03-27-2015, 11:31 AM
My take on the subject.
1. Psycho in every mission or not
I agree with Phantom: It's not necessary to have it in every mission. Short missions can do without it. Longer ones should give the player a second chance, so it's good to have... minus the bugs, of course -_-
2. Long walks vs. starting next to the objective
"Half of the fun is getting there". This applies to Arma in some sense as well. The question shouldn't be "are there long walks", but actually "is the player having fun/experiences the mission as intended".
A kilometer long walk with nothing happening is boring and does not serve any purpose. However, depending on mission design, it can be pretty exiting. It all depends on what the mission does with it's kilometer long walk.
Since Phantom brought in Operation Flashpoint, there are some good examples for this topic. Some missions are nothing but kilometer long walks. For example, "After Montinac", the mission that leaves you stranded in enemy territory with nothing but a rifle. This IS just a long walk. Another one, "Guardian", leading the convoy to the airport.
Others close with long walks, like "Saboteur", where you have to retreat to enemy lines after blowing up the tanks in the border zone.
There's no universal truth, it all depends on the mission and the intention of the mission maker. The only thing that should be a guideline is "Is the player enjoying the experience ?". An uneventful Sander-style 2 km march probably isn't. Evading enemy patrols while trying to leave the area is (or can be).
And as Alwarren correctly mentioned, searching an area you've started in for the last remaining guy is actually really shitty, and I would honestly trade that for a longer walk.
1. Psycho in every mission or not
I agree with Phantom: It's not necessary to have it in every mission. Short missions can do without it. Longer ones should give the player a second chance, so it's good to have... minus the bugs, of course -_-
2. Long walks vs. starting next to the objective
"Half of the fun is getting there". This applies to Arma in some sense as well. The question shouldn't be "are there long walks", but actually "is the player having fun/experiences the mission as intended".
A kilometer long walk with nothing happening is boring and does not serve any purpose. However, depending on mission design, it can be pretty exiting. It all depends on what the mission does with it's kilometer long walk.
Since Phantom brought in Operation Flashpoint, there are some good examples for this topic. Some missions are nothing but kilometer long walks. For example, "After Montinac", the mission that leaves you stranded in enemy territory with nothing but a rifle. This IS just a long walk. Another one, "Guardian", leading the convoy to the airport.
Others close with long walks, like "Saboteur", where you have to retreat to enemy lines after blowing up the tanks in the border zone.
There's no universal truth, it all depends on the mission and the intention of the mission maker. The only thing that should be a guideline is "Is the player enjoying the experience ?". An uneventful Sander-style 2 km march probably isn't. Evading enemy patrols while trying to leave the area is (or can be).
And as Alwarren correctly mentioned, searching an area you've started in for the last remaining guy is actually really shitty, and I would honestly trade that for a longer walk.