Jump to content
Dwarden

Development Blog & Reveals

Recommended Posts

"During our project review last year, we significantly changed the direction of the project"

"A few assets seen in screenshots and other media were taken well before the project review, when Arma 3 was a different game."

It would be very interesting to see what game ARMA 3 was before the review, how was it different to what we have now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Should We actually worry at All about what kind of reviews Arma 3 gets?

Or should We worry how people who have no idea what Arma series is about, feel about the game after they have chosen to buy it?

Those total newbies to the whole Armaverse either like it or hate it no matter how "finished" the product is (from this point to near future).

We, as "veterans" are the most mean and strict critics the game will ever have. We know what to ask and what to hope, and to be disappointed if we don't get things like "weapon resting" or "fast roping" or "correct weapon sounds" or "'TOH'-flight model"s.

For a newbie, Arma 3 will be full of new cool things when they'll buy it on 12. day or later.

Well, people who have no idea what Arma series is all about will look to the reviews Arma 3 gets to decide if they want to choose to buy it or not. So yeah, reviews are kinda important. :)

After all - Yes.

Because we as fans know what the series is about. We know its potential. We know its weaknesses and strenghts. Of course, those thigns you mentioned are important to us.

But not for James from Akron, Ohio, who just checks when and then some better known magazines or websites and reads reviews. He just checks if the game has a good rating or not, and if yes, he is going to buy it.

I know that BI some-when stated that's not what they want, that they have their very own circle of fans who buy the game, but you can't ignore the mass of videogamers who aren't fully into a game.

But since DayZ and Wasteland, more and more people get into the ArmA series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After all - Yes.

And again ... why should We be worried?

BIS know what they are doing and where they are, it's their game. They know it won't sell as much as as the "hollywood"-war games, and their target audience is a lot smaller.

I don't care about "James from Akron" who buys games only if they are "90+/100".

But if he reads the review, reads about the nature of the game, reads about the bugs and flaws, but also reads about the unique experience Arma is, reads about continuing support and polishing, community and content that is on the way, about the mission editor and mods and how this game has a lot to offer for years to come, which, I believe the reviewers will write, ...and then buys the game, then "James from Akron" is cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What exactly was the increase in quality that came from having less units compared to those we saw in A2, allowing for the "inflation rate" for graphics?

Oh, I don't know, maybe you can take a look around and tell me :wink_o:

I think what most people overlook is that only one jet is a low number. It's normal to be disappointed, and I bet BIS themselves are disappointed they couldn't add more. What I don't understand is who people see the need to sell this as good news or as not an issue. It is an issue, one that BIS obviously wants to address but the timeframe and the "if" of that is questionable still.

Absolutely! I totally agree that one jet for the initial release is not enough and that the game should be postponed for it to be considered a "full release".

However our "should's" unfortunately don't dictate the reasons why the game has to be released which, as subtly hinted at, involve finances and BIS continuing to exist as it is atm. But we aren't entitled to know these reasons. It's an unfortunate situation but a situation which can't be changed. So why argue and lose one's mind over how the situation could have changed?

And sure, no matter what decision you put out, there are always people who like or dislike it. :rolleyes:

Nonetheless, it really isn't dramatic. The content will follow and as it's said in the SITREP it won't cost a cent. :)

And it's not just jets, we need transport planes too

Yes, absolutely. A cargo plane is very necessary for airborne forces or just transport!

But there's neither quality nor quantity.

Yes there is quality. A lot actually.

BIS will add the content that should've been there in the first place nobody knows when - I must be happy.

You don't have to be happy. You have to understand.

"Should" is nice and dandy. "Can" is a different story.

they have a biggest team in a history of ArmA

Perspective is a beautiful thing, isn't it? Yes, 70 people aren't enough to create the perfect combined arms simulator featuring all the things... There's a reason why other massive companies don't try to make a game like it. It's a immense and crazy endeavor.

Still, these people somehow managed to create it. With a game like Arma it's quite easy to forget the complexity and scale, especially compared to other games but in the end, there's only so much a small team can do in a given time.

If you want to continue to complain about how the development was interrupted by arrests, legal pressure which required storyline changes and errors made by the previous project lead, you have to ask yourself how far you'll get with it. Why not cut to the chase and understand that we're living in the moment were these things happened and are irreversible.

The game is coming along very nicely, people like to play it, they have fun and BIS will deliver you the stuff they simply couldn't finish yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, I don't know, maybe you can take a look around and tell me :wink_o:

I have to disagree with that. To me that easily falls within the expected graphical increase from a 2009 game to a 2013 game. Arma 2 assets had to go through the same increase yet they still managed more content than in Arma 1. New features like PiP and damage modelling aren't handled by the artists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to disagree with that. To me that easily falls within the expected graphical increase from a 2009 game to a 2013 game. Arma 2 assets had to go through the same increase yet they still managed more content than in Arma 1. New features like PiP and damage modelling aren't handled by the artists.

And I disagree with you. Increase in quality != graphical quality i.e. the vehicle quality increased in a number of ways, not just texture resolution and triangle number. The fact that PiP and damage modelling are not handled by the artists is irrelevant because one does not measure the quality of a vehicle in ARMA just by how beautiful and well done it is but also by how functional and immersive it ends up being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And I disagree with you. Increase in quality != graphical quality i.e. the vehicle quality increased in a number of ways, not just texture resolution and triangle number. The fact that PiP and damage modelling are not handled by the artists is irrelevant because one does not measure the quality of a vehicle in ARMA just by how beautiful and well done it is but also by how functional and immersive it ends up being.

They still have many of the A2 flaws eg: collision issues or engine sounds bound to speed instead of rpm/throttle, the damage model is unchanged too. Also it's impossible to tip them over which was definitively possible in A2, might be fixable though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And I disagree with you. Increase in quality != graphical quality i.e. the vehicle quality increased in a number of ways, not just texture resolution and triangle number. The fact that PiP and damage modelling are not handled by the artists is irrelevant because one does not measure the quality of a vehicle in ARMA just by how beautiful and well done it is but also by how functional and immersive it ends up being.

But that doesn't explain why that would impact the number of vehicles. PiP is a module that can be applied to any vehicle. They don't have to redo it from scratch every time they want to use it with a new vehicle. What increase in quality do you see with units that would explain a reduction in quantity? They don't have any enhanced interactivity like ToH. They work exactly like they did in A2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that doesn't explain why that would impact the number of vehicles. PiP is a module that can be applied to any vehicle. They don't have to redo it from scratch every time they want to use it with a new vehicle. What increase in quality do you see with units that would explain a reduction in quantity? They don't have any enhanced interactivity like ToH. They work exactly like they did in A2.

PIP and Physx with vehicles are an increase in quality that requires a huge amount of time and resources to implement on a per-vehicle basis. You DO have to re-implement a lot of things with each iteration. Just look at all the changelog entries for it.

And has there been some sort of collective amnesia regarding the weapons attachment and equipment customization features, with backpacks that actually work? Does no one remember sorting through hundreds of M16 variants in a single crate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys think that because the team has to work on the game and the engine that may affect what they get done maybe? For example some game studios may use unreal or cryengine and just worry about the game. Just a thought not trying to say it's the reason there's been cuts on features or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolutely! I totally agree that one jet for the initial release is not enough and that the game should be postponed for it to be considered a "full release".

However our "should's" unfortunately don't dictate the reasons why the game has to be released which, as subtly hinted at, involve finances and BIS continuing to exist as it is atm. But we aren't entitled to know these reasons. It's an unfortunate situation but a situation which can't be changed. So why argue

Nonetheless, it really isn't dramatic. The content will follow and as it's said in the SITREP it won't cost a cent. :)

The game is coming along very nicely, people like to play it, they have fun and BIS will deliver you the stuff they simply couldn't finish yet.

Well I understand all that but in reality what do you do? Go back to playing Arma2 until September 2014 when all this will be finished? I don't mind and will keep buying and supporting but reputations will take a pounding in the press and I can hear the trolls on YouTube sharpening their knives like they did with the original Arma 2 release. Is there anyone in the community that would consider an act of charity and donate some models so at least the release goes well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there anyone in the community that would consider an act of charity and donate some models so at least the release goes well?

If BIS would have asked people to do so..

..i believe *most addon-makers would have been happy if BI would ask them permission to include their work in 'Vanilla' ArmA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there anyone in the community that would consider an act of charity and donate some models so at least the release goes well?

Many people would happily donate their scripts, codes, models and blah but the question is would BI impliment them, there is a LOT that goes on for one single unit and we've heard there are problems with accepting more simple things such as fast ropes and bipods so..yeah.

You guys think that because the team has to work on the game and the engine that may affect what they get done maybe? For example some game studios may use unreal or cryengine and just worry about the game. Just a thought not trying to say it's the reason there's been cuts on features or not.

That depends on who you ask and wether they think the iterations between Arma 1 and Arma 2 were as big.

Edited by NodUnit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey BIS, I put in this ticket for a fix that shouldn't be very difficult and is absolutely necessary and it has yet to be acknowledged or corrected.

This error was not an issue in Arma 2 and it is in Arma 3, it has to do with configuring controls for Commanders in vehicles, could you please look into it and fix it. As of now I can't use AI in the drivers seat and act as a gunner since the act of zooming in, changing views, etc is causing my AI to move forward, stop, back...etc....arg!

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=11066

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That depends on who you ask and wether they think the iterations between Arma 1 and Arma 2 were as big.

Right I see what you mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey BIS, I put in this ticket for a fix that shouldn't be very difficult and is absolutely necessary and it has yet to be acknowledged or corrected.

This error was not an issue in Arma 2 and it is in Arma 3, it has to do with configuring controls for Commanders in vehicles, could you please look into it and fix it. As of now I can't use AI in the drivers seat and act as a gunner since the act of zooming in, changing views, etc is causing my AI to move forward, stop, back...etc....arg!

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=11066

It's been reviewed now for the developers to take a look now! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's how the retail deluxe edition looks like :)

I wonder, will the Digital Deluxe Edition content be available immediately with the release ? Having a large digital map of Altis would help with mission making...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why not, since it already includes a printed map of Altis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolutely! I totally agree that one jet for the initial release is not enough and that the game should be postponed for it to be considered a "full release".

However our "should's" unfortunately don't dictate the reasons why the game has to be released which, as subtly hinted at, involve finances and BIS continuing to exist as it is atm. But we aren't entitled to know these reasons. It's an unfortunate situation but a situation which can't be changed. So why argue and lose one's mind over how the situation could have changed?

And sure, no matter what decision you put out, there are always people who like or dislike it. :rolleyes:

Sure, not to argue with that. The point I was trying to make was that while I understand the reasoning, it is still reasonable to be disappointed about the lack of jets, and it is still reasonable to be concerned about this (and other things like the lack of single player content that will last a while) having a negative impact on reviews, which, in spite of some people claiming not to be important, will be the deciding factor in a lot of people's chain of thought when they wonder whether they should buy or not.

Nonetheless, it really isn't dramatic. The content will follow and as it's said in the SITREP it won't cost a cent. :)

At least that is the intention, but I am quite sure that a patch for ACR was intended at one point as well, and still didn't materialize. The problem I keep having with these post-release things (whether they will cost or not doesn't really matter that much to me since I am a supporter edition buyer) is not the when or the how, but the if. As I said, commercial reality sometimes means that e.g. bad sales will force you to abandon a project prematurely, people being assigned to other projects will make things go on the backburner. And while I understand these issues, the end result would be that the game would stay pretty much incomplete. I am not so much worried about content since I am quite sure the mods will come (heck, if I don't see HMWWV's soon I am going to try one myself) but about the features that mods cannot put it, or only hacked up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely whether they will cost or not *is* of importance as if BIS suddenly made everything free DLC-wise (hahaha I know :p) then you'd feel slightly on a downer? Of course, the free DLC isn't the pure motivation for some, but it was one of the main features about getting the supporter edn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait so what exactly was the update to the Dev branch today? It says it's the patch candidate, and to wait for a SPOTREP for the full changelog. They only gave us one example of what was changed, and that had to do with Showcases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×