ArmA 3 on Steamworks?

[Alpha-Kilo 36]

Summary:

At the presentation of the PlayStation 4 in New York Sony published a list of developers who are working on projects for the Paystation 4. This list has been revised. The text mentions companies that were on the orignal list but aren't on the revised one. It speculates why these companies are not listed anymore and it mentions some companies that are on the new list but weren't on the original one. Finally it lists all European developers who are on the revised version. Bohemia Interactive is one of them.

That's all. There is no info whatsoever about the projects in question.

[iceman77 18]

Well sometimes Steam really sucks.

I just wanted to play Shogun 2 but steam told me that it has to convert the game files into a new more efficient format. This will take a few minutes.

Well, it just started to redownload the whole game @ 600KB/s

Ok, lets play something else.....I can´t klick on anything as long as this converting BS is running...FML

I like how the steam fanbois ignore your post Tonci. It's okay Tonci. Steam will let you play the game when steam feels like it! I mean who cares that you payed money for these games right!? Yeah.. steam is great! They even have it so you can jump through hoops before you can play. Don't you enjoy jumping through hoops? And these are the good hoops too, because you pay to jump through them!:239:

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Don't bother, some don't really understand how a business in the game industry needs to be run

Not sure if /sarc or not coming from you, but the point here is that only MP sells games today, as DayZ has shown.

Unless you're BioWare, of course. :cc:

[kilroy the nerd 14]

@Iroquis Or Skyrim, or Far Cry 3, or Sleeping Dogs... Only one of those even has MP, and I doubt anyone bought it for that reason.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

@Iroquis Or Skyrim, or Far Cry 3, or Sleeping Dogs... Only one of those even has MP, and I doubt anyone bought it for that reason.

The first two are longstanding sandbox franchises developed by AAA studios with AAA publishers - released on all 3 platforms.

You get what I mean. Red Harvest won't sell you 500k copies. Competitive MP (including CO-OP!) with proper community services ala BF3 - will.

http://arma2.swec.se/server/list

Only a small percentage of players asked for an offline single-player DayZ version.

[PuFu 4591]

Not sure if /sarc or not coming from you, but the point here is that only MP sells games today, as DayZ has shown.

This time around i wasn't being sarcastic at all. Some have been living in the past, and for whatever reason cannot grasp that techology has evolved, the internet has evolved as well, and with those, the gaming industry. This is not 2001, and BIS needs to secure some sales, and have a product that runs well in MP from the get-go, and that means an improved MP server browser (fav servers, friends etc etc), as well as incorporating the community content. Things like: you cannot join this server. file xxx_yyy.pbo is missing should actually be a thing of the past (at least i hope).

---------- Post added at 00:52 ---------- Previous post was at 00:50 ----------

@Iroquis Or Skyrim, or Far Cry 3, or Sleeping Dogs... Only one of those even has MP, and I doubt anyone bought it for that reason.

Point is, do you still play Far Cry 3? Because, as far as i am concerned (and everyone i know that owns FC3), as soon as they have finished the campaign and there was nothing else to do with it (bar the stupid MP part, which is just that...stupid), dumped it, no matter how many (i'll try and call them) mods and DLCs have been announced.

Do you think Bi wants the same development cycle for A3?

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

This like: you cannot join this server. file xxx_yyy.pbo is missing should actually be a thing of the past (at least i hope).

I hope it's being improved to the point that the player doesn't have to know what a .pbo is. There's the mod description, there's 20 servers with 50 people each playing it - he wants there, and he better end up there.

Redundant complexity shaves off whole populations to the point that we're left here with 430 votes in this poll.

Some stats: http://arma2.swec.se/server/list - Players Online: 19057

http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

Borderlands 2 - Current: 10,670, Peak today: 17,527 (Is Borderlands 2 steam exclusive?)

Call of Duty: Black Ops II - Multiplayer - Current: 18,670, Peak today: 70,024

ArmA II Op: Arrowhead is there with 5k/8k with 1 spot below COD: MW3 & Planetside 2, but that's only Steam.

Edited February 25, 2013 by Iroquois Pliskin

[jefferspang 2]

Are you privy to their balance sheet? I only know that ArmA II didn't sell "well" before DayZ, and I, myself, was a witness to lack of MP servers well into the game's lifespan, which had since disappeared, courtesy of DayZ.

Trust me, a 225 km^2 map zombie game goes a long way in this world, since it is running on a unique engine.

Those whole 151 and a half persons, myself included? They will buy ArmA III regardless. Know why? Because it's the same game, as OFP, Armed Assault, ArmA II was - with a lot of polish on top.

Again, show me the balance sheet and their expected sales number, under the condition* that ArmA III would be released just the same way as ArmA II had been - obscure retail, Sprocket & Steam, while featuring, more or less, the same multiplayer features. Without Steam integration, they wouldn't be able to retain enough people to call the game "Successful".

Dude, what statement? It's business, nothing personal - if it was unprofitable to release ArmA III under the old conditions, then it was unprofitable - end of story. Be glad it's coming out at all.

Customer is always right in the way that said customer may walk out of the store, but if people start insulting the store owners and trashing their property -- Wee-ooo-wee-ooo, here comes the police.

*Don't forget what happened in September, along with renaming of Lemnos to Altis. (There's a good reason for that, albeit political one, which I won't discuss here)

No? You said that Bohemia Interactive's resources are stretched so therefore I pondered if you knew something that we didn't know (are BI on the verge of bankruptcy?) and now you ask if I have "privy to their balance sheet"? Let me get this ironed out. You made the claim that Bohemia Interactive can't afford to stretch their resources further so I would like to know do you have any evidence to back that up (AKA are YOU privy to their balance sheet?). Since ArmA is regarded as an average consumer Military Simulator more than a FPS, you can say that they are appealing to a niche market, definitions of successful sales are subjective since there are nearly no competitors in the average consumer Military Simulator market to compare sales unless you count FPDR

DayZ standalone hasn't happend yet, no one can tell. You have your opinion, I have mine, we'll just see.

It's common sense. DayZ happend by accident and it was well into the development of A3. It's safe to assume before DayZ, the ArmA series contributes a significant percentage of their revenue. By the time they realize the potential of DayZ, they would've invested too much resources into A3 to call it quit (not to mention the sunk cost involved). So yeah it's pretty essential for Bohemia to push out ArmA 3 regardless even if it isn't profitable, the revenue gained will atleast absorb some of the sunk costs to make the failure less damaging.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Let me get this ironed out. You made the claim that Bohemia Interactive can't afford to stretch their resources further so I would like to know do you have any evidence to back that up (AKA are YOU privy to their balance sheet?)

Have you read their announcement and that part, where it says they wouldn't be able to release ArmA III in 2013 without Steam support/integration?

There's also a big difference in "I honestly think & They just can't afford statements -- the latter of which I didn't make.

Since ArmA is regarded as an average consumer Military Simulator more than a FPS, you can say that they are appealing to a niche market, definitions of successful sales are subjective since there are nearly no competitors in the average consumer Military Simulator market

Not sure what your definition of ArmA is, but it is an FPS. DayZ shows it, MP shows it.

It's not my problem you guys walk in tacticool 360 wedge formations all the time and then get quickscoped by a rascal with an SVD.

DayZ standalone hasn't happend yet, no one can tell. You have your opinion, I have mine, we'll just see.

And when it's going to happen, they wouldn't want DayZ dragging out ArmA III out of the red territory. Why not profit on both titles?

DayZ dev blog 1 posted February 6th, 899,967 VIEWS, 19k Likes -

DayZ dev blog 2 posted February 22nd, 174k views, 6.3k Likes -

See my point yet?

It's common sense. DayZ happend by accident and it was well into the development of A3.

And then that cycle got interrupted. They've adapted. We have Steam now. End of story.

Perhaps, there's a good reason why this channel has been inactive for 7 months straight - http://www.youtube.com/user/Arma3official

It's safe to assume before DayZ, the ArmA series contributes a significant percentage of their revenue.

Sure, but if they went with obscure retail copies again with 7 different variations, the margins would be so low that you wouldn't see ArmA IV. Not without Steam anyway.

So yeah it's pretty essential for Bohemia to push out ArmA 3 regardless even if it isn't profitable, the revenue gained will atleast absorb some of the sunk costs to make the failure less damaging.

Cool story bro. You make an investment "just because" and then take a haircut of, let's say, 5-25% and walk away. Doesn't happen.

Edited February 25, 2013 by Iroquois Pliskin

[jefferspang 2]

Have you read their announcement and that part, where it says they wouldn't be able to release ArmA III in 2013 without Steam support/integration?

There's also a big difference in "I honestly think & They just can't afford statements -- the latter of which I didn't make.

Not sure what your definition of ArmA is, but it is an FPS. DayZ shows it, MP shows it.

It's not my problem you guys walk in tacticool 360 wedge formations all the time and then get quickscoped by a rascal with an SVD.

And when it's going to happen, they wouldn't want DayZ dragging out ArmA III out of the red territory. Why not profit on both titles?

And then that cycle got interrupted. They've adapted. We have Steam now. End of story.

Sure, but if they went with obscure retail copies again with 7 different variations, the margins would be so low that you wouldn't see ArmA IV. Not without Steam anyway.

Cool story bro. You make an investment "just because" and then take a haircut of, let's say, 5-25% and walk away. Doesn't happen.

So you assumed that their resources can't be stretched anymore because they said that they will only release in 2013 only with Steam? There are many explainations for this, maybe they're trying to maximise profits by pushing it out ASAP even if it means it'll require the use of an imperfect platform, that doesn't necessarily mean that if ArmA III is delayed, it will become a loss.

Yea, it's catagorised as an FPS but is it a substitute good to COD/Counter Strike? No chance in hell. Therefore it is unreasonable to compare ArmA to the majority of other FPS since the target audience is completely different. Also what are you on about 360 wedge ... irrelevant.

Yea but since when is delaying ArmA III automatically = a loss venture? What mathematical speculative functions did you use that convinced you that if ArmA III doesn't come out soon, it will such a loss that DayZ's profit will have to subsidise it? I am fine with ArmA III with only one "version" - a non steam one. If BI can't afford to keep up with a non steam and a steam version, why not just drop the Steam one? I've never heard someone say they wouldn't buy a game just because it's not on Steam.

Your last line doesn't make sense, so let me just repeat what I've written. BI has invested X amount into the development of ArmA 3 and then realized it became unprofitable. According to you (which we're lucky to even get ArmA 3) if they dropped it, BI would make a loss of X amount. However even though its unprofitable, Bohemia decides to push out A3 and so the total invested will become X+x; x being the amount invested from time they realized it was unprofitable to day of release. By having any amount of revenue R, they can offset the potential loss. Would BI rather make X amount of loss or R-(X+x)? (Granted it's dependant on whether R<x or not).

I'm off to bed now, was nice to debate with you guys. Good night! :)

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

an imperfect platform

You mean the retail disk with Vanilla ArmA 1.0? For which you have to scour the Internets to get the latest 1.05, 1.07, 1.15 patches, applying them and getting 3-4 CRC errors in between, then having to re-do the installation after performing a dance-ritual in a dark room with a mirror and a candle?

No thanks, I'll take Steam.

[PuFu 4591]

Redundant complexity shaves off whole populations to the point that we're left here with 430 votes in this poll.

Agreed, especially when it comes to external game game mechanics (not that the game has no issues between input and outcome).

Some stats: http://arma2.swec.se/server/list - Players Online: 19057

http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

Borderlands 2 - Current: 10,670, Peak today: 17,527 (Is Borderlands 2 steam exclusive?)

Call of Duty: Black Ops II - Multiplayer - Current: 18,670, Peak today: 70,024

ArmA II Op: Arrowhead is there with 5k/8k with 1 spot below COD: MW3 & Planetside 2, but that's only Steam.

I do not agree with the comparisons. It is like comparing the grid or nfs user range with iRacing.

Since ArmA is regarded as an average consumer Military Simulator more than a FPS, you can say that they are appealing to a niche market, definitions of successful sales are subjective since there are nearly no competitors in the average consumer Military Simulator market to compare sales unless you count FPDR

while true, BI has always had a different plan for their games than your average 1 released / year cycle.

That said, even with a niche market, in 2013, it would be advisable for them to sort out most of the quirks regarding (at least) their MP part of their game. A game (be it FPS or simulator if your please) even for a narrower market could work properly and have more firendlier features in it. Not everyone is willing or has time to deal with community made tools (such as six) to get the game to work properly (as in being able to connect to a server).

It's common sense. DayZ happend by accident and it was well into the development of A3. It's safe to assume before DayZ, the ArmA series contributes a significant percentage of their revenue. By the time they realize the potential of DayZ, they would've invested too much resources into A3 to call it quit (not to mention the sunk cost involved). So yeah it's pretty essential for Bohemia to push out ArmA 3 regardless even if it isn't profitable, the revenue gained will atleast absorb some of the sunk costs to make the failure less damaging.

yes, but no matter of the funding they have (unexpected i am sure) in the late life cycle of A2, doesn't mean that funding has not already been covering wholes from previous development cycles for projects released after A2/OA. Indeed, afaik, A2 didn't sell bad, but not great by any standards before DayZ, nor has TKOH or CC for that matter. I don't get why some assume just because A2/CO sold pretty well lately at around 30Eus a pop, it means not suddenly Bi has money to extend A3 development cycle even more.

[viper[cww] 14]

Not sure what your definition of ArmA is, but it is an FPS. DayZ shows it, MP shows it.

This is the most retarded and untrue statement I've ever read on these forums.

Wiki

First-person shooter (FPS) is a video game genre centered on gun and projectile weapon-based combat through a first-person perspective; that is, the player experiences the action through the eyes of the protagonist.

I shouldn't even have to paste the above as everyone knows what an FPS is, yet it seems you need educated in what the genre is.

[Nicholas 5]

;2303571']This is the most retarded and untrue statement I've ever read on these forums.

Wiki

First-person shooter (FPS) is a video game genre centered on gun and projectile weapon-based combat through a first-person perspective; that is' date=' the player experiences the action through the eyes of the protagonist.[/i']

I shouldn't even have to paste the above as everyone knows what an FPS is, yet it seems you need educated in what the genre is.

The greatest thing about ArmA is that it can be any genre you want it to be. It doesn't matter.

I am quite happy to see ArmA III being integrated with Steam.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

I do not agree with the comparisons. It is like comparing the grid or nfs user range with iRacing.

It was a comparison of activity in the Top-20 titles on Steam, not genres. I've seen ambitious indie games break the mold in MP activity there, Chilvary: Medieval Warfare being one of them.

Thanks to DayZ, ArmA II is in that Top-20 as well.

---------- Post added at 03:14 ---------- Previous post was at 03:11 ----------

;2303571']This is the most retarded and untrue statement I've ever read on these forums.

Wiki

First-person shooter (FPS) is a video game genre centered on gun and projectile weapon-based combat through a first-person perspective; that is' date=' the player experiences the action through the eyes of the protagonist.[/i']

I shouldn't even have to paste the above as everyone knows what an FPS is, yet it seems you need educated in what the genre is.

Yes, you shouldn't, seeing as you've dug up a definition of what ArmA is. Thanks, we all knew that it is an FPS - for infantry at least.

[iceman77 18]

You mean the retail disk with Vanilla ArmA 1.0? For which you have to scour the Internets to get the latest 1.05, 1.07, 1.15 patches, applying them and getting 3-4 CRC errors in between, then having to re-do the installation after performing a dance-ritual in a dark room with a mirror and a candle?

No thanks, I'll take Steam.

Weird. Maybe if you took out the dark ritual part, you could install trivial arma patches... :rolleyes:

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Weird. Maybe if you took out the dark ritual part, you could install trivial arma patches... :rolleyes:

Search these forums for CRC errors and enjoy helping people, since you seem knowledgeable enough on how to install patches.

[iceman77 18]

Yeah because it's a very common occurrence right? Steam is definitely needed... that's the fix? LMAO. So instead of BI maybe fixing this minor issue, we clearly need steam to counteract this.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

.....So instead of BI maybe fixing this minor issue, we clearly need steam to counteract this.....

Just how minor was the issue? All I heard publicly was that the team had faced some difficulties and needed steam to save devepoment time and ensure a timely release. Can you elaborate on the small nature of this problem?

Redundant complexity shaves off whole populations to the point that we're left here with 430 votes in this poll..

yep.......that really puts a few of minor gripes about steam (my own included) into some sort of context.

Edited February 26, 2013 by Pathetic_Berserker

[iceman77 18]

I was being sarcastic. It's an uncommon issue when installing the game. Apparently, to some, steam is the problems savior. Anyhow, just a little friendly banter between pliskin & I. The whole "saving dev time" is the only viable excuse, that I've heard, about why we would need steam. Everything else, the whole steam social networking & game updates etc etc, can go in the wind. Those things simply aren't (or shouldn't be :rolleyes:) needed. It hasn't been so far. The community has managed just fine without steam for ~12 years. Any way you slice it, or try and glorify steam, it's an extra hoop to jump through for the user. Some of us don't care too much for redundancy, and it shouldn't be forced upon us if we choose to keep playing the series we've played for ages.That's the bottom line for most of the people who would prefer not to use the program. Also, I fail to see how forcing me to use steam will generate extra revenue. Can the persons who would choose to use steam (for other games or w/e), not see A3 available there? Where do I (we) come into play in generating this drastic increase in BI sales?

Also, there's plenty of loyal, able members of this community that could & would pick up any slack voluntarily...concerning dev time. I'd rather them reach out to the community than steam to help with dev time. While ofcourse those who prefer steam could still use steam... My2c.

Edited February 26, 2013 by Iceman77

[T.S.C.Plage 0]

Just how minor was the issue? All I heard publicly was that the team had faced some difficulties and needed steam to save devepoment time and ensure a timely release. Can you elaborate on the small nature of this problem?

Basically Steam is the reason why they needed extra time in the first place because they had to deliver a "special" version for them. It's also the main reason why there were that many hick-ups with patching everything to the same standard. The versions published elsewhere didn't have such problems AFAIK. So instead of getting rid of the cause or better staying away from the "thing" that caused all the problems they decide to solely go with it. :banghead:

The sales connected to DayZ must have blinded them.

/edit: @ SniperWolf: I read your answer but have nothing else to add about "polls". The question if you mods also checked the "yes" votes for tampering is legit in my opinion and wasn't answered before. At least as far as I knew. You've to excuse the little "side blow" in the question but it actually wouldn't be to far fetched that you (now as the decision was made) maybe turn a blind eye to that problem.

Edited February 26, 2013 by T.S.C.Plage

[pathetic_berserker 4]

@ Iceman 77 Ahh gotcha now. Quite right. I've never felt the need for anything like steam when playing Arma in fact I could add salt by saying that as I keep all the patches, I've never felt the need to be online to install or play.

But historicaly BIS have never been one to put all thier eggs in one basket unless its thier own so I get the feeling that BIS wouldn't have made this move without some very compeling reasons. Having to put up with steam anyway for other games, my interest now is whether it actualy does improve things compared to say SIX or has any effect on MOD development etc.

---------- Post added at 15:24 ---------- Previous post was at 15:20 ----------

Basically Steam is the reason why they needed extra time in the first place because they had to deliver a "special" version for them. .......

I don't think the A2 experience automaticaly translates to A3

[T.S.C.Plage 0]

..., my interest now is whether it actualy does improve things compared to say SIX or has any effect on MOD development etc.

It only has an advantage for lazy or unable people...and people like that don't belong into this game in my opinion. This isn't or better so far wasn't a falderal game.

[memphisbelle 99]

According to mods and addons.

I am playing Skyrim and know the workshop things...so does any game have the data files button to change, enable or disable mods?

I am not sure that I have ever seen such a button at other games of my steam libary...

secondly..once there will be another stand alone Game besides ArmA3, so I think the trouble will get started at its fullest. because Operation Arrowhead was installed directly in the Arma2 directory...for steam user it wasnt and they always had problems in MP or certrain A2OA Missions, because of proper mod loading...any experience from steam users in this matter?

Edited February 26, 2013 by MemphisBelle

[-Coulum- 35]

It only has an advantage for lazy or unable people...and people like that don't belong into this game in my opinion. This isn't or better so far wasn't a falderal game.

Why do people think that "lazy and unable people" shouldn't be able to give this game a good shot? Too mind, this is so backwards. You'd be suprised how people change once they fully discover the game.