Why is this game having such a serious lack of user-created content?

[roshnak 41]

The one possible reason is because A2/OA was comparable to real life scenarios and quite immersive. You can be watching the news about some troops in Afghanistan and feel the urge to hop on OA. Also contemporary military was and always will be the perfect base point for content. It can be created with out speculation and compared to real life equipment/vehicles easily.

Just to put things into perspective: how many mods for A2/OA focused on future warfare?

Not many. Why? Because people are not interested in that. If they were you would see plenty of mods for A2/OA about future warfare. However you are absolutely right, people made Vietnam, zombie and ww2 mods because people enjoyed that and it was interesting. Unlike future warfare.

Now we have a game who's entire focus is future warfare, and half the community is attempting to just bring contemporary military/A2 content back to A3 while the other half is trying it's best to use what little was given to create new addons.

This is not really a response to the points made in my post. It's kind of just repeating, "I don't like future stuff" when my whole point is that doesn't have any bearing on what kind of addons people make or whether they make them at all. I listed off a number of addons and mods made for Arma 2 that were not set in a present day conflict in Eastern Europe or a Middle East analogue.

Edited February 16, 2014 by roshnak

[lightspeed_aust 681]

For me personally, except for the player movements, I find A3 a huge let down. Promised so much but delivered far less than A2/OA. The result is I'm not really inspired to create anything.

Now I only make missions and campaigns but the lack of immersion in the villages, very limited number of objects, and for the most part, boring islands just leave me happy to go and play A2. In fact if we could port the movements to A2 then I would happily kiss goodbye to A3.

[xx_fr0st-w0lf_xx 10]

This is not really a response to the points made in my post. It's kind of just repeating, "I don't like future stuff" when my whole point is that doesn't have any bearing on what kind of addons people make or whether they make them at all. I listed off a number of addons and mods made for Arma 2 that were not set in a present day conflict in Eastern Europe or a Middle East analogue.

You are missing my point that the future atmosphere + the lack of A3 content is making people reluctant to make new things. Yes people are going in different directions as they always did. Most are making Modern warfare content while some do as they did previously and make new adons not set in future or modern day. However those that enjoyed using the A2 base content to create their mission/addons are not inclined to do so for A3.

For me personally, except for the player movements, I find A3 a huge let down. Promised so much but delivered far less than A2/OA. The result is I'm not really inspired to create anything.

Now I only make missions and campaigns but the lack of immersion in the villages, very limited number of objects, and for the most part, boring islands just leave me happy to go and play A2. In fact if we could port the movements to A2 then I would happily kiss goodbye to A3.

I feel you. I loved making missions in A2, but A3's lack of content and severe lack of interesting content is a let down. Wish they made an expansion to add all of A2 and OA stuff in to A2

[Cytreen 14]

As far as content goes having an updated engine does not help when half of it is not even documented or documented so poorly it does not make since. The only Tools that have been released is PBO maker to pack mods into PBO files and Oxygen 2. Oxygen 2 is more of the same but we have no sample models to work from, config files get broken with every update and the multiplayer performance is beyond shit in terms of performance and stability (dedicated servers included.) As for the whole future aspect, people are over reaction to it when allot of the stuff similar to the in game assets is actually being used in Afghanistan today. The caseless ammo is not fielded but caseless ammo (LSAT started development in 2004) has been in Army Trials since 2008 for its two current configurations. The main reason people have an Issue with Arma 3 somewhat futuristic setting is not having the familiar Stoner design in game aka the M16/M4 or the recognizable Humvee. If BIS wanted to make a compromise on the vehicles side it would be to build manned up-armored turret open top or netted with either a M2/Mk19 variation the Hunter (aka the BRV-O.)

I have been working on my own mod since Jun of 2013 and im only about 10% done with it so far. Im doing everything myself from the Multiplayer Mission design, modeling(3ds Max and Oxygin), texturing, animation, script(Story), scripting(code), audio, and voice casting for voice overs. Im going to stay with the 2035 setting of Arma 3 as it allows more freedom with mission designs as i am sick of go here kill/rescue this/that. I want to maintain a cinematic feel for every mission thats realistic in setting and game play. Every mission in the campaign has full intro/outro cinematic sequences in multiplayer along with full voiced overs for all AI interactions and mission briefing. The mod itself is nothing more than a multiplayer campaign but i have to create so much in assets for each mission it has to be released as an addon. Since i am trying to stay away from the typical kill/rescue scenarios, i have to build and/or add unique story objects/equipment/vehicles for a compelling realistic story.

To give you an example i will not use the SDV in my campaign (yet) unless i can show how the player arrived there and the reason for being there. This would mean i have to build out a full scale Virgina class attack sub in game along with a few interior section to give a realistic setting to the story. This would include full briefing cinematic intro sequences with voice overs from inside/outside the sub to show the delivery of the SDV to the insertion point. Building this out in game takes time. I dont have access to a motion capture studio so any in game or cinematic briefing sequences i do with an AI that is visible to the player. I must either create the animation hand drawn from key framing or recycle some the bis sequences from the campaign. Have not even got to multiple extraction types and debriefing.

Most people would ask why the hell do i go into so much detail. Simply put i love doing it and want everything to be correct.

(I went so far with wanting to be correct with a mission i did for the 15th MEU the order of the flags/type of flags at the base was correct to military standards.)

[chortles 263]

... didn't check samples_F for the sample models, did you?

[seba1976 98]

I was thinking, the point here is not exactly why there are or aren't user created content, but more why do we needed it so much. The content BIS provided doesn't represent what most of us want to see in a military simulator, and that's why there's this urgent need for user created content, that wasn't here before the near future setting was choosen.

And it takes now a lot more of work to produce an addon, that matches the quality of the new engine. And the same can be said about terrains. I remember when A1 was released, some people started to use the phrase "Who gives a f*** about Sahrani". Sadly enough, I think we're about to create the "Who gives a f*** about Altis", because nobody relates with fighting in a Greek island...

[mr burns 131]

For me personally, except for the player movements, I find A3 a huge let down. Promised so much but delivered far less than A2/OA. The result is I'm not really inspired to create anything.

Now I only make missions and campaigns but the lack of immersion in the villages, very limited number of objects, and for the most part, boring islands just leave me happy to go and play A2. In fact if we could port the movements to A2 then I would happily kiss goodbye to A3.

+1´ed (minus the missions)

Especially on the performance front, my (low end, but not utter rubbish) PC cannot accept what A3 does, or fails to deliver.

Compared to A2, A3 is all worse looks and worse FPS, for no apparent reason.

No fun.

[almanzo 144]

I was thinking, the point here is not exactly why there are or aren't user created content, but more why do we needed it so much. The content BIS provided doesn't represent what most of us want to see in a military simulator, and that's why there's this urgent need for user created content, that wasn't here before the near future setting was choosen.

And it takes now a lot more of work to produce an addon, that matches the quality of the new engine. And the same can be said about terrains. I remember when A1 was released, some people started to use the phrase "Who gives a f*** about Sahrani". Sadly enough, I think we're about to create the "Who gives a f*** about Altis", because nobody relates with fighting in a Greek island...

I would say that mods keep ARMA alive for several reasons, and I don't think it's because the main game is shit. The point is, ARMA as a platform has allways inspired new and cool ideas in people. No matter how good a game developer company is, there is allways room for improvement. ARMA III has what, 50 devs? Even though that is a lot, the community at large is way bigger. Of course that means alot of ideas that the BIS devs wouldn't have thought of, or that wouldn't make much sence in a commercial perspective, or it would be impossible due to copyright. Star wars mods, ACRE and Arrowhead radio, Altis Life, Wasteland, DayZ. Alot of those mods doesn't make sense in the vanilla product, but a whole bunch of people enjoy them. Things like ACRE expands on the original concept, but would be difficult to include in the main game unless they had a cooperation with teamspeak in order to not have to rely on third party software. Infeasable, but the mod makes sense. You can't expect the entire user base to use third party software. You can't require third party software from users to be able to perform standard features, but mods are offered to those who find it useful.

And that's just mods and game modes. Then ARMA provides a powerful tool for people who wants to tell a story. The endless flow of content in forms of missions and campaigns keeps ARMA alive for people who enjoy singleplayer either exclusively or along with multiplayer. You can't expect BIS to constantly provide more and more scenarios and campaigns for free, but players will. Some are generic and not your cup of tea, some are gems. You'll never run out of new missions to play, and then you have the thousands of dynamic missions to top it off. I would have been boored of ARMA ages ago if it wasn't for user created content and mods. Like other games, I would eventually be tired off it and leave. I have breaks from ARMA too, but I keep comming back. In the course since ARMA III was released, I must have played at least 10 - 20 other games and become bored of them or finished them. ACIV BF is one of them, huge game and very entertaining. Development have been much more expensive than ARMA III, but I will play and enjoy ARMA for much, much longer than AC. If it hadn't been for mods and user generated content, it's life would have been much smaller.

[dc207 11]

There seems to be a ton of user created content for this game, to me. I see a lot of mods and user missions. I am no expert, since I am still trying to get a PC that I can use to run this game. But I have watched a ton of videos that seemed to be user created or user missions.

[seba1976 98]

@almanzo I don't know why you quoted my post, what you said has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make? **confused**

[almanzo 144]

@almanzo I don't know why you quoted my post, what you said has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make? **confused**

I might have missinterpreted you, but I read you as saying that we need mods because the game it self lacked the content regular players want. I tried to point out that mods provide us with stuff that isn't reasonable in a commercial product, but is reasonable as addons made by the community.

So, to clear it up. You asked why we need mods, and provided an answer for that question (that BIS didn't make the content people wanted). I think your answer was partly right, but tried to point out other reasons as well. I might have completely misunderstood your point, if so, I am sorry.

[seba1976 98]

I might have missinterpreted you, but I read you as saying that we need mods because the game it self lacked the content regular players want. I tried to point out that mods provide us with stuff that isn't reasonable in a commercial product, but is reasonable as addons made by the community.

So, to clear it up. You asked why we need mods, and provided an answer for that question (that BIS didn't make the content people wanted). I think your answer was partly right, but tried to point out other reasons as well. I might have completely misunderstood your point, if so, I am sorry.

No problem. You got it right.

We want the new engine to render what is right now on the battlefield, for that we're gonna need addons, and the addons will never be on par with the high quality units BIS provided with the engine, among other reasons, because it's too damn hard to create them.

A middle east setting, with revamped units and a new terrain, rendered with the new engine, I think would have been more pleasant for more players. But it's a missed opportunity, because BIS is not going to do it.

And I don't hate the setting they went for, it's enjoyable too but, from my point of view, it was unnecessary. It part ways from VBS. It push the title to the Sci-Fi genre, instead of the Simulation one.

[chortles 263]

But it's a missed opportunity, because BIS is not going to do it.

Admittedly one thing that strikes me about this is that the setting they went for was one of the first reveals about Arma 3... one of the first "what will we do differently with A3" things.

The other thing that struck me is that Maruk made it clear that the reason for the Arma 2 source data release was not just for players to create their own ports, but because the devs weren't going to port the A2 content themselves, much less recreate it from scratch...

And I don't hate the setting they went for, it's enjoyable too but, from my point of view, it was unnecessary. It part ways from VBS. It push the title to the Sci-Fi genre, instead of the Simulation one.

And devs on record calling Arma sandbox and not sim... heck, look at my sig!

[Varanon 892]

And devs on record calling Arma sandbox and not sim... heck, look at my sig!

It's been called a lot. Some devs called it a simulation, too. The box at called Arms 2 a simulation. Arms 3 is the successor.

In the end, this whole "Sim vs. Sandbox vs. Game" discussion is rather pointless and there is no need to bring this up like a mantra every time.

[Alwarren 2765]

And devs on record calling Arma sandbox and not sim... heck, look at my sig!

Just Cause 2 is a sandbox game as well, and there you can ride on the top of a car and zip-line off it onto a building.

Sandbox doesn't have zero to do with genre, or simulation, or anything else.

[almanzo 144]

No problem. You got it right.

We want the new engine to render what is right now on the battlefield, for that we're gonna need addons, and the addons will never be on par with the high quality units BIS provided with the engine, among other reasons, because it's too damn hard to create them.

A middle east setting, with revamped units and a new terrain, rendered with the new engine, I think would have been more pleasant for more players. But it's a missed opportunity, because BIS is not going to do it.

And I don't hate the setting they went for, it's enjoyable too but, from my point of view, it was unnecessary. It part ways from VBS. It push the title to the Sci-Fi genre, instead of the Simulation one.

And that part, I agree with. But some mods like ACRE and stuff aren't really feasable in a commercial product. I didn't think MCC was either, but what to I know, now we have Zeus :P

[seba1976 98]

I know, rigth? And now it could potentially change the MP scene. Crazy world.

[Cyper 18]

If you actually look at ARMAHOLIC, it is obvious that there is a good amount of content for ARMA III.

One also has to consider the fact that models in ARMA III have higher quality than in ARMA II which means that more time and effort has to be put in. Another factor is that content is in production, but yet not released.

Personally, I don't create mods, but I am working with my first campaign, and all I can say is that it takes time.

[jgbtl292 0]

Jesus if they released all of A2 content in a 40$ dlc I would have bought 9 copies.

true have no problem with a 50€ for this.