What if DAYZ becomes a stand-alone game and ARMA3 is still a non popular game

[ProfTournesol 956]

What if this topic is useless now ?

[[aps]gnat 28]

Useless because .... who cares if ArmA3 is "non-popular". The ArmA series is "non-popular" but it still has a great community and a lot of followers, and generally gets played/supported 3-4 times longer than all those other short-lived games ....

I'll still be happy. Probably more-so if DayZ is a roaring success. BIS can then spend more time/money on ArmA3 :D

[Mr. Charles 22]

Take on helicopters

No, the TKOH team is working on A3.

[-GR-Operative 10]

Gnat;2203435']I'll still be happy. Probably more-so if DayZ is a roaring success. BIS can then spend more time/money on ArmA3 :D

Sorry, but this is a failed logic: if DAYZ is a roaring succes, BIS will spend more time/money on DAYZ.

[dmarkwick 261]

Operative;2203582']Sorry' date=' but this is a failed [b']logic[/b]: if DAYZ is a roaring succes, BIS will spend more time/money on DAYZ.

I don't think that word means what you think it means :)

[-GR-Operative 10]

English is not my strong point, so really, I did not understand it :(

EDIT: Or do you mean that it is not logical BIS expending more resources on DAYZ, if it's a success?

Edited August 8, 2012 by [GR]Operative

[i76 1]

You are right about the maintenance bit. As recent betas show BIS fixes mostly what was broken in DayZ by DayZ instead of improving ArmA2. Like that VoN improvement. Nobody uses VoN in ArmA2 because it's crap compared to TS3 and especially ACRE and improving sound quality will not change that a bit because the issue runs much much deeper (lackluster 3D positioning, no custom channel separation allowing for dozens of channels incl. within the channels, no radiochannels). But VoN is used in DayZ because of a very closed nature of a mod forcing the same setup on everybody. Mumble support was voted in a long long time ago but BIS doesn't try to implement that still.

And then other stuff like magazine fullness indicator which was made for DayZ but is of almost no use in ArmA2 where instead the bullet counter on HUD should be removed, DayZ broke VoN with how players respawn, it was fixed for DayZ almost immediately, DayZ broke player authentification, again it was fixed for DayZ almost instantly. At the same time the majority of most voted issues on dev-heaven keeps catching dust.

Just to add, BIS took a week to release a beta fixing the 'gamma goggles' for DayZ (cheap mans NVG)... its a fucking mod, when this issues has been a neglected for nearly 4 years https://dev-heaven.net/issues/8748

But to add insult to injury BIS's fix for this negatively effected ArmA 2 by making it so dark that looking into pine trees at midday was like looking a a bunch of black trees... was eventually fixed but fuck me BIS.

I see a steady decline in the quality of BIS products.... They backed Iron Front which imo was a piece of shit which BIS refused to refund.

They released ACR which was good except for existing map cut-out (cheap BIS).

Then Carrier Command, could be sooooo much better, but BIS fucked it for a quick cash fix.

I think BI$ are starting to see the $$$... and if the trend continues they will be EA in 10 years.

BI$ can do whatever they want.... I'll just move onto the next true developer like Chris Roberts 'Star Citizen'

Edited October 27, 2012 by i76

[onlyrazor 11]

Just to add, BIS took a week to release a beta fixing the 'gamma goggles' for DayZ (cheap mans NVG)... its a fucking mod, when this issues has been a neglected for nearly 4 years https://dev-heaven.net/issues/8748

But to add insult to injury BIS's fix for this negatively effected ArmA 2 by making it so dark that looking into pine trees at midday was like looking a a bunch of black trees... was eventually fixed but fuck me BIS.

I see a steady decline in the quality of BIS products.... They backed Iron Front which imo was a piece of shit which BIS refused to refund.

They released ACR which was good except for existing map cut-out (cheap BIS).

Then Carrier Command, could be sooooo much better, but BIS fucked it for a quick cash fix.

I think BI$ are starting to see the $$$... and if the trend continues they will be EA in 10 years

BI$ can do whatever they want.... I'll just move onto the next true developer like Chris Roberts 'Star Citizen'

Don't take this the wrong way because I fully respect your opinion, but replacing the 'S' in a company's name with a dollar sign just makes everybody that does it look like self-righteous pricks. Money is kinda the whole point of capitalism, you know?

[[aps]gnat 28]

Yeh

Small Game Maker / Developer trying to do their best without the size and shit of other big time (capitalist and self righteous) game company.

...... done good for me for 10 year.

[chortles 263]

To answer the title question: ... then we'll just be right back to where ARMA (OFP)/BI has been for the past decade :rolleyes:

The appeal and civilian market for milsim has always been limited, whereas DayZ (the mod) meant that a "designed for milsim" engine ended up getting way more of a chance from mainstream gamers when it was wrapped in a "open-world zombie survival" wrapper than it ever would have in a "tactical realism milsim" wrapper. In the mainstream there's plenty of continued interest in the DayZ concept but very little love for Real Virtuality, as evidenced by the greeting the news of the standalone being mixed with so, SO much antipathy for "the Arma 2 engine" and "please tell me that this won't use the "Arma 2 engine" or "please tell me that this uses the Arma 3 engine"... you may consider that last one a positive or a negative as you like, but maybe the real reason that DayZ got such priority from BI is because DayZ is now the way that most people even hear of the engine? I mean, Maruk did already talk early on in the mod's life about how it'd get attention. :p

I will note though that a bunch of these "fixes that only happened because of DayZ, or for things that aren't used in regular ARMA 2 play" seem like they were made back before the standalone" happened back when Rocket was still publicly calling for a standalone (and seemingly throwing Real Virtuality 3 under the bus in the process) which suggests to me that the future direction of "how will BI implement the DayZ concept" remained unclear, i.e. when people were publicly wondering "will it be an ARMA 3 DLC? just porting over the mod?" BI may have been internally debating the same thing.

But yeah, if ARMA 3 remains non-popular then it won't be because of "the bugs" this time or because of "insufficient" love from BI... it'll be because the appeal of the idea of "tactical realism milsim" was always limited, even if ARMA 3 makes itself more approachable for those mainstreamers who give it a chance.

P.S. The Army's own "VBS2 successor" contract (as opposed to other VBS2 or VBS2 successor contracts) I've heard from Kotaku is to the tune of almost $45 million over five years, or approximately $9 million/year.

Edited October 27, 2012 by Chortles

[nodunit 397]

Well not everything was changed to befit dayZ, the patch release that changed the ballistics of rifles and especially handguns to better reflect their IRL counterparts was 'welcomed' by the dayZ community with greeeeat loathing. And the things that did come from the dayz patch that supposedly focused on dayz COULD be used to benefit Arma2, the question is A. if anyone will use them, B. in what manner.

I'm not sure I'd say BIS are greedy really, not when I look at the changes that occur between each iteration of the engien, with A3 being the most severe change to date, and the thing is that they don't even NEED Arma 3 to be financially stable, they could drop it, focus on dayZ and VBS and be set. The revenue Arma 3 would bring in couldn't hope to compare to a dayZ stand alone or VBS2 series, yet they press on with a no doubt pricey budget for a game that probably won't return all of it.

If BI were EA, they'd drop Arma altogether and focus on milking DayZ with as many redundant DLC's as possible along with a no questions asked requirement of sprocket being installed and further require you to be online at all times to play the game.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

If BI were EA, they'd drop Arma altogether and focus on milking DayZ with as many redundant DLC's as possible along with a no questions asked requirement of sprocket being installed and further require you to be online at all times to play the game.

Exactly.

[chortles 263]

Well not everything was changed to befit dayZ, the patch release that changed the ballistics of rifles and especially handguns to better reflect their IRL counterparts was 'welcomed' by the dayZ community with greeeeat loathing.

Having taken a glimpse the DayZ mod forums when that ballistics change happened, I can second that; DayZ players were speaking up against the change, and they too resented the change being part of an ARMA 2 patch instead of simply being something that happened in the mod.

I'm not sure I'd say BIS are greedy really, not when I look at the changes that occur between each iteration of the engien, with A3 being the most severe change to date, and the thing is that they don't even NEED Arma 3 to be financially stable, they could drop it, focus on dayZ and VBS and be set. The revenue Arma 3 would bring in couldn't hope to compare to a dayZ stand alone or VBS2 series, yet they press on with a no doubt pricey budget for a game that probably won't return all of it.

I'd point back to Vespa's comment somewhere that the standalone is getting its own engine iteration instead of using Real Virtuality 4 (believe me, the reception of ARMA 3 footage versus ARMA 2 was a lot more positive by these "casuals") because it would be "insane" to try for two separate games using an engine that was still not yet developed maturely, and in any case Rocket has elaborated as well that what's already been released is stable.

Admittedly the hype from these "DayZ casuals" at the since shot-down idea of "DayZ on ARMA 3" was at the idea of the DayZ concept being executed on an engine with such better-looking graphics and infantry movement/weapons handling, but to me that actually bodes well, that ARMA 3 as of GamesCom actually appeared to be on the right track... and the subsequent shoot-down by Rocket announcing that it would use its own engine iteration instead was also "ARMA 3 being on the right track". :p

[Janez 507]

If BI were EA, they'd drop Arma altogether and focus on milking DayZ with as many redundant DLC's as possible along with a no questions asked requirement of sprocket being installed and further require you to be online at all times to play the game.

They would not drop Arma. They would probably add some blue, bloom, make the sun over half of sky, make 90% of map out of bounds and use it to kill CoD (and your eyes). :p

[metalcraze 290]

Well there's some truth to "BI$" thing.

ArmA could be selling much better if many years old issues were fixed. But BIS has its priorities wrong. DayZ will die down and die out. Zombies are a fad just like WW2 games were. And then BIS will have to get back to their original ArmA sale numbers. Which could've been much bigger.

Like BIS had more than 3 years to fix driver's AI - and yet they did almost nothing. Had it been DayZ issue - this wouldn't be an issue anymore.

It took 2 years to fix warping? Come on BIS.

More than a decade to teach AI fight inside buildings? Still nothing. CS bots can do it and their pathfinding is very simple. Oh wait no - in DayZ standalone AI will supposedly be able to run indoors. That's like a giant leap forward or something.

They have an ACR hint telling you to take a knee when you fire - and yet BIS still can't make AI do that after more than a decade. How hard can it be?

Ha I remember how BIS was "we won't be working on Chernarus anymore" and look at what they are doing now :rolleyes:

Edited October 28, 2012 by metalcraze

[katipo66 94]

Good on BIS, why miss an opportunity!!? i don't understand all the whiney bitching, For around $150 I've spent too many hours I'd care to admit on a game that's just getting better, especially with all the topshelf MODs being released, it's crazy.

I hope BIS pull off the double with Arma3 and Dayz, exciting times for them...

[chortles 263]

No, I don't believe that "ArmA could be selling much better if many years old issues were fixed" -- as I answered, milsim's got a popularity ceiling.

I'd add to what you said about years-old issues that there's no competitive pressure from anyone else trying to encroach on the "simulate air, armor and infantry... and modding!" territory, it's all BI's sandbox... because no one else even wants to get into it.

[nodunit 397]

...

Fine well and dandy but do you really think that even with those fixes that Arma 3 would attract as huge a crowd as DayZ? My point is that they wouldn't need Arma to survive any longer, if it didn't mean something to the company, the numbers of Arma players is akin to comparing a them park swimming pool to a great lake.

They would not drop Arma. They would probably add some blue, bloom, make the sun over half of sky, make 90% of map out of bounds and use it to kill CoD (and your eyes). :p

The only reason EA keeps Battlefield afloat is due to the MASSIVE following, if it didn't have that then they'd can it, Arma 3 by it's very nature just cannot compare to the crowd that it would attract. Furthermore they begin anew with each game, it isn't a purpose of leaving cliff hangers again and again, the story is begun and finished at the end, that's it, another one begins with new themes and settings, it's not rehashing.

Yes BI makes some strange decisions and has odd priorities nobody is going to argue that, but you expect me to believe that the company is completely out for money should be compared to EA when-

Arma 1- contained a tweaked lighting system, Track IR, hand signals, graphical enhancements, new flight model, changed a few things gameplay wise (being able to job with AT launchers), holding breath, rolling expand of the map size vs OFP

Arma 2- Further tweaked lighting system, 10KM view distance, swimming, deeper vehicle damage model, leaning, dragging, carrying wounded, a psuedo FLIR system, hand signals, hold breath, continuous patches covering various things, UAV's (albeit not the best), even larger terrain, free version

Arrowhead- More tweaked lighting, particular at sunset, VBS2 FLIR, whispering, vertical and horizontal recoil, weapon ranging, bullet penetration, laser rangefinder on some vehicles, UAV remote control with laser designation and indicators, vastly tweaked HDR (NVG's are now your friend) more video options, free versions of every DLC

Arma 3- HUGE lighting system change, fixed HDR, Diving, water combat, picture in picture, physX, inverse kinetics, enhanced infantry combat (prone stance and prone leaning, reaction time), weapon customization, 20KM view distance, HUUUUGE maps both primary and secondary with most varied terrain to date, adjusted sound system, new animations, body armor system, furthered vehicle damage, even more graphical enhancements and who knows what else.

Each iteration has only added, and to a fault that can be a problem when you add, add, add but don't poolish. But they also continue to allow and promote modding, as well as release patches, keep a tracker dedicated to collecting information on bugs, and much more. And some of you want to compare these guys to EA?

Edited October 28, 2012 by NodUnit

[Sealife 22]

What if :- revenue from DayZ allows BIS to employ more staff to make a more refined Arma3 :) ?

Win WIn WIN win , doesn't matter how you type or say it , its all WIN and Arma 3 will benefit , even if DayZ flops Arma3 will benefit from the processes and the DayZ type mods that will be no doubt be spawned from the arma2 versions :)

[Janez 507]

Eh, it was a joke. ;)

[chortles 263]

Fine well and dandy but do you really think that even with those fixes that Arma 3 would attract as huge a crowd as DayZ? My point is that they wouldn't need Arma to survive any longer, if it didn't mean something to the company, the numbers of Arma players is akin to comparing a them park swimming pool to a great lake.

Arma 3 by it's very nature just cannot compare to the crowd that it would attract.

This is exactly what I'm thinking -- I know that ARMA can't attract as huge a crowd as DayZ, and that's something that I think that the BI forums community for ARMA sometimes has trouble wrapping their head around, and that their collective discontent only grows when DayZ comes in on "the same" engine (when it was a mod and not the standalone) and takes all the hype and the engine (and ARMA 2) end up being known more because of DayZ than for "tactical realism milsim"... and can't admit that that's because the idea of "tactical realism milsim" actually drives away more people than it brings in, or that the ARMA 2 reputation was iffy well before DayZ to non-believers and that its flaws/bugs that players came to accept were unacceptably bad to people for whom DayZ was their first encounter with the engine, the UI, the mechanics of character movement/shooting and so on. :rolleyes:

Heck, that's part of why ARMA 3 was so well-received by the DayZ players... the thing is, for ARMA players they're improvements while for "casuals" they're "you finally made it to our expectations". ;) Both sides like it even after hearing that the standalone will NOT use RV4 (and thus dashing their hopes) but for different reasons... to ARMA players it looks like a good game, but to the DayZ players and other non-ARMA fans it looks like a good engine.

I hope that the difference isn't lost?

The only reason EA keeps Battlefield afloat is due to the MASSIVE following, if it didn't have that then they'd can it,

I wouldn't really agree -- massive following yes, but what EA has wanted was to have a "CoD killer", which I understand was part of the reason for the mid-development switch from PC as the lead platform for BF3 to consoles. I don't like it, but that's the apparent motive -- wanting to build a market share base enough to not just profit but to outright compete for primacy with COD (which BI knows better than to try).

[instagoat 133]

I think the problem is that previously, BI´s record as far as releasing playable releases has been a bit stained. OFP was buggy at release, not unplayably so, but it took a long time (even after the release of Resistance) to clear everything up, and even then, issues remained. Arma, same story, along with shoddy production values, particularily regarding the Queen´s Gambit addon. Arma 2 was, again, pretty much the same story. Especially the german release was difficult to stomach, and for me the goodness of Arma 2 only arrived with Arrowhead.

So far, a lot of bricks have been thrown (unintentionally) into the path of Arma´s success by BI. Not enough publicity for Arma after the success of OFP and the split, a bugged release, a mediocre addon and then on to Arma 2, which had well intentioned and revolutionary changes, but all those were (again) hampered by quality control issues, overengineering (particularily in some missions. I´m looking at you, Manhattan.) as well as lack of a clear line as to what the game was really trying to be. It did pretty much everything, but nothing very well.

I hope Arma 3 will be different in the respect that it will actual completely know what it is doing, and not flop about like Arma 2. A game can´t be a shooter/rts/ecosim/tactical rts/life simulator/navigation trainer/wildlife simulator at the same time. I am exagerrating a bit, but there were certain things Arma 2 could´ve done without, and would´ve been better for it. I hope they will handle things better for Arma 3.

The crux though, really is Advertising. BI are relying too heavily on publicity trough gaming websites and magazines. However, people who do not care about the game in the first place will not read the article and/or check the websites. New people need to be drawn in, and they best not be introduced first to the archived disaster messages about Arma 2s botched germany release (which are still first in line when searching for Arma 2 on youtube, at least for me.)

Without a good, active, and concise PR campaign, Arma 3 will be another fish in the pond. Same for DayZ. If you don´t remind people that you exist, they will forget about you quick.

I hope the devs and particularily the PR dept people are aware of this too.

[rangerpl 13]

Well there's some truth to "BI$" thing.

ArmA could be selling much better if many years old issues were fixed. But BIS has its priorities wrong. DayZ will die down and die out. Zombies are a fad just like WW2 games were. And then BIS will have to get back to their original ArmA sale numbers. Which could've been much bigger.

Saying that ArmA would be the next big blockbuster shooter if it only had a better marketing budget and fewer bugs is absolutely delusional. ArmA is a niche game released to a niche market.

There is no secret EA/Activision conspiracy that is forcing people to buy CoD and BF, people buy them because those games appeal to them. Most people don't have an interest in ArmA because it's an extremely hardcore game, brutally difficult and not always "fun". It's not a game that you just pick up and play for 30 minutes before you go to work (unlike DayZ).

Let's not delude ourselves.

Edit: And personally I wouldn't be so happy if ArmA went ultra-super-duper-hyper-popular all of a sudden. It's not necessarily something that's needed (BIS has managed to turn a profit for the past 11+ years, it's not like they're being subsidized) and I fear that making the game too mainstream would quickly ruin the community.

Edited November 3, 2012 by RangerPL

[iceman77 18]

Yes yes, nobody played ArmA until DayZ came and saved it 11 years later. It's all because of that damn REALISM like infinite medkits and TAB-lock. But hey why stop at realizing that DayZ is real FUN? Why not make ArmA3 a Call of Duty? 1 mln? That will sell 10 mln!

I can't tell if you're serious or not metalcraze. What do you mean "nobody played Arma until DayZ came and saved it 11 years later"? That's ironic, I've seemed to notice a lower number of populated Arma2/CO servers since dayz. And what do you mean by "infinite medkits"? You mean being a medic? Also, it's up to server owners to tweak their configs to an "expert mode" where things like lock boxes (tabbing) & reticles doesn't exist.