Small Token DLC : Chernarus 2 - Open [ ? + Wishlist ]

[dmarkwick 261]

I should like to see an updated Chernarus DLC for both ArmA2 and ArmA3. Fully enterable buildings. Will pay :)

[[frl]myke 14]

I wouldn't pay for A2 as i would see it as "bugfixing" (how Chernarus should have been since release) but i would gladly pay €10 to €15 for a ArmA 3 DLC containing Chernarus+.

[kireta21 13]

I have slighly different idea. What about DLC that would upgrade all ArmA2 assets to Arrowhead standard. Backpacks, optic modes, all enterable buldings in Cherno, USMC and Russian weapons with NV and IR sights, thermal textures for ArmA2-only vehicles (T-90, Vodnik, LAV-25), buckshot for Saiga and M1014, and release it as 5€ DLC, that would require both ArmA2 and Arrowhead, just like ACR does. While remake of Cherno and IR textures can require some work, others are simple config and model tweaks. Surely much less work than, say, ACR

Sure, there are mods for all those things, but "official" version would give as standardization, so helpfull in MP, and likely would have less impact on perfomance than 15+ mods with, quite often, much more detailed models.

[Beagle 684]

I have slighly different idea. What about DLC that would upgrade all ArmA2 assets to Arrowhead standard. Backpacks, optic modes, all enterable buldings in Cherno, USMC and Russian weapons with NV and IR sights, thermal textures for ArmA2-only vehicles (T-90, Vodnik, LAV-25), buckshot for Saiga and M1014, and release it as 5€ DLC, that would require both ArmA2 and Arrowhead, just like ACR does. While remake of Cherno and IR textures can require some work, others are simple config and model tweaks. Surely much less work than, say, ACR

Sure, there are mods for all those things, but "official" version would give as standardization, so helpfull in MP, and likely would have less impact on perfomance than 15+ mods with, quite often, much more detailed models.

most what you ask for is for free in latest 5 beta patches already.

[kireta21 13]

Really? I haven't used BETA for quite some time, which ones?

[Beagle 684]

Really? I haven't used BETA for quite some time, which ones?

Simply use always the last one.

[kireta21 13]

No, I'm asking which of things I mentioned was done in beta :D. I hardly play stock game anymore, so I could easily miss those changes.

[zenomp5 1]

To me, this makes sense if it is brought to ARMA 3. For ARMA 2 you can more than likely just drag the revised Chernobyl map from the DayZ standalone to ARMA 2 - May have to bring over some assets, but don't think it'd be too difficult.

[mrcash2009 0]

Myke;2332092']I wouldn't pay for A2 as i would see it as "bugfixing" (how Chernarus should have been since release) but i would gladly pay €10 to €15 for a ArmA 3 DLC containing Chernarus+.

Isnt that a bit contradictory? To do the same for 3 is still going to be bugfixing right?

I dont think it was ever a bug, as it was intentional on map creation, a bug would be open buildings that just could not be entered through fault design. So asking for it for arma3 is just the same as asking for it for arma2. Lets face it, if they did it for 2 and then ported that to 3, then it covers the entire thing. The rest is psychological in terms of which is more justified to pay for, end results are the same.

Although for business reasons, I can envisage it being packed for DLC for 3 once 3 has arrived for that purchase group, almost a carrot on a stick for sales too I guess.

Anyway, 3 is about a year away, 2 is here now with the map that was made for it, so thats the main point.

Edited March 15, 2013 by mrcash2009

[[frl]myke 14]

Isnt that a bit contradictory? To do the same for 3 is still going to be bugfixing right?

AFAIK Chernarus was included in ArmA 2 but not in ArmA 3. So for ArmA 2 it would "fix some bugs" like non-enterable buildings while for ArmA 3 it would be a addition. Not quite the same IMHO.

[dmarkwick 261]

Myke;2342977']AFAIK Chernarus was included in ArmA 2 but not in ArmA 3. So for ArmA 2 it would "fix some bugs" like non-enterable buildings while for ArmA 3 it would be a addition. Not quite the same IMHO.

IMO "fix some bugs" is definitely not the correct term, as the buildings are not enterable by design, it's not a bug. What you would be paying for is new/additional content.

In any case, I doubt there will be any ArmA2 DLC release of any kind. All we can hope for is a release of Chernarus via DLC for ArmA3, perhaps a porting over of the soon-to-be-released DayZ version, which looks like it will be entirely more enterable and even with new urban areas/buildings as far as I've seen. And, I assume some sort of further processing might be required to make it all PhysX-friendly.

[mrcash2009 0]

IMO "fix some bugs" is definitely not the correct term, as the buildings are not enterable by design, it's not a bug.

Exactly what I mentioned, I agree to differ on that Myke. Performing the exact same modelling and map building 3d tasks to export to a pbo whether its final pbo is placed for Arma3 to pick up or arma2 on launch = the same result & process, the map never had any bugs. The addition would be the buildings being open regardless of platform, cherno exists as a map already for 2 just as much as it is right now to place over into 3, its entire map minus open building for 3 would be the same, whats left? Opening the buildings.

Its a map 'update', no matter which platform version could view it.

Im not expecting this to happen more and more as 3 becomes more popular through alpha and makes 2 "old" in the mind. But, if the dayZ rendition works enough to bring in then that would be a trade off.

Edited March 18, 2013 by mrcash2009

[dmarkwick 261]

Exactly what I mentioned, I agree to differ on that Myke. Performing the exact same modelling and map building 3d tasks to export to a pbo whether its final pbo is placed for Arma3 to pick up or arma2 on launch = the same result & process, the map never had any bugs. The addition would be the buildings being open regardless of platform, cherno exists as a map already for 2 just as much as it is right now to place over into 3, its entire map minus open building for 3 would be the same, whats left? Opening the buildings.

Its a map 'update', just as much as it would be for putting it out on 3.

Im not expecting this to happen more and more as 3 becomes more popular through alpha and makes 2 "old" in the mind. But, if the dayZ rendition works enough to bring in then that would be a trade off.

Dr Feelgood fan, eh? :) me too ;)