Development Blog & Reveals

[doln 10]

Please try not to put much stock into what metalcraze says, he is in his own little world a lot of the time.

I really hope we get more than 1 jet per faction

---------- Post added at 19:27 ---------- Previous post was at 19:26 ----------

language_f, search "missile","Zephyr", "ASRAAM", "MK82" and "GBU12"

Those are all weapon names.

[trent 14]

language_f, search "missile","Zephyr", "ASRAAM", "MK82" and "GBU12"

Ah, those. They actually do list the units that use them. Zephyr is used by the Kasatka, ASRAAM appears on the Comanche, the L-159 and F35 both use the Mk82s and GBUs.

[f27sharps 1]

Ah, those. They actually do list the units that use them. Zephyr is used by the Kasatka, ASRAAM appears on the Comanche, the L-159 and F35 both use the Mk82s and GBUs.

If search more in this file you will find that ASRAAM is short range AA missile, there is also a long range one, and you find 2rnd and 4rnd of both missile. The same for bombs. You can find a pod in 20 mm caliber with 300rnds which probably use by a plane.

[instagoat 133]

i generally personally agree but that's still a very narrow perspective. i have a lot of friends that have no idea how to make scripts or even use the editor to its full extent. i also find it not a positive thing how BI seems to rely on modders more and when it comes to interesting features and good content. especially when i look at the tools they provide. if they would advertise it like gmod and give us all the power it would be different. otherwise it's just PR sugar coating. to me, eventhough i never finished it, the arma 2 campaign and the whole scenario was a very important part to draw me into the world and not make it feel like a tech demo.

and eventhough the last campaign i enjoyed was resistance, i still have high hopes for the arma 3 campaign. i thought the sandbox term was also very much related to the openess (open worldness) the campaign was supposed to offer this time.

Well, it is more about what the game theoretically offers, not necessarily what people actually end up doing with it. I agree about the tools, there have been many, many complaints about their quality for years. BI said they´d provide new ones at release, though, but if they´re so much under pressure that they toss out the campaign, I suspect the modding community will not see those tools at release either.

I think complete sandboxing in a campaign is bad games design, but Arma has always been about an open and free approach, where success or failure was entirely the players responsibility, and not down to the forced nature of the mission design. But in the end, you always have an objective in a campaign mission, and if you want to achieve that you need to do things a certain way. An example is the mission in resistance where you go to the Villa in the middle of the fields on the eastern coast to listen in on the soviet officers meeting there. Going in guns blazing would not only screw up the mission objective, but it would get you killed.

For the community to grow, the tools need to be better, though. The hurdles to get content in are rather too high for the average person with the average attention span and dedication to get in. No matter what the modders say, I think everyone who has gotten into modding Arma in their free time put up a lot more effort and dedication than the average person reskinning CoD, for example. And in general, if BI wants a healthy and active modding and mission building community, the tools with which to get content ingame need to be made up to scratch.

Because without a community to sustain the game, it will tank rather quickly. re Red River. This is especially critical because the series has been around for ten plus years, and many really, really oldtimers are by now moving on. That will change the modding landscape, and right now I heavily doubt that we will see a modding scene as diverse as it was during OFP times, or even Armed Assault times.

No lega warz, AK-wielding vampire wizards, Iraqi tank battles and hyper-realistic infantry mods galore unless people can get in reasonably easy, considering the changed type or person that is buying these games today, as opposed to ten years ago.

[doln 10]

If search more in this file you will find that ASRAAM is short range AA missile, there is also a long range one, and you find 2rnd and 4rnd of both missile. The same for bombs. You can find a pod in 20 mm caliber with 300rnds which probably use by a plane.

The L-159 uses a 20mm gun pod.

[f27sharps 1]

The L-159 uses a 20mm gun pod.

I Know

[instagoat 133]

By the way, does anybody by now have a clue what CSAT stands for.

Central South Asian Treaty?

[ck-claw 1]

By the way, does anybody by now have a clue what CSAT stands for.

Central South Asian Treaty?

This has been discussed else where, there were many suggestions-my best was:- Cider Supping Assault Team :bounce3:

[trent 14]

If search more in this file you will find that ASRAAM is short range AA missile, there is also a long range one, and you find 2rnd and 4rnd of both missile. The same for bombs. You can find a pod in 20 mm caliber with 300rnds which probably use by a plane.

Actually the long-range AA missiles are more likely to be mounted on the Tunguska type vehicles, though CAP versions of the two jets are also possible. And I think it's the L159 that uses the machine gun pod. Unfortunately none of that indicates there'll be more than the two known aircraft.

[Wiki 1558]

Well, it is more about what the game theoretically offers, not necessarily what people actually end up doing with it. I agree about the tools, there have been many, many complaints about their quality for years. BI said they´d provide new ones at release, though, but if they´re so much under pressure that they toss out the campaign, I suspect the modding community will not see those tools at release either.

I think complete sandboxing in a campaign is bad games design, but Arma has always been about an open and free approach, where success or failure was entirely the players responsibility, and not down to the forced nature of the mission design. But in the end, you always have an objective in a campaign mission, and if you want to achieve that you need to do things a certain way. An example is the mission in resistance where you go to the Villa in the middle of the fields on the eastern coast to listen in on the soviet officers meeting there. Going in guns blazing would not only screw up the mission objective, but it would get you killed.

For the community to grow, the tools need to be better, though. The hurdles to get content in are rather too high for the average person with the average attention span and dedication to get in. No matter what the modders say, I think everyone who has gotten into modding Arma in their free time put up a lot more effort and dedication than the average person reskinning CoD, for example. And in general, if BI wants a healthy and active modding and mission building community, the tools with which to get content ingame need to be made up to scratch.

Because without a community to sustain the game, it will tank rather quickly. re Red River. This is especially critical because the series has been around for ten plus years, and many really, really oldtimers are by now moving on. That will change the modding landscape, and right now I heavily doubt that we will see a modding scene as diverse as it was during OFP times, or even Armed Assault times.

No lega warz, AK-wielding vampire wizards, Iraqi tank battles and hyper-realistic infantry mods galore unless people can get in reasonably easy, considering the changed type or person that is buying these games today, as opposed to ten years ago.

I kind of disagree witcha:

I like the campaigns in games because it tells a story.

It (IMO) MUST BE driven and scripted, and even if ArmA is a wide open world, it is adapted to it.

In general, the briefing explains quite well how to fulfill the objective, and I think people are clever enough to follow the orders (especially in a milsim in which we play a soldier - as IRL, soldiers must follow orders).

[Varanon 892]

Could we maybe at least stop the insulting ? Thanks

[sqb-sma 66]

I kind of disagree witcha:

I like the campaigns in games because it tells a story.

It (IMO) MUST BE driven and scripted, and even if ArmA is a wide open world, it is adapted to it.

In general, the briefing explains quite well how to fulfill the objective, and I think people are clever enough to follow the orders (especially in a milsim in which we play a soldier - as IRL, soldiers must follow orders).

• If the story is of the caliber of OFP, having it in the game on launch will massively help the review score
  
• If the story is of Arma 2 caliber then I wouldn't mind not having it at all.
  

[rehtus777 10]

Call me a "Fanboy" .... call me what you will, but I love Bohemia Interactive and ArmA 3 (and this is only Beta...about 1/10th of what is to come in game - Vanilla). I trust this Company and their decisions; I love the Community and their ability to make Mods (ACE, ACRE, Weapons, Planes, etc). Even "IF" this turns out to be like ArmA 2 (but with better game mechanics / Radio Voices), then I'm gonna be happy as a Lark. Why change something if it isn't broken (referring to the "Game Play"). But I'm sure ArmA 3 is gonna be the Next Level for the Series.

To Bohemia Interactive: Please don't take to heart the "naysayers". Please keep plugging away at this fine "Sandbox" game. I believe Ivan Butchta once said (Paraphrased): "ArmA 3 is not the complete dream or final reality I have in mind....but we are getting close." I believe what Ivan was saying here is that the Hardware / Technology is not quite here yet to make the "PERFECT" simulator that he has dreamed of in his mind. But he said that ArmA 3 is gonna be close. So, I want BIS to know that we support you and that we want to keep Ivan's Dream alive for ArmA 4...... again, most of us who play your game appreciate what you are doing and we thank you for it.

*Note* - As for my "Simulator" comment earlier..... I like to call it a "Simulator" because I'm 46 years old. I don't like calling it a "Video Game" and lumping it in with COD or BF3. Also, when people ask me what I do in my spare time, I say: "I play a military simulator on my PC" ....this catches their attention and they ask about the "Simulator". Also, it gets me off the hook by NOT having to say, "I'm 46 and I play a video game" :p

Edited August 5, 2013 by rehtus777

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

I think people are expecting far too much at release, remember it will be continually developed like Arma2 was and there will be further official addons released on Steam and the community addons will catch up. The original Arma2 was OK, it became great with the release of Arrowhead, British Armed Forces and PMC. Patience.....there are years of fun developments to come.

[dale0404 5]

Call me a "Fanboy" .... call me what you will, but I love Bohemia Interactive and ArmA 3 (and this is only Beta...about 1/10th of what is to come in game - Vanilla). I trust this Company and their decisions; I love the Community and their ability to make Mods (ACE, ACRE, Weapons, Planes, etc). Even "IF" this turns out to be like ArmA 2 (but with better game mechanics / Radio Voices), then I'm gonna be happy as a Lark. Why change something if it isn't broken (referring to the "Game Play"). But I'm sure ArmA 3 is gonna be the Next Level for the Series.

To Bohemia Interactive: Please don't take to heart the "naysayers". Please keep plugging away at this fine "Sandbox" game. I believe Ivan Butchta once said (Paraphrased): "ArmA 3 is not the complete dream or final reality I have in mind....but we are getting close." I believe what Ivan was saying here is that the Hardware / Technology is not quite here yet to make the "PERFECT" simulator that he has dreamed of in his mind. But he said that ArmA 3 is gonna be close. So, I want BIS to know that we support you and that we want to keep Ivan's Dream alive for ArmA 4...... again, most of us who play your game appreciate what you are doing and we thank you for it.

*Note* - As for my "Simulator" comment earlier..... I like to call it a "Simulator" because I'm 46 years old. I don't like calling it a "Video Game" and lumping it in with COD or BF3. Also, when people ask me what I do in my spare time, I say: "I play a military simulator on my PC" ....this catches their attention and they ask about the "Simulator". Also, it gets me off the hook by NOT having to say, "I'm 46 and I play a video game" :p

I love your optimism buddy, I really do. I was one of those people bashing BIS over the news that the campaign is not going to be released until after the main game releases. It really pissed me off that this news got out via a 3rd party and the fact that there was no explanation (at the time) as to why. I hope the blog about the whole thing that is coming (hopefully today) to explain this choice allays any fears that I may have.

I have some good new about the campaign (and I quote), "the campaign will be released, soon after release."

[R0adki11 3949]

This is a polite request, please keep any insults to other members out of this thread and not on the forums.

Thanks

Rk

[windies 11]

I think people are expecting far too much at release, remember it will be continually developed like Arma2 was and there will be further official addons released on Steam and the community addons will catch up. The original Arma2 was OK, it became great with the release of Arrowhead, British Armed Forces and PMC. Patience.....there are years of fun developments to come.

Expecting single player content at release is expecting too much....

I get they have their reasons, that's fine. But releasing something with the promise that it will come later is walking a fine line. It opens up the door later on for there not to be a campaign, or for decisions to be made to release half a campaign then a DLC with a full campaign so the contractual obligation to have a stock campaign is fulfilled. It's just not a good road to go down.

Reviewers are going to eat the game alive if there is no campaign, I mean lets face it this game isn't BF3 or any type of mainstream multiplayer FPS. The multiplayer in ArmA isn't the easiest to get into. You have your choice of wasteland, wasteland, wasteland or domination with 20 people running around in their underwear with 20 M320's or GM6 Lynx's and 500 magazines in their Bergen Sack. You pretty much HAVE to find a group to play with on a closed server and that generally means mods. Even a lot of public servers require mods and again it just leads to a cumbersome environment of having to find what server you want to connect to, figure out what mods you need, either enable them all or go download them if you don't have them from a 3rd party site. Again it's something that people who are used to it, know what they are doing. It's a very cumbersome experience though for new blood that's not used to it and doesn't have easy access to websites of where to get mods and such. Also with the huge performance hits in multiplayer for pretty much having more than 5 people in a server or having more than 2 AI active in a mission, I foresee single player being the bread and butter of ArmA 3 for awhile after launch.

I actually think our expectations have gotten lower with every release, because we expect more bugs and more missing content and nonworking feature's and we create excuses for it and justify why it had to happen and we just perpetuate the cycle. There's nothing like the age old, "Oh the community can fix that for you BIS!" statement every time a cut feature is discussed or there's some feedback suggested. It's reaching a point where some people start to ask the question "Why?" and there's really no good answer other than poor planning, poor execution, and poor management with a poor set of priorities. Development seems to get worse with every release more-so than it gets better and I think that is what people are starting to realize and question.

[rehtus777 10]

I love your optimism buddy, I really do. I was one of those people bashing BIS over the news that the campaign is not going to be released until after the main game releases. It really pissed me off that this news got out via a 3rd party and the fact that there was no explanation (at the time) as to why. I hope the blog about the whole thing that is coming (hopefully today) to explain this choice allays any fears that I may have.

I have some good news about the campaign (and I quote), "the campaign will be released, soon after release."

I hear ya. Let's give BIS a chance. IMHO, they really can't disappoint me. Why? I love ArmA 2 and the Game Play. ArmA 2 came out 4 years ago. Technology has gotten better....the Dev's have gotten better.....so ArmA 3 is going to be better. I'm still in awe at the Eye Candy of the Beta and the Mechanics of the game. I'm sure Altis is going to look even better.

I'm patient. I realize that the game is going to have it's problems at the start, most all of them have bugs to iron out. ArmA 3 will be no different. As I said earlier, one year from now all will be forgotten / forgiven and ArmA will be humming like a well tuned engine - with the Modding Community making it even better. All is good, my friend.

One last thing: The 3rd Quarter will be coming to a close in 7 weeks. BIS is most likely going to keep its promise on the Final Release Deadline during the 3rd Quarter of 2013. With BF4 and COD releasing around Halloween and Christmas just around the corner, I'm sure they want to release the game in September....it makes Business sense for the Christmas Rush. I'd bet you $100 that they will release the Single Player Campaign in October or November before the Christmas Holiday.

Aim High

Edited August 5, 2013 by rehtus777

[Varanon 892]

One last thing: The 3rd Quarter will be coming to a close in 7 weeks. BIS is most likely going to keep its promise on the Final Release Deadline during the 3rd Quarter of 2013.

The gamescon announcement said you would be able to play a release candidate, so chances are that the release will be shortly after gamescon.

[rehtus777 10]

The gamescon announcement said you would be able to play a release candidate, so chances are that the release will be shortly after gamescon.

Good enough.

Side Note: Steam releases its new stuff on Tuesdays. Sept. 24th is the last Tuesday of the 3rd Quarter and that is only 7 weeks away ;) As for releasing it after Gamescom, I'm not so sure....usually they would have promo's and advertisement's all over the web weeks before the release, but nothing is out there right now. Also, I would expect Steam to put it on their "Coming Soon" in the Store....but no Dice, nothing is there at all. I'd bet Sept. 24th. is the Final Release.

[old_painless 182]

I am generally an optimist and have faith in BI to deliver a good game in the end. What worries me a bit about the Q3 deadline, is that Altis and presumably better MP will have to be in that release. And we have tested neither of them. As someone who tests (and develops) software for a living, this worries me. Two really big features coming up shortly before release, sofar completely untested by the community

[chortles 263]

The people that make excuses for the poor development of this game must not care about what they pay for or easily accept mediocrity.

Alternately, "and now you know why I paid only US$33 for it!"

**

I suppose my solution is pretty easy; I won't be touching the game until the campaign is out. The Beta is cool, but it seems a lot of the modding community is waiting for a more stable build with less under-the-hood changes before they start ramming out lots of new stuff. At the very least, gold guarantees a more fixed framework for the community.

In fairness, this was going to be the case re: "a lot of the modding community" whether or not this news came out -- as you said, "a more stable build with less under-the-hood changes" is what's lacking either way at the moment, it's just that now the definition of 'gold' in use here no longer implies a SP campaign.

**

That doesn't sound like it. From what the video said, there was no "if" attached. It said specifically that the campaign will not be in the final release, and it said nothing about the release being shifted backwards. There will be no campaign in the release version, it will come later.

I was referring to what NMDANNY seemed to believe, not what the video was saying.

A big PR failure, but seriously, with all the apologetic posts here (and ignoring the outright insulting ones), what I really don't get is how anybody can think indifferent or even positive about this issue.

As NouberNou, myself and others both on and off-forum have alluded to: we just don't have confidence enough in the quality of BI's campaigns to actually feel that we're missing much. :p Or rather, you had people specifically singling out all of the non-Cold War Crisis campaigns as poorly-designed, fatally buggy or otherwise lacking as part of the reason that they didn't feel bothered. For example: "If it's like the original OFP or Resistance campaigns I will play it. If it's like ArmA1 or ArmA2s then nope nope nope." Hell, just look at SQB-SMA's post: "If the story is of the caliber of OFP, having it in the game on launch will massively help the review score / If the story is of Arma 2 caliber then I wouldn't mind not having it at all."

Again, I, and a few others, aren't upset about the fact that the campaign is delayed, or the game would be delayed. What I am upset about is that they call it finished, sell it full price, and only promise to deliver the missing content later. I am upset that in spite of being known for ages, critical issues are being addressed at this late a point, causing content to be cut/delayed from the game. What I am upset about it that we always have to find out these things by accident, including cut features like the 3D editor (which, as much as some people like to deny it, was an announced feature listed in the 2011 E3 presentation). Yes, plans change, yes, circumstances force people to make hard decisions, I know. But there is a fine line before this is overstretched.

I'm just going to note that the 3D editor was not a "by accident" reveal, it came out in an interview with the prior project lead Dan Musil (I believe GameStar.de?) and it's simply that the current project lead has never publicly revisited his predecessor's decision; as for the rest, admittedly I'd find it interesting to see just how things went so awry, but it's pretty clear that design decisions were made and evidently some devs had different ideas as to what was "critical". To this day, I still find a certain remark of InstaGoat's on AI as of Gamescom 2012 very interesting...

**

Ok then, I was afraid of something like DayZ or Wasteland - as they're called sandbox too.

People can call them sandbox, but as said before that term's more often misused -- they're like the AAA games in being more "open world" than "sandbox", however complex, detailed and varied the range of possibilities within that "open world" may be.

**

Well, it is more about what the game theoretically offers, not necessarily what people actually end up doing with it. I agree about the tools, there have been many, many complaints about their quality for years. BI said they´d provide new ones at release, though, but if they´re so much under pressure that they toss out the campaign, I suspect the modding community will not see those tools at release either.

I distinctly remember BI saying that new tools would be post-release, I've never seen a promise of them being at release.

**

I am generally an optimist and have faith in BI to deliver a good game in the end. What worries me a bit about the Q3 deadline, is that Altis and presumably better MP will have to be in that release. And we have tested neither of them. As someone who tests (and develops) software for a living, this worries me. Two really big features coming up shortly before release, sofar completely untested by the community

It's been mentioned that Altis might appear on dev branch before release... no idea what you mean by "presumably better MP" so I can't possibly reply properly to that.

[old_painless 182]

As for the campaign quality they have hired some big guns. not worried about its quality. The delay alludes to a high standard. Altis will appear on the development branch, but somewhat late given the scale of this feature. As for better MP I assume that the current situation with fps problems is not suitable for the finished product. Therefore must be improved before final

[Wiki 1558]

Who is working on the campaign?

[instagoat 133]

Who is working on the campaign?

I think Karel Moricky (Gaia) is involved, and I also heard they have recruited some mission designers directly from the community at the start of Arma 3s development. Gaia was responsible for, among other things, Eagle Wing and the PMC missions.