View Full Version : One question that MANY fans care about.
Well ArmA had a very important problem. The PvP part of the game, there was absoloutely no PvP.
There where only some PvP maps that had serious bugs, like Sector Control where in the OpFor when you died you couldn't respawn. Anyway those maps where bodge. Ofp and ArmA need some maps in order to promote the PvP part of the game (warefare is totaly no PvP). A PvP mode that will introduce the gameplay of Battlefield2 with the mix of the realism of ArmA. In order to have a succeded game you have to draw the intrest of people playing it, so they will keep playing it and buying expansion packs (unlike that of Queens Gambit).
When I see interviews all I see all is talking about Warefare. Well warefare has no intrest of playing in a pro gaming level (where is all the fun if you ask me http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif ).
The way to draw attention of big organizations like ESL to launch cups, ladders etc is to have competition. Whoever doesnt like this kind of gameplay can still play warefare and evoloution no.4324320
So still we (and i speak behalf a big number of ArmA and OFP fans) want to know will the game finnaly support PvP modes? Or we ll have to wait again for individuals to make crappy maps in order to play the game, if we are going to get it finnaly.
The ESL mappack, what the pvp community wants:
http://rapidshare.de/files/41317823/esl_mappack_v1.zip.html
Pulverizer
Jan 7 2009, 09:15
Quote[/b] ]gameplay of Battlefield2 with the mix of the realism of ArmA
Isn't BF2 Project Reality mod exactly that?
Or Berzerk mission for ArmA?
[APS]Gnat
Jan 7 2009, 11:19
(and i speak behalf a big number of ArmA and OFP fans)
Um, how did you work that out?
Quote[/b] ]A PvP mode that will introduce the gameplay of Battlefield2 with the mix of the realism of ArmA.
Sorry .... seems to me like trying to mix oil with water.
Sure BF2 may have attracted some short and intense attention, but I think like OFP, ArmA and ArmA2 are for a different demographic.
Theres also plenty of flexibility in ArmA, if people wanted PvP (or someones idea of what they think PvP is) then it has been or can be made into a mission any time.
Gnat @<hidden> Jan. 07 2009,13:19)]
(and i speak behalf a big number of ArmA and OFP fans)
Um, how did you work that out?
Quote[/b] ]A PvP mode that will introduce the gameplay of Battlefield2 with the mix of the realism of ArmA.
Sorry .... seems to me like trying to mix oil with water.
Sure BF2 may have attracted some short and intense attention, but I think like OFP, ArmA and ArmA2 are for a different demographic.
Theres also plenty of flexibility in ArmA, if people wanted PvP (or someones idea of what they think PvP is) then it has been or can be made into a mission any time.
Frist GNAT sarcasm is not contributing and not constructive.
Fist of all in order to make something work it needs to be OFFICIAL. If there are not OFFICIAL made maps they don't get popular and new comers to the game get bored and drop it, to honest i think it even discourages people from playing the game. About berzerk maps I won't say anything more than that they are only for public fun use and having fun, you can't arrange a match on in clan level in those. Also when I ment BF2 mix with ArmA I ment the realism of ArmA with the zone control of BF2 but made in a way that 5vs5 will be possible, Berzerk doesnt allow that and they are not official too.
All successful on-line games had official pvp maps.
I can show you many leagues, Cups and Tournaments in ArmA that like that part of PvP (C&H, Hold Location, CTF etc) if you want to put it that way here are some I can think of http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif
http://virtual-battle-league.info/
http://www.arma-liga.de/
http://www.european-combat-league.com/
www.esl.eu (the most popular PvP maps where made here and are used by many organizations modified)
http://www.owl.st/
www.armedassault.gr
What are all those people doing there (add the fact that ArmA is dieing due to the fact of anticipation of ArmA2)? You can see its a very big number of ArmA players, not adding other gamers, who want to come to this game or generaly enjoy this type of gameplay.
I am not a fan of BF2 my xfire says i ve played less than 24 hours in total.
Project reality is again not an official project and its not ArmA.
and many others that I can post here if I want.
These are my thoughts.
About want you people might think of whats PvP cause Warefare is PvP and pacman is also PvP of who will get the highest score. I ment about gameplay noone who likes to play a 1 hour quick match based on skill and tactics (check again ESL or even ECL maps) to see what I mean, will NEVER on earth try to play warefare, also warefare would also not be played by a new-comer to ArmA that comes from other Action-Fps games from where most people come.
Not all fans of ArmA love the military (not going to use any other expression http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif ).
Or care about addons.
Pulverizer
Jan 7 2009, 18:05
What's it matter if it's official when you download missions automatically from server anyway. As if BIS knew how to make better PvP missions than the actual PvP players http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
I think the lack of PvP play is because ArmA simply isn't a fitting engine for fast paced run'n'gun'n'shot'u'right'in'the'face'lol action. And not because there weren't good official missions.
funnyguy1
Jan 7 2009, 19:31
I really don't know why shouldn't they include real PvP in ArmA2. It would really attract a lot of ppl. It's a matter of better out of the box PvP missions, and that's it. I play bf vietnam with my friends recently (a lot during xmas) because they hate ArmA, and all that time I think: wow, how cool would it be...And I'm einhundert % sure guys I play with would enjoy it if only ArmA had some kind of decent bf-ish type of PvP, with all of ArmA's features and realism!
Commando84
Jan 7 2009, 19:37
isn't ware pvp? i think warefare is one of the best mixes of pvp with coop elements. with the right people it can be pvp but its on a large scale, maybe if there where light, medium and large versions of warefare maybe?
BeerHunter
Jan 7 2009, 20:26
"One question that MANY fans care about"
Don't really think so. A few maybe.
If you want PvP my god there's tons of them out there , from DoD through BF2 up to CoD5 to name but a few.
If you want good co-op , there are very few that offer the opportunity.
Don't understand why you would be so concerned about PvP with ArmedA since that would degrade it to a CoD clone and IMO , the ONLY fascination with PvP is to see how many kills you can rack up before you go down.
Co-op OTH , offers the opportunity to work as a team with friends to complet a mission by supporting and assisting rather than running aorund blowing things up.
Besides , PvP servers , for the most part are simply breeding grounds where idiots congregate .
Infam0us
Jan 7 2009, 21:09
Why is it that only "idiots" and "morons" play PvP. Perhaps playing PvP is much better than Coop, take for instance the tournament I play at IC ArmA.
We average about 40vs40 players weekly in battle and for those 3 hours it is better than any Coop you play, as actual human players react, and use tactics a lot better than the AI does in Coop.
Yes ArmA is a simulator, and also does Coop well but I don't like it when everyone assumes that PvP is just about the frags. Imagine playing a Coop but your enemy's are actual gamers instead of the shoddy ArmA AI. But then again I suppose I'll be shot down for making such remarks http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
[APS]Gnat
Jan 7 2009, 21:45
Fist of all in order to make something work it needs to be OFFICIAL. If there are not OFFICIAL made maps they don't get popular and new comers to the game get bored and drop it
Bull-Dust ! ! !
What was CTI in OFP .... its was one of THE biggest ongoing used mission type in OFP ....... was it "official" ? No it bloody well wasn't.
Quote[/b] ]Frist GNAT sarcasm is not contributing and not constructive.
LOL .... well I took your use of the word "MANY" as sarcasm.
@<hidden>
"If you want PvP my god there's tons of them out there , from DoD through BF2 up to CoD5 to name but a few."
But we like ArmAs' gameplay?
"Co-op OTH , offers the opportunity to work as a team with friends to complet a mission by supporting and assisting rather than running aorund blowing things up."
I don't find it intresting killing bots, you can also work as a team play a 5vs5 match and that is much more exciting if you ask me its a matter of taste.
"Besides , PvP servers , for the most part are simply breeding grounds where idiots congregate."
What if I say the same thing for coop servers? This of course is very sad to hear from anyone, underestimate people that have not the same tastes as him. I can find many things to tell to coop players like they dont like getting pwnd for instance. But the point is that arma has warefare which is nice if you play coop its also nice if you like a mix of pvp and coop but if you like to play C&H or CTF types of maps you won't choose to play this one.
I don't get why coop ArmA players dont want ArmA2 to have more PvP support from BIS, seriously i don't care about addons and I won't play antything that includes AI and many others too. ArmA already has Coop and many mods about AI (FFN was top and if you add ACE with it you have a great game).
About talking behalf PvP ArmAs' community its easy to see that orginized PvP clans are more than coop hm... teams? squads? friends? Or whatever its a matter of taste if you read my fist post BeerHunter you will se many organizations that support PvP play.
@<hidden>
You don't get my point. Yes warefare might be good but still its a matter of taste, I personaly don't like warefare, others do. The point is that many people like me will never play Warefare like you for instance won't play berzerk.
Thats what i say is what funnyguy1 says too. I bought the game with many of friends from OFP-Counter-Strike and Rts scene like my but after a while they got bored of the game cause we there weren't any maps to play a match with another team, there werent even public maps.
@<hidden>
Well i don't want to play that kind of map, thats you don't understand, its a matter of taste, you might enjoy it I and many other people don't.
Counter-Strike official PvP maps like De_dust2 or BF strike at karhad what was the name? Or Q3DM7 for Quake 3, Two Faces for Unreal Tournamet. Who doesnt know these maps? They were included when the game was launched and they were used in public and clanmatches.
What you dont get is that in order to arrange a map with more than 5 people is hard, clans tend to be at that numver in every game.
My opinion:
I don't really like all that mass-attracting missions like Warefare, CTI, Evolution, Domination, etc... They and the most players playing them, feeling similar like "Senseless Deathmatch" in their matureness to me. Even though the Scripting and stuff behind them is surely very impressing.
(Please don't feel offended creators, you surely have done a awesome job for many players, but its my personaly opinion and i'm personally rather addicted to respawn-less teamplay, which can't really be found in any of those missions http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif )
I love respawn-less Coop missions or big PvP missions of similar "matureness" with focus on maximum teamplay, especially ACE-Powered and played on closed Servers or Teamplay Focus Servers like from "GOL-Clan" or "Tacticalgamer.com" Servers.
But, i don't really get the topic of this topic.... where is the problem?
Everyone can make great PvP maps.... The Editor+Scripting+Usermade Islands gives you nearly endless possibilities.....
Hello there,
The games by BIS are of the sandbox type. While they do offer content for introduction and to serve as examples , the main thing you buy and the main reason people buy is because you get a set of functionality to set up your own game. Your own mods,your own islands,your own units,your own scripts,your own missions.
You and your friends seem to have misunderstood that and believed it to be a content-based game. It is certainly not.
Luckily for you since the game modes you and your many friends are into are CTF,DM and derived game types have very very simple game mechanics even a complex game like OFP/ArmA can be reduced to that simplicity.
It takes neither much intelligence, much effort or much experience in mission making to create any PvP of those game types.
Also they are small in size and the downloading process is automated so the distribution is no problem either.
Furthermore there are BIS templates for it, but I wouldn't trust them to give me proper results either.
So you will be happy to hear that all that stops you from having grand PvP games with superb tactics is only yourself and your many friends. And perhaps finding someone to host it. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Needless to say that neither 99% of the Coop missions or CTI missions(Which warfare is after all) where created by BIS and this should give you an example that it doesn't need any official missions to make something popular.
So I look forward to the many PvP missions you and your many friends are going to create since you are all seem quite desperate to play them and as I just showed its quite easy to do. Have fun http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/thumbs-up.gif
sparks50
Jan 8 2009, 00:42
Its all what the players does of it. Some of the tactical pvp I have played in ArmA, has been the most nerve wrecking in the game.
But that is provided that the people you play with wants the same as you. PVP has the potential of being just as good as coop, with one exception, that your enemy has a brain, making the game play extremely intensive. But its all up to you and the people you play with, and not the game.
@<hidden>
Your absoulutly right. He states most arma and ofp players want this type of gameplay but i say BS!! The ONLY thing stopping them from achiving that is themselves and when I look at the servers almost none are playing anything close to DM or CTF or BF2 style.
@<hidden>
So give me a break and think before you post and stop complaining about that you can't "ROFL-PWn-own-LOL" someone on this game.
@<hidden>
Your absoulutly right. He states most arma and ofp players want this type of gameplay but i say BS!! The ONLY thing stopping them from achiving that is themselves and when I look at the servers almost none are playing anything close to DM or CTF or BF2 style.
@<hidden>
So give me a break and think before you post and stop complaining about that you can't "ROFL-PWn-own-LOL" someone on this game.
Hey mr.angry this is a topic about PvP players and our demand to have some official maps so we can organize tournaments where pro players can measure their skill and have fun.If you don't like it pass over the topic.What's your problem?We ask BIS about something.If you dont like it and you like to play coop,make your missions with the editor,place your (d.....s AI)bots and kill them to get happy.
@<hidden>:What makes you think that the community is you?
The community is every single person that plays ArmA.So i dont want you to speak for me ok?Just keep your opinion,I respect it but dont get us out of the community.You have not that right.
As much as I like PvP and such (playing quite a bit of things like CoD5, ETQW, blabla...).
I'm sorry to say, but this kind of requests are, to say the least, useless...
OFP, ArmA, both came with a neat, powerfull (imho, the most versatile and powerfull mission editor one can see) mission editor.
On top of this, missions are downloaded on the fly easily, preventing ANY need for a player to have the mission on his harddrive when connecting.
OFP came with ZERO usefull PvP map, but have seen a sheer number of very good user made ones. Did it kill the competitive side of OFP? no.
What killed ArmA competitive PvP is something else, FPS issues, animations issues, things like that.
So there is no need for BI to even care about much about making PvP missions themselves. Most will be snubbed by community anyway for X or Y reasons (and probably mainly because BI guys do not have the PvP mindset) and community WILL PREFER (with reasons) custom made ones, which, once more, HAVE NO IMPACT ON NEW PLAYERS (it's seamless to them, they connect to server, they download the mission, they play, it takes what.... 10 seconds more than not downloading the mission... wow...)
Question to Cydon, refering to this (sentence that I don't quite get) :
Quote[/b] ]But we like ArmAs' gameplay?
Define "ArmA's gameplay" please, compared to PvP oriented games.
PVP isn't just CS-style run and gun... And any map can be fun with the right people.
Technically, nothing is preventing you to replicate most BF2 maps (or very similar ones) and mechanics into Arma already... Like : drop a few buildings on Rahmadi, set flags to conquer the zones, a few triggers and there you go.
However, if the game doesn't have any good PvP map out of the box, most of the new pvp players may not even realize that you CAN create good pvp missions in the editor... You have to seduce as many people as possible at launch, without relying solely on the comunity to release pvp maps 3 months later...
More pvp players = more money for BIS = more expansions for Coop players !
But as Whisper said, if pvp isn't played as much, it's probably more due to other factors than the lack of official maps : slower pace and animations, instant death with no revive, focus on large scale battles rather than CQB...
Hopefully, many of those issues/features (depends on how you see it) will be adressed in Arma 2 : revamped anims, first aid and battlefield clearance, better urban environment and precision...
We may have the best of both in the end... and as much as I hate Deatmatch, I wouldn't mind a C&H or CTF with a few buddies...
Pulverizer
Jan 8 2009, 09:19
I'd like to see how an exact recreation of BF2 map mechanics and map balance would play with ArmA game play. Also, CS and Quake 3 maps http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
Those games have good PvP because they are made as PvP games from the ground up, not only because they have good official PvP maps. Where as OFP engine only got multiplayer as an after thought.
That said, OFP and ArmA work pretty well in large scale PvP, like your basic A&D mission or CTI.
I'd like to see how an exact recreation of BF2 mechanics and map balance would play with ArmA game play.
Are "Mechanics" and "Game Play" not the same thing?
As has already been identified, the differences are in the animations and controls.
Pulverizer
Jan 8 2009, 09:25
Are "Mechanics" and "Game Play" not the same thing?
I mean BF2 map mechanics, like where and when you respawn and how the control points and vehicle respawn works. Not how you control your infantry or vehicles.
sparks50
Jan 8 2009, 09:26
I dont see the issue here either. How long is it going to take before someone ports a Berzerk map to Arma 2 after release? One day? 20 minutes?
And after that, anyone can download it directly from the server.
Pulverizer
Jan 8 2009, 09:34
Apparently it is a quality issue but I think it's impossible to make a mission of so high quality that it would magically make ArmA as playable as BF2 or Quake 3 on those games' home turf so to speak.
However, if the game doesn't have any good PvP map out of the box, most of the new pvp players may not even realize that you CAN create good pvp missions in the editor... You have to seduce as many people as possible at launch, without relying solely on the comunity to release pvp maps 3 months later...
I beg to differ. Community map will come out very fast if the game is PvP friendly, and once again it will be transparent to new players (when new to CoD5, I didn't even bother trying the maps offline, I connected to a server, if I do the same on ArmA2 with a custom map => I'll download it right away).
There's not that much time for the release of custom maps, because :
- mission makers are experienced, back from OFP.
- map templates already exists
- if you ask me, the exact layout and placing of objects, cover, etc... is less critical in ArmA than other games, because of the size of maps. ETQW maps take months and months to be done properly, because of the need of micro-designed and fully tested layouts and such, any tiny error can lead to disastrous effects and imbalance. It's not so much the case in ArmA.
Just a bit more about my last point : I've this feeling some of the PvP people kind of miss the original purpose of the whole OFP engines serie.
Poseidon has been built with 1 purpose in mind, originally : size. It was about providing as big as possible a playfield.
I think BI has been mainly expanding on the idea of scale in their serie of game.
Imho, "realism" and "simulation" aspects of OFP have just been side effects of how the game was built (with the ideas of "huge" and "freedom" in mind, not "realistic").
Though ArmA has pointed more in the realism factor (as listed right on the box), thus going away from PvP (not that PvP must be unrealistic, but BI idea of realism, with annoying things like non-fluid animations, kill PvP elements)
But I feel that requesting for features seen in other games to be mimicked in ArmA2, otoh, also miss the point (like going for realism above anything else miss the point).
What will ArmA2 bring to the table when mimicking other game's mechanisms? (that was the core of my question to cydon originally)
I don't see any particular interest in making a BF2 gameplay clone, with all the same characteristics, with ArmA2.
What would change, compared to original BF2? Weapon properties, anims.... Imho, not much.
Strong point of the engine, PvP wise, is scale.
Of course, it impacts competition cause most comp is small scale.
But I've always felt something could be done good for public playing (Berzerk is an example), if the actual feeling of ArmA2 is ok for PvP (animation wise, for example, not the case in ArmA).
.kju [PvPscene]
Jan 8 2009, 10:28
What people easily forgot, omit or don't know is the numbers
of servers hosted in OFP by teams or individuals for PvP were
easily the majority.
As BI isn't hosting server themselves, guess how important that is.
Same is probably true for the absolute numbers having played in MP.
The ratio between SP only players and MP / MP PvP players may
be possible to find out via gamespy statistics.
BI probably knows the numbers from the internal gamespy
statistics. The CD key also serves as a good identifier for
various data.
It would not be in their interest to avoid that big share of
potential customers.
ArmA was for a long time unplayable for any PvP mode and still
today there are major issues out there.
Some of these are said to be addressed by A2. We will see.
Hardware requirements and stability with common and
uncommon hardware/OS/setups will again play a major role IMHO.
Most companies go for an (closed and) open beta for that
reason to test as many PC configurations and polish the game
for the release.
As for PvP (league) maps provided by BI. They have shown
that they don't have the background, knowledge and interest
to provide these.
That said, its not needed and the community will do far better.
Instead IMHO BI would do better to integrate popular PvP maps,
small and large, made by the community into the core product
for the release/shipping of A2.
BeerHunter
Jan 8 2009, 12:07
Though I would expand on my comment regarding my preference for Co-Op/SP vs PvP.
First , with the introduction of mods and ACE the AI seem to be almost as intelligent (sometimes more so) and just as willing to obey orders as the majority of players on PUBLIC PvP servers who tend to come from other fast action, go for broke FPS such as BF2042(?),CoD etc. etc. and play ArmedA that way.
These also bring with them cheats , hacks , inane chatter and the odd one has no other intent than to disrupt the game. (I've obviously had bad experiences playing online haven't I http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif )
Obviously there are a lot of players out there that want to play the game properly,that's why there are so many clans. For those who can organize a full scale PvP scenario I can honestly see where it could be challenging and a lot of fun.
Being a casual player myself , not interested in clans nor competition , the fact that there are so many decent Co-Op/SP maps and,if I want to venture online , well run/adminned Co-Op servers , puts ArmedA head and shoulders above anything else out there right now for me.
As was stated earlier , creating your own maps is so easy in ArmedA so it isn't really necessary for BI to cater to this sector. Look at many other games in the leagues and count the ones that are NOT using custom maps. They are few and far between.
If the PvP sector was that big,there would be nothing BUT PvP on armaholics but , fact is , there are tons of SP and CoOp missions there too so quit a few players also like or even prefer this mode of game play.
Provided the basic mechanisms are fine for PvP in ArmA (character handling, etc...), you would see much more PvP played on servers.
Fact is, ArmA fight vs humans is a pain to handle.
In OFP days, you'd see tons of people playing competitive PvP.
Low number of people playing PvP in ArmA is probably not because there are more people prefering Coop only, but because PvP people have been put away from ArmA by the bad sides of the game (performance, handling).
Pulverizer
Jan 8 2009, 12:47
Maybe there should be an FPS Mode for infantry in difficulty options, to make infantry move and aim, and weapons handle like COD4. I bet there would be a ton of PvP servers and good PvP missions.
The mode should also restrict view distance to 200m to keep acceptable frame rates for fast PvP.
Problem is that you need to change run-n-gun style PvP into a more tactical based team vs team style PvP that ARMA/ARMA2 is mean for, which many PvP players have no idea what it is, or dont give a fuck to learn how to.
Quote[/b] ]he mode should also restrict view distance to 200m to keep acceptable frame rates for fast PvP.
That'd be misusing a game specifically designed to offer huge environments...
200m is overkill in a dungeon or space station, but in outdoors, that's not doing Arma any favour.
You have to use a game for what it's good at and accept that it cannot be the best at everything, from Blackshark to Counter Strike (even though the guys at BIS are doing their best to strike the right balance).
On a side note, you can fix the viewdistance on the server already...
ParaGraphic L
Jan 8 2009, 15:10
Problem is that you need to change run-n-gun style PvP into a more tactical based team vs team style PvP that ARMA/ARMA2 is mean for, which many PvP players have no idea what it is, or dont give a fuck to learn how to.
I think for ArmA the above is the biggest issue of all.
Offcourse ArmA isn't as smooth in animations, and I've had my fair share of issues with performance as many others.
But PvP should be played as TeamvsTeam even if it's just 5vs5 (razor teams?) in ArmA and ArmA2. But it's hard to find people that KNOW how to play in such a style and with all the years of PvP gameplay and all the other games having such gameplay most if not all people will tend to try and survive in such way.
So to have a succesfull PvP scene you need people to know how to run it succesfull and create missions that fit this gameplay and people to learn this new gameplay.
And I guess THAT is the reason why it is and will not be popular on this engine.
But on the other hand, if you get the Co-op groups interested in having TvsT challenges with others and eventually have that open for individuals you might see it work.
If you think BF, CoD or Quake-style competition scene is about individuals fighting each others instead of teams, I'm afraid you're wrong.
Taking for example ETQW, playing as team is cornerstone of being effective.
That doesn't mean the 1vs1 part should be overlooked
I know i'll get bashed, but maybe one of the reasons coop is so popular in Arma is because the ai is often unpredictable and tends to get you cornered somehow.
Its generally fun and engaging to fight against well script supported ai's. Also they are more deadly compared to most other games, and a solid enemy to fight.
Sure there are pvp unfriendly elements in Arma, but there where also in OFP. A pvp in both games tends to be more of a camp fest then anything else. The problem is that Arma and ofp simulate real life a lot better, and often camping is a very good solution ;-)
Other pvp games often solve this by raising the speed at which one can move. This however contradicts simulation...
However there may be a lot of reasons noone seems to consider for a "lack" of pvp.
Other games that provide a "better",mostly corridor, pvp experience churn out by the thousands...
It may be a question of competition, that cannot be solved without ruining the basic arma/ofp experience.
That said, with a bit better anims and a stable game i think pvp might just come back.
What i miss most is the basic CTI experience OFP had: an ideal mix of PVP VS COOP. I don't know why but Warfare never was my nack...
[APS]Gnat
Jan 8 2009, 15:50
@<hidden>
Well i don't want to play that kind of map, thats you don't understand, its a matter of taste, you might enjoy it I and many other people don't.
........ you completely missed my point.
I'm not say you must like it, I'm saying MANY people liked it and played CTI (maybe other than you and your many friends).
AND, it wasn't an official BIS mission.
Same applies to the likes of Hexenkessel, huge favourite for OFP and ArmA, but again not from BIS.
@<hidden>
Quote[/b] ]The games by BIS are of the sandbox type
Exactly
@<hidden>
Quote[/b] ]@<hidden>:What makes you think that the community is you? The community is every single person that plays ArmA.So i dont want you to speak for me ok?Just keep your opinion
LOL ... wtf. I didn't speak for anyone, I was just questioning where the so called "MANY" came from.
And do you realise what you just said ? ..... "everyone is community" ... "but I should shut up" ? wow
All I'm saying is
- There gamers who buy BF2 because thats what they want
- There gamers who buy OFP and ArmA because thats what they want.
- Both games have a different market
- BIS don't have to make their game a clone of another
- I personally (still not speaking for the community) don't like run-n-gun canned games that pretent to have teamwork for a matter of minutes.
- I personally (still not speaking for the community) like realism sandbox games with awesome moding tools, huge custom mission flexibility, HUGE environments, sessions that can go on for hours and hours and a shit hot community of like-minded people.
I believe we would be talking about the same thing, i am just gonna call it TvT:
There should be at least one of those wide spread style maps delivered with a2 (COOP, CTI, DM, TvT -CTF, -CTH etc).
BUT that doesn't mean those should be "official", the most played missions and game concepts out there were done by players anyways.
I am sure you know that ALL the other games are released with so many maps because the player have no easy means of doing that by itself (aka no mission editor). So there is no way you can compare CS, UT, BF2, COD4 with arma here
There is a good reason ppl don't play PvP games: they are usually just that: run and gun. I am sorry to say, but every server that i've been on and had CTF/CTH missions playing had a similar to CS layout, contained, same damn weapon, same damn crap flying around.
Who is to blame? BIS? No! but the ones(players) trying to port the same run and gun PvP concept from games like COD4, BF2 into arma: it just does NOT FIT.
Arma allows you to play on 100x more terrain than any other game. It allows you to flank, outmaneuver, etc etc. Most ppl don't go that far, they just wanna pwn some others. There are plenty of games allowing you to do just this out there
The only small size layout that i have actually enjoyed was in arma was the A&S one.
BUT Yes, i do enjoy myself playing against humans rather than AIs.
Why? because even with the best AIs out there in any game, it is more fun to play against a working brain. And that is why i am currently enlisted in 3 different ArmA TvT tournaments: 2 featuring respawn, the kill count is off and it doesn't matter at the end of the day, and another one having a more realistic setup, based on a non-respawn mission: this is where teamplay shows, as well as strategy, thinking ahead, as well as player skills.
in the end, i am all for bringing more life in the PvP/TvT community (support for more players - tournaments, more fluid animations, etc). But you all need to understand that all that bunny hoping crap that happens in any other game like CS/BF2/COD4 will never work on a platform like arma anyways. You will need to adapt your run and gun to fit this game, and not the other way around.
Maybe there should be an FPS Mode for infantry in difficulty options, to make infantry move and aim, and weapons handle like COD4. I bet there would be a ton of PvP servers and good PvP missions.
The mode should also restrict view distance to 200m to keep acceptable frame rates for fast PvP.
Why would it be a good idea to make it a different game when fighting against human enemies? I thought the idea of pvp missions in a game is to play the exact same game against players instead of AI. The animations and graphical performance in Armed Assault are universally poor and just because it shows better in pvp doesn't mean that sp and coop people don't have the same issues.
Pulverizer
Jan 8 2009, 17:11
Maybe there should be an FPS Mode for infantry in difficulty options, to make infantry move and aim, and weapons handle like COD4. I bet there would be a ton of PvP servers and good PvP missions.
The mode should also restrict view distance to 200m to keep acceptable frame rates for fast PvP.
Why would it be a good idea to make it a different game when fighting against human enemies? I thought the idea of pvp missions in a game is to play the exact same game against players instead of AI. The animations and graphical performance in Armed Assault are universally poor and just because it shows better in pvp doesn't mean that sp and coop people don't have the same issues.
True, controls do generally suck for everyone in ArmA, but it's supposedly better in ArmA2 with animation interrupt and separate upper and lower body animation for reloading on the move etc.
I just don't see how you can make "realistic" (ie, slow movement, slow weapon handling) animation and controls that the average co-op / SP / A&D player wants and at the same time make them fast enough to keep a shoebox DM enjoyable.
This is just me, but shoebox DM == I play CoD
What will be in ArmA2 that would make shoebox DM better than in other games suited for this type of gameplay? I see nothing, personnaly.
Pulverizer
Jan 8 2009, 19:29
What will be in ArmA2 that would make shoebox DM better than in other games suited for this type of gameplay? I see nothing, personnaly.
Not much. But at least that way people wouldn't cry about the slow animations not being suited for PvP.
I can also imagine the clumsy first person controls being the number one deal breaker in ArmA for many players who are only used to normal FPS controls.
Michael_Wittman
Jan 8 2009, 20:08
Well,
This game is supossed to be battalion scale at least....thats like 200 men per side...ARMA1 was supposed to give 124 vs 124 online players and I never saw it in my life.
PvP is a hacker attractor so...if BIS want that they´d surely put half the whole money in a "allways latest" cheating buster and for sure that is not the case. If you are asking for PvP game...fun...playable...and run-into-action-quick this is not your game.
MOST of the people dont know the f#~€€¬ of how to survive having the best equipment....let alone play as a team.... I had a hard time teaching my fellows comrades how to assault, retreat or withdraw...where to set a fire position or how to use tophography to attack using choppers!!!
Dont be such a smart%%&& ..... playing coop is hard for 80% of the people....and we are talking only as infantry.
Inkompetent
Jan 8 2009, 20:20
Why does PvP have to be shoebox DM? ArmA is HORRIBLE for shoebox fighting. It isn't meant for that. If one wants it there is both CoD and BF2 that does the job 100 times better, but on the contrary would be utter crap for fighting at distance.
Judging from the TvT maps running on public servers I understand if it isn't many playing it. Not a single person cooperates, communicates, or does anything logical at all for that matter. It's usually an on orgy in e-peen measuring where everyone want the biggest guns.
On the contrary I just now (after the release of ACE) started playing on the TacticalGamer server, where one of the missions is a random location TvT mission on Sahrani with just one infantry squad on each team fighting over a random objective. The combat zone isn't bigger than one square kilometer, but it's perfect for that scale of infantry combat.
This kind of TvT play is awesome. But if TvT has to mean "twitch-play in shoebox sized map where e-peen is more important than communication", then I'd rather not have TvT at all in ArmA.
If it wasn't so depressingly predictable, it would be amusing to see so many self-proclaimed Co-op players coming out of the woodwork to comment on a form of play they shun. Worse, to hear so many ill-informed opinions from those players about why PvP isn't popular in ArmA .
As Q said, anybody who actually played OFP will know that PvP was a _huge_ success in that version of the game. Many players valued the 'one-shot, one-kill' model along with the floating iron-sights, semi-realistic ballistics etc. Unfortunately, ArmA had a less-than brilliant launch and also introduced a rather clumsy animation-transition model. Many of my team-mates (yes, PvP players do join teams and use teamwork) simply weren't willing to wait for the game to be patched up to playability. Personally, I stuck with it and was reasonably happy with the final state of the game but by then there simply wasn't the critical mass of players to get decent games going.
According to steam (http://store.steampowered.com/stats/) there were a maximum of 26 ArmA players online today. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif
To comment on the original request....
Yes, ArmA2 needs to have a couple of default CTF's and maybe a DM but the reality during OFP days was that you very rarely saw those maps getting any time amongst the huge variety of player-made content. There were many successful leagues which used maps created specially and it's interesting to note that these ranged all the way from 1v1 death-match right up to large-scale team matches with more 'realistic' rules and scenarios such as WGL. The beauty of OFP was always that it could incorporate such a wide range of casual fun through to hardcore simulation. PvP will not live or die based on the supply of 'official' maps but on the success of the game launch and the ability to build a critical mass of online players.
The Masta
Jan 8 2009, 21:00
According to steam (http://store.steampowered.com/stats/) there were a maximum of 26 ArmA players online today. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif
Steam only shows the players using the steam version, so there were 26 players online with their steam version of ArmA.
sparks50
Jan 8 2009, 21:08
Yup, I did a quick count rounding up to ten right now, and theres easily a lot more than 500 people
BTW while looking at the server list, its great to see how many servers are embracing the ACE mod.
Yes the animations has its issues, but it really isn't such a pain when you plan ahead instead of the usual run in a straight line until you find a enemy to shoot at.
And I can not see how that can be coop/militaristic tosser exclusive, because surely you want to stay alive and win the game?
Inkompetent
Jan 8 2009, 21:12
Yes, I can atm at http://stats.swec.se/server/list see there is 932 players online, so yeah... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
But on the PvP again: Indeed, there were some fantastic CTF maps in OFP, and I can't really see why that wouldn't work in ArmA.
I do agree with Q though. Take popular maps that are made by the community and stick them into ArmA2. Even though ArmA comes with the lovely ability to download missions on the fly when connecting to a server, it doesn't hurt with a few different and good maps to start with, to give flavours of Warfare, CTF, TDM and alike.
>Steam only shows the players using the steam version, so there were 26 players online with their steam version of ArmA.
The server list at SWEC (http://stats.swec.se/server/list) counts over 800 which is a pleasant surprise. I might have to reinstall my copy ! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
Interesting to see how relatively unsuccessful the steam version seems to have been although perhaps that's because it primarily served the US market and the stats are simply showing the fact that most of them are still at work or school.
STEAM version is fail mainly because ATARI failed to keep it up2date forcing users lived to 'comfort' of automated up2date game updates to manually update the game ...
in short ATARI (non)support for STEAM version is total disaster for end user ...
Inkompetent
Jan 8 2009, 23:10
How about coop pvp?
What's that? Mission-oriented PvP?
.kju [PvPscene]
Jan 8 2009, 23:23
It always funny when people come and brang their non existing
KNOWLEDGE and EXPERIENCE how decent OFP and ArmA PvP
looks like. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
So please do us all a favor, if you know only hexe and berzerk
stop to annoy us with your lack of understanding.
Have you ever played PvP maps from Zeus, ShackTactical?
Have you ever played in OFRA, IC or AToW league?
Have you ever played Celery's missions?
Have you ever played OFP in ANY PvP league?
No. Ok. Now continue to derail this thread and make yourself
laughable. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif
As said, it would be in BI's best interest to sell again 2+ million copies.
If YOU want to tell us OFP was a bad game, please
leave this place for the better. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/band.gif
Edit:
That said hexe and Berzerk are decent maps as well.
If you don't like them, don't play them. Simple eh. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
extreme pvp in close quarters is gay...
i remember an ofp map that all it was was this little 100 m by 100m map that wasted the entire game engine!
you only got 2 weapons and the map was a piece of $@<hidden>!^
arma pvp is much more special, better, sophisticated. you final need to think in a game more than mouse skill!
arma is not a type of game you run and gun like all the other clone games out there, it is its own style of game and should be at the forefront of its own style of game play that should not be nerfed.
i want strategy along with most of the other fans, not another quake or unreal tournament!
sparks50
Jan 9 2009, 00:59
Q, A little request from me, please do not keep hitting enter after every small sentence, your post looks like a EMO poem from high school and is a pain to read.
A working template for pvp to come in the box isn't too much to ask for. Though I am not entirely sold on the idea that this was the sole thing that stopped Arma from selling 2 millions.
this game is not about selling as much as cod or bf2 by whoring for players with short attention spans but pleasing the true fans, and creating a game with a simulation combat emphasis!
there are enough clones of cod, bf, cs, and other nameless titles that get old fast! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif
arma is a true game where you think plan and strategery to the max
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/notworthy.gif
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
this game is not about selling as much as cod or bf2 by whoring for players with short attention spans but pleasing the true fans, and creating a game with a simulation combat emphasis!
there are enough clones of cod, bf, cs, and other nameless titles that get old fast! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif
arma is a true game where you think plan and strategery to the max
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/notworthy.gif
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
LOL ... ROFL ... Super ROFL
Nice sarcasm. Like that 'getting old fast' thing there.
.kju [PvPscene]
Jan 9 2009, 07:33
@<hidden>
Quote[/b] ]You should keep your lines as short as possible; period.
Why? Well, have you ever read a newspaper? Most likely yes. How
do they write their articles? One big block going from the left page
margin to the right one? No. But why do some people here insist
on writing source code like this??? Newspapers write articles in
very short columns. Why? Because it is much easier to read. Your
eyes can quickly jump from left to right and then to the next row,
without ever losing focus.
Text Columns: How Long is Too Long? (http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000618.html)
Is the 80 character line limit still relevant? (http://richarddingwall.name/2008/05/31/is-the-80-character-line-limit-still-relevant/)
I see what the problem is. There is a general hostility from coop players towards the PvP community of ArmA. They for some reason try to prove that ArmA is not suited for this type of gameplay. The thing is that they keep (mindlessly) say that ArmA does need official support for PvP. The point of this post is to gather THOSE who care about PvP not those who don't want PvP in the game for some reason I can't really think of, they think that coop,warefare will be put aside?
Most of you who play coop etc you have no problem, ArmA had almost everything you wanted. I don't get why you want to discourage people from playing the game. Thats racist in a way, you underestimate people that like differnt type of gamplay from you calling them "run'n'gunners", "immature" and other names with a sinking and sarcastic tone, to prove youselves your superiortiy over them (maybe becase you might have suffered in other games by the word noob? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif ).
The point is that people who like coop (cause again is a matter of taste) can find ALL those elements they want in ArmA (great editor, scripting etc).
So the problem is: what do we do about the other half of players of ArmA and people who might want to try the game?
Those who don't care learning how to make maps, don't care about addons since in tournamets you all have to play with the same product, don't care about Warefare and don't care about coop and simulating combat operations (to all those who havent been to army and play only a games, well the game is FAR FAR away from reality).
The answer "Go play CoD and BF" is really annoying and demotes the level of the conversation. To make this post and having ALL those clans and organizations that make cups/tournaments (hundreds of players not say thousands) that still prefer ArmA gives the answear.
Some people do not know what "Pro PvP" or just competitve PvP is well here is a small list of things:
1. PvP is not about "pwning" random people in public servers as some of you said.
PvP is organized team play between clans-teams or whatever.
2. PvP is not meant to be close quarters battles (hexhencastel etc)
C&H is the ideal thing, NOONE of you has tryeied the ESL or ECL maps which was the greatest example of how ArmA can go for "pro pvp". ArmA is the only FPS game that strategy and skills together can make the differance unlike CS and other FPSs where skill has the major role.
3. Deathmatch PvP is for Quake etc. ArmA needs more sophisticated type of games like C&H or Hold Location etc.
4. I find really silly the coop player phrase "you want to play PvP go play deathmatch in CoD or BF" this shows that you have NEVER tried any actual tournamet/ladder/league PvP map.
5. PvP does not include AI at all. PvP that includes AI is another type of gameplay and I think its called TvsT here in the forums.
6. The fact that ArmA can be shaped and take many forms does not mean that NOT having official support will make it better (thats the point make the game better).
7. Ready and TESTED (no bugs, balanced etc) maps give a serious boost in contrast to other games (life OFP2) who keep their funs and sell more copies.
8. A player that wants competitve PvP will NEVER in the world play coop, its just boring for him.
9. Whoever doesn't want competition can just not play this kind of missions simple as that.
I don't get whats for ALL this hostility against this kind of gameplay. Coop players have whate they need. It's like you don't want PvPers in the community. I can't explain what you don't want BIS to make 5-10 maps with the game and give them in one box?? Whats the problem with that.
P.S. Many people don't read what others say theyjust read the title and post things in random lol http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif
I see what the problem is. There is a general hostility from coop players towards the PvP community of ArmA.
Holy hell... Am I getting old, or is this argument really coming up again?
They for some reason try to prove that ArmA is not suited for this type of gameplay.
For the most part, they seem against turning it into another CoD, BF or CS clone...
The thing is that they keep (mindlessly) say that ArmA does need official support for PvP.
Which it doesnt, the ONLY "game mode" AmrA has any official support for is Warfare.
The point of this post is to gather THOSE who care about PvP not those who don't want PvP in the game for some reason I can't really think of, they think that coop,warefare will be put aside?
Since you can have more than one player in a network scenario, you can never get rid of the PvP aspect.
Most of you who play coop etc you have no problem, ArmA had almost everything you wanted. I don't get why you want to discourage people from playing the game. Thats racist in a way, you underestimate people that like differnt type of gamplay from you calling them "run'n'gunners", "immature" and other names with a sinking and sarcastic tone, to prove youselves your superiortiy over them (maybe becase you might have suffered in other games by the word noob? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif ).
I think I may have lost a few IQ points reading that, what are you, 12? Racist? Superior? Blaming people for reacting badly to being called crap, then suggesting that you'd call them crap anyway (which seems to be a common theme in your pro PvP posts)
Everything posted here in a "negative" sense is angled towards preventing ArmA2 from becoming another BF/CoD/CS clone. I mean come on, all the pro PvP posts are about getting rid of the floating zone, adding bunny hop/jump, limiting view distance to 200m, etc etc etc. Fine, you have your little bunnyhop-tastic 200m box of death, I'll just lob hellfires into it from a safe 8km away. Do you not see how forcing the game to have those settings hardcoded is a step backwards? ESPECIALLY when it is ALL possible now. As has been said over and over and over, its up to the mission maker.
The point is that people who like coop (cause again is a matter of taste) can find ALL those elements they want in ArmA (great editor, scripting etc).
And THE point is, that same editor and scripting can be used to create EPIC PvP maps. You just have to put the effort in.
So the problem is: what do we do about the other half of players of ArmA and people who might want to try the game?
Put some effort in and make some PvP missions instead of expecting to be spoon fed them on a silver platter? Also, are you suggesting that everyone who is new to ArmA and wants to try it is looking for PvP? Thats a big reach if you ask me...
Those who don't care learning how to make maps
Have to play the missions that other people make "for" them...
don't care about addons since in tournamets you all have to play with the same product
And a lot of missions dont use addons, and hey, if you made them yourself you could both ensure that the missions dont use addons AND be the "saviour" of the seemingly un-saveable PvP community.
The answer "Go play CoD and BF" is really annoying and demotes the level of the conversation. To make this post and having ALL those clans and organizations that make cups/tournaments (hundreds of players not say thousands) that still prefer ArmA gives the answear.
People only say that because those games have exactly what you're looking for. Pre-packaged, non-sandbox PvP straight out of the install. OFP and ArmA have ALWAYS (and hopefully will always) require a little extra effort.
6. The fact that ArmA can be shaped and take many forms does not mean that NOT having official support will make it better (thats the point make the game better).
7. Ready and TESTED (no bugs, balanced etc) maps give a serious boost in contrast to other games (life OFP2) who keep their funs and sell more copies.
And lo, were back to the fact that the only regularly-supported official mission is warfare. All the other co-op missions are made by players and supported by players. Why is it so hard for the PvP'ers to do the same?
I don't get whats for ALL this hostility against this kind of gameplay. Coop players have whate they need. It's like you don't want PvPers in the community. I can't explain what you don't want BIS to make 5-10 maps with the game and give them in one box?? Whats the problem with that.
What is not wanted is the "dumbing down" of the game to suit the demands of the PvP'ers. 200m view distances, no floating zone (which can be reduced to nil in the options btw), running on rails so as to make 100m+ headshots on the move, tiny play boxes, etc etc. Why force the removal of all that makes ArmA awesome just to please the PvP'ers?
Its funny, you're so set on making the game perfect for the PvP'ers, that you cant see how you would ruin it for everyone else...
I'm not hostile to PvP in any way, I play twitch games in fact more than I play ArmA
I have a problem when the suggestion to make PvP scene successfull is "to reduce the view distance to 200m". It's not OP suggestion, but you got to agree that doing so would be kind of a waste of what the ArmA2 engine can bring compared to other titles.
I have a "problem" (not really, just that I don't see the real usefullness) with suggesting that "official PvP maps" will give any boost to PvP scene of ArmA2.
Again, I've never seen BI CTF played in comp in OFP. In fact, I don't think I've played them online bare once or twice.
Even more, Bohemia Interactive do not really do good PvP maps. Custom made ones are far better, and, again, seeing how we'll have a bunch of experienced mapmakers, and how easy it is to play a custom map, there is no gain in BI making "official" PvP maps.
Tbh, BI do put official maps in their game, be it OFP or ArmA, they even provide templates for map makers.
Have you ever played BI PvP maps? I didn't. The only one I played was ArmA demo CTF.
.kju [PvPscene]
Jan 9 2009, 10:37
Good job DM http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
Keep on derailing the thread with your stories. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif
No one in here wants to dump down ArmA.
Its only you fanatics trying to imply that.
Quote[/b] ]“If you repeat a lie a thousand times, it becomes the truth”
George Orwell
[APS]Gnat
Jan 9 2009, 10:53
Everything posted here in a "negative" sense is angled towards preventing ArmA2 from becoming another BF/CoD/CS clone. I mean come on, all the pro PvP posts are about getting rid of the floating zone, adding bunny hop/jump, limiting view distance to 200m, etc etc etc. Fine, you have your little bunnyhop-tastic 200m box of death, I'll just lob hellfires into it from a safe 8km away. Do you not see how forcing the game to have those settings hardcoded is a step backwards? ESPECIALLY when it is ALL possible now. As has been said over and over and over, its up to the mission maker.
LOL .. yes, exactly.
There is a general hostility from coop players towards the PvP community of ArmA.
Ummm ... no, I actually don't like Coop that much. I much prefer a good CTF or a cool C&H with lots of vehicles & weapons, or even better a CTI, where I tend to not be a big "team" player, more of a loner, slowly nibbling away at a town of AI.
You are generalizing about people again.
I very much enjoy the variety of OFP and ArmA.
At last count I had collected something like 4,500 different missions for OFP.
Find one post of me that I tak about view distance etc. Please make me this favour.
For the most part, they seem against turning it into another CoD, BF or CS clone...
Turning it in what?? Does this has any logic?
Which it doesnt, the ONLY "game mode" AmrA has any official support for is Warfare.
Yes that's what I mean apart from Warefare there is no other support.
Since you can have more than one player in a network scenario, you can never get rid of the PvP aspect.
Yes but there are no official PvP maps.
I think I may have lost a few IQ points reading that, what are you, 12? Racist? Superior? Blaming people for reacting badly to being called crap, then suggesting that you'd call them crap anyway (which seems to be a common theme in your pro PvP posts)
UM where did I do that Mr.DM http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif
the "Pro Theame" is just a word to show that some people like competition.
Everything posted here in a "negative" sense is angled towards preventing ArmA2 from becoming another BF/CoD/CS clone. I mean come on, all the pro PvP posts are about getting rid of the floating zone, adding bunny hop/jump, limiting view distance to 200m, etc etc etc. Fine, you have your little bunnyhop-tastic 200m box of death, I'll just lob hellfires into it from a safe 8km away. Do you not see how forcing the game to have those settings hardcoded is a step backwards? ESPECIALLY when it is ALL possible now. As has been said over and over and over, its up to the mission maker.
Who talked about 200m view distance? Floating zone yes for me is annoying others that play with other system apart from mouse and keyboard might find it usefull. You read my post??? I have been saying that I like ArmA and the only thing that this game has from being great is maps and you come and tell me that the gameplayed has to be changed??? Did you even read my post? Do you understand the basics of communication
And THE point is, that same editor and scripting can be used to create EPIC PvP maps. You just have to put the effort in.
That some people do not care to even bother use. And still if there are those map not in the box people might get bored with the game in the first month.
who is new to ArmA and wants to try it is looking for PvP? Thats a big reach if you ask me...
What do you mean? The first thing that people who like PvP is try this, not the campaign/ediotr/single maps. They will try the MP and its not hard to learn playing a game as long as there other people ot play with you.
Have to play the missions that other people make "for" them...
Thats the point, to have maps from the first day the game it is released.
And a lot of missions dont use addons, and hey, if you made them yourself you could both ensure that the missions dont use addons AND be the "saviour" of the seemingly un-saveable PvP community.
Don't you see it. You are the hostile and your attitude is aggresive for no reason. YOU can play what you want with this game which might be Evolution or whatever I and many others can't.
People only say that because those games have exactly what you're looking for. Pre-packaged, non-sandbox PvP straight out of the install. OFP and ArmA have ALWAYS (and hopefully will always) require a little extra effort.
Extra effort? Why?
What is not wanted is the "dumbing down" of the game to suit the demands of the PvP'ers. 200m view distances, no floating zone (which can be reduced to nil in the options btw), running on rails so as to make 100m+ headshots on the move, tiny play boxes, etc etc. Why force the removal of all that makes ArmA awesome just to please the PvP'ers?
Where in my post do you find ANY of those you say above, show me where? I don't you floating zone as I told you above but thats my choice.
quote=DM,Jan. 09 2009,10:38]Its funny, you're so set on making the game perfect for the PvP'ers, that you cant see how you would ruin it for everyone else...[/quote]
Its funny how you read my post and your imagination made up sooo many things http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif
You still don't get the point THE ONLY F*** IDEA OF THE POST IS TO HAVE SOME MP MAPS IN 5VS5 MODE NOT TO CHANGE ANYTHING ELSE DID YOU READ THE POSTS??? OR YOU MAKE UP THINGS???
Still I don't get, why you don't want PvP maps in ArmA2 I really can't get it.
Well actually, quite a number of people want to dumb the game down.
They all have the same misunderstanding Cydon does.
They come here from your standard FPS game , which all can be quite fun by the way and are extremly puzzled or ignore that BIS did quite a number of things differently with OFP.
I don't really need to repeat what it was , it has been cited quite often , in this thread too , but freedom of choice,complexity,incentives for creativity and large scale could be the generalized buzz words.
I am not an avid Coop player as well by the way, I think shooting a bunch of static AI is a boring as hell , I guess I fit the TvT type according to some definitions. I would describe myself as Wargamer who likes to use this game for Tactical Warfare Scenarios tho.
I tell you this Cydon , just to point out AGAIN that if you or me want my preferred mission type to be played , one has to do it yourself. They are quite a number of reasons BIS is never going to do something you like 100% , the major one being that this community being so diversified you can't please everyone.
So you need to learn how to , and BIS made it simple as hell to do so.
Unless you understand this difference with this engine/game , you will always face hostility or misunderstanding.
P.S: Infact there are even quite a number of scripting commands which are mainly designed to help make PvP missions possible. So how you can say BIS doesn't support that kind of PvP is beyond me. If you were to complain about broken animation transitions( note: I never want 0 ms 'fluid' animations tho) I would get that. If you were to suggest engine changes so you can make you preferred type of mission better fine (within keeping with the general design principles of OFP of course,mentioned above,I am talking extra scripting commands here for example,or being able to carry 2 flags for whatever purpose) , but describing the lack of PvP missions by BIS as the downfall of ArmA2 is quite ridiculous,sorry.
ParaGraphic L
Jan 9 2009, 11:59
@<hidden>: Just to make sure I understand you're request 100%;
- do you want missions that are designed to fit 5vs5 battles?
or
- do you want an island designed so it can host the above battles in a perfect way?
if it's the second request I would understand your request a bit more, but as stated many times, missions are easy to make and the ones that where so great in OFP-times are easily to port over and fit on the new island.
either way, both request would recuire some kind of example from you about how you would like to see this being done.
what is it that keeps you from having this in ArmA for example, what would allready be possible in ArmA but isn't done yet and would you like to be done by BIS on release?
As I see it, ArmA just isn't the game for 5 vs 5 battles, I would understand if you'd say 5 SF players to infiltrate a base with 15 regular players. Or some kind of hunter scenario, but having to defend a base/hill/town with 5 men against 5 men, that really doesn't seem to be what ArmA is made for if you can have fights at least 10 times bigger.
I was going to make a big ole wordy quote again, but I cba (seems to be another common theme...)
What I will say is this;
Even tho its identified that the only "game type" that has any on going support from BIS is Warfare, PvP gaming is suffering the most?
This can only be for one reason, and you identify it yourself: the PvP players are too lazy (theres the theme, tho I will clarify - the most vocal PvP players are too lazy) to:
Either get stuck into the editor and make a few missions themselves (which is an obtuse generalisation, since I've seen a couple of threads today with missions aimed explicitally at PvP)
Or, even worse, have a server admin competent enough to load a few custom missions onto the server.
Its been said over and over, this engine/game is all about options unlike an out of the box server like CoD, BF or CS, where you have a set number of maps in rotation, with ArmA you have 2 terrains which you can create any number of missions on. Its limited only by your imagination and the amount of effort you're willing to put in...
A few quoty-points I will make:
Quote[/b] ]Who talked about 200m view distance?... ...Did you even read my post? Do you understand the basics of communication
Now who's not reading the thread? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Quote[/b] ]
Quote[/b] ]And a lot of missions dont use addons, and hey, if you made them yourself you could both ensure that the missions dont use addons AND be the "saviour" of the seemingly un-saveable PvP community.
Don't you see it. You are the hostile and your attitude is aggresive for no reason. YOU can play what you want with this game which might be Evolution or whatever I and many others can't.
I fail to see the hostility? I merely suggested that you might use the editor to make some missions? I guess I'm the bad guy for suggesting that you put a bit of effort into anything you do?
Quote[/b] ]Extra effort? Why?
And theres the proof. Clearly you were not brought up with the idea of "the more you put in, the more you get out".
Life does not serve things up for you on a silver platter, why should games be any different?
I'd much rather have ArmA, which I can do anything I want in, than a game where I'm restricted to the standard missions/maps.
Quote[/b] ]Still I don't get, why you don't want PvP maps in ArmA2 I really can't get it.
If you can find anywhere on this whole forum where I state I dont want PvP maps included in ArmA as standard, then I'll quite happily have the mods ban me.
Since I'm confident that I have never claimed such things, I might refer you back to your own point of "zomg, dont you ever read the posts!!1!1!!11!"
Also, USING ALL CAPS AND LOTS OF http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif SMILIES IS NOT HELPFUL TO GETTING YOUR POINT ACROSS IN A MATURE FASHION, which is the "theme" I was refering to in my previous post - just look at any one of your posts and it always trails off in an fps-doug asplosion (bonus points for getting the reference there) of shouting and !!!1!!1's
@<hidden> Q
When did you get so cynical?
NoRailgunner
Jan 9 2009, 12:15
Simple solution - make some good missions that you like and dont die waiting for it.
Isnt there anyone in those leagues who can make "official ArmA league missions"? Why you cant discuss and develop it there? Imho its a good solution to find out what fits and what not. Another part is that BIS canot please all pvp players - guess that you will come back and cry if those mission doesnt fit to your visions. Ask here if someone is still playing official ArmA mp missions. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Maybe you should describe it more how you like to play in ArmA2 pvp missions and make some examples/concepts. Developers might be gods but irl they dont know everything. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wow_o.gif
Pulverizer
Jan 9 2009, 12:25
Maybe you should describe it more how you like to play in ArmA2 pvp missions and make some examples/concepts. Developers might be gods but irl they dont know everything. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wow_o.gif
Read the OP:
Quote[/b] ]Ofp and ArmA need some maps in order to promote the PvP part of the game (warefare is totaly no PvP). A PvP mode that will introduce the gameplay of Battlefield2 with the mix of the realism of ArmA.
From what I understand, he wants missions like BF2's primary mode of play (a kind of C&H). I guess BIS could afford a few copies of BF2 to see how it works and then do that in ArmA2.
Maybe you should describe it more how you like to play in ArmA2 pvp missions and make some examples/concepts. Developers might be gods but irl they dont know everything. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wow_o.gif
Read the OP:
Quote[/b] ]Ofp and ArmA need some maps in order to promote the PvP part of the game (warefare is totaly no PvP). A PvP mode that will introduce the gameplay of Battlefield2 with the mix of the realism of ArmA.
From what I understand, he wants missions like BF2's primary mode of play (a kind of C&H). I guess BIS could afford a few copies of BF2 to see how it works and then do that in ArmA2.
BF adapation has already been made in OFP, called Battlefield1985, it evolved in map called Berzerk under ArmA.
Really, I don't get it.
It was not needed in OFP to have a successfull PvP scene.
Why oh why should it suddenly be needed for ArmA2? Because ArmA PvP failed for completely unrelated reasons? I fail to see the logic.
Maybe by "MANY fans" he ment those from casual fpses who find ArmA too hard cause http://stats.swec.se/game/statistics clearly shows the PvP "popularity".
Yes, because downplaying PvP players is the way to go to understand and answer to their requests ....
This PvP bashing is really getting old.
When you don't know what and who you're talking about, you better simply shut it up.
ParaGraphic L
Jan 9 2009, 14:28
Maybe by "MANY fans" he ment those from casual fpses who find ArmA too hard cause http://stats.swec.se/game/statistics clearly shows the PvP "popularity".
As I see it, and I'm most probably wrong, but on that site you see that the PvP/TvT community is as strong as the Co-op community is. Both in hours as in games.
#Mode Games Player Time
1 COOP 37224 159:55:51
2 CTI 6964 84:57:36
3 HOLD 1600 40:55:40
4 TEAM 3083 39:28:10
5 CTF 2386 08:42:58
6 C&H 4483 03:01:50
7 DM 1752 01:05:37
8 SC 372 00:16:43
9 FF 439 00:01:06
Co-op
game= 37224
time= 159:55:51
PvP (= the rest(?))
game= 21079
time+/-=178:00:00
Pulverizer
Jan 9 2009, 15:17
BF adapation has already been made in OFP, called Battlefield1985, it evolved in map called Berzerk under ArmA.
Yup. I mentioned that in reply #1.
Berzerk is no good though. It must be official, made by BIS, delivered in the box and probably also really, really good to meet the standards for professional league play.
BF adapation has already been made in OFP, called Battlefield1985, it evolved in map called Berzerk under ArmA.
Yup. I mentioned that in reply #1.
Berzerk is no good though. It must be official, made by BIS, delivered in the box and probably also really, really good to meet the standards for professional league play.
Why MUST IT BE? :O
Knowing BI record for PvP map, the last thing I want is them doing it.
OTOH, I'd rather have them polish the animations to have them as fluid as possible, because THIS is what killed ArmA PvP, not the lack of "official PvP missions".
What's the big problem with everyone saying ArmA should be this or that.... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif
The reason why ArmA is better than all other combat games is because of its versatility.
You can have large scale warfare or CQB with Co-Op or PvP...
BIS has included some Co-Op and PvP missions that may not appeal to all but it gives an idea of whats possible. BIS's job is to make ArmA/II as good and stable as possible not create missions.
THATS WHY THERE'S A MISSION EDITOR!!!
As with OFP its the community that creates content that suits everyone.
Max Power
Jan 9 2009, 21:40
What the fucking hell happened here?
Cydon wants better pvp maps in ArmA out of the box and all of a sudden, out of nowhere comes this shit storm about hard coded bunny hopping. I have never seen such a parade of abject nonsense.
ArmA 2 needs better maps of all kinds out of the box. Noone plays the default ArmA maps. All of the popular maps are user generated. That Capture the Flag map in the demo was pretty good, though- a little one sided but pretty good. As far as I'm concerned it was the best map out of the three that were included.
I support a movement for better missions in general, even if it means having fewer in number at first.
ArmA 2 needs better maps of all kinds out of the box.
At last someone who has some basic communication skills.
I see what the problem is. There is a general hostility from coop players towards the PvP community of ArmA.
They for some reason try to prove that ArmA is not suited for this type of gameplay.
WTF?! We never said that, what we said is
"It is of so much ease to do this kind gameplay in this game that the ONLY thing stopping your self ARE yourselves!!!"
I see what the problem is. There is a general hostility from coop players towards the PvP community of ArmA.
They for some reason try to prove that ArmA is not suited for this type of gameplay.
WTF?! We never said that, what we said is
"It is of so much ease to do this kind gameplay in this game that the ONLY thing stopping your self ARE yourselves!!!"
Why then all say to go and play BF CoD or whaterver?
Come on man... Do you want me to quote them for you?
You still don't get the point of the conversation which is ArmA2 needs to include official pvp maps for competitve play in styles of C&H or something like that so PvPers can play and focus on those maps.
Not wait for the community to make them.
sparks50
Jan 10 2009, 01:28
CyDoN, surely there must be one pvp mission for Arma that you like? If not, how exactly would your dream mission differ from Berzerk?
As previously mentioned, according to BI the script language is pretty much the same in Arma 2, so porting a mission shouldn't be any harder than porting a mission to another island is today(with some class name changes etc. of course)
There would be little if any waiting time.
Dr_Eyeball
Jan 10 2009, 08:42
CyDoN, I fully support the idea of PvP in ArmA but you will need to give an example (even from another game) of the particular game-mode you have in mind.
I would support most of the game-modes found in BF2 Project Reality mod (http://www.realitymod.com/guide/Game_Modes), like AAS2, Insurgency, Command and Control (CNC) & Counter-Attack (CA).
I've identified about 8 common groups for PvP game-modes. BIS's PvP designs fall into 2 or 3 of these groups.
Also, there are significant differences between designing missions suitable for public servers for regular nightly play versus private/competition servers played once a week.
The number one reason PvP is difficult to keep alive on a public server, is getting sufficient player numbers on at the same time. With coop, 1 player is sufficient to start any old mission and have more players slowly join over the following hours, (like with Warfare). But with PvP, if you don't have the required player numbers from the start, you have to just wait until sufficient players join.
As far as some of the PvP critic comments go in this threads, some are totally unwarranted and misguided and some are just forum agitators. Their reputations have now plummeted.
Devastation
There's also the Devastation PvP mission pack (http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard311/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=67;t=72430;st=0) available too, which utilises the AAS2 game-mode design.
It has a few improvements over missions like Berzerk and similar game-modes, with changes to provide proper resource proportions & limits and a suitable balance to promote fair & regular play on public servers.
Quote[/b] ]<ul> limited weapon availability (to prevent everyone having an MG, sniper or AT/AA weapon). Using specialist roles simplifies this issue.
utilises AAS2 game-mode (not AAS1) to focus the conflicts but still provide a choice of objectives and create a front-line concept
large spacing between zones (flags), encourages transport sharing and combined attacks
large zone capture areas (markers), reduces camping
provides better vehicle balance (like avoiding mixing tanks and jets and infantry haphazardously). Instead it uses 'Themes' (like Sea/air vs land).
uses long capture times. There's nothing more boring than knowing a player can simply touch each flag or wait 10 seconds, then immediately move on to the next flag without any threat of opposition.
- require the capturer to find a defensive position or seek out threats for the entire capture duration.
- allows the defenders to react to the capture.
removed spawn points at flags. It is afterall the objective.
longer vehicle specific spawn durations (transport vehicles have low times, armour & attack aircraft are highest)
multiple spawn options & protected bases to prevent inescapable spawn camping and spamming[/list]
It also has extended functionality, not just improvements:
Quote[/b] ]<ul> mobile respawn vehicles for remote spawning. This also acts as a task (to deploy and protect) and a secondary objective (to destroy by opposition).
deployable bunkers from trucks for armaments & spawning. This also acts as a task and a secondary objective.
deployable assets from trucks: MG, AT, crates, fuel, etc
airlifting cargo & vehicles (required for offshore island bases)
team status dialog to enable joining groups
field dressings concept
ladders on small town missions, to change the normal CQB scenario from purely 2D ground based combat to 3D.
minor features: CSS, artillery HUD, WP HUD, airlift HUD, HMD Heli HUD, mission HUD, laser designator HUD
if scoreboard is visible, adds bonuses for non-combat roles (eg: transport, etc) and penalties for TK's, etc.
menu system for: enemy spotting, common requests and squad command menus
air-drops for crates & 4x4 jeeps.[/list]
A new update is due soon, with further changes in future. It will be ported to ArmA2 fairly close to release.
CyDoN, I fully support the idea of PvP in ArmA but you will need to give an example (even from another game) of the particular game-mode you have in mind.
I would support most of the game-modes found in BF2 Project Reality mod (http://www.realitymod.com/guide/Game_Modes), like AAS2, Insurgency, Command and Control (CNC) & Counter-Attack (CA).
I've identified about 8 common groups for PvP game-modes. BIS's PvP designs fall into 2 or 3 of these groups.
Also, there are significant differences between designing missions suitable for public servers for regular nightly play versus private/competition servers played once a week.
The number one reason PvP is difficult to keep alive on a public server, is getting sufficient player numbers on at the same time. With coop, 1 player is sufficient to start any old mission and have more players slowly join over the following hours, (like with Warfare). But with PvP, if you don't have the required player numbers from the start, you have to just wait until sufficient players join.
As far as some of the PvP critic comments go in this threads, some are totally unwarranted and misguided and some are just forum agitators. Their reputations have now plummeted.
Devastation
There's also the Devastation PvP mission pack (http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard311/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=67;t=72430;st=0) available too, which utilises the AAS2 game-mode design.
It has a few improvements over missions like Berzerk and similar game-modes, with changes to provide proper resource proportions & limits and a suitable balance to promote fair & regular play on public servers.
Quote[/b] ]<ul> limited weapon availability (to prevent everyone having an MG, sniper or AT/AA weapon). Using specialist roles simplifies this issue.
utilises AAS2 game-mode (not AAS1) to focus the conflicts but still provide a choice of objectives and create a front-line concept
large spacing between zones (flags), encourages transport sharing and combined attacks
large zone capture areas (markers), reduces camping
provides better vehicle balance (like avoiding mixing tanks and jets and infantry haphazardously). Instead it uses 'Themes' (like Sea/air vs land).
uses long capture times. There's nothing more boring than knowing a player can simply touch each flag or wait 10 seconds, then immediately move on to the next flag without any threat of opposition.
- require the capturer to find a defensive position or seek out threats for the entire capture duration.
- allows the defenders to react to the capture.
removed spawn points at flags. It is afterall the objective.
longer vehicle specific spawn durations (transport vehicles have low times, armour & attack aircraft are highest)
multiple spawn options & protected bases to prevent inescapable spawn camping and spamming[/list]
It also has extended functionality, not just improvements:
Quote[/b] ]<ul> mobile respawn vehicles for remote spawning. This also acts as a task (to deploy and protect) and a secondary objective (to destroy by opposition).
deployable bunkers from trucks for armaments & spawning. This also acts as a task and a secondary objective.
deployable assets from trucks: MG, AT, crates, fuel, etc
airlifting cargo & vehicles (required for offshore island bases)
team status dialog to enable joining groups
field dressings concept
ladders on small town missions, to change the normal CQB scenario from purely 2D ground based combat to 3D.
minor features: CSS, artillery HUD, WP HUD, airlift HUD, HMD Heli HUD, mission HUD, laser designator HUD
if scoreboard is visible, adds bonuses for non-combat roles (eg: transport, etc) and penalties for TK's, etc.
menu system for: enemy spotting, common requests and squad command menus
air-drops for crates & 4x4 jeeps.[/list]
A new update is due soon, with further changes in future. It will be ported to ArmA2 fairly close to release.
Hey Dr_Eyeball hi..
I am pretty sure that CyDoN speaks about maps like the ones that use many leagues like ESL,ArmA Liga,VBL etc.
They are very nice optiized maps perfect for fights between teams of 5-6-7 players.
I wonder all of those ppl who hate the idea of official PvP tournament maps (not public) have ever
played once one of these maps?
Give them a try.
[APS]Gnat
Jan 10 2009, 12:31
I am pretty sure that CyDoN speaks about maps like the ones that use many leagues like ESL,ArmA Liga,VBL etc
.....
.....
.....
I wonder all of those ppl who hate the idea of official PvP tournament maps (not public) have ever
played once one of these maps?
Give them a try.
Well how about we bridge the "gap" people think there is and;
Post a link to download "My idea of a TRUE PvP mission that BIS should make Official"
Your example, what you think PvP really is .....
Because if we don't understand, BIS have no friggin chance do they ......
Dr_Eyeball
Jan 10 2009, 12:34
I am pretty sure that CyDoN speaks about maps like the ones that use many leagues like ESL,ArmA Liga,VBL etc.After reviewing some posts, it doesn't seem like he is. At some of the PvP tournament sites I visited, the missions were identical in structure to Arma's very basic CTF & C&H game-mode missions. But he said these "had serious bugs" and were "bodge".
As Pulverizer said on previous page, see his opening post, which says:
A PvP mode that will introduce the gameplay of Battlefield2 with the mix of the realism of ArmA.which sounds like the BF2 Conquest game-mode with some sort of enhancements. So it sounds closer to what I described.
@<hidden>: Already did http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
ok here are the maps I am talking about
If you want download them and try them.
Its only 5MB
http://www.arma-liga.de/index.php?id=277
Also there are some very nice 3on3 maps at the bottom.
CyDoN, surely there must be one pvp mission for Arma that you like?
ESL maps are my favourite maps. Are the maps that i mean for competitive clan level PvP but here noone seems to know about, guess what? They are not official, they don't come with the game.
http://rapidshare.com/files/181791533/esl_mappack_v1.zip.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/41317823/esl_mappack_v1.zip.html
Yes the maps I like where those that Ptolemaios mentioned.
@<hidden>
I saw your maps and we even had them in our server but there were not any people willing to play them, and I think the reason is that the werent official otherwise they were great. Another thing is that those specfic maps you created where those for many ppl and with great organization (cannot be achived in public.
ParaGraphic L
Jan 10 2009, 15:31
CyDoN, surely there must be one pvp mission for Arma that you like?
ESL maps are my favourite maps. Are the maps that i mean for competitive clan level PvP but here noone seems to know about, guess what? They are not official, they don't come with the game.
Yes the maps I like where those that Ptolemaios mentioned.
@<hidden>
I saw your maps and we even had them in our server but there were not any people willing to play them, and I think the reason is that the werent official otherwise they were great. Another thing is that those specfic maps you created where those for many ppl and with great organization (cannot be achived in public.
@<hidden>: You like BIS to have ESL Maps included at release? If so explain what makes those missions good, maybe point to one exact mission and describe the good features.
If not go on and explain what you like to see done by BIS cause PvP is so versitile.
Dr_Eyeball made a good post, but is that what you have in mind aswell?
@<hidden>: You like BIS to have ESL Maps included at release? If so explain what makes those missions good, maybe point to one exact mission and describe the good features.
If not go on and explain what you like to see done by BIS cause PvP is so versitile.
Dr_Eyeball made a good post, but is that what you have in mind aswell?
They are fast intense, need few people about 5 to 8 to throw the fun. I don't say that BIS has to include third-party works. I say they need to see them and make something like that.
They are based on skill and tactics. The scripting is great they are small and they have no need of addons. They are balanced and they have great objective systems. They can be played from 5vs5 to 12vs12.
http://rapidshare.com/files/181791533/esl_mappack_v1.zip.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/41317823/esl_mappack_v1.zip.html
Here you can have a look.
There are great maps with my favourite (and most popular) being
B2T, Two Sides, Die Ahnoehe, West Sahrani
Dr_Eyeball
Jan 11 2009, 05:38
I had a quick look at "ESL 12v12 C&H TwoSides", "B2T" & AL version of "B2T".
Quote[/b] ]Structure:
- There are 1 or 2 flags to C&H
- Civilian arbitrator for competition matches
- There is TK & base rape protection
- Crates have limited basic weapons
In ESL version:
- mobile respawn truck
- Flag at base has an action to teleport you to the respawn truck.
- Vehicles: 1x Stryker ATGM, 2x Vulcan, 3x HMMWV MG, 1x truck
My opinion is that these are essentially the same as BIS's C&H missions, simply tidied up to make them suitable for competition plus having a large selection to choose from.
I suspect BIS has already prepared 10 variations (at different locations) based off their updated "C&H" game-mode template for Arma 2.
A few days work & it's done. So I wouldn't be concerned. The only part BIS need to focus on to match your missions is a few competition tweaks (arbitrator & base protection).
It seems you want "fast intense" small 30 minute missions for competition play, which is the opposite of what I want, being "slow & unpredictable" 2 hour missions with many tasks (but still with intense battles) on a large scale for public servers.
@<hidden>
I agree with you.Also I think that BIS have to release some unbugged maps cause in ArmA in every map you could find some bugs.I wish at the end we will be happy with ArmA2 maps either it is Coop or PvP.
I've noticed that various people seem to keep refering to missions as maps, at least my compehension of some posts reads that way.
@<hidden>
When you mentioned maps in your last post did you mean bugs in the island map itself or bugs in the missions?
I only ask as I've encountered heaps of mission bugs, but no island ones with missions on any of the default BIS maps (at least none I've noticed).
I'm just trying to improve my understanding of what everyone here is saying.
Am I wrong or do some people refer to maps when they mean missions? I'm sure i did it myself when I started playing Arma having come from games like Quake where it's not a mission but a map.
Regards
Gnrnr
I've noticed that various people seem to keep refering to missions as maps, at least my compehension of some posts reads that way.
@<hidden>
When you mentioned maps in your last post did you mean bugs in the island map itself or bugs in the missions?
I only ask as I've encountered heaps of mission bugs, but no island ones with missions on any of the default BIS maps (at least none I've noticed).
I'm just trying to improve my understanding of what everyone here is saying.
Am I wrong or do some people refer to maps when they mean missions? I'm sure i did it myself when I started playing Arma having come from games like Quake where it's not a mission but a map.
Regards
Gnrnr
Hi gnrnr
There is an official mission PvP called Sector Control.
There are 5 flags if I remember correctly that you have to control so you can gain points.
A bug I have noticed is that the opfor side cannot respawn correctly.
I mean you respawn,you hear noises but your screen is black.
I am very surprised that this bug never refered or fixed.
When I say map I mean mission.I know etimologicaly is not correct but I used to call them maps.
Yeah,
Was fun trying to find "Maps" for Arma when I first got it. Had much better success searching for "Missions" http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
Regards
Gnrnr
Yeah right http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
A little off-topic but the maps in the community refered as ''islands''.And missions as ''maps''.
What a mess eh?
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif
andersson
Jan 11 2009, 09:59
Not really, maps are what you look at when you are playing a mission on an island http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
I agree that the support for missions wasnt the best for arma. I havent played any SP, MP or campaign fully yet because of quality.
I do believe in arma2 as I read in some interviews that they are making an effort getting it right this time. We have to remember that arma was a 1.5 bonus between OFP and, at that time, OFP2.
Still its sad that the missions arent updated.
I enjoyed the original Arma and the QG SP campains. I've played a couple of others that i thought were good. "White Wolf" from memory was OK, been a while since i played them though.
I'm trying (and largely failing) to learn how to create missions and the scritping needed for that. This is taking up much valuable actual game time. So far I've only ever released one mission, and it is really just tweaking of the WACO warefare mission, with some different units added.
Michael_Wittman
Jan 12 2009, 13:13
Looks to me that the pink elephant is still invisible for most of the people...c ´on guys....of course PvP can be fun but it did never take-off because this game in ment to be extremely moddable wich makes it piece of cake for hackers to ruin any efford to make it popular. Warfare was awesome when they first released it but since the game any-cheating protection is almost like using windows xp firewall as your actual firewall that kind of gameplay and the rest of PvP were all born death.
Many people have suffer the cheaters in too many games for too long. They are specially unaceptable on a game that can take so many hours to meet the goal.
Try this: play for 3 hours completely inmersed in the game...a bad arse match in wich your team almost lost but after a frantic efford had made a awesome comeback and is in the edge of victory...then some random KFC son of ·$%·&/ joins the game and starts spamming buildings, changing hand weapons for the 20mm guns....etc...
Taste that bitterness 20, 30, 50, 100 times!.
Yes of course...to even thinking about any try to relaunch the PvP gameply its imperative to get a proper-updated-state-of-the-art-anticheating.
[APS]Gnat
Jan 13 2009, 10:43
Bunch of those sample missions require a heap of addons, hence I didnt test.
But the ECL maps look and feel very professional.
And those C&H are fairly typical of may I have played and enjoyed in ArmA, but the ECL ones seem a little more polished.
As for BIS making "bug free" missions, I'd go as far to say all missions have bugs, and how many times did many of our favorite non-BIS mission get revised during their releases, many times.
So BIS would have to be working REAL hard to get a Battle tested bug free C&H for the first realease ....
.... I guess similar to how Warefare got done http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
If you think BF, CoD or Quake-style competition scene is about individuals fighting each others instead of teams, I'm afraid you're wrong.
Taking for example ETQW, playing as team is cornerstone of being effective.
That doesn't mean the 1vs1 part should be overlooked
clearly not, in fact i have seen teamworking many times in my time playing DoD that works very effectivily to a point that can take the hold map within mins, but 70% of time those teamworking effort is non-exist because most ppl only care about shooting the enemys, oh well
what BI have to do, is to creat PvP mission simple that WORKS in the first place, i think there should be enought example 3rd party mission out there to give BI ideas on how to make a pvp mission, the only thing is to make it as bug free as possible
If you think BF, CoD or Quake-style competition scene is about individuals fighting each others instead of teams, I'm afraid you're wrong.
Taking for example ETQW, playing as team is cornerstone of being effective.
That doesn't mean the 1vs1 part should be overlooked
clearly not, in fact i have seen teamworking many times in my time playing DoD that works very effectivily to a point that can take the hold map within mins, but 70% of time those teamworking effort is non-exist because most ppl only care about shooting the enemys, oh well
what BI have to do, is to creat PvP mission simple that WORKS in the first place, i think there should be enought example 3rd party mission out there to give BI ideas on how to make a pvp mission, the only thing is to make it as bug free as possible
Well you dont follow the conversation. We are talking about organized PvP for instace maps that can be played at matches but at the same time being enjoyable in public servers, without addons and anything else.
-Total-
Jan 14 2009, 02:14
Three words:
Advance And Secure
(aka BF-style play of taking objectives)
The template has been out since 2006 and it's easy as heck to use.
When a few teams at www.teamwarfare.com were trying to get and ArmA league/ladder going, I submitted the first three "missions" of AAS for TWL as soon as the template kit was released. I put them on my server and even put Player Vs Player in the server title. People didn't join.
The answer to "why not?" is simple. ArmA is a co-op haven. Large scale battles where you can organize a few and play with many (ie each player with AI).
AAS in ArmA takes for more teamwork and coordination than the avergae gamer is willing to put forth. It's incredibly difficult even with the layout being easy. While I was hoping it would have taken off, I haven't seen an AAS in a very long time and my missions that I created have been on DVD of miscellaneous backup files for the past 2 years.
I don't blame BIS for this. It's the nature of the majority of gamers out there who want (as mention before) a fast-paced run n gun. BF2'ers who bought ArmA said it was too slow and stopped playing it. You can't speed it up, otherwise it drops the realism that makes ArmA what it is - ArmA.
Well you dont follow the conversation. We are talking about organized PvP for instace maps that can be played at matches but at the same time being enjoyable in public servers, without addons and anything else.
hum? use correct mission structure, choose correct location on map, place correct objects into to map, using correct scrpits, and above all creat a game that is as bug free as possible for the things above to work
isnt all these is needed to creat enjoyable mission(AKA mission that works)?? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif
anyway i really dont think BI will creat many of these organized matches in the final release, they may be able to creat 10 to 20 of them, but any more will required a lots of time and man power which is unreasonable for business, also new ideas may comes up, new script may created, mission makers may still have to creat a lots of things themself
Viiiper
Jan 14 2009, 16:04
Yes I too say go play COD & the other PvP games.
PvP players only look for exploits in maps and games and then take full advantage of them in every game I've ever seen. PvP gamers bunny hope, knife slash & generally play for only one thing the points/ kills, top killer, top waste of time.
ARMA is about team play & strategy, PvP players would say thats what they really want, but ever time you include a PvP based game style it turns into kiddie wonderland.
TEAM PLAY
If you mean PvP as in team against team, it's already there.
If you mean team play then that is TDM Team Death match which is a serious play format.
I associate PvP with Deathmatch, everyman for themselves.
If you want PvP build your own mod and add it and don't make excuses that if it ain't official it isn't going to work. Some of the best parts of ARMAI were/are NONE OFFICIAL MODS and every serious ARMA player knows it including B.I.S.
That's why those ideas have been incorp. into ARMAII by B.I.S.
ARMA is not a PvP game never was never will be, it is a Team game TDM & COOP.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/goodnight.gif
I really don't understand why arma can't be both, why does it have to be only one way? (coop only), I have played both single,coop and pvp maps and they are all enjoyable IMO, for PVP I play cerberus 5 maps, and they are enjoyable, some have aspects of more team play, others are more solo, but they still add some fresh air to the stupid AI/evolution din.
I reject the notion that you have to change the base game for it to be PVP compatible, that is utterly and completely stupid.
Is it as fast paced as BF2 or COD, no, but I don't see a problem with that, each person in game has the same "slowness" and it adds an air of "game realism", and dynamic that coop will never have IMO, at not least until AI = human thought (for good or bad).
I also reject the notion that PvP = bunny hop, blah, blah blah, again very stupid, sure most PvP games use this crap, but it is NOT! a requirement, it is the "status quo".
So to sum up, there is absolutely no reason that both can't co-exist together, one type of game play does not threaten the other, you can have both without changing the base engine.
If you don't wish to play a certain map/game type, then don't its that simple, and Arma is a GAME!, so having multiple game types builds different aspects of the entire community, and not pigeon hole it to any one place.
Croc4
the point is that while some of us think that ARMA can be both with its existing form, many others thinks it cant, or even worse, refused to accept the play style that it bring.
I am more then happy to see a serverlist full of populated server with people playing all kinds of mission so that i can have more choose, but sadily its not happening, and i am for sure dont want to play a dumped down game
@<hidden>:
It seems you did not grasp the meaning of PvP correctly. You confuse exploiting game mechanics with typical PvP behavior and your general understanding of PvP is too narrow.
PvP players only look for exploits in maps and games and then take full advantage of them in every game I've ever seen. PvP gamers bunny hope, knife slash & generally play for only one thing the points/ kills, top killer, top waste of time.
What you describe here is not the meaning and core concept of PvP but the practical appearance of the "play to win" mindset. These people do not care about the means they use to accomplish victory as long as it serves them.
A very popular article is Playing to Win (http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.html) which is often referred to as an excuse for the poor behavior you mentioned. Nevertheless it holds interesting ideas and when your only aim is to win or be the best it pretty much hits right on spot. Whether this is good or not is a moral question and depends on your motivation for playing. Problems arise when two opposite interests clash.
This is no synonym for PvP or PvP players though. I do understand why you perceive it that way as PvP games very well deliver the environment for such behavior. On the other hand PvE games suffer/benefit from it too but because you play against AI there is no one with an opposite motivation to play against you and as such there are no clashing interests.
I associate PvP with Deathmatch, everyman for themselves.
[...]
ARMA is not a PvP game never was never will be, it is a Team game TDM & COOP.
And this is where you are fundementally wrong. That YOU associate PvP with Deathmatch is fine, but that is not what PvP stands for. As you know PvP is the abbreviation for Player vs. Player. This may very well mean Deathmatch but actually is a much broader term. It defines every kind of interaction between players in a competitive way, including TDM. It doesn't matter what you are doing as long as your counterpart is another human being. As such I would even include Coop to a lesser extend into the PvP category if the AI side has human players alongside them.
This opens up a very wide playing field for PvP game modes which are virtually limitless as much as PvE scenarios are.
That PvP games tend to be chaotic and self-centric is due to their nature: they do have lots and lots of humans who are not organized. If you had a Coop-only game with 60+ people without anyone organizing it you would witness the same chaotic and self-centric behavior and patterns PvP-only games and game modes have.
If you want PvP build your own mod and add it and don't make excuses that if it ain't official it isn't going to work. Some of the best parts of ARMAI were/are NONE OFFICIAL MODS and every serious ARMA player knows it including B.I.S.
This is flawed again. Of course a PvP focused player can create his own gaming content but this - and that's what the OP is saying - won't attract the masses at first. Without a massive amount of players you cannot have big PvP engagements like CTI scenarios with humans only. Coop Maps are different in this regard as missing players can be replaced by AI characters and especially opponents are. This means you can play your self-created content far more quickly and spread the word about it as you simply need far less players to effectively run it at first.
ArmA2 can be both: a great PvE/Coop game and a great PvP game. The latter needs a very high player count and that's why ArmA2 should have an appealing variety of PvP maps/missions/game modes from the very beginning. Otherwise it's more likely than not that it misses out a great deal of its potential imo.
ArmA2 could be among the greatest PvP games if done right.
As I'm a great fan of PvP and PvE I'd like to agree with 4 In 1 at the end:
I am more then happy to see a serverlist full of populated server with people playing all kinds of mission so that i can have more choose
cheers
R4-P
whisper
Jan 16 2009, 20:37
Yes I too say go play COD & the other PvP games.
PvP players only look for exploits in maps and games and then take full advantage of them in every game I've ever seen. PvP gamers bunny hope, knife slash & generally play for only one thing the points/ kills, top killer, top waste of time.
ARMA is about team play & strategy, PvP players would say thats what they really want, but ever time you include a PvP based game style it turns into kiddie wonderland.
Wrong on all accounts.
Though it sums up pretty well the ignorance from the I'm-so-godly-better-than-others Coop breed (fortunately just a minor part of them) about what is PvP gaming.
Public Coop playing is as disorganized as public PvP playing.
Competitive PvP playing is as organized as private squad base Coop playing.
You should have a minimum of knowledge of the games you're talking about before playing the "I'm better than thou" card. Something you clearly lack, sir.
Yes I too say go play COD & the other PvP games.
PvP players only look for exploits in maps and games and then take full advantage of them in every game I've ever seen. PvP gamers bunny hope, knife slash & generally play for only one thing the points/ kills, top killer, top waste of time.
ARMA is about team play & strategy, PvP players would say thats what they really want, but ever time you include a PvP based game style it turns into kiddie wonderland.
Wrong on all accounts.
Though it sums up pretty well the ignorance from the I'm-so-godly-better-than-others Coop breed (fortunately just a minor part of them) about what is PvP gaming.
Public Coop playing is as disorganized as public PvP playing.
Competitive PvP playing is as organized as private squad base Coop playing.
You should have a minimum of knowledge of the games you're talking about before playing the "I'm better than thou" card. Something you clearly lack, sir.
+1 Whispery lad niceone on all those Viiiiiiiper sayers http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
The bad thing here is that people from coop backround think that pvp is just shooting people at random and getting high score NO thats not orginzed pvp thats public games. The best part is this one from Whisper
"Public Coop playing is as disorganized as public PvP playing.
Competitive PvP playing is as organized as private squad base Coop playing."
Well people cannot understand that. Another thing that people dont understand is that people are not discouraged from playing ArmA at the beginning. And also the same mistage is made again and again.
NO WE DON'T WANT TO PLAY BATTLEFIELD OR COD http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif THATS WHY WE TALK HERE!!!
That's what people do not get. Another thing, is ArmA THAT differant from BF2? NO ITS NOT its differant only in the small details that make the game differant from the other and make it better. For instace in BF2 and ArmA we have the same realism in using vehicles but in ArmA there are more roles for every vehicle.
I am SURE that if ArmA2 will have official PvP support it will succed in every aspect cause its a great game with great gameplay. It's fast and realistic at the sametime.
OH and something else to all of you there its NOT TDM OR DM its C&H http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Michael_Wittman
Jan 17 2009, 01:29
Well lets say it what it is. In most of the games out there you can aim whyle running and jump in some cases...
As this game tryes to be realistic thats no longer possible so I presume that most of PVP enthusiastic are simply "CAMPERS" as in every other game are called. And a battle of campers in very far from the commont taste of fun.
That said I allways scored top 3 on EVERY single battle of everyh single game I have played.
So I dont care as the day I switched I knew what was commming.
This game is this game....you will not have plenty detailed building interiors...or plenty detailed anything because its the game that goes into evything...and yes PvP can be "fun"for a whyle....for a WHYLE.
To play the game you must enjoy Coop otherwhile you will be very frustrated because its no way similar to any other clon of CoD...indeed I think you´d better path CoD untill it fits your requirement rather that asking BI to make it COD with huge maps....
I think ARMA I was a warmup to deliver the game they allways wanted....the true cruel real war simulator.
Sadly its not for kiddies..
Well lets say it what it is. In most of the games out there you can aim whyle running and jump in some cases...
As this game tryes to be realistic thats no longer possible so I presume that most of PVP enthusiastic are simply "CAMPERS" as in every other game are called. And a battle of campers in very far from the commont taste of fun.
That said I allways scored top 3 on EVERY single battle of everyh single game I have played.
So I dont care as the day I switched I knew what was commming.
This game is this game....you will not have plenty detailed building interiors...or plenty detailed anything because its the game that goes into evything...and yes PvP can be "fun"for a whyle....for a WHYLE.
To play the game you must enjoy Coop otherwhile you will be very frustrated because its no way similar to any other clon of CoD...indeed I think you´d better path CoD untill it fits your requirement rather that asking BI to make it COD with huge maps....
I think ARMA I was a warmup to deliver the game they allways wanted....the true cruel real war simulator.
Sadly its not for kiddies..
Hello MR. GROWN UP!! (as we are the kiddies I suppose from your wittings) When you play a match between 2 teams that have trained in a specific map CAMPING is a strategy and not something annoying (maybe if you know war is about camping so the simulating that is awosome realism) and I didn't ask building interiors as it would have been retarated for someone to think of it when C&H and ArmA is about an area and not a building. When playing in Clan level in tournametns noone looks in what position you finished but only who has won the match/tournament/league.
You haven't read any single post and you come here and post this? Say what? Well the game is nice but the only thing it lacks is MP maps tell me Mr. Michael_Wittman why should I play CoD when I don't like it and I like ArmA?
You should play coop in Doom 1 then and not ArmA.
ArmA is about teamwork, teamwork cannot be achived in public servers as its known even if its in PvP or Coop. So we want to play in orginzed clan level, as there are coop communities who aim in simulation.
We don't care about public PvP and we also don't care in what position you score in public servers in all the games you have played.
BangTail
Jan 20 2009, 17:31
Bottom line -
You arent going to get what you want unless you design the missions yourself. ArmA/ArmA 2 are not and will not be geared towards PvP players.
I'd suggest you grab PRMM (www.realitymod.com) as that is probably the most realistic PvP experience you are going to get (I love it).
I know its probably not what you wanted to hear, but it is what it is. You can't please all of the people all of the time and your thread title is very misleading.
I've been playing OFP/ArmA since the beginning and I come across very few people who care about PvP in ArmA. I dont think MANY fans care about it at all but I will grant you there is a vocal minority.
E
SaBrE_UK
Jan 20 2009, 19:34
I've been playing OFP/ArmA since the beginning and I come across very few people who care about PvP in ArmA. I dont think MANY fans care about it at all but I will grant you there is a vocal minority.
Indeed, I don't care for PvP in ArmA, but given the option I believe PvP (or TvT) can be highly rewarding and more satisfying that fighting flawed AI. A well-made TvT mission could be amazing with the right players. A more structured approach to TvT would be an excellent boost for multiplayer.
wamingo
Jan 20 2009, 20:41
You should play coop in Doom 1 then and not ArmA.
We don't care about public PvP and we also don't care in what position you score in public servers in all the games you have played.
Actually, Doom1 coop is awesome.
I'm all for BIS making awesome missions, but I don't think official pvp maps will make pvp or TvT more popular.
In my opinion, YOU are the only one that can make something popular. And by "You" I mean the people with the desire for it.
So what I think you ought to try is to pick a day or two per week for several straight weeks, advertise it on forum or so, get all your friends to sign up and play exclusively tvt or whatever.
And if it's true that there are "many caring fans", then it should be easy as cake?
There will be PvP in ArmA2!
The question is only, if it will be any good or not...
In ArmA the PvP part was strong at the beginning, but ended up in being very little.
Now i think there are just a few servers left with DM and Berzerk missions.
Compared to OFP and the many PvP servers there, ArmA has nearly no PvP at all.
Most PvP players recognized that the controls and movements of the infantry soldiers were just not good enough for PvP games, so they stopped playing at all or tried out other games.
Now we are all waiting for ArmA2 and i hope the controls and movements of the infantry soldiers wont be as clunky as it was in ArmA.
A good PvP community in ArmA2 wont disturb anything. It would even help to have more games sold and so more money for BIS.
I prefer PvP, but i also like nice COOP missions.
However, im definitely going to make some PvP missions for ArmA2, but only if ArmA2 will have smoother controls and movements for the infantry soldiers.
And as far i heard, BIS already said that they overworked it.
Here a little quote:
Quote[/b] ]Animations (more fluid and realistic, hand signals, ability to reload while walking, climb over smaller obstacles)
So im really looking forward to the release of ArmA2 and im also looking forward to have a lot of fun with self-made PvP missions! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/thumbs-up.gif
I didn't brother reading all here, because this topic was counteracted from the start by bigoted people who never played the great PvP maps for years in OFP.
Just wanna say, if ArmA II has the same stiff animations, movement and aiming, the PvP part of the game will fail again.
And it has noting to do with the quality of maps.
The problem is the controles and the aim.
OFP is still the reference here.
will be there Mortars.??? .. it would make it more intensive.. and it opend more tactical solutions..
maionaze
Feb 4 2009, 14:23
will be there Mortars.??? .. it would make it more intensive.. and it opend more tactical solutions..
MLRS artilerry will be present in the game , much more fun
will be there Mortars.??? .. it would make it more intensive.. and it opend more tactical solutions..
WTF? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif
will be there Mortars.??? .. it would make it more intensive.. and it opend more tactical solutions..
MLRS artilerry will be present in the game , much more fun
Yeah. All those duds which will then become landmines would also be major fun http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
Michael_Wittman
Feb 9 2009, 21:27
Regarding artillery I would love to see this.
ARCHER (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4jnUXUzV2c)
what do all these have to do with pvp?
There was a much different mindset of gamers in 2001 when compared to now.
FPS's such as Battlefield 1942, Tribes2, OFP, etc would not have worked as well these days.
FPS gamers are generally after one thing these days - kill stats.
There's no kill glory in a support role no matter how vital it is. People are not going to flock to a game where they can't immediately pick up a weapon and start shooting things. The patience just isn't there anymore.
I would absolutely love large scale pvp battles in ArmA and ArmA2, but it would not fly. Coordinating more than 6 gamers these days is, well, short of impossible. Each person seems to have their own idea of what is going to make their team win and everyone branches off to do their own thing - and boost kill stats while they're at it.
Look at AA 3.0 coming up. In 2001, AA was the only game of it's kind. It took skill and teamwork. Over the years, it was developed and degraded into a fast-paced, kill-centric game. Videos of the new, 2009 one show the weapon staying totally centered while the player is running down stairs.
Due to it's complexity and reliance on coordination and teamwork, ArmA and ArmA 2 will be more successful in their roles as large scale coop missions. And that's pretty sad considering the potential that is there.
There was a much different mindset of gamers in 2001 when compared to now.
FPS's such as Battlefield 1942, Tribes2, OFP, etc would not have worked as well these days.
FPS gamers are generally after one thing these days - kill stats.
There's no kill glory in a support role no matter how vital it is. People are not going to flock to a game where they can't immediately pick up a weapon and start shooting things. The patience just isn't there anymore.
I would absolutely love large scale pvp battles in ArmA and ArmA2, but it would not fly. Coordinating more than 6 gamers these days is, well, short of impossible. Each person seems to have their own idea of what is going to make their team win and everyone branches off to do their own thing - and boost kill stats while they're at it.
Look at AA 3.0 coming up. In 2001, AA was the only game of it's kind. It took skill and teamwork. Over the years, it was developed and degraded into a fast-paced, kill-centric game. Videos of the new, 2009 one show the weapon staying totally centered while the player is running down stairs.
Due to it's complexity and reliance on coordination and teamwork, ArmA and ArmA 2 will be more successful in their roles as large scale coop missions. And that's pretty sad considering the potential that is there.
Well lad you are wrong. When playing in a clan fighting other clans in a match every player has his role. The way things are going to roll is about tactics and strategy, in public games of course things cannot be organized.
-Total-
Feb 10 2009, 23:19
Well, if 37 years old is being a lad, then I'll take the compliment http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
I've competed in team-based online gaming since 1998. Been to the invite level in both CAL and TWL in several games....just not CS or CSS. Never liked those two lol!
Yes, there's teamwork in a clan match depending on the game, but more often than not it centers on killing the other team rather than the objective.
America's Army was beautiful for competition, but over time the larger outdoor maps were dropped from the leagues in lieu of the smaller maps that could be accomplished faster with a more smash heads style gameplay. Maps that used to have league round times of 8 mintues are now down to 4 minutes to make it "more tense."
Even Tribes2 and Battlefield 1942 both saw this. BF42 saw the inevitable camping of the spawn flag, turkey-shoot to burn down the kill tickets.
Competition in ArmA never took off. In TWL, I submittted the first mission pack using the AA Template. I was a competition manager at the time, so it wasn't some random name putting this out there. The missions were made for the 5v5, 7v7, and 10v10 team sizes. Put up on our server and advertised as Player vs Player. Scantly populated, it never took off. I could put Evolution on though and it would fill up in a heartbeat lol!
I am speaking, primarily, of US-based gaming too. The European leagues had a bit better luck with the more complex games.
Sorry, but you play the wrong game, if you want ArmA to be similar to BF. In RL there is no instant spawn 20 sec walk to headshot an enemy.
-Total-
Feb 11 2009, 09:49
Whoa!
Where did I even imply that I wanted it to be anything like BF?
That's the last thing I want lol! BF42 just one of the games that I competed within in my past. I never did play BF2 past the demo. That one ruined the franchise by nubbing the game down to death.
I would LOVE for ArmA to have some great PvP pubs and competition venues, but the sad fact is that it will not likely draw anough participants to justify any sort of league or ladder. God knows I tried to get it going at TWL, but the interest was too low because ArmA's gameplay is too "slow"
By "slow", people mean that they just wanna rush in an kill things rather than use their heads.
In no way though would I ever want ArmA's gameplay to even come close to some arcade atrocity like BF2! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
Frantic
Feb 11 2009, 10:25
=- @<hidden> Feb. 11 2009,08:57)]Sorry, but you play the wrong game, if you want ArmA to be similar to BF. In RL there is no instant spawn 20 sec walk to headshot an enemy.
lol...the good old "In RL" argument.
ArmA is still a game, so if you want RL go and join the army! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Furthermore, ArmA can be similar to BF.
Just start the mission-editor and create it.
The greatness of OFP was and still is the possibility to create every game-mode you want and which you can imagine.
So in OFP it was able to be done, also in ArmA and for sure in ArmAII.
BIS already mentioned that the controls of the infantry soldiers will be more fluent compared to ArmA and so we all hope that the robotic movements of the infantry soldiers will be no more existent in ArmAII.
The downfall of ArmA with PvP was the terrible movements of the infantry soldiers and if BIS gets rid of these then we will get a great game with ArmAII, even for PvP action.
About your statement with the non existence of respawn in RL, just create a mission with no respawn and be happy with it. Many others like to have a respawn and so i would propose you to let us alone with our respawn missions and for yourself just dont go on servers or missions with respawn! I hope thats not too hard for you. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
I also tried to get some league action going with ArmA, but sadly i failed too.
There were enough people for league action at the beginning, but after some patches most people recognized that BIS are happy with the controls and movements of the infantry soldiers and so many people moved on to other games and stopped playing ArmA.
Lets all hope that BIS has learned something out of the dropping online player numbers in ArmA and will show us some nice fluent movements of the infantry soldiers in ArmAII! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/notworthy.gif
@<hidden>
My opinion is that the problem are not the movment my friend. The problem is that there was no map pack to play with. Most PvP players tried to play ArmA but found no maps to fight others, in a clan level also. This was a big strike at the game, especialy when clan matches consists of 5vs5 to 10vs10 tops for various reasons. Another problem is people who say this silly things like "you want pvp go play bf2" if you read some of the posts here in this thread you end up rofl, someone said that we (the pvpers) want visibily of 200m or something like that, generaly ArmA community is agianst PvP. They tend to think that with addons and mods things get improved, which is a silly thing also as addons are not allowed to be used in matches or at least the use of specific ones is only available.
@<hidden>
We tried to get into TWL but we didnt see much as u mentioned although ESL was my best expirience with ArmA. Great maps, great teams and players. We still play those maps up until now and yes in general in the US ArmA was more for evoloution http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
The problem as I and others metioned before many times is the officiality of maps, some say that in order to play one must make his own maps, thats pointless I know the basics of scripting and map making but
First: I don't want to spend my time on that, many people have no idea for how to make maps.
Second: I gave 45Euros dont I deserve to have 10 damn maps?.
Third: How is going to gurentee that the maps will be blanaced?
Last: Is anyone willing to join a sever with a map called B2T (the best map in ArmA if you ask me)?
The PvP players in all games do not care to learn how the game was made, most warcraft 3 playres that play DOTA do not know that warcraft3 has an editor. They want to play the GAME against other players in some organizations in order to achive competition and PLAY nothing more nothing less, they do not care about addons or simulation or whatever.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif
Frantic
Feb 11 2009, 11:25
You say that you dont wanna make missions by yourself, because you think that BIS has to do it?http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
BIS already proved in ArmA that they are not really interested in making PvP missions.
The few PvP missions in ArmA were just bad, lots of bugs and not really balanced too.
You say that you spent 45€ and so there should be quality PvP missions within ArmAII?
I can underline that, but sadly as i said already BIS is not really interested in PvP and i think even if they try they would fail. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
There is a good reason why BIS dont care about PvP missions within the game and we all know it.
The mission-editor is all what we need. Ok you need the players too to test the missions, but that worked well in OFP and ArmA.
However, the PvP community will never be as popular in ArmAII as in some other games.
We can just hope that the PvP community in ArmAII will be nearly as good as it was in OFP. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Many people would like to see the PvP community in ArmAII more popular as in CSS, but thats just wishful thinking.
The only way i can think of to get quality PvP missions within ArmAII is by doing it by ourself and sending them in to BIS and maybe they implement them in a next patch.
Well made custom missions always spread out and league play is also possible with self-made missions. Just publicize them on the ArmAII fan pages and then you will see them on many servers. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
However, you are right with the appeal for quality PvP missions within ArmAII.
That would help the PvP community alot and would not scare away many possible PvP players from the beginning.
But i still think that the clunky controls and the robotic movements are the real reason for the nearly non existence of PvP play in ArmA!
Akira BAADAKKU
Feb 12 2009, 13:44
It is funny how people used to tell you to go play BF when you "accidentally" speak about pvp...
BF ?? What is it ? hmmm...hoo...I may renember, is it Battelfield ?? And Battelfield 2 by the same way ??
Are those game still existing ?? I renember I tested the BF2. Yeah was funny...you know...just like that...but I fastly as other players get bored of it. Why should we replay that ? You're misunderstanding the players whom you speak to.
There are no CS players here, nor Cod4 players, or whatever classic fps game that I could make an endless list. We're almost all from OFP and ArmA, other players would be horrified or shooked to see the name "ArmA" on a forum and would certainly go away.
So please everybody...do not speak about this game anymore, nobody care of it and this repetition, especially when it is used as an argument, is getting on our nervs, because it DOES mean NOTHING...
80% of OFP pvp players had played coop for months and years, they surely know better than you do about what was so cool with OFP, and what was the failure with ArmA. They played almost every mods and type of game from OFP (COOP, ctf, c&h, cti, serial-killer, hunt-the-rabbit, CrymeCity...and so on), so when ArmAII is explicitly meant by this community to be only a COOP game...we're laughing our head off, because it's so ridiculous and is a pig-headed way to see ArmAII as a "future" excellent game just because of COOP simulation.
Look to ArmA...how many years before it collapsed ? One year ?? Okay, one year and half maximum ??
Even OFP is more active today...
Ha yes I almost forget it, you're gonna say me "Hey you're wrong, look how many coop evolution there are, and if want play classic coop there are still some of them which hide in the server list"
COOP Evolution...only a few of you are playing this, and if you're looking for a real coop you know it's almost as hard to find it as it is to find a CTF.
How many times we have to speak about it, how many time we have each other repeated ourself about the question.
But still I've got the feeling that the community desperatly want to make of this game another failure.
OFP was the best wargame based on a simulation "structure", but still it was so well balanced in the gameplay, and especially about THE MOVEMENTS (and the problem had not come because of the mapping, which was still devellopped on ArmA whatever it was C&H or CTF...), which allow players to have so much comfort and different style of gaming. The CTF, DM fraggers, C&H players, CTI players, none of those type of game spoiled OFP, none of those prevented COOP players to play with so much satisfaction a coop mission as I've so enjoyed in the past myself.
OFP was and is still the exception of every FPS game I met before, even every games who are existing and existed. It unified RTS, RPG, and FPS players, thanks to the hugeness of gameplay possibilities, and its amazing gameplay balance which was maybe the result of "luck" or mistake by the developpers, who, as an alchemist, found the supreme potion by mistake.
IS the PvP important for ArmA II ?? Of course it is, and I hope the developpers didn't forget it.
ArmAII does not have to be an exclusive COOP game, OR the marvelousness of OFP would be definitively reminded as a MYTH
without successor, a story from the past, a science and an Art forgotten forever.
Michael_Wittman
Feb 12 2009, 17:23
If you are expecting ARMA II will build a large community of PvP be sure to ask for a solid easy-to-use anticheating system otherwise the vast mayority of players will flee from Arma II faster than the speed of light. Its a common problem with every PvP capable game out there...and the greatness of this game is also its sin...its too open.
Frantic
Feb 12 2009, 23:47
quote from the Russian interview of Ivan Buchta translated by Raphier: link (http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard311/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=56;t=76313;st=480)
Quote[/b] ]Gameinator: What multiplayer game modes will there be?
Bohemia Interactive: We are seriously focused and we want to make them similar to Warfare mode, it works perfectly for our games, but we also have incorporated more popular multiplayer modes (deathmatch, team deathmatch, Capture the flag). mission editor will allow players to quickly and easily make custom modifications.
And of course we must not forget that in Armed Assault 2 players will be able to join 'my friends' to play an entire campaign in co-operative multiplayer. Fans for several years begged us for it, now it's possible!
So there will be CTF missions made by BIS. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/notworthy.gif
Looking forward to see them. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Michael_Wittman
Feb 13 2009, 09:41
Coop multiplayer campaign!! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif
HellToupee
Feb 13 2009, 11:01
But i still think that the clunky controls and the robotic movements are the real reason for the nearly non existence of PvP play in ArmA!
Yep agreed, maps were never the issue especially with ARMA where all the popular MP missions were quickly ported.
But even if one says game is coop focused not pvp, where was the co-op? every server is just evolution or similar, thats not really co-op.
BangTail
Feb 15 2009, 22:26
@<hidden>
My opinion is that the problem are not the movment my friend. The problem is that there was no map pack to play with. Most PvP players tried to play ArmA but found no maps to fight others, in a clan level also. This was a big strike at the game, especialy when clan matches consists of 5vs5 to 10vs10 tops for various reasons. Another problem is people who say this silly things like "you want pvp go play bf2" if you read some of the posts here in this thread you end up rofl, someone said that we (the pvpers) want visibily of 200m or something like that, generaly ArmA community is agianst PvP. They tend to think that with addons and mods things get improved, which is a silly thing also as addons are not allowed to be used in matches or at least the use of specific ones is only available.
@<hidden>
We tried to get into TWL but we didnt see much as u mentioned although ESL was my best expirience with ArmA. Great maps, great teams and players. We still play those maps up until now and yes in general in the US ArmA was more for evoloution http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
The problem as I and others metioned before many times is the officiality of maps, some say that in order to play one must make his own maps, thats pointless I know the basics of scripting and map making but
First: I don't want to spend my time on that, many people have no idea for how to make maps.
Second: I gave 45Euros dont I deserve to have 10 damn maps?.
Third: How is going to gurentee that the maps will be blanaced?
Last: Is anyone willing to join a sever with a map called B2T (the best map in ArmA if you ask me)?
The PvP players in all games do not care to learn how the game was made, most warcraft 3 playres that play DOTA do not know that warcraft3 has an editor. They want to play the GAME against other players in some organizations in order to achive competition and PLAY nothing more nothing less, they do not care about addons or simulation or whatever.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif
Simply put, you are playing the wrong game and consequently, setting yourself up for a big disappointment.
OFP and ArmA rely HEAVILY on 3rd party missions, mods and addons. It will be the same with ArmA 2.
ArmA isn't a game for people who dont want to learn the whole package. It is essentially an editor with some very basic missions out of the box to keep people quiet.
Even some of the original SP missions in ArmA STILL dont work properly.
The best stuff to come out of OFP and ArmA are all 3rd party and are more often than not, aimed at cooperative players.
ArmA is a sandbox, PvP is possible but it is not what the engine was designed for and there are better choices (like PRMM) for those who want a PvP experience.
E
@<hidden>
My opinion is that the problem are not the movment my friend. The problem is that there was no map pack to play with. Most PvP players tried to play ArmA but found no maps to fight others, in a clan level also. This was a big strike at the game, especialy when clan matches consists of 5vs5 to 10vs10 tops for various reasons. Another problem is people who say this silly things like "you want pvp go play bf2" if you read some of the posts here in this thread you end up rofl, someone said that we (the pvpers) want visibily of 200m or something like that, generaly ArmA community is agianst PvP. They tend to think that with addons and mods things get improved, which is a silly thing also as addons are not allowed to be used in matches or at least the use of specific ones is only available.
@<hidden>
We tried to get into TWL but we didnt see much as u mentioned although ESL was my best expirience with ArmA. Great maps, great teams and players. We still play those maps up until now and yes in general in the US ArmA was more for evoloution http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
The problem as I and others metioned before many times is the officiality of maps, some say that in order to play one must make his own maps, thats pointless I know the basics of scripting and map making but
First: I don't want to spend my time on that, many people have no idea for how to make maps.
Second: I gave 45Euros dont I deserve to have 10 damn maps?.
Third: How is going to gurentee that the maps will be blanaced?
Last: Is anyone willing to join a sever with a map called B2T (the best map in ArmA if you ask me)?
The PvP players in all games do not care to learn how the game was made, most warcraft 3 playres that play DOTA do not know that warcraft3 has an editor. They want to play the GAME against other players in some organizations in order to achive competition and PLAY nothing more nothing less, they do not care about addons or simulation or whatever.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif
Simply put, you are playing the wrong game and consequently, setting yourself up for a big disappointment.
OFP and ArmA rely HEAVILY on 3rd party missions, mods and addons. It will be the same with ArmA 2.
ArmA isn't a game for people who dont want to learn the whole package. It is essentially an editor with some very basic missions out of the box to keep people quiet.
Even some of the original SP missions in ArmA STILL dont work properly.
The best stuff to come out of OFP and ArmA are all 3rd party and are more often than not, aimed at cooperative players.
ArmA is a sandbox, PvP is possible but it is not what the engine was designed for and there are better choices (like PRMM) for those who want a PvP experience.
E
Maybe you are playing the wrong game.Go join real life army.
Also you didnrt make the try to read all posts.So before you make retard posts read them first.Here is a topic for PvP.Keep your coop away.If you have any idea about PvP is welcome otherwise dont post.
P.S. : What all coop players dont understand is that PvP is Coop against human enemies.
BangTail
Feb 16 2009, 23:50
@<hidden>
My opinion is that the problem are not the movment my friend. The problem is that there was no map pack to play with. Most PvP players tried to play ArmA but found no maps to fight others, in a clan level also. This was a big strike at the game, especialy when clan matches consists of 5vs5 to 10vs10 tops for various reasons. Another problem is people who say this silly things like "you want pvp go play bf2" if you read some of the posts here in this thread you end up rofl, someone said that we (the pvpers) want visibily of 200m or something like that, generaly ArmA community is agianst PvP. They tend to think that with addons and mods things get improved, which is a silly thing also as addons are not allowed to be used in matches or at least the use of specific ones is only available.
@<hidden>
We tried to get into TWL but we didnt see much as u mentioned although ESL was my best expirience with ArmA. Great maps, great teams and players. We still play those maps up until now and yes in general in the US ArmA was more for evoloution http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
The problem as I and others metioned before many times is the officiality of maps, some say that in order to play one must make his own maps, thats pointless I know the basics of scripting and map making but
First: I don't want to spend my time on that, many people have no idea for how to make maps.
Second: I gave 45Euros dont I deserve to have 10 damn maps?.
Third: How is going to gurentee that the maps will be blanaced?
Last: Is anyone willing to join a sever with a map called B2T (the best map in ArmA if you ask me)?
The PvP players in all games do not care to learn how the game was made, most warcraft 3 playres that play DOTA do not know that warcraft3 has an editor. They want to play the GAME against other players in some organizations in order to achive competition and PLAY nothing more nothing less, they do not care about addons or simulation or whatever.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif
Simply put, you are playing the wrong game and consequently, setting yourself up for a big disappointment.
OFP and ArmA rely HEAVILY on 3rd party missions, mods and addons. It will be the same with ArmA 2.
ArmA isn't a game for people who dont want to learn the whole package. It is essentially an editor with some very basic missions out of the box to keep people quiet.
Even some of the original SP missions in ArmA STILL dont work properly.
The best stuff to come out of OFP and ArmA are all 3rd party and are more often than not, aimed at cooperative players.
ArmA is a sandbox, PvP is possible but it is not what the engine was designed for and there are better choices (like PRMM) for those who want a PvP experience.
E
Maybe you are playing the wrong game.Go join real life army.
Also you didnrt make the try to read all posts.So before you make retard posts read them first.Here is a topic for PvP.Keep your coop away.If you have any idea about PvP is welcome otherwise dont post.
P.S. : What all coop players dont understand is that PvP is Coop against human enemies.
Keep your personal attacks to yourself.
Its got nothing to do with RL, and I never said that it did. OFP/ArmA are not traditionally PvP or geared towards PvP.
You'll just have to live with that.
E
What does it mean "live with that"?
Again you are off-topic.Post about PvP or go to another thread.OFP had many PvP missions and the majority of servers were running PvP.So you are wrong once again.
What you cannot understand is that PvP has more intense,is more unpredictable,is more tactical etc. cause you play against humans.Now go to the editor and play with your boring bots. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
BangTail
Feb 17 2009, 17:14
What does it mean "live with that"?
Again you are off-topic.Post about PvP or go to another thread.OFP had many PvP missions and the majority of servers were running PvP.So you are wrong once again.
What you cannot understand is that PvP has more intense,is more unpredictable,is more tactical etc. cause you play against humans.Now go to the editor and play with your boring bots. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
LoL, I just checked the ArmA server browser and the ONLY populated servers are CooP. ArmA 2 will be more of the same chief.
I'll agree that OFP did have a more robust PvP base but as someone else pointed out, its all about kill stats and e-p33n waving in the PvP world and ArmA doesnt lend itself well to that type of play.
Cheers,
E
PS : Stop telling me where and what I can post please. Tx in advance http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/whistle.gif
And why "ArmA doesnt lend itself well to that type of play." Its a great game it should have it.
What u still don't understand is that we do not talk about public servers. Public gaming has no intrest, there is no satisfaction winning players of lower skill than you.
Frantic
Feb 18 2009, 09:47
But we need public PvP activity and thats the reason why some well made PvP missions by BIS itself would help the PvP ArmAII commnuty a lot.
I knew this endless discussions between PvP and COOP since OFP and way more since ArmA.
Because in OFP we PvP players had not much to criticize.
The gameplay of OFP was good for both PvP and COOP.
However, since ArmA many people stopped playing ArmA or turned back to OFP because of the horrible movements and controls of ArmA. Not only PvP players but also COOP players.
In OFP are still more PvP servers running than in ArmA...
I really dont understand why so many COOP guys have still a problem with the PvP part of a game...
I have never seen a PvP guy who comes a long and tells the COOP guys to play another game...
However, thats offtopic...
BIS has made PvP missions for ArmA.
So they will do it again for ArmAII.
We just wanna see this time decent missions without any bugs!
Thats all we want. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
PS: and of course the fluent movements and nice controls of infantry units. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Michael_Wittman
Feb 18 2009, 11:20
Just to refresh peoples mind about what ARMA public PvP turned out to be:
And I think that ends the PvP discussion.
Placebo
Feb 18 2009, 12:03
Please do not link to them or anything related to them.
Michael_Wittman
Feb 18 2009, 12:28
OK sorry...just trying to make a point http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
BangTail
Feb 18 2009, 19:46
TBH, I have nothing against PvP. Conversely, the general attitude of PvP players just puts me off. I would prefer that they stuck to UT3 or whatever.
I know its not all of you but the "Im so great and you're a n00b" attitude that comes along with SOME PvP players is plain sad.
I'm sure PvP with organized groups can be quite good fun but the public face of it is cheats and braggards. I play PRMM for my PvP fix and the community used to be really good, with everyone getting on comms and using Teamwork.
Unfortunately, it has become way more popular of late and a lot of the vBF2 community have shown up and ruined it with cheating etc.
If "clunky" movement etc keeps these people out of ArmA, then I hope BIS do nothing to change the core of the game. There are plenty of PvP games to play. Not every single one of them has to be adjusted to suit PvPers.
E
TBH, I have nothing against PvP. Conversely, the general attitude of PvP players just puts me off. I would prefer that they stuck to UT3 or whatever.
I know its not all of you but the "Im so great and you're a n00b" attitude that comes along with SOME PvP players is plain sad.
I'm sure PvP with organized groups can be quite good fun but the public face of it is cheats and braggards. I play PRMM for my PvP fix and the community used to be really good, with everyone getting on comms and using Teamwork.
Unfortunately, it has become way more popular of late and a lot of the vBF2 community have shown up and ruined it with cheating etc.
If "clunky" movement etc keeps these people out of ArmA, then I hope BIS do nothing to change the core of the game. There are plenty of PvP games to play. Not every single one of them has to be adjusted to suit PvPers.
E
It's waste of time trying to explain to you cause you don't seem to understand. Although since my girlfriend woke me up and I am bored I give it a try.
1. "TBH, I have nothing against PvP." SURE http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/yay.gif
2. Of course there will be teamwork since you will probably know your clan mates more in person than in-game.
3. "I know its not all of you but the "Im so great and you're a n00b" attitude that comes along with SOME PvP players is plain sad."
You know? Noone cares if you are a "n00b" a "pr0" player does not think about it, success is not to win in a public server, the "pr0" will not even play in public servers. Of course the "pr0" has spend more time on the game, and of course he will "pwn" you.
4. pr0 players DO NOT cheat, they win without cheats, they won't even try to play in a public server, the only game that you cannot organize instant clan matches is ArmA, not because there are no players but because they do not care to evolve in gaming terms - use forms of communications - for instance the most popular Irc or even xfire etc. And since you seem to be form the inside check quaknet channels for every game that exists and see the thousnands of players, of course in #armawarorga channel noone shows up.
http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=77343 (http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard311/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=64;t=77343)
5. "Unfortunately, it has become way more popular of late and a lot of the vBF2 community have shown up and ruined it with cheating etc."
WHat?
6. You are not reading the threads you just came here to post what YOU think we are talking about. NOONE said about "adjusting" the game they only said that the game needs MP maps.
Hello,
the only guys that don't seem to understand from my point of view seems to be you guys.
There are never going to be "official","well balanced" PvP maps. This isn't such a game and BIS isn't such a company.
Quite honestly, your stubborn demands to be spoon-fed by BIS are an insult to anyone who spent numerous years spending quite an amount of freetime,brain power and money to get his/her gameplay out of this marvelous open engine. Usually without any support by BIS that is.
And that is like a lot of creative people , the kind that this community is made out of.
This game luckily allows for diversity and many people have fun with it , but surely the uncreative,uncommitted will either have to accept what they get or in your case spend 1-4 days to make a bloody DM/CTF/C&H mission.
(.. or find someone else in the community to do it for you. Trust me, you will get way better missions for you this way)
Frantic
Feb 18 2009, 22:11
...
If "clunky" movement etc keeps these people out of ArmA, then I hope BIS do nothing to change the core of the game. There are plenty of PvP games to play. Not every single one of them has to be adjusted to suit PvPers.
E
sorry, but this statement is not really constructive...
The robotic movements of the infantry units in ArmA is really nothing to be proud of.
Even COOP is no fun to play for me with this controls and the resulting robot-moves.
A more fluent gameplay does no harm at all to everyone.
Believe me, ArmAII like ArmA wont be attractive for those people.
And online public play always happens on a server and the server where i mainly play on is my own, so people who get on my nerves or people who destroy the fun of others can be kicked or banned very easily.
It seems that you are really against public PvP in ArmAII.
Thats really sad, because the minority of all the people who could have fun with ArmAII and public PvP are the nerving guys and because of this few individuals is your opinion that nobody should have fun with public PvP in ArmAII?!?
If i am right with this assumption then it just shows me that you must have had bad experiences with public PvP in the past.
And im feeling sorry for you, because i had really a lot of fun with public PvP in OFP and ArmA. Ok, way more with clan-wars.
However, i can also say that i have seen a lot of bad people destroying COOP missions too.
There are always some poor souls out there with PvP or without.
So its really not correct to say that the PvP part of a game is the reason for childish behaviour.
I always thought all OFP and ArmA fans wanna see a great game with ArmAII.
And everybody hopes that BIS will earn a lot of money with ArmAII to be able to support ArmAII as long as possible and therefor they need to sell as many copies of ArmAII as possible. And the best thing to do this is in my opinion to learn from the failures done with ArmA and the major failure was the movements/controls of the infantry units.
BIS just have to make them more like in OFP and i think nobody will be disappointed. The COOP and the PvP community will be happy.
I really never thought about the existence of people who thinks that its fun to play as Robocop! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
BangTail
Feb 18 2009, 22:42
...
If "clunky" movement etc keeps these people out of ArmA, then I hope BIS do nothing to change the core of the game. There are plenty of PvP games to play. Not every single one of them has to be adjusted to suit PvPers.
E
sorry, but this statement is not really constructive...
The robotic movements of the infantry units in ArmA is really nothing to be proud of.
Even COOP is no fun to play for me with this controls and the resulting robot-moves.
A more fluent gameplay does no harm at all to everyone.
Believe me, ArmAII like ArmA wont be attractive for those people.
And online public play always happens on a server and the server where i mainly play on is my own, so people who get on my nerves or people who destroy the fun of others can be kicked or banned very easily.
It seems that you are really against public PvP in ArmAII.
Thats really sad, because the minority of all the people who could have fun with ArmAII and public PvP are the nerving guys and because of this few individuals is your opinion that nobody should have fun with public PvP in ArmAII?!?
If i am right with this assumption then it just shows me that you must have had bad experiences with public PvP in the past.
And im feeling sorry for you, because i had really a lot of fun with public PvP in OFP and ArmA. Ok, way more with clan-wars.
However, i can also say that i have seen a lot of bad people destroying COOP missions too.
There are always some poor souls out there with PvP or without.
So its really not correct to say that the PvP part of a game is the reason for childish behaviour.
I always thought all OFP and ArmA fans wanna see a great game with ArmAII.
And everybody hopes that BIS will earn a lot of money with ArmAII to be able to support ArmAII as long as possible and therefor they need to sell as many copies of ArmAII as possible. And the best thing to do this is in my opinion to learn from the failures done with ArmA and the major failure was the movements/controls of the infantry units.
BIS just have to make them more like in OFP and i think nobody will be disappointed. The COOP and the PvP community will be happy.
I really never thought about the existence of people who thinks that its fun to play as Robocop! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
I dont have the problems you have with the movement but I am glad it keeps the PvP crowd away http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
I have NEVER had problems with other players while playing CooP. Conversely, I have had numerous problems with PvP players in ArmA, OFP and many other games.
I used to love PvP back in the Quake CTF days, but as with everything PC gaming, it has become mainstream and full of little rubber people who feel it necessary to tell you how great they are etc.
I have no patience for this whatsoever and see ArmA as a "last bastion" that tends to exclude these people because they cant run around "pwning" everyone (without cheating). Since there is no one else playing PvP, they dont have anyone to show off to (which is their purpose in life) so they go back to vBF2 or UT3 or whatever.
See, your comment about Robocop is "not constructive" in my eyes. I dont have a problem with the control scheme and I dont see why it should be changed to suit PvP players or a PvP gamestyle.
To each their own but I submit that there are PLENTY of PvP games for you to play without having to complain about not having a PvPcentric version of ArmA/ArmA2.
E
your stubborn demands to be spoon-fed by BIS are an insult to anyone who spent numerous years spending quite an amount of freetime,brain power and money to get his/her gameplay out of this marvelous open engine.
Did you spend any time to read any of the posts above.
Stubborn? I don't get the game free i pay to buy it.
I am insulting the community?? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/goodnight.gif
BangTail
Feb 18 2009, 23:13
your stubborn demands to be spoon-fed by BIS are an insult to anyone who spent numerous years spending quite an amount of freetime,brain power and money to get his/her gameplay out of this marvelous open engine.
Did you spend any time to read any of the posts above.
Stubborn? I don't get the game free i pay to buy it.
I am insulting the community?? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/goodnight.gif
I dont think you are insulting the community. You have the right to your opinion.
Having said that, I wouldn't buy ArmA 2 expecting it to be a "PvP paradise". My suspicion is that you will be disappointed.
Eth
Akira BAADAKKU
Feb 18 2009, 23:41
What OFP pvp players are hoping from ArmA II is to be quite like OFP. It doesn't mean we want to have a "pro pvp game" at all (there are always cod4 or css to deal with it), but just an ArmAII like OFP which was very balanced in the engine/movement to satisfate everyone, COOP, c&h, and ctf communities.
We don't want to spend our nights after going back from work to train and train untill we play like a robot, we just want to enjoy to make some "clanwars-leagues", "firendly war","challenge" but challenge which isn't part of a "pro-gamer" behavior...but far more the way to enjoy having some teamplay as "amators" (if you prefer...)
I played coop in OFP before moving to ctf, I even finished Armed Assault campaign, and so would I to make the same with ArmAII campaign. But Hell I want this game to live like OFP! Not seeing ArmAII fell in the forgotten place as ArmA was ! I want not only enjoy coop mission, but CTF with players like Frantic I've been knowing for long time. I wanna see a living community, not an industrial COOP evolution community!
But why the word "PvP" may disturb you when you know that a lot of players enjoyed OFP for it ? The question you may ask yourself is if PvP in OFP has ever prevented you to play a COOP mission, with COOP players and, THAT, without being bored by "fragers" who were looking to muke you...Of course not...
You enjoyed OFP very well.
So just imagine ArmAII as similar as OFP in all point (without forgetting new gameplay possibility and graphics to add on) to be set up, would it make ArmAII a shit game ? SO OFP was a bad game because of it?
As OFP you would play coop, and ctf players would play ctf, c&h players would plays c&h, and so on...
You could play coop as you enjoyed it with so much plaisir as you did before, so what's the point ? Why keep going on again, and again with this useless fear of transforming ArmAII in a "bf2" game (as you love to say it, and I still don't know why people keeps using that old fashioned expression here lol) when we have THE PROOF it wont...yes I call it again ! The Mythic Operation Flashpoint reference so well claimed and so true! The magic game who counter every cooper argument about how pvp can RUIN the game, because OFP has been running since 2001!
I DO think the only way to have another great game is to copy back the OFP features and balancement.
ArmA was like an expansion which transformed OFP to a COOp community with updated graphics. So why asking again a same "expansion" with ArmAII when you already have ArmA, this ArmA with MODs that already included features from ArmAII's gameplay, and by which developpers has been inspiring from it to shape their new game?
WHy do you need ArmAII when you can play what you want already ? Would it be so shabby to call for the new Game Of The Year like OFP was before ??
Don't you think it is a litlle bit "selfish" and even pointless to keep on moving like that ?
Frantic
Feb 18 2009, 23:46
sorry, but you really dont get it, ethne!
We already went away from ArmA.
And we were nice people, our server was always a nice place to have some fun and we always tried to keep the server clean of all the childish behaviour we mature players dont like.
Furthermore, we supported OFP with mods, missions, leagues and several servers.
We continued our support in ArmA from the beginning.
We have some very ambitious members who made a lot of quality missions and as i said already we had a well visited server mostly for PvP.
However, after 1 year of waiting for a patch which should solve the problem with the "robotic movements" in ArmA we moved on to other games, because nearly nobody was left of the old OFP members of my clan to were willing to continue to play with ArmA.
I think we were just 3 guys left and so we had to close our server and without a server we couldnt continue to test new missions.
We tried out other games like BF or CoD of course, but we played OFP for such a long time and therefor we really missed the good old OFP feeling in the other arcade games.
It was just such a big disappointment to see such a great game like ArmA with such terrible controls and movements of the infantry units.
ArmA is the only PC game i play from time to time.
At the beginning of ArmA i always said to everyone who was unhappy with the controls that it needs more time to get used to it. Sadly, i nearly was the only one who thought so and one day i realized that the controls are just not good.
However, long story short:
I loved OFP, i like ArmA, but i wanna adore ArmAII and the only thing which it needs are fluent movements and controls where you really have the control over your alter ego ingame.
BIS are going to release PvP missions within ArmAII thats a fact and it cant be a big problem to create this time missions without bugs, i think thats not too much to beg for! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 00:03
sorry, but you really dont get it, ethne!
We already went away from ArmA.
And we were nice people, our server was always a nice place to have some fun and we always tried to keep the server clean of all the childish behaviour we mature players dont like.
Furthermore, we supported OFP with mods, missions, leagues and several servers.
We continued our support in ArmA from the beginning.
We have some very ambitious members who made a lot of quality missions and as i said already we had a well visited server mostly for PvP.
However, after 1 year of waiting for a patch which should solve the problem with the "robotic movements" in ArmA we moved on to other games, because nearly nobody was left of the old OFP members of my clan to were willing to continue to play with ArmA.
I think we were just 3 guys left and so we had to close our server and without a server we couldnt continue to test new missions.
We tried out other games like BF or CoD of course, but we played OFP for such a long time and therefor we really missed the good old OFP feeling in the other arcade games.
It was just such a big disappointment to see such a great game like ArmA with such terrible controls and movements of the infantry units.
ArmA is the only PC game i play from time to time.
At the beginning of ArmA i always said to everyone who was unhappy with the controls that it needs more time to get used to it. Sadly, i nearly was the only one who thought so and one day i realized that the controls are just not good.
However, long story short:
I loved OFP, i like ArmA, but i wanna adore ArmAII and the only thing which it needs are fluent movements and controls where you really have the control over your alter ego ingame.
BIS are going to release PvP missions within ArmAII thats a fact and it cant be a big problem to create this time missions without bugs, i think thats not too much to beg for! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Actually, it seems to be you who isnt "getting it"
At any rate, ArmA had a few PvP maps as well ... I dont have a problem with that.
As with ArmA, ArmA 2 will appeal to modders/coop players. The PvP crowd will play it for a week or two (until they get bored of the maps).
As I said before - OFP/ArmA/ArmA2 are as good as the third parties that design content. The good mod teams are almost exclusively CooP.
Eth
Frantic
Feb 19 2009, 00:23
Actually, it seems to be you who isnt "getting it"
At any rate, ArmA had a few PvP maps as well ... I dont have a problem with that.
As with ArmA, ArmA 2 will appeal to modders/coop players. The PvP crowd will play it for a week or two (until they get bored of the maps).
As I said before - OFP/ArmA/ArmA2 are as good as the third parties that design content. The good mod teams are almost exclusively CooP.
Eth
Why should ArmA not appeal to PvP players?
I prefer PvP, but i also like COOP and other game modes.
You can be sure that there are COOP players too who are not really happy with the current robot style movements.
I really like your argument that the PvP crowd will be bored after one or two weeks because of the maps...lol
First a map is like an island and secondly there is a mission-editor and with that we can create as many missions as we want, so we will never get bored because of too less missions.
That was never a problem of OFP and not of ArmA and wont be the problem of ArmAII.
Why should the PvP community not profit from mods?
I remember to have played in a league with one big mod which got the most realistic gameplay i ever seen. I think it was called Wargames...not sure about the name.
It was one of the greatest PvP experience i ever had.
So please dont think that mods and addons are just for the COOP lovers. We all benefit from people who are willing to do something for free.
I have never seen a mod which is exclusively for COOP...
You can really believe me that everybody will profit from a well made ArmAII.
We all know that ArmA was rushed and was more a money-pig for BIS, so they were able to continue their work on Game2 which is ArmAII.
So i really dont see a reason why they should not improve the controls and gameplay of ArmA in ArmAII.
BIS wanna sell copies of ArmAII and the best way to do that is to have a well polished game and fluent movements and nice controls are the most important part thats the basics.
In OFP we loved the gameplay and not really the graphics.
We always said: Gameplay is more important than beautiful graphics.
Since ArmA it looks more like: Graphics > gameplay
And in my opinion is that not really the best way to do it...
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 00:34
Actually, it seems to be you who isnt "getting it"
At any rate, ArmA had a few PvP maps as well ... I dont have a problem with that.
As with ArmA, ArmA 2 will appeal to modders/coop players. The PvP crowd will play it for a week or two (until they get bored of the maps).
As I said before - OFP/ArmA/ArmA2 are as good as the third parties that design content. The good mod teams are almost exclusively CooP.
Eth
Why should ArmA not appeal to PvP players?
I prefer PvP, but i also like COOP and other game modes.
You can be sure that there are COOP players too who are not really happy with the current robot style movements.
I really like your argument that the PvP crowd will be bored after one or two weeks because of the maps...lol
First a map is like an island and secondly there is a mission-editor and with that we can create as many missions as we want, so we will never get bored because of too less missions.
That was never a problem of OFP and not of ArmA and wont be the problem of ArmAII.
Why should the PvP community not profit from mods?
I remember to have played in a league with one big mod which got the most realistic gameplay i ever seen. I think it was called Wargames...not sure about the name.
It was one of the greatest PvP experience i ever had.
So please dont think that mods and addons are just for the COOP lovers. We all benefit from people who are willing to do something for free.
I have never seen a mod which is exclusively for COOP...
You can really believe me that everybody will profit from a well made ArmAII.
We all know that ArmA was rushed and was more a money-pig for BIS, so they were able to continue their work on Game2 which is ArmAII.
So i really dont see a reason why they should not improve the controls and gameplay of ArmA in ArmAII.
BIS wanna sell copies of ArmAII and the best way to do that is to have a well polished game and fluent movements and nice controls are the most important part thats the basics.
**FIXED**
In OFP I loved the gameplay and not really the graphics.
I always said: Gameplay is more important than beautiful graphics.
In my opinion, Since ArmA it looks more like: Graphics > gameplay
**FIXED**
And in my opinion is that not really the best way to do it...
Your argument is moot. I just checked the ArmA server browser again. Not ONE populated PvP game.
Your whole argument that the movement etc should be changed to suit your playstyle is part of the foundation of my disagreement with you.
The game is what it is. If you dont like it, go play one of the MANY PvP games out there that ARE geared to your style of play.
Im sick of games being changed to accomodate people because said people have to have everything their way.
Eth
PS : Robotic? Meaning guns dont just appear in front of you when you switch weapons etc? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
Frantic
Feb 19 2009, 09:37
Your argument is moot. I just checked the ArmA server browser again. Not ONE populated PvP game.
Your whole argument that the movement etc should be changed to suit your playstyle is part of the foundation of my disagreement with you.
The game is what it is. If you dont like it, go play one of the MANY PvP games out there that ARE geared to your style of play.
Im sick of games being changed to accomodate people because said people have to have everything their way.
Eth
PS : Robotic? Meaning guns dont just appear in front of you when you switch weapons etc? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
It seems that you just dont wanna read what i write.
Its clear that there are nearly no PvP servers left in ArmA...believe me there are still some, you just havent seen them...I always see one or two if i look at the server browser screen.
I explained already why there is so less PvP in ArmA, so no need to go into details again.
It looks like that you dont see where I and others are coming from.
I played a lot OFP and was really happy to have a game where you can have fun with nearly every game-style you can think of.
PvP, COOP, SP, everything was fun to play in OFP.
Now in ArmA there is nearly only COOP left and the only reason for that are the clunky movements of the infantry units in my opinion.
Its really strange that some people seem to be happy about this progress.
OFP was great because of the big variety you were able to find there. (COOP, PvP, SP, campaign, mission-editor, mods, addons)
Now in ArmA there is just COOP. Thats in my opinion a sad thing. I like to play COOPs with the right people, but i also like to play a DM or every other game-mode.
It is really sad that ArmA compared to OFP missed the biggest profit of OFP. The freedom to play what you wanna play.
OFP was a really big playing field.
At one day you could have an intensive thrilling clan-war, at the next a chilling COOP and on another day just funny brainless public PvP.
In OFP you were able to have that all.
And that attracted a lot of people, therefor the high selling numbers.
Now a question to you:
Have you liked OFP and do you like ArmA now more because of the "great" improved controls of the infantry units?
I have written that before and will do it again:
Everybody will profit with more fluent movements and better controls.
There will be no harm at all to your loved COOP.
There will be just more people playing the game.
There will be also more COOP server then, so there is really no reason for you to defend the robitic-style movements and the uncontrollable controls.
BIS has changed the controls and movements in ArmA compared to OFP without a good reason.
Now i hope that they will solve the obvious problem of ArmA in ArmAII, because they wanna earn money with it.
And the numbers of sold ArmA copies are really nothing against the numbers sold of OFP!
As a PvP player, I say the "clunky" movement is completely overrated. PvP works really well in ArmA but people have just bashed it into their heads that it doesn't.
Frantic
Feb 19 2009, 11:58
As a PvP player, I say the "clunky" movement is completely overrated. PvP works really well in ArmA but people have just bashed it into their heads that it doesn't.
So thats your argument for the nearly nonexistence of PvP in ArmA?
That people are just thinking the controls are clunky but in reality everything is good with the controls?
So you say that all the old-school OFP PvP players are wrong and that there was no reason for them to stop playing ArmA?
Please explain a bit more why the PvP numbers are so low in ArmA now.
Akira BAADAKKU
Feb 19 2009, 12:29
Ethne, it is because you have a so high proud of your principles and or is it just blindness ??
You talk to people here like if they come from CoD4, BF2 shit, or whatever...
It's always the same with you guys, we have to repeat again and again cause you don't even take the time to read our contents, because you're only believe on what you think and you're always holding your position on pointless arguments which has been countered a numburous of times.
WE ARE ALL OFP PLAYERS HERE!
WE DON'T ENJOY PLAYING OTHER PVP GAMES! (not as we did with OFP)
OPEN YOUR EYES! OPEN YOUR EARS! HELLO ?! Is somebody there http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif Can you listen to us ?? Are you okay ??
We've maybe played OFP before you did, and contrary to you we have a more global view and balanced than you have. Because WE HAVE BEEN SHARING your point of view since the beginning, we started OFP because we were looking for a wargame simulator, we understand your felling not only because we've read it, but because we've felt the same things than you do actually.
But still we have a larger view than you have, cause you only remain on your COOP style point of view. A COOP style Frantic and me or whoever OFP Players I know do share with you, what you're saying we already know it. And we know it does not improve the future ArmAII situation if it would be exactly the same as ArmA. On the contrary the game would get down the ladder more and more.
You cannot stop saying us to go play BF2, like if it means something to us. Change your words, it's exhausting to listen to a robot who repeat himself without stopping.
WE DON'T like BF2.
And I should add that if it is to bring the same arguments we know about COOP style in this topic, then GO PLAY ArmA. WHy do you need ArmA II ?? I guess you even didn't think about it.
We have been thinking all the time about how OFP was so a great game, thanks to his wargame simulation engine support, and about how it has satisfated everyone. It is for THIS, for THIS that OFP was so Great!
So why do you think we want transform ArmAII to a "fast games" ?? You're so mistaken. Nobody here would that game to be transformed like this.
The ArmA evoluted on a strict way which killed the game. Don't say me Ethne that you love COOP Evolution, cause I know you don't like them if you're really a coop player.
ArmAII should or must go back to some of OFP features which made it a marvellous game, especially on the great balancement of its engine/movements".
The succes of OFP isn't old fashioned. It is still the new FASHION, whereas ArmA is totally unkown...ArmAII must follow that new era OFP created before!
Or the creation of OFP would have meant nothing...
NoRailgunner
Feb 19 2009, 13:21
This discussion goes in circles and Arma2 release is close (May the 4th?). http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Imo first of all the game itself should run fine + perform well and than you can argue (or not) over missions that should be made by BIS or better by those people who are more involved in (pvp) scene. Hope the best for creating different and unique mission types/variants in Arma2! Lets see if BIS is making some good examples or templates...
What's wrong with warfare PvP? If you can get some good team together, then there's plenty of PvP action to be had. I recall several games where some teammates and I spent HOURS finding and eliminating player controlled squads in warfare games.
The beauty of ArmA is that it's incredibly easy to mod, so if someone really wants a "BF2" style sector control multiplayer mode, then it is easy enough to create one.
I gotta know... Why do I hear people dropping phrases like, "More like BF2 or COD4." What is this world coming to?! Isn't that the last thing anyone true ArmA/OFP fan should hope for?
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 16:47
What's wrong with warfare PvP? If you can get some good team together, then there's plenty of PvP action to be had. I recall several games where some teammates and I spent HOURS finding and eliminating player controlled squads in warfare games.
The beauty of ArmA is that it's incredibly easy to mod, so if someone really wants a "BF2" style sector control multiplayer mode, then it is easy enough to create one.
I gotta know... Why do I hear people dropping phrases like, "More like BF2 or COD4." What is this world coming to?! Isn't that the last thing anyone true ArmA/OFP fan should hope for?
Simply put, some people feel the game should be changed to suit them. I dont feel it should be changed to suit them.
As you very correctly stated, Good PvP is easy to create via the editor.
I object to having the game changed "out of the box" to suit these people and would prefer they played something else as opposed to changing ArmA 2.
Eth
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 16:51
Ethne, it is because you have a so high proud of your principles and or is it just blindness ??
It's always the same with you guys, we have to repeat again and again cause you don't even take the time to read our contents, because you're only believe on what you think and you're always holding your position on pointless arguments which has been countered a numburous of times.
WE ARE ALL OFP PLAYERS HERE!
WE DON'T ENJOY PLAYING OTHER PVP GAMES! (not as we did with OFP)
OPEN YOUR EYES! OPEN YOUR EARS! HELLO ?! Is somebody there http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif Can you listen to us ?? Are you okay ??
We've maybe played OFP before you did, and contrary to you we have a more global view and balanced than you have.
But still we have a larger view than you have, cause you only remain on your COOP style point of view. A COOP style Frantic and me or whoever OFP Players I know do share with you, what you're saying we already know it. And we know it does not improve the future ArmAII situation if it would be exactly the same as ArmA. On the contrary the game would get down the ladder more and more.
The ArmA evoluted on a strict way which killed the game. Don't say me Ethne that you love COOP Evolution, cause I know you don't like them if you're really a coop player.
ArmAII should or must go back to some of OFP features which made it a marvellous game, especially on the great balancement of its engine/movements".
The typical response of an "elitest" PvPer.
"I played before you etc, the game MUST be the way I want it etc".
This is exactly the kind of attitude I am talking about.
Eth
What's wrong with warfare PvP? If you can get some good team together, then there's plenty of PvP action to be had. I recall several games where some teammates and I spent HOURS finding and eliminating player controlled squads in warfare games.
The beauty of ArmA is that it's incredibly easy to mod, so if someone really wants a "BF2" style sector control multiplayer mode, then it is easy enough to create one.
I gotta know... Why do I hear people dropping phrases like, "More like BF2 or COD4." What is this world coming to?! Isn't that the last thing anyone true ArmA/OFP fan should hope for?
Simply put, some people feel the game should be changed to suit them. I dont feel it should be changed to suit them.
As you very correctly stated, Good PvP is easy to create via the editor.
I object to having the game changed "out of the box" to suit these people and would prefer they played something else as opposed to changing ArmA 2.
Eth
I see your logic, however I also believe that a balance could be achieved in order to add some variety to the game.
However, it is true the coop and warfare scenarios are what make the ArmA/OFP series great, and the last thing BIS should do is cater to the Counter Strike/BF2/Call of Duty PvP oriented fanbase that wants, "Arcady," thrills. ArmAII originated from a military conflict simulator. Those looking for anything other than a simulation should look elsewhere.
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 17:03
What's wrong with warfare PvP? If you can get some good team together, then there's plenty of PvP action to be had. I recall several games where some teammates and I spent HOURS finding and eliminating player controlled squads in warfare games.
The beauty of ArmA is that it's incredibly easy to mod, so if someone really wants a "BF2" style sector control multiplayer mode, then it is easy enough to create one.
I gotta know... Why do I hear people dropping phrases like, "More like BF2 or COD4." What is this world coming to?! Isn't that the last thing anyone true ArmA/OFP fan should hope for?
Simply put, some people feel the game should be changed to suit them. I dont feel it should be changed to suit them.
As you very correctly stated, Good PvP is easy to create via the editor.
I object to having the game changed "out of the box" to suit these people and would prefer they played something else as opposed to changing ArmA 2.
Eth
I see your logic, however I also believe that a balance could be achieved in order to add some variety to the game.
However, it is true the coop and warfare scenarios are what make the ArmA/OFP series great, and the last thing BIS should do is cater to the Counter Strike/BF2/Call of Duty PvP oriented fanbase that wants, "Arcady," thrills. ArmAII originated from a military conflict simulator. Those looking for anything other than a simulation should look elsewhere.
The balance is there, you just need people to make the mods.
Its a shame that there arent more people doing that for the PvP crowd but I still wouldn't be happy if BIS altered the game to cater to them.
Especially given that there are SO many decent PvP games out there.
Eth
Michael_Wittman
Feb 19 2009, 18:25
Sorry but a game where a half-retarded guy can script his own custom cheat will NEVER grow any decent size public PvP comunity NO MATTER how good animations are. Period.
Now anyone of you PvP enthusiast please answer anything to the contrary.
Frantic
Feb 19 2009, 19:28
Sorry but a game where a half-retarded guy can script his own custom cheat will NEVER grow any decent size public PvP comunity NO MATTER how good animations are. Period.
Now anyone of you PvP enthusiast please answer anything to the contrary.
Cheats are in every game.
But you are right that it was very easy to cheat in OFP and i think there was no change in ArmA...
However, the cheats which destroyed the fun of gaming were mostly cheats which destroyed everything, like bomb rain or multiple object appearing.
Those kind of cheats just destroys a round and not the whole online gaming.
Cheats with which you get an advantage over the others are not hurting anyone only the person who uses it.
Speed-runner, aimbot user, teleporter, immortal, ESP, ect...
Some of those cheats were easy to detect and some of them were impossible to detect.
I know that since a long time and we still were able to have fun in public matches and clan-wars.
At the end of OFP league gaming, every league-mission had 3 spectator slots and in every match was one or more referees watching with a running Fraps.
So there are ways to have fun with PvP in a modable game.
Its clear that every player wanna have fun playing a game and the only thing which was really different between OFP and ArmA were the movements and controls of the infantry units in my opinion.
And i heard it so many times that old OFP players stopped playing ArmA just because of the movements of the model in game.
And at the end i came to the same resolution.
I think Q tried to mod the movements of ArmA back to OFP style and Celery made a mini mod for having the same aiming and shooting feeling of OFP in ArmA.
Furthermore, Celery and me created several missions and included a little script inside the mission to disable speed-runners and object-deleting...but all this effort was just too late, many, or i would even say the most, of the old OFP PvP players had already moved on to other games or went back to OFP.
Some of them are still playing OFP and just for the curiosity, some guys have created a working anti-cheat mod for OFP.
Now you think, this tool wont last long.
However, there are no new cheats in OFP because its too old and so their anti-cheat thing works fine. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
To some it up:
I never had a big problem with cheaters.
The controls and movements of the infantry units of ArmA are the reason why i stopped playing ArmA or play it just from time to time.
And the same goes to many other people out there who loves the idea behind OFP and ArmA but cant stand the clunky movements of the ArmA soldiers.
In my view was ArmA just a 1.5OFP with some new features of Game2. BIS used the OFP fans to test some stuff in ArmA which they are going to implement in ArmAII.
So ArmA was just so well made that the people could use it and nothing more.
Along the way, BIS was able to earn some money with it and so they were able to continue their work on Game2 = ArmAII.
Thats how i think about ArmA and i really dont believe that BIS wont improve the movements and controls of the infantry units in ArmAII.
Now you are maybe wondering why im still discussing here if im convinced about the fact that there will be better movements and controls in ArmAII.
Its just because of some people here who really think that the actual movements and controls are good and should stay like that and because of the nonexistence of PvP in ArmA and of course, because this thread goes about PvP and i really care a lot about PvP in ArmAII.
I even have a bad information for you ethne, here a little quote out of an old preview or interview:
Quote[/b] ]Animations (more fluid and realistic, hand signals, ability to reload while walking, climb over smaller obstacles)sorry, but i dont know the source anymore...:rolleyes:
Animations more fluid means for me that the movements will be more fluent too and thats exactly what many people and i are waiting for! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
ArmAII PvP will be the best! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 19:41
ArmAII PvP will be the best! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
I dont think it will be, I think it will be popular in the first few weeks, and then the game will be left to the modders who are more interested in developing mods and simming warfare scenarios etc.
Its not "bad news for me". I could care less about PvP and I play with a tight group and never on public servers.
You just dont get that ArmA 2 isn't about kill stats and how much better you are than other players.
It wasnt designed to be like that and it never will be.
More fluid movements are fine with me by the way. But then again, I never had a problem with them in the first place. Its majoritively the PvP community that dont like the controls because they cant run around "pwning" etc
Bad news for YOU really.
OFP 2 might have better PvP possibilities for you.
Regards,
Eth
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 19:45
Sorry but a game where a half-retarded guy can script his own custom cheat will NEVER grow any decent size public PvP comunity NO MATTER how good animations are. Period.
Now anyone of you PvP enthusiast please answer anything to the contrary.
Yup, thats another reason it will never take off.
Its such a ridiculous statement to say that "Cheating doesn't bother me".
Why bother playing then http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
Frantic
Feb 19 2009, 20:30
ArmAII PvP will be the best! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
I dont think it will be,I think it will be popular in the first few weeks, and then the game will be left to the modders who are more interested in developing mods and simming warfare scenarios etc.
?!?...of course are mods more interested in modding otherwise they wont be mods... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
And the mission-editor will help to have enough new missions to play with.
Its not "bad news for me". I could care less about PvP and I play with a tight group and never on public servers.
So why do you bother about PvP then,if you never leave your closed home server?
You just dont get that ArmA 2 isn't about kill stats and how much better you are than other players.
I never said that.
And i cant care less about such stats.
You dont get it that for some people playing against real humans makes more fun than just shooting AIs.
It wasnt designed to be like that and it never will be.
Who said that its directly designed for that?..nobody!
However,in OFP it was possible and lot of fun and why not in ArmAII?
More fluid movements are fine with me by the way. But then again+I never had a problem with them in the first place. Its majoritively the PvP community that dont like the controls because they cant run around "pwning" etc
lol...you really have a prob with PvP and "pwning"...
I never said anything about owning or other childish vocabulary.
Bad news for YOU really.
oO..?!?..where?!?
OFP 2 might have better PvP possibilities for you.
Till now it looks more like another arcade game and nothing more...
Sorry, but its obvious that you dont read what others write if they have a different opinion than your own.
Its sad, but you have just your fixed view about PvP and everyone who likes to play PvP is for you another headless chicken which wanna own the world.
Sorry again, but there are people out there who likes every aspect of OFP and are just unhappy with the current situation of ArmA and are just hoping that ArmAII will be a great game again with every gamemode and gamestyle available!
And thats what i wanna see in ArmAII: people who have fun playing COOPs and PvPs! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
PvP is not always about how much frags you get and stuff like that. PvP attack & defend style maps with objective and no respawn can be hell of a lot fun. Just like coop mission +10 times the thrill.
Akira BAADAKKU
Feb 19 2009, 20:59
Quote[/b] ]The typical response of an "elitest" PvPer.
"I played before you etc, the game MUST be the way I want it etc".
This is exactly the kind of attitude I am talking about.
Eth
I don't think so. I outlined the fact you were talking to OFP players, not about the way of "elitest pvp" as you like to say, but to mean you're mistaken about us.
We come from the same game, but contrary to you we don't cry about our personnal complexe of "pvp players", we try to explain what was wrong with ArmA and what must be then improved for ArmAII.
You're always saying "I don't like PvP, I don't like pownzers", but if you play coop then it is not suppose to disturb you at all. So what's point ? At first it's not even an argument, and your statement is even out of credibility because the PvP cannot destroy the COOP game for the only reason that the kind of Pvp players you don't like would never play a COOP, and they couldn't be a reason of what's wrong with the game.
Do you understand ? Or do we need to explain it again and again ?
Explain yourself, give arguements. Or you can rather answer to our arguments for one time.
Michael_Wittman
Feb 19 2009, 21:01
[QUOTE]@<hidden>
You are right that the animations are clunky as ... Any easter weapon... Furthermore..there are no hotkey shortcuts to drop mainweapon and pick pistol... And yet its not the main problem.
You still focus on players from Ofp...diehard fans of this game that most of us dont know and maybe will never... Because you agree when and where to play.... I think you cannot ask developers to puild the game for that gamers in mind as a matter of fact those communities are not that significant on the overall market. Anyone that have really played this game can tell you that the current scale of public servers id no way enough to run this game properly. As I said in some other posts Ive played plenty other games finishing top of the rank. IMHO wether they really hire a crack programmer to scrit the AI and Implement something like the "pilfius" addon and a state of the art anticheating...or the PvP will be born death.
As the policy record says this is out of course and the game will surely keep focusing on coop and overall being "opensource" for the community...anything to the contrary would highly surprise me.
Akira BAADAKKU
Feb 19 2009, 21:03
Eth[/quote]
Quote[/b] ]Its not "bad news for me". I could care less about PvP and I play with a tight group and never on public servers.
Pfeeew. We finally agree on something. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
Next!
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 21:36
Quote[/b] ]The typical response of an "elitest" PvPer.
"I played before you etc, the game MUST be the way I want it etc".
This is exactly the kind of attitude I am talking about.
Eth
I don't think so. I outlined the fact you were talking to OFP players, not about the way of "elitest pvp" as you like to say, but to mean you're mistaken about us.
We come from the same game, but contrary to you we don't cry about our personnal complexe of "pvp players", we try to explain what was wrong with ArmA and what must be then improved for ArmAII.
You're always saying "I don't like PvP, I don't like pownzers", but if you play coop then it is not suppose to disturb you at all. So what's point ? At first it's not even an argument, and your statement is even out of credibility because the PvP cannot destroy the COOP game for the only reason that the kind of Pvp players you don't like would never play a COOP, and they couldn't be a reason of what's wrong with the game.
Do you understand ? Or do we need to explain it again and again ?
Explain yourself, give arguements. Or you can rather answer to our arguments for one time.
Lol, Im not crying. Im just pointing out to you that unless someone steps up and does some modding for PvP scenarios, you arent going to get what YOU are crying about endlessly.
Ive enjoyed ArmA and Im going to enjoy ArmA 2.
You PvP whiners always feel the need to tell us how much more thrilling etc PvP is. That's subjective.
I find CooP far more "thrilling" and satisfying", that doesnt make me wrong.
Your opinion of what is wrong is not one that I share and I dont want the game changed to suit the likes of you. If you dont like it, go play something else and DEAL AVEC.
Eth
Michael_Wittman
Feb 19 2009, 21:39
So the worst enemy of PvP game or gaming style of a given game is not the coop comunity... Its the power of a single cheater to screw the rest of 31 players wether they want a brainless shkirmish or not
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 21:44
So the worst enemy of PvP game or gaming style of a given game is not the coop comunity... Its the power of a single cheater to screw the rest of 31 players wether they want a brainless shkirmish or not
I totally agree with you on this and its one of the reasons I dont do so much PvPing anymore.
I try to play PRMM from time to time but even then, there are cheaters all over the place there. The community is pretty good at weeding them out mind you, but equally, a cheater can ruin a session pretty quickly to the point you arent going to want to play.
Cheating is rampant and that, along with the lack of people who develop PvP scenarios, will kill it pretty quickly IMHO.
Eth
What's wrong with warfare PvP? If you can get some good team together, then there's plenty of PvP action to be had. I recall several games where some teammates and I spent HOURS finding and eliminating player controlled squads in warfare games.
The beauty of ArmA is that it's incredibly easy to mod, so if someone really wants a "BF2" style sector control multiplayer mode, then it is easy enough to create one.
I gotta know... Why do I hear people dropping phrases like, "More like BF2 or COD4." What is this world coming to?! Isn't that the last thing anyone true ArmA/OFP fan should hope for?
Simply put, some people feel the game should be changed to suit them. I dont feel it should be changed to suit them.
As you very correctly stated, Good PvP is easy to create via the editor.
I object to having the game changed "out of the box" to suit these people and would prefer they played something else as opposed to changing ArmA 2.
Eth
Are you retard or what?
Where are we saying to change the game?We only ask for some official PvP missions.
Your hate about PvP blinds you.Get a life. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
All the time you say go play BF2 or COD.I say stfu cause I play OFP since 2001 I spent many many hours on OFP and ArmA and are the only FPS I like to play.So plz stop telling me what to play.
And if you are so happy how ArmA is at the moment with the majority of coop servers stfu and go play.This topic is not for you.
Here we are PvP players that we ask from bis for some basic official PvP missions.If you want Coop go make your own topic.
Is that to hard to get it?For you I guess it is.
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 22:37
What's wrong with warfare PvP? If you can get some good team together, then there's plenty of PvP action to be had. I recall several games where some teammates and I spent HOURS finding and eliminating player controlled squads in warfare games.
The beauty of ArmA is that it's incredibly easy to mod, so if someone really wants a "BF2" style sector control multiplayer mode, then it is easy enough to create one.
I gotta know... Why do I hear people dropping phrases like, "More like BF2 or COD4." What is this world coming to?! Isn't that the last thing anyone true ArmA/OFP fan should hope for?
Simply put, some people feel the game should be changed to suit them. I dont feel it should be changed to suit them.
As you very correctly stated, Good PvP is easy to create via the editor.
I object to having the game changed "out of the box" to suit these people and would prefer they played something else as opposed to changing ArmA 2.
Eth
Are you retard or what?
Where are we saying to change the game?We only ask for some official PvP missions.
Your hate about PvP blinds you.Get a life. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
All the time you say go play BF2 or COD.I say stfu cause I play OFP since 2001 I spent many many hours on OFP and ArmA and are the only FPS I like to play.So plz stop telling me what to play.
And if you are so happy how ArmA is at the moment with the majority of coop servers stfu and go play.This topic is not for you.
Here we are PvP players that we ask from bis for some basic official PvP missions.If you want Coop go make your own topic.
Is that to hard to get it?For you I guess it is.
I rest my case. It's their way or the high way.
You need to relax with your personal attacks chief. You also need to stop telling me where I can post. This topic is of significance to me and YOU dont decide who posts where.
Simply because people dont agree with you, doesnt make them "retards"
I wont be replying to you anymore Ptolemaios.
Eth
Akira BAADAKKU
Feb 19 2009, 22:38
Quote[/b] ]You PvP whiners always feel the need to tell us how much more thrilling etc PvP is. That's subjective.
I never told you the way you should play, surelly not as much as you tell us to share your opinion without going away to play another game.:crazy:
Quote[/b] ]Your opinion of what is wrong is not one that I share and I dont want the game changed to suit the likes of you.
And why should we continue on the strict way of COOPing in ArmAII just for players like you who only play on a little server with password ? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
By the way we already spoke about the question. ArmAII as an OFP-like, how could it bother you? You still haven't answered.
If you want to post on a forum, the first thing to do is read what people say before replying.
I don't know what you're doing here if it's to blablating uselessly on a topic conerning the Game balancement and pvp, where you seem to have nothing to say except the usual Pro COOper moaning.
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 22:41
Quote[/b] ]You PvP whiners always feel the need to tell us how much more thrilling etc PvP is. That's subjective.
I never told you the way you should play, surelly not as much as you tell us to share your opinion without going away to play another game.
Quote[/b] ]Your opinion of what is wrong is not one that I share and I dont want the game changed to suit the likes of you.
And why should we continue on the strict way of COOPing in ArmAII just for players like you who only play on a little server with password ?
By the way we already spoke about the question. ArmAII as an OFP-like, how could it bother you? You still haven't answered.
If you want to post on a forum, the first thing to do is read what people say before replying.
I don't know what you're doing here if it's to blablating uselessly on a topic conerning the Game balancement and pvp, where you seem to have nothing to say except the usual Pro COOper moaning.
How do you know what ArmA 2 is like?
You dont know anything about how it plays and neither do I. All we have is videos at the moment.
Ill say this, it looks an AWFUL lot like ArmA to me.
Guess you'll be disappointed - AGAIN
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
Eth
PS : As with your friend Ptolemaios, you need to stop telling people what and where to post. My opinion is just as valid as yours.
Frantic
Feb 19 2009, 22:45
Ok, it looks like that we have now a few different opinions about the subject "why is there so less PvP in ArmA?".
-CyDoN thinks its because of the lack of BIS made standard PvP missions.
-ethne thinks its because ArmA is not designed for it.
-Michael_Wittman thinks its because of the cheaters.
-Akira BAADAKKU thinks its because of the missing OFP players.
-I think its because of the unpolished movements and controls.
(sorry if i have someone misunderstood, but i think that were the main statements of you guys)
Its great to see some different views on ArmA about PvP.
I try now to find a common assumption which we all can accept and underline.
We all dont wanna have CoD, BF, CS controls, like bunnyhopping game-style.
We all enjoy the "realistic" game-style of OFP and ArmA.
We all love the modability of OFP and ArmA.
We all love the open scenario of OFP and ArmA.
We all enjoy to play OFP and ArmA together with nice people.
We all wanna see a nice polished ArmAII.
I hope everybody here can accept this 6 statements and see that we all wanna have the same actual.
And for those who are still thinking ArmAII cant please everyone, thats just totally normal, because everybody has a different taste.
However, OFP was able to please every game-mode and was made by BIS!
So why not ArmAII? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 22:48
Ok, it looks like that we have now a few different opinions about the subject "why is there so less PvP in ArmA?".
-CyDoN thinks its because of the lack of BIS made standard PvP missions.
-ethne thinks its because ArmA is not designed for it.
-Michael_Wittman thinks its because of the cheaters.
-Akira BAADAKKU thinks its because of the missing OFP players.
-I think its because of the unpolished movements and controls.
(sorry if i have someone misunderstood, but i think that were the main statements of you guys)
Its great to see some different views on ArmA about PvP.
I try now to find a common assumption which we all can accept and underline.
We all dont wanna have CoD, BF, CS controls, like bunnyhopping game-style.
We all enjoy the "realistic" game-style of OFP and ArmA.
We all love the modability of OFP and ArmA.
We all love the open scenario of OFP and ArmA.
We all enjoy to play OFP and ArmA together with nice people.
We all wanna see a nice polished ArmAII.
I hope everybody here can accept this 6 statements and see that we all wanna have the same actual.
And for those who are still thinking ArmAII cant please everyone, thats just totally normal, because everybody has a different taste.
However, OFP was able to please every game-mode and was made by BIS!
So why not ArmAII? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Good post.
I respect your opinion.
You presented it in an intelligent way without resorting to name calling etc.
I should also quantify that the Arma/ArmA2 engine can be used for whatever people design.
I dont think the game design lends itself to traditional PvP and I do think the open ended design allows for endless exploiting/cheating.
I still maintain that ArmA 2 will not have a big (any) PvP following (not counting the first few months) and if Im wrong, Ill be happy to come here and admit it.
Regards,
Eth
Akira BAADAKKU
Feb 19 2009, 22:50
Quote[/b] ]You PvP whiners always feel the need to tell us how much more thrilling etc PvP is. That's subjective.
I never told you the way you should play, surelly not as much as you tell us to share your opinion without going away to play another game.
Quote[/b] ]Your opinion of what is wrong is not one that I share and I dont want the game changed to suit the likes of you.
And why should we continue on the strict way of COOPing in ArmAII just for players like you who only play on a little server with password ?
By the way we already spoke about the question. ArmAII as an OFP-like, how could it bother you? You still haven't answered.
If you want to post on a forum, the first thing to do is read what people say before replying.
I don't know what you're doing here if it's to blablating uselessly on a topic conerning the Game balancement and pvp, where you seem to have nothing to say except the usual Pro COOper moaning.
How do you know what ArmA 2 is like?
You dont know anything about how it plays and neither do I. All we have is videos at the moment.
Ill say this, it looks an AWFUL lot like ArmA to me.
Guess you'll be disappointed - AGAIN
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
Eth
Do you know what the preterit tense of the "can" auxiliary means in that context ?
I guess not.
WHere did I say I exactly know how ArmAII is ? I suggested the way it should be, which is quite different.
Ethne, are you out of answer but so proud to show it, or are you some kind of troller ?
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 22:53
Quote[/b] ]You PvP whiners always feel the need to tell us how much more thrilling etc PvP is. That's subjective.
I never told you the way you should play, surelly not as much as you tell us to share your opinion without going away to play another game.
Quote[/b] ]Your opinion of what is wrong is not one that I share and I dont want the game changed to suit the likes of you.
And why should we continue on the strict way of COOPing in ArmAII just for players like you who only play on a little server with password ?
By the way we already spoke about the question. ArmAII as an OFP-like, how could it bother you? You still haven't answered.
If you want to post on a forum, the first thing to do is read what people say before replying.
I don't know what you're doing here if it's to blablating uselessly on a topic conerning the Game balancement and pvp, where you seem to have nothing to say except the usual Pro COOper moaning.
How do you know what ArmA 2 is like?
You dont know anything about how it plays and neither do I. All we have is videos at the moment.
Ill say this, it looks an AWFUL lot like ArmA to me.
Guess you'll be disappointed - AGAIN
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
Eth
Do you know what the preterit tense of the "can" auxiliary means in that context ?
I guess not.
WHere did I say I exactly know how ArmAII is ? I suggested the way it should be, which is quite different.
Ethne, are you out of answer but so proud to show it, or are you some kind of troller ?
Im not going to answer you anymore.
Im tired of your condescending tone.
Happy pwnage1111!!!111 http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
Eth
Akira BAADAKKU
Feb 19 2009, 22:56
Frantic, I shared your opinion about the movement and control. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
The missing OFP players are the consequence of it.
Quote[/b] ]We all dont wanna have CoD, BF, CS controls, like bunnyhopping game-style.
We all enjoy the "realistic" game-style of OFP and ArmA.
We all love the modability of OFP and ArmA.
We all love the open scenario of OFP and ArmA.
We all enjoy to play OFP and ArmA together with nice people.
We all wanna see a nice polished ArmAII.
How many times did I say this...It's exactly what I think!
Frantic you must have something magic in your words, you say what I think but you are able to convince pig-headed guys like ethne to finally agree with it.
Come one Frantic, give me your trick http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
BangTail
Feb 19 2009, 23:00
Frantic, I shared your opinion about the movement and control. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
The missing OFP players are the consequence of it.
Quote[/b] ]We all dont wanna have CoD, BF, CS controls, like bunnyhopping game-style.
We all enjoy the "realistic" game-style of OFP and ArmA.
We all love the modability of OFP and ArmA.
We all love the open scenario of OFP and ArmA.
We all enjoy to play OFP and ArmA together with nice people.
We all wanna see a nice polished ArmAII.
How many times did I say this...It's exactly what I think!
Frantic you must have something magic in your words, you say what I think but you are able to convince pig-headed guys like ethne to finally agree with it.
Come one Frantic, give me your trick http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
Seriously guy, stop with the personal attacks.
Thats why no one respects what you have to say! Because you are rude and have an inherent inability to present your points in a coherent and tactful manner.
Lets agree to disagree and leave it at that.
Eth
Akira BAADAKKU
Feb 19 2009, 23:08
I am not going to answer you anymore
Im tired of your condescending tone.
Happy pwnage1111!!!111 http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
Eth
Although you stuborn, it's even hard to speak with you without you get on your shady character. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif
Nevermind...
------------------------------------------------------------
Back on the subject...
Let's wait May and see how ArmAII will looks like. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/thumbs-up.gif
I wont be replying to you anymore Ptolemaios.
Eth
You can post on-topic but from your first post you are off-topic and flaming all the time against PvPers.
You are not going to reply me?OWNED http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/thumbs-up.gif
Frantic
Feb 19 2009, 23:35
...
I respect your opinion.
You presented it in an intelligent way without resorting to name calling etc.
I should also quantify that the Arma/ArmA2 engine can be used for whatever people design.
I dont think the game design lends itself to traditional PvP and I do think the open ended design allows for endless exploiting/cheating.
I still maintain that ArmA 2 will not have a big (any) PvP following (not counting the first few months) and if Im wrong, Ill be happy to come here and admit it.
Regards,
Eth
Finally i found a way to convince you that i dont wanna harm ArmAII. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
I hope you understand now that it would be no danger for ArmAII to make the controls and movements more fluent.
I wanna enjoy every aspect of ArmAII.
And in the game you are the most time on foot and thats why i think that the controls and the resulting movements of it should be as good as possible.
As i posted already, BIS said somewhere that the animations will be more fluent in ArmAII and i guess not many can be upset about this.
Lets hope that the released ArmAII will be a great game and many people can have fun with it, even the OFP fans who prefers PvP game-modes. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Back on topic please.
Ptolemaios there's no need for name calling next time you'll be pr'd.
Michael_Wittman
Feb 20 2009, 09:30
We all dont wanna have CoD, BF, CS controls, like bunnyhopping game-style.
We all enjoy the "realistic" game-style of OFP and ArmA.
We all love the modability of OFP and ArmA.
We all love the open scenario of OFP and ArmA.
We all enjoy to play OFP and ArmA together with nice people.
We all wanna see a nice polished ArmAII.
I
Agree with that. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/xmas_o.gif
Why am I not surprised that this would become an "are not, are too" argument? The assumptions of some of the people that don't know much about pvp are staggeringly absurd, such as that only arcade style can make a good pvp game or that making a game more enjoyable for pvp gameplay automatically wrecks the coop/sp part.
How do better animations worsen your player vs AI experience?
How does a bigger and more diverse server list hurt your preferred game mode?
How does it affect you that someone on some other server plays deathmatch with rocket cars?
If you put your mind into it, it's not difficult to realize that the only big difference between pve and pvp is your opponent. The game stays the same and it's the game that we want to play. Player vs player is more sensitive to control flaws because a human is almost always smarter, faster and more agile than AI.
You have to be quicker than your opponent but it becomes more difficult and out of your hand when there are unstoppable and long animations and missing transition phases that mess with how your soldier should behave. You have the exact same effect when playing against an AI opponent but those bugs become less critical because time is not of the essence in a typical pve mission and your opponent is very static. You never have to move like in pvp. When you understand this, you understand that fluent animations are beneficial for the whole community and it's stupid to leave a flaw unfixed just because you can live with it.
Regarding the original topic, I disagree with the game needing more than a few showcase pvp missions. The community has the tools to make professional missions of all kinds and it's only a matter of time when the mission maker veterans get started with the mission and script editors. Being "official" has no meaning in this kind of game because Armed Assault has no levels, only an island where you choose a location and start placing objects and scripts. Some other games need official levels because there is no finished world to fight in, you have to build those levels from scratch down to the smallest detail every time. It takes more effort than any OFP/ArmA mission and that's why you have to leave it to the pros.
BangTail
Feb 20 2009, 13:59
Why am I not surprised that this would become an "are not, are too" argument? The assumptions of some of the people that don't know much about pvp are staggeringly absurd, such as that only arcade style can make a good pvp game or that making a game more enjoyable for pvp gameplay automatically wrecks the coop/sp part.
How do better animations worsen your player vs AI experience?
How does a bigger and more diverse server list hurt your preferred game mode?
How does it affect you that someone on some other server plays deathmatch with rocket cars?
If you put your mind into it, it's not difficult to realize that the only big difference between pve and pvp is your opponent. The game stays the same and it's the game that we want to play. Player vs player is more sensitive to control flaws because a human is almost always smarter, faster and more agile than AI.
You have to be quicker than your opponent but it becomes more difficult and out of your hand when there are unstoppable and long animations and missing transition phases that mess with how your soldier should behave. You have the exact same effect when playing against an AI opponent but those bugs become less critical because time is not of the essence in a typical pve mission and your opponent is very static. You never have to move like in pvp. When you understand this, you understand that fluent animations are beneficial for the whole community and it's stupid to leave a flaw unfixed just because you can live with it.
Regarding the original topic, I disagree with the game needing more than a few showcase pvp missions. The community has the tools to make professional missions of all kinds and it's only a matter of time when the mission maker veterans get started with the mission and script editors. Being "official" has no meaning in this kind of game because Armed Assault has no levels, only an island where you choose a location and start placing objects and scripts. Some other games need official levels because there is no finished world to fight in, you have to build those levels from scratch down to the smallest detail every time. It takes more effort than any OFP/ArmA mission and that's why you have to leave it to the pros.
Again, you want the game changed to suit your playstyle.
Switching weapons takes time. To transition from your Rifle to your sidearm is NOT one fluid motion.
While I wouldn't characterize Arma's movement as perfect, it is certainly better than weapons instantaneously appearing in front of you a la "name your fave PvP game".
It's you and some of the others here who think ArmA's movements are flawed and I certainly don't want them replaced by some arcadey crap in the name of catering to the PvP crowd.
PvP DOES NOT hurt CooP, until things are changed in favor of PvP. Because the majority of the people who play ArmA are CooP players, it stands that BIS should cater to that demographic.
Im not saying "go play BF2" or whatever. Im saying, take the game as it is.
Better animations are good. But good is subjective. Your "better" might not be my "better". There are definitely some things that can be tweaked but I wouldn't want to see it drastically changed and it strikes me that some people here would.
OFP was great but the aiming and switching weapons were still a little fast. That may suit PvP very well and that may be why OFP was more appealing to the PvP crowd. ArmA took strides to make the game a bit more realistic and I feel that reverting to the OFP system would be a step backward.
I can't stress it enough, I dont want to deprive anyone of their PvP experience. Conversely, I dont want to see the game changed to suit PvPers.
Ultimately, it wont happen as ArmA's fanbase remains primarily CooP.
Regards,
Eth
Again, you want the game changed to suit your playstyle.
Switching weapons takes time. To transition from your Rifle to your sidearm is NOT one fluid motion.
While I wouldn't characterize Arma's movement as perfect, it is certainly better than weapons instantaneously appearing in front of you a la "name your fave PvP game".
It's you and some of the others here who think ArmA's movements are flawed and I certainly don't want them replaced by some arcadey crap in the name of catering to the PvP crowd.
PvP DOES NOT hurt CooP, until things are changed in favor of PvP. Because the majority of the people who play ArmA are CooP players, it stands that BIS should cater to that demographic.
Im not saying "go play BF2" or whatever. Im saying, take the game as it is.
Better animations are good. But good is subjective. Your "better" might not be my "better". There are definitely some things that can be tweaked but I wouldn't want to see it drastically changed and it strikes me that some people here would.
OFP was great but the aiming and switching weapons were still a little fast. That may suit PvP very well and that may be why OFP was more appealing to the PvP crowd. ArmA took strides to make the game a bit more realistic and I feel that reverting to the OFP system would be a step backward.
I can't stress it enough, I dont want to deprive anyone of their PvP experience. Conversely, I dont want to see the game changed to suit PvPers.
Ultimately, it wont happen as ArmA's fanbase remains primarily CooP.
Regards,
Eth
You clearly see text that I have never written so it's very difficult to have a meaningful conversation.
I haven't said anything about weapon switching. Try sprinting and then stop suddenly. Sprint diagonally right from the start. Try sprinting and going prone as fast as you can so you don't get shot. Throw a grenade in a kneeling position and especially when armed with a handgun. Those are the kinds of animations (or the lack of them) that are detrimental to the game.
I haven't said that I want arcade. I specifically said "The assumptions of some of the people that don't know much about pvp are staggeringly absurd, such as that only arcade style can make a good pvp game" but I take it that you didn't read it.
I have no idea what your idea about "suiting the game for a playstyle" is. Is it impossible to think that some improvements make the game more suitable for all game modes instead of making one better at the expense of others? Where do you see the windmills and exactly how big are they? You might want to look up the term "straw man argument".
BangTail
Feb 20 2009, 14:45
Again, you want the game changed to suit your playstyle.
Switching weapons takes time. To transition from your Rifle to your sidearm is NOT one fluid motion.
While I wouldn't characterize Arma's movement as perfect, it is certainly better than weapons instantaneously appearing in front of you a la "name your fave PvP game".
It's you and some of the others here who think ArmA's movements are flawed and I certainly don't want them replaced by some arcadey crap in the name of catering to the PvP crowd.
PvP DOES NOT hurt CooP, until things are changed in favor of PvP. Because the majority of the people who play ArmA are CooP players, it stands that BIS should cater to that demographic.
Im not saying "go play BF2" or whatever. Im saying, take the game as it is.
Better animations are good. But good is subjective. Your "better" might not be my "better". There are definitely some things that can be tweaked but I wouldn't want to see it drastically changed and it strikes me that some people here would.
OFP was great but the aiming and switching weapons were still a little fast. That may suit PvP very well and that may be why OFP was more appealing to the PvP crowd. ArmA took strides to make the game a bit more realistic and I feel that reverting to the OFP system would be a step backward.
I can't stress it enough, I dont want to deprive anyone of their PvP experience. Conversely, I dont want to see the game changed to suit PvPers.
Ultimately, it wont happen as ArmA's fanbase remains primarily CooP.
Regards,
Eth
You clearly see text that I have never written so it's very difficult to have a meaningful conversation.
I haven't said anything about weapon switching. Try sprinting and then stop suddenly. Sprint diagonally right from the start. Try sprinting and going prone as fast as you can so you don't get shot. Throw a grenade in a kneeling position and especially when armed with a handgun. Those are the kinds of animations (or the lack of them) that are detrimental to the game.
I haven't said that I want arcade. I specifically said "The assumptions of some of the people that don't know much about pvp are staggeringly absurd, such as that only arcade style can make a good pvp game" but I take it that you didn't read it.
I have no idea what your idea about "suiting the game for a playstyle" is. Is it impossible to think that some improvements make the game more suitable for all game modes instead of making one better at the expense of others? Where do you see the windmills and exactly how big are they? You might want to look up the term "straw man argument".
Again, I dont have the problems with movement that you seem to have.
"Playstyle" is self explanatory.
I read your post from start to finish.
What I got was the usual condescending "You dont know much about PvP" attitude that I am used to from PvP players.
I used to PvP more than anything else. It has been ruined by cheats and "ub3r l33t I pwn j00ers".
Finally, keep it on topic and lose the sarcasm.
Eth
PS : I apologize for grouping you with the "weapon handling sucks" crowd. You did not reference that.
Again, I dont have the problems with movement that you seem to have.
And during these 10 minutes between my post and yours you went to the editor and did the things I pointed out?
"Playstyle" is self explanatory.
No it's not.
I read your post from start to finish.
Then why do you have false assumptions of what I want when I clearly said what I want?
What I got was the usual condescending "You dont know much about PvP" attitude that I am used to from PvP players.
Maybe it's because judging from your posts you don't know much about pvp or the people who play it in OFP and ArmA. It also condescending to ignore everything they tell you and to think that you know better what kind of game they want. Then you dig into your defensive position and start talking about things that nobody except yourself brought up.
I used to PvP more than anything else. It has been ruined by cheats and "ub3r l33t I pwn j00ers".
Did you do it in OFP or ArmA?
Finally, keep it on topic and lose the sarcasm.
Might I remind you that you weren't on topic to begin with? The topic is about official pvp missions.
BangTail
Feb 20 2009, 15:15
Quote[/b] ]And during these 10 minutes between my post and yours you went to the editor and did the things I pointed out?
I dont have problems with the movement. I dont know how to make that any clearer to you
Quote[/b] ]No it's not.
Yes it is.
Quote[/b] ]Then why do you have false assumptions of what I want when I clearly said what I want?
I apologized for the one false assumption I made.
Quote[/b] ]Maybe it's because judging from your posts you don't know much about pvp or the people who play it in OFP and ArmA. It also condescending to ignore everything they tell you and to think that you know better what kind of game they want. Then you dig into your defensive position and start talking about things that nobody except yourself brought up.
I dont care what kind of game you or they want. I only care that ArmA/ArmA 2 are not changed to be more PvP friendly at the expense of the main fanbase.
Quote[/b] ]Did you do it in OFP or ArmA?
I was playing OFP and designing missions from the day it was released. The group I play with were entirely PvP in the beginning.
Quote[/b] ]Might I remind you that you weren't on topic to begin with? The topic is about official pvp missions.
Might I remind YOU that I am discussing the topic (as much as you might not like what I have to say) and you are making snidey comments about windmills. Try to differentiate.
Regards,
Eth
Hi all
The idea that PvP means short range, urban environments is a "Strawman" argument.
The oldest form of PvP was that which was developed with the corridor/shoebox shooters: Doom, Duke Nukem, Quake, Unreal, and COD4.
Then came the modded forms that came with CS and others and that led, after OFP's release, to BF and on to the other modded versions of the preceding games.
The Original OFP developed by BIS was different.
No invisible walls no enormous landscape.
No prison for your mind. No limits on what you could do.
The key here is that OFP1, ArmA and ArmAII can do all the other games can do but none of those games can do all that the Real Virtuality engine can do.
There are lots of forms of PvP. I play large scale PvP Coops; Warfare, Berzerk and a thousand other player made forms, that are so popular prove that there is no singel form of PvP.
BIG WAR! is comming! Massive Multiplayer War where even warfare is dwarfed.
So PvP fans will have an even bigger experience.
Kind Regards walker
sparks50
Feb 20 2009, 15:54
Whats "Big war"? Link?
Quote[/b] ]And during these 10 minutes between my post and yours you went to the editor and did the things I pointed out?
I dont have problems with the movement. I dont know how to make that any clearer to you
Quote[/b] ]No it's not.
Yes it is.
Quote[/b] ]Then why do you have false assumptions of what I want when I clearly said what I want?
I apologized for the one false assumption I made.
Quote[/b] ]Maybe it's because judging from your posts you don't know much about pvp or the people who play it in OFP and ArmA. It also condescending to ignore everything they tell you and to think that you know better what kind of game they want. Then you dig into your defensive position and start talking about things that nobody except yourself brought up.
I dont care what kind of game you or they want. I only care that ArmA/ArmA 2 are not changed to be more PvP friendly at the expense of the main fanbase.
Quote[/b] ]Did you do it in OFP or ArmA?
I was playing OFP and designing missions from the day it was released. The group I play with were entirely PvP in the beginning.
Quote[/b] ]Might I remind you that you weren't on topic to begin with? The topic is about official pvp missions.
Might I remind YOU that I am discussing the topic (as much as you might not like what I have to say) and you are making snidey comments about windmills. Try to differentiate.
Regards,
Eth
If you dont care about PvP in ArmA2 or what we want GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE.Stop being off-topic,spamming,flaming,trolling and abusing the thread.
WE DONT WANT OFP,ARMA,ARMA2 to change gameplay.
WE LOVE OFP,ARMA as it is.
WE JUST WANT SOME BASIC PVP MAPS FROM BIS.
Your beloved ArmA bots are smarter than you.
Placebo
Feb 20 2009, 21:45
If you dont care about PvP in ArmA2 or what we want GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE.Stop being off-topic,spamming,flaming,trolling and abusing the thread.
WE DONT WANT OFP,ARMA,ARMA2 to change gameplay.
WE LOVE OFP,ARMA as it is.
WE JUST WANT SOME BASIC PVP MAPS FROM BIS.
Your beloved ArmA bots are smarter than you.
Not sure what is being said that's making you so angry, certainly you're the one that's flaming people from what I can see.
As to the issue at hand, if BIS don't include enough PvP then why not make your own? The editor is advanced enough, the game engine is complex enough to make all kinds of PvP that you can desire, if there aren't enough servers hosting PvP then get together with your friends and start up a PvP only server, if you build it they will come as the movie said http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Now please go back to debating calmly without resorting to flaming.
"get together with your friends and start up a PvP only server"
You are far away from the topic.The matter is not ''some friends gather and play a PvP user made mission".The matter is official PvP missions so we can play them on tournaments like ESL or other leagues.
"Not sure what is being said"
Really?
BangTail
Feb 20 2009, 22:30
Quote[/b] ]And during these 10 minutes between my post and yours you went to the editor and did the things I pointed out?
I dont have problems with the movement. I dont know how to make that any clearer to you
Quote[/b] ]No it's not.
Yes it is.
Quote[/b] ]Then why do you have false assumptions of what I want when I clearly said what I want?
I apologized for the one false assumption I made.
Quote[/b] ]Maybe it's because judging from your posts you don't know much about pvp or the people who play it in OFP and ArmA. It also condescending to ignore everything they tell you and to think that you know better what kind of game they want. Then you dig into your defensive position and start talking about things that nobody except yourself brought up.
I dont care what kind of game you or they want. I only care that ArmA/ArmA 2 are not changed to be more PvP friendly at the expense of the main fanbase.
Quote[/b] ]Did you do it in OFP or ArmA?
I was playing OFP and designing missions from the day it was released. The group I play with were entirely PvP in the beginning.
Quote[/b] ]Might I remind you that you weren't on topic to begin with? The topic is about official pvp missions.
Might I remind YOU that I am discussing the topic (as much as you might not like what I have to say) and you are making snidey comments about windmills. Try to differentiate.
Regards,
Eth
If you dont care about PvP in ArmA2 or what we want GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE.Stop being off-topic,spamming,flaming,trolling and abusing the thread.
WE DONT WANT OFP,ARMA,ARMA2 to change gameplay.
WE LOVE OFP,ARMA as it is.
WE JUST WANT SOME BASIC PVP MAPS FROM BIS.
Your beloved ArmA bots are smarter than you.
Apart from anything else, this answer was not intended for you.
Calm down.
Eth
Quote[/b] ]And during these 10 minutes between my post and yours you went to the editor and did the things I pointed out?
I dont have problems with the movement. I dont know how to make that any clearer to you
Quote[/b] ]No it's not.
Yes it is.
Quote[/b] ]Then why do you have false assumptions of what I want when I clearly said what I want?
I apologized for the one false assumption I made.
Quote[/b] ]Maybe it's because judging from your posts you don't know much about pvp or the people who play it in OFP and ArmA. It also condescending to ignore everything they tell you and to think that you know better what kind of game they want. Then you dig into your defensive position and start talking about things that nobody except yourself brought up.
I dont care what kind of game you or they want. I only care that ArmA/ArmA 2 are not changed to be more PvP friendly at the expense of the main fanbase.
Quote[/b] ]Did you do it in OFP or ArmA?
I was playing OFP and designing missions from the day it was released. The group I play with were entirely PvP in the beginning.
Quote[/b] ]Might I remind you that you weren't on topic to begin with? The topic is about official pvp missions.
Might I remind YOU that I am discussing the topic (as much as you might not like what I have to say) and you are making snidey comments about windmills. Try to differentiate.
Regards,
Eth
If you dont care about PvP in ArmA2 or what we want GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE.Stop being off-topic,spamming,flaming,trolling and abusing the thread.
WE DONT WANT OFP,ARMA,ARMA2 to change gameplay.
WE LOVE OFP,ARMA as it is.
WE JUST WANT SOME BASIC PVP MAPS FROM BIS.
Your beloved ArmA bots are smarter than you.
Apart from anything else, this answer was not intended for you.
Calm down.
Eth
I am very calm just writing CAPS to make sure that you will see what I am writing and you dont change what I am saying.You did it many times and not only with me.
I didnt think that the reply intended to me.
P.S. : Are you the guy who said that you aren't going to reply to me?
BangTail
Feb 20 2009, 23:09
Quote[/b] ]And during these 10 minutes between my post and yours you went to the editor and did the things I pointed out?
I dont have problems with the movement. I dont know how to make that any clearer to you
Quote[/b] ]No it's not.
Yes it is.
Quote[/b] ]Then why do you have false assumptions of what I want when I clearly said what I want?
I apologized for the one false assumption I made.
Quote[/b] ]Maybe it's because judging from your posts you don't know much about pvp or the people who play it in OFP and ArmA. It also condescending to ignore everything they tell you and to think that you know better what kind of game they want. Then you dig into your defensive position and start talking about things that nobody except yourself brought up.
I dont care what kind of game you or they want. I only care that ArmA/ArmA 2 are not changed to be more PvP friendly at the expense of the main fanbase.
Quote[/b] ]Did you do it in OFP or ArmA?
I was playing OFP and designing missions from the day it was released. The group I play with were entirely PvP in the beginning.
Quote[/b] ]Might I remind you that you weren't on topic to begin with? The topic is about official pvp missions.
Might I remind YOU that I am discussing the topic (as much as you might not like what I have to say) and you are making snidey comments about windmills. Try to differentiate.
Regards,
Eth
If you dont care about PvP in ArmA2 or what we want GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE.Stop being off-topic,spamming,flaming,trolling and abusing the thread.
WE DONT WANT OFP,ARMA,ARMA2 to change gameplay.
WE LOVE OFP,ARMA as it is.
WE JUST WANT SOME BASIC PVP MAPS FROM BIS.
Your beloved ArmA bots are smarter than you.
Apart from anything else, this answer was not intended for you.
Calm down.
Eth
I am very calm just writing CAPS to make sure that you will see what I am writing and you dont change what I am saying.You did it many times and not only with me.
I didnt think that the reply intended to me.
P.S. : Are you the guy who said that you aren't going to reply to me?
You dont sound calm.
I've never changed anything you said.
I'd suggest you take it easy as you have now been warned by 2 seperate mods.
I had no intention of replying to you until you told me to F-off in response to a post that wasnt even intended for you.
Lets leave it at that shall we. I agree to disagree http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Eth
Please.
Anyone who doesn't want to talk about pvp missions, please don't post here. This thread is a disgrace.
BangTail
Feb 20 2009, 23:20
Please.
Anyone who doesn't want to talk about pvp missions, please don't post here. This thread is a disgrace.
So, back on topic.
What kind of PvP scenarios are you interested in seeing?
Eth
Please.
Anyone who doesn't want to talk about pvp missions, please don't post here. This thread is a disgrace.
So, back on topic.
What kind of PvP scenarios are you interested in seeing?
Eth
Deathmatch.
BangTail
Feb 20 2009, 23:25
Please.
Anyone who doesn't want to talk about pvp missions, please don't post here. This thread is a disgrace.
So, back on topic.
What kind of PvP scenarios are you interested in seeing?
Eth
Deathmatch.
Straight FFA DM?
I used to like that in Vietcong .... was good fun.
Eth
Frantic
Feb 20 2009, 23:42
@<hidden>: There is really no reason to get upset about a thread in this forum. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
The thread title says:
One question that MANY fans care about.
PvP...
Everybody can clearly see that this thread goes about "MANY fans" and "PvP".
Maybe a thread title with a more clear statement would have helped to let the thread ontopic, like: Request for more official PvP missions
I really have to apologize that we do not only discuss the question about more official PvP missions by BIS in ArmAII in this thread.
Furthermore, i have to say that we already reached a point in this discussion where we already found out that ArmAII will have PvP missions and that there will be a mission-editor for a good reason.
However, this thread already moved over to a more interesting point.
The question why there is so less PvP in ArmA and what can help to have more PvP in ArmAII?
I posted already some suggestions about this problem of some active discussion partners in this thread.
Here a quote of it:
Quote[/b] ]-CyDoN thinks its because of the lack of BIS made standard PvP missions.
-ethne thinks its because ArmA is not designed for it.
-Michael_Wittman thinks its because of the cheaters.
-Akira BAADAKKU thinks its because of the missing OFP players who left ArmA because of the slow movements and controls compared to OFP.
-I think its because of the unpolished movements and controls.
The majority of the active people here in this thread thinks that the controls and movements are the major reason for the missing PvP part of ArmA and are hoping that there will be an improvement to be seen in ArmAII.
I cant speak for all, but i think that most of us dont wanna see ArmAII transformed into an arcade shooter like many other FPS games out there. The people who loved the PvP style of OFP are not interested in bunny-hopping games.
We all love the freedom of modding and the creation possibilities of it and of course the nice scenario and environment which no other game is able to deliver.
I think on that basis everyone can see that we just have a valid point about the controls and movements in ArmA and that we just wanna see an improvement of it in ArmAII.
The reason why the people of the PvP part of ArmA are mostly concerned about the controls and movements of the infantry units is the fact that in PvP you need to be faster than your opponent otherwise you are dead and therefor you need controls which react and no stop-and-go if you run from one cover to another.
I really dont think we have to get into detail about the concerns we have with the controls and movements in ArmA.
Everyone who takes his time to just try out the controls and movements of an infantry unit can clearly see the unpolished parts of it which can really disturb your gaming experience.
It should be clear that an improvement of the animation and controls wont hurt anyone. It would just make ArmAII to a better game for all of us. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
PS: I got an idea about the PvP missions problem of CyDoN and Ptolemaios, how about to make missions by yourself and send them in to BIS, maybe they will make them official and implement them in a patch? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Or another idea, how about BIS are looking after the most frequent missions online and overwork them and release them within a patch then?
Just some thoughts. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
Michael_Wittman
Feb 20 2009, 23:52
Please.
Anyone who doesn't want to talk about pvp missions, please don't post here. This thread is a disgrace.
So, back on topic.
What kind of PvP scenarios are you interested in seeing?
Eth
Deathmatch.
I Almost drop from the chair laughing....oh boy...thank you for that one
@<hidden>: There is really no reason to get upset about a thread in this forum. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
The thread title says:
One question that MANY fans care about.
PvP...
Everybody can clearly see that this thread goes about "MANY fans" and "PvP".
Maybe a thread title with a more clear statement would have helped to let the thread ontopic, like: Request for more official PvP missions
I really have to apologize that we do not only discuss the question about more official PvP missions by BIS in ArmAII in this thread.
Furthermore, i have to say that we already reached a point in this discussion where we already found out that ArmAII will have PvP missions and that there will be a mission-editor for a good reason.
However, this thread already moved over to a more interesting point.
The question why there is so less PvP in ArmA and what can help to have more PvP in ArmAII?
I posted already some suggestions about this problem of some active discussion partners in this thread.
Here a quote of it:
Quote[/b] ]-CyDoN thinks its because of the lack of BIS made standard PvP missions.
-ethne thinks its because ArmA is not designed for it.
-Michael_Wittman thinks its because of the cheaters.
-Akira BAADAKKU thinks its because of the missing OFP players who left ArmA because of the slow movements and controls compared to OFP.
-I think its because of the unpolished movements and controls.
The majority of the active people here in this thread thinks that the controls and movements are the major reason for the missing PvP part of ArmA and are hoping that there will be an improvement to be seen in ArmAII.
I cant speak for all, but i think that most of us dont wanna see ArmAII transformed into an arcade shooter like many other FPS games out there. The people who loved the PvP style of OFP are not interested in bunny-hopping games.
We all love the freedom of modding and the creation possibilities of it and of course the nice scenario and environment which no other game is able to deliver.
I think on that basis everyone can see that we just have a valid point about the controls and movements in ArmA and that we just wanna see an improvement of it in ArmAII.
The reason why the people of the PvP part of ArmA are mostly concerned about the controls and movements of the infantry units is the fact that in PvP you need to be faster than your opponent otherwise you are dead and therefor you need controls which react and no stop-and-go if you run from one cover to another.
I really dont think we have to get into detail about the concerns we have with the controls and movements in ArmA.
Everyone who takes his time to just try out the controls and movements of an infantry unit can clearly see the unpolished parts of it which can really disturb your gaming experience.
It should be clear that an improvement of the animation and controls wont hurt anyone. It would just make ArmAII to a better game for all of us. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
PS: I got an idea about the PvP missions problem of CyDoN and Ptolemaios, how about to make missions by yourself and send them in to BIS, maybe they will make them official and implement them in a patch? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Or another idea, how about BIS are looking after the most frequent missions online and overwork them and release them within a patch then?
Just some thoughts. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
Frantic if you look at the first pages we have a link of the ESL and AL mission packs.They are not our creation but I think its a very good start for BIS.If you want take a look.
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=4584 (5vs5+)
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=4589 (2vs2 or 3vs3)
These missions should be included as well:
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=1442
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=1337
Who is going to play them if they are not official?
These missions should be included as well:
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=1442
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=1337
Who is going to play them if they are not official?
Thats right Celery.Thats what I am saying.
If those missions were official the things would be different.
(Tequila Sunburn my favourite http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/thumbs-up.gif )
sparks50
Feb 21 2009, 11:14
Why?
NoRailgunner
Feb 21 2009, 11:36
sparks50 because few guys here dont like to make/play "nonofficial missions", instead they want blame BIS again if such "official mission" doesnt fit into their kind of gameplay... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Even if they were official, no-one would play them these days....
Face it, the Arma game(s) are not primarily made for quick/fast Deathmatch action.
Its some sort of "tactical simulation", Tactical Team vs. Team or Coop Maps are their métier.
I wouldn't hope that it will be any different for Arma2....
sparks50 because few guys here dont like to make/play "nonofficial missions", instead they want blame BIS again if such "official mission" doesnt fit into their kind of gameplay... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
most useless post in this topic.I guess BIS is busy making cows,copying mods of the community and reskin ArmA units and not some official missions.You see I can blame BIS even now.
@<hidden>
Because every game that respect itself has official missions that can be played in tournaments.The official mission has a special burden to the players.
Frantic
Feb 21 2009, 15:37
These missions should be included as well:
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=1442
http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=1337
Who is going to play them if they are not official?
Thats right Celery.Thats what I am saying.
If those missions were official the things would be different.
(Tequila Sunburn my favourite http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/thumbs-up.gif )
sorry but that are ArmA missions, you wont seen them in ArmAII, only if ArmAII has Sahrani implemented.
And i really dont think it will make a huge difference if a mission is official or custom made. Only if a missions is really good, then more people would be able to play them from the start. But if its like in ArmA with its terrible PvP missions within the game then nobody will remember the official missions and will just continue playing well made custom missions.
The OFP/ArmA community likes self-made content and if something is good then it will be played!
Some of my CTF missions are still played in OFP and ArmA and you can be sure that some of Celery's DM missions are also often in use.
Nobody will be angry obout BIS if they implement some bug-free, well-made official missions in ArmAII.
Many old OFP veterans still remember the greatness of ArmA's precursor. The freedom of every game-mode possible in OFP.
Thats what we wanna see reimplemented in ArmAII, because we love the variety and its just a great thing to have all possibilities of every gaming-style available in one game.
You all know the missions-editor and with its powerful scripting-language all game-styles can be created with it.
Thats why we would like to see a huge improvement of several things in ArmAII compared to ArmA, like reacting controls, fluent movements and no longer the feeling to control a robot instead of a soldier in war.
Some well made PvP missions on the ArmAII disc wont hurt anyone and it will help the online community to have some fun with PvP missions right from the start! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Variety is the key word and OFP was known of its huge variety in missions and addons.
Game2=ArmAII is the real successor of OFP and thats why many OFP veterans hope that more people will be able to enjoy the quality of a game which provides you with lot of different game-styles, game-modes, missions and content, just like OFP still do and hopefully ArmAII will do too!
I think when i compare the time of playing BIS made missions to the community stuff i played, then the community will win with a huge gap in between.
So some BIS made missions will be good for some time, but i dont think they will last forever.
I would suggest the possibility to post missions in a special missions-thread and the community can vote which missions should be made official by BIS, so BIS can still decide if they wanna overwork those missions or not and implement them in a next patch.
Thats the only way i can think of to get missions official.
However, it would still be a great thing to see high quality missions made by BIS just right from the start in ArmAII.
sparks50 because few guys here dont like to make/play "nonofficial missions", instead they want blame BIS again if such "official mission" doesnt fit into their kind of gameplay... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
few? lol like every guy who buys the game cares about missions making? Why should they? I buy the game to play with other orginized clans PvP not to play with scripts or the editor, you know why? Because I don't care about it, I only care about playing the damn game and most of the PvP ppl do the same, go at:
gotfrag.com
and ask "how many of you know how to make maps with the World Editor", then ask "how many of you care to learn how?" The answear will be 1 in the whole forum tops, why?? Because the is Dust2 there is Inferno there is Cbble there is Nuke there is Fire and a few more maps called official. Have you ever wondered why there are no VIP or hostage missions played on tournamets in CS or Americas Army?
"They want to blame BIS"? what is there in ur head, like if we have something personal with BIS I really don't get why you defend them? Is it empty? really read your post again carefully and analize every sentece and then try to think a bit, I know its hard for you but try.
And the sarcasm in the end http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Good points Frantic.
I think BIS said that they will make quality over quantity in ARMA2 and that the game modes were "CTI COOP" and "CTI PvP". Same mission that is just with some variations for both.
If they got settings like size and objectives then it might be good for starters actually. You get COOP and PVP. You can use whole Chechnarus or parts of it. If its made as the only mission(s) then i guess a lot of thaught and quality gone into that mission(s).
Regards
Alex
Michael_Wittman
Feb 21 2009, 16:16
so deathmatch is very important and they d better put their effords on that? Well... Now it makes sense to tell you. GO PLAY BF2....
Some people still dont get what this game is all about...=(
so deathmatch is very important and they d better put their effords on that? Well... Now it makes sense to tell you. GO PLAY BF2....
Some people still dont get what this game is all about...=(
+1
Like said before.... the game is not really suited for quick deathmatch and other such kind of gameplay....
Optimum would be Quake3 for that http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
Can we move on ? This thread is getting repetitive and pretty unconstructive.
In a nutshell :
- We know there will be official PVP maps in Arma 2
- We don't know how much or how good it will be
- Arma1 movement felt clunky and slow for many PVP Players, hopefully it will change,
- PVP is not only Deathmatch and bunny hoping
- CLAN PVP has nothing to do with Public PVP
- Team vs Team PVP can be very organized, just as much than COOP players
- Coop players fear that their beloved game is made in another BF2 clone,
- PVP players fear that their beloved game lose all the fun they had in OFP,
- Many COOP players don't understand why there should be any official PVP mission to start with (see editor),
- Many PVP players don't understand why they should use the editor in the first place
- Rince, Repeat...
Can we move on ? This thread is getting repetitive and pretty unconstructive.
Oh really http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
This thread is basically like bucket where i would do my shit if i wouldn't have toilet. Toilet is too applauding word form this thread as toilet is pretty advanced stuff, bucket is not. Bucket is something which is rather primitive compared to toilet.
There are good writings and good attitude by some writers (basically those who wish that ArmA2 would give nice experiences for both PvP and COOP-player and those who likes to play both), but then again there those who are one of dirties and most disgusting assholes ever lived in internet. Terrible attitude.
WOW,everyone speaks about the deathmatches and not about the TvsT C&H missions I post.You try to find a ''negative'' point (in this case deathmatch)to attack PvP.
Mister second take your shit away please. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif .Just kidding.
Michael_Wittman
Feb 21 2009, 21:16
So here it goes my wishlist for ARMA II:
- Fix phishics (dont wanna see 50 tons tanks flying 100m in the air)
- Make tanks and APC fully functional
- Give choppers counter measures
- Create SAM vehicles so hellfires are not GODLIKE
- Dig in the sim aspect of aircrafts....specially regarding adquiring targets.
- Polish the wheeled vehicle driving so its more sensitive
- Make weapon switching slighly more quick and fluid
- Make shortcuts to drop current weapon and pick auxiliary
Thats for the sake of all us coop and the others
Then for coop (maybe 100% of the people that have played this and have fully understand the game)
- Fix the AI
- Create a strategic level AI
Thats my wishlist... if I were all for the PvP I would ask for a anticheating in the very first place but it looks like the pink elephant in the middle of the room they dont want to point.
Finish.
PD. For me the only reason PvP dont mention the problem with people cheating is that they allready gave up on that...they wont or they cant see that it is nearly
IMPOSSIBLE to create a fresh PvP community on ARMAII if a 12 yrold kid can blow up the game from week 3 from release.
So they still grip to their small communities and say they are worth it all..
AND I REPEAT....GO PLAY HL, COD, BF2....etc etc etc Its easier that you convince usual players of those games that ARMA is for them than us trying to convince that ARMA is for you.
AND I REPEAT....GO PLAY HL, COD, BF2....
Why do you keep telling that? It sounds idiotic.
AND I REPEAT....GO PLAY HL, COD, BF2....
Why do you keep telling that? It sounds idiotic.
and retarded...
WOW,everyone speaks about the deathmatches and not about the TvsT C&H missions I post.
It doesn't matter what is the form of PvP. be it DM, C&H, TvsT or anything as long as players are playing against players.
And if you think that i'm against PvP your wrong: i want it back in. So i agree with you and Celery that Michael_Wittman is one of those which i refer to be assholes.
Michael_Wittman
Feb 22 2009, 08:39
Using a batallion level battlefield simulator with a 20x20km map for deathmatch is not only idiotic and retarded it speaks from itself about the player.
Its so plain stupid that I cannot find the point to begin to explain you how wrong you are. For me it would be like trying to explain quantum mechanics to a 5yrs old kid. I give up on you.
Anyway I think I did hit the nail as the name calling has suddenly begin ... Loooooooooooool.
Yes guys the awfull truth hurts dry your tears and move on and repect yourself and stop the name calling - that one is for free.
trooper_ryan
Feb 22 2009, 09:02
Using a batallion level battlefield simulator with a 20x20km map to play against AI instead of capable human players... is not only idiotic and retarded it speaks from itself about the player.
#vote kick Michael_Wittman
Coop and PvP are both feasible and with some minor animation + control tweaks. Arma2 will hopefully please absolutely everyone, except close minded people such as yourself.
Wittman: Blah... As many times before i've crushed you when you come out with your odd ideas and logic, i could do it in this thread as well.
Quote[/b] ]Using a batallion level battlefield simulator with a 20x20km map for deathmatch is not only idiotic and retarded it speaks from itself about the player.
Like this. So instead of PVP you use it in idiotic COOP where 10-20 guys slaughters hundereds of AI opponents who acts idiotically. Just as accurate stereotype as yours.
Using a batallion level battlefield simulator with a 20x20km map for deathmatch is not only idiotic and retarded it speaks from itself about the player.
It's not idiotic or retarded. It's fun. The way you act so hostile against specific game modes tells that you are quite narrow-minded. Deathmatch is nothing more than a global objective of killing other players more than they kill you, the game doesn't matter except it's more entertaining with the realistic gameplay of ArmA.
Its so plain stupid that I cannot find the point to begin to explain you how wrong you are. For me it would be like trying to explain quantum mechanics to a 5yrs old kid. I give up on you.
Your argument is obviously so stupid that you can't even back it up. That's why you fail to explain yourself. It's like arguing with a 5 year old child who just says "I'm right and you're wrong!"
You need both... have your cake and eat it too. So be quite you poopheads!
On the one hand, once you figure out how AI operate, its only a matter of figuring out how to exploit those non-human characteristics. Granted, though they are hard, they are nothing compared to human opponents, they never will be, not in a 100 years - thats life.
On the other hand, however, the fact that AI can/is programmed has its mannnnnny advantages too... I mean, what is the likelyhood of you wanting to play online with some human friends and assault a enemy camp, are humans REALLY going to be patrolling that camp and pretend that nothing is going to go wrong? Are your friends going to patrol the forest and make way for a convoy to go through - all within a 5 minute notice from the time you get the urge to the time your actually playing... No. You need AI, plain and simple. There are numerous other examples, but the more I give - the more 'they' will reply with pointless negativity.
Theres going to be a mission editor, hence all gamemodes are available... So I don't know what the big deal is, play what you want. There has been no hints that the game is going to be oriented one way or another, so arguing about this stupid crap warrants nay sayers nothing... so shut up and sit down... and never enter this thread again.
NoRailgunner
Feb 22 2009, 11:45
Sorry to lump few ArmA pvp players here together with those bodycount + headshot l33t pwners http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
Agree that cheat protection and proper server settings + good admin are one of the most important points to play a good pvp mission. Otherwise its stupid run and gun like in many other shooter. Sure it can be fun if you bit drunken and dont care anymore on realism. Hehe reminds me of a sniper mission with 35mx500m "arena". Reducing the combat area in that way is imo only good for funshooter serious addicted "mastak1ll3r". But each to his own. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Make a concise list with all important things for all kind of Arma2 pvp missions. Better to do something for it instead of bitching again and again.
Maybe BIS can provide some kind of templates that only need some fine-tuning from a good pvp player/mission designer?
DarthElvis
Feb 22 2009, 17:04
...Co-op OTH , offers the opportunity to work as a team with friends to complet a mission by supporting and assisting rather than running aorund blowing things up.
Co-Op offers teamwork against an opposing force made up of retards and mental defectives(A.I. I mean). I find and have found absolutely NO challenge in co-op.
An OPFOR made up of thinking, adaptable people will always challenge you more than the mindless drill running of standard co-op against the moving target drones of the A.I.
PvP can be done right. Evolution would be amazing if you could join the OPFOR. Face it ,even co-op the way it is now has it's fair share of idiots. I don't think Pvp will bring anymore.
The realism of this series will keep out the hardcore run 'n gun FPS mouthbreathers anyways.
IMHO, YMMV
Maddmatt
Feb 22 2009, 20:12
Using a batallion level battlefield simulator with a 20x20km map for deathmatch is not only idiotic and retarded it speaks from itself about the player.
Its so plain stupid that I cannot find the point to begin to explain you how wrong you are. For me it would be like trying to explain quantum mechanics to a 5yrs old kid. I give up on you.
Anyway I think I did hit the nail as the name calling has suddenly begin ... Loooooooooooool.
Yes guys the awfull truth hurts dry your tears and move on and repect yourself and stop the name calling - that one is for free.
Oh please. In the end it's a friggin video game. People play it how they want.
I've played large organised missions, and I've played simple deathmatches and CTF games. I've enjoyed them all, and I would rather play them in ArmA than Call of Duty.
You can't go telling people how they should play a game, it's like a child telling people how someone should play with their favorite toys http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif
Coop players do not understand 1 thing.
We dont tell THEM what to play, on the other hand they tell us lol
We just say that this game needs some PvP support, if you dont like PvP go kill bots, we dont care, its fine with us.
Whats the problem with that I really cant understand... LOL
And the statement "there is an editor go make missions"
What if I don't know how and don't care to learn? What happens then?
And in the end look all those popular PvP games, they all come up with some maps to kill your friends.
Whats the problem and in the end the THREAD says about how the game needs PvP and how to make it, not IF it has to be made.
@<hidden>
The awful truth is that u tried to play BF2 or any other pvp game, a game I don't like but cant get why you ppl hate so much, but you got so pwnd that you now hate everyone who can win you. I bet you had problems with your friends at school when they were picking other kids to play football http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/nener.gif
Oh and something last. Coop players say that Coop offers the "work as a team" thingy, you obviously NEVER play and orginzied clan PvP match in ANY game from starcraft to ArmA where the 5vs5 or 2v2 or whatever makes you DEPEND on your teamates.
Maddmatt
Feb 23 2009, 00:43
Coop players do not understand 1 thing.
We dont tell THEM what to play, on the other hand they tell us lol
Don't generalise like that. I see players from both sides act like total idiots here at times, some 'hardcores' seem to think their preferred way of playing makes them special somehow.
Many people actually enjoy both, including me. Seeing this pathetic "coop players are lame", "PvP players should go play CS" is just embarrassing the community. It would make an outsider think that this game is mostly played by idiots.
Michael_Wittman
Feb 23 2009, 02:11
Coop players do not understand 1 thing.
We dont tell THEM what to play, on the other hand they tell us lol
We just say that this game needs some PvP support, if you dont like PvP go kill bots, we dont care, its fine with us.
Whats the problem with that I really cant understand... LOL
And the statement "there is an editor go make missions"
What if I don't know how and don't care to learn? What happens then?
And in the end look all those popular PvP games, they all come up with some maps to kill your friends.
Whats the problem and in the end the THREAD says about how the game needs PvP and how to make it, not IF it has to be made.
@<hidden>
The awful truth is that u tried to play BF2 or any other pvp game, a game I don't like but cant get why you ppl hate so much, but you got so pwnd that you now hate everyone who can win you. I bet you had problems with your friends at school when they were picking other kids to play football http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/nener.gif
Oh and something last. Coop players say that Coop offers the "work as a team" thingy, you obviously NEVER play and orginzied clan PvP match in ANY game from starcraft to ArmA where the 5vs5 or 2v2 or whatever makes you DEPEND on your teamates.
Im sorry but you are death wrong i ve played pvp games since doom...conecting 2 pcs by COM port. The first game i played more seriosly was the very firts beta versions of CS by LAN as the módems were 56kers by that time. I have allways score great and the game I have enjoyed the most was the old Day of Defeat 3.1 thats the good old days. In all this time I have enjoyed PVP a lot I know what its all about and from the very beggining I had bitter discussions with my clanmates about wether we should play this game PVP or Coop and I told them this game had nothing to do with any former experience they had and that the game was not suited for PvP....so sure...that back then i said that time would judge how was right... Today we all play coop all the time and the arguing is long gone for good.
About if Im any good at PVP ... I can only say that countless times I have had to switch team just to balance the game. In most of the games Ive played I ve barely found challenging rivals. The people that currently play or have ever played with me rely on my skill and tactics.
Of course everyone is free to use the game as they wish but for me using this game for "hexenkessel" alike missions and deathmatch is like watching someone use their lambo murciélago to carry pigs and fertilizer by the countryside.
Von Klausebitz rolls in his grave.
Maddmatt
Feb 23 2009, 02:49
Of course everyone is free to use the game as they wish but for me using this game for "hexenkessel" alike missions and deathmatch is like watching someone use their lambo murciélago to carry pigs and fertilizer by the countryside.
You know jack shit about PvP if you think it just means hexenkessel and deathmatch type stuff.
This just goes around in circles http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif
sparks50
Feb 23 2009, 03:02
Indeed. Can a moderator please close this?
This thread has been going for soon two months and has not moved an inch.
Of course everyone is free to use the game as they wish but for me using this game for "hexenkessel" alike missions and deathmatch is like watching someone use their lambo murciélago to carry pigs and fertilizer by the countryside.
Von Klausebitz rolls in his grave.
Havent you read all those posts about ESL maps or other tournament map packs???
Have we EVER talked about Hexenkassel??
OMG...
Frantic
Feb 25 2009, 22:54
Have we EVER talked about Hexenkassel??
Nothing against Hexenkessel!
You can blame Celery and me for the existence of Hexenkessel in ArmA, it took me 6 hours to place all the buildings just like in the original mission of OFP. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
However, Hexenkessel was very popular in OFP and it was fun to create this slaughter mission in ArmA too.
Every mission makes the variety bigger and that is something nobody can be upset about.
We all wanna play in ArmAII the kind of missions we like the most and the mission-editor helps us to make that happen.
Im really hoping that BIS will release a well polished game and not another disaster like ArmA was...
Im still missing some fluent animations and real controls of the infantry units in ArmA.
So i hope i will be able to enjoy ArmAII with well overworked movements and a great repertory of missions of all kind of game-modes!
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/xmas_o.gif
Have we EVER talked about Hexenkassel??
Nothing against Hexenkessel!
You can blame Celery and me for the existence of Hexenkessel in ArmA, it took me 6 hours to place all the buildings just like in the original mission of OFP. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
However, Hexenkessel was very popular in OFP and it was fun to create this slaughter mission in ArmA too.
Every mission makes the variety bigger and that is something nobody can be upset about.
We all wanna play in ArmAII the kind of missions we like the most and the mission-editor helps us to make that happen.
Im really hoping that BIS will release a well polished game and not another disaster like ArmA was...
Im still missing some fluent animations and real controls of the infantry units in ArmA.
So i hope i will be able to enjoy ArmAII with well overworked movements and a great repertory of missions of all kind of game-modes!
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/xmas_o.gif
Hey Frantic we have nothing against Hexenkessel http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
but some people here put words that we have never
said.
Honestly I'd rather like BIS to concetrate on the proper SP/coop campaign (so it's comparable to original OFP), instead of making a a few online maps which will get buried under dozens of user-made missions and forgotten within weeks.
Honestly I'd rather like BIS to concetrate on the proper SP/coop campaign (so it's comparable to original OFP), instead of making a a few online maps which will get buried under dozens of user-made missions and forgotten within weeks.
but if they are used properly in tournaments they will not be buried. After all who cares about the campaign.
ck-claw
Feb 27 2009, 13:00
After all who cares about the campaign.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
I totally agree with what your saying in this thread!
But to say no-one gives a f*^k about the campaign i just daft! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Many many ppl got so sucked into Ofp because of the campaigns.
Frantic
Feb 27 2009, 22:00
It is totally clear that BIS are trying to make the campaign of ArmAII as good as possible. It would be dumb to not try it.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
I played the campaign of OFP together with my brother and that was the headstone where the love to OFP began for me.
And the second thing after finishing the campaign was the mission-editor.
With this great tool i was able to create a lot of funny COOP missions for playing them together with my brother in LAN.
It was way later when we got an internet-connection which was good enough to try out the online area of OFP and that was the start of non-stop OFP playing.
At my start of playing OFP online i played everything, COOP and PvP and i have to say that both aspects were just great.
Furthermore, i still think that there is for everyone an aspect in OFP where you are able to find the way of gaming you like the most.
For me it was the thrilling feeling of having a flag on the back and the bullets were flying around my head. That was the reason why i joined a clan to play PvP in a more serious way than playing public PvP only.
I guess it was in 2003 when i came to the online multiplayer of OFP and all the missions we played were just user made content.
I had played the standard missions of OFP already enough in LANs and therefor the new custom missions were just great and it was very easy to find out which ones were good, because the good missions were the most popular ones.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
After another year of constantly playing OFP online i started with my own CTF mission creating, because i wanted to have more high quality PvP missions and the most easy way to get what you want is to make it by yourself.
In the end of 2006 there came ArmA and i started right from the beginning with mission making, but sadly most of the old OFP players stopped playing ArmA one after another, because they were totally upset about the movements and controls of the infantry units in ArmA.
These days there is nearly no PvP in ArmA left and it is just such a shame that this has happened.
BF, CoD and all the other FPS games out there are really no alternative for the gameplay of OFP and it was a shock for us to see that ArmA cant offer the same gameplay as OFP did.
On the first view its not really clear whats the big difference between OFP and ArmA, huge island, a lot of vehicles, many online players possible, mission-editor and so on, but at the end it was really just the clunky controls and the robotic movements of the infantry units which scared many OFP fans away from ArmA.
I already said it a few times in this thread and i try to explain it again.
In a game where you are most of the time traveling on foot, it is really important to have well polished controls and fluid movements, otherwise it can destroy the whole feeling of the game itself.
So im still totally looking forward to ArmAII and its well overworked infantry animations and movements!
I still believe in you BIS!
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.