Discussion on "Axed" Features

[On_Sabbatical 11]

Simple business logic ??? ofcourse ,when you want to sell your major product,you care about what potential customers want to see in it ! ... but ,i guess now that we ,sadly,bought the alpha ,we will have to wait for Mr.BIS to decide what features he would like to have in his "game"!

[PuFu 4600]

1. no one made you to pre-order (which is exactly what you did when you bought the game and were given access to alpha/beta). Vote with the wallet i say

2. when you want to sell a product, you need to be able to actually produce and then release the said product on the market.

3. delaying the game is obviously out of the question, for very obvious reasons. Even so, a delay doesn't necesary grant all your wished things will make it in either

4. there are several wish list threads here. You can even take it a notch further and e-mail any of the developers with your concerns and wishes.

5. your own wishes regarding features or content are just a "one man's dreams" unless you show there is more support behind the idea. the feedback tracker would be a good place to start.

[Anachoretes 10]

There was no need

As a reaction to this.

one can outline a pattern.

"The return of the repressed" says that a person must repeat for survive.

Qazdar

When the coal is over, people starting to burn woods . To maintain the flame.

[On_Sabbatical 11]

1- i ordered it because,i thought things were going to change !

2- ArmA 3 ... that "3" means something ,i guess !

3- I asked for a delay,not to fulfill the community wishes ,but to bring it to a playable level,unless they're happy with A1/2 experience !

5- Damage system and some targetting system that requires a brain ... i m even ashamed of asking for this in a military game ... besides,maybe not everyone is asking for this,but i doubt there is someone who will say "NO" to it !

As a reaction to this.

Qazdar

When the coal is over, people starting to burn woods . To maintain the flame.

Well said !

Edited July 16, 2013 by On_Sabbatical

[Anachoretes 10]

Qazdar

1. Probably all fans bought this game from choiceless. (Yeah, and humans always waiting for changes.)

2. It's mean new game with new features, and some of them you already can see.

3. The reason why AA3 is not filled with wishes "today" is movement to 'playable' form.(Ñ)

4. see above

[chrisb 196]

I would imagine BI knew what was going to be included within the game at release proper (not alpha or beta), i.e. working content (working correctly, that is ;)).

Perhaps a list outlining what content was and wasn’t meant to be in the initial release would stop some arguing.

[scorch_052 127]

I enjoy ArmA 3 for what it is right now. One of my biggest complaints has been addressed in that TvT is now much more playable. Regardless, I think that they should either be more specific and clear with what is or isnt confirmed to be in the game at release, or stop confirming things so quickly. It seems that BIS is operating with the idea that if they begin work on something, they should confirm it.

[Anachoretes 10]

would stop some arguing.

But would deprive them of trumps during the so-called release. I respect their right to do so.

[metalcraze 290]

1. no one made you to pre-order (which is exactly what you did when you bought the game and were given access to alpha/beta). Vote with the wallet i say

Oh come on. There were so many promises made before A3 alpha release. So of course we bought it expecting to get what was promised time and again. And suddenly half of it is not in the game and isn't going to be as we've learned just last week.

When people complained that promised stuff is not done at around 5th of March apologist's top excuse was "it's an alpha!" but now it's "well it's your own fault, why did you buy it?". Nice.

It can never be BIS fault for misleading customers with false promises, is it?

[chrisb 196]

But would deprive them of trumps during the so-called release. I respect their right to do so.

Business doesn’t or shouldn’t work like that.

Trumps! I built you a car, surprise, I stuck a gearbox in there for you.:D.

Too much, OTT !

o.k. right down to a switch to turn the wipers on, still unusable without that switch.

Lets at least see the working basics (fully functioning), that were to be in-game on release proper, list wise.:confused:

[afp 1]

Pufu, even from business point of view, some things are unexplainable. The 3D real time editor that the community made many years ago worked just fine in ArmA 1 and 2. All that should be done was to integrate it with the game so people don't have to use 3th party software. When you expect good reviews and sales, you need to come out at least with a major change, if not more. That was nothing like impossible, it was already done, and probably not taking "unlimited" resources. That's why these decisions remain a mystery to me.

The guys working on game probably do their best, I'd say the issues are at higher levels. It is obviously a lack of programmers, those requested features take time. I can only speculate that management calculations focus on some other areas, possible to see soon after release a "years 2000 weapons and vehicles packs" that we need to buy or something like this.

I mostly missed ArmA2 series as LOD flickering was a game breaking, couldn't play with things popping up all over. For ArmA 3, I expect a finished product but as times goes by it become obvious that in the 3 months left we can't expect major changes. There will be tons of issues with the newly added content and the focus will be on those. A little more efforts from the guys we give our money and our credits would be highly appreciated.

[chortles 263]

If the problem is "a lack of programmers", I doubt that "a little more effort" on the part of the few that are around would help... then again, "in the 3 months left" kind of implies that it's already too late for "a little more effort" to help, doesn't it? Though as has been described before, these problems aren't just the "throw more programmers at it" sort... as you said, "the issues are at higher levels."

Oh come on. There were so many promises made before A3 alpha release. So of course we bought it expecting to get what was promised time and again.

... and the fact that this was a game made by Bohemia Interactive didn't at all signal to you that maybe they'd bit more than they could chew? Edited July 16, 2013 by Chortles

[dmarkwick 261]

Oh come on. There were so many promises made before A3 alpha release. So of course we bought it expecting to get what was promised time and again. And suddenly half of it is not in the game and isn't going to be as we've learned just last week.

When people complained that promised stuff is not done at around 5th of March apologist's top excuse was "it's an alpha!" but now it's "well it's your own fault, why did you buy it?". Nice.

It can never be BIS fault for misleading customers with false promises, is it?

This is why developers eventually decide to develop in isolation. I remember a similar situation when B17 The Mighty Eighth was being developed, the developers had a quite open relationship with the community. Eventually, during the normal development cycle where various features are dropped in order to deliver on other features, that relationship went really, really bad. It was a disgrace what happened over there. The same thing is starting to happen here. People who cannot fathom the process decide that they've been duped, mislead, even deliberately excluded because the developers have made statements in the past about what they would like to achieve, and the current gameplay doesn't match what they would like to see.

We all have our favourite features we'd like to see or see improved, but not everything is going to make it. Time to grow up and accept that the game is being developed to play the game. By that I mean it's not being developed to please all the community, but is being developed so that the campaign and vanilla missions work properly. But at least the entire thing can be changed with community content, which lets face it is the reason we here play it.

Edited July 16, 2013 by DMarkwick

[Varanon 892]

First things first, DMarkwick, you're post was just the last drop for me, so apologies for picking it out directly. But please read on and try to take this post as it is intended to be: an opinion of someone concerned with Arma and tired of the tone that is creeping into the forum recently.

People who cannot fathom the process decide that they've been duped, mislead, even deliberately excluded because the developers have made statements in the past about what they would like to achieve, and the current gameplay doesn't match what they would like to see.

I always like how posts here tend to become hidden (or open) insults. It's ridiculous how you disqualify everyone who complains about missing features, unfixed bugs (that persist for years), or deviating too much from reality, as "people who cannot fathom the process".

I'm working in the software industry for over 20 years, I can "fathom the process" quite well and I'm still not content with the direction Arma 3 is taking (which I won't even reiterate here, but you commented on some of my posts in the past, so I assume you know).

It's really become a trend here to disqualify everyone with different opinions. Even though people bring up arguments, they are countered with insult. Not with counterarguments, but just with slander. Or "It's a game/It's an Alpha/It's a beta". When people bring up valid points, they are brushed away with one of those "tools".

Not only is this counter productive, it also sours the relationship, not only between customers and company, but also generally lowers the forum's level of friendliness. Any discussion made in such an environment will naturally decline. Sorry, DMarkwick, as much as I respect your opinion, and your right to voice that opinion, posts like this will not calm down the emotions, nor does it actually help. Threads like these ("Rants", if you will) just show that there is discontent, and trying to label the people that are discontent as "not able to fathom the process" does not help at all.

So, please, people, try to stay away from insults and slander, and at least try to lead a discussion, with arguments for and against.

Thanks for reading

[FallujahMedic -FM- 867]

[7/13/13 7:50:13 AM] FM: I just want realism (not necessarily real life) and simulation. The era or genre doesn't really matter much. I remember the sci fi add ons for Ofp, I think in some way they helped open up the game.

[7/13/13 11:48:36 AM] David Foltyn: ACE3 and PR and similar will deal with the 'realism' ...

As the author of the above quote (FM), I want to make it clear that I was in no way disparaging Dwarden or anyone else. The conversation initially revolved around others' displeasure of future based units as well as other things. I will though support PuFu and his analogy regarding Lego blocks, I used the same analogy during the same Skype chat. I don't expect Bohemia to "make all the things", but I would like to see them "make all the things work together". That in its own right may be a huge task as it is.

Edited July 16, 2013 by Stang69
Fixed a typo in my own quote

[PuFu 4600]

@metalcraze: you saw those as promises, i saw them as development wishlist, aimed objectives etc.

@afp: i am not backing up bi inability to provide features that improve gameplay, besides the visual upgrades (open for discussion here, lod issues would be a good example).

i am simply saying that from a business pov, delaying the game further is not really a viable option, at least from where i am standing.

ps: workarounds made by community have no place in an official take of the same feature.

Edited July 16, 2013 by PuFu
damn iphone

[dmarkwick 261]

First things first, DMarkwick, you're post was just the last drop for me, so apologies for picking it out directly. But please read on and try to take this post as it is intended to be: an opinion of someone concerned with Arma and tired of the tone that is creeping into the forum recently.

No need to apologise :) and I can agree about tones that are creeping into the forum recently, that is what my post is about :)

I always like how posts here tend to become hidden (or open) insults. It's ridiculous how you disqualify everyone who complains about missing features, unfixed bugs (that persist for years), or deviating too much from reality, as "people who cannot fathom the process".

Well, that isn't exactly what I did: I won't quote myself here but I made a different statement to that.

I'm working in the software industry for over 20 years, I can "fathom the process" quite well and I'm still not content with the direction Arma 3 is taking (which I won't even reiterate here, but you commented on some of my posts in the past, so I assume you know).

That's fine, but did you place yourself into the list of people who are "duped, mislead or deliberately excluded"?

It's really become a trend here to disqualify everyone with different opinions. Even though people bring up arguments, they are countered with insult. Not with counterarguments, but just with slander. Or "It's a game/It's an Alpha/It's a beta". When people bring up valid points, they are brushed away with one of those "tools".

Not only is this counter productive, it also sours the relationship, not only between customers and company, but also generally lowers the forum's level of friendliness. Any discussion made in such an environment will naturally decline. Sorry, DMarkwick, as much as I respect your opinion, and your right to voice that opinion, posts like this will not calm down the emotions, nor does it actually help. Threads like these ("Rants", if you will) just show that there is discontent, and trying to label the people that are discontent as "not able to fathom the process" does not help at all.

So, please, people, try to stay away from insults and slander, and at least try to lead a discussion, with arguments for and against.

Thanks for reading

I don't brush people away who have a constructive discourse, I don't brush away people who have a concern they feel is important and who have a reasonable stance to back it up, I brush people away who complain bitterly and go on about what was "promised". It's strange isn't it, how some feature that is not explicitly mentioned by the devs in the last week or so is "forgotten" and removed or is not being worked on, yet a feature mentioned by devs months or even years ago is always clung to as a "promise". :)

However, for those with complaints of the nature I speak of, at least this thread soaks them up and keeps them out of the other threads. (mostly ;))

[metalcraze 290]

This is why developers eventually decide to develop in isolation. I remember a similar situation when B17 The Mighty Eighth was being developed, the developers had a quite open relationship with the community. Eventually, during the normal development cycle where various features are dropped in order to deliver on other features, that relationship went really, really bad. It was a disgrace what happened over there. The same thing is starting to happen here. People who cannot fathom the process decide that they've been duped, mislead, even deliberately excluded because the developers have made statements in the past about what they would like to achieve, and the current gameplay doesn't match what they would like to see.

@metalcraze: you saw those as promises, i saw them as development wishlist, aimed objectives etc.

Sorry what? Devs hyped features on an official website and in presentations - how is that a "wishlist" or not misleading? ArmA3 dev process was anything but open. Because till this month mostly fanboys had to speak for the devs.

Time to grow up and accept that the game is being developed to play the game.

Time to grow up and stop blindly defending a clearly wrong thing that BIS did. Because by defending the horrible lack of communication that was happening for the past year you are making sure devs will do it again.

Edited July 16, 2013 by metalcraze

[dale0404 5]

Because by defending the horrible lack of communication that was happening for the past year you are making sure devs will do it again.

Sorry? Lack of communication? Which planet have you been on?

[dmarkwick 261]

Sorry what? Devs hyped features on an official website and in presentations - how is that a "wishlist" or not misleading? ArmA3 dev process was anything but open. Because till this month mostly fanboys had to speak for the devs.

Time to grow up and stop blindly defending a clearly wrong thing that BIS did. Because by defending the horrible lack of communication that was happening for the past year you are making sure devs will do it again.

*shrug* Same can be said of the opposite - that the persistent claims of dumbing down, simplification, removal of "realism", inability to implement "realism" and general accusations of development incompetence will remove any motivation they have to communicate. If you believe they are not good at communicating, then I suggest you are no familiar with other studios' ways. We're communicated with a heck of a lot more than just about any other studio (that isn't trying to kickstart).

Anyways - looks like I drifted into the wrong thread. :)

[-ghost-tf 12]

Sorry? Lack of communication? Which planet have you been on?

Pretty sure he's on the same planet as me, where the devs made all kinds of promises in 2011, then for a big part of 2012 there was radiosilence (because of the greece incident). Just to find out in 2013 (after we bought the game) that most of these "promises" wont make it into the game.

---------- Post added at 13:06 ---------- Previous post was at 13:00 ----------

that the persistent claims of dumbing down, simplification, removal of "realism", inability to implement "realism" and general accusations of development incompetence will remove any motivation they have to communicate.

Only problem is they are not just blind "claims"

[7/13/13 11:48:36 AM] David Foltyn: ACE3 and PR and similar will deal with the 'realism' ...

why would we even bother to spend our resources on something if we could just say "Hey, use ACRE for that"?

[pettka 694]

Only problem is they are not just blind "claims"

You are taking the quotes out of the context and are still surprised there is a lack of communication with you? :icon_twisted:

[Masharra 10]

*shrug* Same can be said of the opposite - that the persistent claims of dumbing down, simplification, removal of "realism", inability to implement "realism" and general accusations of development incompetence will remove any motivation they have to communicate. If you believe they are not good at communicating, then I suggest you are no familiar with other studios' ways. We're communicated with a heck of a lot more than just about any other studio (that isn't trying to kickstart).

Anyways - looks like I drifted into the wrong thread. :)

Clearly not familiar with as many studios as he would like to think.

either-way this reminds me very much of launch day Aliens colonial marines. :D

You are taking the quotes out of the context and are still surprised there is a lack of communication with you? :icon_twisted:

I think the more rational of us are more surprised at what you choose to respond to, when you respond.

Also lol you're almost quoting the guy from gearbox with aliens colonial marines.

[Varanon 892]

Sorry? Lack of communication? Which planet have you been on?

What metalkraze is referring to is that some bugs/tickets/issues, even though they are "hot" topics, or are highly voted upon on the issue tracker, have not been acknowledged, commented on, or been fixed in the meantime. Even hearing some of the developers I got the impression that they think communication wasn't "enough", although, of course, communication is a time consuming process and proper communication (i.e. saying something that can't be misinterpreted/ripped apart/turned around) is unfortunately VERY difficult and very time consuming.

Sure, devs have been actively involved in the forum, but mostly avoided directly commenting on things like future plans, direction and "feedback of feedback", which I can understand in some aspects, and can not understand in other aspects. I guess for BIS, this sort of open development is very new

[pettka 694]

I think the more rational of us are more surprised at what you choose to respond to, when you respond.

Also lol you're almost quoting the guy from gearbox with aliens colonial marines.

I think that You have seen many more responses in this thread before it started to go completely off topic. Quoting a part of it to make completely different meaning of it just raises a chaos level which I strive against :icon_twisted: To be sincere, I, and many more, have read through this whole topic (as we usually do for most of forums), but giving the same answer again and again doesn't make it any better neither for us nor for the community.