A solution to the Altis Life "Problem": Standalone "Life" Game

[Westonsammy 1]

Preface

I have tried my best to make this post organized, because it is very lengthy. I please ask that you try and read all of it, because I believe each section is equally important. Also, do not try to criticize the post if you have not read the entire thing, upon reading it all I hereby give you my permission to tear it to shreds, but not before.

ATTENTION FORUM MODERATORS I do believe this belongs in the ArmA 3 section of the forums, as this problem is exclusive to ArmA 3, not any of BI's other games. If you really do feel otherwise, I'm not going to argue with you, feel free to move it.

Also, for some background, I've played ArmA obsessively for the past 4 years, 2 of which I spent playing with a life community on ArmA 2, all of which I have spent playing tons and tons of milsim.

As always, the entire post is open to discussion. But please, do not take peoples opinions as fact, including your own. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion.

The Problem

Let me start this section off by saying that the problem with Life is complicated, and that no one is to blame. If you feel like I'm specifically targeting you or that my wording is too harsh, please post so in the replies so that I can appropriately edit the post.

Anyway, the problem with Life missions is not that they are unorthodox for a military game, as ArmA is a open sandbox. The problem is not that Life is popular, it is fine for people to like one gamemode. The problem is not that Life attracts a different community from normal ArmA, we could easily stay outside of each others way.

The problem with Life is instead a combination of all of the factors I have just listed. The fact that a gamemode that is so different and opposite of what many would define as the "normal" gameplay of ArmA has gotten so massively popular that it has attracted a whole entire new community to ArmA is the problem.

Now then, before you all go off in the replies section about how closed-minded and milsim-elitist I am, let me explain my self.

First off, with the whole "normal" gameplay thing.

I do strongly believe that ArmA, at its core, is meant to be a military-style game. Why? Well let us look at the facts. All of BI's marketing of ArmA, aside from Karts which was a self-described "vacation from the series", has been with a heavy military theme. You would be hard pressed to show me a official screenshot or ad for ArmA that does not feature a military-style serviceman, weapon, or vehicle. Also, lets take a look at some of ArmA's steam tags. "Simulation". "Military". "Tactical". "Strategy". "FPS". "Realistic". "War". "Shooter". "Team-Based". On top of this, in the Steam description of ArmA 3, words like "military", "soldier", and "war" are tossed around all over the place.

So what kind of problems are caused when a mission like Altis Life is thrown in there? Without popularity, not much of a problem. But when it gets to the point that more than half of the top 30 ArmA 3 servers are running Life missions, it becomes a problem. For those who have bought ArmA 3 without doing lots of research, the fact that most of the community is playing a gamemode that is so far off from what they were advertised as buying, it is a slap in the face. I, as a consumer, would be very disappointed if I went and bought something just to end up with the opposite of what I wanted. Also, those of us who bought the game for milsim are probably going to have little to no interest in a mission that involves no military or simulation.

Now onto Life's popularity.

Obviously, Life is the most popular gamemode in ArmA 3 currently. Back in ArmA 2 it was DayZ, but upon the announcement of DayZ Standalone and release of ArmA 3, Life took that title. Now again, if Life was a gamemode in line with the themes and gameplay of "normal" ArmA 3 (As described above), then this would not be a problem, because the entire community would be able to enjoy it. But as it stands, Life missions are competing with the milsim community for players and space. The sheer amount of completely full Altis Life servers (in correlation with other missions, like wasteland, Breaking Point and KOTH) completely drown out most milsim servers, to the point where you have to spend time searching for a good server. In a game that claims it is a military style shooter sandbox (again, see above), I would expect it to be easy to find a decent server that plays a gamemode of that type. But instead I am greeted with a variety of other gamemodes, of which I probably won't have much interest in. This is obviously a big problem for the milsim consumer.

Lastly, the community of Life missions.

Now this is where I expect people to take the most offense, so please realize that I do not mean that everyone who plays Life is like this, I am just generalizing communities by what sort of people they tend to attract. I am also not saying that the milsim community is better or worse than the Life community. Alright, so lets take a look at the milsim community. Most people who want to play Milsim tend to be among the older demographic, as well as being more mature, patient, fixated, and admittedly stubborn. Life players, on the other hand, tend to be among the younger demographic, as well as being less mature, more wanting of direct action, and more easily distracted. So what do we have ladies and gentlemen? Yup, that is right, two opposite communities. Existing in the same game. At the same time. Both competing for the same space on that server list.

I'm pretty sure this is a problem. The most obvious result of this situation is the bleed over of players from these two communities into the other communities server. Although not much of a problem with milsim players, who, again tend to be more mature and fixated on playing the mission (Again, not a good or a bad thing), it is a problem with Life players, who sometimes see milsim servers as nothing more than an opportunity to troll and dick-around, and in the worst cases, to exercise their script kiddie "skills". Again, these are only a small minority of Life players, but the fact that the community is so huge means that even a small minority has some large numbers behind them. For milsim players, seeing people running around not caring about the mission and trying to be as silly and "funny" as possible is EXTREMELY annoying, considering we came here specifically to avoid that sort of stuff. I also imagine it is annoying for Life players when milsim players connect and don't give a crap about role-playing. The bottom line is, these two opposite communities find each other annoying, and being forced to share the same space is not fun.

The Solution: A Standalone Life Game

Hey, it worked for DayZ, right?

No but seriously, it is my personal opinion that a standalone Life game by BI would solve everyone's problems and make everyone happy.

Why? Well, lets look at the three groups affected by BI releasing a standalone Life game. The milsim community, the Life community, and Bohemia Interactive.

What does the Milsim Community gain?

The milsim community, very simply, gains their game back. With a separate game for people who really want to enjoy the Life gamemode, the only people left in ArmA 3 would be those who enjoy ArmA 3 as a milsim or military-style game. Obviously there would still be gamemodes like Wasteland and KOTH that are a bit of a deviation from Milsim, but nothing as drastically different as Life. This would allow public Milsim servers to become a lot more popular and easier to find. Consumers looking for a milsim experience would also be a lot more pleased and less confused with ArmA 3 upon purchase, because they are now getting the experience they paid for.

What does the Life Community gain?

Most obviously, a larger, more polished, more supported version of the gamemode they all know and love. BI aren't about to start adding official roleplaying features to ArmA 3, but with a Life Standalone, BI would be able to officially support the roleplayers with features, updates and DLC based around roleplaying. Also, Life players would no longer have to worry about all the milsim fluff in the game, or the milsim community for that matter.

What does Bohemia Interactive gain?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

I think that the "open world multiplayer roleplay" genre is a really untapped market. Look at all the roleplaying mods out there for multiplayer games like gmod, Mount and Blade, and of course, ArmA. People enjoy just being plonked down in a world that says "do whatever and be whoever", and so far no game has really tapped into that feeling, only mods. If BI were the first to make a game like this, just like they were the first to make a realistic survival game, they would be in for some serious dough.

The Reality of it all

But let us get back to reality. Would BI really just go ahead and start working on a standalone Life game? Unfortunately, things aren't as simple as that. BI has a number of issues to deal with before they can start on a Life Standalone. First off, for a small studio they already have their hands full with the continued support of ArmA 3 and continued development of DayZ Standalone and TakeOnMars. To start work on a whole new game may take resources and time that BI doesn't have. Also, how many of BI's developers know how to make a multiplayer roleplaying game like Life? As has already been discussed many times, BI cannot simply recruit the people who made Life and Life mods to their team.

But on the other hand, BI does stand to gain a lot of monehs from a Life Standalone. Maybe not as much as DayZ Standalone, which was bound to be a hit, but definitely a lot. Again, to my knowledge a standalone game of this type has not been done before.

So would it be worth the time and resources for BI to make a Life Standalone? Feel free to discuss what you think.

Thanks for reading.

[vegeta897 13]

The milsim community, very simply, gains their game back.

Oh god!

frantically checks steam library

Phew, there it is.

This post is in jest, I know what you meant. While I do not believe Altis Life or any other game mode or mod detracts from the experience of existing players, it could theoretically give people who don't know what Arma is the wrong idea about the game. However, I think trying to preserve the public face of the game by segregating the results of it being such an open platform is not such a good thing. An experienced PC gamer that is familiar with the concept of highly moddable games would be able to tell what Arma really is, and I think we should strive to achieve this kind of awareness in PC gamers in general.

Edited November 5, 2014 by vegeta897

[Westonsammy 1]

However, I think trying to preserve the public face of the game by segregating the results of it being such an open platform is not such a good thing.

I on the other hand, think it is a good thing.

IMO, I think that this is a case where the mod (or in this case mission) has taken over the identity game. I can't think of any other examples in modern PC gaming where this has happened, except long dead titles like BF2.

Also, I don't see the move towards making a standalone Life game as "preserving the public face of the game", I see it as giving everyone what they want. Also I think it stands as a testament, not a detriment, to having an open platform in PC games when user-created content becomes popular enough to warrant creating a standalone game.

But again, that's just the way I see things.

[slatts 1978]

So which life devs are going to be hired? :rolleyes:

More seriously, Life missions are flooded with different ideals. Different player bases and so on. One mans cup of tea is another mans marmite. DayZ was made standalone but DayZ spin offs are still going strong because they prefer what offered in the spin off. Translate that to Arma 3 and you'll still have a bunch of RP servers who have more American styled units of the standalone was made more European life. Hell even the life server I was on in Arma 1 couldn't agree on us all liking the same style of cop uniforms and we were mostly European.

But hey if there's a job going for BIS for this, I'll throw my name into the hat ;)

Edited November 5, 2014 by Slatts

[vegeta897 13]

I really don't think it has taken over the identity of the game. If it did, then I would begin to agree about segregation being necessary. Most people that I mention Arma to have heard of it and know it's some kind of milsim game. It has had this reputation long before Altis Life was a thing, and it's not going to fade away that quickly.

I wasn't saying preserving the public face of the game was the primary motivation, but you did bring up the topic of what the milsim community would gain. I was specifically addressing that. Of course it would be great for Life fans if BIS made a game for them. And it wouldn't be a detriment as a standalone. But you're calling it a detriment in its current for (as part of Arma 3) because you think it's taking over the game's identity. I was just saying it would be great if PC gamers grew more accustomed to the idea that a PC game can be transformed away from its original audience through the power of the community. Being accustomed to that idea would mean understanding what Arma 3's original identity is (which is obvious to anyone who simply goes to arma3.com or looks into it beyond whatever Altis Life youtube video they came across)

[devilslayersbane 28]

Well, you potentially have less players playing BI's main gaming franchise if you segregate them like this. Like DayZ, Life servers bring in a lot of new players. A lot of those players stay life players (and stayed DayZ players). However, many players will (and have, as I am an example of) get bored of these and begin to play the game for the military bulk of the game. This means that potentially, you get more players for milsim communities. However, if you split the playerbase, you'll end up with your average joe like me, super tired of life servers, but still having to buy a entire other game to experience the rest of the engines' capabilities. Yes, these servers bring in a lot of trolls and hackers, but they keep to the more populated servers (e.g. life servers). However, I would not like paying $30 for a "life game" and then another $60 for Arma. Especially if I'm not committed and just testing the waters of the community.

[BL1P 35]

I would rather they gave us a better Server browser with a blacklist function in it.

So I could type Life,wasteland,royale,#CTF,#DM,TDM into the blacklist and it would remove all servers using those strings from my shown list of servers, for example.

where #string = gamemode.

[dezkit 28]

doesn't need to be a differnet game just a better filter system honestly :P

[bad benson 1733]

why would BI "invest" into making it a separate game, when it's already happening at the cost of developing one game?

about life popularity. sadly (depending on perspective) dayZ with its hype made arma as a platform/engine mainstream. that is also (not sure to what extend) due to streamers picking it up. so in my opinion we can thank the streamers for this seamless transition from dayZ to life. there was always life in arma with very similar features so it can't be the game mode itself that makes it popular.

life same as dayZ is really good for streaming since it creates a lot of continuous gameplay with a lot of space (aka walking/driving) as in filling time. life even more so with players filling in the gaps. totally makes sense why stuff like that is watched more than small portions of FPS rounds. so acting on that popularity like it's some kind of holy gameplay grail would not be very clever which brings me back to my first point.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Bad Benson

[chortles 263]

But on the other hand, BI does stand to gain a lot of monehs from a Life Standalone. Maybe not as much as DayZ Standalone, which was bound to be a hit, but definitely a lot. Again, to my knowledge a standalone game of this type has not been done before.

Perhaps they stand to get a lot of money from a Life standalone, but do they stand to gain more from a Life standalone than it would have cost to make, distribute, and market a standalone game in the first place?

Second, if the answer to the first is a "no", can it be proven that the revenue generated by Life standalone purchases would be greater than that of "bought Arma 3 to play Life" purchases?

Thirdly, if the answer to the second is also a "no", then is there any direct way the development of this "loss leader" to result in greater profit (I mean profit specifically and not "mere" revenue) for other BI-published titles, thereby resulting in greater net profitability for BI across the whole portfolio of BI-published titles? If that's also a "no"...

As Bad Benson said, "it's already happening at the cost of developing one game".

IMO, I think that this is a case where the mod (or in this case mission) has taken over the identity game. I can't think of any other examples in modern PC gaming where this has happened, except long dead titles like BF2.

*looks funny at Defense of the Ancients All-Stars* I'm sorry, you were saying?

[danius 13]

I think Altis Life is weird as hell. However, I really don't see the point in making a standalone title. I mean, who cares? They play their game mode, and you can play yours. I'm not really sure the presence of multiple game modes in a sandbox platform is diluting your player base somehow. Personally, I love Wasteland. I also am of the opinion that it fits into the military sim theme just fine and I'm not really sure why people feel differently. I guess the point is, different strokes for different folks and all that. Just because it's available in your server list, doesn't mean you have to play it.

[EDcase 87]

As stated by others, better server filtering is all that's needed.

[ArmaPilot 1]

Filtering for all RPG to not show up in the main list. You have to select RPG in the filter to find the servers. I honestly can't find other servers with 300 Altis life severs showing up endless I have to go through each gamemode in the filter.

[slim_pikins 12]

I personally am very happy that there is a lot of different ways of playing arma2/3 so you can choose the play style and community that best suits you. ANY interest in arma creates sales those sales are investment, I would rather they put that investment into the future of arma3 and let the moders build on that. I personally am a very hardcore milsim player (check out dedicate Rejects if you want to know what a real hardcore 2 week mission is like *shameless punt*) The fact is arma gives us a game that IS that sandbox flexible the OP mentioned that we can all can get the game to do what we want by changing what we want and I can go from farming salt to QCB town clear out in the same game (how cool is that).

BUT this is the same arma life that has constantly broken BIS rules charging people to play until BIS had to step in numerous times? has taken other games art/arma moders work without permission? not taken the aforementioned work when requested? not given kudos to the creators of the mods, not given the moders a cut in the profits (interesting question that last one, anyone down load a *cough* free song/film lately?)....yup

IMHO it should not matter what part of the arma community you are from you should know that's a pretty poor show and needs to be shunned and definitely should not be rewarded with its own arma branch, but if they had done it the right way who knows what they could have accomplished.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Slim_Pikins
spelling

[slatts 1978]

You know I thought about it quite a bit last night. It could work and be fun to play. But if it would be a success or not in terms of sales and player count in the long run I'm not so sure.

[zooloo75 834]

Is it really so damn hard for BI to just add a text filter to the server browser that is simply a textbox and a dropdown that specifies {"INCLUDES", "EXCLUDES"} and just does a string::find() ?!?!!!!!!

Here's some help -> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2340281/check-if-a-string-contains-a-string-in-c

BLEH!

[havatan19 10]

u guys want to know why most people vote no ? :p because the life mods increase sales of arma 3 which gives BI more money to invest it into arma 3 to polish and extend arma 3 :p :p

ye ye i know the real reason :D if BI would make a standalone game, they have to invest it and maybe employee of arma 3 have to abandoned arma 3 and work on the standalone game.

so everyone votes no because it brings profit which will be used for arma 3 development :D :D :D :D

[Sub-Human 10]

Altis Life needs to be removed from the server list. A default filter should do the job. The first impression of a new ArmA player is that Altis Life is all there is to the multiplayer (and, unfortunately, it largely is true). Why does he need to spend at least a minute or two to find a military simulation server on a military simulation game?

[vran. 13]

I think it's not a bad idea that there would be more expansion on RV based titles, but I have something else in mind. Instead of a thematic title, they could make a sort of 'sandbox editor' with a easy-to-use tutorial for users, covering both, beginners aswell as advanced users. The question is just how such a title would be percieved. Would people want to pay a full price for it? Would they buy it at half price? Would it be seen just as 'the standalone Arma editor' ? Would the Arma player base see it as a 'cash grab' and making features previously seen as part of Arma experience commercial? There's a lot of unanswered questions here.

[froggyluv 2136]

Life and DayZ -bleh. Why join an island sausage fest of no women and live out a virtual Life -gives me the jeebies.

Now Dino Life, a resource gathering, robust tribal women, sprint for your life only to be scooped up pterdactyls - now THATS a game I would play for a long time.

Point being, I'm glad this engine offers such diverse opportunities and also welcome a better server filer.

[almanzo 144]

I guess what we can take from this is a real, glearing need of a proper and intuitive server browser filter system.

[nodunit 397]

Have to join in that we just need better server filtering is all.

DayZ and Life are two very different things, while streamers made it more popular, life has nothing on DayZ's popularity and how it practically took over Arma 2's name late in its life to the point that people didn't know about Arma 2 as much as DayZ and referred to it as DayZ.

Secondly, what kind of lesson does this teach exactly? That if something manages to become popular because a bunch of youtubers constantly stream it that it should be turned into its own game?

One should consider the ethics of the two developments before deciding to throw money at them (from what I hear A3life has that base covered).

If anything what this would say is "It's okay to steal whatever you want, as long as you become popular".

[quadrono 10]

Mil-sim as the "real" Arma is a thing of the past.

[St. Jimmy 272]

DayZ and modding. I bet that will happen. But the real solution is better server filters, especially exclude filter is needed.

But very good points OP. This is really a problem even though the Life and Wasteland don't need IMO a standalone game.

Edited November 11, 2014 by St. Jimmy