Development Blog & Reveals

[chortles 263]

That’s a lot to look forward to! How about the Arma 2 content library? Will there be some form of backwards compatibility?

It doesn't sound like 'regular' backwards compatibility but rather "we'll release Arma 2 source stuff to modders to bring to 'Arma 3 standards'".

[Tonci87 163]

I'm fully against paid addons for a few reasons:

1) Already hard enough to get people to download free addons, but now you have to convince people to buy them as well? (Lite versions will be REQUIRED in my opinion)

2) People will stop sharing models with each other because of this. Right now there are a lot of great modellers out there that gracious provide their base models to people such as myself (who cannot model worth a shit), but I like to re-texture them, make small changes to the models and provide my own configs. I don't want to see this stop because of money.

3) There will be a huge reduction of free addons available because every single person is going to want money for their time and effort (who'd blame them). I think this will "cheapen" the experience of the only reason any of us actually play ArmA (for the custom made content).

4) I wouldn't consider about 70% of content that is released to the community worth money. Don't get me wrong, the models are usually not the problem. It's the config work that is usually really poorly done. I have no problem with free addons having issues, especially because I can just fix config issues for my personal use, but as soon as I have to pay for something, I expect top notch quality in ALL aspects.

I think BIS shouldn't ruin the fact that we MIGHT actually FINALLY get in-game addon downloading with a bullshit idea like this.

THIS

I think it is totaly OK if Addon makers have a Pay Pal account for Donations, some do that already and people can donate if they want, if they can afford it and how much they want.

Paid Addons would destroy this Community!

(I´m OK with some kind of voluntary Donation System)

[ProfTournesol 956]

I'm fully against paid addons for a few reasons:

1) Already hard enough to get people to download free addons, but now you have to convince people to buy them as well? (Lite versions will be REQUIRED in my opinion)

2) People will stop sharing models with each other because of this. Right now there are a lot of great modellers out there that gracious provide their base models to people such as myself (who cannot model worth a shit), but I like to re-texture them, make small changes to the models and provide my own configs. I don't want to see this stop because of money.

3) There will be a huge reduction of free addons available because every single person is going to want money for their time and effort (who'd blame them). I think this will "cheapen" the experience of the only reason any of us actually play ArmA (for the custom made content).

4) I wouldn't consider about 70% of content that is released to the community worth money. Don't get me wrong, the models are usually not the problem. It's the config work that is usually really poorly done. I have no problem with free addons having issues, especially because I can just fix config issues for my personal use, but as soon as I have to pay for something, I expect top notch quality in ALL aspects.

I think BIS shouldn't ruin the fact that we MIGHT actually FINALLY get in-game addon downloading with a bullshit idea like this.

I really want to wait for more explanations on this by BIS, but user payable content will be the dead end of the community spirit (which is already suffering a lot IMHO), unless on a very limited scope, such as released as BIS DLC.

[.kju 3240]

Actually some form of monetisation is the only way to keep many of the long term, highly skilled and dedicated people around.

Right now many of those try to get some form of cross financing via work for BISim, BI or other 3rd party companies. Mostly this is not working well..

Of course for many modding will stay a hobby, yet for some it is way more than that.

Of course proper licensing of work and clear agreements are to be made, as well as free lite versions to remain available at the same time.

[windies 11]

I'm fully against paid addons for a few reasons:

1) Already hard enough to get people to download free addons, but now you have to convince people to buy them as well? (Lite versions will be REQUIRED in my opinion)

2) People will stop sharing models with each other because of this. Right now there are a lot of great modellers out there that gracious provide their base models to people such as myself (who cannot model worth a shit), but I like to re-texture them, make small changes to the models and provide my own configs. I don't want to see this stop because of money.

3) There will be a huge reduction of free addons available because every single person is going to want money for their time and effort (who'd blame them). I think this will "cheapen" the experience of the only reason any of us actually play ArmA (for the custom made content).

4) I wouldn't consider about 70% of content that is released to the community worth money. Don't get me wrong, the models are usually not the problem. It's the config work that is usually really poorly done. I have no problem with free addons having issues, especially because I can just fix config issues for my personal use, but as soon as I have to pay for something, I expect top notch quality in ALL aspects.

I think BIS shouldn't ruin the fact that we MIGHT actually FINALLY get in-game addon downloading with a bullshit idea like this.

Those are valid points as well. I guess to clarify my stance, I'm fine with modders making something off their work, like Donations and such, but when you go into the realm of monetizing addons for a game it just opens a whole new can of worms as far as quality and inter-compatibility.

[ProfTournesol 956]

;2501477']Actually some form of monetisation is the only way to keep many of the long term' date=' highly skilled and dedicated people around.

Right now many of those try to get some form of cross financing via work for BISim, BI or other 3rd party companies. Mostly this is not working well..

Of course for many modding will stay a hobby, yet for some it is way more than that.

Of course proper licensing of work and clear agreements are to be made, as well as free lite versions to remain available at the same time.[/quote']

Well, IMHO BI should find a way to pay those "key guys" such as you or Sickboy for example, without going into the "community buys community addons" way.

[Tonci87 163]

;2501477']Actually some form of monetisation is the only way to keep many of the long term' date=' highly skilled and dedicated people around.

Right now many of those try to get some form of cross financing via work for BISim, BI or other 3rd party companies. Mostly this is not working well..

Of course for many modding will stay a hobby, yet for some it is way more than that.

Of course proper licensing of work and clear agreements are to be made, as well as free lite versions to remain available at the same time.[/quote']

Sounds like you know more about those plans than we do kju.

As far as I am concerned those highly skilled and dedicated people can all go elsewhere if they are only here for the money.

I even think that the overall quality of Mods would decrease over the time since some people might think that it is more profitable to release a mod ASAP (aka rushed) to start work on the next "cashbringer"

[celery 8]

About time al the Addon makers who make quality addons got reward for there efforts , a fantastic idea and well deserved for those who now have to spend many weeks if not years (terrains) slogging there fingrs and brains out.

quality will obviously dictate so im sure the whats worth what will be naturally worked out by that at th ed of the day the requirement of an addon is merely dictated by a string in a mission textfile created by a mission maker , so there cant possibly be any argument about community splitting as nothing is really forced on anyone

Caveat ( free lite versions for mp continuoty of course )

What about mission makers who spend weeks if not months or years making playable content that do the game and potentially those paid addons justice?

Wouldn't it be fair that in order to enjoy top-grade paid vehicles and weapons you'd also pay for good missions that actually put them to use?

Of course, there's the pesky problem of multiplayer missions copying over to clients when they play it on a server, making it easy to spread a mission without paying for it. Not to mention that the clients wouldn't have to pay to play the mission, or...?

Edited September 13, 2013 by Celery

[mr_centipede 31]

I thought the paid user addon thing is that BIS are the one that will be paying the addon makers... not the end users. I'll read it up again... But I think he also said they will make an official announcement later, so what we think now are just rumours and speculation...

[edit]

After re-reading it again, it might be along the line of, me making a mission/mod -> the BIS make a deal with me -> BIS sell those mission/mod and I got a percentage... think dayZ/take on mars which was originally a mod... and that is just my 'speculation'

Edited September 13, 2013 by Mr_Centipede

[Tonci87 163]

I thought the paid user addon thing is that BIS are the one that will be paying the addon makers... not the end users. I'll read it up again... But I think he also said they will make an official announcement later, so what we think now are just rumours and speculation...

[edit]

After re-reading it again, it might be along the line of, me making a mission/mod -> the BIS make a deal with me -> BIS sell those mission/mod and I got a percentage... think dayZ/take on mars which was originally a mod... and that is just my 'speculation'

I think I might be fine with that, I need more info.

[tonygrunt 10]

Some problems with paid addons:

- Might work for island, models, sound addons but what about enchanment addons (missions, ace, blastcore, AI enhachment, acre).

- Paid content should be as bugfree as possible which means updates, what happens after 1 year when the author abandons his addons?

- Some addons might break due to Arma 3 updates who is responsible for fixing the problem? Will the author fix it? Timetable for this fix?

- I expect any bought addon will be encrypted like the Arma 2 OA DLC so no more "looking under the hood" to see how something worked.

- If there are no lite addons, server owners/providers could try to monetize on this. Sell addons that give special benefits on their servers.

[bad benson 1733]

Of course for many modding will stay a hobby, yet for some it is way more than that.

i don't really get this. why not get a job in the industry? or why doesn't BI hire those "pros" like it's normal in the indusrty? i mean sure money is a nice thing but i fail to see how this is going to improve the community. it will just result in more paid DLCs. there is no difference who made it...

[Maio 293]

i don't really get this. why not get a job in the industry? or why doesn't BI hire those "pros" like it's normal in the indusrty? i mean sure money is a nice thing but i fail to see how this is going to improve the community. it will just result in more paid DLCs. there is no difference who made it...

They way I read it:

1. User makes quality content in his/hers spare time

2. The community enjoys the content

3. BI compensates the user for the quality content

4. The user is motivated to create more content while keeping his/hers job

5. BI gets a happy community (as far as content availability goes)

[ProfTournesol 956]

They way I read it:

1. User makes quality content in his/hers spare time

2. The community enjoys the content

3. BI compensates the user for the quality content

4. The user is motivated to create more content while keeping his/hers job

5. BI gets a happy community (as far as content availability goes)

Well, that assumes a lot, but i hope it'll be that way.

[tonygrunt 10]

They way I read it:

1. User makes quality content in his/hers spare time

2. The community enjoys the content

3. BI compensates the user for the quality content

4. The user is motivated to create more content while keeping his/hers job

5. BI gets a happy community (as far as content availability goes)

I am afraid they might use the steam model for selling user generated content (see team fortress 2).

[horrorview 10]

As a primarily single player user, I'd have zero problem paying for some of the incredible mods I've seen made for the ARMA series. As someone with absolutely zero modeling skill, if someone were to make an island that would give me hundreds of hours of enjoyment, the least I could do is pony up $10 or $20 bucks to reward them for their efforts. Of course, the hope would be that premium content would undergo some form of quality control before it's allowed to be sold. As someone who did a lot of texture modifications for Skyrim and a few other games (that's all I'm good for, really), there was a donate feature on the site my work was on, and fans of my work who had extra coin threw me a few bucks here and there. It's a nice feeling to have someone tell you that your work is worth something to them.

On the flipside, I can imagine the issues this would bring up in multiplayer, but, then again, I can't seem to join any servers due to the fact that most don't even allow for mods.

It's a slippery slope, but, as a few others have said, there are really dedicated modders here who've been doing fantastic work for NOTHING that really do deserve the opportunity to make a little dough from it.

[Smurf 12]

And if they charge only for full convertions (LIFE, Wasteland) or "armies" mods like CSLA (ACR could be a test bed for that?), FDF and co; DLCs like BAF but community made. Let's face it, there are some VERY well made works out there that deserves some money and (I might be wrong) donations doesn't make up for it.

I don't know. May piss off other modders, create bad blood, stop the sharing of content... This can turn out good but has the potential to destroy the whole thing! I mean, who decides what is worth and how much is worth?

Some serious discussios with mod makers and BIS must take place here first.

[Maio 293]

I am afraid they might use the steam model for selling user generated content (see team fortress 2).

Although financially sound, I don't see this model catching with the Arma community.

1. I might be mistaken, but I don't see the average A3 player paying to buy a hat, vest, car,etc

2. The inventory system is mission/server dependent. Whatever you bought, you wont be able to use it unless the files are on the hosting server.

[tonygrunt 10]

Although financially sound, I don't see this model catching with the Arma community.

1. I might be mistaken, but I don't see the average A3 player paying to buy a hat, vest, car,etc

2. The inventory system is mission/server dependent. Whatever you bought, you wont be able to use it unless the files are on the hosting server.

Didn't mean selling comparable content as TF2 but the steam workshop agreement has sections for selling user content and with BI going all out STEAM they might (have to?) use it.

TF2 shop sells also tickets for map servers to support the map creators.

[froggyluv 2130]

Get ready for a BIG shift in attitude toward addon makers once people are paying for.

"This Sh*T is garbage!!"

"No! You don't tell me WHEN IT"S Done -I PAID for it!!"

"You promised and you lied!!!"

" Your piece of dung Helo isn't compatible with my Ostrich farm addon -fix it NAO!"

The days of "Hey, awesome addon mate! Thanks so much for your dedication" will be a teary eyed memory.

[mistyronin 1181]

I don't know either how its gonna end, but here are my two cents.

A more liberal buying system could be that each modder decide the price, and the customers decide if for them is worth spend X money on it or not ( market law ), or more like Apple iTunes, the same price for each unit ( no matter their quality ).

People are asking for more and more stuff, and if its possible with good quality. BI has limited capacities, so this could be the best solution. The profit possibility would convince more modders to work in new addons.

Obviously that will increase criticism, but only in the paid ones, so the "paid" modders would have to work more seriously and bear what anyone that works for money has to bear.

Edited September 13, 2013 by MistyRonin

[.kju 3240]

Let me emphasize two parts:

I think the next big thing could be opening up Arma 3 to paid user-made content. It’s great to see talented mod-makers pulling off amazing missions, add-ons and mods as free content, but if we manage to find some incentive for the best mod-makers to develop more content, I think we can raise the bar even higher. I want to push this effort in two distinct ways, and I consider these as a priority for next year. We are going to announce more specific details in the coming months.

Certainly this is a very complex problem with many different aspects playing into it.

As you can see BI will take the time to think this through and get it done as good as possible.

How comes many have here the assumption that everything will be made or even be possible to become pay-ware.

One may think of a model of community created DLCs - free for everyone. Paid to get the high quality version.

Of course especially team projects will be hard, yet thats how commercial business works too.

Also 3rd party content use and sharing will be though, yet exactly these problems have prevented BI to use community made stuff.

If done right, the open hobby modder scene will remain as it is, with people spending hundreds or even thousands of hours creating

high quality content getting some income from doing so.

The key part is to make sure there are limited to practically no negative impacts, and at the same time benefiting from people being

able or continue to spend such vast amount of time creating content for the series.

Also you may not forget the community tools makers like mikero, Sickboy and some others - without their research and hard work

this community would not where it is today. Building great tools requires very skilled people with lots of time.

Not everything can be done as a hobby.

[VanZant 48]

There is a lot of difference between a "secret" compensation coming from BI, and a DLC or paid addon, or people selling sh*t out there by its own.

I would like to see how BI releases a DLC with all the A2 content. I'd pay for it and if kju is involved then he deserves his piece of cake. Why not? keep those people motivated. I really like it.

But what I'm absolutely against is a kind of app store or market place for ArmA. Hell no. That day I will burn the game onto a disc, only to throw it to the trash.

And the content still should be accesible, more or less like now. Do you want to support the community? Do you want more modders in the future?, then let the people see how it is done.

Edited September 13, 2013 by VanZant

[ProfTournesol 956]

Sure, that's a complex matter. But as BI is benefiting a lot from community addons (some still buys OFP for its addons, mind you :)), BI should find a way to reward addon makers without people being forced to buy them, APART from official DLC (even if ACR DLC was the worst one ever released). My two cents though.

[Dwarden 1124]

Get ready for a BIG shift in attitude toward addon makers once people are paying for. "This Sh*T is garbage!!" "No! You don't tell me WHEN IT"S Done -I PAID for it!!" "You promised and you lied!!!" " Your piece of dung Helo isn't compatible with my Ostrich farm addon -fix it NAO!" The days of "Hey, awesome addon mate! Thanks so much for your dedication" will be a teary eyed memory.

i'm sorry but that already happened ... you just don't see such posts and users around as our great mod team take care of those who violate the BIF rules ...people who will thank you will thank youpeople who would like support you will send you the money, one way or anotherpeople who want to hate and rage will do that too anyway all this is now distant future i may happen this or that way so no point to lose hairs over it