Why I will never buy any of your games ever again.

[simon1279 51]

just one expression about DLC

{[bug fixing time] + [guys at work = number x] + [guys at work for adding new content]} =

(time costs moneys) + (guys at work salary)

result:

making DLC to earn additional moneys to pay guys at work salary and to pay taxes off course.

This is the hard world of buisness.

edit: in my country there is a proverb that says: "Time is money"

Edited January 7, 2015 by Simon1279

[fn_Quiksilver 1633]

Well perhaps in hindsight you should have written your opening post in a more calm a collective manner, rather than posting in an angry and demanding tone.

To help us to help to help you play Arma3, perhaps you can start by telling us what your Computer Specs are? Whats your Internet Connection? Which Servers you connect to? As from this information we might be able to help you make your Arma3 experience more enjoyable.

As from my experience, issues with MP FPS are down to several factors: PC, Internet Connection or Game Server

I think BIS forums needs a 'venting' sub-forum where all the negative and non-constructive threads go. :)

It truly is not nice to come to BIS forum a few times a week and see these types of threads everywhere.

There are some legitimate complaints and stuff, but 10 such threads a week detracts from the quality of the message board. Perhaps part of the reason you don't see many Devs around these parts, I would avoid forums with these types of venting if I were them too. Its not nice atmosphere and not constructive either.

[infiltrator_2k 29]

I think BIS forums needs a 'venting' sub-forum where all the negative and non-constructive threads go. :)

It truly is not nice to come to BIS forum a few times a week and see these types of threads everywhere.

There are some legitimate complaints and stuff, but 10 such threads a week detracts from the quality of the message board. Perhaps part of the reason you don't see many Devs around these parts, I would avoid forums with these types of venting if I were them too. Its not nice atmosphere and not constructive either.

If BIS and its Devs fixed the game then there would be very few of these rants. I think customers who have purchased the game have a valid reason to be disgruntled a right to air their grievances. IMO Bez should not be made to feel as though he should have detracted from the comments he made. He aired his frustration and his valid reasons to why he's not prepared to buy another BIS game. Criticising him for saying it how it is will only deter other people from speaking out an airing the grievances. If people on this forum are made to feel that they cannot speak out from fear of criticism then this forum will be tainted by suppression.

I built my gaming rig to play Arma 3. For the tower alone it cost me close to £2,000 FFS! Hosting my own dedicated server and playing on that hi-spec rig and I get like 30FPS? I've also spent hours creating a Takistan mission only to discover that the Simulation Manager Module and Drone bug has totally rendered the mission useless. Needless to say that was reported months ago and still it hasn't been fixed!

Before BIS even anticipated releasing DLC they should have fixed the basic game first. Instead of Developers burying their heads in the sands by avoiding this forum they need to listen to the customers and address the issues; ignoring valid complaints will be their undoing. No company can expect to sell a flawed product and have a successful business in the future.

If there's a valid reason to be disgruntled with BIS rest assured I have it. 2K gaming rig and 30FPS pfffffttt.... Sort it out BIS!!!

[vegeta897 13]

Nobody is saying criticism should be discouraged or ignored. In fact, they're actually encouraging criticism to be made in a proper way so that it can be better received.

The thing you're missing is that adding anger and frustration to a post does not actually add value to the post. Bez could have made his points in a less dramatic way, and posted more specifically about the problems he's having. Adding anger and rants to that will only cause people to dismiss what he has to say. Criticism should be welcomed, as you say, and there is no better way to encourage that than to encourage criticism that doesn't cause people to only see the anger and not the complaints behind it. What does anger and ranting help? BIS pays more attention to real feedback that actually looks like it has good intentions. Titling the thread with what is essentially a statement of boycott is not how you encourage a developer to improve their games. Good games are fueled by positive energy and rational thinking, not fear of losing customers or negative pressure.

So, again, it's about mannerisms. Discouraging ranting is not discouraging criticism, it's ensuring that the criticism gets the attention it deserves.

Edited January 7, 2015 by vegeta897

[I give up 152]

What about adding support for DirectX 9?

I am pretty sure that could solve much of current performance issues.

[big_t 1]

I disagree, there is something fundamentally flawed about an engine that links client side render framerate to server simulation framerate.

This is the painful Truth although many don't want to believe it's so simple a solution: It's the map. It's Altis.

Play Altis in Kavala: Note frame rate

Play Stratis in open field: Note frame rate

Play Breaking point Thirsk map: Note frame rate

Before typing that I'm wrong: Please report back with the above findings.

No one wants to believe it's so simple? Release a smaller map with less buildings. All performance grievances solved.

You are all welcome.

T

[vegeta897 13]

That is moving backwards, not forwards. Of course those maps of a much smaller scale and less objects are going to perform better. That doesn't mean they should waste countless hours removing stuff from a finely crafted map just to increase performance. Moving forwards is improving the engine and optimization so this island performs better.

[infiltrator_2k 29]

I have a friend with an inferior PC to mine yet he's getting over double the frame rate on the same server. With my build I'm only getting 20FPS MP and 30FPS SP. That's seriously messed up.

[SG_Smokintodd 0]

I noticed that starting somewhere around 1.32, performance as well as stability degraded and for me, is now at an all-time low. As an MP, PvP player only I rarely play anymore because of this. The 1,800 hours or so that I've logged were, for the most part, a great experience as have all the previous titles I own but I'm tired of fighting with this game in its current iteration. Hopefully, Dwarden and Co. will one day find the performance gains they/we seek or at least return ARMA 3 to where it was before 1.32.

[windies 11]

If there is ever going to be a major improvement to performance, it's going to come in these "specific/mundane" fixes, not some magic one time patch.

Don't misread mundane/trivial as technical fixes. Again it's not so much that it's done, because even trivial things need to be fixed, it's just that when you take away the trivial fixes you see that not a whole lot really changes.

[das attorney 857]

Don't misread mundane/trivial as technical fixes. Again it's not so much that it's done, because even trivial things need to be fixed, it's just that when you take away the trivial fixes you see that not a whole lot really changes.

Hi man,

I remember back in the day (mid-life arma 2 time), the CEO of BI (marek or maybe suma (I'm not good with names or forum names)) came on the forums and laid out a plan to sort out Arma 2 performance (and also terrible warping that got sorted out for 1.60 release)***. That for me was a golden time in that there were very knowledgeable people active in the community like Sickboy and Xeno who could help out very immediately with what needed to be done.

Now it seems the creator of Arma has gone on to his next project (programming DayZ architecture) and a lot of the old guard have moved on so it becomes a different game. ****

I liked how Dean Hall managed the face of his game, and I'm aware he's jacked it in now, but at least for a while it seemed there was actually a figure at the helm of DayZ.

I'm just trying to say that I like the maverick side of BI, that made revolutionary products in 2001 & 2012, and I hope they don't disengage with their bread and butter audience (ie: us).

*** = you have to spare a thought for all the Project Reality people who released under 1.59 and found that their intended userbase hated the warping and ultimately killed the mod at the time.

**** = not forgetting knowledgeable people like .kju who stay on.

[OMAC 254]

^ ^ Excellent post, which tells it like it is. I also remember those heady days leading up to 1.59 and 1.60 releases, with Marek and Suma posting all the time with cool ideas (remember tone mapping?), visions for future directions, performance optimization, etc. I have never seen such excellent collaboration between a game company and community, all centered around dev-heaven (Sickboy and kju). Morale was super high all around. I will never forget those days. But they are long gone, and we have a much more advanced, but very different game overall, and a very different company with new priorities. I guess we have to say, "Out with old, in with the new!" But I'm still holding on to good ol' A2CO. Big time.

[windies 11]

Hi man,

I remember back in the day (mid-life arma 2 time), the CEO of BI (marek or maybe suma (I'm not good with names or forum names)) came on the forums and laid out a plan to sort out Arma 2 performance (and also terrible warping that got sorted out for 1.60 release)***. That for me was a golden time in that there were very knowledgeable people active in the community like Sickboy and Xeno who could help out very immediately with what needed to be done.

Now it seems the creator of Arma has gone on to his next project (programming DayZ architecture) and a lot of the old guard have moved on so it becomes a different game. ****

I liked how Dean Hall managed the face of his game, and I'm aware he's jacked it in now, but at least for a while it seemed there was actually a figure at the helm of DayZ.

I'm just trying to say that I like the maverick side of BI, that made revolutionary products in 2001 & 2012, and I hope they don't disengage with their bread and butter audience (ie: us).

*** = you have to spare a thought for all the Project Reality people who released under 1.59 and found that their intended userbase hated the warping and ultimately killed the mod at the time.

**** = not forgetting knowledgeable people like .kju who stay on.

I remember it as well but it's not like that anymore so reminiscing really doesn't do anything for the problem at hand. Personally and this is only my opinion but I think you mistake "maverick", in the sense you mean it, to be more akin to having to be innovative and creative in order to sell their product and keep their company alive. Back then all they really had was ArmA and they had to keep not only the hard core coop crowd interested but also try to bring in new blood to increase sales and drive their company. Frankly, and I don't really blame BI for this because I think it's a sign of the times, Business wise BI are smart to not exactly abandon ArmA but to basically keep it in stewardship while developing DayZ. It's a new platform with a much much larger demographic and outreach than ArmA could ever possibly hope to achieve. Doesn't mean I like it though, and it doesn't mean that I like the direction ArmA is heading playability and technical wise. There's design decision I don't agree with but it is what it is, I'll deal with it. But when I can barely run the game, when I can barely enjoy it in over 50% of the plausible scenario's it SHOULD be able to simulate, that to me is untenable.

Again I don't know if you have a problem with what I posted or not, I mean I agree with your post but fail to see really what it has to do with what you quoted me on unless you're just trying to say they weren't always like that, in which case I agree with you but that matters little what they did in the past if they don't continue to do it. While you hope that they don't disengage with their bread and butter audience, I hate to tell you they already have as you succinctly pointed out in your post comparing the BI of old versus BI of new. We're no longer their bread and butter audience, DayZ is and the 50 million people behind that and they cashed in on the craze and that's where they're sinking their priorities. They're priorities have changed and their demographic along with it sadly. Out with the old in with the new as OMAC said. I just wish I wasn't left with what ArmA 3 is, which feels and amounts to a broken pretty buggy game when it comes to playability, not moddability.

[das attorney 857]

Again I don't know if you have a problem with what I posted or not, I mean I agree with your post but fail to see really what it has to do with what you quoted me on unless you're just trying to say they weren't always like that, in which case I agree with you but that matters little what they did in the past if they don't continue to do it. While you hope that they don't disengage with their bread and butter audience, I hate to tell you they already have as you succinctly pointed out in your post comparing the BI of old versus BI of new. We're no longer their bread and butter audience, DayZ is and the 50 million people behind that and they cashed in on the craze and that's where they're sinking their priorities. They're priorities have changed and their demographic along with it sadly. Out with the old in with the new as OMAC said. I just wish I wasn't left with what ArmA 3 is, which feels and amounts to a broken pretty buggy game when it comes to playability, not moddability.

No I wasn't getting pissy with you. I've talked to you before and that was all cool so why would I suddenly have a problem with you?

I was just telling a nice story about when stuff didn't seem so business orientated and it all felt a bit more involved. That probably got lost in translation the way I posted but that was all that it was.

Edited January 8, 2015 by Das Attorney

[infiltrator_2k 29]

So, just so we don't lose track, it's evident that BIS are focusing their attention on releasing premium DLC and developing DayZ rather than fixing Arma 3.

[windies 11]

No I wasn't getting pissy with you. I've talked to you before and that was all cool so why would I suddenly have a problem with you?

I was just telling a nice story about when stuff didn't seem so business orientated and it all felt a bit more involved. That probably got lost in translation the way I posted but that was all that it was.

I wasn't getting pissy either. Like I said, I agree with you but wasn't sure what point you were exactly trying to make if any. I personally remember back in ArmA when we had a lot of performance issue's after the release and BI worked very hard on the issue's, there was a lot of communication both on what was wrong as well as what they were going to do to fix it. It wasn't just hope and talk, things actually got done, you could see the advances every patch. Even in A2 and OA it felt like they put a lot more into fixing things and the communication was better. I don't see the same with ArmA 3, it feels like the exact opposite where things are getting worse as the game gets patched and again I feel like it really changed with the financial success of DayZ shifting priorities from one project to another. Business wise I can understand it, but as a fan of ArmA and with the state of ArmA 3 I can't accept it.

[dav 22]

Assaf. You have probably pumped hundreds of hours into Arma 3. You then say you are walking away and never buying an Arma game again. I agree A3 is the best game ever made so you will never walk away completely.

[vegeta897 13]

So, just so we don't lose track, it's evident that BIS are focusing their attention on releasing premium DLC and developing DayZ rather than fixing Arma 3.

How is that evident? DayZ has its own development team, and Arma 3 has its own.

DLC is necessary for Arma 3's sustainability, so they can keep fixing the game, as they have been since release.

Just because there are still things to fix, or what you want hasn't been fixed, doesn't mean nothing is being fixed and BIS doesn't care.

Shortsighted comments like that are a serious downer and don't help anything. Say something useful or keep it to yourself. This is what I was talking about before. Criticism is not welcome if it isn't constructive. And especially if it's just not true.

[enex 11]

agreed vegeta.I mean Developer stated that the team is the same size as was in pre production.

[bad benson 1733]

you guys realise though that the dayZ team is a fork, right? it may be independent in terms of organisation but it's kind of naive to think that bohemia doesn't have a centered interest and resources aren't shifted according to that. it's the same stuff that always comes up for VBS (not quite but similar :p).

sure it's different teams and in the last years no mention of Spanel is to find connected directly to VBS. but let's not forget that OFP is the mother of all. and the rights to that (not the name :D ) should be at just plain old bohemia (who-/whatever that is). because everything else would be insane. why would they just give away what generates their income.

not saying that devs get directly "stolen" or crazy stuff like that. just using common sense here. this whole "but it's a different team" thing gets a bit old and is a bit overly defensive. let's be realistic please. i've accepted (kind of :D ) arma's state and i see slow progress. and i'm carefully optimistic for the future. i just hate these pseudo knock out arguments.

[infiltrator_2k 29]

How is that evident? DayZ has its own development team, and Arma 3 has its own.

DLC is necessary for Arma 3's sustainability, so they can keep fixing the game, as they have been since release.

Just because there are still things to fix, or what you want hasn't been fixed, doesn't mean nothing is being fixed and BIS doesn't care.

Shortsighted comments like that are a serious downer and don't help anything. Say something useful or keep it to yourself. This is what I was talking about before. Criticism is not welcome if it isn't constructive. And especially if it's just not true.

Forgive me, but I'm not that well informed with regards to DayZ. But unless the DayZ development team is fully self-funded from revenue generated from the sale of DayZ products then BIS would be sacrificing Arma's development to subsidise DayZ. IMO the financing and development of DayZ should have been an Arma 3 expansion like Operation Arrowhead was to Arma 2.

I've heard it from the CEO that BIS have doubled its staff in size over the past 12 months alone, so who and what is paying for the development of DayZ? DayZ is only in its Early Access development stage so I'm guessing it's the sales of the Arma series and the premium DLC for a half-baked Arma 3 that's supporting it. That's not a rhetorical question but a genuine one. Unless the DayZ development is 100% self-funded by sales of its products then BIS have sold out on Arma fans.

BIS still haven't fixed the Simulation Management Module and drone bug. An easy fix but months on and it still hasn't been addressed. The proof is in the pudding. There seems to be 'Team BIS' and 'Team Reality' on this thread. Just take a look at my build and I'm getting '20' FPS MP FFS! How can anyone defend BIS when there's irrefutable evidence that the Arma's a massively technically flawed game. There must be thousands of customers who cannot play this game online and BIS' answer was to start development on a zombie game what uses the Arma 3 engine???

Seriously.

[Greenfist 1863]

I think BI made plenty of money from DayZ; almost 3 million copies sold, much more than Arma.

And Dayz doesn't use Arma 3 engine, by the way.

[malcom86 33]

Also if I noticed a decrease of FPS after the last update (and only on some servers, in SP I haven't noticed any change at all). I agree Arma is not the game meant to be played SP, I too bought Arma 3 most for the coop servers and milsim groups :D

And I'm sure BI know that and they are working on it. This is a discussion I had many times and I also got some answers from developers: they are working on it with the resources they have.

[artisanal 22]

True, that is fixed by decoupling the renderer from the simulation, but that's a major undertaking that likely won't be happening in Arma 3's lifespan. Just like x64 integration. So the best we can hope for are the cumulative small fixes that make the game more playable one small step at a time.

Yeah, well actually they (and I mean Bohemia Interactive) did brag not so long ago about the fact they finally managed to separate the renderer from the rest of the engine for DayZ (see the whole "Enfusion engine" story). Ok, it's not the same engine which is used, but I guess they got some experience for that matter now. It would'nt suprise me at all if we'd see something along this type of separation at the engine and renderer level added to the game during this year or in 2016 (yes I'm quite careful, as you can notice).

Edited January 8, 2015 by Artisanal

[infiltrator_2k 29]

I think BI made plenty of money from DayZ; almost 3 million copies sold, much more than Arma.

And Dayz doesn't use Arma 3 engine, by the way.

No you're right, although it is based on Arma's engine - albeit parts of A2's and A3's. It seems the DayZ devs are creating a superior engine to Arma's. Although of course they'd never admit that. Take the improved dynamic lighting for example. If the DayZ engine proves successful then I reckon it's only a matter of time before Arma uses a custom variant of it IMO. Although already I sense that BIS might plan to use it on Arma 4 and leave Arma 3 in its current state. New game news sales.

It would be pretty ironic if it was DayZ's development that eventually makes the Arma series better. I think we all better get use to the premium DLC because that's here to stay.