Where is the Game?

[stalkerm 10]

Well, it's like buying a ferrari and using only the first gear.

I think it's more like buying a Ferrari and not modify the camshaft, the valves, the pistons...if i buy a Ferrari i'm expecting an already optimized car. If i want something challenging i'm going to buy car's parts and building a car on my own.

ArmA for me was a something like a "war simulator" not a "programming simulator" or lego simulator and stuff.

[memphisbelle 99]

I think it's more like buying a Ferrari and not modify the camshaft, the valves, the pistons...if i buy a Ferrari i'm expecting an already optimized car. If i want something challenging i'm going to buy car's parts and building a car on my own.

ArmA for me was a something like a "war simulator" not a "programming simulator" or lego simulator and stuff.

What you´re saying is nonsense because the developer made it puplic what they are about to do. There´s no reason to talk like that.

I am very sure that you wouldn´t complain if your connection would be better. If you´d have a 50 Mbit connection (which seems to be the most common connection already) so you even wouldn´t care. You´d take it as it is...so stop blaming BIS, blame your telcome provider whos doesn´t care about your connection, blame your governement that they aren´t forcing better Internet in your region...

[roshnak 41]

I think it's hilarious how many people on these forums defend terrible business practices. I'm not saying that BIS specifically is guilty of any of this stuff, but attitudes like these are the reason that the video games industry is full of such terrible customer service. Maybe if more people felt entitled we wouldn't have to deal with things like day 1 DLC and preorder bonuses full of content that should have shipped with the game, codes to download content online so that games can't be resold, etc.

As for the comments about there being plenty of resources to find out what you were getting with ARMA 3 ahead of time: last time I checked, there are several announced features, including in the "confirmed features" thread right here on the forums that are not in the final product.

[memphisbelle 99]

I think it's hilarious how many people on these forums defend terrible business practices.

If a developer Team cares about his community so this is BIS. Compare EA, Codemasters or any other developer Company with BIS and tell me they are better...BIS might not be perfect, how could they, they are just a small Team compared to other companies...but for what they are doing they are putting way more love and effort in their products than others are. I wouldnt call that terrible Buiseness practices...this is the best they can do to provide the best they can...but it seems that it isnt possible to make people stop crying.

I'm not saying that BIS specifically is guilty of any of this stuff, but attitudes like these are the reason that the video games industry is full of such terrible customer service.

That is wrong. What we are experiencing lately in the gaming Industriy is the more and more DRM Products are beeing released...look at CoD, look at EA. They are releasing Games that might not need quite a lot patching, but you´ve got to pay a full price game fow what? A 7 hours story and thats it....a story that is basically ALWAYS the same? THIS is what I call terrible customer Service...Next thing is support, if you have an issue, try to get proper support from EA...it´s nearly impossible. Again, BIS isn´t perfect, but they are far away from having terrible customer service.

Maybe if more people felt entitled we wouldn't have to deal with things like day 1 DLC and preorder bonuses full of content that should have shipped with the game, codes to download content online so that games can't be resold, etc.

Peronally I havent any problems with this. I rather have a working product that comes in pieces as somethings that is either full of contents and full of bugs or is lacking support overall. BIS has made some mistakes in the past, and they´ve learned about it and decided to do it better...I ask my question again...how is it possibloe to become you guys satisfied?

As for the comments about there being plenty of resources to find out what you were getting with ARMA 3 ahead of time: last time I checked, there are several announced features, including in the "confirmed features" thread right here on the forums that are not in the final product.

Basically you guys cant compare BIS and ArmA with other Developers. This is quite a huge different. NO OTHER GAME is providing SO MUCH modding possibility. NO OTHER Developer cares so much about their community than BIS (and ED) are doing.

If you cant stand what you have...so you need to break with ArmA and BIS and wait until it´s fully finished...Yes, that might take time...may be even some years...but this is worth waiting

[stalkerm 10]

What you´re saying is nonsense because the developer made it puplic what they are about to do. There´s no reason to talk like that.

I am very sure that you wouldn´t complain if your connection would be better. If you´d have a 50 Mbit connection (which seems to be the most common connection already) so you even wouldn´t care. You´d take it as it is...so stop blaming BIS, blame your telcome provider whos doesn´t care about your connection, blame your governement that they aren´t forcing better Internet in your region...

yeah...this can be a possibilty

[celery 8]

If a developer Team cares about his community so this is BIS. Compare EA, Codemasters or any other developer Company with BIS and tell me they are better...BIS might not be perfect, how could they, they are just a small Team compared to other companies...but for what they are doing they are putting way more love and effort in their products than others are. I wouldnt call that terrible Buiseness practices...this is the best they can do to provide the best they can...but it seems that it isnt possible to make people stop crying.

That is wrong. What we are experiencing lately in the gaming Industriy is the more and more DRM Products are beeing released...look at CoD, look at EA. They are releasing Games that might not need quite a lot patching, but you´ve got to pay a full price game fow what? A 7 hours story and thats it....a story that is basically ALWAYS the same? THIS is what I call terrible customer Service...Next thing is support, if you have an issue, try to get proper support from EA...it´s nearly impossible. Again, BIS isn´t perfect, but they are far away from having terrible customer service.

Peronally I havent any problems with this. I rather have a working product that comes in pieces as somethings that is either full of contents and full of bugs or is lacking support overall. BIS has made some mistakes in the past, and they´ve learned about it and decided to do it better...I ask my question again...how is it possibloe to become you guys satisfied?

Basically you guys cant compare BIS and ArmA with other Developers. This is quite a huge different. NO OTHER GAME is providing SO MUCH modding possibility. NO OTHER Developer cares so much about their community than BIS (and ED) are doing.

If you cant stand what you have...so you need to break with ArmA and BIS and wait until it´s fully finished...Yes, that might take time...may be even some years...but this is worth waiting

So does any of that cancel out the fact that the game was released as a sandbox editor with incomplete assets and missing playable content?

[PuFu 4600]

So does any of that cancel out the fact that the game was released as a sandbox editor with incomplete assets and missing playable content?

Obviously, no, it doesn't cancel anything

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

I am enjoying the game and have played many hours, but not enjoying it quite as much as Arma2 yet. Shooting is far too clunky and performance in multiplayer still needs improvement. Vehicles are badly done, end of story, in Arma2 I 'feel' like I am in a vehicle, in Arma3 vehicles are like poor quality toys.

Regarding shooting, someone I know actually visited a range while on holiday in the USA just to test out how detached from reality Arma 3's gun wobble really is. He even ran around outside for 10 mins to simulate fatigue. Verdict: You only get the sort of Arma 3 gun wobble in real life if you have fatigue and drink a bottle of vodka or have some sort of neurological illness. It's the main thing that spoils the game, especially in coop as the AI don't have the same problem. Playing this game reminds me of that scene in Pulp Fiction where the guy misses every shot while shooting at Jackson & Travolta from 10 yards. Happen's all the time, at close range I now aim for the AI's right foot and spray & pray, knowing that the wobble and silly recoil will eventually mean some rounds hit the target.

Edited September 29, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[eymerich 11]

If you purchase Arma you enter in the Arma universe.

Now, i too was hoping in much more content but I haven t purchased Arma because of campaign: i purchased because of editor....

I am just doing my own campaign and I have 200 hr + (since Alpha).

[memphisbelle 99]

So does any of that cancel out the fact that the game was released as a sandbox editor with incomplete assets and missing playable content?

I wouldnt even think about this thing because BIS told me they are doing this to provide a good result...so why thinking bad about this when a Company wants to provide me a good product for my money...even if it comes in pieces

[mamasan8 11]

I wouldnt even think about this thing because BIS told me they are doing this to provide a good result...so why thinking bad about this when a Company wants to provide me a good product for my money...even if it comes in pieces

The assumption here would be that what is in the game now, the base, works very well.

The failure is that it does NOT work well.

Basically, we are getting a Beta with no content. Crashes, slowdowns, low FPS.

I have a mission with 30 AI fighting in a town. FPS drops from 60 -> 10 or 20 FPS instantly. So no, not even SP works.

Just for reference, I bought the Alpha. Never played it, it was just such a pile of dung. In Beta it started to be playable.

For me, BIS has always provided the base product. For the good product, I turn to mods.

But when the base product deteriorates to this standard...no mods can save it.

[OMAC 254]

I get those slowdowns also in SP, especially when I turn quickly.

[Pac Man 10]

The failure is that it does NOT work well.

Basically, we are getting a Beta with no content. Crashes, slowdowns, low FPS.

I have a mission with 30 AI fighting in a town. FPS drops from 60 -> 10 or 20 FPS instantly. So no, not even SP works.

1) It's a far smoother release than Arma1 by far and one could make a very strong case it's release was "far" better than Arma2's.

2) There are literally hundreds upon hundreds of sp & mp missions already available. There are already good addons available. And if you want to get down to brass tacks about vanilla content (aside from a shotty campaign that wasted time in rma2), Arma3 has vanilla Arma2 beat here aswell (not talking about CO.. vanilla A2). There may appear to be a minuscule amount of weapons only because each weapon serves as a base weapon for attachments.

3) Idk what to say about the FPS issue. The franchise has always been good to (seemingly random) peoples hardware, and bad for others. Regardless if you have a mid or high range setup. I personally get decent FPS on my mid range computer, some may even say low end. It mostly comes down to mission optimization for me & if I'm playing MP, server optimization too.

4) I've heard some people getting crashes. Fortunately I haven't been a victim yet. So it's not like we can speak for everyone.

I'm not saying that Arma3 shouldn't have had more release content, but it's still a very viable game with many options. As you can see the server list is usually populated to the brim, with several full servers and tons of active servers in general. So the game isn't as bad as you've made it out to be.

[celery 8]

And if you want to get down to brass tacks about vanilla content (aside from a shotty campaign that wasted time in rma2), Arma3 has vanilla Arma2 beat here aswell (not talking about CO.. vanilla A2). There may appear to be a minuscule amount of weapons only because each weapon serves as a base weapon for attachments.

How does this argument constatly get used despite being blatantly untrue?

Once again, here is the asset list of Arma 2: http://www.dayzsuperhive.co.uk/arma-ii.html

You're welcome to point out which category has an inferior number of assets compared to Arma 3, and you're most welcome to ignore the attachment variants of the weapons.

[Pac Man 10]

How does this argument constatly get used despite being blatantly untrue?

Once again, here is the asset list of Arma 2: http://www.dayzsuperhive.co.uk/arma-ii.html

You're welcome to point out which category has an inferior number of assets compared to Arma 3, and you're most welcome to ignore the attachment variants of the weapons.

Yeah I suppose you're right. There's like 30 variants of the bmp2 & brdms, plus lots of small objects haha. In any case, I personally don't "feel" the huge gap in content, when i'm actually in game, playing any given scenario.

Kind regards,

Pac Man

Edited September 29, 2013 by Pac Man

[laverniusregalis 10]

The assumption here would be that what is in the game now, the base, works very well.

The failure is that it does NOT work well.

Basically, we are getting a Beta with no content. Crashes, slowdowns, low FPS.

I have a mission with 30 AI fighting in a town. FPS drops from 60 -> 10 or 20 FPS instantly. So no, not even SP works.

Just for reference, I bought the Alpha. Never played it, it was just such a pile of dung. In Beta it started to be playable.

For me, BIS has always provided the base product. For the good product, I turn to mods.

But when the base product deteriorates to this standard...no mods can save it.

You computer is a potato?

Nah, I have an average PC, I can have fairly big firefights in CQC and maintain 30FPS on medium-high settings. I have never experienced a single crash yet, in my 150+ hours of play, either, but I haven't been playing Wasteland or Life. Usually the only thing that troubles me is bigger forests.

Edited September 30, 2013 by steamtex

[MissionCreep 12]

I think it's hilarious how many people on these forums defend terrible business practices.

The thing people like you don't understand is that many people on this forum are not merely "customers". They are Community. They pour their time and creative talents into Arma, and BIS acknowledges this effort back. Arma is not a "product" it is a Community work-in-progress and has always been so. Before you criticize "fanboys" and alike, put yourself into the mindspace of someone who paid a pittance like $40, $50, $60 for the incredible honour to become a permanent members of Community instead. Arma fans from the beginning have been through far worse than "only one jet" or "I want 50 different choices of handguns".

You want to see Community, go to

http://www.armaholic.com

Edited September 29, 2013 by MissionCreep

[celery 8]

The thing people like you don't understand is that many people on this forum are not merely "customers". They are Community. They pour their time and creative talents into Arma, and BIS acknowledges this effort back. Arma is not a "product" it is a Community work-in-progress and has always been so. Before you criticize "fanboys" and alike, put yourself into the mindspace of someone who paid a pittance like $40, $50, $60 for the incredible honour to become a permanent members of Community instead. Arma fans from the beginning have been through far worse than "only one jet" or "I want 50 different choices of handguns".

You want to see Community, go to

http://www.armaholic.com

Arma 3 should stand on its own legs as a game that anyone interested can play and have their money's worth of fun without special concessions or apologies. This community that you speak of so highly becomes a little more obnoxious in the eyes of "outsiders" every time it jumps to defend Arma 3 with the same old sentimental arguments that change nothing about how the game compares to other releases in the game industry and what people who don't live for the Arma franchise expect from the games they buy.

[Fulcrum90 10]

and BIS acknowledges this effort back.

How?? By releasing an unfinished product? By removing half the content and leaving place-holders in place? Reskins and Frankensteins instead of diverse armys?

The thing people like you don't understand is that many people on this forum are not merely "customers". They are Community. They pour their time and creative talents into Arma,

Ahhh and because we are a community we should be fanboys that mindlessly praise everything BIS does? Fuck no, Im a customer. I paid money and received an unfinished product.

[laverniusregalis 10]

How?? By releasing an unfinished product? By removing half the content and leaving place-holders in place? Reskins and Frankensteins instead of diverse armys?

Deadlines. Besides, let's see what ArmA2 VANILLA had.... Two guerrilla factions, both using almost the exact same gear and barely different models. Basic infantry for USMC and Russia. Comparable to ArmA3, sans the semi-automatic shotgun.

Let's compare USMC to NATO. "two" harriers, only difference was weaponry. Harrier and SU-34 were both updated from A1. F-35 was a new unique model. Two Abrams tanks, one of which has extra polygons and more protection. A bunch of humvee variants. A truck, a tractor for an aircraft carrier, and two derpy bikes which shouldn't have been added in the state they were in. Two APCs. Several static weapons. A truck. The static arty in A3 was replaced by a mobile SPG. So, what does ArmA2 have on A3 comparing NATO and USMC? Well, a few aircraft, an extra helicopter and more slight variants than NATO. And as for CDF? Most of their assets are borrowed from OPFOR and reskinned. And before you tell me about the Apache, it was in an update. It wasn't stock.

Ahhh and because we are a community we should be fanboys that mindlessly praise everything BIS does? Fuck no, Im a customer. I paid money and received an unfinished product.

Be constructive then. Don't just bitch.

[celery 8]

Deadlines. Besides, let's see what ArmA2 VANILLA had.... Two guerrilla factions, both using almost the exact same gear and barely different models. Basic infantry for USMC and Russia. Comparable to ArmA3, sans the semi-automatic shotgun.

Let's compare USMC to NATO. "two" harriers, only difference was weaponry. Harrier and SU-34 were both updated from A1. F-35 was a new unique model. Two Abrams tanks, one of which has extra polygons and more protection. A bunch of humvee variants. A truck, a tractor for an aircraft carrier, and two derpy bikes which shouldn't have been added in the state they were in. Two APCs. Several static weapons. A truck. The static arty in A3 was replaced by a mobile SPG. So, what does ArmA2 have on A3 comparing NATO and USMC? Well, a few aircraft, an extra helicopter and more slight variants than NATO. And as for CDF? Most of their assets are borrowed from OPFOR and reskinned. And before you tell me about the Apache, it was in an update. It wasn't stock.

I wish Arma 3 had as much content as your post has rhetoric. Then it wouldn't need you to defend its number and variety of assets compared to Arma 2.

[Fulcrum90 10]

Deadlines. Besides, let's see what ArmA2 VANILLA had.... Two guerrilla factions, both using almost the exact same gear and barely different models. Basic infantry for USMC and Russia. Comparable to ArmA3, sans the semi-automatic shotgun.

Let's compare USMC to NATO. "two" harriers, only difference was weaponry. Harrier and SU-34 were both updated from A1. F-35 was a new unique model. Two Abrams tanks, one of which has extra polygons and more protection. A bunch of humvee variants. A truck, a tractor for an aircraft carrier, and two derpy bikes which shouldn't have been added in the state they were in. Two APCs. Several static weapons. A truck. The static arty in A3 was replaced by a mobile SPG. So, what does ArmA2 have on A3 comparing NATO and USMC? Well, a few aircraft, an extra helicopter and more slight variants than NATO. And as for CDF? Most of their assets are borrowed from OPFOR and reskinned. And before you tell me about the Apache, it was in an update. It wasn't stock.

.

Did you seriously just try to talk away all the vehicles that were included in the release of ArmA 2? Here: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/ArmA_2:_Vehicles

That shit was all in ArmA 2. Vanilla. We had FIVE different Jets for fucks sake. Not speaking of all the other planes -_-

[laverniusregalis 10]

I wish Arma 3 had as much content as your post has rhetoric. Then it wouldn't need you to defend its number and variety of assets compared to Arma 2.

Comparing ArmA 3 to A2CO/Reinforcements isn't fair, just as a note.

Did you seriously just try to talk away all the vehicles that were included in the release of ArmA 2? Here: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/ArmA_2:_Vehicles

That shit was all in ArmA 2. Vanilla. We had FIVE different Jets for fucks sake. Not speaking of all the other planes -_-

What I'm trying to say is this: ArmA2 might have more vehicles than A3, but if I count the unique vehicles in each category:

10 Armored.

27 Wheeled. Lots of which were civilian sedans.

19 Air, not counting parachute.

6 Sea.

The end result is that while A2 has more overall vehicles than ArmA3, it's mostly due to 14 civilian vehicles, the aircraft, and trucks.

Did you seriously just try to talk away all the vehicles that were included in the release of ArmA 2? Here: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/ArmA_2:_Vehicles

That shit was all in ArmA 2. Vanilla. We had FIVE different Jets for fucks sake. Not speaking of all the other planes -_-

I did, because of all the different-turret-on-a-humvee vehicles, what, 10 similar looking sedans, and the HUGE VARIETY OF TRUCKS THAT LOOK ALMOST THE SAME. Also, the SU-34 and Harrier, weren't they in ArmA1? Didn't they look mighty similar? Eh?

Edited September 29, 2013 by steamtex

[celery 8]

Like it or not, comparing ArmA 3 to A2CO/Reinforcements isn't fair. So stop doing it.

Only one hour ago in this very same thread I said this:

How does this argument constatly get used despite being blatantly untrue?

Once again, here is the asset list of Arma 2: http://www.dayzsuperhive.co.uk/arma-ii.html

You're welcome to point out which category has an inferior number of assets compared to Arma 3, and you're most welcome to ignore the attachment variants of the weapons.

Nobody's talking about Combined Operations here. So stop embarrassing yourself.

[Tacti-Cool 10]

Be constructive then. Don't just bitch.

Why should the community have to finish the job?