Boehmia, be reasonable, and honest.

[instagoat 133]

TBH, the game should still be called "Alpha". I really wish BI were more honest about what the people are getting. ArmA II was a complete game, if a bit unpolished. ArmA III is, at release, more akin to an alpha version, with half the assets missing and very few missions.

Arma 2 wasn't complete and -still- isn't complete. There are parts in the campaign that are obviously dead ends, have been cut, or are still so buggy that the devs who tested the missions are not aware that these things exist. For example, the mortars in Manhattan. Then you have the recycled A1 era and OFP era content (that barn...), etc, and -many- parts of the core engine were obviously incomplete. Nobody knew how the AI worked, and when A3 was started nobody knew how it worked -still-. Nevermind the shoddy performance and aged and broken interface.

A3 is not an "Alpha". It's not a beta anymore either, we are past release day, and as far as content goes, it is a game that offers much already. I have 600 hours logged, and those just on stratis and with the mraps.

Also, BI are honest. Every bit of content that is in the game is listed on the website. What more do you ask?

[zukov 490]

Also, BI are honest. Every bit of content that is in the game is listed on the website. What more do you ask?

that at least all work well,

i 'm on you with your comment in "branch discussion" a severe list of problem on the veiclhes, nothing it happenened and i'm afraid that never will be fixed in future

Edited September 13, 2013 by Zukov

[HJohnson 16]

Think of it this way

They had a bunch of content, then the Anti-Everything-that-isn't-the-cold-war crowd came in and complained that Arma 3 was a new game with new things rather than Arma II 2... So much of that content was dropped.

[AlexVestin 24]

@Thread title: They've been honest if anything. I've not seen any bad surprises yet.

Going through this thread, most here really need to read-up on BIS statements. All from campaign to vehicles. There's also huge lists of patch notes.

Please, go through the sitreps atleast and actually read it all. It's almost inviting to join in on all the trolling.

http://dev.arma3.com/

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?149636-Beta-Development-branch-changelog

@Thread: "The price is too damn high!" Well, there's been months of time for anyone to buy the game cheaper. It's been one day since release now, you're silly.

[antoineflemming 14]

Arma 2 wasn't complete and -still- isn't complete. There are parts in the campaign that are obviously dead ends, have been cut, or are still so buggy that the devs who tested the missions are not aware that these things exist. For example, the mortars in Manhattan. Then you have the recycled A1 era and OFP era content (that barn...), etc, B. Nobody knew how the AI worked, and when A3 was started nobody knew how it worked -still-. Nevermind the shoddy performance and aged and broken interface.

A3 is not an "Alpha". It's not a beta anymore either, we are past release day, and as far as content goes, it is a game that offers much already. I have 600 hours logged, and those just on stratis and with the mraps.

Also, BI are honest. Every bit of content that is in the game is listed on the website. What more do you ask?

And this is okay with you? Just because this was/is the state of Arma 2 does not mean that it's ok. You want to know why so many people flock to Battlefield and Call of Duty? It's not because they hate realism (although they see games as a form of escapism from reality). It's because those games are stable, those games are complete. Sure, Arma 3 deals with more, it includes more, but that's not an excuse for the game to be incomplete. That's not an excuse for unfinished work. Sure, at times the dev team bites off more than they can chew. But you don't just stop chewing and spit it out. Keep chewing and it will eventually go down.

You are right. We are past release, meaning we should have finished content in the game. Nevermind the things that aren't in the game. Everything that's coded in the game at this point should be finished. That is a complete, release-day-ready game. Anything less may be forgivable, but it is not excusable. And, yeah, at least they didn't add more to the list than what was currently finished in-game. But some things that are in the code could have been finished that aren't. To me that's unfinished, even if it's not listed on their website. But, yeah, it does offer a lot. Also, I think some misunderstand what it meant by "complete". Complete doesn't mean that there's no new features or fixes. Complete means there's nothing that is unfinished/half-done/whatever else you want to call it. It's not even about bugginess. Incomplete is when you have a sage booniehat that still uses the desert texture because a quick reskin wasn't made (random example) or when the tan shemagh has a model with messed up UVs/wrong texture/not fully covering the head when you have the olive shemagh that is complete and finished (real example, it'd have been simple for BIS to have used the one model with hiddenSelections, simple solution). That's unfinished and is what I don't like. That, and performance issues (currently a constant 20FPS just about when having AI in the editor, occasionally raising or dipping, like 45 every other time.)

[instagoat 133]

And this is okay with you?*snip*

Nope, it's not. I too am frustrated, but I have also been with Bi long enough to, with a sigh of resignation, accept this as par for the course.

It still is better than Arma 2's release. At least the missions work, more or less. I am sure they'll break sooner or later as patches come along, like quite a few of the arrowhead content did. Because if the release content is any indication, their QA was also in over their heads, they probably didn't take a single look at all the half-finished assets. Even some major ones are bugged, like the T-100 which pretty much misses every animation short of the tracks moving.

Like I said, I'd rather had BI throw out more stuff and finish the rest, rather than what we have now. But it is what it is, and we've gotta deal with it. And hope that the rest of the world is more lenient than we, so good press results in good sales, and time and money going into the company to polish the game. Hate waiting for patches, but that's how it is, yo.

Still, there seems to be a large and/or extremely vocal group of people who seem to want tons of badly made/rehashed kit rather than a working game. It's not sensible, especially when considering the track record, where Bi consistently were trying to lift too heavy baskets and fell over when trying. Arma 2 was overly ambitious, and thus didn't get finished. Arma 3 was extremely ambitious, and when they announced it I already had a feeling that it wouldn't be close to what they were shooting for at day one, but it also brought so much new stuff that I am satisfied with the improvements this round.

What is lacking again is polish. Maybe we'll get to see that soon when devbranch rolls out again, because right now, while first impressions will be good I think, most people that dig around in the game will notice how many loose ends there still are.

[KING5TON 10]

And this is okay with you? Just because this was/is the state of Arma 2 does not mean that it's ok. You want to know why so many people flock to Battlefield and Call of Duty? It's not because they hate realism (although they see games as a form of escapism from reality). It's because those games are stable, those games are complete.

HA!

Go on to the BF4 forum on launch, you'll see the exact same types of people complaining about same types of things.

Why isn't this gun in? Why isn't there this vehicle? Why not this map? Why can't I play online? Why can't I run the game with high FPS? Someone needs to be sacked! I want a refund! this game is Broke! etc.. etc..

Same with COD. Didn't someone get death threats recently for changing some guns FFS?

Battlefield games are a regular clusterfark at launch, I love the games but I hate them at launch. Not played COD in ages so can't compare.

Battlefield also no longer supports mods.

Arma 3 does and then some, you can create mods, missions and mulitplayer game modes.

Getting a bit sick and tired of the whine on these and other forums. I think there's currently a disease with certain gamers at the moment, don't why and how it started or how to fix it other than cutting off certain people's internet.

Edited September 13, 2013 by KING5TON

[chortles 263]

They had a bunch of content, then the Anti-Everything-that-isn't-the-cold-war crowd came in and complained that Arma 3 was a new game with new things rather than Arma II 2... So much of that content was dropped.

Nothing like that to make me less sympathetic to the "realism" crowd.

[Flogger23m 2]

I think there's currently a disease with certain gamers at the moment, don't why and how it started or how to fix it other than cutting off certain people's internet.

... or BI can actually make improvements on some very seriously antiqued areas of the game rather than release a heap of garbage content and a graphics update. They're becoming like the CoD developers - releasing the same game with new weapons/units. They also went the future route to.

Give me a good old M4 or FAL, and make both sets of animations for it. Complete the damn thing before jumping to futuristic content, which not surprisingly, also lacks both sets of animations. How about a 3D editor which swaps to 2D mode like Jane's USAF did in 1999? An AI command menu that isn't a clusterfuck?

Improvements are what I want. Not more futuristic content that is more or less of low, garbage quality.

[zukov 490]

HA!

Go on to the BF4 forum on launch, you'll see the exact same types of people complaining about same types of things.

Why isn't this gun in? Why isn't there this vehicle? Why not this map? Why can't I play online? Why can't I run the game with high FPS? Someone needs to be sacked! I want a refund! this game is Broke! etc.. etc..

Same with COD. Didn't someone get death threats recently for changing some guns FFS?

Battlefield games are a regular clusterfark at launch, I love the games but I hate them at launch. Not played COD in ages so can't compare.

Battlefield also no longer supports mods.

Arma 3 does and then some, you can create mods, missions and mulitplayer game modes.

Getting a bit sick and tired of the whine on these and other forums. I think there's currently a disease with certain gamers at the moment, don't why and how it started or how to fix it other than cutting off certain people's internet.

from Battlefield vietnam i have proper animations, never i have seen a mechanic that fix a veichle by first aid kit! like in arma 3, the tank the veichles in bf2 (year 2005) are far better that todays tank and IFV in arma 3 (shell extraction, bouncing antennas,)

[aoshi 1]

The problem is, people played in dev branch, and when the release come, no one get WOW, so much things,

release= BIg island, tanks, an airplane (ok ok one..) the show cases and some missions for altis multiplayer (I don't play multiplayer because I can only handle a server with <10 people) but it't is ok, the weapons have a lot of variations... with the new attachment systen,I was feling arma don't have improvements too. because of dev branch, but go play a little vanilla arma 2, and see how much more fluid, the game is.

Don't forget, we gona still have 3 free addon,maybe with new assets(they said somewhere they will make two more air "beasts" "A-10 lookslike I hope"

Sorry for my english I'm brazilian (by the way here we pay 130R$ seems a fair price to mee)

[David77 10]

The problem is, people played in dev branch, and when the release come, no one get WOW, so much things ...

Exactly.

[Wraith420 10]

900+ hours in the Alpha and Beta, steam id WraithTheDayZBandit

Yea I am a longtime member of Armaholic's Anonymous. This game is already something awesome when its playing smoothly of course, but it does need more content. The upcoming DLC need to give me the tools neccessary to create immersive missions, but one thing I am really missing is a good amount of static MG's and weapon systems, i dont really care for copy and pasted weapons with a different spray paint on them.

[windies 11]

Nope, it's not. I too am frustrated, but I have also been with Bi long enough to, with a sigh of resignation, accept this as par for the course.

This is what I don't get. Why accept it? By accepting it, you're saying it's OK, it doesn't bother you and you agree with it. I'm not saying rage out, but why just accept it as "par for the course"? Do you think BI can't do any better? Are you afraid to ask of them to do better?

I also beg to differ that this launch is better than ArmA 2 as I bought ArmA 2 at release and was playing both single player missions and multi player just fine while in ArmA 3 I'm struggling to do either at this point.

[dav 22]

900+ hours in the Alpha and Beta, steam id WraithTheDayZBandit

Yea I am a longtime member of Armaholic's Anonymous. This game is already something awesome when its playing smoothly of course, but it does need more content. The upcoming DLC need to give me the tools neccessary to create immersive missions, but one thing I am really missing is a good amount of static MG's and weapon systems, i dont really care for copy and pasted weapons with a different spray paint on them.

900+ hours? Damn I taught I was an armaholic lol. Nice to see some positive posts, I agree it needs more chunky content.