Arma 3 Community Alpha - Announcement!

[Raptor 10]

who is suma?

The lead lead lead master programmer?

Lead Master Mind behind the RV Engine?

The 1/2'th of the big boss?

The 1/2'th of the Spanel Brothers? :D

Alpha should be a bonus for Pre-ordering ArmA III, and seeing as Stratis is beautiful and looks to be very much complete, that's a lot of value.

?

Jesus! No, Alpha should be free for all, without pre-oder bonus. ;) Everything else will be a real big loss of confidence and very disappointing.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Raptor

[chortles 263]

The lead lead lead master programmer?

Lead Master Mind behind the RV Engine?

The 1/2'th of the big boss?

The 1/2'th of the Spanel Brothers? :D

The new man behind the DayZ standalone? :eek:

Jesus! No, Alpha should be free for all, without pre-oder bonus. ;) Everything else will be a real big loss of confidence and very disappointing.

What this guy said. :D

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Suma decided to share a bit of his hard work to demonstrate what the ArmA engine can do.

download Showcase: Helicopters

Downloading.

Personally I'm not very impressed with this Mini-Alpha. the trees look almost ported from ArmA, but it gives a very nice impression of how the engine has advanced over time.

Foliage on Takistan was of outstanding quality, even to the point that FPS suffered with SSAO on in Bastam. :cc: Trees on Chernarus looks realistic as they get with this polygon count, can't complain if they see the light again in ArmA III.

---------- Post added at 07:38 ---------- Previous post was at 07:36 ----------

?

Jesus! No, Alpha should be free for all, without pre-oder bonus. ;) Everything else will be a real big loss of confidence and very disappointing.

Nope, that's the standard practice in the industry, besides you'd want to filter out TOTAL nabs. Keep in mind, ArmA has had a good exposure with DayZ, and every third zombie freak will rush to get the Pre-order to find out what the standalone of DayZ might hold.

---------- Post added at 07:42 ---------- Previous post was at 07:38 ----------

The demo is so awesome, long live Poseidon!

UrPo9jmnkDw

Edited September 15, 2012 by Iroquois Pliskin

[andersson 285]

Suma decided to share a bit of his hard work to demonstrate what the ArmA engine can do.

download Showcase: Helicopters

Personally I'm not very impressed with this Mini-Alpha. the trees look almost ported from ArmA, but it gives a very nice impression of how the engine has advanced over time.

http://www.armedassault.info/ftp/pics/news/pics1/ss_preview_Arma3_screeenshot8.jpg

LOL

[chortles 263]

Nope, that's the standard practice in the industry, besides you'd want to filter out TOTAL nabs. Keep in mind, ArmA has had a good exposure with DayZ, and every third zombie freak will rush to get the Pre-order to find out what the standalone of DayZ might hold.

Whereas I thought that total nabs were pretty much the target of the "best ARMA yet" approach... :P Besides, unfortunately for pre-orders, Rocket's already ruined the secret that the standalone won't use the ARMA 3 engine. :(

[Raptor 10]

Nope, that's the standard practice in the industry, besides you'd want to filter out TOTAL nabs. Keep in mind, ArmA has had a good exposure with DayZ, and every third zombie freak will rush to get the Pre-order to find out what the standalone of DayZ might hold.

Ah now I understand: you seems to be the guy who make such decisions, right ? or was it him:

We hope to be able to come up with smart combination of free and closed P&C Alpha of Arma 3.

And your arguments are so clear and sheer like a milky window. ;)

@Chortles

Sorry i've forgot it. :)

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

I'm just saying what's reasonable, given the current playerbase of ArmA and given its complexity. If they can streamline controls, interface and character interaction with the world to the point, where it won't present a redundant impedance in the process of learning the game, then everything goes.

P.S. Slow morning today, Codarl, thanks for the laugh. :icon_mrgreen:

[sethos 2]

Even if it's alpha, by then I already expect the biggest bugs to at least be funny instead of game-breaking... if the community alpha were any more "janky" than the Gamescom build I'd be hitting the panic button, and I don't even mind "missing features"... what matters is "is there a worthy core underneath, a diamond in the rough?" and your comments implied "no". I do apologize if you in fact like me have more faith now in ARMA 3 post-Gamescom than back in early June, that "yes there is (FINALLY) a diamond in the rough". (The direction in ARMA 3 in 2011 was far less appealing, RiE deserves much credit for focusing on promoting the elements that got me to come around on the game.)

I think you should read up what an Alpha is because your arguments are downright stupid. An Alpha can easily move backwards if developers decide to try out new features or technology, implement a different approach or a graphical feature.

Alphas are NOT demos and they shouldn't be in the hands of every Joe who doesn't know what an Alpha is, as that'll defeat the purpose and work against them.

[bensch 1]

Can't wait for the Community-Alpha :D

[gossamersolid 155]

I think you should read up what an Alpha is because your arguments are downright stupid. An Alpha can easily move backwards if developers decide to try out new features or technology, implement a different approach or a graphical feature.

Alphas are NOT demos and they shouldn't be in the hands of every Joe who doesn't know what an Alpha is, as that'll defeat the purpose and work against them.

Exactly.

Also, I don't know about you guys, but I'd like to see new features. Everybody keeps saying "Oh we don't need x feature or y feature, let's just make sure the game is stable". Well if we don't get any new features, we're just getting ArmA 2 with a new coat of paint and frankly, that's not worth the price of admission.

I'd prefer to see new features and of course expect new bugs.

The biggest problems I see in this series are the content related bugs because they never seem to get fixed in patches really, but engine problems and mission problems do seem to get fixed at least.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Exactly.

Also, I don't know about you guys, but I'd like to see new features. Everybody keeps saying "Oh we don't need x feature or y feature, let's just make sure the game is stable". Well if we don't get any new features, we're just getting ArmA 2 with a new coat of paint and frankly, that's not worth the price of admission.

Such as? Read the "canceled features" troll thread. I'd say there are ample improvements to warrant the name ArmA III: Animations, new stances, ragdolls, vehicle physics, new island & underwater terrain/warfare to name but the few, and do keep in mind this is the bare minimum that needs to be working in order for the rest of the "extras" to really function and be appreciated by the playerbase.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Iroquois Pliskin

[Ninja_Prime 10]

I can't wait to get the full game once it is released, not really that concerned about the Alpha, as I am sure there will be enough willing testers out there :)

[Killbert 0]

Sure, it's easy:

1. Wait
   
2. Wait some more
   
3. When the option to pre-purchase is announced, go to sprocketidea.com
   
4. Pre-purchase the game
   

I hope if pre-purchase is required for the alpha, it won't be sprocket only. I'm willing to pre-purchase it from Steam, but not from Sproket. I bought Arma 1 from Sprocket, and had pretty bad experience with it.

[W0lle 1046]

I hope if pre-purchase is required for the alpha, it won't be Steam only. I'm willing to pre-purchase it from Sprocket, but not from Steam. I have Arma 2 in Steam, and had pretty bad experience with it. :p

Sorry but Steam just sucks for ArmA. Look at how much trouble there was recently with patches. How long it took until the latest DLC was finally available. How cumbersome it was initially to combine OA and A2 into CO when bought from Steam.

I never had such problems with the BI store. The only not so good thing with that is that you must deal with patches on your own. But I actually prefer that cause I don't need a nanny who makes sure I'm up to the latest version. :)

[Killbert 0]

Well let's hope they provide us with options then :) Buy it from Sprocket, activate on Steam or Sprocket when the game is released.

[NeuroFunker 11]

are we back again to "pre-purchase for alpha" thing?

The Community Alpha is intended to be a public build of Arma 3, offering a limited subset of content and features, with the fundamental goal of improving Arma 3's full retail launch.

i guess pubilc alpha means: download and play.

[MulleDK19 21]

The only not so good thing with that is that you must deal with patches on your own. But I actually prefer that cause I don't need a nanny who makes sure I'm up to the latest version. :)

Actually I prefer that. Not to mention that when you buy on Sprocket, the updates are much lower size than on Steam, because the retail update only changes the parts of the big files that was changed, while Steam redownloads the whole thing.

[Ash712 1]

No offense here, but can we just lock this thread until there's a "Solid" announcement from BI regarding the "Alpha", and it's release date/information etc.?

I come to this thread when I see new posts have been made, but all the talk is off-topic, or speculation, and it gets my hopes up everytime for that real announcement! lol! :(

Just saying...

[Maio 293]

No offense here, but can we just lock this thread until there's a "Solid" announcement from BI regarding the "Alpha", and it's release date/information etc.?

I come to this thread when I see new posts have been made, but all the talk is off-topic, or speculation, and it gets my hopes up everytime for that real announcement! lol! :(

Just saying...

This is beyond your comprehension newbie. You cant simply close a thread of this magnitude without tangling with the very fabrics of the ArmA 3 sub-forum. Just...walk...away. Your dealing with forces beyond your grasp.

Ahem... ONTOP:

I support the pay to play method

[papanowel 120]

I support the pay to play method

It's common sense to me and logic compare to others BIS recent title (GAIA, TOH).

[chortles 263]

Didn't TOH have something where players had to have OA?

Mind you, I didn't really have a problem with Steam and ARMA, so I wonder if there's going to be a preorder bonus on Steam? :D

Such as? Read the "canceled features" troll thread. I'd say there are ample improvements to warrant the name ArmA III: Animations, new stances, ragdolls, vehicle physics, new island & underwater terrain/warfare to name but the few, and do keep in mind this is the bare minimum that needs to be working in order for the rest of the "extras" to really function and be appreciated by the playerbase.

It's a "redo" of the existing concept (oh hey sandbox open-world with "hardcore" ballistics physics, big maps/engine-designed-for-big-maps and extreme modding capability) in a new engine that besides "fundamental improvements to the engine" also has greater greater fluidity/responsiveness in infantry movement and weapon handling (the most important gameplay change for me, but you seem to have that as "Animations, new stances"), underwater (diver movement, diver combat and 'true' submersible/submarine support) being an integral part of the two default terrains, the new physics and such, these are the core functionalities that're needed... everything else? Hell, we can playtest the community alpha to see if these core functionalities are in fact working smoothly and bug-free* in the most recent build, and if so then it's then time to see if the features on top of these core functionalities are any good. :D (If they're being buggy... well I know what I'm reporting in my feedback. ;) )

* "UO holds a TvT mission, a BLUFOR walks into a rock and takes incapacitating damage" is an example of buggy.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Physics is the most complex part of that equation, and if I were them I wouldn't focus on anything else, prior to accomplishing the tasks of integrating the PhysX into the core engine, creating the required ragdolls for units and vehicles, creating believable collision boxes, fine-tuning the mass and other values and somehow integrating all that into the MP netcode.

Lots of work, thank Poseidon they have experience with VBS2; perhaps Nvidia themselves are assisting - there's a paid Dev support option for their engine.

---------- Post added at 11:59 ---------- Previous post was at 11:31 ----------

It's a "redo" of the existing concept (oh hey sandbox open-world with "hardcore" ballistics physics, big maps/engine-designed-for-big-maps and extreme modding capability)

Funny thing about the "redo": I wonder if ArmA III bullet ballistics are completely simulated on the new engine? Handling could vastly differ even for the same weapons, compared to ArmA II. There shouldn't be anything left of the old physics, because even the water looks like it doesn't come from RV, but some 3rd party - PhysX. :)

I remember someone remarking on VBS2 ballistics being different in a good way.

---------- Post added at 12:16 ---------- Previous post was at 11:59 ----------

P.S. http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2718679/Re_VBS2_updated_to_version_1_2.html

ADDED: NVIDIA_logo and PhysX_logo to splash screen

CHNGD: Changed position of nvidia logos and copyright text in splash screen.

---------- Post added at 12:30 ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 ----------

Still digging on the topic of ballistics,

Page 29 - http://distribution.bisimulations.com/docs/VBS2_Whitepaper.pdf

3.2.2.6 Physics

VBS2 uses its own proprietary physics engine for ballistics (both external and terminal), particle effects and physical simulation of vehicles. Recently, Bohemia Interactive also implemented support for PhysX by Nvidia, which is used for rope simulation (eg helicopter laod carrying and fast roping), vehicle recovery (towing by rope or bar), articulated vehicles, UGVs (enabling them to climb stairs), and high-fidelity simulation of certain vehicles as requested by customers: for example, the HMMWV improvements for the USMC.

Very relevant to ArmA III.

Inconclusive, can't link PhysX to ballistics, will have to settle for RV solution. :)

Edited September 16, 2012 by Iroquois Pliskin

[khaki 10]

Regarding Pay to play alpha, I think it's intended to also help entice more players for the game, when its free them once the game is released it'll make those people want to buy the full game. Kind of like game demos that used to be everywhere..not so much now.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Regarding Pay to play alpha, I think it's intended to also help entice more players for the game, when its free them once the game is released it'll make those people want to buy the full game. Kind of like game demos that used to be everywhere..not so much now.

Well, i'm not too sure. An alpha release is obviously unfinished and somehow buggy, that's not the best way to attract new players.

[chortles 263]

ProfTournesol, the key to "attract new players" when it comes to an alpha is whether the bugs are minimal enough to not be game-breaking, i.e. not affecting the core features ("what makes arma arma"), and thus allowing players to 'properly' test whether other features just need reworking or are fundamentally unworkable :D

Example of a "didn't drive players away" bug: apparently back in the BF3 alpha, according to Gamespy "knifing someone while they're prone will cause them to stand up before the animation plays", while as an example of the bit about playtesting features, apparently only Engineers had the tactical flashlight accessory, the destruction was limited compared to the release build, and most noticeably the attacker team's LAV-25 in Operation Metro (map) Rush (match type) was removed in the BF3 beta and the release builds.

In contrast, I recall one of the problems with the BF3 "beta" was that it was apparently more buggy, and the bugs more severe, than in the alpha...