Arma 3 Kart DLC

[Llano 11]

I'm sorry, but imo this is retarded. How about spending the develope-time on something that the game actually needs?..

[Wiki 1558]

So $16 for two helos and another $16 for a few sniper guns? That can't be right. No mini campaigns?

Where did you see there won't be SP missions/showcases or mini-campaign?

Plus, it's smarter to buy DLC bundle, you'll have both Helicopters and Marksman (plus Kart) for 20€

[enamel 10]

Holy crap what a nice surprise this AM.

Thanks BI, you have no idea what a big smile I have on my face right now as IO rip thru Kavala.

[down8 30]

I'm sorry, but imo this is retarded. How about spending the develope-time on something that the game actually needs?..

+1

I will buy the bundle when the helicopter DLC arrived, but the DLC kart is silly. I would prefer they skipped this and focus in hellicopters, marksmanand the big expansion. I like to support development by I don't know how I feel supporting this lame ideas.

[katipo66 94]

I'm sorry, but imo this is retarded. How about spending the develope-time on something that the game actually needs?..

Maybe it's an offshoot of other development related to the game or something like that, im sure it all ties in. The cart track was in Altis from the get go so obviously in the plans.

[kremator 1065]

I'm sorry, but imo this is retarded. How about spending the develope-time on something that the game actually needs?..

Boo to you!

How about you let them get on with whatever they want? I for one fully, support them. So what if it came from an April Fool !

Good job BIS - unexpected and really fun!

For those whining ... guess what? You don't have to play it !

[ProfTournesol 956]

I'm sorry, but imo this is retarded. How about spending the develope-time on something that the game actually needs?..

+1

I will buy the bundle when the helicopter DLC arrived, but the DLC kart is silly. I would prefer they skipped this and focus in hellicopters, marksmanand the big expansion. I like to support development by I don't know how I feel supporting this lame ideas.

Come on guys, if you're unable to see the fun factor in it, i'm sad for you : it was a april fool joke that turned into a very cheap DLC, the purpose of which is to support Czech Red Cross. Get down of your high horses.

[froggyluv 2136]

Where did you see there won't be SP missions/showcases or mini-campaign?

Plus, it's smarter to buy DLC bundle, you'll have both Helicopters and Marksman (plus Kart) for 20€

Well that was my initial question: What exactly is in the DLC's to provide we buy the bundle on blind faith. Bah, I'm sure ill buy them all anyways and even tho the go-karts are kinda silly they're also kinda kick ass and I support this very weird endevour.

[John Kozak 14]

+1

I will buy the bundle when the helicopter DLC arrived, but the DLC kart is silly. I would prefer they skipped this and focus in hellicopters, marksmanand the big expansion. I like to support development by I don't know how I feel supporting this lame ideas.

"DLC kart" is merely a public test for the system, think on it this way.

[foffy 58]

Are people really getting mad by the Karts DLC? Wasn't it made by one guy?

[l mandrake 9]

Confused.com. Just updated, and purchased Karts DLC. Can't see how to actually play it?

[ProfTournesol 956]

Confused.com. Just updated, and purchased Karts DLC. Can't see how to actually play it?

You've got missions in the "challenges" area.

[Max255 59]

Exactly, go and just have fun with it, even the free version, this one Time Trial is lots of fun. I'm enjoying it very much and I might be considered very hardcore milsim player.

So, how are yall times? :D

I managed 17.620 so far... ^^ http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/580149529200660109/CEBB621A9F3D35A8C04E9D6B2638E3F436E07D7E/

But there still is room for improvement.

[WulfyWulf 10]

I realize that jumping to conclusions at this announcement isn't constructive, and I know for a fact that BIS have given their DLC strategy a lot more time and thought than I and my friends have based on our first impressions of their announcement roadmap. However, several things stand out to me that unsettle me about this business decision- I don't see a lot of people talking about these problems (other than superficial complaints about paid DLC in general), so I want to bring up some things that have me and other A3 players I know concerned.

I'll dive straight into the biggest problem that jumped out to me- despite the intent, the owner/non-owner split is still present and a very real danger, in many circumstances with this strategy. The non-owners walkthrough describes this:

"The helicopter is available to try out in the editor, but the SP scenario is locked.

You can use the helicopter with some restrictions (e.g. you can only board the helicopter as a passenger).

The longer you actively use it, the more prominent the premium content notifications become.

Afterwards, you join a multiplayer server that uses the MP scenario (or any custom mission including the helicopter):

You can join as normal.

Again, you experience the progressive DLC notifications and restrictions."

The multiplayer section says that the DLC restrictions are in place for multiplayer, too- this means that non-owners will be restricted to passengers only, and we can only speculate what the restriction for the marksmen DLC will be in this regard. Here's a specific example that comes to mind, with the helicopters DLC:

If these restrictions are in place, this is going to cause problems within missions where the DLC helicopters are present and require players to fly them as part of the mission (either by design or creative choice). If nobody in a group of players owns the DLC, they won't be able to play that part of the scenario at all- alternatively, the mission maker will have to make allowances to have a non-DLC helicopter present to fly, too, or have parameters to enable/disable DLC content when they publish their mission, which means more work and unnecessary design concessions by the mission maker to accommodate this, if they want to avoid this issue in a publicly published scenario.

Unless the mission is built with the intent of having a great deal of choice in helicopters used by a large amount of players (Domination, for example), this is going to encourage mission makers to exclude these helicopters from their missions, or only include them as extra options on top of the base helicopters. This is because if they don't, they'll have to advertise their mission as "requiring" the DLC, and will immediately lose audiences who don't want to pay for the DLC. So, you have two options as a scenario editor to have people actually download and play your missions- make them an option alongside base helicopters, or exclude them altogether from the player's arsenal, and limit them to just AI use. In the former, the quality crafted content is being reduced to an ugly duckling or an elitist exclusive. Nobody wants to use it, and those that do hold it over the heads of those that don't, and that's unfair to the content and the creators of it. In the latter, it's completely discarded because of this split it causes. This strategy goes from the LITE solution where some people (who would throw enough of a fit over LITE assets to not use them based on graphics) would not use the content in a scenario that has it, to a solution where NOBODY will use the content.

Moving on, how will this impact the Marksmen DLC? We don't have any info on this, so I can't make any assumptions, but are non-owners going to be restricted from using the guns? Attachments? Will there just be the pop-ups and notifications? I'd like to make it clear that I'm not against the notifications and pop-ups- they might be annoying to non-owners, but they ensure COMPATIBILITY and consistency of experience whereas the restrictions have significant implications for the design and compatibility of multiplayer scenarios.

I can't pretend to know the details of the financial success of the LITE solution, but the restrictions seem heavy-handed for trying to encourage non-owners to pick up the premium content. If LITE failed to produce the sales anticipated with its reduced quality assets solution (i.e., large percentage of people playing the content and not minding reduced quality enough nor wanting the scenario content), I could understand looking for ways to improve sales. I just don't agree that these restrictions are a good idea. The notifications and pop-ups sound like fine compromises to me- they allow players to maintain a consistent multiplayer experience (though it still discourages non-owners from using that content, which has the implications in mission design expressed above, but not nearly as severe as outright preventing people from flying a helicopter, for example) while encouraging non-owners to purchase the content they are using.

However, I cannot agree with the restrictions we've seen in the DLC strategy. While attempting to prevent a community split in the gameplay portion, it has subtle but massive consequences for the scenario design aspect which may not have been entirely obvious (or given the attention it needs) during the design of this strategy. I believe a split in scenario design like the one I've described above would completely fragment the community and will alienate the DLC owners in the long run- they simply won't have scenarios produced that let them use and enjoy their content.

Look at the LITE solution. PMC and BAF both enjoyed their content implemented into scenarios and could be enjoyed by LITE users because it was a standard part of the game- no addons needed, no separate downloading, compatibility was airtight. If we look at ACR, though, which although it had a LITE version, was not part of an official patch and had to be downloaded separately. The amount of missions using ACR content relative to PMC and BAF content is miniscule for this reason- ACR's content is fantastic and high quality, but it wasn't the LITE graphics that turned off people from implementing it in their missions. It was the lack of CONSISTENCY and compatibility that resulted from ACR LITE being a separate download. Not everyone had it, and it caused problems just like any other mod that some people have and some people don't have. So it was rarely used for this reason. Is this really any different than having scenarios that have helicopters or weapons that only some people can use? That could be made unplayable if no person in that group of players owns the DLC? That's not consistency and it discourages scenario makers from making missions with the content people have PAID for- that's a split in the userbase.

Perhaps combining the LITE strategy with the notifications would be a good solution? This would retain the reminders and notifications that graphics and audio users are viewing are reduced versions of premium content while ensuring consistency no matter who plays in a given mission. With the LITE solution, I cannot stress enough how the consistency of scenarios across players' experiences is far more important than a perceived consistency of graphics.

I realize that a lot of this is conjecture and completely based on assumption- again, I'm sure BI has thought for a lot longer about this issue than I have with just this morning's announcement. Still, it is my opinion that this strategy has significant long-term consequences for the health of Arma 3's multiplayer community. While we'll only really know based on how it plays out in practice, I implore BIS to look into a less intrusive method as they implement their DLC through A3's lifespan.

[theevancat 277]

So as for using the DLCs in addons, I wonder if the restrictions will still be in place. For example, the karting suits are pilot jumpsuits but with gloves - something that I prefer instead of the bare hands. If I were to put retextured karting suits ingame as pilot uniforms with gloves, there'd still be the restrictions for non-owners?

[metralla 19]

I think you have not tried the system restriction of dlc, I've tried it with the mission editor and I assure you they have been right with this system. You can try the kart for a time and alerts you with a message that if you want to continue riding in the vehicle have to checkout. It is perfect for anyone who wants to have all the dlc and have the maximum experience with the game.

And it is clear that for 20 € I think anyone with a Arma 3 and loves the game pass per box if or if.

[John Kozak 14]

I never "enjoyed" BAF content on public servers since its quality felt far more outdated than OFP content. This just breaks quality and immersion.

Edited May 29, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[ProfTournesol 956]

I never "enjoyed" BAF content on public servers since its quality felt far more outdated than OFP content. This just breaks quality and immersion.

Exactly, i'm absolutely unable to play Lite versions of DLC.

[Tyl3r99 41]

YEPPIE haha @BI can you organize something like a raceday (race the devs)

[Llano 11]

Maybe it's an offshoot of other development related to the game or something like that, im sure it all ties in. The cart track was in Altis from the get go so obviously in the plans.

Karts? Really?..

Boo to you!

How about you let them get on with whatever they want? I for one fully, support them. So what if it came from an April Fool !

Good job BIS - unexpected and really fun!

For those whining ... guess what? You don't have to play it !

Wow.

Come on guys, if you're unable to see the fun factor in it, i'm sad for you : it was a april fool joke that turned into a very cheap DLC, the purpose of which is to support Czech Red Cross. Get down of your high horses.

fun? Yes maybe. Does the game need it? Not really. There are SO many other things that this game is screaming about to get implemented. Priorities my friend, priorities.

Are people really getting mad by the Karts DLC? Wasn't it made by one guy?

Mad? No, dissapointed? YES. I thought there was more important stuff that BIS was working on.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Priorities my friend, priorities.

As Zeus, it's hardly a one man projet. And it's very funny, that's more than enough for me.

[CaptainObvious 95]

Mad? No, dissapointed? YES. I thought there was more important stuff that BIS was working on.

I wonder how many programmers were involved with Karts and how little it affected overall development of Arma, I bet it's next to negligible.

[Westonsammy 1]

Mad? No, dissapointed? YES. I thought there was more important stuff that BIS was working on.

Because every fiber of their being was being directed toward making the kart DLC.

I mean really, they are raising money for charity AND giving us more content. You're just looking for a reason to complain.

[Llano 11]

As Zeus, it's hardly a one man projet. And it's very funny, that's more than enough for me.

I wonder how many programmers were involved with Karts and how little it affected overall development of Arma, I bet it's next to negligible.

Yes, maybe they only were one guy working on this. But still, it's the principle.

Because every fiber of their being was being directed toward making the kart DLC.

I mean really, they are raising money for charity AND giving us more content. You're just looking for a reason to complain.

Imo, wrong content.

[dr. hladik 231]

I wonder how many programmers were involved with Karts and how little it affected overall development of Arma, I bet it's next to negligible.

One programmer for one hour (adding two new animation sources).