Development Blog & Reveals

[Smurf 12]

Can we have a projection for the lighthing Dev's Diary? Time to get matters out of the shadows and show some eyecandy.

 

Hope all the development is going well and not slipping in some muddy terrain; The team should have a better navigation throught all the process by now weather things go well or not.

 

Regards.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

What are you playing at?

[graemeshute 218]

darksidesixofficial I think what smurf is saying is can he get a status update on the improved lighting tech promised by BIS for ArmA 3.

[broduz 71]

Can we have a projection for the lighthing Dev's Diary? Time to get matters out of the shadows and show some eyecandy.

 

Hope all the development is going well and not slipping in some muddy terrain; The team should have a better navigation throught all the process by now weather things go well or not.

 

Regards.

SOoOoOo......Navigating by stars and Spintires like ground physics is what  got from that lol :P 

[zukov 489]

a  new Tanoa's screenshot before christmas?  :D

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

a  new Tanoa's screenshot before christmas?  :D

Highly unlikely. Maybe sometime into next year.

[Wiki 1558]

Maybe some news about Apex as Christmas present ?

[theevancat 277]

SOoOoOo......Navigating by stars and Spintires like ground physics is what  got from that lol :P

 

As a West Point cadet currently stuck in the woods for the 187th day of land nav, I concur that navigation by stars is useful. I'm almost home!

[graemeshute 218]

ROFL theevancat

 

Though on a more serious note. And maybe its a bit speculation on my part. But, I have a nagging suspicion what we will get regards the Apex/ Expansion is maybe a very light mobile force. Maybe just some Marine raiders (MARSOC) and perhpas some PLA spec ops with equipment of irregular warfare.

 

My understanding Tanoa is very dense Jungle based Island. So I doubt we will see much if any new Tanks or APCs. So we are perhaps looking at a highly mobile force brought in behind enemy lines with the confirm VTOL and getting around on a Light Strike Vehicle.

 

On a more then what I expected list. I am hoping said CSAT and NATO get a texture make over for the Tropics regards to a Jungle camouflage, making mission creators have the possibility to play on this island with a large conventional force.

 

And then as a new faction(s) the Chinese PLA are the new OPFOR with supporting amphibious units and systems and US Marines with supporting equipment with everything from the canceled EFV or Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV).

 

The hardest guess work is when did they really start with Apex-more so units and weapons etc? Obviously if work began on units and models a year ago then we can maybe expect more. But if its only been 6 months. We may get a Lite more mobile Spec ops framework.  Thus what are they trying to do and what are they prepared to live without is also a factor.

[slatts 1978]

It's already been said (don't ask me exactly where :p) that Tanoa is not full of dense jungle. There are more open land and fields for bigger vehicles so saying tanks are off the list is misplaced.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

There is plenty room for any kind of vehicle in Tanoa. It would just mean a different tactical mindset to how they are used. When referring to the Expansion, you can't really place limitations on it. Bohemia already said it's going to include a large amount of content aside from the map. So vehicles, are likely to have a wide variety. Don't forget there's lots of water too, and with water ways like that, i wouldn't doubt a fast heavily armed Gunboat (no, not a cheap little boat with more GMG's and miniguns on it, i'm talking about a 30mm cannon, ATGM's, or even a 120mm strike/mortar. Who knows). There's also the fact they plan on fixing the tracked amphibious vehicles, meaning they could add in a handful of those too. The South Pacific is supposed to be heavily contested according to the campaign. So... we could get a chance to see some very interesting assets.

[Wiki 1558]

I dream of an AC-130J

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

How about fixing the stuff that is broken or needing to be optimized instead of "fixing" what isn't broken?

And the expansion island is gonna have fewer enterable buildings?  Isn't that just Chernorus.  Cherno feels pretty dated nowadays.  Because it is.

You guys had Arma 2 working pretty well at the end there, but this last patch is sad panda.  Sounds are all screwed up, and weapon sway is impossible.

Hey, wiki, we got locking drone cams now.  That's pretty awesome ;)

Bohemia Interactive need revenue to continue to update the game on a daily basis, which is what the Expansion is for. Not only that, but they'll be updating the game from now until Apex drops anyhow. Plenty of time to help BI fix what needs to be fixed. However, if it's not broken, i urge you not to try and request it fixed.

[zukov 489]

from my part, i would hope a serious improvement regard to some underwater structures with a underwater "endgame" MP mission

[graemeshute 218]

It's already been said (don't ask me exactly where :P) that Tanoa is not full of dense jungle. There are more open land and fields for bigger vehicles so saying tanks are off the list is misplaced.

It all comes down to how much time, artist and resources they are going or have committed to Apex. That is actual content being modeled, textured and rigged etc.

 

I am approaching this with some trepidation based on what content was developed for The Marksman and the Helo DLC. Not features as say Sling loading and FFV. But actual developed Models etc. I hope I am wrong very wrong. So it may be a whole lot or a streamlined light force.

 

I am willing to pay for for more. But I sincerely hope its not just a few bits and pieces. Its honestly like waiting for Christmas to open your presents. I just hope its not socks that no one wants LOL.

[drebin052 323]

I am approaching this with some trepidation based on what content was developed for The Marksman and the Helo DLC. Not features as say Sling loading and FFV. But actual developed Models etc. I hope I am wrong very wrong. So it may be a whole lot or a streamlined light force.

 

Helicopters was the only one that didn't have re-textured stuff used by all sides, which was a pleasant surprise. But that didn't last long as the copy and paste came back for Marksmen with the ghillie suits.

 

The constant mention of Light Strike Vehicles in the latest SITREPs makes me wonder if Apex is going to have just one or two model per vehicle category re-textured for all of the factions again...

[graemeshute 218]

Helicopters was the only one that didn't have re-textured stuff used by all sides, which was a pleasant surprise. But that didn't last long as the copy and paste came back for Marksmen with the ghillie suits.

 

The constant mention of Light Strike Vehicles in the latest SITREPs makes me wonder if Apex is going to have just one or two model per vehicle category re-textured for all of the factions again...

Again these are my worries. I have tried to express on various Social Media platforms owned by BIS. That I would be willing and more then happy to shell out if I was given a large expansion. I am sure the majority of the ArmA 3 fan base would aswell.

 

But what I am worried about is time saving and cost cutting with as you mentioned duplicated systems and no desire to make a comprehensive Expansion. It can be due to whatever reason. From lack of man power to costs involved in making more content to employing temporary developers and not having the financial resources to do so or it being cost prohibitive in the long term.

 

Let me again say I hope I am wrong!  The often used rebuttal for lack of content is use Mods. This is fine but often Mods themselves bring negatives-updates break mods. Mods not inherently always compatible with each other. Also is it the Modders responsibility to add aspects missing when obvious things are missing. This is debatable because I am sure someone can say ArmA 3 has enough for what you want to do. 

 

Hence my rather reserved feelings. I will no doubt buy the expansion and again would do so if it was on pre-order having seen no content from a Units or weapons etc perspective. I can maybe even say if the Expansion was lite; that EDen makes up for it. But that is my feelings based on the fact I use EDen a lot and Modders are constantly developing new content. Prime example is RHS with version 4 soon to be available. All this is speculation at best regards to what is in store with Apex.

 

There is only one way this can be solved but both Joris and Jay Crowe will not agree to releasing the Apex road map now. This is also maybe an issue for them. What happens if they released said plans and it does show limited content. Would ArmA 3 players collectively decide to not buy because the cat is out the bag regards to we just getting two new assault rifles. A new boat, a VTOL, a light strike vehicle and a re-textured unit or two. Would a potential market disappear if we found out early that Apex is limited?

 

Not to hi-jack this thread. But would you pay more if they promised more and said developer did show you the plans for it? Since ArmA 3 is more accessible as a mod-able game and more Community orientated. Should the Community have say on their development decisions and length of projects?

[zukov 489]

just Tanoa itself, worth to buy. With the new assets you have endless scenarios

[chortles 263]

As a West Point cadet currently stuck in the woods for the 187th day of land nav, I concur that navigation by stars is useful. I'm almost home!

Reminds me of how back before "meta-knowledge" of DayZ/Arma was widespread (read: back before there were publicly available digital maps for Chernarus to overcome the default lack of an equipped Map) there sprung up "how to navigate the stars" guides...

graemeshute, I see that you replied to Slatts so I'll just add that the Tanoa Reveal Trailer very much indicates how much room armored vehicles still have to "play" in -- the forests/jungles are broken up in part by roads, but at the periphery of or bordered by said forests/jungles you'll also find settlements, clearings, quarries, the airport and airstrip and seaport.

And then as a new faction(s) the Chinese PLA are the new OPFOR with supporting amphibious units and systems and US Marines with supporting equipment with everything from the canceled EFV or Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV).

Somewhere out there is a joke about however lower-spec the PLA's Type 05 AAAV/AIFV may be than the EFV was, the Type 05 actually made it into service and (as the VN16/VN18) export orders. :lol: Although it should be noted that the PLA also has some other amphibious armor options, though for Arma 3 purposes (considering the current issues with tracked vehicles) all too many of them are tracked... the main exception that comes to mind being the Type 08 wheeled IFV that appeared in Battlefield 4 as the "ZBD-09".

Speaking of export orders, if the devs don't want (hey, Apex's ETA is Q2 2016, I can't be too late to use present tense can I?!) to use real names for factions again even if only in-name (read: "NATO"), i.e. wanting to depict Chinese hardware but not the PLA-in-name, then the OPFOR could be an indigenous military of the Horizon Islands with "export variants" of Chinese vehicles.

Should the Community have say on their development decisions and length of projects?

Absolutely not; considering how wildly divergent and sometimes mutually exclusive "the Community"'s priorities are, trying to heed all of them (as opposedly to merely maintaining awareness of them and and accounting for possible reactions) would guarantee development hell. To quote Game of Thrones:

"Half the men will hate me the moment I give the order." "Half the men hate you already, Lord Commander. Do it!"

[graemeshute 218]

chortles I doubt it will be an issue if the community could vote more on major issues. I am not saying everything...this is about the Expansion. Like do you want a Lite, Medium or a Heavy Expansion. Factions are A, B and C. Prices are X Y and Z. Not assume everyone will be pleased with just 7 weapons in the Marksman DLC.

I have no issue paying more for more. I am even considering buying the Digital Deluxe Edition in hope additional revenue is plowed in development. What I do not want is the big bad boggie man of business maximizing profit and minimizing costs and we will give you a watered down Expansion because we want to make as much as we can. BIS is unique in regards it is very community conscious. Do not alienate you largest player base.

 

There was a Poll on the Marksman DLC on how BIS handles DLC's. I am not saying fine details can be left to the whims of said Community. But lets look at this. TankX tracked Amphibious support It shouldn't even be a debate. It shouldn't even be a situation of us "reminding" the developers we need this. people are asking for an internal fast rope system. The ability to remove the new fatigue mechanic. Yes I read there is some command you can use.

 

I am just worried with Tanoa-yes there is room for big vehicles. But BIS does the whole...well the Island is a Jungle technically...We didn't feel it was perfect setting for that, so there you go here are your pimped out army Jeeps with a .50 and and a AGL on it.

 

Why then even create a Jungle Pacific island if all it is gonna be used for its nostalgia  and "maybe modders can use this better than we can". I mean nostalgia because it has feelings of Jungle Beach invasion amphibious warfare. But if the developed Content doesn't support Amphibious warfare its basically just a prettier official non bugged Stratis or Altis island.

 

Perhaps the new bad guy is Australia...being close to that area LOL. But CSAT is an amalgamation of Arab states and Asian countries. It can only be North Korea, Russia or even a united Korea that is OPFOR. The other potential is China. Judging on the Asian faces included I think its Asian.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

chortles I doubt it will be an issue if the community could vote more on major issues. I am not saying everything...this is about the Expansion. Like do you want a Lite, Medium or a Heavy Expansion. Factions are A, B and C. Prices are X Y and Z. Not assume everyone will be pleased with just 7 weapons in the Marksman DLC.

I have no issue paying more for more. I am even considering buying the Digital Deluxe Edition in hope additional revenue is plowed in development. What I do not want is the big bad boggie man of business maximizing profit and minimizing costs and we will give you a watered down Expansion because we want to make as much as we can. BIS is unique in regards it is very community conscious. Do not alienate you largest player base.

 

There was a Poll on the Marksman DLC on how BIS handles DLC's. I am not saying fine details can be left to the whims of said Community. But lets look at this. TankX tracked Amphibious support It shouldn't even be a debate. It shouldn't even be a situation of us "reminding" the developers we need this. people are asking for an internal fast rope system. The ability to remove the new fatigue mechanic. Yes I read there is some command you can use.

 

I am just worried with Tanoa-yes there is room for big vehicles. But BIS does the whole...well the Island is a Jungle technically...We didn't feel it was perfect setting for that, so there you go here are your pimped out army Jeeps with a .50 and and a AGL on it.

 

Why then even create a Jungle Pacific island if all it is gonna be used for its nostalgia  and "maybe modders can use this better than we can". I mean nostalgia because it has feelings of Jungle Beach invasion amphibious warfare. But if the developed Content doesn't support Amphibious warfare its basically just a prettier official non bugged Stratis or Altis island.

 

Perhaps the new bad guy is Australia...being close to that area LOL. But CSAT is an amalgamation of Arab states and Asian countries. It can only be North Korea, Russia or even a united Korea that is OPFOR. The other potential is China. Judging on the Asian faces included I think its Asian.

Remember, China isn't a potential. They're a grounded force within CSAT according to the Campaign, and have helped develop the Katiba 6.5 (KH-2002 IRL as well)

 

Also, just because there' jungle, doesn't mean that we will get only light vehicles. There's plenty of reason that other heavy weaponry besides Main Battle Tanks would be added, and quite frankly, that would actually be amazing. What better to combat Amphibious landings than a Main Battle Boat, or a heavily armed VTOL aircraft of some kind? You never know, but realistically, there's plenty of military vehicles that can be made that we've never seen before in Arma, and provide for a whole new kind of gameplay. Fast, light infantry on land, while the air and the sea are patrolled and guarded by heavy weaponry. More static objects like D-30's? You never know. But BI have said the expansion is to be a large "Expansion" of the game, content, and features. A little trust. Hopefully sometime near Christmas/2016 we get a peak at Tanoa, or it's assets, or some more detailed info.

[sargken 286]

If you ask me they should come back to modern times an not this botched near future time its in.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

If you ask me they should come back to modern times an not this botched near future time its in.

But that's just it, it is in modern times as of now. There's just some things that BI do to make certain vehicles look... different.

 

The way i see it, is that BI are just using modern weapons systems. They're not really throwing in anything interesting. There's nothing really new, nothing really unique... I guess that pertains to the gameplay aspect. Though, Arma 3 is just the platform, the foundation. I hope the Expansion grows on the basis, and brings new gameplay opportunities, with more modern gear aswell.

[graemeshute 218]

Remember, China isn't a potential. They're a grounded force within CSAT according to the Campaign, and have helped develop the Katiba 6.5 (KH-2002 IRL as well)

 

Also, just because there' jungle, doesn't mean that we will get only light vehicles. There's plenty of reason that other heavy weaponry besides Main Battle Tanks would be added, and quite frankly, that would actually be amazing. What better to combat Amphibious landings than a Main Battle Boat, or a heavily armed VTOL aircraft of some kind? You never know, but realistically, there's plenty of military vehicles that can be made that we've never seen before in Arma, and provide for a whole new kind of gameplay. Fast, light infantry on land, while the air and the sea are patrolled and guarded by heavy weaponry. More static objects like D-30's? You never know. But BI have said the expansion is to be a large "Expansion" of the game, content, and features. A little trust. Hopefully sometime near Christmas/2016 we get a peak at Tanoa, or it's assets, or some more detailed info.

i cannot recall that caveat of information regards China. Its been a while since i replayed the Campaign. Maybe a year...at least the entire thing. I been too busy fart arsing-excuse my French.. with real life Work and EDen. Not that I doubt you. But pity if China isn't the new Blue -eyed poster child for OPFOR. The amount of propaganda existent in North Korea would be welcome in Game. 

 

Regards to what else you said. I maybe wasn't clear. I have no issue about large tracked vehicles, Tanks, MARPS or even APC's. Russia's new BMPT Terminator is really bad ass.

Perhaps even Cruise Missiles fired from a modern day destroyer would be also an awesome system to have in Game. I love variety. Half of my night is spent reading all I can about Military Gear. Keyboard Spec ops LOL.

 

BUT! My worry is BIS may say well Tanoa was conceptualized for a tight claustrophobic setting with a limited movement dynamic and a vision approach.Its best for infantry. We felt vehicles are secondary to that. We didn't feel a large mechanized units would work-cause its a Jungle.  So we kinda just terminated the whole mechanized unit thingy part of Tanoa. And then they say but PS. We have this new Spec Ops guy with a small drone that can fly around and spy on units-diversion. You not gonna miss those. Cause we gave you this new pistol that shoots Auto and Semi. Moving on.

 

I am also super excited about a large expansion. I just don't wanna feel that oh familiar hot feeling of oh well here is what feeling screwed feels like again. The expansion from the Graphical representation of the development time frame lists Q2 2016. I assume that is on Stable branch. http://arma3.com/news/arma-3-roadmap-2015-16#.VmcvBL9LVlg

 

When i first saw this a week or two back i was very curious regards the development of it. As it shows that its been in development from about April 2014. This is though very intriguing because to me it means two things. Work had started then and the expansion has a lot judging on the amount of time they have had to work on it...maybe . Or we sat around and discussed what we would like from that. Tanoa was developed for months. And now come mid 2015 actual getting down to brass tacks started, that is vehicles and weapons etc.

 

I can maybe close with this. To get leaked inside info on the Web on this is virtually impossible. You know a leaked HD version of a hot movie is leaked well before the movie premiers. Apex aint that. I have to really say no one has dropped the ball. The Tanoa accidental Web post wasn't really that bad since it was just a static image.

If I was well off i would honestly pay for a studio tour and ask directly So about that Apex thing..do you mind if i saw a bit of it. BIS has obviously a very close knit crew that will go down with the ship, before they sing like a canary LOL.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

i cannot recall that caveat of information regards China. Its been a while since i replayed the Campaign. Maybe a year...at least the entire thing. I been too busy fart arsing-excuse my French.. with real life Work and EDen. Not that I doubt you. But pity if China isn't the new Blue -eyed poster child for OPFOR. The amount of propaganda existent in North Korea would be welcome in Game. 

 

Regards to what else you said. I maybe wasn't clear. I have no issue about large tracked vehicles, Tanks, MARPS or even APC's. Russia's new BMPT Terminator is really bad ass.

Perhaps even Cruise Missiles fired from a modern day destroyer would be also an awesome system to have in Game. I love variety. Half of my night is spent reading all I can about Military Gear. Keyboard Spec ops LOL.

 

BUT! My worry is BIS may say well Tanoa was conceptualized for a tight claustrophobic setting with a limited movement dynamic and a vision approach.Its best for infantry. We felt vehicles are secondary to that. We didn't feel a large mechanized units would work-cause its a Jungle.  So we kinda just terminated the whole mechanized unit thingy part of Tanoa. And then they say but PS. We have this new Spec Ops guy with a small drone that can fly around and spy on units-diversion. You not gonna miss those. Cause we gave you this new pistol that shoots Auto and Semi. Moving on.

 

I am also super excited about a large expansion. I just don't wanna feel that oh familiar hot feeling of oh well here is what feeling screwed feels like again. The expansion from the Graphical representation of the development time frame lists Q2 2016. I assume that is on Stable branch. http://arma3.com/news/arma-3-roadmap-2015-16#.VmcvBL9LVlg

 

When i first saw this a week or two back i was very curious regards the development of it. As it shows that its been in development from about April 2014. This is though very intriguing because to me it means two things. Work had started then and the expansion has a lot judging on the amount of time they have had to work on it...maybe . Or we sat around and discussed what we wold like from that. Tanoa was developed for months. And now come mid 2015 actual getting down to brass tacks started, that is vehicles and weapons etc.

 

I can maybe close with this. To get leaked inside info on the Web on this is virtually impossible. You know a leaked HD version of a hot movie is leaked well before the movie premiers. Apex aint that. I have to really say no one has dropped the ball. The Tanoa accidental Web post wasn't really that bad since it was just a static image.

If I was well off i would honestly pay for a studio tour and ask directly So about that Apex thing..do you mind if i saw a bit of it. BIS has obviously a very close knit crew that will go down with the ship, before they sing like a canary LOL.

Hahaha, i hear ya. I mean, i'm not guaranteeing China has Opfor. I'm just saying that they're are a memeber of CSAT, within the story line. As to who will be in Tanoa as a faction, we wont know till BI want us to.