Introducing certain features after game-release

[SASrecon 0]

The confirmation of underground buildings being delayed made me think a little,

how plausible would it be for BIS to release their game as planned, and maybe work on a feature for a few months (in this case underground structures), incorporate it into Limnos and release it in a patch/DLC/expansion as a sort of 'Limnos plus' with added caves & basements.

BIS has 'sort of' done this in the past with in Arma1 where if I recall correctly the Arma1 demo contained an island called south Sahrani http://community.bistudio.com/wikidata/images/b/b3/ArmA_SaraLite_satalite_map.jpg (141kb) and an updated South Sahrani was released a few months after release in a patch (1.14?) along with 'warfare mode' and a few other cool things, Two roads were added linking Paraiso to other places better and I think a few changes were made to the area in Corazol near to where the island was cut-off from North Sahrani.

However with a feature like FLIR, it was hard to integrate with older weapons/vehicles (IIRC the AH-1Z still had the old FLIR for some time, or that may just be for people who didn't buy OA I can't remember the exact details so don't scrutinize me for this example!)

These were just minor changes but my question is why don't game designers do this more often?

Pros:

-Keeps the community happy

-Keeps 3d artists, more specifically map designers and AI programmers busy after release

Con(s):

-Some people could complain that BIS should've released features at release and that they paid for an incomplete game bla bla..

-Effort could be spent on more important things? (But afaik that's only the situation before release, afterwards secondary priorities become important as the 'primary' priorities are already finished :p)

It seems like the Pros outweigh the Cons, if you post/pm me some more I'll add them, now discuss!

(For those of you who don't know)

• the idea of underground structures in Arma is was put on hold because the AI couldn't navigate in them and the developers didn't want to move resources from elsewhere

[JaFuzz 1]

I'd rather just let them work on it. Get it all finished and polished the best they can, then any problems that arise they can fix in patches.

But they do need to hurry up lol

[Nicholas 5]

I must ask, when was underground structures even confirmed?

---------- Post added at 10:13 ---------- Previous post was at 10:06 ----------

I just don't get it. They've never confirmed nor mention that there would be underground structures in the first place. Everyone was just judging from a picture. If we remember back from OA, there was also a screenshot of a mine entrance, but no underground structures. Would you rather have then release a buggy game, or release a game with little bugs?

[wiggie 24]

I'm not actually too bothered about content being released later in the development cycle of the game. Post launch updates are really healthy for both a game and a community in my eyes. Though I've never had this problem, many of my friends found ARMA II got very stale and boring after launch, and eight months after buying the game, they stopped playing it... Then, Ping, a year after launch, Operation Arrowhead came out, and the interest was renewed.

Operation Arrowhead is a prime example of how expansions should work in the games industry. They not only added new units, gear, worlds and vehicles to mess around with, but they updated the technology with features like backpacks and thermal imaging, hard coded into the engine. It was refreshing, as on the most basic levels, the US ARMY and Takistan is just a reskin of ARMA II that Modders had already done, but adding new features, like backpacks, flares, thermal imaging and secondary optics, gives new features for the player go utilize and explore, and it really brought the game into a new level of detail.

However, despite praising that, I have not been particularly keen on the DLC's for Operation Arrowhead. When British Armed Forces was announced, I was very excited, being British and all, I was looking forward to playing my own countries forces... And sure, the units and vehicles looked absolutely great, and there were some nice new weapons to play with, but I must admit that with no Mastiff's or Ridgebacks, and a severe lack of ground vehicles or fixed wing aircraft in general, I was a little dissapointed with the game, as it didn't give me a full faction.

Then PMC and especially ACR did let me down quite a bit. A few units that had been reskinned at random to add diversity, a helicopter and some SUV's in one, and the same in the other with tWO maps that had been cloned from Chernarus... I must confess, I was upset. Sorry for the over detail there, most of you already know what I'm saying, but I have to say that I don't like the DLC model at all.

Personally, I would rather have an expansion, once a year, that adds a nice load of shiny new stuff, like armies, weapons, features and islands, rather than a "Booster Pack" for the game.

I love Bohemia Interactive to the death, and no matter what they release, if its for ARMA, I will buy it, but I would like them to stick to Expansions, rather than DLC's.

[Maio 293]

I must ask, when was underground structures even confirmed?

---------- Post added at 10:13 ---------- Previous post was at 10:06 ----------

I just don't get it. They've never confirmed nor mention that there would be underground structures in the first place. Everyone was just judging from a picture. If we remember back from OA, there was also a screenshot of a mine entrance, but no underground structures. Would you rather have then release a buggy game, or release a game with little bugs?

It never was. Dean Hall mentioned it for DayZ and people started assuming.

[Nicholas 5]

Also, just thought I would mention that then working towards a stable release should not mean that there will be fewer patches. There are always things that can be improved upon, its just nice to have a stable game on release.

I have zero issues with content being added in later. The Eagle Wing campaign was amazing.

[kylania 568]

I love content added later, keep it coming! :)

[Ekko 1]

Content added later keeps the game up to date in my opinion, and it just makes it all more exiting to launch the game again.

[Scoggs 1]

I wouldn't mind at all. I understand they they have limited resources and need to release at some point.

I would love to see the 3-D editor put in at some point and also TOH flight model implemented. I don't mind if it is put in after the fact if the release build is stable.

[Mr. Charles 22]

Nonononono. Fix the DATA after release, don't start several other construction sites at the same time. There are lots of Data errors and bugs present in A2 now, because the modelers and artists all work on the next projects. The only things which are regularly fixed are engine bugs/features.

[ceeeb 147]

BI have a history of releasing expansions with a "1.5 engine" with new features (OFP: Resistance, Operation Arrowhead), so it's not unlikely they will do the same for Arma3. While I think this is generally a good thing, the improved releases tend to abandon all of the original content (old missions no longer work, new features don't work with the old units).

To me this is a shame, as the original release generally features more content than the improved engine release. To partially abandon say two years of content work only a year or so after original release is a great shame. Ideally the content development of any improved engine releases should include extending the original content to be compatible with the new engine features.

[Smurf 12]

It's inevitable, they need to continue working on something and make money. But I really don't like the idea of stand-alone expansions (I can see why was done with OA....), not keeping up with new standards or subpar DLCs.

[giorgygr 61]

Basically "I" don't like to 'refresh' my excitement via Expansions and DLC's.

I want something to 'park' for next 2-3-10 years.

I want a "monster-of-capabilities" software release..and maybe they can add some stuff in the form of 'patch'

iMo

[wipman 1]

Hi, the thing of the bonus DLC wouldn't be bad... if it were for free, if you had to pay for a certain DLC that you think that don't worth it, you'll have again the biggest mistake that BIS did, split out the community between those with the DLCs and those with the basic game; that's what killed the game and i would suggest 'em to don't do it again. Let's C ya

[pettka 694]

Hi, the thing of the bonus DLC wouldn't be bad... if it were for free, if you had to pay for a certain DLC that you think that don't worth it, you'll have again the biggest mistake that BIS did, split out the community between those with the DLCs and those with the basic game; that's what killed the game and i would suggest 'em to don't do it again. Let's C ya

And how was the community split? I still wonder how may anyone blame us for splitting the community even when we added lite versions of DLCs to allow all players, not only DLC buyers, to play with new units and features. Or are features for free splitting the community? :icon_twisted:

[Tonci87 163]

And how was the community split? I still wonder how may anyone blame us for splitting the community even when we added lite versions of DLCs to allow all players, not only DLC buyers, to play with new units and features. Or are features for free splitting the community? :icon_twisted:

I don´t think that the DLCs are splitting the community. But I think that the DLC stuff isn´t used very often in MP.

[Steakslim 1]

Hi, the thing of the bonus DLC wouldn't be bad... if it were for free, if you had to pay for a certain DLC that you think that don't worth it, you'll have again the biggest mistake that BIS did, split out the community between those with the DLCs and those with the basic game; that's what killed the game and i would suggest 'em to don't do it again. Let's C ya

You sure you don't mean those with Arrowhead and those without?

[chortles 263]

I don´t think that the DLCs are splitting the community. But I think that the DLC stuff isn´t used very often in MP.

Well, even accounting for the "Lite" packs in OA patches, I think that that's because many players are using user-made addons in place of BI's stuff anyway...