CiA Petition Letter to BIS and DnA's Response

[-Coulum- 35]

Funny thing is that I remember this being one of the things that metalcraze harped on about... when in reality BI didn't forget about it.

Well the only reason they implemented it was because of metalcraze's harping;)

This is actually another thing giving me lots of hope. It seems like they simply didn't have time to properly implement "all teh tings!" so they held them back rather than half assing them. This is much better than them holding back in hopes of getting more players.

I personally hope that they eventually address all of metalcraze's issues with the game.

[OMAC 254]

Whoa, those A3 remakes of the CWC/CWA missions look very interesting. But they won't be the same as fighting on Everon and the other islands. I'm very glad that many (I hope most) Arma players think A3 is a better game, as that was BIS's whole intention, of course. :) The more content for A3, the better. But I don't think CWR2 itself will be ported. For me, A3 is not a better game until the campaign comes out, and more official SP missions. I can just imagine Zipper5, Gaia, and others cranking out the campaign. I wish I had their job....

Metalcraze is one of those Armaholics who was dumped on by new fanboys because he "dared" say something was wrong or missing in A3. Jeesh. Those noobs! ;)

Edited September 28, 2013 by OMAC

[HKFlash 9]

Metalcraze's problem is not his feedback but the way he provides it because as far as the game itself goes, I agree with him on alot of points. Perhaps its time to get him out of my ignore list now that the shitstorm has passed? You know how he behaves when those arrive...

[chortles 263]

Well the only reason they implemented it was because of metalcraze's harping;)

Or so he might claim... whereas based on some dev remarks his way, I'm inclined to believe that his harping sometimes had the opposite effect. :rolleyes:

This is actually another thing giving me lots of hope. It seems like they simply didn't have time to properly implement "all teh tings!" so they held them back rather than half assing them. This is much better than them holding back in hopes of getting more players.

I think that that's where you differ, truthbetold -- I won't say patience, since of course BI had been in the past vague about ever making the changes, but the impression I always got from people's voicing of complaints re: these elements was that they were concerned about implementation by launch, instead of allowing for (or okay with) how Arma 3 development was essentially racing against the clock... hence what you call "held them back rather than half assing". If anything, it sounds like time was the resource that was most denied to Arma 3, whether or not the other complainers could accept that.

Cue all the jokes about going to war with the army that you have, not the one that you wish that you had...

Whoa, those A3 remakes of the CWC/CWA missions look very interesting. But they won't be the same as fighting on Everon and the other islands. I'm very glad that many (I hope most) Arma players think A3 is a better game, as that was BIS's whole intention, of course. :) The more content for A3, the better. But I don't think CWR2 itself will be ported. For me, A3 is not a better game until the campaign comes out, and more official SP missions. I can just imagine Zipper5, Gaia, and others cranking out the campaign. I wish I had their job...

Muwahaha, in that sense, mission accomplished. And yeah, both myself and the mission maker agree(d) re: it not being the same, just look at some of the mission descriptions and their admitted degrees of just how "loose" the remakes were. Still, I don't believe that it's a coincidence that the SP campaign is what seems to be the overwhelming majority of people's liking/nostalgia for CWC/CWA... moreso than anything else about that game. :p I believe that that's why the idea of "Arma 3 remakes" can work, whether or not there's a CWR3.

Speaking of CWR2 not being ported though, I'm left thinking of something very interesting in DnA's response. For all the love for NodUnit and Franze's AH-64D Apache Longbow, it took them over three years, as in throughout Arma 2/OA's release and most of Arma 3's public testing release (the mod being released publicly just under two weeks before Arma 3's "formal" launch), while W0lle's statement re: why there wouldn't be a CWR3 (under him anyway) specifically invoked how "we are still not done 4 years later. If we would move to ARMA 3 with the current team the estimated development time would be around 8 years or even more. By then, no one would even remember ARMA 3", and therefore "I also have no interest in spending the entire lifetime of another game creating a Mod which only gets done when the next game is released."

In contrast, even as the flagship product of BI and with a supermajority of BI devs being Arma 3 devs, DnA had less than a year to turn something that was apparently in the wrong direction (maybe even "brought in to clean up the prior devs' mess") into something deliverable and ready to publish... and I emphasize "had", because I absolutely believe that early on in his tenure (as the "Full Steam Ahead" announcement alluded to) the-powers-that-be, as high as Maruk, had set an ever-hardening deadline for DnA, the other Arma 3 devs, and the game to meet... at any cost.

Metalcraze is one of those Armaholics who was dumped on by new fanboys because he "dared" say something was wrong or missing in A3. Jeesh. Those noobs! ;)

As HKFlash put it, it was the how, and some of what he was saying... I mean, Alwarren, Variable and Varanon for starters did not call the devs the B-team or Jay Crowe a liar while presenting their concerns... or harp about Suma being lead programmer for the DayZ standalone as if somehow one dev, even Suma, would be the difference between Arma 3 rocking or sucking or as if that would somehow get Suma running back. :rolleyes: metalcraze was the only "Armaholic" who got the devs themselves pushing back at him specifically. :lol:

[Pac Man 10]

Metalcraze is one of those Armaholics who was dumped on by new fanboys because he "dared" say something was wrong or missing in A3. Jeesh. Those noobs!

I know right? It's so easy to tell who's new to the series. You just look at their forum join date. Duh! :rolleyes:

[Maio 293]

Back on topic guys :) This thread is not about Metalcraze and the subtle ripples his statements create.

[dav 22]

Wow really exhaustive boring letter, well done 67, you wasted so much time repeating your points too, way to go.

I would just say as a long term fan this medic system is making it too easy for people to survive and regenerate full health. Letter is repeating itself over and over. You could have written everything into one small paragraph and cut the official bull xxxx

[Redphoenix 1540]

What is wrong with this community?

I mean, come on.... I think BI knows what there's wrong with this game, but bitching around here won't forcing them doing something which is more or less an egoistic favour ("I want moar realizms!").

Yesterday themaster said to me "Arma is like a good wine - The older it gets, the better it becomes." Best advice then:

Stay calm and wait.

(And if you want to have more realism, you can do an ACE2 for Arma3.....)

[Varanon 892]

but bitching around here won't forcing them doing something which is more or less an egoistic favour ("I want moar realizms!").

Show me, please, where this letter is "bitching" about anything ?

Egoistic flavor ? Right.

Stay calm and wait.

It always cracks me up how people automatically put a "rager" label on every complaint. Honestly. No one is in need to calm down.

And wait... How many times do I need to stress that the developers ASKED for feedback in the first place ? If everyone waited, the game would have a lot less features, and a lot more bugs.

(And if you want to have more realism, you can do an ACE2 for Arma3.....)

Aaand, of course, the usual mantra "Modders will fix it".. sigh... At least this time it comes from a modder and not a pure consumer like usual. But still, can we get this "modders to the rescue" mentality out of the way ? Thanks.

[Redphoenix 1540]

Show me, please, where this letter is "bitching" about anything ?

I didn't mean the letter at this point at all.

It always cracks me up how people automatically put a "rager" label on every complaint. Honestly. No one is in need to calm down.

And wait... How many times do I need to stress that the developers ASKED for feedback in the first place ? If everyone waited, the game would have a lot less features, and a lot more bugs.

Again, I wasn't talking about the letter. But this post was forwarded to people who say "Fuck this game it's shit because it is like it is."

Aaand, of course, the usual mantra "Modders will fix it".. sigh... At least this time it comes from a modder and not a pure consumer like usual. But still, can we get this "modders to the rescue" mentality out of the way ? Thanks.

No we cannot, because it's an essential part of the game. The game will be how BI wants it to be. There's nothing wrong with that. If they want it to be more casual and easier to learn, it's fine and we as their fnas have to cope with that which means that the hardcore-community has drawn the bad card.

So there has to be a mod revamping the game (and again, there is nothing wrong with that).

[GabielSix 10]

obligatory read. +1

[Varanon 892]

I didn't mean the letter at this point at all.

Apologies for misunderstanding, then

No we cannot, because it's an essential part of the game.

Yes, they are, but they aren't supposed to fix what's "broken", especially since there are things in the engine code that can't be modded, and a game will have to stand on it's own merits. There's one review that called Arma 3 an "editor with some content delivered alongside", claiming that in it's current state, you have to rely on community content to even find anything in the game. That's why I think this "modders to the rescue" doesn't stand.

If they want it to be more casual and easier to learn, it's fine and we as their fnas have to cope with that which means that the hardcore-community has drawn the bad card.

That might be true, but then, there's two problems with that. First of all, it's Arma. Remember when Operation Flashpoint was watered down to Dragon Rising ? Want to go that same route ? Secondly, the game is marketed as an authentic experience. So there's BIS' idea of Arma being authentic. What's wrong in pointing out where we think that the authenticity is too far off ?

[Alwarren 2767]

The game will be how BI wants it to be. There's nothing wrong with that.

That must be why they ask feedback from their community, so they can make the game just how THEY want it.

[galzohar 31]

Weight never had any real effect in ArmA (be it for weapon handling or overall movement). Using it as an argument for why ArmA 3 sucks is just wrong IMO. However, I still believe it's one of the biggest issues in the game (not counting bugs). As we've seen mods can't really fix it, and unfortunately I lost faith that BIS will.

Don't get me wrong, I really appreciate BIS's dedication to improving all aspects of this game, but I just don't agree with the priorities when it comes to which features are more important to implement/finish. For example - Flexible stances are cool and a first aid system might be interesting, but both are simply not nearly as important as making weight (of both weapon and overall character loadout) matter.

[Pac Man 10]

Weight never had any real effect in ArmA (be it for weapon handling or overall movement). Using it as an argument for why ArmA 3 sucks is just wrong IMO. However, I still believe it's one of the biggest issues in the game (not counting bugs). As we've seen mods can't really fix it, and unfortunately I lost faith that BIS will.

Don't get me wrong, I really appreciate BIS's dedication to improving all aspects of this game, but I just don't agree with the priorities when it comes to which features are more important to implement/finish. For example - Flexible stances are cool and a first aid system might be interesting, but both are simply not nearly as important as making weight (of both weapon and overall character loadout) matter.

Well said.

---------- Post added at 14:34 ---------- Previous post was at 14:26 ----------

So there has to be a mod revamping the game (and again, there is nothing wrong with that).

Yup, not like it hasn't always been this way in any case.

[rye1 22]

I think I signed this if I'm not mistaken.

Weight never had any real effect in ArmA (be it for weapon handling or overall movement). Using it as an argument for why ArmA 3 sucks is just wrong IMO. However, I still believe it's one of the biggest issues in the game (not counting bugs). As we've seen mods can't really fix it, and unfortunately I lost faith that BIS will.

Don't get me wrong, I really appreciate BIS's dedication to improving all aspects of this game, but I just don't agree with the priorities when it comes to which features are more important to implement/finish. For example - Flexible stances are cool and a first aid system might be interesting, but both are simply not nearly as important as making weight (of both weapon and overall character loadout) matter.

Maybe we'll see such with the 'upper body adjustments' they were making. Chortles knows more than me on this but weren't they making some upper-body rotations that would make you more effective at turning your body, especially for closer range firefights, and they removed it in a Beta patch to fix it?

[Variable 322]

I think I signed this if I'm not mistaken.

You have :)

Maybe we'll see such with the 'upper body adjustments' they were making. Chortles knows more than me on this but weren't they making some upper-body rotations that would make you more effective at turning your body, especially for closer range firefights, and they removed it in a Beta patch to fix it?

I would love to hear more about this.

[Alwarren 2767]

Weight never had any real effect in ArmA (be it for weapon handling or overall movement). Using it as an argument for why ArmA 3 sucks is just wrong IMO.

Ignoring for a moment that nothing in the letter said "Arma 3 sucks", the previous inventory was severely limited by slots. You could pick EITHER a machine gun OR a launcher OR a backpack. Now you can carry all of them at once, so the trade-off is gone. So I do think it is an issue.

[galzohar 31]

I wasn't referring to the letter, but to a lot of comments people here and elsewhere keep bringing up. Yes, nothing is worse than ArmA 2 in terms of engine features, but some you'd just expect ArmA 3 to stop ignoring some critical things that slipped away (or more precisely made completely arcade-ish) in previous iterations of the engine.

[Alwarren 2767]

I wasn't referring to the letter, but to a lot of comments people here and elsewhere keep bringing up. Yes, nothing is worse than ArmA 2 in terms of engine features, but some you'd just expect ArmA 3 to stop ignoring some critical things that slipped away (or more precisely made completely arcade-ish) in previous iterations of the engine.

Gotcha. Agreed to that.

[instagoat 133]

Ignoring for a moment that nothing in the letter said "Arma 3 sucks", the previous inventory was severely limited by slots. You could pick EITHER a machine gun OR a launcher OR a backpack. Now you can carry all of them at once, so the trade-off is gone. So I do think it is an issue.

I think the problem here is that the intended system was never fully implemented, much like the medical system that hints at more, but clearly is not taken as far as it apparently was meant to go.

You -can- load yourself down with tons of weapons, realistically, but right now the punishment for overloading yourself isn't existent, practically.

Another problem that really -is- important is the lack of seperate handling for heavy weapons such as heavy duty sniper rifles, MMG and other unwieldy weapons. I think one would need to go as far as having seperate animation sets for those, and I think it is something we should focus on and press BI a bit. The weight management system is crippled not because it iself is bad, but because of the deficiencies in weapons handling.

For example, MMG's should not be fired from the shoulder, and if only for short periods of time. You should be physically pushed back when firing MMG/LMG when firing standing, and have a special kneeling stance for firing them when on the knee.

Limiting the inventory by slots isn't the way to go, even though the current system is not perfect either, a weight based layout is more desireable.

I'll probably try and survey what kind of stamina posts there are up on the tracker, and then try and come up with a solution suggestion for the community and BI to judge upon, because I want to be proactive rather than just complain.

I doubt BI aren't realizing that some of the new features are somewhat inbalanced because of lack in other fields of the game, and I am sure we can get some synergy going to fix the infantry gameplay up to a truly superior standard.

Which, in my humble opinion, should focus on enhanced gunplay (Inertia, Weapon weight affecting stance and stamina depending on how you carry the weapon, more sensible animations for heavy weapons.), enhanced bodyarmor simulation (Using RVmats and new penetration system and ditching the mathematical modifiers entirely.) and enhanced medical system (Knockdown on hit, Bleedout, Dual item medical system (Stop bleeding, Heal), increased body alarm response.). These three things, gunhandling, hit handling and medical system (including stamina.) appear to be most important as far as the infantry is concerned.

[-Coulum- 35]

I think the problem here is that the intended system was never fully implemented, much like the medical system that hints at more, but clearly is not taken as far as it apparently was meant to go.

This.... I hope.

I can actually understand if BIS doesn't want to follow realism to the dot. For example the medic system will never be realistic and I can understand why. But it should have some complexity that enriches the game. I mean even COD has complexities through perks and weapons stats, even if it isn't realistic. I am sure BIS wanted this kind of depth, even if it wasn't 1:1 with realism, but It seems that they simply didn't have time to do so.

Now there's lots of time. And unlike arma 2, they have a much stabler platform to work off of (at least I hope).

[bad benson 1733]

But it should have some complexity that enriches the game.

amen! keep on preachin brother!

[OMAC 254]

I think that they are very well aware of enhancements and additions desired by the community, even that they want some of the same things themselves. I could be wrong, but I think we'll be seeing some surprises in the next year or so. I am on an optimistic upswing, partly because of DnA's letter, and partly in knowing that zGuba, Arma weapon config/ballistics expert, is on the job.

I'll be happy if half of the ideas InstaGoat and Variable mentioned are added, and/or weapon/bipod resting...

[Variable 322]

I think that they are very well aware of enhancements and additions desired by the community, even that they want some of the same things themselves.

Oddly enough, I'm pretty sure we get bashed for requesting features that the devs wanted themselves but couldn't accomplish within the time/resources frame. :)

Edited September 28, 2013 by Variable