Confirmed features now cancelled - your thoughts?

[Raptor 10]

Quality over quantity.

Ahoi Q! :)

Just a small note,

it isn't guarantee that ArmA3 will be a qualitative product (as we all are satisfy with) and to be honest if we look on the previous and further decisions/products at least you can be abit sceptical that this fact will change in ArmA3. But I assume that's a fundamental question, also engine/managment related.

Beside the fact that quality(-control) (SP/MP-related) should be always the priority focus. (It is self-evident, isn't it?)

Edited September 8, 2012 by Raptor

[onlyrazor 11]

Remember - when Arma 2 came out, it didn't even have most of the features you take for granted today. Plenty of the improvements came from OA, and before that, mods. In fact, if an Arma 3: Expansion Pack introduces new features in the same vein as OA, it would in fact be a very big improvement. Besides, in an alpha stage nothing is decided yet.

Wait and see.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

I dont really care as long as they are included later for free, not because i don't want to pay, but i think that if there's going to be, eventually, a 3D editor or TOH's flight model

Why not? Operation Arrowhead expansion was worth it, I mean ship vanilla ArmA II with no aircraft counter-measures and overpowered ground anti-air systems, then add flares later in an expansion... waait, bad example. Ok, ok: graphical improvements, like the SSAO, in-game thermal imaging, a Takistani island, a new campaign, units and another playable force is a better one.

I don't see anything wrong with the 3D Editor coming in a later expansion.

[Flash Thunder 10]

BIS got a hold of the Red River Cycle of success.

Take out future> Player says "this feature was not needed anyways or unrealistic > continue until player is STOLEN FROM!

[instagoat 133]

BIS got a hold of the Red River Cycle of success.

Take out future> Player says "this feature was not needed anyways or unrealistic > continue until player is STOLEN FROM!

That´s a pretty harsh accusation.

[samb 15]

If helicopter physics won't be updated to at least toh standard, I am so not buying Arma3. And I have bought all BiS product so far.

[Nicholas 5]

Underground structures were never confirmed. The only evidence that people have is an image of what they believe was an entrance to a bunker and Rocket stating that underground structures would be perfect for DayZ. ArmA 2: Operation Arrowhead had an image of a mine entrance, yet no underground structures. Someone saying that they would like to have something in the game or it would be perfect for the game does not mean it will be in the game.

The helicopter flight model from Take On Helicopters was confirmed though as it came straight from the horses mouth saying that it would be in the game. I wonder if he meant that it might not be in the Alpha.

Everyone is too quick to jump to conclusions.

[maddogx 13]

Everyone is too quick to jump to conclusions.

Oh so very much this.

[Snowden 1]

Even if it is true that BIS decided to promise features, and has now decided to remove them, that doesn't mean we, the expectant consumers of ARMA 3, should get up in arms about it. With in mind, BIS has no obligation to keep us informed on a day-by-day basis of what is and what is not going into the game. In fact, I see this thread as a reason to keep us more in the dark, if only to avoid these hysterical reactions to small pieces of news.

[instagoat 133]

Even if it is true that BIS decided to promise features, and has now decided to remove them, that doesn't mean we, the expectant consumers of ARMA 3, should get up in arms about it. With in mind, BIS has no obligation to keep us informed on a day-by-day basis of what is and what is not going into the game. In fact, I see this thread as a reason to keep us more in the dark, if only to avoid these hysterical reactions to small pieces of news.

BI never "promised" anything. They were asked about the features, they answered or sometimes even just hinted at them. Some features were "in" at one point, and were found to not work properly, so they were thrown out again. Though, if they indeed made a hard promise on something and I missed that, and that feature is now removed, that´d be bad manners indeed.

As far as I´ve seen, though, none such thing happened. And I agree that they have no obligation, and anything they may say will likely later be twisted depending on how the features turn out.

[slatts 1978]

true, the confirmed feature list should not be trusted 100% and i don´t truts the list 100%, but i read and listen to what the devs says and what the videos and screenshots show us.

If you know it is not to be trusted, why are you posting this?

[kilroy the nerd 14]

1: The ToH model is too hard to fly, and ArmA isn't really all about helicopters anyway. That's why we need mods like Mando Missile.

2: When did they EVER confirm tunnels and underground stuff? Maybe caves on stratis, but never really got pics or anything.

3: I will miss the 3D editor, but hopefully they'll add it eventually.

[Steakslim 1]

1: The ToH model is too hard to fly.

It is? Take away the start up procedure and trim and anyone can fly it with as much practice as required to fly in ArmA2 with any competency as it is, and chances are if the flight model is implemented it'll probably be in that form. The game may not be about helicopters but they are a large part of the game and the TOH flight model is a much desired feature by the community.

[oldbear 390]

From what I have understood talking and listening BIS guys is that they are having big expectations for Ama3.

They enjoy playing Arma as we are, they are players/gamers as we are ... and so they expect to build in the game some nice features.

Sometimes it's working, sometimes it's not. Remember the destruction building effects ... Bis has started something looking great but they had backpedaled because of AI path-finding and MP synchro.

The BIS guys know we are expecting underground structures in one of their products, they have done some great achievements in VBS2, they have make some experiments in Arma3 but atm, the trick don't work in Arma3 environment. For me, underwater warfare is the big thing in Arma3 ... we will go underground a bit later !

We all have hopes, we all have dream, we all have a glimpse at something looking like, we all have more or less heard some developer speaking about what he try to get in the game but the real "confirmed features" are going to be those we can get our hands on while playing the "Community Alpha", I am sorry to say that some of them are only "expectationware".

[nodunit 397]

1: The ToH model is too hard to fly, and ArmA isn't really all about helicopters anyway. That's why we need mods like Mando Missile.

Truth be told I actually had an easier time piloting in TKOH, this may be part in part that if you behave recklessly IE fly too fast and get twitchy, that it has consequences in the present rather than when you decide you want to land only to pass over or encounter some other form of..problem.

I agree with Steakslim, more authentic helicopter flight model has been a big wish for a long while, I wouldn't necessarily say that we need vortex ring states, retreating blade stall and other effects, they would be nice sure but I'm mainly after the agility. And going on an extreme if someone complains about helicopters being difficult to fly then that just means that it's realistic.

Helicopters in reality are one of the most illogical forms of transportation, with hundreds of things effecting it all at once, where one little thing can lead to a huge problem...One person summed it up best to me, the aircraft wants to crash, you must convince it not to.

I think that they had plans to add more until the news came up that "well we don't know what to do with the AI.." as well as physics, which changes EVERYTHING. Bullet ballistics can have more effects based on caliber, but now with the physics you more or less have to take the pre existing coding of ballistics out and redefine with new physics, TKOH did not use physX so the flight model cannot simply be lobbed into A3 without some changing and looking into what the effects are, and this goes for everything.

Edited September 9, 2012 by NodUnit

[max power 21]

This thread's existence would get a lot more credibility if there was actually some kind of confirmation on what exactly was *concretely promised* and then *dropped*.

[Gilson 10]

There is no confirmation on the meaning of what was promised or what has been dropped. It's a fracking pre-alpha, this is just another thread of freaking the fack out because ARMA3 may or may not contain something that may or not even have been planned in the first place.

[chortles 263]

There is no confirmation on the meaning of what was promised or what has been dropped. It's a fracking pre-alpha, this is just another thread of freaking the fack out because ARMA3 may or may not contain something that may or not even have been planned in the first place.

Pretty much... while I'm not accusing devs of incompetence here, I have to imagine that a BI guy's (I think RiE's?) hedging-of-bets about features was intentional, basically "just in case we can't deliver on them IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE REST and we have to drop one", just like what Old Bear said earlier in this thread ("Bis has started something looking great but they had backpedaled because of AI path-finding and MP synchro.").

Vespa weighed in on features, though this was more about "someone complains about a feature that I said no about" than "oh hey I have to explain retracting a feature confirmation":

The reason there is no daytime laser with flashlight, or "only" 3 slots on weapons, is that the cost would be too high - and that, in the end, would harm the project. It's easy to get carried away, obsess about small things and lose grip with reality - I saw it happen many times, always ending up badly. So even if it may seem twisted to an outsider, I actually am proud of dropping/not doing some features - because it means the team is healthy and focused on target.

Moreover, in a previous post:

We can't make all the things, or we'd end up in developer hell - together with Duke Nukem Forever.

[inlesco 233]

Speaking of "I WANT DIS&DAT" problem, people always fail to realize that video games are not only that - it's a business (people make a living of it...) where if you don't act irrationally soon you'll be facing the consequences. Most of the features won't make it to A3 simply because, IMO, there must be some innovation left for the future expansions / installments. And of course, in the progress of A3's development, many things changes, many unexpected decisions are being made. That's natural.

[SASrecon 0]

BIS got a hold of the Red River Cycle of success.

Take out future> Player says "this feature was not needed anyways or unrealistic > continue until player is STOLEN FROM!

Well at least BIS is taking out features before releasing the game/alpha, instead of crapmasters for example saying there's dedi-server support on the box even though it was clearly a lie.

Anyways BIS haven't taken anything away from ARMA2, afaik everything will be left in a similar state/upgraded in A3, don't see what we as a community have to lose.

[Sealife 22]

Surely this thread should be called , things mentioned in interviews that have never been confirmed but because they were mentioned that qualifies as confirmed but there not likely to be int the alpha so let's call them cancelled .

As someone already said A3 alpha programme maybe also renamed ExpectationWare .

The mind boggles how conclusions are allowed to be drawn so half cocked in relation to wants of perfection , Oh The Irony .

[mrcash2009 0]

I think the only time this thread would be valid is on release day of the final product and we have a concrete list of things 100 percent promised that we suddenly notice are missing, apart from that it all seems a bit pointless or very much a "ZOMG!!!!" thread, or something to think up to fill post count and keep some sort of flaky debate going out of boredom.

If it wasn't for BI's approach to its user base you should be thankful we even get this kind of heads up way before an Alpha to even complain before anything is concrete in the first place.

Edited September 9, 2012 by mrcash2009

[dmarkwick 261]

This is why I can understand why developers develop in isolation. Because when they DO communicate, and communicate honestly, you get results like this thread where there is general moaning about things being taken away from them.

[chortles 263]

Or they have complainers ignore the devs' own communications. :( A pity, as Smookie, Vespa, RiE, Celery and Mondkalb have posted great stuff... not least because all of them have taken shots at ARMA's sacred cows...

[mrcash2009 0]

I agree DM its a case of Bullseye syndrome:

"Look wot ya would av won"

(UK 80's ref people will get this)