Do you want upgraded Arma 2 content?

[[GLT] Legislator 62]

And one more thing: as it is still possible there will be some update for A2, we cannot simply upgrade the A2 content, as A2 engine would not work with it, not understanding the new features, we would have to "branch: it first and basically have two distributions of it, one for A2, another for OA. Considering OA does not include A2 content, being standalone expansion, this leads to a distribution matrix close to nightmare.

True, but technically you can recognize if someone has A2 and A2OA installed as previous users mentioned. Then you truely could improve A2 for those who own A2AO.

Think of the other way around. AO only users would have one more reason to buy A2 and while A2 only users would be able to have seen their content upgraded after buying and patching AO.

A lot of people like how everything of A2AO, BAF and PMC fits together. Only A2 feels like a separate part.

[gossamersolid 155]

Something has changed meanwhile. Content creation (or adaption cost) has raised a lot. The unit models are a lot more complex, even unit configs are a lot more complex. Moreover, OFP:R was an expansion (you could not run it without OFP), while OA is a standalone expansion (you do not need A2 to run it).

And one more thing: as it is still possible there will be some update for A2, we cannot simply upgrade the A2 content, as A2 engine would not work with it, not understanding the new features, we would have to "branch: it first and basically have two distributions of it, one for A2, another for OA. Considering OA does not include A2 content, being standalone expansion, this leads to a distribution matrix close to nightmare.

Content creation costs have raised up? What we're asking for has already been completed in user created mods, so it can't be hard to do. We just want it implemented officially so people get what we were told, Combined Operations.

As for not being able to upgrade the A2 content, there's an easy way around this. That patch will only be installed on Combined Operations installs. Anybody who has combined operations will not run old ArmA 2 as they can get all the ArmA 2 content via the OA exe already.

If it was such a big problem and you guys knew about it, you should have sold OA as an expansion pack and not a standalone. You've created more issues for yourself.

[[GLT] Legislator 62]

@GossamerS:

Not everything can be done by the community. Model upgrades would require access to the MLODs. For example the backpacks that can be carried by units.

The funny thing is that some content of A2 already got AO feature because of the inheritance of the base classes like airplanes and choppers having countermeasures or USMC tanks having FLIR in gunner view.

[celery 8]

That's not a paid patch, that's an expansion pack. All patches for the game were free.

The main game is nearly unplayable both technically and mechanically because of bugs and deficiencies and only the expansion pack will fix the things that should have been alright in the first place. In practise it's the same thing as paying to get a patch for your bug-ridden game because the fixes aren't available without the expansion.

[Haystack15 10]

This makes the term "expansion" meaningless. better you had market it as "standalone" from the beginning as there is barely a point in mixing the ArmA II and OA units, especially in MP environtment.

It comes down to only two points here what users demand and expected...Add TI to the ArmA II units that have it RL and tone down the brightness of generic heatmaps.

Thats all and mods have done some of it already so it cant be that consuming.

Not True on all points,

By Definition Standalone Expansion means that you will be able to play the content without original or "Base" Content needed, But If the Original or "Base" has been acquired then the Standalone Expansion will Update the Base content as well. In some standalone packs if you do not have the original or other packs you can't use certain units or races contained in the other games in multiplayer nor single-player. ARMA II Operation Arrowhead follows these rules.

ARMA II Operation Arrowhead By Definition is a "Stand-Alone Expansion"

Content creation costs have raised up? What we're asking for has already been completed in user created mods, so it can't be hard to do. We just want it implemented officially so people get what we were told, Combined Operations.

As for not being able to upgrade the A2 content, there's an easy way around this. That patch will only be installed on Combined Operations installs. Anybody who has combined operations will not run old ArmA 2 as they can get all the ArmA 2 content via the OA exe already.

If it was such a big problem and you guys knew about it, you should have sold OA as an expansion pack and not a standalone. You've created more issues for yourself.

I Totally Agree with you,

I think that BIS didn't want to have the same kind of problems with ArmA when they made "Queen's Gambit". So many people said that it was not worth buying. So I guess that they didn't want to make the same mistake. But you are right on them not making it an Expansion instead of a standalone. ARMA II was great and they only reason why Alot more people are now really playing ARMA to begin with is because of OA got more Attention. That would of help ARMA II sales.

But Can't Change History until we have a Time Machine....

Edited January 14, 2011 by Haystack15

[gossamersolid 155]

I Totally Agree with you,

I think that BIS didn't want to have the same kind of problems with ArmA when they made "Queen's Gambit". So many people said that it was not worth buying. So I guess that they didn't want to make the same mistake.

Queen's Gambit didn't sell because it wasn't good. Resistance and Arrowhead sold because they were good.

[wormeaten 0]

Content creation costs have raised up? What we're asking for has already been completed in user created mods, so it can't be hard to do. We just want it implemented officially so people get what we were told, Combined Operations.

As for not being able to upgrade the A2 content, there's an easy way around this. That patch will only be installed on Combined Operations installs. Anybody who has combined operations will not run old ArmA 2 as they can get all the ArmA 2 content via the OA exe already.

If it was such a big problem and you guys knew about it, you should have sold OA as an expansion pack and not a standalone. You've created more issues for yourself.

Suma there is several things whot is not true at all and with such claim you publicly question on our intelligence.

1st production will not cost much more because 95% of work you already have done. All 3D models are better then in OFP but are the same in A2 and OA so no additional job just few configs mostly copied from OA and some additional textures for IR.

2nd BIS selling CO and announcing CO not A2+OA what it is actually you even get after installation shortcut for CO and OA separate. So where is that CO which you selling. Such policy is not fair to us faithful costumers of BIS products for example I spend 60€ for A2 and OA because I buy it first day of release and what did I get in return faults promises for CO and now they even questioning my intelligence by lies about reasons why not CO.

I already explain your bad decision from market and financial perspective you loosing money which will be more than good for covering all additional cost of such implementation. You will earn 5 or more times more money than cost are. It is your fault not our and to remind you BIS action not to do nothing about it but still advertising CO is against the law so not just that you show disrespect to your customers you are also breaking the law which protect customers from such behavior.

Once you lose market it is much more harder to gain it back and much more expensive than is the cost of doing such addon. you already lost more money than cost is and will be in the future.

[galzohar 31]

How about they raise the cost of Arma 2 to cover for the expenses? :P

[Beagle 684]

And one more thing: as it is still possible there will be some update for A2, we cannot simply upgrade the A2 content, as A2 engine would not work with it, not understanding the new features, we would have to "branch: it first and basically have two distributions of it, one for A2, another for OA. Considering OA does not include A2 content, being standalone expansion, this leads to a distribution matrix close to nightmare.

You have already "branched" since a increasing number of ArmA II units already got upgrades that Original ArmA did not feature, you even added some in a patch like TI for the "old" Apache and Cobra...also KA-52, AV8B and MH-60 has flares in OA but still not in ArmA II but all of them have no appearance in OA at all, like T-72 and M1Ax features are branched already bettween ArmA II and OA so this argument does not work.

[gossamersolid 155]

You have already "branched" since a increasing number of ArmA II units already got upgrades that Original ArmA did not feature, you even added some in a patch like TI for the "old" Apache and Cobra...also KA-52, AV8B and MH-60 has flares in OA but still not in ArmA II but all of them have no appearance in OA at all, like T-72 and M1Ax features are branched already bettween ArmA II and OA so this argument does not work.

That's very true.

It's insulting that you guys would treat us like idiots after the amount of time this community has been here keeping your game alive.

[Zipper5 74]

Keep jumping to conclusions and you're bound to break a leg.

[NoRailgunner 0]

What if BIS already making a bigger upgrade "Special Extended Edition" incl. all A2+OA updates + DLC's, new engine upgrades, new improvements and some other new or revised stuff? Something that will hit the off- and online stores late summer/fall 2011...

[Beagle 684]

What if BIS already making a bigger upgrade "Special Extended Edition" incl. all A2+OA updates + DLC's, new engine upgrades, new improvements and some other new or revised stuff? Something that will hit the off- and online stores late summer/fall 2011...

LockOn: Flaming Cliff 2.0

You pay for old content in a new package with a new version number.

I still can't belive that I did buy it since all the fixes in it were promised as a free patch before.

Really im already pissed off by this kind of selling patches by a few other companies...in this case I will cease my 10 year fanship for BIS games on the date this becomes a fact. I am already alienated by the "method" of releasing a full campaign and then cutting it in a patch.

Edited January 16, 2011 by Beagle

[dm 9]

Such policy is not fair to us faithful costumers of BIS products

Then go start a class action lawsuit. I'll see you back here when you either:

A. Dont bother

or

B. Get laughed out of the solicitors office.

I myself, as a faithful customer, bought it and played it. Rather than whining like a spoiled child on the forums.

Seriously, (and I really AM repeating myself far too often now) when did the "community" turn into such spoiled little brats?

The freaking #2 of the company came into the thread and gave a pretty candid response (pretty damn rare in games communities these days) as to why its not gonna happen, yet all you can do is call bullshit and cry about it? You people make me sick. :mad:

[Beagle 684]

Seriously, (and I really AM repeating myself far too often now) when did the "community" turn into such spoiled little brats?

In the Summer of 2002, back in the days when BIS gave us so much toys and new content for free in patches and updates. I guess we're a bit spoiled since then a began to think BIS is the "Jesus and friends" kind of a publisher in this cruel world. Well, its 2011 and today I know by myself that beeing generous and staying in business often do not work at the same time. Edited January 16, 2011 by Beagle

[Neopas 10]

I also want A2 content upgraded.Free patch is always the best ,no doubt, however a paid dlc is also within reason imo.

A 9€ dlc for A2 that would upgrade it to 1.5x and including anything desert camoed, for CO owners to be extra happy,doesn`t sound that terrible to me.

With OA Lite content for A2 and vice versa it would be ideal.

Of course I don`t know much (or anything at all) about what is technically achievable ,or about distribution restrictions but the developers do and

if I understood correctly the developer`s post, this is not possible,or wished for anyway .So in case it has to be an OA dependant content addition, then I fear that due to cost,A2 assets will have to be left behind.Hopefully what is easily upgraded will gradually makes its way to OA with free patches,and a dlc ,with improved content of similar theme ,will fill in the gaps.

Anyway what is important for us ,is for Armaverse to expand and fuel our fun.

Ok OA was advertised as kind of integrating A2 but Armaverse coninues to get core improvements ,alongside with variety,so 100% backwards content compatibility is not easy,we can`t have it all...free...

Edited January 16, 2011 by Neopas
punctuation

[[GLT] Legislator 62]

Well, lets put it together ...

1. A lot of people still care about A2 and its content and want it upgraded (free or payed content)

2. BIS is the only one of doing it right.

We can discuss endlessly but at the end of the day no one but BIS decides the future. Maybe BIS already decided to upgrade it one day but got no manpower right now. Maybe there are more important projects right now like a new expansion pack or new DLC which might be secretly developed.

Of course I would be happy as well as many others if the old content will be upgraded. If this is going to be paid DLC ... well, I might not be happy, but so be it, I'll buy it. I'm not into other games anyway :p

[Gunter Severloh 3949]

We can discuss endlessly but at the end of the day no one but BIS decides the future.

Yes indeed, but the paying customer in the end really decides, their money is thier vote. If BIS releases something be it a patch or DLC,

or even the next game in the series :pray: then the response from the customer I would think decides the next course of action.

Its like when they release a patch and announce it on the forums here, if there are problems or praises that feedback alone also

decides where they should and possibly can go.

I think demo's of soon to be release content be it s dlc or even the next game is imperative, even doing a an open beta testing and getting

feedback, of course Im sure that would take quite a few folks to cover all the reponses so you could then have a limited number of testers,

surely they have something like this already.

But for patches they do this already, release a patch and get feedback from the forums, if again theres problems or praises their sure to

read about and or hear, and this is important for them to know what they need to do next or at all.

I praise BIS for their efforts on keeping the game ever evolving.

Upgraded content yes I would patches I'm all for.

[max power 21]

Then go start a class action lawsuit. I'll see you back here when you either:

A. Dont bother

or

B. Get laughed out of the solicitors office.

I myself, as a faithful customer, bought it and played it. Rather than whining like a spoiled child on the forums.

Seriously, (and I really AM repeating myself far too often now) when did the "community" turn into such spoiled little brats?

The freaking #2 of the company came into the thread and gave a pretty candid response (pretty damn rare in games communities these days) as to why its not gonna happen, yet all you can do is call bullshit and cry about it? You people make me sick. :mad:

+ 1000000

This thread bears the distinction as the first thread since the 'Unleash the MLODs' to make me physically ill.

[Laqueesha 474]

They released Hearts of Iron III in an abysmal state and only the expansion pack gets the game in a state how it should have been in the first place.

The same could be said about ArmA II and Operation Arrowhead. :p :p

"They released ArmA II in an abysmal state and only Operation Arrowhead gets the game in a state how it should have been in the first place." :p :p

Edited January 17, 2011 by Laqueesha

[galzohar 31]

Something has changed meanwhile. Content creation (or adaption cost) has raised a lot. The unit models are a lot more complex, even unit configs are a lot more complex. Moreover, OFP:R was an expansion (you could not run it without OFP), while OA is a standalone expansion (you do not need A2 to run it).

And one more thing: as it is still possible there will be some update for A2, we cannot simply upgrade the A2 content, as A2 engine would not work with it, not understanding the new features, we would have to "branch: it first and basically have two distributions of it, one for A2, another for OA. Considering OA does not include A2 content, being standalone expansion, this leads to a distribution matrix close to nightmare.

While I understand that making thermal textures and making lasers/flashlights work can be quite an effort, I don't understand the argument about "standalone expansion" or "distribution nightmare". What's making it so difficult to include some replacement configs and whatever is needed, which will do nothing if A2 content is not running, as a part of an OA patch?

Of course that's not the main problem here. The main problem is that if BIS doesn't upgrade the content, the only way we would be able to have it is if the community re-makes that content from scratch, which is quite a lot more difficult than updating the existing content. ACE already has its own variants for many of the old A2 weapons and those ACE variants are obviously updated for OA features, but re-making units (soldiers/vehicles) seems like it's a much more difficult task and such replacement packs are likely to never see the light of day.

I'm pretty sure it would be much appreciated by the community to at least have the option to do the stuff that BIS can't afford and/or does not have the time to do.

[dm 9]

While I understand that making thermal textures and making lasers/flashlights work can be quite an effort, I don't understand the argument about "standalone expansion" or "distribution nightmare". What's making it so difficult to include some replacement configs and whatever is needed

Because to make thermal textures, lasers and flashlights work, you need to update the models. So how do you distribute that to players while ensuring at the same time you dont give away ALL of the A2 content to those who only have OA?

Put it this way, if you were selling 2 different things, and people were asking to get the features of product 1, in product 2, and the only way to do that was to ensure that you never made ANY money off of product 1 ever again. Would you do it? (You also have to assume here that you have bills to pay, wages to provide and countless other expenses that come from running a business and not a free-time mod team)

[metalcraze 290]

Because to make thermal textures, lasers and flashlights work, you need to update the models.

Have you heard about Anzins Weapons mod that adds working IR Lasers to AA2 models?

Have you heard about TGW Vehicle Fixes that add TI to AA2 vehicles that have them IRL?

Have you heard about ACE mod that adds fully working backpacks to AA2 units?

2/3 of a work needed to bring AA2 models to OA standards is already done by the community - what stops BIS from just adding fixes to a patch?

They don't even need to do anything because community already did it for them. The problem is that you have to force people to install these mods, but if those fixes are added to the patch they will become a standard.

The only things that aren't done yet:

- thermal textures

- working flashlights on AA2 M4A1s

and that's it.

[dm 9]

Have you heard about Anzins Weapons mod that adds working IR Lasers to AA2 models?

Nope, but since the models lack the proper memory points, I would expect that the laser originates from the muzzle and not the laser device?

Have you heard about TGW Vehicle Fixes that add TI to AA2 vehicles that have them IRL?

Thats optics and not the actual textures. To apply the textures you HAVE to update the p3d.

Have you heard about ACE mod that adds fully working backpacks to AA2 units?

Probably with attachto right? Sure it works, but its not the same basic system as OA uses.

what stops BIS from just adding fixes to a patch

Anything which requires p3d changes, thats what.

[metalcraze 290]

Nope, but since the models lack the proper memory points, I would expect that the laser originates from the muzzle and not the laser device?

It originates from the laser device

Thats optics and not the actual textures. To apply the textures you HAVE to update the p3d.

Yes, but one of the main complaints was that T-90 was inferior to T-72 - it was adressed by the modders.

Thermal textures is the only thing that was left. What stops BIS from updating P3Ds only for CO users? Include them in AA2 patch. They won't be shown in vanilla AA2 anyway.

Probably with attachto right? Sure it works, but its not the same basic system as OA uses.

Gameplay-wise it's the same. Animations are a bit off, but other than that it plays exactly like in OA's case

Anything which requires p3d changes, thats what.

Why the aforementioned fixes didn't stop modders from doing that stuff? And look they don't even release any AA2 content for OA as a part of their mods.

Modders can do this: http://i51.tinypic.com/9tog7l.jpg

but BIS can't?

Edited January 18, 2011 by metalcraze