Jump to content

Photo
- - - - -

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


  • Please log in to reply
646 replies to this topic
Thread Starter
LockDOwn
LockDOwn

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 84 posts

#1

Posted 07 May 2012 - 22:26

Will they FINALLY make on online mulitplayer that will compete with those titles? As of now their game is far above those two. However I don't understand the business decision to not even try and compete in the lucrative online PvP multiplayer? They leave it up to random individuals with low populated servers. PLEASE try. You have the game, just build it!!!

Edited by LockDOwn, 21 May 2012 - 20:43.

It is the Shipmate, not the reporter who has given us freedom of press.
It is the Airmen, not the poet who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the Marine, not the campus organizer who gives us freedom to demonstrate.

It is the Soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag. Who allows the protester to burn the flag?

metalcraze
metalcraze

    First Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 5157 posts

#2

Posted 07 May 2012 - 22:32

You do realize that CoD and BF are popular in MP simply because anyone can play it at random servers due to their extremely primitive gameplay and a complete lack of teamwork?

ArmA at its core can't be played like that. Besides why would you want to play ArmA like that? This game is about teamwork and tactics.
ArmA2: "Doc, I'm wounded, I can barely aim and I'm bleeding badly, come on pull my body out of the harm's way and treat me before I die!"
ArmA3: "You are wounded! Click to instantly regenerate health whenever you feel like it!"

Guess two years post-release aren't enough to make ArmA3 at least half as dumbed down.

Mr. Charles
Mr. Charles

    Sergeant Major

  • Members
  • 1837 posts

#3

Posted 07 May 2012 - 22:33

inb4 sh*tstorm

There's already a thread called http://forums.bistud...939-MP-thoughts :)
Posted Image

instagoat
instagoat

    Sergeant Major

  • Members
  • 1871 posts

#4

Posted 07 May 2012 - 23:05

Online players nowadays are sort of like cats. You can´t herd them.

Once you have an established, organized squad hitting one of the servers, they´d make mincemeat out of the commoners.

And suddenly, ragequits and accusations of cheating everywhere, as well as foul language on the forums etc.

Thanks, but no thanks. I´d like the community to at least retain a semblance of maturity, civility and mental stabillity. Those don´t seem to be too common on public servers running CoD and BF3. I´ve at least not observed that every time I watched my brother play those games.
Posted Image
Railgun advocate

Encumbrance + Fatigue System: BI has unlocked an Achievement: IG's gratitude for working Fatigue system
Suggestion for improvement in absence of 3D vehicle interiors: http://feedback.arma...ew.php?id=12555
Request to improve control of vehicle AI: control turning out, weapons and engine on/off: http://feedback.arma...ew.php?id=13397
DR style handling of Missile Launcher reloading: http://feedback.arma...ew.php?id=11075

batto
batto

    First Sergeant

  • Members
  • 834 posts

#5

Posted 07 May 2012 - 23:17

You do realize that CoD and BF are popular in MP simply because anyone can play it at random servers due to their extremely primitive gameplay and a complete lack of teamwork? ArmA at its core can't be played like that. Besides why would you want to play ArmA like that? This game is about teamwork and tactics.


I share OPs dream. That's not the whole truth metalcraze. Look at Domination servers in ARMA. Sometimes some player may help you (revive, kill armor) but it's very rare. Most of time the teamplay here is comparable to teamplay in public Counter-Strike (sometimes even worse). And people like it. I like it because there's action most of time. But it's vs AI and sometimes you have to walk/fly/ride for a long time. Couner-Strike is just one example. There is a plenty of other small fun game modes. Unfortunately CS is too old and new CQB games doesn't care about realism and their gameplay remains primitive. It's not about running and shooting everywhere ((team) deathmatch, though it can be fun too) but repeating 1 task in small urban-like map (CQB) for some time (10-20 mins) or till your team reaches the score limit. And this task can be played with teamwork and tactics. You should look at some CS tournaments. It's a lot about teamplay if you and your team are serious. PR is good but it's typical ARMA game (= too big). Capture the flag is another example. I know the game mode it's totally arcadish. But isn't respawning arcadish too? Once I played CTF in A2 and it was fun! Unfortunately I've never seen that server/mode again. The truth is that this would please so many people outside community. And no, this would not turn ARMA into arcade shooter. If you think so explain why.

MP thoughts is too general.

tremanarch
tremanarch

    First Sergeant

  • Members
  • 914 posts

#6

Posted 07 May 2012 - 23:36

Armas greatest strength are large battles. Why not build on that somehow. Maybe they could split the map in 6 parts, and all have to play it round after round each part, and after 6 rounds the sides can watch how many areas are conquered by whom etc.. and maybe in the last round its the whole map which the former conquered cities or sth.

The game basically needs some smoothing. Some more polishing. And apart from these mainstream game modes there can be the normal ones. But these do only make fun with nice people, so it is a good thing to have some mainstream servers.

Where BIS needs a little work is close combat gameplay. The movement is buggy. When you walk with the pistol you crash at doors and obstacles. The feel is clumsy. You fall from ladders sometimes etc. This needs some love. Then Close COmbat Lovers could play some rounds too. It is always nice to play a quick close combat round for training and just fun.
Thats why BF3 and COD is so popular. But after some close COmbat rounds players could want some bigger stuff, and then there is ArmAs true strength. So if ArmA could offer both I guess it would be a win - win situation.

Edited by tremanarch, 07 May 2012 - 23:40.


Leon86
Leon86

    Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 2258 posts

#7

Posted 07 May 2012 - 23:41

I wouldn't mind having working pvp in arma but arma plays so different it wouln't appeal to the typical shooter crowd. They'd say it's sluggish, boring etc.

I play battlefield 3 quite a bit and I have to say dice still doesnt have the weapons and vehicles balanced out. Basically the jet can only be countered by another jet and there's only a few guns worth using. In arma it would be even harder to balance stuff out a bit because arma is supposedly realistic or something.
Arma 3 is a twitchshooter
Needs more rainbow six 1-3

tremanarch
tremanarch

    First Sergeant

  • Members
  • 914 posts

#8

Posted 07 May 2012 - 23:42

Yeah but in Arma you wouldnt shoot soldiers with the jet I hope... ;)

ArmA is more of a simulation then an FPS Action-Game.

To please these kind of players, the modelmaker guys, playing with the Editor, it would be great to have a little more fun artificial Inteligence for the NPCs. They behave sometimes strange. And they are shooting much too precise.

metalcraze
metalcraze

    First Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 5157 posts

#9

Posted 07 May 2012 - 23:49

I share OPs dream. That's not the whole truth metalcraze. Look at Domination servers in ARMA. Sometimes some player may help you (revive, kill armor) but it's very rare. Most of time the teamplay here is comparable to teamplay in public Counter-Strike (sometimes even worse). And people like it. I like it because there's action most of time. But it's vs AI and sometimes you have to walk/fly/ride for a long time. Couner-Strike is just one example. There is a plenty of other small fun game modes. Unfortunately CS is too old and new CQB games doesn't care about realism and their gameplay remains primitive. It's not about running and shooting everywhere ((team) deathmatch, though it can be fun too) but repeating 1 task in small urban-like map (CQB) for some time (10-20 mins) or till your team reaches the score limit. And this task can be played with teamwork and tactics. You should look at some CS tournaments. It's a lot about teamplay if you and your team are serious. PR is good but it's typical ARMA game (= too big). Capture the flag is another example. I know the game mode it's totally arcadish. But isn't respawning arcadish too? Once I played CTF in A2 and it was fun! Unfortunately I've never seen that server/mode again. The truth is that this would please so many people outside community. And no, this would not turn ARMA into arcade shooter. If you think so explain why.

MP thoughts is too general.


But you see - that kinda proves my point. Unless there's a teamwork it's boring. If Domi was really popular it would've been played by thousands at any time.
Small maps won't help either. Nobody plays on Shapur and Proving Grounds. ArmA is really boring when you fight at the same hill for a 1000th time.

The strength in ArmA is in an organized gameplay. When people gather, form teams and play a custom made mission just for that session. This can't be happening 24/7 obviously.

I also don't understand why people want bigger numbers of players? It will be a mess in any mission.
Even DayZ is limited to 50 players per server. Because it feels too crowded with more.

When UO gets 70-80 players - commanders can barely hold it all together. Why do you need 10s of thousands playing?


CoD and BF3 are popular because anyone can just run'n'gun. You can't do that in ArmA. It will never be as popular. It's a tactical team game. Some people need to realize this.
If you want CoD or BF3 or CS - well there is CoD and BF3 and CS.

Edited by metalcraze, 07 May 2012 - 23:52.

ArmA2: "Doc, I'm wounded, I can barely aim and I'm bleeding badly, come on pull my body out of the harm's way and treat me before I die!"
ArmA3: "You are wounded! Click to instantly regenerate health whenever you feel like it!"

Guess two years post-release aren't enough to make ArmA3 at least half as dumbed down.

batto
batto

    First Sergeant

  • Members
  • 834 posts

#10

Posted 07 May 2012 - 23:50

I play battlefield 3 quite a bit and I have to say dice still doesnt have the weapons and vehicles balanced out. Basically the jet can only be countered by another jet and there's only a few guns worth using. In arma it would be even harder to balance stuff out a bit because arma is supposedly realistic or something.


I think for most CQB modes this isn't a problem. It's just rifles, smgs, lmgs, nades, flashbangs, ... There is no need to balance anything. Let it be realistic.

Desert1
Desert1

    Private First Class

  • Members
  • 23 posts

#11

Posted 07 May 2012 - 23:58

If the others heard about this game then it would be ruined ... no

batto
batto

    First Sergeant

  • Members
  • 834 posts

#12

Posted 08 May 2012 - 00:03

Unless there's a teamwork it's boring. If Domi was really popular it would've been played by thousands at any time.


Agreed. I try to encourage teamwork in every team game. Some people just ignore.

Small maps won't help either. Nobody plays on Shapur and Proving Grounds. ArmA is really boring when you fight at the same hill for a 1000th time.


But small CQB maps are different. Also the fun is not pure fighting. It's about competition, winning a round (CS) or a game (CTF) like a boss (+ statistics, tournaments, ...). Cheaters and kids that can't behave are inevitable. The only cure is willing admin.

The strength in ArmA is in an organized gameplay. When people gather, form teams and play a custom made mission just for that session. This can't be happening 24/7 obviously.


This will of course remain.

I also don't understand why people want bigger numbers of players? It will be a mess in any mission.
Even DayZ is limited to 50 players per server. Because it feels too crowded with more.


Of course. de_dust2 in more than 16 people would be total mess =)

Edited by batto, 08 May 2012 - 00:22.


Leon86
Leon86

    Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 2258 posts

#13

Posted 08 May 2012 - 00:19

I think for most CQB modes this isn't a problem. It's just rifles, smgs, lmgs, nades, flashbangs, ... There is no need to balance anything. Let it be realistic.


Obviously you wouldnt change guns for balance reasons, but CQB hasn't really been arma's strong side, in fact the opposite is true.
Arma 3 is a twitchshooter
Needs more rainbow six 1-3

Thread Starter
LockDOwn
LockDOwn

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 84 posts

#14

Posted 08 May 2012 - 00:22

I wouldn't mind having working pvp in arma but arma plays so different it wouln't appeal to the typical shooter crowd. They'd say it's sluggish, boring etc.

I play battlefield 3 quite a bit and I have to say dice still doesnt have the weapons and vehicles balanced out. Basically the jet can only be countered by another jet and there's only a few guns worth using. In arma it would be even harder to balance stuff out a bit because arma is supposedly realistic or something.


Sure Arma would. You just have to develop some maps (or use parts of what we already have) and then tweak them to play certain other game styles. You will always have the servers to allow for mods to do their thing, I am just saying you need to have a section that appeals to mass gamers to grow this game. Personally I only stop playing ARMA1 and 2 because after a month the pvp servers are non existent because there is no support or attention given to them. This game has the potential to really take off if done right.
It is the Shipmate, not the reporter who has given us freedom of press.
It is the Airmen, not the poet who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the Marine, not the campus organizer who gives us freedom to demonstrate.

It is the Soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag. Who allows the protester to burn the flag?

WhiskeyTango
WhiskeyTango

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • 127 posts

#15

Posted 08 May 2012 - 00:25

Public play of almost any game is pretty lame. Join a clan, problem solved.

Edited by WhiskeyTango, 08 May 2012 - 00:33.

[OCB]Lyndiman
Join us: http://www.ocb.net.au/
Website: http://lyndiman.com/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Lyndiman
Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/Wichid123

Thread Starter
LockDOwn
LockDOwn

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 84 posts

#16

Posted 08 May 2012 - 00:27

CoD and BF3 are popular because anyone can just run'n'gun. You can't do that in ArmA. It will never be as popular. It's a tactical team game. Some people need to realize this.
If you want CoD or BF3 or CS - well there is CoD and BF3 and CS.


You could run n gun here if bohemia spent some time developing a game mode for it. No one is telling you ARMA has to lose its simulation play. I am just purposing the online portion be expanded to draw in the attention and massive amount of players this game deserves.

---------- Post added at 00:27 ---------- Previous post was at 00:26 ----------

You mean Bohemia would earns tons more cash and build upon this game even more!
It is the Shipmate, not the reporter who has given us freedom of press.
It is the Airmen, not the poet who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the Marine, not the campus organizer who gives us freedom to demonstrate.

It is the Soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag. Who allows the protester to burn the flag?

celery
celery

    First Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 5084 posts

#17

Posted 08 May 2012 - 00:42

Having a pvp game mode that competes or even copies the two big brands is only a matter of a mission maker scripting those mechanics into a mission and adding appropriate assets to the sides. The problem I see currently is that a very big portion of the would-be pvp crowd has no interest in the editing aspect of the game, and those who might be able to do it are discouraged by the low number of pvp players active in the community, meaning that their hard work would hardly be put to use. I made lots of traditional style pvp missions for the CWR² mod but the game tracker hasn't shown them to be played all that much.

Edited by Celery, 08 May 2012 - 00:45.


Thread Starter
LockDOwn
LockDOwn

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 84 posts

#18

Posted 08 May 2012 - 01:06

Having a pvp game mode that competes or even copies the two big brands is only a matter of a mission maker scripting those mechanics into a mission and adding appropriate assets to the sides. The problem I see currently is that a very big portion of the would-be pvp crowd has no interest in the editing aspect of the game, and those who might be able to do it are discouraged by the low number of pvp players active in the community, meaning that their hard work would hardly be put to use. I made lots of traditional style pvp missions for the CWR² mod but the game tracker hasn't shown them to be played all that much.


That is because it is not marketed as such. And if you went this route the scripting would have to be made 'in house' to be successful. The game you are making means a richer and more dynamic PvP than has EVER been made and I see being highly unique and thus successful in my opinion. I don't know how many people have tried this game and then left because it is dependent on the community to make it successful to what they want. Where as if you made similar and some innovative MP PvP games, I don't see how anyone could touch what you offer.
It is the Shipmate, not the reporter who has given us freedom of press.
It is the Airmen, not the poet who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the Marine, not the campus organizer who gives us freedom to demonstrate.

It is the Soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag. Who allows the protester to burn the flag?

pathetic_berserker
pathetic_berserker

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1266 posts

#19

Posted 08 May 2012 - 01:58

Having a pvp game mode that competes or even copies the two big brands is only a matter of a mission maker scripting those mechanics into a mission and adding appropriate assets to the sides. The problem I see currently is that a very big portion of the would-be pvp crowd has no interest in the editing aspect of the game, and those who might be able to do it are discouraged by the low number of pvp players active in the community, meaning that their hard work would hardly be put to use. I made lots of traditional style pvp missions for the CWR² mod but the game tracker hasn't shown them to be played all that much.


Agreed totaly. Personaly I've spent a great deal of my Arma time over the years playing a number of your pvp missions ( many fun hours , thank you), But pvp servers within my reach died off a while back and never realy revived. But coming back to the OPs point I think it would be a wise move for BIS to include a good selection of pvp out of the box. At release A3 will naturaly attract a bit of new attention and excitment and the best way to give that ball momentum is to make the pvp experience great the first time you start the game. BIS will do itself a dis-service if it expects many of its customers to wait for the community to start pvp (or if it listens too much to those that bang on about Arma player being a different breed). Too many of its customers won't even be aware of the community and our work, let alone want to spend thier first arma hrs finding out about us.
Posted Image

twisted
twisted

    Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 2694 posts

#20

Posted 08 May 2012 - 02:13

Having a pvp game mode that competes or even copies the two big brands is only a matter of a mission maker scripting those mechanics into a mission and adding appropriate assets to the sides. The problem I see currently is that a very big portion of the would-be pvp crowd has no interest in the editing aspect of the game, and those who might be able to do it are discouraged by the low number of pvp players active in the community, meaning that their hard work would hardly be put to use. I made lots of traditional style pvp missions for the CWR² mod but the game tracker hasn't shown them to be played all that much.


Thing is thats exactly the problem that comes with the segmentation of the player base. In fact I wasnt even aware of the missions existence.

Now imagine you took those same missions, finessed and refined and pushed them to the very highest standard seen in any game and included them as standard PVP missions available in arma 3. Theyd be played a ton more and the best would be played for a long time to come.

Right now the majority of player made missions trend to be quite unintuitive and confusing at first. Overcoming that is non trivial yet important.