Development Blog & Reveals

[bad benson 1733]

the fact that my wheat maybe your chaff

i doubt that. just because i'm not a fan of counter bitching doesn't mean i like random threads made by morons that have nothing to say ;)

[antoineflemming 14]

Absolutely, but the place for constructive criticism is in the feedback trackers. Sure they trawl these threads but anyone actually interested in the game will take the time to post issues and how to reproduce them there instead of constantly bitching in the forums. It gives the devs a way to see what issues are important to the community and the number of votes the issue has gives an idea of how common it is. In forums it is largely just noise.

I much prefer to see a message like "AI constantly crash or get stuck while driving in towns. Check out and vote at feedback issue: http://xxxx/xxx " then "Man the AI sucks when are the devs gunna wake up. Game xxxx does it better!". Especially when it is rather likely the poster has zero idea (from a technology perspective) how incomparable the game are. Even if they seems "comparable" to a non-developer. They way so may people say X is unrealistic worries me. They never say what military experience they had to know. Just playing lots of computer war games doesn't count as experience in my book...

Fortunately a lot of members do take the time to properly reports issues in the feedback tracker to actually improve the game.

Repros only apply to bugs though. General criticism or dissatisfaction with something isn't something that can be reproduced or put on a feedback tracker. The feedback tracker is not the place for constructive criticism. It is the place for bug reports and errors. I'm honestly not sure where the appropriate place is for constructive criticism (like of the company's/game's direction, focus, amount of content, etc). But it's certainly not on the feedback tracker (which is really a bug tracker, not a feedback tracker).

[.kju 3240]

You can also make suggestions, and raise points that should be changed - hence feedback tracker.

[Gutsnav 13]

Back to the topic of this thread people. Do not post anything unless it is related to "Development Blog & Reveals", for the sake of spam. Thank you.

[zukov 484]

Back to the topic of this thread people. Do not post anything unless it is related to "Development Blog & Reveals", for the sake of spam. Thank you.

indeed I'm waiting the reveal "when the game will ready " atm the T100 is still there like in beta

[NeuroFunker 11]

every your post is about t-100, are you masturbating on it by chance?

[zukov 484]

every your post is about t-100, are you masturbating on it by chance?

no is my sensor about the development of this game, when will read something about the veichles and how they will be fixed i will happy or upset, after the MP part with negative surprises......(pratically is a coop game nothing more)

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Was reading the comments at the end of this article posted in the media thread

http://www.techspot.com/review/712-arma-3-benchmarks/

and found this interesting little morsel, note the penultimate sentence.

Borivoj Hlava said:

Interesting, the game does say PhysX enabled so I would assume that it means it will use the GPU PhysX as well. If a game is PhysX enabled and advertises it, they are using the GPU PhysX from at least what ive seen otherwise they don't really mention it. I was under the impression this game also used PhysX acceleration for effects and such, but I could be mistaken as I have not been following this game.

However, I would like to see some more information on this theory for this game as I had understood the PhysX was actually being used on the GPU if available on Arma 3.

TekGun is right. I am working on Arma 3 and I can confirm that all PhysX calculations in Arma 3 are done on CPU. We are working on PhysX acceleration for effects, but it is not in the game yet. Current particle effects don't use PhysX.

http://www.techspot.com/news/54026-story-page-2.html

[TSAndrey 1]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/19/arma-3-review?utm_campaign=fbposts&utm_source=facebook

"Weak sound"?! "Tough to learn"?! Is the IGN guy retarded? Oh well, it's not like I expect any better from them (9.0 COD reviews)

[gliptal 25]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/19/arma-3-review?utm_campaign=fbposts&utm_source=facebook

"Weak sound"?! "Tough to learn"?! Is the IGN guy retarded? Oh well, it's not like I expect any better from them (9.0 COD reviews)

It's a pity a lot of the issues he is talking about are solved by mods.

Yay!

[2nd ranger 282]

Well, overall the sound is weak, and if you're not used to it then it probably is quite hard to learn. And as he says, there are no tutorials. I think that was a pretty fair review.

[gliptal 25]

Well, overall the sound is weak, and if you're not used to it then it probably is quite hard to learn. And as he says, there are no tutorials. I think that was a pretty fair review.

Both IGN's and Gamespot reviews are quite spot on and fair. I hoped they went on with some mods though (like tpw + tao + jsrs).

Yay!

[Tonci87 163]

Well reviewers have to test the game "as delivered" they can´t use mods. But I think they should give Bonus Points for Games with active Mod support.

[Sniperwolf572 758]

But I think they should give Bonus Points for Games with active Mod support.

They do. "+ Endless content" in the verdict and conclusion is those bonus points.

[gliptal 25]

Well reviewers have to test the game "as delivered" they can´t use mods. But I think they should give Bonus Points for Games with active Mod support.

The main testing must obviously be made with full vanilla, but IMHO they should have at least mentioned the fact that some great mod exist out there that cover most of the issues they were talking about. Both the reviews only mention user made missions.

Yay!

[ziiip 1]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/19/arma-3-review?utm_campaign=fbposts&utm_source=facebook

"Weak sound"?! "Tough to learn"?! Is the IGN guy retarded? Oh well, it's not like I expect any better from them (9.0 COD reviews)

He's propably retarded. I mean what's so exceptionally difficult about the controls? You use WASD to move and the action menu for some interactions. It's also laughable when they say how the command menu is difficult to learn. I mean all you have to do is read the fucking text and you can figure out what the command categories contain.

Even is it was hard to learn, it shouldn't be a negative aspect. I guess he prefers being mouth-fed by games.

[antoineflemming 14]

It's a pity a lot of the issues he is talking about are solved by mods.

Yay!

It's a pity those issues aren't solved with game patches. Mods that fix issues do not excuse release day issues. Nor should they ever excuse vanilla issues.

[gliptal 25]

It's a pity those issues aren't solved with game patches. Mods that fix issues do not excuse release day issues. Nor should they ever excuse vanilla issues.

That's not what I'm saying. As a reviewer though, IMHO you should inform your readers that although these issues do exist in vanilla game (and are not or only partially excusable), mods do exist that solve them.

I think it would also be some sort of gratification for modders themselves ("My mod is so good reviewers think that it largely adds to game experience!").

Yay!

[antoineflemming 14]

That's not what I'm saying. As a reviewer though, IMHO you should inform your readers that although these issues do exist in vanilla game (and are not or only partially excusable), mods do exist that solve them.

I think it would also be some sort of gratification for modders themselves ("My mod is so good reviewers think that it largely adds to game experience!").

Yay!

No, it's a review of the game itself, in the state that BIS released it. It is not appropriate for a game review to point to mods that fix issues, nor is it appropriate for the reviewer to give modders any sort of sense of gratification. So suggest so is to misunderstand the point of a review. So it is perfectly fine to address certain issues, whether or not they are fixed by mods. And, certainly, they should not mention mods that fix those issues. If potential customers are willing to put up with those issues, then they can by the game and seek out the community/guides that mention those mod fixes.

As harsh as it sounds, and as detrimental as it might be to Arma 3 sales, people should buy the game, and games in general, based on the product that the developers/publishers released, not based on the mods that may fix release-day problems with the game. If they decide to buy based on mods that fix issues, then that's their right. But it's not the reviewer's job to promote that. Doing so would not be an accurate assessment of the product that is being reviewed.

Edited September 23, 2013 by antoineflemming

[celery 8]

He's propably retarded. I mean what's so exceptionally difficult about the controls? You use WASD to move and the action menu for some interactions. It's also laughable when they say how the command menu is difficult to learn. I mean all you have to do is read the fucking text and you can figure out what the command categories contain.

Even is it was hard to learn, it shouldn't be a negative aspect. I guess he prefers being mouth-fed by games.

You overestimate the user-friendliness of the action and command menus. I've seen videos where people have no damn clue what to do with the action menu and instead just leave some mission-specific action prompt on the screen for the rest of the game. It's not an intuitive thing to scroll your mouse wheel every once in a while to discover what new things you can do in different situations. Furthermore, you only have very simple move/hold fire commands shown to you when selecting your team, and unless you're previously very familiar with the game series, you'll have no idea that you can access advanced commands with the number keys that aren't shown unless you for some strange reason press backspace without any underlings selected.

[dale0404 5]

You overestimate the user-friendliness of the action and command menus. I've seen videos where people have no damn clue what to do with the action menu and instead just leave some mission-specific action prompt on the screen for the rest of the game. It's not an intuitive thing to scroll your mouse wheel every once in a while to discover what new things you can do in different situations. Furthermore, you only have very simple move/hold fire commands shown to you when selecting your team, and unless you're previously very familiar with the game series, you'll have no idea that you can access advanced commands with the number keys that aren't shown unless you for some strange reason press backspace without any underlings selected.

Admittedly not read it, but aren't these instructions in the game manual?

[celery 8]

Admittedly not read it, but aren't these instructions in the game manual?

Go and read it now, you'll laugh. :p

You need the €7.50 guide. Even then, good luck finding the pertinent information.

Edited September 23, 2013 by Celery

[Ezcoo 47]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/19/arma-3-review?utm_campaign=fbposts&utm_source=facebook

"Weak sound"?! "Tough to learn"?! Is the IGN guy retarded? Oh well, it's not like I expect any better from them (9.0 COD reviews)

This was actually one of the best reviews, if not even the best that I've read so far. I fully agree with him. He could have hinted the existence of mods and their importance in the Arma world a little clearer, but otherwise very good review in my opinion.

[gliptal 25]

No, it's a review of the game itself, in the state that BIS released it. It is not appropriate for a game review to point to mods that fix issues, nor is it appropriate for the reviewer to give modders any sort of sense of gratification. So suggest so is to misunderstand the point of a review. So it is perfectly fine to address certain issues, whether or not they are fixed by mods. And, certainly, they should not mention mods that fix those issues. If potential customers are willing to put up with those issues, then they can by the game and seek out the community/guides that mention those mod fixes.

As harsh as it sounds, and as detrimental as it might be to Arma 3 sales, people should buy the game, and games in general, based on the product that the developers/publishers released, not based on the mods that may fix release-day problems with the game. If they decide to buy based on mods that fix issues, then that's their right. But it's not the reviewer's job to promote that. Doing so would not be an accurate assessment of the product that is being reviewed.

I see your point. :)

I still think that something on the line "The game has serious flaws, although the community already produced modifications to solve some of these flaws. It must be noted though that BIS should learn from this and deliver a better vanilla game from the start" or similar wouldn't go too much amiss.

Yay!

[bad benson 1733]

arma 3 is great and all but seriously. you can't expect from people to understand the shitty UI just because you were with the series for a while. i know how the command menu works because it barely changed since ofp. i still don't use it because it's not fun to use. it's tedious and unintuitive. same goes for the action menu. these obvious flaws don't erase everything that is great about this game and its older incarnations. so there is no logic in finding excuses for the flaws unless you are a masochist and want them to be still there in arma 4.

as has been stated many many times before. mods are only a solution for singleplayer. there is no mod that is allowed on all or most servers...