Mods and ARMA 3 on the same level as FSX?

[mercenar1e 10]

I think the next big thing could be opening up Arma 3 to paid user-made content. It’s great to see talented mod-makers pulling off amazing missions, add-ons and mods as free content, but if we manage to find some incentive for the best mod-makers to develop more content, I think we can raise the bar even higher. I want to push this effort in two distinct ways, and I consider these as a priority for next year. We are going to announce more specific details in the coming months.

would you guys support an approach to mods that are similar to what is seen on the FSX side (freeware,payware) ? things like terrain, weather, full interior for aircraft, vehicles and more.. could the engine handle it?

[frag 0]

Absolutely. I am a big FSX player and this is amazing how little companies can come up with AMAZING products ...

[dezkit 28]

could the engine handle it?

the engine could barely hold itself

[mistyronin 1181]

the engine could barely hold itself

I don't agree. I do think the engine has tons of potential. BI should focus on working in it, and improving it and let other studies and people create the content ( armies, missions, etc. ).

Do you imagine what would had happen with games like Iron Front, if instead of a standalone for another producer, it would had been a expansion/content pack for A2? More people would had bought it, some of its features would had been shared with the main game, BI would have had more benefits, it would probably still be alive and with a lot of community working in it ( as it would had been a part of A2, not a new game ).

Same goes for DayZ, if instead of a new game it would be a content pack for A3, it would make the community bigger, instead of splitting it. That would make more players to buy A3 and then the different content packs, which probably would be better for BI and for the community, as more money invested in the same engine allows more improvements. To me the actual strategy of making standalone versions, its making the series and the studio weak.

[pipin78 10]

the engine could barely hold itself

He's right the engine is not ready for this type of business model.

A model that I don't like anyway.. the community will implode when payware addons start appearing.. this is a mostly multiplayer game, not single player as fsx.

[calin_banc 19]

this is a mostly multiplayer game, not single player as fsx.

+1

It is really difficult to pull something like this off and won't get you anything serious for the series, just more hate as it will be seen as payed DLCs.

[mistyronin 1181]

+1

It is really difficult to pull something like this off and won't get you anything serious for the series, just more hate as it will be seen as payed DLCs.

So people wants tons and tons of high quality varied content, for free, and with a super engine that makes it work all smooth and with tons of features... and all in a few months... ( just read the rest of the forum )

As far as I remember BI is a small studio, and they are free human beings ( I mean they are not slaves, they work a normal amount of hours, I guess 40 a week, have social life, family, etc. ) so... something fails in this equation...

BTW VBS is working a bit like FSX and I think that gives profits and has a lot of extras and addons made by other studies... check its website

[zimms 22]

To be fair, I get the impression that the devs work >40 hours quite regularly.

[pipin78 10]

So people wants tons and tons of high quality varied content, for free, and with a super engine that makes it work all smooth and with tons of features... and all in a few months... ( just read the rest of the forum )

As far as I remember BI is a small studio, and they are free human beings ( I mean they are not slaves, they work a normal amount of hours, I guess 40 a week, have social life, family, etc. ) so... something fails in this equation...

BTW VBS is working a bit like FSX and I think that gives profits and has a lot of extras and addons made by other studies... check its website

VBS is not targeted at gamers but at the military.

To me they should continue with the traditional model: payware big expansion like OA with a lot of content. The released DLCs from BIS where not that good: BAF was ok, PMC and especially ACR where mediocre..

[mercenar1e 10]

+1

It is really difficult to pull something like this off and won't get you anything serious for the series, just more hate as it will be seen as payed DLCs.

"It will be seen as payed DLC"

You make it seem like the modders work for Bohemia Interactive. Let me point out that the people working on creating new content for this game are doing it on there own time and are under no obligation to give you anything for free. We won't know what plans are in store to implement payed add on community content but I feel that it's def going to bring a lot of change... And if it's for the better I won't mind one bit

[zedderzulu 7]

In many regards I'd welcome a influx of 3rd party content, and like the idea that existing modding groups, who juggle all their work with the rest of their lives, could in fact make a hobby their jobs (though that is a little idealistic to assume the transition will be anything like as easy as I've just made it sound). I'm certainly not calling for all mods to be paid-for, but I personally think there's a big market for army, campaign, mission and region packs to be produced. For the MP side, make the campaign co-op capable! Plenty of potential!

My reservation however is that the engine will need to be improved and then standardised. DayZ SA and Iron Front both have unique enhancements to RV... but I don't think it will work very well if, as people have said, individuals buy into individual engine improvements, because that would be a mess. Don't want to sound like I'm saying wai u no do fastrope/underground/walk-in-vehicles/weapon-resting etc etc etc but such things I think would make the engine more attractive to outside developers to develop content for, and then everyone still has a level playing field and MP mismatches are reduced (maybe...)

It would still be complicated if Bohemia paid 3rd party devs to make engine improvements for them, imo.

But purely for content's sake - so just maps, tanks, missions etc - I don't see too much of an issue in the theory. Then the only thing I would hope we see is that 3rd party developers showed enough passion.

[rohan 10]

So basically you are asking me to pay $60 for a half finished game and spend god knows how much on bringing it up to standard? Nope.

[mercenar1e 10]

So basically you are asking me to pay $60 for a half finished game and spend god knows how much on bringing it up to standard? Nope.

Bohemia Interactive is responsible for bringing the game up to standards. The discussion is about paying for Separate add ons created entirely by the community.

[Pac Man 10]

There is already a ginormous thread about paying for addons/missions/mods etc. To answer the question about buying user made content... No. It's a bad idea entirely. The games always been about the diverse amount of mods and missions the community makes available... for free. Now, every person & their dogs would be putting up payed DLC? No thanks.

We may aswell just start playing VBS 2.. & VBS 3 when available. Because at the end of this Arma3 journey, we'd have already payed for god knows how much, just to play the game how we like. How we always have in the past...

Bohemia Interactive is responsible for bringing the game up to standards. The discussion is about paying for Separate add ons created entirely by the community.

But Rohan is absolutely correct. It's never been BI who's brought the game up to standard... it's always been the community that's done that. BI provides us with is a huge & buggy sandbox. The community makes it shine. So we would essentially be spending more money to bring the game up to the standard inwhich we think it should be.

On another note, I don't want to end up paying for some half assed attempt at an addon, just to simply try it out. This could get expensive really fast. And that's never been what the games about. People with deep pockets may not care and think it's great. But the majority of Arma 3 players are average joes & ex military. VBS anyone?

For the MP side, make the campaign co-op capable! Plenty of potential!

They've (BI) already tried MP campaigns. They couldn't get it right. It was buggy and unreliable. And this is the sort of stuff i'm talking about above. Lets pay for things like some half assed, broken campaign. Sounds great!! ugh...

Edited September 25, 2013 by Pac Man

[sorophx 25]

Bohemia Interactive is responsible for bringing the game up to standards. The discussion is about paying for Separate add ons created entirely by the community.

then Bohemia Interactive should be the one paying modders.

[roshnak 41]

So people wants tons and tons of high quality varied content, for free, and with a super engine that makes it work all smooth and with tons of features

You mean like happens in every community outside of flight sims? Making mods is a great way to break into the industry and build your portfolio.

Here's something else to consider: The minute you take people's money is the minute you are obligated to them. The customer is always right, and you have to answer to them.

[Pac Man 10]

You mean like happens in every community outside of flight sims? Making mods is a great way to break into the industry and build your portfolio.

Here's something else to consider: The minute you take people's money is the minute you are obligated to them. The customer is always right, and you have to answer to them.

^ This

Imagine how many crappy DLCs there would be, just to make a buck. And do you think the said community member would care if you're not satisfied? In most cases... No. After all they aren't pros. If they were, they'd already be making money doing it for a living. If there will be user created, payed DLC's, I wont play Arma3. I'll simply grab a VBS title if I'm going to be paying for many DLCs.

Edited September 26, 2013 by Pac Man

[Harbinger2456 10]

Here's something else to consider: The minute you take people's money is the minute you are obligated to them. The customer is always right, and you have to answer to them.

And THIS is something BIS and its Fanboy's need to understand. You can't just ban people when you took their money ( and refuse to give it back ). Company reputations get ruined real quick over these little things. Crytek is a prime example.

---------- Post added at 04:19 ---------- Previous post was at 04:17 ----------

Imagine how many crappy DLCs there would be, just to make a buck.

Oh yeah, been there, seen that. No thank you.

[calin_banc 19]

"It will be seen as payed DLC"

You make it seem like the modders work for Bohemia Interactive. Let me point out that the people working on creating new content for this game are doing it on there own time and are under no obligation to give you anything for free. We won't know what plans are in store to implement payed add on community content but I feel that it's def going to bring a lot of change... And if it's for the better I won't mind one bit

Well, that's obvious! :confused: But there is one thing to create content (after all, DLC means downloadable content) for a constant game world (like Chris Roberts is doing with Star Citizen) or a single player experience (and here I am talking only about approved Bohema mods) and a whole different thing to make it for a game like ArmA, where you could hit something new that will required purchase on almost every server.

Right now, for me at least, Arma looks a little bit like The Elder Scrolls - not a bad game, but lacking in content and it needs the community to do the developer's job in order to have it shine. Not cool at all. When you can't deliver, then just better postpone the launch date.

So basically you are asking me to pay $60 for a half finished game and spend god knows how much on bringing it up to standard? Nope.

You are somewhat right, however, the game does not cost $60 and it was way cheaper in the Alpha.

Edited September 26, 2013 by calin_banc

[max power 21]

You mean like happens in every community outside of flight sims? Making mods is a great way to break into the industry and build your portfolio.

That's arguable. Having a good portfolio is very important- probably the most important thing. But, for instance, if you're an artist doing some hard surface modelling, you don't need to complicate matters by making a fully functioning vehicle and putting it in some game engine. As someone who has done modding stuff specifically for my portfolio, my advice to artists would be to make clean art and forget about all the other stuff that comes along with making a hyper realistic tank addon with functioning cockpits and pressable doodads or whatever. You only want to show your best work so if you're going to go in to doing all this extra stuff you have to go all in. There are specific job roles in games and making an addon requires several disciplines: modeller, texturer, tech artist, and designer. Then for your reel you require skills like lighting, rendering, compositing, maybe animating, whatever. I would seek to keep that list as small as possible. Modding can actually be a barrier or completing a meaningful portfolio.

Edited September 26, 2013 by Max Power

[tortuosit 486]

In my opinion paid user made content will lead to a cummunity implosion, I agree with Pac Man... BTW, the discussion is here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?164192-quot-Opening-up-Arma-3-to-paid-user-made-content-quot-How

Here's something else to consider: The minute you take people's money is the minute you are obligated to them. The customer is always right, and you have to answer to them.

Does not always apply. The customer is not always right. E.g. wide parts of X-Plane have an elitist attitude. As a paying, but unexperienced addon customer, I did receive quite a few rather unfriendly (or kind of "unfriendly under the hood") replies. I found out as a newbie it is is often better to ask stupid and short questions, because otherwise honorable veterans feel somewhat threatened.

Edited September 26, 2013 by tortuosit

[IINAYDOGII 10]

its the freedom that allows games to prosper.

[mistyronin 1181]

Imagine how many crappy DLCs there would be, just to make a buck. And do you think the said community member would care if you're not satisfied? In most cases... No. After all they aren't pros. If they were, they'd already be making money doing it for a living. If there will be user created, payed DLC's, I wont play Arma3. I'll simply grab a VBS title if I'm going to be paying for many DLCs.

Did you know about the laws of supply and demand? If there are tons of content makers, that will mean that the players will have more to choose, and obviously if an addon is a piece of crap, no one will buy it ( think in shops like iTunes or Amazon ).

In fact the possibility of earning a few bucks will make addon makers to work harder and better, and listen to the users, as they want their addon to be famous and bought. The community will be the judge. No one would want to do bad quality addons, as they would give them bad publicity, and no sells.

On the other hand, that doesn't mean the end of free addons, as some people just want to share their work, or don't want to compete. Or they just want to show that they are able to do good addons, some kind of ad for their payed addons.

[frag 0]

Did you know about the laws of supply and demand? If there are tons of content makers, that will mean that the players will have more to choose, and obviously if an addon is a piece of crap, no one will buy it ( think in shops like iTunes or Amazon ).

In fact the possibility of earning a few bucks will make addon makers to work harder and better, and listen to the users, as they want their addon to be famous and bought. The community will be the judge. No one would want to do bad quality addons, as they would give them bad publicity, and no sells.

On the other hand, that doesn't mean the end of free addons, as some people just want to share their work, or don't want to compete. Or they just want to show that they are able to do good addons, some kind of ad for their payed addons.

i agree with you 100%.

FSX has free addons and payware one. Both options live together in harmony. We do not need to be afraid of this. i think that the people that are afraid of that idea do not realize the quality of the addons that could be released by a full blown companies hiring professional artists and developpers.

We would get full blown campaigns, 3D models designed to the bolts level and features we could not even imagine. FSX have tons of good freeware addons, but the most complete ones come from small corporations investing thousands of hours on their content, which could not be delivered for free ... and would never have seen the community otherwise.

This option would dramatically raise the level of quality of Arma 3, since more professionals would work on it. It's that plain simple.

[[aps]gnat 28]

- Brought every BI games, even bought couple copies on the same version!

- Brought all BI's DLC or expansion packs

- Brought 3 copies/versions of FS over the years, never ever purchased any Payware.

I think the BI formula to date has generated a great and creative community.

Don't tell me the ArmA2/OA community addons, missions, terrains etc etc are inadequate .... TONNES of great content.

I vote +100 to leave it well alone. If it ain't broke, don't mess with it.