I put this post in just to ask the dev's to give us a heads up on what's to come so it keeps players interested.
I didn't put it in to slate the game if you have nothing positive to say or want to complain then start another post
While there are tons of games on the market, I think a well made free shooter can do well if done right.
I think the thing is that there's a lot more competition, so you can't have a bare bones game and think you're going to do well. You need lots features (and some unique). You need longevity. You need something that's going to keep people coming back. You need a good competitive scene. You need rankings and leader boards. You need a game that challenges players to continuously learn. You need great maps.
If AA5 came out tomorrow a flood of people would come to try it because "well maybe this time it'll be like AA2." The main question is whether people will stay. Personally, I feel that AAPG was doomed from the start because it was so different and it had that expectation. No America's Army game will ever be able to succeed if it doesn't in some way resemble AA2. That's a fact.
If the America's Army developers want a game that even stands a chance it has to be a legitimate sequel to AA2. That means clone the crap out of the game from a presentation perspective at the bare minimum. Bring back the training starting at basic. Make it so that the game focuses on the life of a soldier. We have tons of new game technology that can probably do it even better than back in 2002. In the same respect players should have the ability to customize their soldier... Every soldier is different.
From a gameplay perspective I'd say mix what worked best in the past 3 games. However, we need stuff and lots of it. You can't expect a game to work when you have 7 weapons (plus OpFor equivalents) and the only customization available are a few sights. More weapons, more optics, more attachments. More unique situational items and weapons. Bring back squads. Map specific load outs. Classes/roles that are more than just a change of weapon. Team play must flow organically rather than being forced. Having each player have a unique role would help with that.
Just some thoughts anyway.
You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
Firts, The community is not united, which means that new players do not play the game for a long time.
Second, We are in 2016! Not in 2003 - 2006. There are many competing games! In 2003 there was only America's Army and Counter Strike, The staff did not know enjoy the good name of the game and everything fell into oblivion.
I don't think the market is strong, I'm looking for a decent ADS competitive fps game.. now tell me my options?
Insurgency comp got old because of hide and seek gameplay, maps are too detailed, it takes the skill right out of the game..boring
Cs is corrupt with cheating, little kids, and isn't exactly an ADS game
COD, BF all have sad respawns and is totally different kind of game
ARMA, or any realistic based game? Please stop.
Imo there is room for a well made AA.. just needs to be more competitive and less casual
Things you didn't mention:
R6:Siege is tactical round-based ADS.
Overwatch is strategic respawn from Blizzard.
Paragon, 5v5 3PS F2P MOBA from Epic Games. Early access now.
Battleborn, FPS MOBA from the Borderlands devs.
LawBreakers, 5v5 sci-fi high-skill arena from Nexon. Not out yet.
Then there's titles like Alpha Reactor, a simultaneous turn-based DOTA/XCOM hybrid.
And these are all just 2016 releases (except R6:S, Dec 2015).
This is an extremely strong market for FPS gaming. That titles like Battleborn are so low-profile in this environment says a lot.
I believe he is relating to modern military specific FPS games.
He wants AA2.
BF series games don't count because respawns. Same for COD. Insurgency is too detailed. CSGO doesn't count because he doesn't like its gameplay. ARMA and Squad are too realistic. R6:S is close enough to military to belong in the comparison. Dunno why Dirty Bomb doesn't work either.
When you have to discount 8 different titles/franchises, it's pretty ridiculous to call the market weak.
It also doesn't help when people call any game without 50k+concurrents "fail". ALL of the FPS games are competing for FPS gamers and there are a ton of very strong recent releases.
Not to mention titles not aimed at competition like The Division or anything else from that twist on modern military shooter RPG.
Let's put it another way. Want to know why nothing else is in the exact little pigeonhole as the AA series? Because the AA series is already sitting in that hole and there's no more room there. There are tons of variants but they're all discounted here because of it.
I don't think the market is strong, I'm looking for a decent ADS competitive fps game.. now tell me my options?
Insurgency comp got old because of hide and seek gameplay, maps are too detailed, it takes the skill right out of the game..boring
Cs is corrupt with cheating, little kids, and isn't exactly an ADS game
COD, BF all have sad respawns and is totally different kind of game
ARMA, or any realistic based game? Please stop.
Imo there is room for a well made AA.. just needs to be more competitive and less casual
Things you didn't mention:
R6:Siege is tactical round-based ADS.
Overwatch is strategic respawn from Blizzard.
Paragon, 5v5 3PS F2P MOBA from Epic Games. Early access now.
Battleborn, FPS MOBA from the Borderlands devs.
LawBreakers, 5v5 sci-fi high-skill arena from Nexon. Not out yet.
Then there's titles like Alpha Reactor, a simultaneous turn-based DOTA/XCOM hybrid.
And these are all just 2016 releases (except R6:S, Dec 2015).
This is an extremely strong market for FPS gaming. That titles like Battleborn are so low-profile in this environment says a lot.
I mean if you're by definition a "gamer" you might try these titles out, but honestly you think these are in the same genre as AA? do most people who play AA play these kind of games? Im not by any means a "gamer" I just got hooked on AA back in the day and stuck with it.
I mean if you're by definition a "gamer" you might try these titles out, but honestly you think these are in the same genre as AA? do most people who play AA play these kind of games? Im not by any means a "gamer" I just got hooked on AA back in the day and stuck with it.
I just don't see those being AA's competitors.
Everybody keeps saying AA2 was a huge mainstream success. Where do you think all those mainstream FPS gamers went if not one of the other major FPS titles?
MOBAs were a new genre when they released and started off by leeching players from the RTS genre (Warcraft etc). They got more popular and started drawing off others, too, so now some dev teams are trying to pull those players back with FPS MOBAs. Heck, I played some LoL with the old i9 crew for a little bit. If something as different as League can pull players from AA, why don't you think R6:Siege or Overwatch can?
This conversation is starting to feel.... well old. Very similar has been had before. However, think about how many people you know that play this game on the average night. Just going from my friends list i would say about 70.. And thats solely comp/used to be comp players. Considering only 500 people on averagely that kinda shows that a decent chunk of the people that actually play this game want comp.
However, ask any comp player and they will say this game isn't ready. So your call. However, I think a Reboot "AA1" would do great. Look at BF1
But what do I know... i still come back to AA after trying other games for a while. The game frustrates me so much, but i cant stay away
I've been playing R6: Siege. It's a lot of fun, really good game. Not perfect, but definitely the type of game that would compete with AA in any type of aspect that you're looking for. Some comp players may not like the destroyable environments which make matches extremely unpredictable, but the game is top notch with the focus on teamwork without holding your hand. There are tons of different types of characters (different for attack & defense rounds) with their own unique weapons and gadgets that can work together in a match. Pretty much every map is a high speed CQB battle. There's obviously a lot less variety in missions than AA and gun play is extremely basic (no sway, simple recoil patterns, etc.), but the game does a ton right.
You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
Next version, (if there is one) should just be developed and released, no public beta period, no opportunity for general players to shape the game.. just kinda just get what we'd be given. Too many people have put onus on the past games, used them as a measuring stick against a modern FPS.. when we really should have been looking to the future. People are stuck in that past, frantically trying to get it back.. the feels they used to get, that community and togetherness.. But imagine it.. AA2 if never released before was released tomorrow exactly as it was, I predict it would be a flop, people would laugh at it. The only thing AAPG is guilty of is being a modern FPS. It don't suck.. it's just not the beloved AA2.
That in mind, I don't think AAPG's recipe of having a beta/feedback/change/bugfix methodry necessarily worked.. As nice as it was to be able to have influence over something, we gotta admit, hardly anyone has been happy and content with whatever we've had/got, over all that time.
Winds me up something rotten when reading the negativity all the time, so much so.. I find myself spending less and less time here being my usual troll self Although.. that might be a good thing
If my trollery drives you crazy, you'd better put on your seatbelt.
Comments
I didn't put it in to slate the game if you have nothing positive to say or want to complain then start another post
I think the thing is that there's a lot more competition, so you can't have a bare bones game and think you're going to do well. You need lots features (and some unique). You need longevity. You need something that's going to keep people coming back. You need a good competitive scene. You need rankings and leader boards. You need a game that challenges players to continuously learn. You need great maps.
If AA5 came out tomorrow a flood of people would come to try it because "well maybe this time it'll be like AA2." The main question is whether people will stay. Personally, I feel that AAPG was doomed from the start because it was so different and it had that expectation. No America's Army game will ever be able to succeed if it doesn't in some way resemble AA2. That's a fact.
If the America's Army developers want a game that even stands a chance it has to be a legitimate sequel to AA2. That means clone the crap out of the game from a presentation perspective at the bare minimum. Bring back the training starting at basic. Make it so that the game focuses on the life of a soldier. We have tons of new game technology that can probably do it even better than back in 2002. In the same respect players should have the ability to customize their soldier... Every soldier is different.
From a gameplay perspective I'd say mix what worked best in the past 3 games. However, we need stuff and lots of it. You can't expect a game to work when you have 7 weapons (plus OpFor equivalents) and the only customization available are a few sights. More weapons, more optics, more attachments. More unique situational items and weapons. Bring back squads. Map specific load outs. Classes/roles that are more than just a change of weapon. Team play must flow organically rather than being forced. Having each player have a unique role would help with that.
Just some thoughts anyway.
Not really see why the second point would be a problem for this game,
btw you forgot one of the biggest shooters from 2003 - Call of Duty 1.
Make AA Great Again!
Insurgency comp got old because of hide and seek gameplay, maps are too detailed, it takes the skill right out of the game..boring
Cs is corrupt with cheating, little kids, and isn't exactly an ADS game
COD, BF all have sad respawns and is totally different kind of game
ARMA, or any realistic based game? Please stop.
Imo there is room for a well made AA.. just needs to be more competitive and less casual
#Support Comp Mode
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
It's now banned after the
latest update.
#Support Comp Mode
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
R6:Siege is tactical round-based ADS.
Overwatch is strategic respawn from Blizzard.
Paragon, 5v5 3PS F2P MOBA from Epic Games. Early access now.
Battleborn, FPS MOBA from the Borderlands devs.
LawBreakers, 5v5 sci-fi high-skill arena from Nexon. Not out yet.
Then there's titles like Alpha Reactor, a simultaneous turn-based DOTA/XCOM hybrid.
And these are all just 2016 releases (except R6:S, Dec 2015).
This is an extremely strong market for FPS gaming. That titles like Battleborn are so low-profile in this environment says a lot.
Make AA Great Again!
Also F2P games IIRC.
I love this community!
This.. don't have to be free.. but I cant take spells, cartoonish games, not for me
#Support Comp Mode
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
BF series games don't count because respawns. Same for COD. Insurgency is too detailed. CSGO doesn't count because he doesn't like its gameplay. ARMA and Squad are too realistic. R6:S is close enough to military to belong in the comparison. Dunno why Dirty Bomb doesn't work either.
When you have to discount 8 different titles/franchises, it's pretty ridiculous to call the market weak.
It also doesn't help when people call any game without 50k+concurrents "fail". ALL of the FPS games are competing for FPS gamers and there are a ton of very strong recent releases.
Not to mention titles not aimed at competition like The Division or anything else from that twist on modern military shooter RPG.
Let's put it another way. Want to know why nothing else is in the exact little pigeonhole as the AA series? Because the AA series is already sitting in that hole and there's no more room there. There are tons of variants but they're all discounted here because of it.
I mean if you're by definition a "gamer" you might try these titles out, but honestly you think these are in the same genre as AA? do most people who play AA play these kind of games? Im not by any means a "gamer" I just got hooked on AA back in the day and stuck with it.
I just don't see those being AA's competitors.
#Support Comp Mode
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
Everybody keeps saying AA2 was a huge mainstream success. Where do you think all those mainstream FPS gamers went if not one of the other major FPS titles?
MOBAs were a new genre when they released and started off by leeching players from the RTS genre (Warcraft etc). They got more popular and started drawing off others, too, so now some dev teams are trying to pull those players back with FPS MOBAs. Heck, I played some LoL with the old i9 crew for a little bit. If something as different as League can pull players from AA, why don't you think R6:Siege or Overwatch can?
These are absolutely competitors.
It's now banned after the
latest update.
#Support Comp Mode
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
I love this community!
However, ask any comp player and they will say this game isn't ready. So your call. However, I think a Reboot "AA1" would do great. Look at BF1
But what do I know... i still come back to AA after trying other games for a while. The game frustrates me so much, but i cant stay away
That in mind, I don't think AAPG's recipe of having a beta/feedback/change/bugfix methodry necessarily worked.. As nice as it was to be able to have influence over something, we gotta admit, hardly anyone has been happy and content with whatever we've had/got, over all that time.
Winds me up something rotten when reading the negativity all the time, so much so.. I find myself spending less and less time here being my usual troll self