Will Arma 3 replace Arma 2?

[BoltboxerPro 1]

Arma 3 just doesn't feel good for me. It takes all of the things I enjoy about arma 2 like the countless glitches, retarded ai, the balance and shear fun of playing a2 and replaces it with this futuristic style gameplay. I've tried Arma 3 for a short while but I'm definitely sticking with Arma 2 for the next ten years.

[fitzee 7]

I'd say avoiding distribution system like Steam es equal to "searching for a new hobby other than gaming". Sooner or later. Gardening can be fun, too.

Well since even Valve doesnt even make their own big games "steam exclusive", I would guess that would be rather later than sooner. Plus, I'm no kid so maybe "gardening" is a good idea :rolleyes:

Besides, on top of the usual pain in the arse that steam is/has been/can and will be, the last time I was foolish enough to purchase a game on steam, they charged my credit card every time I launched the game for a month.

I would have had no problem what so ever, puchasing ArmA3 from the BIS store. Thats how I got Queens Gambit, OA , BAF and PMC. Steam has basicly given me nothing but headaches, as I said BIS has really dropped the ball on this one. But to each their own I suppose.

[cam22222 10]

I hope that it will mostly replace but im sure tehre will still be people playign arma 2

[tragicxxjoy 10]

I wonder the same thing.

[foffy 58]

For those here saying Steam was a bad move, can you please tell me why you think this? This is one of the only places I visit on the internet that seems to have such a hostile view of Valve and the Steam platform. I've seen mods for tons of games available on Steam, so how does making it Steam-only kill this? The mods we have now clearly aren't effected by anything this service offers unless there's something coming that I don't know about that all of the naysayers do know about. To me, the move to Steam was a no brainer; there's been at least one ArmA release in the top sellers on Steam list since DayZ launched last year, making that platform the most successful avenue BI has had with any of their games.

Wrap your head around that; for over a year, something in the ArmA series has been on the best seller list on Steam every single week, where ArmA III was outselling fucking TOMB RAIDER when it launched. How was this move incredibly dumb? Two months since the Alpha launch and ArmA III is still on those charts. BI has found incredible success on Steam, so it is very logical that moving forward they would heavily pump the game on that platform. And who knows if Steam will be the only platform for it; The Witcher 2 launched with DRM, and after a few weeks CD Projekt removed all DRM content from every channel they released the game in. Changes can happen with things.

[sander 14]

Sales figures nor availability of mods have anything to do with it. A product is not bought (or in the case of a Steam game rather rented) based on the number of copies sold or whether there are mods for it. The arguments have been put forward in many previous threads. In short it boils down to this: it is a bot net system that requires the consumer not only to relinquish his consumer rights (read the conditions you agree to), but also control over his own computer and restricts the user more heavily than other methods of distribution. It is useless overhead wasting resources on a user's machine and by introducing this unneeded dependency on a third party it introduces unnecessary risk (Steam browser vulnerability), violating one of the basic principles of sound computing: always run with minimal privileges and services. That Steam offers advantages to the developers is clear, but my primary interest is in the advantages it offers to me and there it falls well short of the mark. That means I will give Arma III a pass.

Regards,

Sander

Edited May 13, 2013 by sander

[chortles 263]

For those here saying Steam was a bad move, can you please tell me why you think this? This is one of the only places I visit on the internet that seems to have such a hostile view of Valve and the Steam platform. I've seen mods for tons of games available on Steam, so how does making it Steam-only kill this? The mods we have now clearly aren't effected by anything this service offers unless there's something coming that I don't know about that all of the naysayers do know about. To me, the move to Steam was a no brainer; there's been at least one ArmA release in the top sellers on Steam list since DayZ launched last year, making that platform the most successful avenue BI has had with any of their games.

Wrap your head around that; for over a year, something in the ArmA series has been on the best seller list on Steam every single week, where ArmA III was outselling fucking TOMB RAIDER when it launched. How was this move incredibly dumb? Two months since the Alpha launch and ArmA III is still on those charts. BI has found incredible success on Steam, so it is very logical that moving forward they would heavily pump the game on that platform. And who knows if Steam will be the only platform for it; The Witcher 2 launched with DRM, and after a few weeks CD Projekt removed all DRM content from every channel they released the game in. Changes can happen with things.

Take a look at the Steamworks thread, but TL;DR there were massive concerns about any persisting DRM (as opposed to "launch" DRM that BI had a reputation for patching out after several months) that even had a former dev protesting, concerns over how offline mode would work due to several posters' less-than-stable connections*, continued fears that "Steam integration" would somehow result in even more of an influx of casuals who would somehow push the devs into making Arma 3 an arcade FPS (personally I thought that the horse had long ago fled the barn when it came to "influx of casuals"), new fears over IP rights due to a reputation for Steam Workshop being prone to mod theft and a certain EULA clause**, the prior less-than-great reputation of the Steam version of Arma 2 (rather ironic in retrospect), belief that the Steam client was a performance hog, seeming uncertainty over whether this meant that the Steam storefront would become the only purchasing point... and though frankly, the idea of BI having somehow "sold out" or "gone mainstream" (cue all the jokes about Arma hipsters) was there. A lot.

That Steam offers advantages to the developers is clear

The thing that amuses me about the initial post-announcement drama, Foffy, is that the announcement was very overt about "Steam offers advantages to the developers" and "because Maruk told us to get this game out in 2013, and without going Steam-required we weren't going to meet Maruk's objective" as why BI was going Steam-required for Arma 3, no hiding behind dishonesty like EA/Maxis with SimCity. :lol:

* This concern was not just for the purposes of single-player (anyone else remember why Ubisoft got such a bad rep here? The first game to get their infamous "always-online" DRM was Assassin's Creed II, which had no multiplayer!) but uncertainty over what required Steam clients/accounts would mean as far as LAN multiplayer.

** The concern over Steam Workshop persisted since BI did not explicitly rule out the possibility of subsequent Steam Workshop integration, which of course is possible on a technical level (other games have had that added in later).

[nettrucker 142]

Oh no . . . not another steam discussion please it has already been discussed to death.

[chortles 263]

It's why I mentioned and tried to TL;DR that discussion. :( The funny thing is that for those who did end up choosing to stay on for Arma 3, it's generally a moot point nowadays and now concerns/arguments tend to be over developments that have no direct connection to Steamworks, i.e. AI behavior, fatigue, UI, etc -- aka the very same things that would have been debated had there not been Steamworks integration.

[nettrucker 142]

For sure it's going to split the community.

[OrLoK 20]

Hello there

Once the ability to play/use A2 kit is available in A3 (which has been hinted at there officially and also a WIP with AiA) then there seems to be very little reason to stay with A2 for the majority IMHO.

There's no point moving 100pc to a version that's only "alpha" and subject to change.

As soon as it's stable I'll move over and will most likely never look back even though I'm not a fan of the "modern" equipment/scenario.

Rgds

LoK

[deltatango 10]

What exactly is everyone so worried about Steam Workshop for? Many games have workshop integration and still allow you to install mods from external sources. The way I see it, Workshop is just another method of releasing or accessing mods. If you don't like it, you can still download or release mods to Armaholic or other sites, similar to how you could get Skyrim mods from either the web or the workshop. Am I wrong? I must be, why else would boycotting the mod scene or even the game because of Workshop integration make any sense?

[chortles 263]

To me that depends on what exactly you mean by "A2 kit", and whether that hypothetical official solution goes further than Rearmed did, due to Rearmed's limitations (A2 helos still flying "as in A2" instead of getting a "TKOH-spec flight model", prior content not being updated "to include TKOH features, such as the new getting animations, interactive cockpits, Picture-in-Picture, etc.", incomplete compatibility)...To me that depends on what exactly you mean by "A2 kit", and whether that hypothetical official solution goes further than Rearmed did, due to Rearmed's limitations (A2 helos still flying "as in A2" instead of getting a "TKOH-spec flight model", prior content not being updated "to include TKOH features, such as the new getting animations, interactive cockpits, Picture-in-Picture, etc.", incomplete compatibility)...

What exactly is everyone so worried about Steam Workshop for? Many games have workshop integration and still allow you to install mods from external sources. The way I see it, Workshop is just another method of releasing or accessing mods. If you don't like it, you can still download or release mods to Armaholic or other sites, similar to how you could get Skyrim mods from either the web or the workshop. Am I wrong? I must be, why else would boycotting the mod scene or even the game because of Workshop integration make any sense?

TL;DR: the concern seems mainly if not entirely from modders, due to #1: a seemingly greater risk of IP theft, as one perception was that it's not nearly as likely to be cracked down on at Steam Workshop as it would be on sites such as Armaholic or on these forums, and #2: a particular Steam Workshop EULA clause that is viewed as putting the modder's IP rights at risk from Valve, even if a mod had been uploaded to Steam Workshop without the modder's permission (whether or not the modder was credited?), and "you can still download or release mods to Armaholic or other sites" is not considered as fixing these problems. For these reasons, several modders had said after the Steamworks announcement that they would slow down public output, go private or just stop modding if Steam Workshop is in, and in at least one case I've already seen a modder or two who was opposed to forward-porting of their content to Arma 3 even without Steam Workshop, in one case having his own mod taken down temporarily!

It should be added that this would be a non-issue if BI specifically ruled out Steam Workshop, as I believe they did last year in also shooting down Steamworks, but when they backtracked on Steamworks this year they did not explicitly state a position on Steam Workshop; modders can't simply "take refuge" in its current absence since Steam Workshop integration can be added post-release, so at least one modder has asked BI to come out and say whether or not SWS will ever happen.

Edited May 11, 2013 by Chortles

[-Snafu- 78]

Arma 3 will not replace Arma 2 for me.

1. The setting of Arma 3 doesn't interest me in the slightest
   
2. Arma 3 isn't the leap in improvement I was hoping for
   
3. Arma 2 has much more custom content available that I like
   
4. Arma 2 has matured nicely in terms of patches and mods
   

[Joe98 92]

In early 2009, BIS started promoting Arma2 with some great screen shots. I suspect they used top of the range or almost top of the range computers.

In July 2010, I got my curent desktop. Top of the range is too expensive so it was probably a few steps from the top. There is a good chance that 18 months earlier it could have been rated top of the range.

My graphics are not anywhere as good as those screen shots taken 18 months before I bought my current PC.

In early 2014 it will be time for the next PC upgrade. If the Arma2 graphics are as good as those screen shots of early 2009 I will be very happy.

The graphics of Arma3 to date loook great. How will they look on my PC?

[chortles 263]

... we have no idea what your computer's stats are, so what can we say in response? Though there's certainly plenty of player-produced videos out there on Youtube for examples of "live" Arma 3 gameplay...

[Joe98 92]

And nor do we know the stats the computers used to take those screenshots of Arma2.

Nor the stats of the computers used to take screen shots of Arma3.

The PC I get in early 2014 will likely be better than any of them. And after Arma 2 the screen shots will probably not look as good as theirs.

[chortles 263]

I said player videos, not official screenshots... and some of these player videos (or the uploader comments) do mention stats.

[lao fei mao 21]

Well, I think ArmA3 won't replace ArmA2 within 2 years from now on. ArmA2 has loads of MODs, especially those islands of all kinds of terrain, which still attract me to goof around. Currently I was really fed up with the ArmA3's constantly updates, bugs and test features, I haven't touched arma3 alpha for almost a month, and will not until the formal version released.

[chortles 263]

Think about it this way, Lao Fei Mao, at least you won't have to pay more to get "the formal version". ;)

Although, you said "constant updates"... were you on the dev branch??

[Heaney 11]

For the MilSim community I would say "Yes, but not for a great deal of time" to the question here.

Ever after release, there are several things that would make the gamers who play ArmA for milsim realism reluctant to replace ArmA 2:

> ArmA 3's infantry movement is less realistic (smoother yes, but less realistic)

> ACE for ArmA 3 will take a long time to get a proper (the key word) release, due to Xeno refusing and Sickboy busy with Play withSIX

> The 2035 setting is not appealing for milsim (not authentic)

> Hundreds of old addons that are frequently used, the authors of which have left ArmA, will not be available. Significantly relevant for groups who use exclusively the equipment of a certain military

I think it will be the second half of 2014 at minimum before ArmA 3 replaces ArmA 2: CO.

Also, not to complain but ArmA 3 is far less of a major change than the differences in the past. OFP --> A1 was a clear choice. So was A1 --> A2 (after ACE was released).

ArmA 3 is... not so sure.

[-=seany=- 5]

Visually and environmental, I would say it's as big as the change from OFP to Arma1. It really impresses me, particularly the clouds and new lighting.

[chrisb 196]

So we’re at Beta stage in Arma 3, of course this has nothing to do with the A2 forum, but has with this thread.

Arma 3 will not take over from Arma 2, I said a while back, not sure if it was on here or on another forum, that I suspected A2 will be for the connoisseurs of the series in the years ahead, whereas A3 for the new faster breed, I think that may be the case unless it progresses along in Beta at a pace of change, which I doubt..

Arma 3 looks better, but it just isn’t better where out and out warfare realism is wanted/needed, its moved towards the centre ground if the beta is anything to go by, therefore we have waved goodbye to the old arma format, a new era has begun.. IMHO..

Not a bad thing as A2 is already pretty honed as a game, the ai I use are exceptional and the overall performance is great, so is there a need to move over, well not really, although I will go over to see the new islands that are bound to appear, a3 is stunning with its lighting effects, sea & ambient feel. But is that enough, certainly not for me, its got to be about game-play and A2 is winning hands down at present, with no view for a change coming.

Arma 3 has only just started and A2 has lots of years behind it, I hear you shout. Thats true, but A3 has set its precedent and that was moving towards the centre ground i.e. mainstream, not fully, but almost, which could cause them problems later on down the road. The game seems to be in a grey area at present, it doesn’t look as good as BF3 from what I have seen of BF3, not got BF3 myself but on YT, its not as fast as BF3, almost frantic rate, again by what I see.

So where does it stand, like the series, I would say, on its own. But unlike the previous inc A2 which all had a cause, to bring intelligent, open world, do anything, warfare gaming to the pc. Instead its in-between and as said its finding the in-between players to go with it..

Its stuck between mainstream and the place it left behind..

So don't hang up A2 just yet..;)

I love the series, so I'm not really dissapointed. I have the best of both worlds, as do most if they want, go into A3 to see the sunsets, swim and generally look around, come back to A2 to play war..

Edited June 21, 2013 by ChrisB

[orcinus 121]

A3 will not be even a possibility for me (nor, indeed, for the rapidly-increasing majority of the global population) as I'm limited to mobile BB. B/W charges would mean even downloading a retail release via Steam (let alone patches, Alphas, Betas, etc.) would land me with a bill of somewhere approaching GBP 400 for the estimated 20GB B/W andthe cost of the game itself. Hopelessly unrealistic.

When/if BI release it on disk that may change. Till then there's much fun to have with CO.

[chortles 263]

When/if BI release it on disk that may change. Till then there's much fun to have with CO.

A disc release is planned although as a Steamworks game it's essentially a Steam installer on a disc with a Steam key voucher, although it will save on bandwidth especially with the delta patching.