubisoft too, but there all of my friends are boycotting them. And never because of bad games, only because of policies to ignore common Privacy Rights (and common decency - a fading word from modern vocabulary).
especially when Battlefield and ArmA are not at all targetting the same market of gamers...
...
I thinnk you'll find that they are both targeting very many of the exact same gamers.
---------- Post added at 09:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:27 PM ----------
Well if Origin is neede to enjoy BF then... :rolleyes:
This is EA's version of Steam I take it?
I'll try anything once. Once I have tried it, I fully expect to be moaning about it incessantly and thinking twice about ever buying anything that uses it in future. (Or at least pricing my distaste into any purchasing decision).
But er... first time = benefit of the doubt. All my life I have been a sucker like that.
TimRiceSE
Oct 28 2011, 21:39
I thinnk you'll find that they are both targeting very many of the exact same gamers.[COLOR="Silver"]
My point was that while there are obvious similarities in the "theme" of the two games - both have guns, vehicles and planes - the similarities dont go much further than that. One is a lot more accessible for quick blasts of fun, whereas the other has a lot more potential for nice long afternoons/evenings of milsim-esque enjoyment...
Its not a "one or the other" choice, I dont see any reason why a lost BF3 customer would equal a new ArmA customer, or vice versa... Surely people can own and actively play more than one game at a time?
Dwarden
Oct 28 2011, 23:34
well there are always alternatives like Desura, ImpulseDriven and Good Old Games ...
but like i tried hint before, too many alternatives pose similar problem as not enough (too low or just monopoly) ...
the market will ofcourse balance itself over time
I'm staying with Take on Helicopters, Arma2 and 3. I like the way BIS does business and they never let the fans down. It's a quality, friendly service unlike the 'mugging at knife point' you get at the hands of the US business model.
Just look at the work being put into the game with the recent beta patches and where else do you get such a great moding community? Every week there is something new going on. I have no complaints.
Sure players might get sick of Origin, and or EA like they have for years yet there is no promotion for ArmA 3 because of that.
Allot of COD, BF players have no interest in ArmA because it isn't a run around get shot, live, blow stuff up game, it's a Military Sim. I have friends that like those games mainly for the get straight into it no real need for thinking factor, for any little exploit they can find to get more kills and medals/rewards.
I personally cant stand the knobs that eventually fill that type of game who ruin it for everyone.
Soul_Assassin
Oct 29 2011, 21:07
really pointless discussion imho
</thread>
Dosenmais
Oct 29 2011, 21:19
Damn i knew it! I had always a big suspect against things as steam and online registration.
am I the only one thinking that if ArmA 3 would focus on large scale combined force battles, instead of Special Forces actions again, it could be a much better choice for a wider amount of gamers, also ones disappointed by BF 3 (those would probably complain about the setting, just like me :P) or searching for "more big battles".
No, you are not.
I too think large-scale, combined ops type stuff would be much better than this OMG-ninja-delta-speshul-forces carp we've been getting from everywhere lately...
No, you are not.
I too think large-scale, combined ops type stuff would be much better than this OMG-ninja-delta-speshul-forces carp we've been getting from everywhere lately...
Maybe the reason we are gettin more OMG-ninja-delta-speshul-forces carp is that ArmA's AI cant really simulate a combat on a lets say even platoon level!
What I mean is:
If we have a platoon on the field (lets say 3 infantry squads,1 weapon squad,HQ) some things became really obvious, like:
-No chain of command
-HQs are just guys with guns and a high rank
-Each squad is on its own and doesnt really reads the situation(ie: enemy contact->go danger->attack without evaluating the situation and enemy forces)
Squads are supposed to be connected togheter and work towards the same objective, having them lying around and doing whatever they feel like doing makes it hard to simulate something bigger than squad level operation.
So maybe, since the squad is the biggest coordinated entity we can have on the field(without scripting or High command?) having this OMG-ninja-delta-speshul-forces carp esulating from any chain of command is what would make more sense?
Anyway, I have to say I never really used the High Command feature in my missions so, I ask you: would it be able to simulate something like this?
Archamedes
Oct 30 2011, 19:48
At the end of the day if you want to play a game thats pretty much an interactive epic movie then COD and BF3 are your games. they are amazing, the grapics are great and it really is like being immersed into a michael bay/john woo film. However if you want a military simulator that isn't restricted and scripted to end the same way every time you play it and have a huge open terrain with the ability to use any vehicle and make you own missions to suit your own, then arma is the way forward. There is nothing wrong with liking both I enjoy both and i dont go all fanboy trying to compare them because you cannot compare them, they are both completely different styles of game. i know everything i have just said is completely offtopic but hey, just saying what i think.
Is BF3 not a well crafted multiplayer then?
That's the key to it for me with these two franchises.
Single Player or Co-op ArmA is a game I want to play, but not PvP and
PvP I want to play Battlefield but not single player or Co-op.
ck-claw
Oct 30 2011, 21:33
Is BF3 not a well crafted multiplayer then?
.
Its what it is -a fooking good blast :cool:
jblackrupert
Oct 30 2011, 22:15
Compared to BC2 or BF1942/BF2/2142?
The flags on the large maps are all clustered together like Rush.
Hello all
Well, I don't think the origin Eula issues will stop many (ie a large percentage of potential buyers) purchasing the game or indeed having a major impact on A3 sales.
The ven diagram of the majority of BF3 users wont cross over to the A3 realm.
I'm not a fan of large (or small!) companies and their draconian Eula's but, as I *have* to agree to Origin to play BF3, then well, I have to take that bitter pill no matter how horrid.
I actually did buy BF3 yesterday (my first games purchase other than Arma/Men of war for a very very long time). And so far Im a happy happy bunny
Iv'e found the whole Origin/Net based server list etc to be a fairly painless affair and although a bit fast paced, I'm adoring the game.
I'd recommend it. It's no Arma, but feels more like Arma:PR to me (on anphetamines).
Rgds
LoK
Compared to BC2 or BF1942/BF2/2142?
The flags on the large maps are all clustered together like Rush.
Smaller maps or just more flags?
Pfffrt, people complain when you have to "run 10 mins to get to the action", people complain when "i spawn in the middle of a fire fight and die".
Cant please them all...
Innomadic
Oct 31 2011, 20:45
At the end of the day if you want to play a game thats pretty much an interactive epic movie then COD and BF3 are your games.
Honestly, i think MGS and Uncharted take the title here. CoD and BF3 are hardly "movie" quality.
jblackrupert
Oct 31 2011, 21:12
Smaller maps or just more flags?
I haven't played it but I've been reading the maps are generaly as large as BF2 and the same number of flags but there are clustered very close together.
Hello all
Well, I don't think the origin Eula issues will stop many (ie a large percentage of potential buyers) purchasing the game or indeed having a major impact on A3 sales.
I know I couldnt care less if they salvaged some useless crap info from my computer in case I bought Bf3.
jblackrupert
Oct 31 2011, 21:21
Have the people concerned about the EULA on Origin bothered to read the ones
for other apps they have installed?
I'm betting most of them are very similar, the only difference is everyone is paying attention to it because it's EA and a new game release.
Have the people concerned about the EULA on Origin bothered to read the ones for other apps they have installed?
Exactly. I don't even read them... I have from Autocad to Photoshop and everything in between installed on my systems, I need them, so I click 'I agree'
nettrucker
Nov 1 2011, 08:12
Maybe the reason we are gettin more OMG-ninja-delta-speshul-forces carp is that ArmA's AI cant really simulate a combat on a lets say even platoon level!
What I mean is:
If we have a platoon on the field (lets say 3 infantry squads,1 weapon squad,HQ) some things became really obvious, like:
-No chain of command
-HQs are just guys with guns and a high rank
-Each squad is on its own and doesnt really reads the situation(ie: enemy contact->go danger->attack without evaluating the situation and enemy forces)
Squads are supposed to be connected togheter and work towards the same objective, having them lying around and doing whatever they feel like doing makes it hard to simulate something bigger than squad level operation.
So maybe, since the squad is the biggest coordinated entity we can have on the field(without scripting or High command?) having this OMG-ninja-delta-speshul-forces carp esulating from any chain of command is what would make more sense?
Anyway, I have to say I never really used the High Command feature in my missions so, I ask you: would it be able to simulate something like this?
Yes!!!!! . . . with High command you can simulate somthing like this.
I've just been reading the amazon.de user reviews page.
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Famzn.to%2Fu2yTQL
I have to say it's a cracker!
It's making me grin from ear to ear.
Maybe I won't be buying this game after all.
Or maybe I can buy it for a friend and just play it on his computer!
Hahahaha.
[ASA]ODEN
Nov 3 2011, 07:35
Since Origin is a Trojan/Virus how can I verify I got rid of it?
Uninstalled and threw the DVD out the balcony but will I need to reinstall all 5 computers in my household?
Fuck I hate this kinda shit.
Maybe I should get avast! to trigger on Origin install :)
Next time the kids wants something from EA I'll just throw $50 out the door and tell them to go out play cowboys and indians.
Herbal Influence
Nov 3 2011, 07:56
I am quite optimistic that Bohemia got new fans during the uproar against Battlefield. Why?
Because there are a lot people, mostly over 25 years old, who are annoyed by fast pace run n' shoot, but like Arma2/AO for the possibility of stratetic long term planning/"programming" with editor and scripts. This sounds more serious to many.
Second, the privacy invasion of Origin is deemed to be illegal, which makes even more clear that it's not a serious company.
I personally do like the graphics of BF3 but I don't like the extreme amount of "head up display" - information which makes me feel like in an 1-Euro-per-game-arcade shooter. I don't like crosshairs etc.
I don't like the multimillion dollar marketing of EA, makes me very suspicious for good reasons.
On the other hand Bohemia acts like a newbie in terms of Marketing: Even though I play BIS games since 2001 I couldn't spontaneously answer whether you need Arma2 or only OA to enjoy online multiplayer gaming at the moment .... lost in diversion.
And though I like missions, mods, addons, new islands a lot ... at the moment it is quite (in marketing terms: "much too!") difficult for a newbie to find an agreeable choice of online missions / servers.
which makes even more clear that it's not a serious company.
Apart from the little bit where they turn over more profit in a month than BIS does in a year :j:
I personally do like the graphics of BF3 but I don't like the extreme amount of "head up display" - information which makes me feel like in an 1-Euro-per-game-arcade shooter. I don't like crosshairs etc.
And "Hardcore" mode switches it all off...
The origin thing is unfortunate, but with ~5 million active users at any one time, its hardly going to be the death of the BF series.
Given the lack of advertising for ArmA compared to BF, I hardly see how the usual nerdrage (anyone remember the "boycott MW2" steam groups? 40,000+ members for most of them, and after the release, a good 80% of every group: "currently ingame: CoD: MW2") which often goes along with actually buying and playing the game is suddenly going to make A3 a multi-million seller.
Sad, but true...
Is true that many people at least took a glimpse at Arma after BF3 turned out to be a quite fast paced shooter.
I dont know how many of them will enjoy the game and stay with it.
But I know one Thing for sure: If Arma 3 turns out to be a good and interesting game, without the usual bugfest at release, then many people will buy it! There are many players who enjoy good Coop with big Maps, vehicels and realism.
Problem is that many of them don´t know that Arma would be the perfect game for them.
BTW there are many people complaining that you can go prone now. They are upset that some hidden prone sniper kills them if they rush blindly to the enemy lines, calling people that take up defensive positions and go prone campers. Isn´t a sniper a camper per definition? Now I know why I like Arma....
Is true that many people at least took a glimpse at Arma after BF3 turned out to be a quite fast paced shooter.
What la-la-land are you living in?
BF was ALWAYS going to be a "fast paced" shooter, always has been, always will be.
As for proof of "many people looking at arma", I dont see that many new forum joins or community peoples, what evidence are you basing this on? Or is it just wild speculation?
Hi. IMHO if BIS added Domination, Capture the Flag, Search & Destroy (aka Counter-Strike style), Team Deathmatch, ... as built-in multiplayer modes + _maps_ (arenas?) designed for such modes + some official public servers many of CoD/BF3 kids would find ARMA3 more interesting (including me). There is a big potential for it and the realistic nature of ARMA doesn't change that. While my colleagues at work like BF3 they're disappointed by flashy UI (eg. fireworks on screen for every bullshit), WoW-like leveling and idiot Xbox mini-games (tap spacebar quickly). As old-school gamers we fail to understand how can someone appreciate such idiocy (it is _killing_ omfg!). BIS know how to do these things properly. One bullet to kill doesn't take away good gameplay. There is a _huge_ amount (majority?) of non-empty _hardcore_ CoD:MW servers.
EDIT: I can imagine playing de_dust2 in ARMA3 ;). By CTF I mean some mid-scale CTF like in UT2004 (with vehicles of course).
EDIT2: I'm not trying to say "zomg plz BIS make arma3 more accessible like BF3", but rather keep it like BIS & community like it and add those PvP mods/arenas.
What la-la-land are you living in?
BF was ALWAYS going to be a "fast paced" shooter, always has been, always will be.
As for proof of "many people looking at arma", I dont see that many new forum joins or community peoples, what evidence are you basing this on? Or is it just wild speculation?
Ok I didn´t really choose the appropriate words. I meant to say that it turned even more into a run and gun game where you don´t really have to think about tactics at all, in comparison to BF2.
People looking at Arma is something that affects the german community since many people feel offended by Origin and look for an alternative
Hi. IMHO if BIS added Domination
please no...
Capture the Flag, Search & Destroy (aka Counter-Strike style), Team Deathmatch, ... as built-in multiplayer modes + _maps_ (arenas?) designed for such modes + some official public servers many of CoD/BF3 kids would find ARMA3 more interesting (including me).
All above mods are possible in BIS games.
So you would want small scale maps for such gamemods, limiting the gameplay to corridor/narrow areas instead of being able to flank, go around and come from behind as it is possible with playing over a smaller area with all the terrain at your disposal?
Oh btw, there are no official servers for A2 for a reason. I am pretty sure BIS will NOT provide such servers or interfere with the community in any way. If you like, every server out there is official. I would actually be dissapointed if it would be any different.
EDIT: I can imagine playing de_dust2 in ARMA3 ;).
well i don't.
By CTF I mean some mid-scale CTF like in UT2004 (with vehicles of course).
Already possible. Your point is?
EDIT2: I'm not trying to say "zomg plz BIS make arma3 more accessible like BF3", but rather keep it like BIS & community like it and add those PvP mods/arenas.
Why would you like arenas dude? All those PvP modes are possible in A2. The main reason this game is not embraced all that much by PvP community is the slower pace and the dodgy controls and some of the animations. That's about it. why would you like BIS to put in gamemods that would actually reduce A3 to CS with more realistic ballistics, damage models and vehicles?
I think he suggests that BIS includes those Gamemodes by default, like Warfare. Its then up to the server Admins to decide if they want to host it
DMarkwick
Nov 3 2011, 11:41
More missions of all kinds cannot be a bad thing :) As long as they can be categorised easily enough.
So you would want small scale maps for such gamemods, limiting the gameplay to corridor/narrow areas instead of being able to flank, go around and come from behind as it is possible with playing over a smaller area with all the terrain at your disposal?
Oh btw, there are no official servers for A2 for a reason. I am pretty sure BIS will NOT provide such servers or interfere with the community in any way. If you like, every server out there is official. I would actually be dissapointed if it would be any different.
Why would you like arenas dude? All those PvP modes are possible in A2. The main reason this game is not embraced all that much by PvP community is the slower pace and the dodgy controls and some of the animations. That's about it. why would you like BIS to put in gamemods that would actually reduce A3 to CS with more realistic ballistics, damage models and vehicles?
You know even de_dust2 can be played smartly. But I didn't mean just small arenas. There is a more players out there that likes to play matches like in Counter-Strike (eg. mostly PvP modes) then players in BIS community (eg. mostly coops). That's my whole point. If you want BIS to grow and add more interesting features over time (like component-driven damage) then you want them to get shitload of money even from such players. Compared to existing features of ARMA2 such stuff can't be that complicated to add. And you can completely ignore those players. As I said, slow paced nature of ARMA3 doesn't prohibit such gameplay
Already possible. Your point is?
Sorry I didn't know. I only played CWC & Resistance. My PC unfortunately can't handle ARMA2 so I'm waiting for ARMA3. Then I'll buy buy GT590 and so on ;).
EDIT: By the way: Why do you resist on adding modes (Dmoniation) which you will not be playing?
I meant to say that it turned even more into a run and gun game where you don´t really have to think about tactics at all, in comparison to BF2.
But it didn't?
Sure you can rambo around on your own, but you will always be more effective if you work together as a squad.
A few examples I've had recently:
3 or 4 people working together to form an AA squad. 2 or 3 engies with AA and one support with the ammo, nothing was able to even take off... Achieved total air supremacy. Cant do that on your own.
3 or 4 people working together to form a mortar squad. 2 or 3 support with mortars, one recon as spotter. Can dominate areas of ground and deny it to the enemy. Not possible on your own.
2 full squads working together with tanks (1 squad as vehicle crew, one as infantry) and you can crush an opposing force (typically you have an engie as the 2nd seat in the vehicle who can jump out and rep)
Then you have the simple squad tactics... More often than not, I will lead my squad away from the meat grinder (on conquest at least) and flank around to cap all the unguarded points - its SO simple and often wins us the round.
It really isnt that dumbed down. Streamlined and perfected maybe, dumbed down, not so much. (Haters gonna hate and all that)
I canceled my Mass Effect 3 pre-order @<hidden> Amazon because of Origin.
Origin is not even compatible with German law, as long they tread their customers like that, they can keep their Games for themselves.
Arma III will be fun.
Hellfire257
Nov 3 2011, 20:32
DM, where are you playing? I can't find anyone interested in squad play so far.
Why would you like arenas dude?
Because PvP is a gametype worthy of custom maps.
If you design a limited Arena then you can set the pace of the gameplay.
Herd the gamers into hotspots and choke points where there will be lots of action.
Provide a limited number of approaches so that tactics can be countered and like chess, the moves and strategies can be learnt.
Stage the fights into zones so every dog has his day. The guy who likes to snipe has a spot he owns, the CQB guy has spot he owns, the tank guy the bazooka guy.. every dog has his day.
And then you can play games instead of simulations.
You can optimise the map layout to reduce bandwidth spiking.
You can even have higher res/higher FPS scenery.
Arena's are fun.
If you play chess on an infinite sized board, the opposing pieces will never meet.
The arenas they make in games like BF and Enemy Territory are really high generation level design.
I think the ease of the interface is another big one. Being able to change role or equipment intuatively and fast. Spawn point etc.
TimRiceSE
Nov 4 2011, 06:57
But it didn't?
Sure you can rambo around on your own, but you will always be more effective if you work together as a squad.
A few examples I've had recently:
3 or 4 people working together to form an AA squad. 2 or 3 engies with AA and one support with the ammo, nothing was able to even take off... Achieved total air supremacy. Cant do that on your own.
3 or 4 people working together to form a mortar squad. 2 or 3 support with mortars, one recon as spotter. Can dominate areas of ground and deny it to the enemy. Not possible on your own.
2 full squads working together with tanks (1 squad as vehicle crew, one as infantry) and you can crush an opposing force (typically you have an engie as the 2nd seat in the vehicle who can jump out and rep)
Then you have the simple squad tactics... More often than not, I will lead my squad away from the meat grinder (on conquest at least) and flank around to cap all the unguarded points - its SO simple and often wins us the round.
It really isnt that dumbed down. Streamlined and perfected maybe, dumbed down, not so much. (Haters gonna hate and all that)
QFT.
I usually play wiht 2-3 friends and we hop into a squad together. Like you said about tanks, if we all get into tanks and have engineers to repair then we're pretty unstoppable... Ace squad more often than not. Youre right about the meatgrinder thing. 90% of the people dont try flanking, but if you manage to get a good position with a couple of squadmates, you can clean up and win very quickly.
At the end of the day you get people playing rambo in any game, ArmA included. Play with people you know and itll be more fun. Or in the worst case you can rant to them about the rest of the team on voice chat ;D
I guess you can either play the game for what it is and have a blast and enjoy it, or just sit around writing crap in forums because its not what you want it to be....
A couple of the maps are kinda crap though. My pet hate is the map with basejumping, on rush.
DM, where are you playing? I can't find anyone interested in squad play so far.
Its not where (we play anywhere with good ping) but who you play with.
My pet hate is the map with basejumping, on rush.
Op Metro on conquest, now theres a dumb map :yay:
TimRiceSE
Nov 4 2011, 10:20
haha, especially 64 player. but theres just something so delicious about mortaring a chokepoint and killing 5-10 people....
Because PvP is a gametype worthy of custom maps.
If you design a limited Arena then you can set the pace of the gameplay.
Herd the gamers into hotspots and choke points where there will be lots of action.
Provide a limited number of approaches so that tactics can be countered and like chess, the moves and strategies can be learnt.
Stage the fights into zones so every dog has his day. The guy who likes to snipe has a spot he owns, the CQB guy has spot he owns, the tank guy the bazooka guy.. every dog has his day.
And then you can play games instead of simulations.
You can optimise the map layout to reduce bandwidth spiking.
You can even have higher res/higher FPS scenery.
Arena's are fun.
If you play chess on an infinite sized board, the opposing pieces will never meet.
The arenas they make in games like BF and Enemy Territory are really high generation level design.
I think the ease of the interface is another big one. Being able to change role or equipment intuatively and fast. Spawn point etc.
I really don´t know why you play Arma....
Because PvP is a gametype worthy of custom maps.
PvP is JUST another gametype. I fail to see why you can't play PvP on the same type of maps. I know i did, and had no issues myself. Why would one want CS/COD sized maps for PvP is beyond me.
If you design a limited Arena then you can set the pace of the gameplay.
You can do that without needing an new tiny island altogether.
Herd the gamers into hotspots and choke points where there will be lots of action.
Yeah well, i don't really liked to be herded....
Provide a limited number of approaches so that tactics can be countered and like chess, the moves and strategies can be learnt.
Maybe some of us want to actually use their heads and improvise rather than learn a certain map by heart and play it the same time in the same way.
Stage the fights into zones so every dog has his day. The guy who likes to snipe has a spot he owns, the CQB guy has spot he owns, the tank guy the bazooka guy.. every dog has his day.
A good PvP mission does that without NEEDING a so called arena
Arena's are fun.
If you play chess on an infinite sized board, the opposing pieces will never meet.
The arenas they make in games like BF and Enemy Territory are really high generation level design.
I disagree. No one says you need the entire thing to stage a PvP game. But one should be allowed to go around the fighting and FLANK rather than go straight into the slaughter, just because the other lad wants to play CS using RV engine...
I think the ease of the interface is another big one. Being able to change role or equipment intuatively and fast. Spawn point etc.
Again, that has nothing to do with the size of the map.
haha, especially 64 player. but theres just something so delicious about mortaring a chokepoint and killing 5-10 people....
that's such a deal breaker for me. it just feel wrong on some maps with 2 mortars on each side...I usually set a task to knife those mortar lads right from the begining.
I really don´t know why you play Arma....
He doesn't, he plays dr and comes here just to troll...
I really don´t know why you play Arma....
Not for it's PvP obviously.
---------- Post added at 02:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:35 PM ----------
I disagree. No one says you need the entire thing to stage a PvP game. But one should be allowed to go around the fighting and FLANK rather than go straight into the slaughter, just because the other lad wants to play CS using RV engine...
A good arena provides for all these things. It also provides for the illusion of being able to go anywhere you want to.
How often did you find yourself bumping the edge of a map in Battlefield?
When did you find yourself unable to flank anything you wanted to in Quake Wars?
A good PvP game does not have Flanking or Blitz, it has both and in abundance. And more! So that no matter what you want you can always find it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.