Priority of Bugfixing and features of BIS

[Harry Canyon 10]

I love it when people complain about doing their jobs.

Sooo true.

[Greenfist 1863]

Who's complaining about their jobs here?

[krazikilla 5]

I love it when non-developer types say this

There is no need in this topic to go personal and trolling, please. If you love it, keep it to yourself, thanks.

(i know quite well and have around 10 years of experience related to software developing)

Back to topic:

@derdoe: Thats quite much that what i mean.

Even ArmA is developed as a sandbox-game, each new version of it gets more nice core elements. (PhysiX, Ragdoll, Diving, graphics in general, PiP, and so on.) I, and i am pretty sure, most of the other feedbacktrack voters, simply would like to know whats goin on about some other featuers, which a lot of people hoped will be in as core element.

And the problem about this things, used as addons is that they are simply not allowed in most public servers, and even sometimes for compatibiliy reasons, not used in "closed" communities.

[Deadfast 43]

To be perfectly honest I'd much rather have fewer features that work perfectly than a whole bunch that work somewhat. I believe A2 was a perfect example of the latter.

[-RFP-CHykis 11]

To be perfectly honest I'd much rather have fewer features that work perfectly than a whole bunch that work somewhat. I believe A2 was a perfect example of the latter.

Wow, I think ArmA 3 has much more features like movement, Physx and so on, but huge part of these don't work properly - physics still poor, ballistics - like from another universe, changing clothes - big problem, you need to pray all day before try it, THAT NETCODE: if there is more than 4 man shootin each other you can see strange things like crew flying on orbit of gunships and tanks, teleportation, 30 and more rnds needed to kill someone. And so on and on.

And yes, VBS2 has many features that i believe work properly, VBS2 can into 64 bit. ArmA 3 came after VBS2 and can't into 64 bit and many features so I think may be he has some point.

This is almost certainly why some features are VBS2 only, moreso than any actual "attempt to price-segregate".

Edited November 6, 2013 by [RFP]CHykis

[Polygon 11]

CHykis;2551451']Wow' date=' I think ArmA 3 has much more features like movement, Physx and so on, but huge part of these don't work properly - physics still poor, ballistics - like from another universe, changing clothes - big problem, you need to pray all day before try it, THAT NETCODE: if there is more than 4 man shootin each other you can see strange things like crew flying on orbit of gunships and tanks, teleportation, 30 and more rnds needed to kill someone. And so on and on.

And yes, VBS2 has many features that i believe work properly, VBS2 can into 64 bit. ArmA 3 came after VBS2 and can't into 64 bit and many features so I think may be he has some point.[/quote']

ballistics, penetration is fine, except insane recoil / muzzle climb. BIS hasn't even addressed that yet.

BIS should make dev branch updates less frequent, thus more interesting as there'd be more time to work on something bigger, not requiring an instant report on progress because it goes *public* soon.

now, by handling small things, BIS is likely getting ready for future and a better core tech for Arma4.

[maddogx 13]

BIS should make dev branch updates less frequent, thus more interesting as there'd be more time to work on something bigger, not requiring an instant report on progress because it goes *public* soon.

I don't think the dev branch updates are much of a factor regarding development of new features. They have more than just the two "public" branches that we know about. New features are developed on internal branches first before the prototype is ready for public testing.

[-RFP-CHykis 11]

ballistics, penetration is fine

Strange damage characteristics, trajectory - not fine

now, by handling small things, BIS is likely getting ready for future and a better core tech for Arma4.

Yeah-yeah BIS is ready for bla-bla in ArmA 2 BIS is ready for bla-bla cool gayplay ArmA 3, 4, 5, 6 just 100 years needed mates

[mistyronin 1181]

CHykis;2551508']Yeah-yeah BIS is ready for bla-bla in ArmA 2 BIS is ready for bla-bla cool gayplay ArmA 3' date=' 4, 5, 6 just 100 years needed mates[/quote']

May I ask you, why you keep buying and playing Arma games? As far as I know, no one is forced to.

If I don't like a game or I think that the studio is not able to deliver a good product, I simply don't buy it. I mean thank God we have plenty of games to buy in the market.

BTW in this case it's just BI. BIS is the studio who makes VBS.

[.kju 3239]

many experienced players just know that the platform is capable a lot more than BI delivers

like if you look into community made game modes, addons, mods or tournaments

its just sad that BI doesn't focus on what is important for the MP and modding community

[mistyronin 1181]

;2551592']many experienced players just know that the platform is capable a lot more than BI delivers

like if you look into community made game modes' date=' addons, mods or tournaments

its just sad that BI doesn't focus on what is important for the MP and modding community[/quote']

IMO Arma has never been a game focused on MP like Battlefield. For example maps like Altis are not designed for MP, unless as MP you understand COOP. BI has always tried to develop a sandbox game that allow everyone to make up their missions.

In fact I don't really believe Arma could have much popularity as an e-sports game, as it's not arcade; so I don't know if for BI would be worth the effort. Although I'd like some new MP features like a Capture points mode, which could force players to work together to achieve goals ( receiving rewards for teamwork like in BF2 ).

[.kju 3239]

MP includes COOP obviously. Still if you look back to OFP, it had a larger PvP scene than COOP. Especially if one includes the CTI scene.

e-sports has no relation to MP basically - why do you bring it even up???

The fact of the matter is that A3 has huge problems in MP. Performance, netcode, stability, server browser, lack of addon sync, etc etc..

[rundll.exe 12]

IMO Arma has never been a game focused on MP like Battlefield. For example maps like Altis are not designed for MP, unless as MP you understand COOP. BI has always tried to develop a sandbox game that allow everyone to make up their missions.

In fact I don't really believe Arma could have much popularity as an e-sports game, as it's not arcade; so I don't know if for BI would be worth the effort.

Sorry, your post makes little sense (and you should know better)

First, "Altis is not designed for MP" . I fail to see how a map design changes that, unless you mean balancing (mirror-like map) for TvT missions. Bu a good mission designer can work around it.

Second, you seem to think MP = e-sports or COOP? That's a bit short-sighted, there are lots of groups playing casual TvT missions (CTI, C&H, roleplaying, etc).

Although I'd like some new MP features like a Capture points mode, which could force players to work together to achieve goals ( receiving rewards for teamwork like in BF2 ).

again, that's up to the mission designer / Server owner, It's perfecty possible to do this already with scripting. BIS should not invest energy in silly features that only a few % of the players use.

[custard 10]

Release of the modding tools would help the most and personally I would like the 3d editor.

[mistyronin 1181]

;2551608']e-sports has no relation to MP basically - why do you bring it even up???

I thought that it was you who brought competitions in the topic. :rolleyes:

;2551592']you look into community made game modes' date=' addons, mods [b']or tournaments[/b]

From Wikipedia: "Electronic sports (eSports) is a term for organized video game competitions, especially between professionals."

First, "Altis is not designed for MP" . I fail to see how a map design changes that, unless you mean balancing (mirror-like map) for TvT missions

Of course that community mission designers can work around most of the issues, but that does not mean that the game has been developed focusing on MP, like the Battlefield saga ( with maps with good performance, spots designed specially for the multiplayer, etc- ). You can even turn Arma into a MMORPG like DayZ...

It's perfecty possible to do this already with scripting. BIS should not invest energy in silly features that only a few % of the players use.

Have you read the post you were answering...? Yeah, the one were I was saying that "I don't know if for BI would be worth the effort"...

Edited November 6, 2013 by MistyRonin

[.kju 3239]

Tournaments in the sense of arma are mostly MP campaigns or tours.

Sorry to say but it seems you have very little clue of the MP OFP/arma scene and yet make strong statements.

[mistyronin 1181]

;2551633']Tournaments in the sense of arma are mostly MP campaigns or tours.

Sorry to say but it seems you have very little clue of the MP OFP/arma scene and yet make strong statements.

Although MP has never been my favorite point of the Arma series, I used to play in a clan in OFP, and I've also participated in some MP campaigns ( also in BF1942 ). So yeah, I have a slightly idea of what I talk.

But how should I know that in your previous post you were meaning that? BTW MP campaigns to me are also part of e-sports ( again go back to the definition of e-sport: videogame competition ).

On the other hand, doesn't say much about you to defend your opinions with personal attacks. You may or not agree with me, but you can give valid arguments without calling me ignorant.

[-RFP-CHykis 11]

Of course that community mission designers can work around most of the issues, but that does not mean that the game has been developed focusing on MP, like the Battlefield saga ( with maps with good performance, spots designed specially for the multiplayer, etc- ).

Oh wow what a fantastic bullshit - if there is a button MP - it has to be optimized for this. If on ArmA3.com was simple phrase: there is no multiplayer and campaign will be three months later in 3 parts. Who will buy this? lolka

May I ask you, why you keep buying and playing Arma games? As far as I know, no one is forced to.

I like these games, but I tired of ppl telling "we have these things not working, but next game will be perfect..."

[mistyronin 1181]

CHykis;2551711']Oh wow what a fantastic bullshit - if there is a button MP - it has to be optimized for this. If on ArmA3.com was simple phrase: there is no multiplayer and campaign will be three months later in 3 parts. Who will buy this? lolka

I'm getting tired of repeating my words like a parrot because people don't seem to be able to read properly my posts. But again' date=' I first said that "IMO Arma has never been a game focused on MP like Battlefield.", which doesn't mean that it can feature a Multiplayer option. I just think that devs don't see the Multiplayer as the main feature ( if they do... I'd be a bit disappointed because the actual MP performance is not the best one ).

Again, IMO, devs are focusing in creating a sandbox so everyone can make their own missions, and play with the units ( like if you give a LEGO box to a kid, and then he starts doing what he wants ).

CHykis;2551711']I like these games, but I tired of ppl telling "we have these things not working, but next game will be perfect..."

Well, knowing a bit the software development industry ( I've worked in it ), I believe that its impossible to deliver a perfect product with so many features, it wouldn't be profitable ( you'll need a huge team and lot of time). So I think that people should accept and understand that fact.

Even in huge AAA projects like BF 4, with a dev team some times the A3 team and with millions as budget, DICE were not able to deliver a perfect game ( in fact in its actual state, it's hard to sell, it crashes almost every 30 min ).

Edited November 6, 2013 by MistyRonin

[windies 11]

I'm getting tired of repeating my words like a parrot because people don't seem to be able to read properly my posts. But again, I first said that "IMO Arma has never been a game focused on MP like Battlefield.", which doesn't mean that it can feature a Multiplayer option. I just think that devs don't see the Multiplayer as the main feature ( if they do... I'd be a bit disappointed because the actual MP performance is not the best one ).

Again, IMO, devs are focusing in creating a sandbox so everyone can make their own missions, and play with the units ( like if you give a LEGO box to a kid, and then he starts doing what he wants ).

Well, knowing a bit the software development industry ( I've worked in it ), I believe that its impossible to deliver a perfect product with so many features, it wouldn't be profitable ( you'll need a huge team and lot of time). So I think that people should accept and understand that fact.

Even in huge AAA projects like BF 4, with a dev team some times the A3 team and with millions as budget, DICE were not able to deliver a perfect game ( in fact in its actual state, it's hard to sell, it crashes almost every 30 min ).

If they don't consider MP to be a major part of their game, why would they release the game sans single player content then? MP has been a major component of ArmA since as long as I can remember back to OFP and ArmA. All the posters before you have just been trying to correct your erroneous viewpoint.

As Kju said it best, a lot of the issue is with the fact that BI knows and has known what the community really wants for a long long long time and continue to basically ignore them.

[mistyronin 1181]

If they don't consider MP to be a major part of their game, why would they release the game sans single player content then? MP has been a major component of ArmA since as long as I can remember back to OFP and ArmA. All the posters before you have just been trying to correct your erroneous viewpoint.

As Kju said it best, a lot of the issue is with the fact that BI knows and has known what the community really wants for a long long long time and continue to basically ignore them.

Well, reading BI devs words, I can't reach logically to that conclusion. BTW in day 0 release, Arma 3 had SP content, just not the campaign ( due to problems during the development ).

Part of the interview about A3 Campaign's delay.

Joris van't Land: We see the launch of the game as a solid starting point. We've focused on creating single-player showcases and challenges, multiplayer modes and, of course, the highly anticipated, Altis terrain, together with the editor and its range of units, vehicles, modules, etc.

Crowe: Exactly, we hope that Arma 3's release content provides a big variety of gameplay out of the box. We want to show players what the game is all about—what opportunities it offers—built on a solid platform, which we can gradually extend with free additions like the campaign episodes.

van't Land: But, honestly, we will admit that this is not our originally planned release strategy. It is one borne from the problems the project faced over the past years, the insightful experiences of releasing public Alpha and Beta versions, and wanting to deliver a quality campaign.

Where do you see that they say that they focus on the MP part among the others? Or they say like I said, that its like a LEGO box?

[Bee8190 10]

Where do you see that they say that they focus on the MP part among the others? Or they say like I said, that its like a LEGO box?

You're right that MP always came as second thought in arma games. It's always been there but afaik BI never denied / confirmed that their main focus is MP. That said I personally spend 90% wandering MP and I'd go as far as assume that the majority of players is focused on MP also.

If BI place MP scene as a second though than I don't know what to say...they'd massively underestimate / misjudge what most players these days ( 2013 ) are interested to play. Actually not what to play but rather who with or who against.

Once again my honest opinion ( but also an assumption ) is that due to trickey AI the lack of support / proper focus on MP is likely one of the reasons

[progamer 14]

It feels at times that the vehicles we have are just to make multiplayer pvp balanced. Which feels really boring. Arma 2's direction when they're did not care about the balance between factions. The pvp I played in Arma 2 also felt a lot more fun.

[Zatan13th 10]

If BI place MP scene as a second though than I don't know what to say...they'd massively underestimate / misjudge what most players these days ( 2013 ) are interested to play. Actually not what to play but rather who with or who against.

Once again my honest opinion ( but also an assumption ) is that due to trickey AI the lack of support / proper focus on MP is likely one of the reasons

I dont think so.

MP is not more popular than SP.

Skyrim, Crysis1, Farcry 2-3, Bioshock, Fallout etc., some of these not even provide MP element but they still got popular.

As for ArmA, I think the devs focus both MP and SP (that is COOP, which is the strong point of ArmA than any game) as we already know that most of ArmA players played PvE more than PVP. (except for Wasteland and DayZ)

[L3TUC3 32]

I'm not sure where priorities lie, but I'm happy that the tracker at least seems to get used now. In the Alpha/Beta you could F5 the recent changes page for a week and only see notes and new issues, while now there's actually items being resolved every weekday. Even if it's just small stuff.