Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
instagoat

The trouble with getting people into Arma

Recommended Posts

I think the community alpha will really help to elevate the popularity of ARMA 3, it's a perfect opportunity for curious COD/BF3 gamers to become acquainted with ARMA's distinct gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whirly do you know that there is a difference between "Alpha" and "Demo" version of a game? How many of those "curious COD/BF3 gamers" will know + care about this difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whirly do you know that there is a difference between "Alpha" and "Demo" version of a game? How many of those "curious COD/BF3 gamers" will know + care about this difference?

It's apparent you don't often visit other gaming forums. Alpha build is generally 'invitation only', most gamers will relish the opportunity to partake in a alpha trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can agree with this, but the simple answer is that there are already games for these people, and ArmA wouldn't suit them. They are not the target market, the target market is us, and the people who would be us if the game were just a little different in some key areas, and stable on release.

+1 for that. no compromises for the weak, i say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately i think BIS actually have your attitude!

I think thats a good thing, I agree with the previous post, and that's from someone who is a gamer.

I play all kinds of games from the well known GTA, Assassins Greed etc, but I hate to see something like ArmA changed to cater for everyone.

All too often with games these days we see them continually dumbed down to cater for larger and larger audiences, and I find it very frustrating.

Example....I actually really like the Assassin's Creed game when it first came out, it was different to anything else (on PC) and as a player felt it had a lot of potential for the future. Unfortunately, imo, over the few years its been around instead of making combat, etc harder as I would prefer, its become easier and easier, more and more hack'n slash. More silly combo attacks that look all really cool but require no real effort or thought from the player. They pump these games out 1 every year now and mark my words the AC series, COD, and any other mass produced games like that will be dead and forgotten in a few short years from now.

I much prefer Bohemia stick to what they did with previous titles. You don't need to copy what everyone else is doing to be successful and make money, you can do it just by offering something different and unique, and that's what ArmA does. Don't EVER dumb it down for all the casual gamers or you will destroy everything that makes it special/worth playing atm.

There is room for games and sims out there. I love both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed 'Team Mike' are using a quote made by Rock Paper Shotgun's Craig Pearson as inspiration - "Here's hoping they'll acheive a balance of complexity and accessibility".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I noticed 'Team Mike' are using a quote made by Rock Paper Shotgun's Craig Pearson as inspiration - "Here's hoping they'll acheive a balance of complexity and accessibility".

Yes indeed, and I fully agree.

The holy grail of game design is achieving a balance in which the absolute basics are intuitive and easy to grasp, while you can learn the complex stuff as you go along, so that everyone can approach the advanced features at their own speed. In other words: "make it easy to learn, but difficult to master".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually when advertisement departments known also as "gaming magazines" say "making the game accessible" they mean dumbing it down naked.

As for devs - I have yet to see a single developer that didn't use "making the game accessible" as an excuse to dumb it down so kids will be able to jump in and play it to get more $$$.

This may be true for ArmA since I can't see how it is unaccessible unless one is very lazy and want just jump in and gun down stuff - I mean it's a simple game (just WASD and aim'n'shoot + more keys for more cool functions) compared to stuff where you need to RTFM like Dangerous Waters or Falcon 4. But we'll see.

Edited by metalcraze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Usually when advertisement departments known also as "gaming magazines" say "making the game accessible" they mean dumbing it down naked.

As for devs - I have yet to see a single developer that didn't use "making the game accessible" as an excuse to dumb it down so kids will be able to jump in and play it to get more $$$.

This may be true for ArmA since I can't see how it is unaccessible unless one is very lazy and want just jump in and gun down stuff - I mean it's a simple game (just WASD and aim'n'shoot + more keys for more cool functions) compared to stuff where you need to RTFM like Dangerous Waters or Falcon 4. But we'll see.

ArmA's GUI is perhaps the most often critisised element for newcomers, and I can agree with that. I remember what it was like when I first started OFP, just because we're all used to it doesn't mean it got any better. Myself I dislike the contextual quick-command menu. Having to chase commands up & down the list because different things cross your view is annoying, several times I sent troops romping off into direct fire because a command I was aiming for jumped away to be replaced with "go there". :D

I will quote Shakura_Chan as he describes the use of his WIP command-rose system for ArmA2.

One thing I've found from using this daily for a while: It is so much easier to use AI. Not just "oh I can issue commands faster" but it actually made more complex combat possible. Working with a basic four man squad in open terrain is, for lack of a better term, beautiful. I've played missions designed for small high command operations using only a basic squad. You're moving, changing your squad's stance, lining up shots, moving your AT soldier into that perfect spot and then drawing fire. You don't have to fiddle with the dang scroll wheel. The AI behave. They don't die from secret hidden enemies (actually standing in plain sight) because they marched off on their own. I found myself using tactics and commands that I never would before, simply because it was so simple to do so. I've been playing the ofp\arma series for a long time, and lots of my most memorable combat moments have come from using this mod.

No complexity is lost, but accessibility is improved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hhhhm, I can't say I was too confused by ArmA's interface when I began playing. It's not perfect that's for sure and needs a bit of reworking to make more usable but I don't think that warrants any measures to make the game "more accessible". It's already been commented in this thread that the ideas of accessibility and usability are two different concepts.

matalcraze: i'm glad we don't see threads on the Falcon forums talking of making Falcon 4 more accessible...or we'd end up with Falcon 4.0 - LockOn Edition :)

Edited by rainbird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hhhhm, I can't say I was too confused by ArmA's interface when I began playing. It's not perfect that's for sure and needs a bit of reworking to make more usable but I don't think that warrants any measures to make the game "more accessible". It's already been commented in this thread that the ideas of accessibility and usability are two different concepts.

matalcraze: i'm glad we don't see threads on the Falcon forums talking of making Falcon 4 more accessible...or we'd end up with Falcon 4.0 - LockOn Edition :)

It's comments like this that make this thread go round and round in an endless loop. As long as you insist that accessibility means dumbing down then each time you see the word you drag out the same comments. Accessibility does NOT mean dumbing down, only making what's there easier to use. However, I suspect this will be a forever recurring point :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see you do not want it dumbed down. I was just saying, accessibility generally implies something completely different to the (and I agree ) positive usability changes you want to see. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can see you do not want it dumbed down. I was just saying, accessibility generally implies something completely different to the (and I agree ) positive usability changes you want to see. :)

Right, so if you know that, then respond with that in mind. You say it "generally implies" something different, and it always will as long as you insist on inferring that. I wouldn't wish to have to repeatedly explain "accessibility" every time it gets used. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In marketings/advertising "accessible" has a slightly different meaning from "userfriendly". The first one is more focused on how many customers may/could find a game attractive while second one is more focused on ingame GUI, controls etc. Of course "making a game more accessible" sounds tenfold better than "making a game more userfriendly". Its about project presentation and how game devs/publishers can sell their products. I don't like command-rose systems especially those which are just flashy + stylish and stop/slowdown ingame time so the player has time to dial whatever + how long he wants - imo its a kind of cheating (realtime). ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd be a whole lot better for everyone if they would actually look up what the word accessibility means. It simply implies something being accessible. The antonym to accessible is inaccessible. A more accessible UI would mean a streamlined UI, a reorganized UI, so may be a radial menu or something. Accessible doesn't mean removing features. It's not that features make the game inaccessible. Usually, accessibility is in terms of strictly UI and menu organization. An example of inaccessibility is having to cycle through all weapons using one key, when a more accessible option is to assign equipment to the number keys 1-6 or so. Another example is the current scroll menu (inaccessible) when a more accessible radial menu can keep the same number of commands, but make it a whole lot quicker to go through. Inaccessible is the Domination game mode's current scroll wheel, laborious method of forming teams when a more accessible method is to do that at the start of the game, when choosing which roles to fill. That's the difference between inaccessible and accessible. It's not a matter of dumbing down anything. It's reorganization of features, controls, and the UI, not removing features or controls or UI elements. It's streamlining.

metalcraze, list examples of games that have said they were "making their game more accessible", when they meant dumbing down. And don't mention COD, because COD never said that or did that.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In marketings/advertising "accessible" has a slightly different meaning from "userfriendly". The first one is more focused on how many customers may/could find a game attractive while second one is more focused on ingame GUI, controls etc. Of course "making a game more accessible" sounds tenfold better than "making a game more userfriendly". Its about project presentation and how game devs/publishers can sell their products. I don't like command-rose systems especially those which are just flashy + stylish and stop/slowdown ingame time so the player has time to dial whatever + how long he wants - imo its a kind of cheating (realtime). ;)

Uh, a radial menu is a lot quicker than scrolling. If there were more than one radial menu, tied to more than just one key, then it'd be a lot quicker. No, the radial menu shouldn't completely replace the standard menu. But a lot of commands should be tied to radial menus. Especially commo responses, and basic movements, stances, and formations. Also, each function key could be separate radial menu. Because you can move your mouse with a whole lot more precision and speed than scrolling. Yeah, you can map certain commands, but that doesn't necessarily go away with a radial menu. No, I'm not talking about Dragon Rising's menu. I'm talking more like America's Army, especially when you have more than one of a certain type of weapon. If you've got multiple grenades, a radial menu can help you quickly select which type you are going to use. Same with more than one primary weapon (instead of the "move to backpack" that's present in Domination). America's Army 3 pretty much showed a proper way to do radial menus. Check this out: http://manual.americasarmy.com/index.php/Radial_Menu_System

You tap a key, say 3, or G, to take out your grenade. To access the radial menu, you hold that key. If you need to stop what you're doing to take cover or fire, you simply release. No need to backspace out of the menu. Look at the pic with the radio commands. The plus signs indicate additional radial menus. It's a much better menu system in my opinion. And I don't see how it's "cheating"

Edited by antoineflemming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NoRailgunner: I think DMarkwick is fully aware of the differences between the words "accessibility" and "usability", particularly in the game industry. He is probably just being naughty, stubborn and feeding us bait by using the word when he should just use the correct word usability. If he really doesn't know the meaning of accessibility than he can just reread metalcraze's last post :)

I don't agree that a command-rose is in any way cheating, it's a perfectly legitimate way to improve usability for many people as it is just an interface (like any other) to issues commands from the AramA system. For instance, I use VAC to issue AI commands which I guess you might feel is cheating. But if you think about it, it is more realistic as I'm verbally issuing commands to my squad iin the same way a real commander would issue commands over the radio. VAC is an ultimate usability improvement to the ArmA interface. However, it does not reduce its complexity in any way, it doesn't make the game any more "accessible" to the average gamer and is not likely to make the game any more attractive.

---------- Post added at 01:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:46 PM ----------

and btw, the strict definition of the term "accessibility" describes a level of social inclusion. Whereas "usability" describes the mechanical ease of using a system.

I can go into a LOT more detail if people persist on denying the true definition of usability vs accessibility and why the word accessibility is inappropriate for what most of us want to see in ArmA. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm quite amazed that although everyone seems to know exactly, precisely, the way in which we are using these terms, that people are regardless maintaining a stance that it must infer dumbing down. I mean, we're trying to discuss something here and each time we have to redefine a word to the same people. Is this recreational nitpicking or what?

Given that not one, single person has suggested that dumbing down in any form should occur, can we agree that accessibility means usability means improvement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, rainbird, it's not hard to just pull up the definition of these words

From the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

ACCESSIBLE

Definition of ACCESSIBLE

1

: providing access

2

a : capable of being reached <accessible by rail>; also : being within reach <fashions at accessible prices>

b : easy to communicate or deal with <accessible people>

3

: capable of being influenced : open <accessible to new ideas>

4

: capable of being used or seen : available <the collection is not currently accessible>

5

: capable of being understood or appreciated <the author's most accessible stories> <an accessible film>

— ac·ces·si·bil·i·ty noun

— ac·ces·si·ble·ness noun

— ac·ces·si·bly adverb

See accessible defined for English-language learners »

See accessible defined for kids »

Examples of ACCESSIBLE

The inn is accessible by train and bus.

The mall is accessible from the highway.

It is a fascinating and accessible book.

First Known Use of ACCESSIBLE

15th century

Related to ACCESSIBLE

Synonyms: affordable, popular

Antonyms: inaccessible, unattainable, unavailable, unobtainable

--------------------------------------------------------------

USABLE

Definition of USABLE

1

: capable of being used

2

: convenient and practicable for use

— us·abil·i·ty noun

— us·able·ness noun

— us·ably adverb

See usable defined for English-language learners »

See usable defined for kids »

Variants of USABLE

us·able also use·able

Examples of USABLE

Is any of this junk usable?

<although the spade is usable as a snow shovel, it doesn't do a very good job>

First Known Use of USABLE

14th century

Related to USABLE

Synonyms: available, employable, exploitable, fit, functional, operable, practicable, serviceable, useful

Antonyms: impracticable, inoperable, nonfunctional, unavailable, unemployable, unusable

------------------------------------------------------------

USER-FRIENDLY

Definition of USER-FRIENDLY

: easy to learn, use, understand, or deal with <user–friendly software>; also : agreeable, appealing <a user–friendly atmosphere>

Usability does NOT imply ease of use. It simply implies that something can be used. Accessible and user-friendly are basically the same thing. THOSE two words describe the ease of using something. Accessibility, or User-Friendly, is the CORRECT WORD. On the surface, they mean the same thing (see bolded, underlined parts)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Given that not one, single person has suggested that dumbing down in any form should occur, can we agree that accessibility means usability means improvement?

Apparently no, we can't. This very same discussion pops up every time someone innocently mentions the word "accessability", which consistently triggers the usual suspects to jump up and scream bloody murder. It's practically a conditioned response. B.F. Skinner would be proud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only wish is that they make movement like every other FPS game when walking, this is a major turn off to new players

E.G. Trying to aim out of a window too far left tap right and now your too far right

Need to really be able to move character precisely, this is one bit of realism that needs bending ingame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Accessability: Well I think people are reacting not to the Webster definition of the word but the current Game Dev's use of it and context. Generally what I've seen is that when the word is used often before release, a tactically watered down game emerges. Perhaps we shoud have a '*' after the word to indicate our context of the word ;)

My only wish is that they make movement like every other FPS game when walking, this is a major turn off to new players

You do realise that other FPS generally don't model the entire human but a ripping fast gun on wheels instead...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hehe in 5 or 10 years we will hear and see some totally new word creations that will sound more "accessible" to the target groups ears than those "userfriendly" old terms and meanings. As long as people like to buy & play games all is fine. Perhaps we should open a new thread and list all the things marketing staff/publishers/devs said before release and what the player really got. Or something like "The best pre-release quotes, promises and ads!" ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Accessability: Well I think people are reacting not to the Webster definition of the word but the current Game Dev's use of it and context. Generally what I've seen is that when the word is used often before release, a tactically watered down game emerges. Perhaps we shoud have a '*' after the word to indicate our context of the word ;)

You do realise that other FPS generally don't model the entire human but a ripping fast gun on wheels instead...?

What developers have said this? I really don't recall any (probably not games I play, but still).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well off the top of my head:

Dragon Rising to Red River: took away squad control and put player on literal rails.

RO1 to RO2: Made areas much smaller and replaced slower tactical team play with faster arcade action.

Rainbow 6: Pretty obvious if you've ever played the originals.

At some point I remember reading from all of these developers that accessibility to new players was a huge priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, rainbird, it's not hard to just pull up the definition of these words

No, but what is slightly harder is to actually work in the game industry (which I have, as a graphic artist, for the past eight years) and gain real-world experience of the use of these terms and what they actually mean. Also, it's slightly harder to take a 3 year media degree, do a module in Human Computer Interaction and redesign the London Museum's interactive multimedia devices as part of your main assignment. I'm not stooping to the level of "bragging" here, I'm just pointing out the fact that I do have a very clear understanding of the strict meaning of these words in terms of the games industry and HCI (which is what we are actually discussing here).

I'm affraid cutting 'n' pasting definitions from a general English dictionary doesn't help support your case. We're talking about specialist industry terminology ("accesability" vs "usability") which can only be understood in the contexct of HCI design and the game-industry.

I think it's already been hinted at in a previous post, "accessibility" is a crossover term which originates from the marketing departments of game companies and has infiltrated the design decisions of Producers (the men/women who decide the overal design of a game). You will not find the word "accesibility" mentioned in the pages of any respectable HCI/Comp Sci textbook, because it has no meaning in that context but it does have a pretty clear meaning now in the games industry. It is _social/economic_ term and has absolutely nothing to do with improving a game's interface and everything to do with broading the appeal of a game by utilizing popular themes, creating "dumb" interfaces which can be grasped by the widest possible audience and stearing very clear of anything remotely complex in a game.

Usability on the other hand is an understood HCI term which programmers and game designers prefer to use. It means perfecting the interactions between the player and the game system - without sacraficing the features of that system for any other reason than to make that system more usable and enjoyable. The game can remain _extemely_ complex and "difficult" for the average gamer but its interface is optimized and about as good as it could be - considering that game's complexity. The same is not true of the term Accessibility for the reasons mentioned in my previous paragraph.

As for the effcts a focus on "accessibilty" rather than "usability" has on a game. Well, you only have to read the words of Sid Meier when discussing the evolution of the Civ franchize just before the release of Civ V. He's a man who clearly understands the idea of "accessibility" and he promissed he would make Civilization V the most "accessible" Civ ever. He certainly done that, so much so that it is playable on a console. He absolutely obliterated a game with a beautifully complex interface and turnt it ito a braindead click-fest. :) Of course, the masses of new Civ fans and reviewers drown out the voices of those who remeber the details of the game's play and it is considered a good game. But it's actually a shadow of what it once was.

I understand you're all using the terms interchangeably but understand that you're using them incorrectly and at least try not to expose your belligerent ignorance by shouting down those who point out YOUR error. :)

Edited by rainbird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×