ARMA will never effect battlefield sales, nor will it ever have more players than Battlefield. Performance puts a lot of people off the ARMA series as it runs like crap unless you have a decent system and even then people get slowdowns. Another thing is hackers, the game is full of them.
Battlefield 4 Thread ~ Server details in opening post ~
- Thread starter ~Mike~
- Start date
Indeed Arma wont effect BF sales in anything other than an imperceivable amount due to the fact that the BF series now attracts a different audience than it did in 2005 and the current audience enjoy it for what it is and no doubt want more. I think what DG is getting at (I might be wrong) is that people who were once attracted to the BF "scene", those that were the target audience all those years ago can see some light in the Arma franchise where as they can see very little that is appealing in the current BF releases.
I'm not knocking BF btw, I wish it was still "our game" but its not and hasn't been for some considerable time now. It wont change so we must.
I'm not knocking BF btw, I wish it was still "our game" but its not and hasn't been for some considerable time now. It wont change so we must.
Yeah this is true, battlefield is now designed for consoles and that oh so casual market, whilst ARMA is for PC gamers only, kids need not apply.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 16 May 2005
- Posts
- 31,297
- Location
- Manchester
no idea how I do it for a living then maybe you would like to fill me in?
eh?
edit: I can't be bothered checking this again later so I guess I'll fill you in now. If you re-read my message you'll see that I said that you and LOAM had already answered MissChief's post (and that I agreed with you). My comment about not knowing anything was directed at MissChief.
Last edited:
re read that back check all those comments and look at bf3
ill just add bf3 is the most cheated game of recent years. cod 4 probably worst fps before that but that is 6 years old probably now. arma no where near.
re read that back check all those comments and look at bf3
ill just add bf3 is the most cheated game of recent years. cod 4 probably worst fps before that but that is 6 years old probably now. arma no where near.
The difference is punkbuster and other methods servers put in place on BF3 are very effective. With ARMA script kiddies can take a while to catch and once they nuke a server it requires a full restart... this is far from enjoyable and it put me off dayz and wasteland for a while.
Guys, this isn't a bad thing surely?
I've been seriously impressed by BF3 and would certainly welcome an addition of BF4 to the series. They haven't been released year in/year out like the others, DICE offered a great product here and do some have class over other developers.
Look at the other franchises you've been buying over the years. (A.Creed, Fifa, CoD, Halo's etc..) No it's not reinventing the wheel, but half of you saying you won't play it, will.
I've been seriously impressed by BF3 and would certainly welcome an addition of BF4 to the series. They haven't been released year in/year out like the others, DICE offered a great product here and do some have class over other developers.
Look at the other franchises you've been buying over the years. (A.Creed, Fifa, CoD, Halo's etc..) No it's not reinventing the wheel, but half of you saying you won't play it, will.
That's what I can't understand, you see some of the people who have hammered complaints in about BF3 since release to then go on and buy BF3 premium after they've slated paying for DLC. The hypocrisy is strong.
Sounds like BF is becoming the new COD.
That means im not interested tbh. Ill definately take a look closer to release but as of right now it sounds like the cow is being milked.
Still knowing BF it will be a decent game when its here. If however there is talk of another BF 5 or whatever shortly after it id probably miss it out.
That means im not interested tbh. Ill definately take a look closer to release but as of right now it sounds like the cow is being milked.
Still knowing BF it will be a decent game when its here. If however there is talk of another BF 5 or whatever shortly after it id probably miss it out.
Excellent post.
because with out these finer points you get consolized mw3 styled fps games.
do you want all dumbed down fps as a whole cause thats what youll get and its happening with every release now.
im surprised we have got auto aim or assist on yet on pc. you need the competitive scene in fps you need that learning curve without it fps games die off quicker than without it.
do you want all dumbed down fps as a whole cause thats what youll get and its happening with every release now.
im surprised we have got auto aim or assist on yet on pc. you need the competitive scene in fps you need that learning curve without it fps games die off quicker than without it.
Its because its where game refinement and promotion happens.
Refinement comes in the guise of competitive MODs such as ProMod for the CoD4 release or just MOD's in general, look at what Trauma did with 1942 (they were arguably the inspiration for BF2). How many extra copies of 42 were sold on the back on DC, how many copies of ARMA II were sold on the back of DayZ, how many copies of HL were sold on the back of CS.
Secondly, how many extra copies of titles are sold because of gaming league and ladder sites. LAN events are often sponsored by publishing companies with large prizes.
To say you aren't interested in competitive gaming is absolutely fine but to dismiss them is as short sighted as dismissing the relevance of F1 is to car production (to an extent, I'm not suggesting competitive gamers are in the same elite bracket as F1 drivers). It should be catered for, every aspect should be catered for where possible.
The lack of MOD tools harms the industry in my opinion, how many game developers started out making MODS, getting used to engines and playing with editing tools, they are potentially the life blood of the industry free of corporate BS and financial constraints.
Look at Rocket, the creator of DayZ, he's now employed by BI making a retail version of his MOD that will make BI vast amounts of money. That simply wouldn't have happened without MOD / Competitive scene and I bunch them together because I firmly believe the go hand in hand.
I totally agree, back when I played CoD2 *everyone* got sucked into the competitive play. Every server you went in people were in teams, playing mixes, irc channels with hundreds of players wanting to play matches. It just isn't like that anymore, I don't care about perks or what the colour of my gun is and I hate that gaming has gone that way. I miss the tactical competitive play.
You have to face up to the fact the industry has changed.
COD has proved you can make more money by making a game that appeals to every age group and every skill group and getting a load of hype behind it, than you can by creating a good game for the enthusiasts and giving them mod tools.
Halflife sold well on the back of CS, but it never sold like COD does now.
For the big publishers like EA and Activision, that sales model has gone now and it isn't coming back. So its best just to accept this, and enjoy the games for what they are. If you don't like what they are, take your money to elsewhere from publishers who still do follow this model.
COD has proved you can make more money by making a game that appeals to every age group and every skill group and getting a load of hype behind it, than you can by creating a good game for the enthusiasts and giving them mod tools.
Halflife sold well on the back of CS, but it never sold like COD does now.
For the big publishers like EA and Activision, that sales model has gone now and it isn't coming back. So its best just to accept this, and enjoy the games for what they are. If you don't like what they are, take your money to elsewhere from publishers who still do follow this model.
Indeed, although I prefer to think that the people who make those decisions see the light and make steps to re-establish the older model. There was several of the guys at DICE that were (still are) very pro MOD tools.
I'm much older now anyway so the competitive scene isn't really something that I would be that interested in anyway. For some time now I've accepted games at face value. I still believe things will get back to how they should be though.
Very true!
when given the choice between:
A) create a game that appeals to as many people as possible and thus make them a large amount of money, which goes into developing further games and ensuring business continuity, while annoying a few elitist nerds that believe a game should be tailored to their needs.
B) make a very niche game that appeals to certain hardcore gamers, with additional content given for free and mods so that community can make more conent, that they as they developer get no benefit from, so that they make as little money as possible from something and possibly go bust in a market that is very hard to make money in.
No brainer from publishers who have to make money to stay afloat.
Last edited:
But its not the case of A or B, it can very very easily be A + B and indeed most if not all of the best FPS games in history have catered for both.
To say that a developer gets no benefit from community made content is a very naive comment.
To say that a developer gets no benefit from community made content is a very naive comment.
Last edited: