Squad

What would it need for you to switch from Project Reality to Squad?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=fn8uVdxlsFU
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

...

...

...

...

...

...

Nothing, I already have.

good choice comrade

can you just drop in and play squad or do you need tryhard friends?

Pub servers are good enough, most people use mics and many communites enforce microphone rules for squadleaders

I don't play PR but if they wanted me to switch from Arma 3, they'd need a better SDK where I didn't need to load every game asset just to make weapons.

content, squad is alright but PR has so much more content and a better community too, bought squad half a year ago and every server i joined was full of lonewolfs and french faggots that cant speak english
refunded the game instantly, PR isnt only free but a much better game in every way except graphics.

>firing at a metal wall

Whats the point? delete this webm now.

enemies in a second floor, 30 mm cannon has penetration?

Air assets
Larger maps
Better aiming system (the snap-to-grid feeling of infantry weapons is offputting outside of Battlefield 2)
Grappling hooks
TANKS

>shoot at tiny shack house with big gun
>the walls are completely intact
Hey maybe if you had things actually break I would play your game.

You have a point, but a 30mm would go through that like butter, the building wouldn't start falling apart

Jets

Can we just make this thread about Arma3 and its new expansion coming up?

Hyped for the carrier

im not switching untill they roll out the new animations

also is there an alternative to the grappling hook? i mean that thing fucking made PR get it in squad you lazy cunts

Look BUDDY, I don't like running around at 1 mile per hour or dying from three feet drops. But I like the idea of taking part of a big war battle. So unless you're implementing full building destruction and you're letting me and my squad sweep through a tight urban area watching skyscrapers topple and elevators get sabotaged, I don't want in. I don't want five different leaning stances, I want to drive a tank into an office building like I'm the kool-aid man over the course of two hours.

BF maps barely do destruction well, and the trade off is they don't do shit in urban maps. Amiens in Battlefield 1 barely has any destruction, and all the urban maps in BF4 you can't do shit to buildings

Waiting for Arma 4 in like 3 years

> Arma 4 in like 3 years
More like 5 to 6 years

This isn't battlefield. It's a shooter that tries to implement some realistic aspects and make them an enjoyable gameplay experience. Maybe you should stay away from the games for adult audiences and continue playing your ADHD simulators.

>armafags always up to shit up squad threads
that's why nobody like you guys

Just like Squadfags shitting up ArmA-Threads. Your game is dead anyway so nobody cares.

theres like 1 squad thread a week

what is there to shit up?

dead game, move on.

Who's to blame? Graphicsfags? Could we have that delicious and innovative map destruction if we make the graphics look like Half-Life 1? I want creative battle scenarios with map destruction, but I don't want it to be really easy to topple buildings.

Tank-impervious shanty-shacks doesn't sound like realism to me. And I haven't played a Battlefield since BC2, but that was certainly an enjoyable gameplay experience.

Battlefield level destruction is only possible on small maps and even then it takes tremendous amount of scripting. Buildings will always collaps in the same way, walls will always break at the same spots and only in the parameters scripted for the wall. Syncing that online takes ressources too so in the end you'd worsen the performance of an already struggling engine and game. There are more important things and more realistic things to implement.

Tank-impervious shanty-shacks are a necessary evil we have to take in order to allow for other mechanics and more important projects.

Bad Company 2 had pretty large maps and great destruction though.

I'm not talking about scripted Battlefield stuff, I'm talking about like, man I don't know, those CSS minigame maps where you jumped across precarious sand-colored platforms while two players shot at you and made your platforms fly away and topple. True freedom.

BC2 had that building that would always cave in the same way & that's all I remember.

>but a 30mm would go through that like butter

You're a retard. Stop trying to be /k/ when you don't know shit

Unless you're a life/koth/wasteland/zombie plebeian trash.

Arma 3 is far more dead than Squad.

>Bad Company 2 had pretty large maps
Is this a joke? The Maps are tiny as fuck and mostly consists of a heavily limited actual play-area.

>Great destruction
It's mostly the same objects getting destroyed in the same scripted ways over and over again. A building would have multiple segments of walls that all behaved the same. It was very simple in its core.

You mean the maps that had a 1x1 squares that would suddenly pop out of existance when you shot it? Not comparable with actual destruction.

Delusional Squadfag. Enjoy your dead game.

Constant full servers 24/7

Why is obvious shilling okay if it's not a console game?

tfw you bait fellow squad bros for the free bumps

sorry lad

Why the fuck would a building, walls made out of thin metal, break apart if pierced by a 30mm armor piercing rounds?

I think you are the fucking retard

Is 3k not enough to get games going or something? What does this mean?

Isn't building destruction a planned feature?

>You mean the maps that had a 1x1 squares that would suddenly pop out of existance when you shot it?
No, those are glass maps. I mean this: youtube.com/watch?v=fn8uVdxlsFU

>Keeo Getting Shot At And You Literally Can't See Them: The Game
Yeah, nah, I'll stick to Insurgency.

>more players than red orchestra 2 / rising storm
>dead

you are fucking stupid you know that?

Arma fags are the worst, enjoy shooting braindead AI with the other autist in your military roleplay group

They weren't even big by battlefield standards. Play more games

Yeah, 3.4k people playing Squad.

How many people on Arma3 playing anything else than meme gamemodes the kind of liriks broadcast?

I've known a time on Armed Assault when Domination/Invasion modes were looked down upon. Nowadays it's as hardcore as Arma 3 can get without setting up a private session with a clan.

Is there a complaint any more indicative of being a scrub?

I dropped PR long time ago,but for me to buy squad it needs a proper collision system for guns
ala RO2

>hurr windows
>hurr where am i getting shot from
>hurr I'm bad at the game => bad game

This is you during the free weekend

Which is basically the same. Low detail objects popping out of existance when you shoot them. Are you actually comparing that to realistic building/cover destruction?

1. Denial & Isolation

Arma isn't really an option considering how it runs.

>Could we have that delicious and innovative map destruction if we make the graphics look like Half-Life 1?

As someone who's looked into the SDK (aka the full game's) coding.

In order to have destruction, you'd have to program it in. UE4 is more or less as versatile as Frostbyte.

However, you'd want to create a "Destruction system" that all assets that "can be destroyed" inherit from. Probably by using masking of some sort to save on processing power.

They however are working on a new animation system.

Dunno man. Roughly the same amount of people is still playing ArmA 2 OA. Maybe that should give you an idea how dead your game is.

3k is plenty of players. I don't like squad, I don't play squad, I don't own squad. 3k players is plenty to find a low ping high playercount server in any game.

Damn the memories. After I finished college and lost touche with all my CSS comp buddies, I spent at least two hundred hours logged in on CSS Beta because for some reason it had those great servers just running MG and Deathruns.

They don't, "pop out of existance(sic) when you shoot them." The floor of the map kills players who fall. When the platforms get knocked away, they disappear so players can't hold up the game by clinging to some barely-holding-on platform cocked against the side of the map. And mind you that CSS doesn't do moving platforms very well. It's merely the first thing I thought of when I think of my idea. Don't you want to innovate? Be creative for once.

>decide that public gamemodes are cancer
>try to join a milsim group
>download 100 gazillion GBs of mods
>group only plays once on a weekend
>probably shit missionmakers
>probably shitty performance because of shit mission makers
>power tripping retards
>find a decent group
>they only play co-op
>everyone bitches and moans when an occasional PVP is played, because everyone is only used to brain dead AI
>MILITARY SIMULATION

webm related

again, how is Squad dead when it has more concurrent players than Red Orchestra 2, or all milsim groups playing arma 3 combined?

2. Anger

ArmA is Second Life with a military theme

Same thing...

People playing Wasteland, Life, DayZ.

You have a two digit IQ but you can check it yourself on gametracker.

Don't even bother answering, you're too pathetic.

...

Reply in my thread again when you can do more than meme tier replies, here is your (You)

Don't worry. One day you will be able to accept it.

>>find a decent group
>>they only play co-op
>>everyone bitches and moans when an occasional PVP is played, because everyone is only used to brain dead AI


Hmm, I wonder what group that is.

Every Arma milsim group ever? I legit can't find a group that does regular PVPs

Any news when the new anims, bipod and free look coming? That's all I'm waiting to get back into it.

Right now the game feels too clunky. I hope to see vast improvements in the way the inventory and weapon switching works. Playing medic is a pain in the ass and switching between items feels awful. This shouldn't need to feel as clunky as PR BF2...

ideally Squad would motivate BI to make ArmA 4 an actual functional game but in all honesty I doubt it as mod shitters will probably sustain them for life

In order to PVP correctly you'd need atleast 64 players.

The best arma 3 group at its height barely got there.

I had really fun PVPs in Arma 2 with United Operations, they did event with 120 players total fighting a russian clan, shit was a m a z i n g. To bad, they are the definition of milspergs.

>What would it need for you to switch from Project Reality to Squad?

Why bother switching to Squad when ARMA exists?

Larger maps, mainly.

as someone who played PR, I would need as good of if not better squad communication, the same multiple chats, squad chat, team chat, proximity chat, and squad leaders chat. and maps and shit ,

>Arma
>15 year old engine held together by ducttape
>netcode with constant desync
>awful vehicle physics in multiplayer

Arma simply is shit for any kind of PVP

>3.4k players only
yeah , and , so , what ?

literaly this

/thread

I enjoy playing the game at 60fps, something arma 3.

It'd have to buy me a non-potato computer.