Dead game
![[DFekt].NoVaseline](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar.php?gravatar_id=fd82e9f20dc98635e5b2b22877c8b1e6&size=50&default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2Ffd82e9f20dc98635e5b2b22877c8b1e6.png){kind=avatar}
[DFekt].NoVaseline
Posts: 12Player
Im doing this post in the hopes that the aapg dev team will see this
iv'e noticed that this community is dying agree or not its true. server are shunting down clans are leaving
server populations in official are dwindling i love this game but the fires going out you have done very small patches adding no new content in the past 3 o 2 years nothing new has been aded but 2 maps and 2 guns. a lot of people have lost faith in the Devs from Americas Army Studio they are showing no interest in keeping the game going .
iv'e noticed that this community is dying agree or not its true. server are shunting down clans are leaving
server populations in official are dwindling i love this game but the fires going out you have done very small patches adding no new content in the past 3 o 2 years nothing new has been aded but 2 maps and 2 guns. a lot of people have lost faith in the Devs from Americas Army Studio they are showing no interest in keeping the game going .
Comments
Based on this, I wouldn't expect ground-shaking changes in AAPG.
oh a new game hellz yea!
Hc|Captain(HUN) -
That's bold! And hurts. Also, things were slightly different back then. Might be a matter of fond memories, but i still remember the forums, the community, the maps depot!! That was awesome, the amount of custom maps (with several coop missions)...and then it was shut down along with all the other AA2 related services back in late 2011.
The coop community was quite tight. Too bad we weren't that many tho (one of em actually reached to me on youtube a couple days ago watching one of my videos
2.3, maybe 2.5 was the beez-neez. 2.8.5 was just too much
Either way, what really started killing AA2 were the implementation of movement restrictions (limiting crouch & jump) and things like atomic flash bangs (where guys would just sit around with a flash in hand waiting for guys to blind and kill). There were other things too, but I can't remember. They were all changes that were made in the name of realism because the uber realism junkies started complaining that the people who were better players than them would do unrealistic things and things like how getting flashed wouldn't make you be able to get back into the fight so quickly... and yes, I remember huge threads about these things being discussed in the forums at the time.
Before you knew it a lot of the competitive teams started dropping the game and tons of people left. I remember 2.6 or 2.7 was around the time that I mostly stopped playing AA2. At the time I was involved enough in the comp scene to know a large base of players from all sorts of different teams and most people were getting fed up with the game and complained about the changes after each patch.
It should have occurred to you by now that this is what the studio was trying to do with the game FOR THEIR CUSTOMER, the Army.
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
(Disclaimer: I was not around in the AA2 era. My comment is more of a generic one.)
Well, the army pays, thus they are technically the customer. However, if this causes the studio to make bad things for gameplay... they are still poor choices for gameplay! Sure, they are kind of "justified", because the paying customer wanted it. But justified poor decisions are still poor decisions from the perspective of the players. And player will make decisions based on the player's perspective.
I, the player, will want something, what is good for me. I won't think like: "hey, this thing is super unfun, but I guess the Army made them implement it, thus all is forgiven/forgotten. I'll keep playing, I don't care it is not fun!". I want to have fun. Even if I understand, that I'm not the one with the money, I want to have fun.
And if the Army has sense, they want their target audience to have fun, because this is the only was they can achieve what they want. The question is: am I the target audience or not?
Understanding why decisions are made and agreeing with these decisions is NOT the same thing. They are fundamentally different IMO.
Just wow.
True Levente. Some people like to lean on the Army is the customer crutch. And while they pay the bills, I'd bet my arm that Col John Doe isn't telling Devs to implement this or that nuance. There may be some guidance, but that doesn't mean the Studio is being micromanaged to the most minute details.
I
Bravo, I say. Bravo!!! :worldsTiniestClap:
FACTS are not a crutch just because you don't like them.
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
In AA2 it's 100% certain that they got rid of the ability to jump too often because people complained about it, they removed the ability to crouch too often because people complained about it. I remember so many threads on the forums about people complaining about bunny hoppers and players who crouch spammed because they couldn't aim so therefore it had to be put to a stop. I also remember long threads in the forum about flash bangs needed to be more effective because realism. At that point in time the game had a huge player base, you don't make changes like that and not expect huge repercussions. I don't care what some big shot at the Army who probably doesn't play the game wants (yes, I know what they want is what goes -- Not the point here). The point of this game at the end of the day is to get tons of eyes on the US Army. So no matter who you want to say is the customer, if the so-called customer is the only one playing this game then it's failed. Same with if the only people playing this game are a niche group of realism junkies or 30+ year old men, then it's failed. Sorry, but I can hardly recall a time in recent memory where I've heard someone who isn't in their 20s or older playing AAPG.
At the time it was thread after tread of realism junkies saying that they wanted the game to be more realistic. The Army gave into these people and the game suffered. Even today we get people on here who want AAPG or AA5 to be more like Arma (a niche game) rather than trying to compete with the big boys. You talk about people who want the game to be the way they want for selfish reasons. They'd rather a round based Arma clone that will get 5,000 people playing vs. trying to consider making a game that hundreds of thousands will want to play.
It's not like the Comp crowd wasn't noisy. Why didn't THEY influence the build?
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
AFAIK because you betas didn't like to see the comp beta so it got cancelled?!
Sure it's possible, but if that's the case then those were foolish decisions regardless. Don't fix what ain't broken and don't try to ram a square peg into a round hole... all that good stuff. The Army really needs to sit down and do some research on what makes a game successful in today's environment. Obviously, right now that's battle royale and I'm not saying to make an America's Army squad based BR game, but it's important to look at what kind of features and basic game mechanics are prevalent in the market, improve on them, do something unique with them, and add that Army flare. That's the blue print to being successful. Don't just tailor a game to a small loud niche who wants an Army simulator or a pure AA2 clone. Yes, it's good to look at AA2 and copy some of those features/ideas and mechanics, but the game needs to also come into the current decade.
What I'd LIKE to see doesn't really matter, and I accept that. Unlike:
As to the Comp Beta group, I wasn't a Beta then, but my impression of 'most' of the comp crowd in general was that they were belligerent, entitled, disruptive, demanding, and terrible at useful feedback here in the Public Forum. I have no idea if they behaved the same way behind 'Closed' doors, and if they did, I'd not be allowed to comment on it anyway.
Comments like 'old grandpa's proning around the maps' and 'get rid of this, 'it's not Scottish*"' were pretty typical.
The forums were toxic back then, and I hated it.
So, all we can do is move forward and learn from our mistakes, I hope.
(* - 'if it's na Scottish, it's ****' )
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
Either way, regardless of anything, any of us few remaining here want to see a successful America's Army game. I just caution the Dev team to really figure this thing out before anything. Really understand the market and do it right. The last thing you want AA5 to be is a _____ clone or a game that plays like it's from 2005. The day AAPG came out it was immediately labelled a CoD clone. Unfair or not, that was it for the game.
If you asked me I would love to see old maps. Ohh but wait I can
It would be awesome to have more maps and better ones. Oh, really AA has provided a powerful editor where I can learn to make my own map the way I want. Hmm but how do I get started? What there is a section on the forums that has other players that are willing to help you get started and guilds on steam, how awesome it that
I hate that AA:PG did not set up any comp server or any comp within the game. What's that I read in the forums? A bunch of comps that players have set up all on their own? Maybe I should stop my complaining and do something my self and set something up too?
Hey I would love to see a comp for user made maps. The Devs did say something about getting something going at one point. Hmm now they can't because there main focus is on the new AA game? Well I guess I could complain about it till I get my way OR I can do it myself like suggested by the Devs. And maybe I can get players to help donate for a 1st and 2nd place prize. I might be even able to get a Devs attention once I have finished setting up and see if they are able to op in and check it out and maybe do something for the winners too.
I want the game like AA2. AA2 this AA2 that. All I want is AA2 when the game had no comp because the game had no real comp. Even PlayStation and xbox was garb. Ohh but look now how the PC gaming is dying and PS and Xbox is doing so much better. I guess I can see how the future moves on to bigger and better things. It would be awesome if there was backwards comp for the new AA5 so that anyone playing AA5 can play with anyone playing on console.
I am with you guys on a lot of your points. But I think most of you got the point that this game is no longer AGS main focus. So is it worth complaining about AA where I will get no great feedback from? Or would it be better for leave my great ideas on what should happen with AA5 in the right thread and hope that my voice is heard because I was polite and game a thought out play plan on AA5 rather then nag like a teen what is not getting what he or she wants.
I love this game like many of you and would LOVE to see some changes. However the things I want to see from AA5 has already been told from my own voice. Those things that I want to do still with this game. I motivate myself and others to do the things that I want to do. I guess the last thing to do is keep busy until we can start doing some work on something new.
For the main question on this page. I guess AA:PG is dead because of the consistent comp and how old this game is. I am in my 30's and most of the people I work with and younger or around the same age. I ask others all the time what they are playing since I have Xbox. No matter young and old 80% of them are playing a new game ever 2 weeks. And the Games like AA or PUBG they have their times until the next new best game comes out. But do you see the Devs of those game do much dif then what ours do? No. There are patches new maps and new guns just like others. If there are bugs that you think need to be fixed. Then leave a bug report because chances are the Devs might not know about it. But with AA5 being the focus. Like a bunch of older games. Don't expect fixes to happen right away.
I do agree that they should happen more often. But I can understand why and play the game just the way it is just fine.