Let us play 1.58!

[GBee2 68]

We know it's playable, because you accidentally shipped it early for a few hours the other day. Why pull it again? You think we're  more concerned with some minor bugs than being stuck months behind the Windows players on 1.54?

 

If you are really that concerned about potential bugs, then create a ports beta/development branch.

[TrueCruel_Nobody 35]

We know it's playable, because you accidentally shipped it early for a few hours the other day. Why pull it again? You think we're  more concerned with some minor bugs than being stuck months behind the Windows players on 1.54?

That version slipped by accident, was not intended yet to be played. 

[pedeathtrian 99]

We know it's playable, because you accidentally shipped it early for a few hours the other day. Why pull it again? You think we're  more concerned with some minor bugs than being stuck months behind the Windows players on 1.54?

 

If you are really that concerned about potential bugs, then create a ports beta/development branch.

So you know the bug was minor? Tell us more about it, please.

 

I'm pretty sure they pulled back for a reason (or reasons) and that reason was not to have you being frustrated and complaining on forums and not being able to play.

As often happens, blocking issues appear right after you release stuff, and that could be the case.

Also, the game itself being playable is not actually the entire release. My usual way of playing ArmA 3 involves using both legacy port of client and legacy port of dedicated server (which by the way was not released: it could have problems too).

Patience, my friend, you will have you game when it's ready enough.

[Vince_ 6]

They are only about to update it to 1.58? Holy shit, that's it? lol. That sucks. 

[GBee2 68]

Patience, my friend, you will have you game when it's ready enough.

 

You're right, I need to be patient, I waited 10 years for Arma to come to Linux but it's much harder when it's just within reach. I know posting here won't actually change anything, it's not fair to take that out on BI and for that reason I apologise to them for my outburst. I was frustrated, especially since I'd actually managed to hold onto 1.58 for a full day so I'd started building a scenario in the Eden editor and had grand plans to play through the weekend.

 

Truth be told I'm also frustrated because it's 1.58 and not 1.60. Talking to a guy who works for VP (though not on this port), I get the impression that BI could/should be pushing out engine updates to VP as soon as they happen rather than waiting for VP to finish porting 1.58 before giving them 1.62 etc An awful lot of the time spent on the ports seems to be spent in testing but the testing time is pretty much static, it might have delayed the release overall but we would have likely received 1.60/1.62 a month from now instead of 1.58 today. As it currently stands, based on the interval between current port releases, we won't be getting 1.62 before the end of the year which means no Apex/Tanoa until 2017.

[TrueCruel_Nobody 35]

- If they would let it to patch 1.62, then BI (they would have to take over from VP) would have to maintain two different games with bugfixes etc.

- The Multiplayer is non-existent on Linux. Not even 30 servers online and all of them are empty

 

This are just 2 reasons why the progress of the port is so slow and most likely will stay until BI stops further development on A3.

[GBee2 68]

- If they would let it to patch 1.62, then BI (they would have to take over from VP) would have to maintain two different games with bugfixes etc.

- The Multiplayer is non-existent on Linux. Not even 30 servers online and all of them are empty

 

This are just 2 reasons why the progress of the port is so slow and most likely will stay until BI stops further development on A3.

 

I'm don't follow?

 

Giving version a 1.60 build to VP as soon as that version was ready wouldn't have required BI taking over maintenance of the port.

 

I really don't see how the lack of MP affects the progress of the port?

 

In fact, it's the other way around, because no Linux/Mac users can get onto the vast majority of the servers, they are put off the game which directly affects the viability of the port. There might be as many as 30 servers running 1.54, but many of them are locked, empty or have terrible pings etc . Every single time I look at what MP games are available there is no-one online at the time, in fact last week I found just one server with someone on it and that was pedeathtrian. We're far better off getting organised, between the SteamLUG and GamingOnLinux crowd I know there are a huge number of Linux Arma 3 players, if we can get together a group then we can schedule some games around the times that people are available so instead of 30-40 people starting their own servers each night, we can get that same number onto one server.

[TrueCruel_Nobody 35]

Giving version a 1.60 build to VP as soon as that version was ready wouldn't have required BI taking over maintenance of the port.

VP is still working on 1.58, we are already at 1.62. Even if BI would give VP the patch as soon they would arrive, VP would be still be completley slow porting that. 

 

I really don't see how the lack of MP affects the progress of the port?

Money. If there would be a LOT of people playing the Linux/Mac port, BI would do it by themself if they knew that this would bring in more - which doesn't right now, at all.

 

I just tried it out myself earlier. I started a 1.54 server on my vServer and played 2 hours in it. The server is already attractive because it is instantly visisble (because of the lack of servers) and with 1 player in it.

 

And you know what happend? 2 players joined, and one left instantly after connecting. And the other one joined in the last half of the 2 hours and disconnected too (and that one was not talkative at all).

 

To your 30-40 player theory:

A3 has every evening nearly 30k+ players that are online, at least half of them in MP. If you take the 15k players and 40 of them play on linux/mac - that's only 0.26%. So it's not huge at all.

 

I also want the ports coming faster, but as long it does not involve a mass of players which can generate money by buying A3 - it won't happen faster.

[mick18 1]

As stated, the port is experimental, so BI and/or VP pulling the 1.58 back makes no sense. In the short time i played with it, there were no game breaking bugs so...

 

Also, i dont think anyone can make any real observations on the multiplayer side until we get an updated, official port.

[GBee2 68]

It appears there was an update today, 5.2GB - much larger than the last update but when I ran it I had no text in the menus. If this is the full 1.58 build then they broke something between last Thursday and today.

[GBee2 68]

It just downloaded another 2.3GB update as I was writing my previous post.

 

Then moments after that finished, it started downloading another 2.3GB update ...

 

Given the numbers, I think it's safe to assume that 5.2GB update previously was two 2.3GB updates (assume they round the values). So in the past few hours they've pushed and pulled the build 4 times?

[mick18 1]

Well, i just got an 14.7 GB update, thats like the entire directory and then some. Maybe the 1.58 was an accident, because they actually have something much more updated?

 

idk, my download speed is like ~300kb/s so it's gonna be awhile before i know what it is :P

[TrueCruel_Nobody 35]

They are targeting 1.58 for tomorrow:

https://twitter.com/Arma3official/status/762618320898129920

[mick18 1]

Sweet. Any VP guys on here? just like to say thanks for the hard work guys.

[mick18 1]

The update stopped, i guess they changed their minds again :huh: .

 

Well, in other news BI got the OF back from codemasters and put up a trailer for Operation Flashpoint 4 :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9LLa7xixR8

[mc-evergreen79 10]

It's out! it's out!!

Going home to play!!!!!

[TrueCruel_Nobody 35]

Now they only have to release the server files.

[Werekorden 0]

Are you possible to update?

 

I am still at 1.54 Steam is configured to be developmental for ARMA and ARMA should be updated first before Game is started

[deo 10]

Damn, it's great it is out! And thanks for announcing 1.62 is in the works!

[Werekorden 0]

Shit how did you guys got the dev 1.58 to run. I am on Mac and Steam won't update

[TrueCruel_Nobody 35]

Shit how did you guys got the dev 1.58 to run. I am on Mac and Steam won't update

Afaik you don't even have the dev branch on Mac/linux. Opt out of any branches and it will download the latest patch for Mac.

[Werekorden 0]

Afaik you don't even have the dev branch on Mac/linux. Opt out of any branches and it will download the latest patch for Mac.

 

 

Well you can tell steam that you want to participate for the betas. Then in the list ARMA ist called ARMA (development). But nevertheless it is not downloading the 1.58

 

Strange!

 

 

I found out! you have to deactivate the BETA. Then you get the newest update. 

[TrueCruel_Nobody 35]

Opt out of any branches and it will download the latest patch for Mac.

I found out! you have to deactivate the BETA. Then you get the newest update. 

Next time read the whole post then you would have found out even earlier ;)

[Werekorden 0]

Next time read the whole post then you would have found out even earlier ;)

 

You said opt out of any branches. That is not possible. you have the dev branches or the normal branches so you can not opt out of "any". I was on dev. branch 1.54 as everybody else. Because MAC/Linux is beta. 

 

But now we have fixed that and can play.

[Hoopenfaust 0]

Shit how did you guys got the dev 1.58 to run. I am on Mac and Steam won't update

 

Try opening and closing steam. Another thing, are you running the dev build or normal build? Stay on the normal dev. Hope that helps