Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
NeuroFunker

Things you wish NOT to have in the game!

Recommended Posts

I think the underwater aspect is awesome. And I think it will reveal a new world and come to great use in the milsim community.

What I'm scared of is them trying to make it more playable and mainstream..

My feelings exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... bugs life Iranians.

This brought a smile to my face. :)

The Fast and the Furious: Baghdad Drift

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I was reminded of it again today I don't want my parked HMMWV to spin 180 degrees while I'm firing the .50 cal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i dont want 'STEAM' as prerequisite for the game.

awww, don't cry... only thing I don't like about Steam (I'm a current Steam user) is that it very briefly but frequently drops connection. Although we kinda saw this coming. First with the OA Beta being added to and updated through Steam, and seeing an ArmA3 ValveTestApp. Just curious, and I know this is a little offtopic, why do you anti-Steam guys hate Steam?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well too bad, 'cause most of us want it this year, not in +1 years from now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
awww, don't cry... only thing I don't like about Steam (I'm a current Steam user) is that it very briefly but frequently drops connection. Although we kinda saw this coming. First with the OA Beta being added to and updated through Steam, and seeing an ArmA3 ValveTestApp. Just curious, and I know this is a little offtopic, why do you anti-Steam guys hate Steam?

If it's a base platform, at least they'll be less moaning about mods failing through steam and annoying updates... because we'll all be in the same bucket!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well too bad, 'cause most of us want it this year, not in +1 years from now.

^this. I'm all for a developers taking their time with a game to make sure it's the best possible, but that doesn't mean that they should spend forever working on a game. For ArmA3's initial target date, which, mind you, was Summer 2012, are late. It got pushed back Fall 2012, then to Winter 2012, and now to "2013". That's not an issue of "we're taking as long as necessary to polish the game for release". This is an issue of failing to meet target dates, as in development is going too slow, not taking necessary time. This is clearly pointed out in the recent developer blog. Simply, they are late by their timetable. Judging from the wording of this devblog, ArmA3 will probably be released later this year (as in around Fall/Winter 2013). Why do I say this? Because they are integrating Steam in to ensure that they release in 2013. As in they are struggling to do that, which means that it'll happen towards the end of the year. I'm not expecting the community alpha any time soon either. Seems like the game development has been really delayed, and not because of the Limnos incident. So for me, I want the game to be polished, but I don't want the game taking forever to be released. Because if a game takes too long to release, chances are it's not releasing and will be cancelled. Saw this with Novalogic's Delta Force Angel Falls, saw this with LucasArts' Battlefront 3. Seen it with a couple other less known games. Taking a very long time for release is not an indicator of time spent polishing the game. It's an indicator of failure to meet milestones. And, judging from the devblog, it's failure to meet milestones and a number of setbacks that is the reason for the delays and the radio silence.

Edited by antoineflemming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For ArmA3's initial target date, which, mind you, was Fall 2011

Lolwut? Not it fucking wasn't. Arma3 was announced in May 2011 with the release scheduled for Summer 2012.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bugs, glitch, oh wait that is imposible, even in Minecraft

people complaining about mods like DayZ, Wastelands, etc... this mods keeps the game alive, not all the people likes military things only, and this engine is so powerful that will be a shame not to have it. And I dont even play DayZ or Wastelands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lolwut? Not it fucking wasn't. Arma3 was announced in May 2011 with the release scheduled for Summer 2012.

Oh, so Summer 2012 was the first target release? Even still, it got pushed from Summer to Fall to Winter to now "2013". They've failed to meet milestones. They haven't been polishing. They aren't there yet. They are still implementing features. So all this talk of "BIS is taking their time making the best game possible" is bullshit. And, if you read the devblog, you'd know that this is the primary reason they went with Steam. It saves them development time.

And, SpetS15, what does this have to do with DayZ? ArmA2 was kept alive long before DayZ or Wasteland (no "s" on the end) were released. If someone wants to make a Wasteland mod for ArmA3, well they are free to do so. But there's no point for an ArmA3 DayZ mod for the DayZ-only community (as in those who buy ArmA2 ONLY for DayZ) when there will be a DayZ standalone which is on the ArmA3 engine. Oh, and don't say DayZ Standalone is on the TKOH engine. With all the features they are adding, it's on the ArmA3 engine. It's got the weather, the lighting, the clothing customization, the character models, the enhanced terrain and vegetation, etc. Having DayZ and ArmA3 separate means that those who really only care for the zombie survival game can have that in DayZ, while those who care for the military gameplay of ArmA can have that in ArmA3. And if someone loves both? Well, I'm sure there will be zombie addons for ArmA3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^this. I'm all for a developers taking their time with a game to make sure it's the best possible, but that doesn't mean that they should spend forever working on a game. For ArmA3's initial target date, which, mind you, was Summer 2012, are late. It got pushed back Fall 2012, then to Winter 2012, and now to "2013". That's not an issue of "we're taking as long as necessary to polish the game for release". This is an issue of failing to meet target dates, as in development is going too slow, not taking necessary time. This is clearly pointed out in the recent developer blog. Simply, they are late by their timetable. Judging from the wording of this devblog, ArmA3 will probably be released later this year (as in around Fall/Winter 2013). Why do I say this? Because they are integrating Steam in to ensure that they release in 2013. As in they are struggling to do that, which means that it'll happen towards the end of the year. I'm not expecting the community alpha any time soon either. Seems like the game development has been really delayed, and not because of the Limnos incident. So for me, I want the game to be polished, but I don't want the game taking forever to be released. Because if a game takes too long to release, chances are it's not releasing and will be cancelled. Saw this with Novalogic's Delta Force Angel Falls, saw this with LucasArts' Battlefront 3. Seen it with a couple other less known games. Taking a very long time for release is not an indicator of time spent polishing the game. It's an indicator of failure to meet milestones. And, judging from the devblog, it's failure to meet milestones and a number of setbacks that is the reason for the delays and the radio silence.

alarmbells ringing when they are forced to cut corners like this. where else did they have to cut corners. relying heavily on steam systems never seem to actually be a positive to me, it might be easier for the developers, but it never seems better for me as a user. although I don't mind one way or the other now, being steam only means I am not going to buy the game. too bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't want exclusive steam version

We get it. But that's going to happen so chill the fuck up and deal with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't want exclusive steam version

Eat your vegetables boy! It's healthy for you and ArmA3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alarmbells ringing when they are forced to cut corners like this. where else did they have to cut corners. relying heavily on steam systems never seem to actually be a positive to me, it might be easier for the developers, but it never seems better for me as a user. although I don't mind one way or the other now, being steam only means I am not going to buy the game. too bad.

Yeah, too bad Steam is a dealbreaker for some. Don't really get why, but I'm still getting it. Guess you just have to miss out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pls, even we have sort of democracy, cut it off with NO STEAM FFS stuff! It's as nearly as saing: no futuristic setting in arma 3, FUUUU!!! etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pls, even we have sort of democracy, cut it off with NO STEAM FFS stuff! It's as nearly as saing: no futuristic setting in arma 3, FUUUU!!! etc.

Well, I fail to see why the people refusing to use Steam should stfu now. Or you see anyone saying 'cut off the praising now?'

Deal with the fact that there are people around refusing to use Steam, they have the same right to complain as the ones who dislike the futuristic approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We get it. But that's going to happen so chill the fuck up and deal with it.
Fairly typical (and pathetic) response that...though I wonder how much whining would be going on from the other side if the decision would have been to cut ties with Steam?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I fail to see why the people refusing to use Steam should stfu now. Or you see anyone saying 'cut off the praising now?'

Deal with the fact that there are people around refusing to use Steam, they have the same right to complain as the ones who dislike the futuristic approach.

says another steam-hater.

---------- Post added at 20:58 ---------- Previous post was at 20:57 ----------

Fairly typical (and pathetic) response that...though I wonder how much whining would be going on from the other side if the decision would have been to cut ties with Steam?

i wouldn't care at all, i just wanna finally get my hands on alpha at least. But since i'm using steam a lot, that are good new for me and everyone whos steam-friendly like me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×