The new ARMA 3 DLC system - debate

[John Kozak 14]

I honestly have no idea how that was the message you took from my post. I specifically stated that the new system is more intrusive than the old one.

You've described the fact, I made the conclusion. From what you said, this was the exact instance of situation which forced BIS to invent the current system.

Let's discuss based on facts, not projections "how everything will be bad". That's merely a rationalization of conservatism feelings.

Edited May 31, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[VanZant 48]

They really should split the game, make more money, release a larger more powerful editor (3d) with new tools etc ('a new game' but not), on its own with a couple of basic equipped factions and a terrain for £40 or so (no campaigns). Then follow that up with ‘buy to use’ extras i.e. terrains, armies, equipment, vehicle, aircraft etc. Make these high quality that work cohesively with all other parts, no conflicting etc.

All high quality extras.

.

Of course still allow very ‘restricted’ mod and addon making (certain types), but BI themselves should concentrate this particular side of their business on content, building the mil/sim style ‘as a game’ (not VBS, that’s a training tool, not a game. o.k. I know, it’s a different business ;) ).

War gaming is a lucrative market place, they just don’t seem to see it as a business. £40 a pop for added content, a release each month, I’m there no problem, the rest of the group I play with too.

Those that can’t or don’t want to, have the mainstream game, with the 2d editor, its good.

Come on BI, do the right thing, make wargamers happy, we tend to be willing to part with money, for quality, very quickly.

I’d pay that for a dozen terrains alone (12 months), those that worked flawlessly with the game (don't need to be huge terrains, but quality). Cheap entertainment really, in comparison to going down the pub one night and seeing £60 piss down the wc..

A note: I appreciate every mod and addon that I have used over the years. I’ve contributed to many that have had the facility to allow me to do so, even helped when people have needed upgrade pc’s to help them keep making them.

Its ment, in no way, to be derogatory to those makers, we have a better series for it.

But..

I’m talking about a new concept, BI making a 'new' game, with ongoing extra content for players to buy, guaranteed to work, as said, cohesively with the 'new' game itself (no conflicts etc), high quality extras, £40 a pop, a release each month or sub. Turning and making part of the series, into a true mil/sim style game, you have the assets to do it, the know how and ability. The market may be smaller for wargaming, but it would be very lucrative, I'm sure.

Why not, as said, your sat there with the ability to do it.

Probably not a popular view with many, but for me and many others I know, it makes perfect sense. ;)

You forgot to add [irony] tags, right?

[John Kozak 14]

I like the idea.

Let them put the minimum price at, let´s say 6€. And then you pay how much you think it´s worth.

The benefits are that BIS would indeed be forced to make DLCs attractive to buy (no more half assed stuff like ACR).

The DLC would be much more widespread, almost everyone would own them.

Even the people who think that 12,99 is just too expensive (and there is a lot of them) would rethink if they could pay a smaller price. The huge volume of additional sales would make up for the lower price and BIS would still get the same profit.

Additional marketing for BIS. Again they pionier an unusual idea and the world loves them for that.

This is so not going to work it's not even worth explaining why.

[Tonci87 163]

This is so not going to work it's not even worth explaining why.

Why not?

[John Kozak 14]

Why not?

it's not even worth explaining why.

Trouble understanding written text, eh? But, okay, specially for you: it does never work in real life and never will. Many games were sold on Humble Bundles, yet average check size is flying around 6$ mark despite having more than a few 10$ games in the bundle frequently. Das Attorney's example also shows the results of such experiment.

Stop trying to impose immature idealistic views on a commercial entity - and stop thinking you're a representative of the community. You are not.

Edited May 31, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[jgaz-uk 130]

A case of the The Pot calling the kettle black here DarkWanderer to say the least!

Arrogance in the extreme with your posts, sadly.

[John Kozak 14]

A case of the The Pot calling the kettle black here DarkWanderer to say the least!

I never said "I get feedback from whole community", so - you found a mare's nest ;) And it's not me who started with ad hominem, either.

Arrogance in the extreme with your posts, sadly.

Anything on the topic, maybe?

Edited May 31, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[jgaz-uk 130]

I rest my case

[Tonci87 163]

So do I. Some peiople are simply to close minded and ignorant to waste time on.

EDIT: Ad Hominem my ass. If you don´t want to get called out on BS then don´t pretend that you are a mission author.

[Belbo 461]

I clicked on "No - I prefer [the] Arma 2 system". But not because I don't like the idea of available content for non-buyers, or the limited functionality for non-buyers.

My main problem with the new strategy is: You have all the content available, but (and it's a big but) you won't be paying for the content.

What you're paying for is for not being nagged by on-screen infos on how to buy the DLCs and additional effort to fully use the content. I'm fine with paying for content, like I did paying for the Arma 2 DLCs, but with the new DLC system the feeling of a purchase, of an actual exchange of goods is missing. It's like paying protection money. I feel like being blackmailed for my immersion and my fun. And that leaves a bitter aftertaste.

Of course I will buy the DLCs, to support BIS, to be a righteous owner of the stuff and to brag about it in front of friends, colleagues and family. But on an existential level I have a problem with the marketing- and distribution-method.

[katipo66 94]

Let them put the minimum price at, let´s say 6€. And then you pay how much you think it´s worth.

Hi Bro, Would that minimum cost what ever that might be cover everything including any well deserved profit and then anything we pay on top is cream for BIS, or is the minimum cost you mention the net total cost only BIS spent to create any (thing) and profit is decided on what we (us) decide its worth? sorry man, economics and mathematics were never my strong point obviously but your statement does seem a bit dubious and not profitable from a business point of view? if BIS went out of business i might be forced to watch TV which i havent done in four years or when ever it was i purchased Arma 2 and fell off the planet :)

Id also like to recommend the Korean 'Jinro' (with caution) just as lethal as Sake but with slightly more warning :D

[down8 30]

With the ArmA 2 system you were able to check out the content before buying! Hell! You were able to use the units to no end! Now adds pop up everytime I get into a vehicle?

http://i.imgur.com/mzKbDGa.jpg

WOW, this is serious inbelievable, changed my vote.

I don't understand how a lot of fans are not annoyed with this kind of stuff. Is this the game you love and supported for so many years?

[Tonci87 163]

So that makes me wonder how many people who voted yes actually knew what the new system contains.....

[kremator 1064]

Oh I know what it contains, and what a great method to get people to try before they buy. Kinda makes me wonder about people who voted no that haven't read the full release from BIS....

@Tonci - Look, I totally agree with everything that needs fixing in your sig. The only way we can do that is to get more money for BIS, and I would like to wait and see how the new DLC system works out for us all. Yes, I am biased, as I have already purchased the Supporters edition, so it is less problematic for me. I can see your point of view but I need to be less of a fanboi and you less of a cynic (until other DLCs are released anyway ;) )

[down8 30]

So that makes me wonder how many people who voted yes actually knew what the new system contains.....

I have to admit I changed my mind reading good points made by detractors here about it. Like yours about better value DLCS in the past (BAF).

But the mobile gaming style screen popups, its the lamest detail. Absolute immersion killer. Hard to enjoy a mission watching that kind of stuff in-game.

[Tonci87 163]

Oh I know what it contains, and what a great method to get people to try before they buy. Kinda makes me wonder about people who voted no that haven't read the full release from BIS....

@Tonci - Look, I totally agree with everything that needs fixing in your sig. The only way we can do that is to get more money for BIS, and I would like to wait and see how the new DLC system works out for us all. Yes, I am biased, as I have already purchased the Supporters edition, so it is less problematic for me. I can see your point of view but I need to be less of a fanboi and you less of a cynic (until other DLCs are released anyway ;) )

Yeah I also totally understand your point of view, but I´m relly not trying to be a cynic here. This DLC is there for BIS to test this new approach (and I applaud them for beeing so sensible), and only by giving feedback we can influence how the "real" DLCs will be distributed. So Imho if we do nothing now, nothing will change and the problems will become blatantly obvious when the DLCs drop, but then it will already be too late. We must not wait.

And you don´t really think that BI is in shortage of money, do you? :p

Arma 3 has sold over a million copies and DayZ has basically a lifetime subscription for the Top 10 of the Steam Topseller list.

They won´t fix Arma 3 faster if we pump more money into them.

[onlyrazor 11]

I'd prefer a hybrid approach of a Lite model with notifications. If people don't know why the textures and sounds are crap, give them a notification when they look at a DLC vehicle. "This vehicle is part of the X and Y Lite DLC. The full DLC contains high-quality textures and sounds." If people care about the DLC, they'll buy it and if they don't they still won't have to worry about not being able to control it if the mission asks for it.

[PuFu 4591]

Yeah I also totally understand your point of view, but I´m relly not trying to be a cynic here. This DLC is there for BIS to test this new approach (and I applaud them for beeing so sensible), and only by giving feedback we can influence how the "real" DLCs will be distributed. So Imho if we do nothing now, nothing will change and the problems will become blatantly obvious when the DLCs drop, but then it will already be too late. We must not wait.

And you don´t really think that BI is in shortage of money, do you? :p

Arma 3 has sold over a million copies and DayZ has basically a lifetime subscription for the Top 10 of the Steam Topseller list.

They won´t fix Arma 3 faster if we pump more money into them.

Arma3 also sold over 1 mil copies btw

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Yeah I also totally understand your point of view, but I´m relly not trying to be a cynic here. This DLC is there for BIS to test this new approach (and I applaud them for beeing so sensible), and only by giving feedback we can influence how the "real" DLCs will be distributed. So Imho if we do nothing now, nothing will change and the problems will become blatantly obvious when the DLCs drop, but then it will already be too late. We must not wait.

And you don´t really think that BI is in shortage of money, do you? :p

Arma 3 has sold over a million copies and DayZ has basically a lifetime subscription for the Top 10 of the Steam Topseller list.

They won´t fix Arma 3 faster if we pump more money into them.

They might not have a shortage of money but they have to justify expanding content by having a source of income

[Vigil Vindex 64]

arma 3 has sold over a million copies and dayz has basically a lifetime subscription for the top 10 of the steam topseller list. They won´t fix arma 3 faster if we pump more money into them.

^^ this +1!

I want to buy the DLC. But I feel that from the very start of Arma 3 development BIS have dropped the ball letting AI languish in a state that has been static since 2001. AI is central to the infantry experience and it wasn't even given a proper overhaul since 2001. How do I relay this to BIS? Thread after thread, year on year this has remained a problem. I will try and resist buying the DLC in the hope BIS will get the message. It's a shame I have to resort to such desperate measures to try and ensure BIS get the message, we need the core game fixed before new content.

How you go from Arma 2 to making Arma 3 and not even consider sorting out the AI is beyond me.

PS. The reason I think the core game engine needs overhauled before new content is because I read the ToH flight model caused a 10 fps drop, at the time the average fps was about 30fps, so removing another 10fps would lower the average and make things unplayable so they cut it. Now after some performance improvements in other areas we can spend that 10 fps on the ToH flight model again, hence it being in the Helicopters DLC. I think even being in a situation like that where performance is so limited that you have to actually cut stuff to keep the performance is a sad situation that cries out for an overhaul.

Edited May 31, 2014 by ssechaud

[suiside 95]

they might consider a slightly less intrusive system where they use the click away pop up in the loading screens, and lobby of MP sessions, and a slightly less detailed but not as low as arma 2 dlc textures.

this way it does not kill the game experience much and the pop ups do not interfere with game play but both remind you of having the option to buy a slightly better quality and asset.

[Tonci87 163]

How about they leave the Pop-up in and just remove the restriction? So everytime you get into a DLC vehicle or use a DLC Weapon you have to klick OK on a Popup? As we know the Popups can be circumvented compeltely trough mods, if they remove the restriction at least the Popup get´s to stay.

[Belbo 461]

How about they leave the Pop-up in and just remove the restriction? So everytime you get into a DLC vehicle or use a DLC Weapon you have to klick OK on a Popup? As we know the Popups can be circumvented compeltely trough mods, if they remove the restriction at least the Popup get´s to stay.

That wouldn't make anything better. The restrictions are alright. The popups are the problem.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?178393-The-new-ARMA-3-DLC-system-debate&p=2701206&viewfull=1#post2701206

[suiside 95]

maybe make it like a "turn on" or "remove safety" on the vehicle or weapon ? or like a "remove before flight" flag and "safety lock" which when removed gives you a less intrusive pop up like steam notification to buy ?

just trying to imagine it in game...

(edit)

or have a sticker in the cockpit that says "arma 3 rental" and decal on the side of the heli but only for the non buying player visible not others, and a "rent a gun" on the gun ?

have an option to remove sticker and get a buy option ?

Edited May 31, 2014 by suiside

[down8 30]

I clicked on "No - I prefer [the] Arma 2 system". But not because I don't like the idea of available content for non-buyers, or the limited functionality for non-buyers.

My main problem with the new strategy is: You have all the content available, but (and it's a big but) you won't be paying for the content.

What you're paying for is for not being nagged by on-screen infos on how to buy the DLCs and additional effort to fully use the content. I'm fine with paying for content, like I did paying for the Arma 2 DLCs, but with the new DLC system the feeling of a purchase, of an actual exchange of goods is missing. It's like paying protection money. I feel like being blackmailed for my immersion and my fun. And that leaves a bitter aftertaste.

Of course I will buy the DLCs, to support BIS, to be a righteous owner of the stuff and to brag about it in front of friends, colleagues and family. But on an existential level I have a problem with the marketing- and distribution-method.

Good points.

The in-game pop ups are hideous and inappropiate in a paid game like Arma 3, at least in an honest one. It's sad that some people won't recognise how ugly is this, because they aren't going to be annoyed by them, because they have supporter editions or unconditionally purchase the DLCs.

If EA is doing this, the shitstorm and critics against them would be extreme.Even though people here obviously care much less about Battlefield than Arma.

Edited May 31, 2014 by Down8