I put this post in as a positive to try to help get more players playing the game.
Once again the idiots have spoiled that by making silly accusations please stick to the topic.
We should all be on the same page here not throwing silly accusations around.
The dev's are doing the best they can to make this game succeed they have put 1000s of hours into the game and continue to do that every day so lets try to help them find a way to get more players in the game and not just slate them at any chance you get.
No malice, no hate for old devs, just following what our customer wants. ??????
The customer being the US Army / government? Well I can understand that , however if you guys are serious about your love of AA2/3 , Why did you not put a case forward to grow the format as it was. If we all wanted to play COD/Battlefield we would. Look at the die hard AA3 player pool. Most have less than a few hours on pg. Is that not telling that a large part of there AA community has said No to pg?
What does the customer want? A poor mans COD? I have really lost what the primary point of the game was supposed to achieve. If its still recruitment? I say nobody would consider joining the army on the game as it stands. If its a primary a public relations exercise I think it did and will not achieve this goal. I say yes the customer wants something different but pg is not it. If you guys are thinking strongly about a new version . I say look at squad. Its everything PG should have been. Its a very strong leadership game with strong points on tactics. Its the game AA2/3 was hoping you would give us. I want to continue supporting you guys as do the rest of the AA community but first your customer needs some convincing.
I'd assume that "the customer" just wants an outreaching application that is both educational and exciting. It just so happens a first person shooter can fit the bill and has done in the past. AAPG and AA3 have been unfortunate victims of its predecessors success. But, gaming, in this generation is probably the most effective way outside of reality to showcase in some way what a life in the army is like, for young adults.. from the weapons and equipment you'll likely use, to the the camaraderie in a battle situations. Whilst AAPG does not simulate, it does both direct and indirectly educate.
Wether or not you like it, or rather the end user (people who end up playing it) likes it.. well I guess that's just a matter of opinion. They are only doing their jobs, that are handed to them by a boss, have they done that job? I think so.. we have a game, its a multiplayer shooter and it has Army in it.. seems to me it's mission accomplished.
Think about these things when your composing a post bashing a game you don't like, simply because it's no longer something you grew up playing, that happened to be a worldwide hit
If my trollery drives you crazy, you'd better put on your seatbelt.
I highly doubt people nowadays prefer a super tactical large map game over a casual-ish game. Squad at least from my point of view is the only game in that niche while AAPG is competing with many others. Now take a look at the numbers, not that amazing on the Squad side despite barely any contestants.
lol squad is expensive and alpha. Im not talking about massive maps but more on how they use the squads and use leadership. Also I confidently say I speak for the whole of the AA3 community
lol squad is expensive and alpha. Im not talking about massive maps but more on how they use the squads and use leadership. Also I confidently say I speak for the whole of the AA3 community
lol squad is expensive and alpha. Im not talking about massive maps but more on how they use the squads and use leadership. Also I confidently say I speak for the whole of the AA3 community
AA3 is dead and will never be back, just like AA2, come play PG and enjoy what is the here and now or just move on. There is no other option...
The big push in multiplayer games these days is for competition (e.g., Dota, CS) and unique playable characters that organically blend together to create team play where players are forced to rely on others due to their own character's innate shortfalls (e.g., Dota, Overwatch, TF, R6 Siege). Find me a game that's highly popular on PC that doesn't have those one or both of those metrics.
Round based games in themselves are extremely difficult to work with in today's world without extremely fast paced rounds. No one wants to wait 10 minutes between rounds. Add in the fact that you can just use the rifleman class and never have to worry... the depth and team play are lacking.
Even AA2 fails in these respects. That's why a new AA game would have to borrow from the prior games, but figure out how to address the need of team play. Doing something along the lines of what R6 Siege does (a unique operator/hero type metric) is probably the best way. Such a system could work out great for a game like AA by allowing a player to take their character through basic and training for their specialty.
You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
The Army Game Studio makes what our customer (the Army) wants.
Playing umm is just not the same thing as official maps.
Playing umm is not the same? Once the devs have finished with the game and there is no more 'official maps' I'm hoping that umm's see a sizeable increase in popularity tbh. Out of thousands of custom maps, there are lots that can go up against the mighty Inner.. surely.
I guess that folks have just gotta be willing to stick at them, try them and learn them.. yeah there are negatives in all maps, some maps plain old suck, some have potential, some are excellent.. but how many hidden gems are uploaded to the workshop (past and present) that nobody has posted about and advertised here? and, do you ever try them? if not.. then that's as much a part of the problem as nobody playing them is.
No map is perfect, someone will always dislike something about something and that something will be cool for someone else (water, bushes, IED traps etc..)..
I think maybe people can be to insistent on perfection. As long as a map has a good feel and flow, is well balanced and the eyeballs can tolerate it.. I don't see why something as silly as a bit of dust or singular undesirable object placement disorders can write off maps.
If my trollery drives you crazy, you'd better put on your seatbelt.
The Army Game Studio makes what our customer (the Army) wants.
Playing umm is just not the same thing as official maps.
Playing umm is not the same? Once the devs have finished with the game and there is no more 'official maps' I'm hoping that umm's see a sizeable increase in popularity tbh. Out of thousands of custom maps, there are lots that can go up against the mighty Inner.. surely.
I guess that folks have just gotta be willing to stick at them, try them and learn them.. yeah there are negatives in all maps, some maps plain old suck, some have potential, some are excellent.. but how many hidden gems are uploaded to the workshop (past and present) that nobody has posted about and advertised here? and, do you ever try them? if not.. then that's as much a part of the problem as nobody playing them is.
No map is perfect, someone will always dislike something about something and that something will be cool for someone else (water, bushes, IED traps etc..)..
I think maybe people can be to insistent on perfection. As long as a map has a good feel and flow, is well balanced and the eyeballs can tolerate it.. I don't see why something as silly as a bit of dust or singular undesirable object placement disorders can write off maps.
The UMM system is... difficult. It's a lot to be forced to download every map on the server, keep up with updates, not to mention the longer load times. A lot of people don't want to deal with them. Official maps have none of those problems.
You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
I love what some of the map makers have done, and appreciate their work. But playing on UMM servers is a chore as stated before. Keeping updated UMMs and the dev's requiring that you download them all has locked out those servers to alot of us.
People want to play official maps, while most people that play this game may not be "Comp", but the competitive nature in all of us brings us to play and play over again. Most people do not want to dump time in maps that will never get the green light from the devs.
We don't hate AA2/3, far from it. Many of us played them. Heck some guys are at the studio because of how much they loved AA2 and they worked their way up the chain and got a job at the studio. (Lookin' at you Ko$her and Tear!)
Maybe it's not so sinister as "new devs hate old devs". The Army Game Studio makes what our customer (the Army) wants. They don't want AA2/AA3 remakes. They don't want a game they paid for 10 years ago uprezzed and to pay for it again. They want something new, so that's what we give them.
No malice, no hate for old devs, just following what our customer wants.
This was taken from the Army website.
Funded by the Army Marketing and Research Group, America's Army, the official game of the U.S. Army, delivers an authentic and entertaining Army experience by reflecting the values, training, technology, skills, and career advancement of a United States Army Soldier. Rated T for Teen, the game features authentic weapons and technologies, realistic training and exciting gameplay missions.
I see my tax dollars at work here. Would that make me a customer?
The America's Army concept was conceived in 1999 by Colonel Casey Wardynski; the Army's Chief Economist and Professor at the United States Military Academy.[2] Wardynski envisioned "using computer game technology to provide the public a virtual Soldier experience that was engaging, informative and entertaining."
Which in turn has been used as a promotional tool for recruitment.
Furthermore, if the key of the game is to have people play the game and for the Army to advertise itself.. Right? Why would you dismiss ideas and direction that would bring more people to play the game? If you look at the charts http://steamcharts.com/app/203290 this game is on life support. The failure to corporate a competitive aspect to this game and to bring back the beloved popular AA2 maps is not helping the game, it is just one of many death blows to the game.
I downloaded 86 maps just to play on one server by the time I downloaded them the server was empty
I have removed them all now because for some reason the game started to stutter also I don't like the fact when you start steam you have to wait for any umm updates.
I have made 5 maps and paid for a 24 slot server but no one wants to play them the way the system is right now.
Would be good if we could go back to just downloading the one map being played at the time you want to join the server.
We don't hate AA2/3, far from it. Many of us played them. Heck some guys are at the studio because of how much they loved AA2 and they worked their way up the chain and got a job at the studio. (Lookin' at you Ko$her and Tear!)
Maybe it's not so sinister as "new devs hate old devs". The Army Game Studio makes what our customer (the Army) wants. They don't want AA2/AA3 remakes. They don't want a game they paid for 10 years ago uprezzed and to pay for it again. They want something new, so that's what we give them.
No malice, no hate for old devs, just following what our customer wants.
This was taken from the Army website.
Funded by the Army Marketing and Research Group, America's Army, the official game of the U.S. Army, delivers an authentic and entertaining Army experience by reflecting the values, training, technology, skills, and career advancement of a United States Army Soldier. Rated T for Teen, the game features authentic weapons and technologies, realistic training and exciting gameplay missions.
I see my tax dollars at work here. Would that make me a customer?
The America's Army concept was conceived in 1999 by Colonel Casey Wardynski; the Army's Chief Economist and Professor at the United States Military Academy.[2] Wardynski envisioned "using computer game technology to provide the public a virtual Soldier experience that was engaging, informative and entertaining."
Which in turn has been used as a promotional tool for recruitment.
Furthermore, if the key of the game is to have people play the game and for the Army to advertise itself.. Right? Why would you dismiss ideas and direction that would bring more people to play the game? If you look at the charts http://steamcharts.com/app/203290 this game is on life support. The failure to corporate a competitive aspect to this game and to bring back the beloved popular AA2 maps is not helping the game, it is just one of many death blows to the game.
It's interesting right? Why are the people who play this game not considered the customers? Aren't they the reason why this game is being made? Are the Dev team just making this game so these so called customers can play (if they even do... which I doubt) by themselves?
I thought the whole point of this game was PR and recruitment? What's the point if no one is playing it? I know for sure that AA2 helped people get into the Army. I remember playing in those days and talking to so many people who were going to join when they got of age. Maybe that was already their decision, but playing this game certainly didn't hurt. Now the last two games have been flops. Can AAPG be saved? No. Can it at least sustain an OK sized community for years? Sure, if the Devs and/or their "customer" stop being stubborn and listen to their real customers. Until then, this game is going to slowly bleed to death. We're already below 1000 peek players.
You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
Comments
Urban
Pipeline
Weapons Cache
MOUT
Insurgent Camp
Dusk and Border
always had full servers in AA2.
Once again the idiots have spoiled that by making silly accusations please stick to the topic.
We should all be on the same page here not throwing silly accusations around.
The dev's are doing the best they can to make this game succeed they have put 1000s of hours into the game and continue to do that every day so lets try to help them find a way to get more players in the game and not just slate them at any chance you get.
Vote added here http://www.souldefenders.net/
The customer being the US Army / government? Well I can understand that , however if you guys are serious about your love of AA2/3 , Why did you not put a case forward to grow the format as it was. If we all wanted to play COD/Battlefield we would. Look at the die hard AA3 player pool. Most have less than a few hours on pg. Is that not telling that a large part of there AA community has said No to pg?
What does the customer want? A poor mans COD? I have really lost what the primary point of the game was supposed to achieve. If its still recruitment? I say nobody would consider joining the army on the game as it stands. If its a primary a public relations exercise I think it did and will not achieve this goal. I say yes the customer wants something different but pg is not it. If you guys are thinking strongly about a new version . I say look at squad. Its everything PG should have been. Its a very strong leadership game with strong points on tactics. Its the game AA2/3 was hoping you would give us. I want to continue supporting you guys as do the rest of the AA community but first your customer needs some convincing.
Evilstorm AA since 2003
Wether or not you like it, or rather the end user (people who end up playing it) likes it.. well I guess that's just a matter of opinion. They are only doing their jobs, that are handed to them by a boss, have they done that job? I think so.. we have a game, its a multiplayer shooter and it has Army in it.. seems to me it's mission accomplished.
Think about these things when your composing a post bashing a game you don't like, simply because it's no longer something you grew up playing, that happened to be a worldwide hit
I love this community!
You are the whole of the AA3 community
AA3 is dead and will never be back, just like AA2, come play PG and enjoy what is the here and now or just move on. There is no other option...
Round based games in themselves are extremely difficult to work with in today's world without extremely fast paced rounds. No one wants to wait 10 minutes between rounds. Add in the fact that you can just use the rifleman class and never have to worry... the depth and team play are lacking.
Even AA2 fails in these respects. That's why a new AA game would have to borrow from the prior games, but figure out how to address the need of team play. Doing something along the lines of what R6 Siege does (a unique operator/hero type metric) is probably the best way. Such a system could work out great for a game like AA by allowing a player to take their character through basic and training for their specialty.
Who is this customer I'd like to play against him..
Seriously are we not the customers? What happens to the game without us?.. does the Army continue to play it?
This customer needs to realize what's good for the game, and a map pack is needed.
Playing umm is just not the same thing as official maps.
#Support Comp Mode
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
Playing umm is not the same? Once the devs have finished with the game and there is no more 'official maps' I'm hoping that umm's see a sizeable increase in popularity tbh. Out of thousands of custom maps, there are lots that can go up against the mighty Inner.. surely.
I guess that folks have just gotta be willing to stick at them, try them and learn them.. yeah there are negatives in all maps, some maps plain old suck, some have potential, some are excellent.. but how many hidden gems are uploaded to the workshop (past and present) that nobody has posted about and advertised here? and, do you ever try them? if not.. then that's as much a part of the problem as nobody playing them is.
No map is perfect, someone will always dislike something about something and that something will be cool for someone else (water, bushes, IED traps etc..)..
I think maybe people can be to insistent on perfection. As long as a map has a good feel and flow, is well balanced and the eyeballs can tolerate it.. I don't see why something as silly as a bit of dust or singular undesirable object placement disorders can write off maps.
The UMM system is... difficult. It's a lot to be forced to download every map on the server, keep up with updates, not to mention the longer load times. A lot of people don't want to deal with them. Official maps have none of those problems.
People want to play official maps, while most people that play this game may not be "Comp", but the competitive nature in all of us brings us to play and play over again. Most people do not want to dump time in maps that will never get the green light from the devs.
Just my opinions of course.
This was taken from the Army website.
I see my tax dollars at work here. Would that make me a customer?
Which in turn has been used as a promotional tool for recruitment.
Furthermore, if the key of the game is to have people play the game and for the Army to advertise itself.. Right? Why would you dismiss ideas and direction that would bring more people to play the game? If you look at the charts http://steamcharts.com/app/203290 this game is on life support. The failure to corporate a competitive aspect to this game and to bring back the beloved popular AA2 maps is not helping the game, it is just one of many death blows to the game.
I have removed them all now because for some reason the game started to stutter also I don't like the fact when you start steam you have to wait for any umm updates.
I have made 5 maps and paid for a 24 slot server but no one wants to play them the way the system is right now.
Would be good if we could go back to just downloading the one map being played at the time you want to join the server.
It's interesting right? Why are the people who play this game not considered the customers? Aren't they the reason why this game is being made? Are the Dev team just making this game so these so called customers can play (if they even do... which I doubt) by themselves?
I thought the whole point of this game was PR and recruitment? What's the point if no one is playing it? I know for sure that AA2 helped people get into the Army. I remember playing in those days and talking to so many people who were going to join when they got of age. Maybe that was already their decision, but playing this game certainly didn't hurt. Now the last two games have been flops. Can AAPG be saved? No. Can it at least sustain an OK sized community for years? Sure, if the Devs and/or their "customer" stop being stubborn and listen to their real customers. Until then, this game is going to slowly bleed to death. We're already below 1000 peek players.