Which one do you think you will be buying/playing?
To me, there seems to be two choices of big multiplayer online shooters on the horizon which will be dominant on the PC in the coming months/years.
I have been a big fan of the BF series of games since BF2 on which I clocked over 1500 hours of gametime. I also thoroughly enjoyed BFBC2 and also BF3. However, with BF3, I am seeing signs that the series is going predominantly in an Activision CoD inspired direction that I don't like.
I don't like most of the maps or expansion packs and only ever play B2K or the vanilla fly maps. Practically every map outwith those, I find to be nothing more than a explosion and bullet spamming kackfest. There are also a couple of good ones in the Armored Kill expansion (Armoured Shield + Death Valley), but I cant play these maps these days as I cant find a populated server running them that isn't 'Premium Only'. Of course, whilst Operation Metro may get the ALT F4 treatment from a large proportion of BF3 gamers, it is well known that Metro CQ is the most 'popular' (in terms of numbers of people playing on it). Clearly, the sort of gameplay that Metro offers is where the money is at. EA know this and the pressure will be on DICE to give the people 'what they want', as perhaps was seen with Close Quarters and Aftermath (I never tried End Game). Complimenting the dumbed down level design is of course the dumbed down gameplay (over BF2), and I really hate the fact that the retarded flight mechanics that allow aircraft to be most manoeuvreable using mouse n keyboard.
ARMA III on the otherhand, seems to be offering something that has been designed by creatives under much less influence from the money men who are interested only in the bottom line. The aim is for a much more realistic shooter, occurring within a vast sandbox which is based on a 3d virtual copy of a realworld greek island. Presumably the gameplay is aiming much more for realism and will require a much more patient and measured approach to it than with BF3. The game will be hugely moddable and there will be no lmits other than hardware limits placed upon how large (in terms of players) that a server can be. Furthermore, ARMA III will be supporting all the kinds of immersion increasing specialist toys that we PC gamers like, such as proper flight stick functionality and Track IR (turning head to look around in-game, lean around corners etc).
Having become a little sick n tired of the way that the BF series is panning out, I have pre-ordered ARMA III bought a decent flight stick and am pondering over Track IR. The thing is, I do actually like 'arcade' gameplay (BF2 afterall could only be described as arcade) and do wonder whether I will find ARMA III a bit stale and lacing in action in the long run and end up jumping into a BF4 game with double helpings of Op Metro!
To me, there seems to be two choices of big multiplayer online shooters on the horizon which will be dominant on the PC in the coming months/years.
I have been a big fan of the BF series of games since BF2 on which I clocked over 1500 hours of gametime. I also thoroughly enjoyed BFBC2 and also BF3. However, with BF3, I am seeing signs that the series is going predominantly in an Activision CoD inspired direction that I don't like.
I don't like most of the maps or expansion packs and only ever play B2K or the vanilla fly maps. Practically every map outwith those, I find to be nothing more than a explosion and bullet spamming kackfest. There are also a couple of good ones in the Armored Kill expansion (Armoured Shield + Death Valley), but I cant play these maps these days as I cant find a populated server running them that isn't 'Premium Only'. Of course, whilst Operation Metro may get the ALT F4 treatment from a large proportion of BF3 gamers, it is well known that Metro CQ is the most 'popular' (in terms of numbers of people playing on it). Clearly, the sort of gameplay that Metro offers is where the money is at. EA know this and the pressure will be on DICE to give the people 'what they want', as perhaps was seen with Close Quarters and Aftermath (I never tried End Game). Complimenting the dumbed down level design is of course the dumbed down gameplay (over BF2), and I really hate the fact that the retarded flight mechanics that allow aircraft to be most manoeuvreable using mouse n keyboard.
ARMA III on the otherhand, seems to be offering something that has been designed by creatives under much less influence from the money men who are interested only in the bottom line. The aim is for a much more realistic shooter, occurring within a vast sandbox which is based on a 3d virtual copy of a realworld greek island. Presumably the gameplay is aiming much more for realism and will require a much more patient and measured approach to it than with BF3. The game will be hugely moddable and there will be no lmits other than hardware limits placed upon how large (in terms of players) that a server can be. Furthermore, ARMA III will be supporting all the kinds of immersion increasing specialist toys that we PC gamers like, such as proper flight stick functionality and Track IR (turning head to look around in-game, lean around corners etc).
Having become a little sick n tired of the way that the BF series is panning out, I have pre-ordered ARMA III bought a decent flight stick and am pondering over Track IR. The thing is, I do actually like 'arcade' gameplay (BF2 afterall could only be described as arcade) and do wonder whether I will find ARMA III a bit stale and lacing in action in the long run and end up jumping into a BF4 game with double helpings of Op Metro!
Last edited:
)