AA5 Discussion Thread (Renamed)

1535456585966

Comments

  • .!.dgodfather.!.dgodfather Posts: 445Player
    AA2 remastered would be entertaining for about 2 months at most, then it would die, again.
    Fragweiser Website
    Make AA Great Again!
  • frankoffrankof Posts: 1,018Moderator
    AA2 remastered would be entertaining for about 2 months at most, then it would die, again.
    Most likely true, i have a few versions still "installed", and the game feels really dated, and not just the visuals.

    ss_4_frankof.png
  • -SD-DELTON-ACI--SD-DELTON-ACI- Posts: 1,441Player
    AA2 remastered would be entertaining for about 2 months at most, then it would die, again.

    I agree but adding some of the great maps from AA2 and AA3 would be good.
    gKQ6BB2.png
  • .!.dgodfather.!.dgodfather Posts: 445Player
    I agree but adding some of the great maps from AA2 and AA3 would be good.

    You agree to promote spending time on developing something that will die in 2 months time? Let's not..
    Fragweiser Website
    Make AA Great Again!
  • -SD-DELTON-ACI--SD-DELTON-ACI- Posts: 1,441Player
    I agree with
    "AA2 remastered would be entertaining for about 2 months at most".
    But adding a few good maps from AA2/3 would be good.
    gKQ6BB2.png
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,123Player
    edited April 3
    AA2 has a lot of great ideas that can be included in a new version of AA, but a pure remake would fail miserably. You need to take a look at the gaming market right now. Facts are that a round based shooter will fail if rounds aren't in that 3 (maybe 4 at most) minute time range. There are only two round based shooters in the market that really mean anything right now and that's R6 & CS. I see AA falling somewhere in the middle of the two in terms of gameplay. It would need to have its own unique style, but that's where it needs to be.

    Bringing back the past won't work. Quake tried and failed. The market has moved on.
    BR works because you're always playing even if there are long pauses between action.
    Respawn games are even mostly dead with the exception of non-realistic hero shooters (e.g, Overwatch). BFV didn't catch on. CoD BO4 didn't catch on.
    You're left with BR & round based shooters. Where the round based shooters are highly competitive and have short faster paced rounds.

    You can still include long play maps in casual mode. You can still include private servers. You can't expect 7 minute round games to appeal to most players. No one wants to play that, no one wants to watch that. You can't make a game for 30+ year olds.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • .!.dgodfather.!.dgodfather Posts: 445Player
    millennials... O.o
    Fragweiser Website
    Make AA Great Again!
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,123Player
    edited April 3
    millennials... O.o

    It's Gen Z as well. It does make sense though. The idea of playing a game, dying in the first minute and waiting for 5 minutes to get into the next round is awful. That's why they put revives into the game (which no competitive game would take seriously).

    I think you could maybe have Casual-Open, Casual (or unranked)-5v5 Competitive, and Competitive-5v5. Casual-Open allows for up to 12v12, private servers, more customization regarding round times, maps, etc. The competitive versions use either matchmaking or lobbies and use preset competitive settings with faster round times, etc.. Casual version is unranked so that lower skilled players can learn the ropes in the competitive environment without getting reamed at by players who are try hards. You can maybe even have deathmatch mode which maybe uses the paintball or laser system. That said, it would be a mistake to do what they did with AAPG in having competitive maps that do not play well in the open environment. Look at CS, you can play every comp map in casual.

    I do think that the market is ripe for a game to come in and offer something a bit different and compete with R6 & CS. CS has been around forever and R6 is aging (even if it still puts out regular updates) as well.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • .!.dgodfather.!.dgodfather Posts: 445Player
    edited April 3
    I like the casual concept you're promoting, but that may well just divide the community, something games need to do less of. That's kind of what BDX and FLO do.

    The point I've been long trying to get at with AA and previous gen games we old dogs long for is that long round games don't have to die out. The creative process has to be non-typical. I get it's easy to do what everyone else is doing because the code-base and information available to do so is quantitative.

    So now then we're talking about keeping people in the game. People don't want to wait 5 minutes to play when they rush out in the opening seconds and get mowed down or blown away by a spam nade, right? Why not develop a game where you have a sort of "virtual" server within the game. What I mean by that is you live on the old AA2 style maps. Maps that are big with plentiful space to plan your attacks (I know that's not how it goes, but the potential is there). You can create concepts here too. Grouping abilities, that's for a different focus topic.. Back to big maps with long rounds and bored players.

    The virtual thing... so on-screen you have an "action" hub in the lower right corner. I'm thinking 3 visible buttons with the ability to scroll through a maximum of X. When you click on a button you can switch between servers where you define yourself as "active" within that server. Imagine something like Windows Task View or Mission Control in mac. So let's say I get in a game and I'm blasted immediately in the opening minute. I go to the bottom and click the "virtual" server button. I get a server select screen or it uses matchmaking and puts me into a new server (maybe with some saved preferences) where I get back into the action, while still having my previous session loaded in the "background". Now we have 2 "buttons" on the bottom right of my screen. One is green, where I am active now, and the other is grey, indicating an inactive session. The server maintains state that I've got a slot available in the previous session, while I'm on the current session in a new server. If I last longer in the second session, then my first session will give me notice (maybe the button turns orange and changes from orange to grey as the progress or count-down of the game goes to a live match). I can now choose to go back to the first session, or sit it out while I continue the second session. At this point, whatever session I choose to stay live in, the other loads a "NPC" or AI bot in my place. Ultimately a multiple session game space.

    Oh snap, time for me to go start a fundraising campaign for a game design... :)

    Some barriers will have to be defined such as you can't just switch back and forth between sessions mid round, or maybe you can based on certain circumstances if there are objectives. In any case, even if this idea is a complete failure, consider different concepts in making a game work. Don't just give up on something because it doesn't fit the mold of today.

    Be creative AA devs!
    Fragweiser Website
    Make AA Great Again!
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,123Player
    edited April 3
    I think the main problem is that you may end up with a server full of AI bots as people keep joining virtual servers and dropping out. You could always just allow dead players to transport themselves to an offsite battleground with respawns where they just fight it out until the end of the round, but even that still keeps players out of the game and is just a distraction so they don't get (as) bored.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • .!.dgodfather.!.dgodfather Posts: 445Player
    I think the main problem is that you may end up with a server full of AI bots as people keep joining virtual servers and dropping out. You could always just allow dead players to transport themselves to an offsite battleground with respawns where they just fight it out until the end of the round, but even that still keeps players out of the game and is just a distraction so they don't get (as) bored.

    It's possible. A server full of nothing but bots would simply be terminated and that session would be removed from the players console. In reference to the buttons, the inactive game session would allow the player to decide which match is important to them, so they would be choosing to be bored or not.
    Fragweiser Website
    Make AA Great Again!
  • nu.-maRknu.-maRk Posts: 4Player
    edited April 4
    OICURMT! wrote: »
    nu.-maRk wrote: »
    Can we get an AA2 remastered? O.o

    I think before anyone asks for an AA2 anything you need to read all 55 pages of this thread...

    That's a lot. Maybe I'll spend some time this weekend and go through it. I'm just an old school AA1/AA2 professional player from the prime high times of AA. Competed in CPL, CAL, Cevo. Game was perfect imo. From the quick skimming it looks like everyone praising AA3 which is what killed the game. I must be one of the few from the old community that still occasionally checks in. But I can tell you if an AA2 remastered happened a good chunk of the competitive community would flock back.

    For now I guess I'll just hold onto 25assist until it takes it's final breath.

    Update: maybe I should stop being lazy and scroll up. Seems like at least everyone on the 55th page is on board with me. Hopefully the Devs listen.
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,123Player
    edited April 5
    nu.-maRk wrote: »
    OICURMT! wrote: »
    nu.-maRk wrote: »
    Can we get an AA2 remastered? O.o

    I think before anyone asks for an AA2 anything you need to read all 55 pages of this thread...

    That's a lot. Maybe I'll spend some time this weekend and go through it. I'm just an old school AA1/AA2 professional player from the prime high times of AA. Competed in CPL, CAL, Cevo. Game was perfect imo. From the quick skimming it looks like everyone praising AA3 which is what killed the game. I must be one of the few from the old community that still occasionally checks in. But I can tell you if an AA2 remastered happened a good chunk of the competitive community would flock back.

    For now I guess I'll just hold onto 25assist until it takes it's final breath.

    Update: maybe I should stop being lazy and scroll up. Seems like at least everyone on the 55th page is on board with me. Hopefully the Devs listen.

    Not sure where you get that people are praising AA3. Many of us are AA2 vets, but the problem is that AA2 would not be very successful in the current market. The Army Dev team can't make a game targeted for 30+ year olds. Of course, I don't think a bs kiddy game would work either. AA5 certainly needs to look to AA2 for inspiration, but it needs to come 15 years into the future. A lot has changed in the gaming scene since then. I don't necessarily think it has to be full blown 100% focused on competitive play like CS or even R6, but it definitely needs to be competition friendly meaning a sizeable skill curve, built in competitive mode, easy ability to setup matches, etc. I shouldn't be able to jump in day one and dominate, that's for sure. It also needs to do something new and interesting meaning it can't be just another run-of-the-mill basic military shooter (which IMO is a big part of why AAPG failed).

    I've been playing some R6 & CS a bit over the last few days and both games just don't do it for me. Granted, I haven't touched either in competitive mode and that's really their bread and butter. CS casual is pretty awful really. What's funny is that CS is built upon being a 90s/00s era shooter, but knowing what CS was back in the beta days doesn't compare to today.
    Meanwhile, R6 just feels too boxed in for me to enjoy. It feels like a game that's all about map knowledge and whoever can shoot first.
    Maybe I'm just getting old, but personally I despise the current multiplayer FPS scene.

    EDIT: Just saw your edit :smile:
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • [soldier][soldier] Posts: 127Player
    I liked AA3 way more than the current game in every respect, except for that nasty unsolvable server memory leak bug that caused lag.
  • .!.dgodfather.!.dgodfather Posts: 445Player
    [soldier] wrote: »
    I liked AA3 way more than the current game in every respect, except for that nasty unsolvable server memory leak bug that caused lag.

    I too am much more a fan of AA3 than AAPG. AAPG is just bad. It's an example of trying to do something with today's market that just doesn't work with the AA series.

    A lot of wants were asked for AAPG. If it played more like BF/COD it would be more enjoyable. It plays something like those games. That didn't do it. Make it more like AA2. They transformed the beginning of AAPG later down the line to simulate AA2. That didn't work. So what is it then?
    Fragweiser Website
    Make AA Great Again!
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,123Player
    edited April 5
    [soldier] wrote: »
    I liked AA3 way more than the current game in every respect, except for that nasty unsolvable server memory leak bug that caused lag.

    I too am much more a fan of AA3 than AAPG. AAPG is just bad. It's an example of trying to do something with today's market that just doesn't work with the AA series.

    A lot of wants were asked for AAPG. If it played more like BF/COD it would be more enjoyable. It plays something like those games. That didn't do it. Make it more like AA2. They transformed the beginning of AAPG later down the line to simulate AA2. That didn't work. So what is it then?

    Good question right? Maybe we're all clueless and hopefully someone in the Dev team has a better idea. I think at the end of the day it comes down to what's so special about this game that I can't get elsewhere? From my point of view, one of the biggest things that AAPG did that ruined it was that it stripped away everything that made America's Army different. Training, squad roles, a medical system that actually mattered and wasn't gimmicky, OpFor weapons (later added), even the cyclical breathing pattern was unique (this is my favorite example of taking a mechanic that could be learned and making it random... they later changed it to something more predictable but the old system was still better). All that the game really had was the always play as US Army type thing and even when the game came out that wasn't really clear (since you were training you were technically playing against US soldiers, I think?). Those are some things to build upon, but AAPG came out and it looked, felt, played like a generic shooter.

    Even in its current form it doesn't do a lot that differentiates it from the crowd. Seriously, CS, R6, CoD, I'll leave out BF, list me 5 things that AAPG does that is unique compared to those games. Revives (actually R6 has limited revives)? Always play as US soldier? Limited player roles (maybe)? Anything else? because I can't think of anything and those things that I listed aren't exactly going to get people to run and play your game.

    It's pretty much a less featured version of CS mixed with R6 and a bit of CoD. The problem there is that CS & R6 take a long time to learn. CS has shooting and game play mechanics (including economy) that are extremely difficult to learn/master. R6 has complex maps due to their destruction mechanics along with hero characters that take time to master. I'm sure I'm over simplifying that too. AAPG is so casual that any player who has good aim and is pretty good at FPS games can jump in on day one and sit near the top of the server. That's something that doesn't fly in today's market. In today's market games need to be difficult to master. It needs to take years. I've seen way too many AAPG players who have thousands of hours and never improve. Meanwhile guys jump in day one and are dominating. Figure out a unique way to solve that while making the game fun for new players and you may have a fighting chance.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • -hyperlite--hyperlite- Posts: 102Player
    AA2 remastered would be entertaining for about 2 months at most, then it would die, again.

    100% correct


    From my point of view, one of the biggest things that AAPG did that ruined it was that it stripped away everything that made America's Army different. Training, squad roles, a medical system that actually mattered and wasn't gimmicky.


    I dont agree with this assessment because I feel what you just said appeals to the 35+ year olds. What young individual wants to do training before they play. They want instant action much like I would and I dont consider myself young anymore.
    Squad roles I could care less about and I feel would make little difference because I dont plan on following some random's ideas because of his squad position.
    When it comes to medics, I hope they dont ever exist. I dont want to wait for somebody, or rely on someone to patch me up. You could have nothing but potato heads running around as medics and your entire team would be screwed. I dont even want to imagine getting shot in the upper torso and bleeding to 10% health for a realism factor.

    Constant action with very little down time will appease the masses.
  • [DFekt].L.D.50-[DFekt].L.D.50- Posts: 17Player
    I don't feel like going through 55 pages trying to find this mention so if it has been mentioned...sorry.
    From my point of view, one of the biggest things that AAPG did that ruined it was that it stripped away everything that made America's Army different. Training, squad roles, a medical system that actually mattered and wasn't gimmicky.

    I fully agree with having this again. I can remember getting SO pissed off as time went on with AA because of the BCT all the way to SF but it was handy.


    Ping Limiter - AA2 had a ping limit for your server. This would be nice to have back in place once again. I hate kicking people out of server BUT with the way the netcoding is with this game, high ping shooters actually have advantage over a lowping which shouldn't happen.

    Random yelling from ingame character - This has really been one big annoyance of mine because I'll be trying to sneak up on the enemy. Next thing I know the character will randomly yell out some stupid (ish) and give away my position.

    Sound - Even with a headset like Logitech G633, the sound needs to be heavily modded. I shouldn't hear a player crawling from spawn to spawn in a map like Breach.

    My last complaint for the night is....

    NO MORE HOSPITAL REBOOTS. GET RID OF IT ENTIRELY. No reboots of any previous AA maps.
    RpylfC7.gif
    Owner/Leader - DFekt Gaming
  • .!.dgodfather.!.dgodfather Posts: 445Player
    Don't alienate a map that plays well. +1 for reboots at the right time fitting the right game.
    Fragweiser Website
    Make AA Great Again!
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,123Player
    edited April 5
    What young individual wants to do training before they play. They want instant action much like I would and I dont consider myself young anymore.
    Probably, but what's the point of an Army game if there's nothing to teach you about the Army? The only thing I can think of otherwise for integrating training is skin unlocks (maybe even weapon unlocks). Make people want to do it rather than forcing them to do it in order to play.
    Squad roles I could care less about and I feel would make little difference because I dont plan on following some random's ideas because of his squad position.
    No one ever followed the FTL or SQL's orders in the original game either. It was a good way to limit classes and added Army authenticity. My idea for squad roles would be to allow each role to be able to break down into different specialties. Rather than rifleman just being rifleman, you can choose a specialty which gives your rifleman different equipment and such.
    When it comes to medics, I hope they dont ever exist. I dont want to wait for somebody, or rely on someone to patch me up. You could have nothing but potato heads running around as medics and your entire team would be screwed. I dont even want to imagine getting shot in the upper torso and bleeding to 10% health for a realism factor.
    Don't disagree, but this is an Army game. I'd be shocked if they don't include medic and the way it was implemented in AAPG vs. AA2 made it worse. I personally hate bleed damage in games. Part of me thinks it'd be better for gameplay if medics actually restored a portion of a player's life rather than stopping bleeding. This way bad medics mean players don't regain life rather than meaning players lose life. You can live without them, but you'll want them around for that extra boost when needed. I personally despise the self-bandaging in AAPG. Awful mechanic and even more awful to watch.

    I'll also add in damage penalties, another thing that should go in the next game. Being injured is penalty enough, don't make it so that you are useless once you're injured as well.
    Constant action with very little down time will appease the masses.
    True enough, but how do you make yourself different than every other game that already does that?
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
Sign In or Register to comment.