Will Bohemia finally improve ARMA's PVP to attract New Players?

[frostwyrm333]

There are some MP missions (DM,CTF) bundled with the game but I don't think that anybody gives a damn about them.

[GossamerSolid]

winter one with trenches

Nope, I'm calling bullshit on this one.

I've played RO2 enough to know that you can't make a 600m with default zeroing no matter what.

You are a big bullshitter.

[SexParty]

But battlefield players want fast paced bullshit, bro. They won't play ArmA unless you can do magical one hit knife kills, can bunnyhop and run'n'gun. That's why they aren't still playing it.
Not because it's "clunky".



I haven't noticed a lot of difference between America's Army and BF. It still plays like a dumbed down arcade run'n'gun.
I don't know what you mean by "slower higher skill and tactical" since America's Army is none of these.

But most of all BF players hate teamwork. That's why they made threads here crying about how they want magical respawns near their group, magical markers on the magical minimap that will tell them whenever someone is wounded, etc. How will you make them play ArmA which requires teamwork or otherwise it turns into a boring crap that you can see on public servers where everyone is running randomly around, dies, respawns, dies, respawns. This is not the way to play it obviously.

Sorry guys but you have no idea what you're talking about.

The offical battlefield forums are a wash with hatred, complaining and suggestions everyday to make the game slower, more rewarding, more skill based, larger scale and more importantly team play focused. On a daily basis they ask for everything that ARMA has just not of course to the extent of ARMA in some cases. But it's what people want.

You can't tell me you know what they want because you aren't them. You can't speak for them and why would you, when they want games to better the same way you do. Team play focused. All the offical battlelog polls are even going against the creators opinions/predictions and in the gamers favor of what they want/what I'm talking about.

Battlefield sucks not because it appeals to what it's fans want but because it's fan base has been too loyal to stop and boycott the dam thing ever since it's developers ruined it. But we will see what happens when Planetside 2 and ARMA3 release. I predict a lot of them will leave it for these games. Player stats have already been cut in half since janurary.

As for the america's army comments I don't know how much expereince you had with it but it was in no way comparable to battlefield. It was a good middle ground between a casual arcade shooter and a milsim. Like ghost recon and raven shield. Had a lot of arcade elements but also had some good milsim like additions to it.

[Fenrisulven]

Wow.. why is this thread not locked?

ArmA may be a game developed for entertainment purposes, but it shares the same platform and soul as VBS that is used by professionals and military personnel world wide. Therefore ArmA is enjoyed by "real men" with a passion for hard core realism ,) while CoD, BF and the likes are mainstream games developed for boys and by clueless studios *cough* Codemasters *cough* who mainly cares about profit.

---------- Post added at 01:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:57 PM ----------

.. and yes I'm aware that CoD is developed by Treyarch and BF by DiCE (whom I support, great studio) but I was using Codies as the example because they disgraced "Flashpoint".

[antoineflemming]

Sorry guys but you have no idea what you're talking about.

The offical battlefield forums are a wash with hatred, complaining and suggestions everyday to make the game slower, more rewarding, more skill based, larger scale and more importantly team play focused. On a daily basis they ask for everything that ARMA has just not of course to the extent of ARMA in some cases. But it's what people want.

You can't tell me you know what they want because you aren't them. You can't speak for them and why would you, when they want games to better the same way you do. Team play focused. All the offical battlelog polls are even going against the creators opinions/predictions and in the gamers favor of what they want/what I'm talking about.

Battlefield sucks not because it appeals to what it's fans want but because it's fan base has been too loyal to stop and boycott the dam thing ever since it's developers ruined it. But we will see what happens when Planetside 2 and ARMA3 release. I predict a lot of them will leave it for these games. Player stats have already been cut in half since janurary.

As for the america's army comments I don't know how much expereince you had with it but it was in no way comparable to battlefield. It was a good middle ground between a casual arcade shooter and a milsim. Like ghost recon and raven shield. Had a lot of arcade elements but also had some good milsim like additions to it.

You're right about America's Army. It's no Battlefield in terms of scope and scale, but it's closer to the tactical shooter genre. By the way, what you say about the Battlefield forums is now the case for the Ghost Recon forums. That said, let's definitely hope BIS doesn't at some point cave in to the casual market like DICE and Red Storm have. But, at the same time, I don't think the presence of future technology, like new designs for helicopters, make the game more casual. In all, if anything, ArmA should compete on some level with the tactical shooters. But then again, that only really involves the close quarters aspects of ArmA anyway.

[Reuben5150]

Sorry guys but you have no idea what you're talking about.

Indeed, all battlefield games prior to BF3 were much different to how things are now, the series has become completely dumbed down.

[LockDOwn]

Thanks for the title change mods

[DMarkwick]

Oftentimes, I think sales targets matter not to BIS when it comes to ArmA, since VBS should cover all development expenses; the mil buys 15,000 copies and they're set. This is why we get a hollow husk of a game in terms of 'content' and people wonder why the servers are all devoid of life.

BIS do not develop VBS2, a separate company develops it. BIS lease their core engine to them.

[Celery]

BIS do not develop VBS2, a separate company develops it. BIS lease their core engine to them.

BIS (BISim) develops VBS, BI develops Arma.

[KrAziKilla]

Celery, go to sleep, you should be well-rested tomorrow at work, so you can make us some nice ArmA3-features :P