13€ DLC, hefty price for 2 choppers

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Basically, I don't see these DLC's as anything other than a way to bring in the new features. Why? Look at it the way I see it. In Arma 2, the DLC was OA, and it added that massive amount of content. In Arma 3, they confirmed that they are going to have that eventually, via. "The Expansion", which includes another map. No one knows anything about the Expansion. Now, back to the DLC's however, before they even announced them, the community has been asking for features, Firing From Vehicles, Rope PhysX, TKOH FDM, wind affecting bullets, better ballistics. So my guess is, BIS has come up with the DLC's as a way to introduce tea new features. At the same time, they probably figured since it took time and resources to charge for the addition of the features many thought to be in the base game from the beginning, because those features were on the confirmed list. So, this is where it starts. Being confirmed to be in the game, and not being in the game from the start, is where the split is. I don't see a problem with them charging for the DLC's, however, as they already stayed, Content is Payed, Features are free. Based on what they told us, via. Word of mouth, and on many accounts through Twitter, a detailed report, and more, it would be great to have a little more Content included. Besides that, I don't mind that they have prabably factored in a little change for the Features anyway, as they probably couldn't get these features in release due to problems in the beginning, design lead being arrested, change of the story line and more. But still, in end game, wanting more content is never a bad thing, and more versatility, more life to a seemingly almost empty game even to today, is some respects (civilian), can only make Arma 3 a better game, and close that gap of fullness between Arma 2's content, and Arma 3's potential for content, and outstanding features to enhance the content's capabilities.

[chortles 263]

Can´t say i liked the old "smudge texture" approach any better, as i simply didn´t use the stuff then, which contradicts the stuff being there in the first place.

I would not be surprised if BI noticed that there were a lot of players who thought the same as you did (instead of buying the DLC, just don't use the content) and removed the "smudge texture" method based on that...

[yxman 90]

the old dlc model was accepted with open arms without any controversy what so ever, in fact the community was praising bis as a company who was bold enough to challange current business models with their dlc strategy. The lores textured models where more than enough incentive for me... Actually, what made me buy the dlc's was simply due to my trust in bis and the philosophy behind the strategies. The campaigns included in all of the dlc's where extensive, btw... And at least in the case of baf, they tried to adress an ever returning complaint with the campaign, the lack of diversity in vehicle use.

The content was and wasn't behind a pay wall at the same time. Everyone could try the content in the dlc out with full functionality in the editor and in community made missions, but the campaigns and the decent resoluted units where hidden behind the pay wall. And again, the sheer number of units where immense, especially baf. Here is a snippet from the feature list:

In total, they claim this:

Also considering that you got a full campaign, i would say that the value for money in this was way surpased what heli dlc offers. In the case of pmc dlc, we also got new terrains. Albeit small, quite a huge addition for a really small amount of money.

I hate to say this, but the current dlc model reminds me much more about the sims and the rediculously scamlike dlc strategy they use than the old model they used. The difference between the two is the intention behind it. I don't think bis is willfully trying to scam us out of money, but i must say i prefer the old model much, much more.

The thing is, i find this really sad. I love arma for all it's worth, but i also feel powerless, helpless and sad to see that the company i've used as an example of good business behaviour now are leaving those behind. I also feel powerless because i know that it's very unlikely that they will change this possibility now, and that the game will never be as rich in content as arma ii ever was, even at launch. Thing is, there is no alternative to arma. There isn't any competition, so i'm stuck with bis.

The development of arma iii has been riddled with hoops and troubles, i know. But the same is true for arma i and arma ii as well. Game2 was never released, bis where near bankrupt before arma ii release and so on. Bis has never been in a more lucurative possition than they are now. Dayz has made bis play in a very different leage, a leage that allows them to throw 500 000 euros on prices for the community (an effort i highly, highly endorse btw). They are in a much better position for making arma reach it's potential, and i find it sad that they choose to go down the road we now are on. But i think it's more a result of ignorance than greed.

You end your post by saying:

Rest assured, both are comming.

I am sorry, but i am in doubt. No dlc or expantion will fix the fact that all factions use the same turrets for their vehicles, no expantion will deliver enough content to give the amount of content arma ii had, not even close. Some of the dlcs for arma ii delivered more content for the price of a dlc than arma iii currently have... A huge expantion of content in arma iii is not going to happen... It might get better, sure... But i really doubt that it will be enough.

The lack of content and the fact that all the gear is modernized means that the game is much simpler than arma ii was. Gunning in a vehicle used to demand that the gunner knew how to range and adjust, and having a spotter would increase your effieciency by a large factor for instance. With all of the vehicles having zoomable optics, inbuilt range finders and are having the gunner safe and sound behind an armed chassy it makes vehicle warfare much less interesting. This is only one aspect.

Then the launchers... The rpg7 in arma ii had several warheads, now we have what? 5 launchers or so in total, if even that? None with different warheads if i'm not wrong? I don't see arma iii ever becomming on par with arma ii. If it was up to me, i would still be playing arma ii with ace and miss a few features from arma iii... But sadly my community has moved on to arma iii.

this! i hope the community doesn't support this dlc ripoff plan of arma3.

[zukov 484]

this! i hope the community doesn't support this dlc ripoff plan of arma3.

i have already bought all DLCs, hahahahahhahahah

[Bouben 3]

this! i hope the community doesn't support this dlc ripoff plan of arma3.

What ripoff plan?? Seriously? With all that features for free?

[ProfTournesol 956]

Yes, what ripoff ? Don't like it ? Don't buy it, you'll have all features for free.

[nodunit 397]

Can´t say i liked the old "smudge texture" approach any better, as i simply didn´t use the stuff then, which contradicts the stuff being there in the first place.

You may not have but I liked it a lot, it gave me an opportunity to examine the content before coming to a decision of purchase and it also prevented any split in the online community because everyone had the content, which was the main reason for it to be done that way. Lower quality visuals to prevent splits but high quality for those who purchased.

Now I won't say there weren't any miss steps, making the optics lower quality was a huge mistake.

[merlin 17]

One of the things i didn't like about the ArmA 2 DLC model was the absence of hiddenselections, which, for obvious reasons were not included. I didn't like how the 'DRM' mechanism punished the owners in that respect. What i would have done to make a civilian Ka-60 or VIP Merlin. Hopefully someone who owns karts can get back to me but i would imagine with BIS's current DLC model this won't be an issue and retextures will be trivial.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

One of the things i didn't like about the ArmA 2 DLC model was the absence of hiddenselections, which, for obvious reasons were not included. I didn't like how the 'DRM' mechanism punished the owners in that respect. What i would have done to make a civilian Ka-60 or VIP Merlin. Hopefully someone who owns karts can get back to me but i would imagine with BIS's current DLC model this won't be an issue and retextures will be trivial.

From what I can remember, Arma 2 didn't even have Hiddenselections possible in it's engine. Which is one of the reasons that vehicles were separate. For example, "Lada", and "Lada (Red)".

[CaptainObvious 95]

You may not have but I liked it a lot, it gave me an opportunity to examine the content before coming to a decision of purchase and it also prevented any split in the online community because everyone had the content, which was the main reason for it to be done that way. Lower quality visuals to prevent splits but high quality for those who purchased.

Nothing is stopping you from testing and examining the choppers now either, just drop one in the editor with yourself as the pilot and off you go, or script yourself to the pilot's seat even during a mission, no community splitting occurring either because of that, and everyone has the hi quality helos anyway on top of all the features.

[Sniperwolf572 758]

From what I can remember, Arma 2 didn't even have Hiddenselections possible in it's engine. Which is one of the reasons that vehicles were separate. For example, "Lada", and "Lada (Red)".

You don't remember correctly. :p

Config hiddenSelections was there at least since OFP:R, but you had to run a script if you wanted to retexture something on init.

Config hiddenSelectionTextures was there since Arma 1 or 2.

Arma 3 added hiddenselections that show/hide depending if you are in water or not, can't remember the exact name (that's how flippers, rebreather and other stuff like that works). And I believe it also added hiddenSelectionMaterials.

Edited October 2, 2014 by Sniperwolf572

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

You don't remember correctly. :p

Config hiddenSelections was there at least since OFP:R, but you had to run a script if you wanted to retexture something on init.

Config hiddenSelectionTextures was there since Arma 1 or 2.

Arma 3 added hiddenselections that show/hide depending if you are in water or not, can't remember the exact name (that's how flippers, rebreather and other stuff like that works). And I believe it also added hiddenSelectionMaterials.

Hmmmm... I like the way Arma 3 utilize's it.

[Sniperwolf572 758]

Hmmmm... I like the way Arma 3 utilize's it.

Yep. It's due to the devs themselves definind proper selections to enable retexturing so we don't have to hex edit the models. Features were all there in Arma 2, it was just not used, hence all the retextures were hex edits and whatnot. :)

[x3kj 1247]

You may not have but I liked it a lot, it gave me an opportunity to examine the content before coming to a decision of purchase and it also prevented any split in the online community because everyone had the content, which was the main reason for it to be done that way. Lower quality visuals to prevent splits but high quality for those who purchased.

But you woudlnt know if a mission made use of those new assetts and then you are surprised and forced to endure the horrible look when you want to play that mission. Surprise in-your-face uglyness. On the flipside now you propably get popups "buy dlc now" crap. Not a good solution either. Not sure if there even is a good solution for this at all.

I would buy the dlc only for support of improved engine features. The vehicle assetts in vanilla and the dlc are laughable.

[VALROKOFFICIAL 10]

Could we at least make that kind of DLCs (somewhat similar to the karts DLC in features), available to buy as a partial donation? I think it would make a lot more sense to have BI donate part of the income from this kind of DLC, to charity, when all expenses had been covered (if they are not doing this already).

[selmer79 10]

OK, maybe I'm a weirdo, but here's how I view the €13 Helicopter DLC:

I'm paying developers €13 to model, script and skin two helicopters, add sling-loading to the existing helicopters, keep bug-hunting the DLC after it's released, add features to it after it's released (not sure if VRS is in the Advanced Flight Model yet) and maybe even keep developers employed for a while longer to squash general game-bugs and add more features to the main game.

In short, I'm sponsoring BI to make Arma 3 better, and in return they're giving me two helicopters as a "thank you".

[the_demongod 31]

OK, maybe I'm a weirdo, but here's how I view the €13 Helicopter DLC:

I'm paying developers €13 to model, script and skin two helicopters, add sling-loading to the existing helicopters, keep bug-hunting the DLC after it's released, add features to it after it's released (not sure if VRS is in the Advanced Flight Model yet) and maybe even keep developers employed for a while longer to squash general game-bugs and add more features to the main game.

In short, I'm sponsoring BI to make Arma 3 better, and in return they're giving me two helicopters as a "thank you".

And that is exactly how you should be thinking. BI has put a lot of time and energy into bringing these amazing features and vehicles to arma 3, so it makes perfect sense to me to pay more for the helicopters because that way I'm supporting their work on the free features as well.

Again, no you aren't paying for the features because everyone is getting them for free anyway.

And they're being nice enough to expect you to pay more lolwut??

How is that being nice? So they're being nice by expecting me to cover the cost of a bunch of other freeloaders who won't get the DLC, and as a reward they'll allow me to fly 2 helicopters without an annoying pop-up? Oh man how generous of them...

They are being nice enough to release the features for free. The least you can do is spend 13 fucking euros once a year to buy a DLC and support BI as a company for all their work, whether or not you want the helicopters. If you're so impoverished that you can't afford to pay 13€ for a video game DLC, I suggest you find another hobby. Because in the time it took you to write that reply, you could've washed somebody's car or mowed their lawn or shoveled the snow out of their driveway and made enough money to buy the DLC.

[calin_banc 19]

Some would argue, "it's not about the money, it's about sending a message".

[chortles 263]

Some would argue, "it's not about the money, it's about sending a message".

Whenever I see a post like this, my reaction is to warn that "sometimes the message you intended to send and what the recipient hears are two very different things"...

[Tankbuster 1733]

In short, I'm sponsoring BI to make Arma 3 better, and in return they're giving me two helicopters as a "thank you".

There's no sponsoring, or thank you's. That's irrelevant. This is a commercial transaction you are entering into and it's my view that this isn't a particularly good value one.

Don't forget that all of the other 'features' such as the flight model and sling loading we get anyway, regardless of if we buy the DLC or not and while we're not forgetting stuff, remember that both features are already in ToH and mature.

The above said, both helicopters look lovely and the Taru is original and they get loads of kudos for making a 'Thunderbird 2' for us AND I'm pleased, yes pleased, that they've taken a public decision to delay it because it's not in good shape yet. Given the company's history of releasing half finished junk (I had Armed Assault 1.0) they have been brave here on both counts.

[Sterlingarcherz101 15]

Some would argue, "it's not about the money, it's about sending a message".

Those very same people would have clocked up hundreds of hours on arma3.

So bis must be doing something right.

They Could have just brought out 5 helis and made them fully paid. So then half your friends could be on a server playing and you couldn't join them till you bought the dlc end of. Then there be a whole other thing to moan about. I pay for the dlc and maybe that little bit more to keep this kind of approach to not split up mates and splinter communities playing the game.

I look at the value of other dlc content from other games and compared how they go about it. Some of it is just pure and utter greed.

They don't see you as a player who likes their game. They view you as others have said on here, just another transaction. They sure as hell don't have devs openly talking with players either. So some people should be careful how they wish other people would view stuff.

[enex 11]

There's no sponsoring, or thank you's. That's irrelevant. This is a commercial transaction you are entering into and it's my view that this isn't a particularly good value one.

I beg to differ.Bohemia interactive care about community so they didn't put Sling loading TKOH and Firing from vehicle

under price tag and I will return the favor and pay this little money to support this kind of mindset*.

I keep No thank you and no sponsoring for companies like EA, ubisoft, sega...

I'm surprised how many people take features for granted just because they aren't under price.

*Features free, content paid

both features are already in ToH and mature.

I don't play TKOH so this is irrelevant since we are talking about arma 3.

[Tankbuster 1733]

I don't play TKOH so this is irrelevant since we are talking about arma 3.

My point was not that it's only relevant to those that own a particular game. More that the technology, concept and codebase for these features already exists and is well proven within the BI stable, so bringing it to A3 is easier than knocking up two new helicopters. As such, it's expected -and has come to pass- that we wouldn't pay for the development of these features in quite the same way ToH users have done. It's already there. Likewise, It would be a sensible move to take both these helicopters to ToH. But that's OT. forget I said it :)

[enex 11]

My point was not that it's only relevant to those that own a particular game. More that the technology, concept and codebase for these features already exists and is well proven within the BI stable, so bringing it to A3 is easier than knocking up two new helicopters. As such, it's expected -and has come to pass- that we wouldn't pay for the development of these features in quite the same way ToH users have done. It's already there. Likewise, It would be a sensible move to take both these helicopters to ToH. But that's OT. forget I said it :)

ah that makes more sense, now that I see your perspective.

[chompster 29]

And that is exactly how you should be thinking. BI has put a lot of time and energy into bringing these amazing features and vehicles to arma 3, so it makes perfect sense to me to pay more for the helicopters because that way I'm supporting their work on the free features as well.

They are being nice enough to release the features for free. The least you can do is spend 13 fucking euros once a year to buy a DLC and support BI as a company for all their work, whether or not you want the helicopters. If you're so impoverished that you can't afford to pay 13€ for a video game DLC, I suggest you find another hobby. Because in the time it took you to write that reply, you could've washed somebody's car or mowed their lawn or shoveled the snow out of their driveway and made enough money to buy the DLC.

I already stated that i have the bundle so you little rant is redundant. And before you ask "then why complain now?" again refer to my previous post.

"then why are you complaining??" because if you don't, they're going to assume you're fine with giving them money and getting little in return

I got the bundle, but if they ever do more DLC i'm waiting for more info first. They really shouldn't even be putting DLC up until they can clearly show what you're getting.

Buying the €60 game itself should be more than enough "support" Yeah it's great that they're releasing it for free, but again what am i, as the one paying, getting? the privilege to fly a helicopter that my group will most likely never use due to future aesthetics and mods doing the exact same?

I'm standing by my point that the value for the amount they're asking just isn't right. You see it as supporting BI, thats fine. I don't. I already bought the game, there's your support. When releasing DLC and asking over €10 for it you should expect to at least get a little bit more other than "hey now you can fly these helicopters without annoying adds popping in your face.