I don't know how I feel about the art style. It all seems too smooth or something.
Animation style reminds me of stuff like Looney Tunes back in the 90's
Terribly accurate depiction of ArmA's community.
I play so many tedious missions on United Operations, with like 40+ guys doing a task that 5 guys could do with less hassle and in less time. It's fun, with all the organisation and stuff, but it's undermined by the fact that very few players are either certified arm-chair generals (like me) or ex-/current military, in other words, not many players have (all) the qualities needed to be successful in large scale games: Discipline, Patience, Communication, Situational Awareness and Knowledge/experience. Not many people want to have to put these things into practice, and this is pretty much where the organisation falls apart because of it.
Now to a person who hasn't played any of the series, this stuff might seem pointless and just there to add to the tedium, but if you have 10 guys working together, with solid formations, keeping eyes out as many directions as possible, and a good leader, nobody dies (in co-op at least). It can be a very rewarding game when played right, but on a public server where the CO is trying to put good tactics into practice, it all falls apart because of small mistakes like tunnel vision, bad communication practices etc etc
The missions have a lot of effect on how satisfying it is though. The other day I played a mission with about 40 players - 3 rifle squads and 1 command section. What enemies did we have to fight? About 5 insurgents spread across a space of 500m2, and 2 IEDs. How long did it take? An entire fucking hour. All that organisation, planning and shit for a firefight that lasted 5 minutes, followed by fuck all except moving my squad about until we cleared the last compounds.
Compare that to one of the best experiences I had in ArmA to date. This one was a TvT dead at night. Me and three other BLUFOR had to take a RHIB to hit a random 2 of 8 possible targets on a relatively small island. We had NVGs, suppressed weapons and AT launchers, while the OPFOR players (numbering 20+) had several jeeps, a helicopter that could drop parachute flares, and flashlights. In the same amount of time it took for the above mission, we destroyed the (player controlled!) helicopter, destroyed one target as a diversion and hit the two actual ones, culminating in a big firefight as we tried to retreat to the boat.
That was over a year ago now and nearly every mission I've played since pales in comparison, even other TvTs.
ArmA can be one of the most intense and enthralling game experiences going, but it's only as fun as what 1: the missions and 2: the leadership makes it. I don't know what my overall point is here - The video sums up what I both love and hate in this game's MP.
Let's face it: If you role-play court marshaling a Pvt. for throwing a grenade on accident and call off a probably fun mission over a probable glitch... Well, you might be missing the point of the term "Game" and maybe a little hectic action is needed.
[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;42330199]I play so many tedious missions on United Operations, with like 40+ guys doing a task that 5 guys could do with less hassle and in less time. It's fun, with all the organisation and stuff, but it's undermined by the fact that very few players are either certified arm-chair generals (like me) or ex-/current military, in other words, not many players have (all) the qualities needed to be successful in large scale games: Discipline, Patience, Communication, Situational Awareness and Knowledge/experience. Not many people want to have to put these things into practice, and this is pretty much where the organisation falls apart because of it.
Now to a person who hasn't played any of the series, this stuff might seem pointless and just there to add to the tedium, but if you have 10 guys working together, with solid formations, keeping eyes out as many directions as possible, and a good leader, nobody dies (in co-op at least). It can be a very rewarding game when played right, but on a public server where the CO is trying to put good tactics into practice, it all falls apart because of small mistakes like tunnel vision, bad communication practices etc etc
The missions have a lot of effect on how satisfying it is though. The other day I played a mission with about 40 players - 3 rifle squads and 1 command section. What enemies did we have to fight? About 5 insurgents spread across a space of 500m2, and 2 IEDs. How long did it take? An entire fucking hour. All that organisation, planning and shit for a firefight that lasted 5 minutes, followed by fuck all except moving my squad about until we cleared the last compounds.
Compare that to one of the best experiences I had in ArmA to date. This one was a TvT dead at night. Me and three other BLUFOR had to take a RHIB to hit a random 2 of 8 possible targets on a relatively small island. We had NVGs, suppressed weapons and AT launchers, while the OPFOR players (numbering 20+) had several jeeps, a helicopter that could drop parachute flares, and flashlights. In the same amount of time it took for the above mission, we destroyed the (player controlled!) helicopter, destroyed one target as a diversion and hit the two actual ones, culminating in a big firefight as we tried to retreat to the boat.
That was over a year ago now and nearly every mission I've played since pales in comparison, even other TvTs.
ArmA can be one of the most intense and enthralling game experiences going, but it's only as fun as what 1: the missions and 2: the leadership makes it. I don't know what my overall point is here - The video sums up what I both love and hate in this game's MP.[/QUOTE]
You can tell this guy really plays ARMA because of how long and tedious this post is
I played ARMA 2 alot.
Best games that I had? Games where either shit hit the fan so hard(losing your entire force and only you surviving) and last standing.
Or getting behind enemy lines with a tank, and then fighting to the end.
Normally it just goes like 'helicopter -> get out -> shoot and miss -> get shot and die'
Or once I was with 4 other people on teamspeak, taking out tanks and enemy units tacitally.
I tried to get into arma, i really really did. Arma 2 controls are slow and just flunky. Arma 3 improved, but its not 100%.
COOP is fun when playing with 3-4 players on custom missions, but most servers are either wasteland deathmatch or Domination where you fight bots. The bots are actually pretty good, but in the end they are still bots and you don't get the same feel when fighting players.
The best experience i had was playing with a small group of friends or FPARMA sometimes, although i haven't recently.
How come there is 64 player servers, but no 32v32 domination?
The most fun I had in Arma was playing a PVP Mission on UnitedOperations.net where I was the gunner and our BMP took out 3 player controlled abrams :v:
But the Video is entirely right, getting into arma is like running against a brick wall.
-snip- stupid post
what is joke
[QUOTE=NOR_92;42333773]Good job being an asshole for no apparent reason.
Is it really that hard to just accept the fact that different types of shooters do exist and that people have differing tastes, or does everything have to devolve into petty arguments?[/QUOTE]
Um, shouldn't the ratings of the post you quoted already indicate that it was a joke?
-snipped because he got the message-
The video is so true.
Especially the ending.
Arma is my favorite game because we spent 30 minutes walking up a hill and then we all died once we reached the top.
[QUOTE=NOR_92;42333773]Good job being an asshole for no apparent reason.
Is it really that hard to just accept the fact that different types of shooters do exist and that people have differing tastes, or does everything have to devolve into petty arguments?[/QUOTE]
lol even I laughed at it, don't get your knickers in a twist
The bulk of your time playing ArmA will be spent sitting on a hill shooting at another hill hoping they won't shoot back.
Still more interesting than most other FPSes.
[QUOTE=Mr. Tripp;42334105]The bulk of your time playing ArmA will be spent sitting on a hill shooting at another hill hoping they won't shoot back.
Still more interesting than most other FPSes.[/QUOTE]
Not to mention shooting in the general direction of an enemy without knowing their exact position :v:
..because you can't fucking see them
[QUOTE=Profanwolf;42334147]Not to mention shooting in the general direction of an enemy without knowing their exact position :v:
..because you can't fucking see them[/QUOTE]
this is why every single person should use tracers.
just makes it so much easier to know where to shoot.
I love this guy.
His Amnesia video was pure gold.
[QUOTE=counterpo0;42333237]I tried to get into arma, i really really did. Arma 2 controls are slow and just flunky. Arma 3 improved, but its not 100%.
COOP is fun when playing with 3-4 players on custom missions, but most servers are either wasteland deathmatch or Domination where you fight bots. The bots are actually pretty good, but in the end they are still bots and you don't get the same feel when fighting players.
The best experience i had was playing with a small group of friends or FPARMA sometimes, although i haven't recently.
How come there is 64 player servers, but no 32v32 domination?[/QUOTE]
If you want a good experience, You will 99% of the time not find it on a random public server.
I would reccomend joining an Arma 2 community such as United Offensive, And with the game being clunky go into your options and turn off "mouse smoothing", Makes looking around less slidey.
[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;42334079]lol even I laughed at it, don't get your knickers in a twist[/QUOTE]
Oh, sorry. I had a knickers in a twist morning, apparently.
[QUOTE=Mr. Tripp;42334176]this is why every single person should use tracers.
just makes it so much easier to know where to shoot.[/QUOTE]
Usually at least fireteam leaders tend to use tracers, but it's still a problem even with tracers sometimes :v:
It pains me to view the ending, the people I have introduced to ArmA bar from one just suck off DayZ now as if there was nothing else in the world to play.
Not a single enemy soldier seen in the video.
Just like the actual game.
Dat ending
Been playing ArmA II since release, its tedious and slow sometimes.. maybe even frustrating..
But I've met some great people through the game, played awesome missions and learned a great deal about military stuff that has no use for me in RL at all.
Best missions I've played was beta/alpha testing for the Invasion 1944 mod.
I still join in on "operations" every sunday night.
The reasons why you cannot jump in Arma 3:
[url]http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=8894[/url]
My cousin was in the Army and he basically found a good sniper and found himself a nice place to camp with a good view of an important valley that lead to a shop.
He cleaned lots of guys moving up the valley and spent the whole stay in the server doing that. People then started complaining that he was camping and that this wasn't Battlefield.
The problem with the ARMA community is that people have this exaggerated notion of combat tactics and they are overly fundamentalist about how to follow them that they end up taking huge unnecessary amounts of time to complete their goals.
That's why I rather play Wasteland than those custom missions where people take forever to escort 2 hostages out of a building for example.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
