High Quality Addons Project [HQAP]

[BlackViperGaming 3]

Project has failed, if you want information on this please pm me and I will be glad to help you out.

Edited March 27, 2014 by BlackViperGaming
Shit hit the fan

[Rages123 10]

i read the topic wrong.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Rages123
failed it

[giorgygr 61]

Quality...

Filling the arma world with poly's and high-er resolution textures would bring everyone's (already wounded) performance

below zero frames (!oO!)

I ll try to reinforce my point here bringing as example the civilian vehicles you mentioned.

Already to have a "realistic looking" scenario you need both sides of a capital's road

with parked vehicles in 80cm distance 1 from another (not for looks only-but also for proper cover..)

Even if you bring civilian cars from ArmA1 which they have 1/3 of ArmA3 poly's and

quality textures you ll get a significant (imo) performance hit.

You said you are making a "quality map"

Make sure the quality means *MORE objects per 10m than poly's spend to single object's detail per 10m (again imo)..

Anyways.. i wish you good luck with your idea.

I hope you will find what you seek..

Edited March 25, 2014 by GiorgyGR

[andersson 285]

What is high quality? Something that looks good or something that is made good? Ofcourse a good addon has both, but many good looking addons are not of high quality due to unnecessary high poly and what not, or have other faults and errors that the user don't see but affect performance.

Who can judge without full access to the addons internals? And who wants to be judged?

My 0.02€

[lone.wolf 80]

Like Andersson pointed out this is a very personal opinion topic, because its very indivual what a person looks for in a addon/mod... Some want quantity over HD textures, other want handpainted textures over quantity... and so forth...

Of course i dont mind super high quality addons, but i want the choice to choose what is high quality for me, and if i was a addon maker i wouldn't like to know others have to give me quality stamp or not, if anyone should do this it should be from BI and not inside the community, so more like a BI Recommended Addon or BI Community Quality Garantied Addon...

But still hope you have luck with your idea, maybe it will be a success...

[artisanal 22]

Toadie's weapons mod would be "high quality" worthy, I guess (as an example). But just don't forget one important fact : modding is something you do "for free" (except for make arma not war competition) :)

[fluttershy 2]

I think the overall "issue" if you want to call it as one, with the lower quallity of addons, especially for arma 3 right now, is that a lot of new community members try and get there work done with the provided samples or templates provided by others.

These individuals might not pay the outmost attention to detail and most likely just want to have a first experience with the world of arma modding. Some stick arround and continue, others improve and become great assets to this community.

For most addon creators the positive and constructive feedback from the community is more then enough as approval for the efforts and time invested.

On the other hand you have long time members that are modding for Arma since the very early stages and have gathered great ammounts of expertise, that create amazing addons in visuals as well as performance. For most "elderly" BI-lievers these people are very well known and stand for quallity simply with there username.

Everything a stamp or seal would do is guide the "generic" user towards an addon (IF the developer himself or the team actually use that stamp or seal). It is especially a double edged sword if you are looking to create addons yourself and other people might not think of your result as "High Quallity". Creating addons, even in a group of people and in reverse judging the work of others might not be the best idea.

[PuFu 4600]

so you, someone who has little to no experience regarding modding in general, would want to staple a discriminatory tag (and eventually a jpg seal) on other's people work that has been shared with you for free, based on a number of subjective criteria, is that right?

well, good luck with that. Of course no one can stop you making your own list of addons or anything, but i doubt you'll find the support you're looking for, especially within the addon makers such as myself.

@lone.wolf: BI should have no saying in this, especially if you consider the state of their own content, if not for other reasons. BI will have a say when it comes to MANW contest

Edited March 25, 2014 by PuFu

[mihikle 2]

I can imagine if an author made a mod that he or she has put hours and hours of work into to only have it not be accepted as a 'high quality addon' because the seats were not perfect, they would be pretty miffed off.

Whats 'high quality' and whats 'not high quality' is someones personal opinion and based upon their needs from a mod.

[smokedog3para 365]

yes michael i don't think your hq tv will make it mate sorry lol hahaha

[mihikle 2]

Does that pass your quality test mate? If you can work out what it is, please tell me, because I can't even work out what I've made!

[PVT Watt.J 14]

http://i1247.photobucket.com/albums/gg636/mihikle/WTF_zpsa234ea4a.jpeg

Does that pass your quality test mate? If you can work out what it is, please tell me, because I can't even work out what I've made!

I'm going to have to go with either a lit flare or a Pez dispenser...

[giorgygr 61]

I'm going to have to go with either a lit flare or a Pez dispenser...

+1 to Pez dispenser..but he will need some 4096x4096 textures to "pass"

A 300mb Pez dispenser it is :D

[smokedog3para 365]

lol its a desk lamp 4096x4096 FTW

[mihikle 2]

I think originally it was supposed to be a desk lamp in Maya - I tried to bend the tube and that happened! Something went SERIOUSLY wrong there.

However I prefer the title 'Dildo of Death'. I'll look into getting it released.

Haha!

[Yoshi 10]

I'm sorry but this topic is outrageous, you mean to decide who's mods are high quality and add your stamp to them if you will. That's basically saying that anyone who sees that it has been approved by you starts to think that you are an authority on other peoples mods, I'm sorry but if you think I'm going to let you put your mark on my mod your mistaken, all modders mod for one reason and one reason only, to bring content to a game they enjoy... Not so that you get to judge whether they have the right to call it quality or not. IMO you shouldn't have created this topic if you've never released a mod. I think your out of line mate, jog on!

[PVT Watt.J 14]

I think your out of line mate, jog on!

Hold on, we can talk about whether the attitude is right or not, but something like the OP suggests is very badly needed.

We have a lot of great user-made content for Arma 3 in terms of units, weapons and vehicles. However, in doing this,we have a LOT of duplication. Let's take a moment to consider the AK-47. I can think of at least 4 different mods with different AK-47s (HLC, Massi, CAF Aggressors, Russians). That's 4 different duplicates of the same weapon, with incompatible and duplicated magazines/attachments as well.

This causes real problems. It clutters up VAS (unless you manually tinker with exclusions), it makes for annoying problems (you pick up a mag of an enemy and it is not compatible!) and leads to lower-quality weapons being used.

It would much better if the authors of these mods would cooperate in a way that some of these great weapon/unit packs could be combined to use the best of all content.

But asking a modder to participate is a delicate question because people take usage rights seriously. Something like this, if it could even be done, would be best done by someone who is well-respected as a modder and trusted to be impartial and give proper credit.

[mistyronin 1181]

The main thing I see here, is that someone with low modding skills ( with null contributions as far as I know ) wants to qualify some other people's work, people that have worked lots of hours, even hundreds for free, so we can all enjoy their stuff.

I agree that modders could join efforts and share some of their work to keep a better quality ( like make the best AK47 a standard available to the rest ) but its their decision.

Summarizing IMO really bad idea.

[biggerdave 56]

Hold on, we can talk about whether the attitude is right or not, but something like the OP suggests is very badly needed.

We have a lot of great user-made content for Arma 3 in terms of units, weapons and vehicles. However, in doing this,we have a LOT of duplication. Let's take a moment to consider the AK-47. I can think of at least 4 different mods with different AK-47s (HLC, Massi, CAF Aggressors, Russians). That's 4 different duplicates of the same weapon, with incompatible and duplicated magazines/attachments as well.

This causes real problems. It clutters up VAS (unless you manually tinker with exclusions), it makes for annoying problems (you pick up a mag of an enemy and it is not compatible!) and leads to lower-quality weapons being used.

It would much better if the authors of these mods would cooperate in a way that some of these great weapon/unit packs could be combined to use the best of all content.

But asking a modder to participate is a delicate question because people take usage rights seriously. Something like this, if it could even be done, would be best done by someone who is well-respected as a modder and trusted to be impartial and give proper credit.

So what we want is something like JAM. Some masterlist of "good" addons will just mean you'll have 50-odd slightly better looking AKs which are incompatable with each other.

[Yoshi 10]

IMO a mod is a persons take on what they want to achieve, to say that mods cause incompatibility with other mods is fair enough, but if that's the case, then download one or the other, I don't believe that anyone person should be in control over everyone's work... that isn't a modding community, pretty soon some moron will try making it a pay to get society instead of what it is... a community that offers thousands of others the chance to play their game the way they want, with the mods they want. I won't have someone with no prior experience modding take my mod and say "This is high or low quality". it has nothing to do with them, I don't struggle for hours to build and develop a mod that I will release for free for someone to then turn around and say whether people should download it because he thinks it's worthy.

I quote "I have always been frustrated with ArmA's lack of high quality addons" well tough, every mod on this forum is a worthy mod, I personally believe that all modders who have contributed to not only the ArmA series but others as well, have done so with the up most dedication to their work. I myself modded the HMS Astute into Silent hunter 4, so yes I have modding experience, and to have someone with little if any modding experience to boast of doesn't get to decide for others! I'm sorry if that annoys some of you but at the end of the day we put a lot of effort into our work and I won't give anyone permission to state whether its worthy or not.

[BlackViperGaming 3]

Hello Everyone,

I would first like to start out by saying thanks for all your feedback and I have taken this into consideration. If I have offended anyone by creating this project I sincerely am sorry. I am merely trying to put together a list of mods that display both function and looks. I am not trying to in any way shape or form use this as "my opinion" I plan on having the community help decide which addons are worthy of being HQAP approved. This is not a one man effort here. A lot of you mention about this seal I talked about...I did not mean a physical picture or seal which would be added to the addon, it is merely stating that the community and those who helped agree that the addon is HQAP approved thinks the addon is very well made. Also for those of you who say that I am "someone with low modding skills ( with null contributions as far as I know )" you would be right, but just because I cannot develop my own addons doesn't mean I have zero input. I would also like to address the fact of performance. It might just be me, but I have used a fairly highly detailed set of civilian vehicles mods before in ArmA 2, I placed each vehicle roughly 1 meter away from each other along the entire road from Chernogorsk to Solnichniy and drove along the road with zero performance hit, I do realize this would probably change in MP but in SP it did fine. I am going to start the list of HQAP approval awaiting addons and I would like you guys the community to agree or disagree if these addons would meet everyone standards of HQ. Again I did not mean for this to become such a heated topic, I am merely trying to help out the community. I meant for this to be a community effort to create a list of HQ mods with functionality that other addons could go to this topic and see why these addons are knows as HQ and possibly try to get thier mods up to par with the ones listed within the HQAP. Again if I offended anyone or hurt anyone I would like to apologize. Please let me know what you think.

[zorrobyte 30]

It may be more beneficial to start your own website/blog. Hosting a wordpress site isn't too hard and I personally think your efforts would be much better used reviewing mods. Instead of some "stamp of approval" why not a star scale broken down into several categories like most PC hardware sites do? You could host some ads, etc to make it worth your time.

[BlackViperGaming 3]

It may be more beneficial to start your own website/blog. Hosting a wordpress site isn't too hard and I personally think your efforts would be much better used reviewing mods. Instead of some "stamp of approval" why not a star scale broken down into several categories like most PC hardware sites do? You could host some ads, etc to make it worth your time.

Nice Idea and I may actually consider this, but I am not currently in the financial state to pay for a website at the moment. I realize its not that much but I have to worry about other things as well. I actually will be starting to do ArmA mod reviews on my youtube channel starting by going over every single mod on armaholics ArmA 2 section then moving on to the ArmA 3 section.

[HJohnson 16]

"High Quality"

Toadie's AK's are considered high quality but have poor materials and textures near the ironsights

Robert Hammer's M4's are considered high quality but have muddy textures and poor materials

Blastcore is considered high quality, meanwhile 90% of the effects are not properly applied, and everything is yellow and orange, not to mention the giant firefly sparks.

So what are these "high quality" mods you plan on adding?

The F18?

Cause that's all you got buddy.

[PuFu 4600]

Hold on, we can talk about whether the attitude is right or not, but something like the OP suggests is very badly needed.

We have a lot of great user-made content for Arma 3 in terms of units, weapons and vehicles. However, in doing this,we have a LOT of duplication. Let's take a moment to consider the AK-47. I can think of at least 4 different mods with different AK-47s (HLC, Massi, CAF Aggressors, Russians). That's 4 different duplicates of the same weapon, with incompatible and duplicated magazines/attachments as well.

This causes real problems. It clutters up VAS (unless you manually tinker with exclusions), it makes for annoying problems (you pick up a mag of an enemy and it is not compatible!) and leads to lower-quality weapons being used.

It would much better if the authors of these mods would cooperate in a way that some of these great weapon/unit packs could be combined to use the best of all content.

But asking a modder to participate is a delicate question because people take usage rights seriously. Something like this, if it could even be done, would be best done by someone who is well-respected as a modder and trusted to be impartial and give proper credit.

It is a matter of perception. It might be badly needed for you, but for instance, personally i really don't feel such a need.

The fact that each addon group or person for that matter makes his own version of the same unit/gear/etc is only expected. The simple fact that YOU cannot be bothered to customize VAS, or use another option for that matter is a completely different thing. With RHS AFRF on the horizon, i can tell you there will be even more AKs, since we do strive to have only bespoke content and not ported from other engines. I am sorry if that is gonna create problems for yourself.

What you and any other user out there don't get is this: most addon makers choose to share content with you. They have different reasons for creating said content (mostly personal interests), almost never you or other consumer being on the top of the priority list.

Yes, people take their IP rights quite seriously, and why shouldn't they? spending countless hours of their free time is not something that goes unnoticed, at least from their part.

So all in all, in the end YOU, the consumer, has to choose out of what is out there.

Hello Everyone,

I would first like to start out by saying thanks for all your feedback and I have taken this into consideration. If I have offended anyone by creating this project I sincerely am sorry. I am merely trying to put together a list of mods that display both function and looks. I am not trying to in any way shape or form use this as "my opinion" I plan on having the community help decide which addons are worthy of being HQAP approved. This is not a one man effort here. A lot of you mention about this seal I talked about...I did not mean a physical picture or seal which would be added to the addon, it is merely stating that the community and those who helped agree that the addon is HQAP approved thinks the addon is very well made. Also for those of you who say that I am "someone with low modding skills ( with null contributions as far as I know )" you would be right, but just because I cannot develop my own addons doesn't mean I have zero input. I would also like to address the fact of performance. It might just be me, but I have used a fairly highly detailed set of civilian vehicles mods before in ArmA 2, I placed each vehicle roughly 1 meter away from each other along the entire road from Chernogorsk to Solnichniy and drove along the road with zero performance hit, I do realize this would probably change in MP but in SP it did fine. I am going to start the list of HQAP approval awaiting addons and I would like you guys the community to agree or disagree if these addons would meet everyone standards of HQ. Again I did not mean for this to become such a heated topic, I am merely trying to help out the community. I meant for this to be a community effort to create a list of HQ mods with functionality that other addons could go to this topic and see why these addons are knows as HQ and possibly try to get thier mods up to par with the ones listed within the HQAP. Again if I offended anyone or hurt anyone I would like to apologize. Please let me know what you think.

holly mother of text wall.

1. you haven't created anything. you planned something, which is completely different.

2. in the end, is still going to be a one man opinion, or a number of people opinion. Nothing you can do about it.

3. you simply don't get it. You can make whatever list you want. It still doesn't hold water due to the fact that, no matter how you put it down, is still a subjective and impartial opinion of a few. You cannot set a number of criteria simply because you don't really know how things are working. simple as that.

"High Quality"

Toadie's AK's are considered high quality but have poor materials and textures near the ironsights

Robert Hammer's M4's are considered high quality but have muddy textures and poor materials

Blastcore is considered high quality, meanwhile 90% of the effects are not properly applied, and everything is yellow and orange, not to mention the giant firefly sparks.

So what are these "high quality" mods you plan on adding?

The F18?

Cause that's all you got buddy.

What you are saying is true, but is mainly due to (i am talking about models here) those being made for CS, not of A3 (meshes and textures). Most content intended directly for A3, or even for a next-gen engines (yeah i hate that term, but i wasn't the one to come up with it) is gonna have an upper hand, at least in terms of visuals.

Edited March 26, 2014 by PuFu