Future Release Cycles for Arma 3 and Onward?

[kualus 1]

I am curious, what will be the release cycles for Arma 3 and future releases? Will BI stick with the standard release model, or is some variant of a rolling release cycle being considered?

[PuFu 4600]

1. i guess it depends a lot on the sales.

2. afaik, there is no certain release cycle pattern for BI so far. They have always been the adepts of will release when it's done concept (some might say it has never been fully "done" anyways ;))

[Flash Thunder 10]

Current model (Arma 2 2009 to present) is working fine.

Retail game 50 dollars 2-3 year development cycle

year later Themed Expansion pack 40 dollars 1 year cycle

Themed DLC's 10-20 dollars a piece 3-6 months cycle

This is what I prefer, gives BIS good income and gives us good amount of content.

After DLC's continue forward and create a heavily revise to next generation of Real Virtuality Engine

And BIS could try out the Premium route, paying X amount of dollars upfront and getting the expansion and the DLC's which would be worth it IMO.

[Neopas 10]

Not so fine imho considering that even until now ppl are still coming here, asking what they need to buy in order to play or why they can`t join servers.

[_Mofo_ 1]

Not so fine imho considering that even until now ppl are still coming here, asking what they need to buy in order to play or why they can`t join servers.

That's because people tend not to read and want everything spoon fed to them. If you cater to the lowest common denominator... you end up with a crap product / service. Set the bar high and if you want it bad enough... you'll figure it it out. Cream rises to the top.

As for the release cycles... they should be... "we'll get there when we get there". If you want something that comes and goes in cycles... there is always COD or BF3...4.... that seem to be in the mindset that there must be something new in cycles to get paid for and to keep the players interested in garbage.

[Covert_Death 11]

thats a problem with the game itself.... when playing BF3 you know exactly why you can't join a server that has armored kill if you don't... arma2 just gets jumbled and the servers and mods required are not very apparent. its a game issue not a number of expansion issue

[_Mofo_ 1]

So you're implying that it's the error codes not being descriptive enough when booting you from a game?

Like saying "you cannot play this due to mission content... XXXXXXXX / XXXXXXXXXX / XXXXXX"

It clearly states the error when you get booted out of a server down the text area unless I'm mistaken somewhere... how hard to read?

-------

Edit...

Also, when you really think about it... the game is OPEN where you can write you own mods to it. When the "BASE GAME" was developed... there were no mods to it so the idea that somehow the devs can continually update the BASE GAME to reflect all the new mods is quite out there.

Speaking of which... you "could" write a server browser for it..... how much time ya got?

P.s... BF3 is a bad example in this case... we can't mod it and therefore... the DEVS have complete control over the game and what "should" throw errors. Apples to Oranges bud... just doesn't work.

Edited January 29, 2013 by _Mofo_

[NoRailgunner 0]

Last time I checked it was clear that A2 + OA = CO and that the optional DLC's are BAF, PMC, ACR. Imo BIS said that they are working on the A3 mp browser/UI to make it more userfriendly and accessible.... the release cycles for Arma 3 and future releases depending on how good/bad the game is from the get-go. Maybe you can make a deal with BIS if you buy 10 million copy's of A3 at release day? ;)

[gossamersolid 155]

So you're implying that it's the error codes not being descriptive enough when booting you from a game?

Like saying "you cannot play this due to mission content... XXXXXXXX / XXXXXXXXXX / XXXXXX"

It clearly states the error when you get booted out of a server down the text area unless I'm mistaken somewhere... how hard to read?

I'm saying the error messages are complete shit. The error messages will output the PBO Patch names, which won't help people unless they actually know what it means.

"You cannot play this due to CA_Wheeled2 missing"

Most people don't know what the hell that means. I know that it means the player is missing ArmA 2 content (Used to see this all the time when OA came out and all the standalone derps were trying to play CO maps).

To be honest, the standalone expansion was a terrible idea. I really hope for ArmA 3 that the expansions are actually expansions.

[Nicholas 5]

I'm saying the error messages are complete shit. The error messages will output the PBO Patch names, which won't help people unless they actually know what it means.

"You cannot play this due to CA_Wheeled2 missing"

Most people don't know what the hell that means. I know that it means the player is missing ArmA 2 content (Used to see this all the time when OA came out and all the standalone derps were trying to play CO maps).

To be honest, the standalone expansion was a terrible idea. I really hope for ArmA 3 that the expansions are actually expansions.

You are 100% correct. I've said it many times before and completely agree with you that the standalone expansion created much confusion among people new to the series. Even some veterans of the series were confused by the standalone expansion.

They need to make it clear why someone is kicked from a server. As you said, most people have no clue what "CA_Wheeled2" is. It should be more like "Sorry, you need (Addon/DLC Name) to play on this server."

[metalcraze 290]

I'm saying the error messages are complete shit. The error messages will output the PBO Patch names, which won't help people unless they actually know what it means.

There's this thing called Google. Maybe you've heard of it? I think more people should start using this underground search engine. It's quite challenging to use I know. You gotta input some text and hit enter and leave everything else to Google but it works.

[fragmachine 12]

I have the same issue with errors occuring when trying to play missions i've made in editor - "missing this and that"

Even when i installed ACE via SixUpdater it showed me missing files of ACE content - and that surprised me. But I found them separatedly on the internet, put them into addon folder and viola - everything works!

Back on topic: In my opinion there will be an ArmA4 when BIS decide to work on it. We should be happy that they working on ArmA 3 - and that they will bring us developer support for it and attention to that title like no any other developer of games like BF3 or COD would.

Edited February 1, 2013 by fragmachine

[Nicholas 5]

There's this thing called Google. Maybe you've heard of it? I think more people should start using this underground search engine. It's quite challenging to use I know. You gotta input some text and hit enter and leave everything else to Google but it works.

Obviously people can look up the error message online. But it should not use the .pbo names when the error message pops up.

[dm 9]

But it should not use the .pbo names when the error message pops up.

Pro tip: it doesn't ;)

[metalcraze 290]

Obviously people can look up the error message online. But it should not use the .pbo names when the error message pops up.

Actually it should.

You can be missing some PBO (for whatever reason, like fragmachine above) but it will tell you "oh some mod is missing". And you will look and be like "hey but its folder is there and its files are there".

Or perhaps one stores several mods in a single folder like I do because having 40 folders for every mod (islands especially) I have installed is annoying and the mod string goes through the roof. It will be much easier for me to know what exactly am I missing instead of some vague message with a mod name.

If it's that impossible/uncomfortable/challenging/hard for people to type even the little bit of a message into google and check the very first result telling them what's wrong - why are they dealing with ArmA2 in the first place?

Edited February 1, 2013 by metalcraze

[Janez 531]

And BIS could try out the Premium route, paying X amount of dollars upfront and getting the expansion and the DLC's which would be worth it IMO.

Yeah... I really hope not.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Well BIS could have made more simple + descriptive error messages if default A2 or OA (or DLC) content is missing for example: "This mission requires Arma2 content!" or "You need Operation Arrowhead to play this mission!" As for community addon/mods there could be error messages like "Addon/Mod 123 is missing, please make sure you have it activated!" or "Mission Kekeke requires Addon/Mod version 666 - you have another version activated!" Just simple and userfriendly... :)

[Smurf 12]

Or they could deliver a complete mod management tool that covers all that.

[metalcraze 290]

Well BIS could have made more simple + descriptive error messages if default A2 or OA (or DLC) content is missing for example: "This mission requires Arma2 content!" or "You need Operation Arrowhead to play this mission!" As for community addon/mods there could be error messages like "Addon/Mod 123 is missing, please make sure you have it activated!" or "Mission Kekeke requires Addon/Mod version 666 - you have another version activated!" Just simple and userfriendly... :)

That's descriptive? What if I have ArmA2 installed and it will tell me I'm "missing ArmA2 content" just because maybe there was some pbo added/deleted in some patch? No there should be a list of what exactly I'm missing. Version 1.2 of some mod may have some pbo cut out, but version 1.1 has it and a mission made with that in mind will tell me "oh that mod is missing"?

[NoRailgunner 0]

@metalcraze: If "mabye" BIS delete/update some files in their patches I'm pretty sure that they are able to take care of these certain error/warning messages too. Highly doubt that players need to search and download vanilla game files/content elsewhere - if they have a legit copy of games/DLC's. As for community made content and updates - you may ask the addon makers why they cut out stuff. Probably this stuff isn't that nice/polished and addon makers like to improve it? Or they simply have no permission to use it? Would be easier for many people to deal with missions/addons/mods if there would be a little more respect and not only "grabbing hands grab all they can" attitude.

[metalcraze 290]

So BIS will have to take care of for example updating old (which can mean years old) user missions to be able to run with the current patch?

You fire up some old mission and it goes like "you are missing ArmA2 content" - so surprise - you still must type that into google but now with a cool bonus - enjoy digging through dozens of threads trying to figure out what exactly is your problem. Since now you have 1 problem description for a 100 of them.

Whereas stuff that says "missing fuelcan paa"/etc brings you right to where you want.

And FYI there was a thread years ago where someone complained that an old mod was glitching out after some ArmA2 update because of changed/missing stuff.

Too lazy to use google, too lazy to look for and do a simple installation of mods. In 5 years it will be people demanding AI giving them a warning before it shoots them (oh wait no that happened already)

Edited February 1, 2013 by metalcraze

[NoRailgunner 0]

metalcraze - you do know that BIS were and still are very cautious about "cutting out stuff" and do prefer not to break default game missions with their own updates and IF they probably do/will announce it? Are you aware that its more secure to use the legit copy of a game/DLC instead of relying on files that are downloadable somewhere on the internet? Who knows maybe BIS will include a "repair" and/or "reset" feature for A3 so people don't have to re-install all of the game or BIS will add even a feature/service which can optional check if the default game is correctly installed? Btw why should one waste time with finding the right addon/mod version if a proper working addon/mod browser-launcher is able to do this? User missions are not the problem for BIS because its up to the user to update/upgrade their own missions.

[_Mofo_ 1]

Well BIS could have made more simple + descriptive error messages if default A2 or OA (or DLC) content is missing for example: "This mission requires Arma2 content!" or "You need Operation Arrowhead to play this mission!" As for community addon/mods there could be error messages like "Addon/Mod 123 is missing, please make sure you have it activated!" or "Mission Kekeke requires Addon/Mod version 666 - you have another version activated!" Just simple and userfriendly... :)

You must have missed what I put in my first post...

That's because people tend not to read and want everything spoon fed to them. If you cater to the lowest common denominator... you end up with a crap product / service. Set the bar high and if you want it bad enough... you'll figure it it out. Cream rises to the top

The problem with trying to cater to ALL the people who can't be bothered with learning how something works or how to solve problems... you end up with a product trying to accommodate EVERYONE in which NOONE is happy.

Since the devs allow the community to MODIFY the simulator itself, it stands to reason you need to have errors codes at the LOWEST LEVEL so that "IF" only one of the .pbo files are modified... you know WHICH one it is. Common sense stuff here... I know.

Example:

If I changed the pine trees on Cherno to be maple trees... compiled a .pbo and signed it then used it on my server.... when a person connects they get....

(A) You cannot play this mission due to missing content... Edit_Trees.pbo

or as you see it, they would get...

(B) You cannot play this mission due to missing content... ERROR

Since the devs have no possible way to keep up with mods that written and published, much less than the ones not published, it stands to reason it would just be a blanket ERROR of some reason that would cause even more confusion than an actual file description.

This "SIMULATOR" is pretty dang advanced compared to "games" on the net and the controls alone take a level of skill from the end user. I'm sure the devs probably think that if you're skilled enough and have the drive enough to play this sort of simulator... then you have the skills to solve the problems that may arise by using it as well. You know... things like searching the internet, posting in the forums with exact error messages, etc etc.

Edited February 1, 2013 by _Mofo_

[NoRailgunner 0]

Well _Mofo_ BIS have to and do care primarily about that their own project/game and that it stays enjoyable out of the box. If someone is screwing around and "forget" to make a proper addon/mod or replacement - this person is responsible for his work and bugs too. As for your example the error message could be: "Mission 1337 requires maple trees version 0 addon!" or a little bit different: "This mission is using modified content, please download and activate addon "maple tree version 0" !" This is simply more userfriendly and helpful (maybe even faster) than forcing every player to search for certain + working pbo files in the internet.... Btw where is the problem with

why should one waste time with finding the right addon/mod version if a proper working addon/mod browser-launcher is able to do this?

Nothing against some alternative and oldschool download options just in case of "shit happens"....

[zoog 18]

Not so fine imho considering that even until now ppl are still coming here, asking what they need to buy in order to play or why they can`t join servers.

Added to the confusion is that a combination of different installations have a second combined name as well :s Worst move ever :D

Arma 2, Arma 2: Operation Arrowhead, Arma 2: Combined Operations, British Armed Force, Private Military Company, Arma 2: Reinforcements, Army of Czech Republic....