Arma 3 Community Alpha - Announcement!

[celery 8]

Or maybe we're waiting for everyone to shut the hell up unless it's news about the alpha.

Edited September 13, 2012 by Celery

[Captacha 1]

So do we have to pre-order the game before we get the Alpha or can anyone download it once it comes out?

[-Coulum- 35]

Or maybe we're waiting for everyone to shut the hell up unless it's news about the alpha.

Oh its not fair! :k:

[lightspeed_aust 681]

Personally, I love the Alpha - not many bugs at all.

[Nicholas 5]

So do we have to pre-order the game before we get the Alpha or can anyone download it once it comes out?

I highly doubt they'll just let everyone download it.

[chortles 263]

Whereas "let everyone download it" is exactly what I'm aiming and rooting for.

[MulleDK19 21]

Whereas "let everyone download it" is exactly what I'm aiming and rooting for.

It's a pre-order bonus. They said so at GamesCom.

[maddogx 13]

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

^^ Whatever this means. Sounds to me like there could be two different versions - one free and one P&C for pre-purchasers.

[saetheer 9]

^^ Whatever this means. Sounds to me like there could be two different versions - one free and one P&C for pre-purchasers.

Then tell me how to pre-purchase Arma 3

[maddogx 13]

Then tell me how to pre-purchase Arma 3

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
   

[Lou Montana 101]

clever!

[dmarkwick 261]

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'm not sure whether I'm waiting, or waiting some more :)

[chortles 263]

It's a pre-order bonus. They said so at GamesCom.

Link, considering Maruk's own post that MadDogX quoted above me has Maruk saying "smart combination of free and closed P&C Alpha"? As long as there's some free P&C alpha, I think I'll be okay even if they tier it so that preorders get more benefits (though I'd be... annoyed if this extended to "listening to the preorders" more... see below for why).

While this here is over months old:

A completely open testing model will be hell in a handbasket. The entire Day Z fanbase suddenly knows about this game, they'd test it out and you would hear nothing but "OMG broken, oh it's so janky,

They would be right to say that, if it's indeed so janky, and I would want them to. I like to think that if it was so janky, the hardcores would have noticed too...

We keep hearing how Bohemia want to reach a wider audience, because right now the entire franchise is fairly niche at its core. Even was a study some months ago how demos and betas had a huge negative impact on how the public perceived the games whilst trailers was the most positive.

It's still perturbing three months later for that first sentence to be brought up as if "Bohemia wants to reach a wider audience" is a bad thing in the eyes of the ARMA hardcores, while the second sentence implies that pre-release gameplay builds won't stand up to public scrutiny so that BI "should" hide the ARMA experience behind prerendered, staged trailers. If that was indeed the case, then... why should I buy ARMA 3 when one of its would-be supporters claims that the underlying gameplay isn't good enough to stand up to testing? :rolleyes:

Disclosure: I'm overall positive about the direction that ARMA 3's creative direction seems to have taken, in no small part thanks to the A3-related posting on these forums by such devs as Smookie, RiE, Vespa, Mondkalb and Celery, as well as in-person (at E3 and GC) by such devs as RiE (as Jay Crowe), Ivan and Gaia, and I look forward to the alpha confirming this; the above was meant in response to the seeming implication that ARMA 3's gameplay would necessarily not be good enough for public reveals.

ArmA 2 is infamous for all its perceived jank and problems, releasing a PUBLIC alpha of its sequel, bound to get a ton of attention after a huge influx of interest from the Day Z mod is a PR disaster as the same problems, jank and performance issues will rear its ugly head - No matter how many Alpha stickers and notices you slap on there, it will get received negatively in the groups they wish to attract. And no, 'let them complain' is just stupid, this isn't playground rules of "I don't care, can't hear you lalala" BIS are actually running a business here and they need all the PR traction they can get.

At least with the BF3 beta (I participated) the bugs were funny, and (even with all the "balance problems" of the time) it broadly worked... thankfully this part at least seems to be outdated as a bunch of the stuff that came out around the E3 to Gamescom time period helped with building positive ARMA 3 hype. Was a bunch of it "imagine DayZ running on this engine OMG" and subsequent fights between ARMA hipsters and trolls and newcomers who are fans of "brutally hardcore" (that's what made DayZ more than a mere zombie mod) but are not fans of milsim? Yes, of course...

... but for the first time I can recall, the engine wasn't a public laughingstock, because even in a controlled and limited setting (i.e. sectioned-off showcases set on the smaller island with little AI involvement except as dismounted OPFOR infantry or stationary divers, focusing on a "player centric" presentation*), ARMA 3 looked like it was finally free of the hilariously bad reputation of "all its perceived jank and problems" from ARMA 2. It looked clean and functional and stable, faster-paced and more fluid, and if the community alpha reveals that this will remain the case closer to the release? Oh man have we got a winner that believe you me I'll be telling my friends about!

(Admittedly it helps that the wider DayZ player base may not have completely absorbed the news that the standalone will use an "Arma 2.5" style engine. ;) )

So unless they want yet another Armed Assault, ArmA 2 situation they need to keep the Alpha locked down behind selective testing, P&C or any sort of mechanism that will only entice people who are familiar with the games history and can handle those kind of problems. It's not a demo, it's not meant to persuade people who are unsure about the game to buy it, it's meant to be an actual test to iron out problems and it does NOT make sense to release that kind of alpha for a game know for those problems, to a huge Day Z enticed audience.

Whereas I see the goal of the alpha besides playtesting (since they can do that internally) is to prove that those problems are gone, which IS a PR move... as for the boldfaced part, I take offense at the claim that only the monetarily invested and thus presumable long-time ARMA fanatic should be permitted to decide the development of ARMA 3, when they are the least suited to help the devs achieve the intended ARMA 3 "newbie friendly" direction. Time to quote Mondkalb again:

I believe that old fanatics got somehow blind and/or just used to the very rough edges of the game that are in most cases result of a 11 year old legacy, and they simply don't notice it anymore. For example where an OFP Veteran would say: "Well, that's the engine, it has been doing that always.", and then carries on. A person unfamiliar to the game would say: "Why on earth can't I select my weapon with the number keys above the letters? This is so annoying!", and then probably ragequits.

I like -Coulum-'s response as well:

Exactly. Us fanboys often forget all the little bugs and annoyances that turn other people off arma and therefore don't mind if they are left unattended in turn for more gameplay feautures like better ai, 3d editor, realistic armour simulations, flight model etc. But BIS already know we are buying the game no matter what so I don't believe that their primary objective is to satisfy all our wishes. They want to get rid of all those problems turning off other players so they can expand their player base and therefore make more money. At least that's the way I see it. And I am in no way trying to say that BIS doesn't care about what we want, or that they are selfish and greedy. In fact they are still giving us tons of neat stuff in a3. Its just that the world doesn't revolve around our small comunity and we are not always the centre of BIS attention.

* That is, not "oh here's what the engine can do" but rather "here's what you can do"... I really liked that about the E3/GC presentations.

[Raptor 10]

I think a free to play alpha for everyone would be a nice christmas present. ^^

[kylania 568]

I think a free to play alpha for everyone would be a nice christmas present. ^^

I'd prefer a release on Sept 19th, as nice Talk Like A Pirate Day present. :)

[Nicholas 5]

Wow you guys are really getting into it. Basically there will be some sort of Alpha testing to be done. I'm sure Bohemia Interactive knows what they are doing.

[kremator 1065]

OK so its 100 pages .... release the community alpha BIS :)

[sethos 2]

(Admittedly it helps that the wider DayZ player base may not have completely absorbed the news that the standalone will use an "Arma 2.5" style engine. ;) )Whereas I see the goal of the alpha besides playtesting (since they can do that internally) is to prove that those problems are gone, which IS a PR move... as for the boldfaced part, I take offense at the claim that only the monetarily invested and thus presumable long-time ARMA fanatic should be permitted to decide the development of ARMA 3, when they are the least suited to help the devs achieve the intended ARMA 3 "newbie friendly" direction. Time to quote Mondkalb again:I like -Coulum-'s response as well:* That is, not "oh here's what the engine can do" but rather "here's what you can do"... I really liked that about the E3/GC presentations.

This doesn't make sense. ALPHA means the game is far from done, a product with lots of bugs and missing features - You think that's a platform to prove people 'problems are gone' and it's a PR move to entice people to buy it?

What am I reading.

[lawndartleo 109]

Community alpha and beta releases sound like a very bad idea to me. They are usually rife with issues. Those who know exactly what and alpha/beta is will understand, those who don't will will deluge the forum with commentary that will not be helpful, more likely harmful. I'd rather see a release candidate at a later date to just proof the master before it goes to the DVD press.

"I wonder if Arma2 hipsters are now saying: 'I played the game before DayZ made it so popular!'" - Karel Mořický

Hey, at least DayZ got them here.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Community alpha and beta releases sound like a very bad idea to me. They are usually rife with issues. Those who know exactly what and alpha/beta is will understand, those who don't will will deluge the forum with commentary that will not be helpful, more likely harmful. I'd rather see a release candidate at a later date to just proof the master before it goes to the DVD press.

If it's limited to that Stratis E3 demo, then I think we might not break it. A lot. :) 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.

[chortles 263]

This doesn't make sense. ALPHA means the game is far from done, a product with lots of bugs and missing features - You think that's a platform to prove people 'problems are gone' and it's a PR move to entice people to buy it?

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.)

Community alpha and beta releases sound like a very bad idea to me. They are usually rife with issues. Those who know exactly what and alpha/beta is will understand, those who don't will will deluge the forum with commentary that will not be helpful, more likely harmful. I'd rather see a release candidate at a later date to just proof the master before it goes to the DVD press.

So the "take our word on it" approach of COD? Whereas I feel that "the old hardcores" will be the one to deluge with commentary that will not be helpful, more likely harmful" because they're too close.

If it's limited to that Stratis E3 demo, then I think we might not break it. A lot. :) 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.

LAST I HEARD, the community alpha is limited to Stratis island so far as terrains go... but then again, just about everything about ARMA 3 promoting this year has been set on Stratis. Edited September 15, 2012 by Chortles

[Toasticuss 10]

Alpha should be out to test the core mechanics of the gameplay and engine, such as multiplayer limitations, scripting feedback, mission development behind the scenes...

[chortles 263]

Alpha should be out to test the core mechanics of the gameplay and engine, such as multiplayer limitations, scripting feedback, mission development behind the scenes...

I'm actually in agreement with this -- although, I recall that the alpha will only have single-player at first and that multiplayer functionality would be added in later?

[codarl 1]

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.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Codarl

[tremanarch 6]

who is suma?

how can we also get hands on the alpha version?