why im tired of arma 4 topics & why im against arma 4

[lato190 55]

hello,

 

first of all, im tired of all these "what do you want in ArmA4" , "what setting you wish for arma 4" topics. i mean it has been over 3 years since the release of ArmA 3 (alpha) and ArmA 3 will get support for the next 2 years. There was no single evidence or a single word from the BI devs about ArmA 4. One of the BI dev even said this:

 

so please stop all these ArmA 4 rumor topics, we dont know what BI plans next. Maybe they will move to dayz, maybe they will create something new. What is confirmed is that they will work on the new engine and dayz is still in alpha which need also some work.

 

Now the next thing is why i am against a new arma title:
BI puts so much work into ArmA 3 and will get support for the next 1-2 years, it would be a waste to stop the support and suddenly announce a new arma. Lets not forget all the mods out there and the big community. Look at arma 2, most of the mods there and the game itself is basically dead. almost no one plays the awesome RHS russian force mod for arma 2 or the cold war mod. almost everyone moved to arma 3. it would be sad to see this happening again since we have even bigger, better mods with a larger community now. Imagine if a new arma comes out, some big projects that are in progress have to be ported to the new arma or it release would be when arma 3 community moved on.

Technically, ArmA 3 offers so much that we dont really need a new arma just for some new stuff. features can be released as free platform update and content as DLC. it would not be worth creating a new arma just for content and featurewise arma is rich. I mean this game offers already so much. Some people are annoying with theyr "can arma 3 have realistic waterwaves please" , "can arma 3 have breakable wings on planes please" , "can arma 3 have physics destruction like battlefield please" , "can arma 3 be like VBS please". GUYS BE HAPPY WITH WHAT ARMA OFFERS TO YOU! YOU WONT SEE THAT IN ANY OTHER GAME! And too much realism = bad for gameplay = less fun. Most of those complex and arcadish features people are wishing here arent really needed in arma, so technically it isnt worth creating a new arma for features/content and graphics in arma 3 are awesome aswell. Graphics also doesnt count, people even play ofp or bf1942 nowadays.

 

A new arma would basically destroy current mods/modders/community, it would be annoying for some modders to port the mods again to make theyr work & ideas into something worth

 

just my 2 cents.

 

[Heinrich Kramer 172]

Arma 4 will come eventually, everything else doesn't make sense.

It is BIs flagship and Arma 3 managed to be the first arma that is generally successfull (aside from the DayZ craze in Arma 2 CO), sure, Arma 3 might still be supported for the next few years but never believe for a second that BI just thinks "oh well now that we have a really successful IP and a new Engine in the works that might rectify the problems of the old one we can finally stop making money"

 

that wouldn't make sense

[PuFu 4600]

On 2/1/2017 at 11:16 PM, lato190 said:

A new arma would basically destroy current mods/modders/community, it would be annoying for some modders to port the mods again to make theyr work & ideas into something worth

 

just my 2 cents.

 

are you modder yourself? if not why are you basing your entire argument on something you know nothing about?

PS: there is a thread for this topic already

[ProfTournesol 956]

If you don't like Arma4 topics, don't read them. Period.

[road runner 4344]

On 2/2/2017 at 4:16 AM, lato190 said:

Now the next thing is why i am against a new arma title:
BI puts so much work into ArmA 3 and will get support for the next 1-2 years, it would be a waste to stop the support and suddenly announce a new arma. Lets not forget all the mods out there and the big community. Look at arma 2, most of the mods there and the game itself is basically dead. almost no one plays the awesome RHS russian force mod for arma 2 or the cold war mod. almost everyone moved to arma 3. it would be sad to see this happening again since we have even bigger, better mods with a larger community now. Imagine if a new arma comes out, some big projects that are in progress have to be ported to the new arma or it release would be when arma 3 community moved on.

Technically, ArmA 3 offers so much that we dont really need a new arma just for some new stuff. features can be released as free platform update and content as DLC. it would not be worth creating a new arma just for content and featurewise arma is rich. I mean this game offers already so much.

All this coming from a guy who complains it's a  mess with hardly any posts or input in the main forums? and then announces in the 64 bit exe thread he's leaving Arma 3.

[warlord554 2065]

I would openly welcome A4, as long as it gets an engine upgrade. But hey, I'm a Arma groupie either way haha

[5C4R556 3]

I'm just glad there will be more DLC for Arma III. I'd rather have DLC, wait a little bit, catch it on sale, than buying a whole new game and then wait for mods to populate. With mods you don't even need the DLC but I'll buy it on sale to support BI.

 

There will be an Arma IV. That's inevitable and I'll buy it. But I'd rather BI milk Arma III some more before making us buy a whole new game.

[Rydygier 1309]

Arma 4 is hopefully inevitable indeed sooner or later. As we can read, rather not before BI devs will feel "complete" about Arma 3, so no worries here. IMHO being against new Arma just because it may harm mods is highly shortsighted point of view. AFAIK there are numerous, desired things, improvements and changes that simply can't happen inside Arma 3 due to its limitations and require whole next game. 

 

Also don't worry about modders being irritated about porting their stuff to A4. You can trust me here - speaking from very own experience. If Arma 4 will bring new goodies (including new toys and possibilities for modders) worthy of new title, any possible irritation will vanish like a morning dew under summer sun. Not, that I missed, how people was complaining about how modding stuff in Arma 3 is more difficult comparing to OFP or even A3 times (mostly modellers, I think). BI devs themselves, IIRC, confirmed that. Doesn't mean, A4 in relation with A3 must continue this trend. It may be also opposite. 

 

Now, about discussing, what Arma 4 may be - I can only guess, but I have that strange feeling, that's exactly the time, where such discussion may have biggest impact on actual Arma 4 shape. I mean - before they even start to think about planning Arma 4 development itinerary, community already produces some data about what's expected and desired, maybe suggest some good ideas. And this information will be ready in case, BI devs decide to take in the consideration the voice of the community at planning Arma 4. 

[tortuosit 486]

BIS will not stop to exist, ArmA 4 is a necessity. I guess we'll see the next DLCs and then it will still take a while... 2020+? I hope many things to be in ArmA 4, all are important,but getting everything is unrealistic :-)

Maybe in order to stay the undisputed Kings of milsim they should seriously upgrade the engine... more physics calculations, better AI, soldier health simulation, etc etc. Things that run well on year 2030 computers, haha. 

[Heimer Dinger 0]

I hope Arma 4 will be released sooner than later.. There are a lot nice things waiting with a newer gameengine.

[Undeceived 392]

Of course I want an Arma 4! 

 

But I'm also happy that BI are supporting and expanding A3 that long. If they announced the next game instead of the new DLCs after Apex, I'd have been disappointed. But instead,  Arma 3 will still be around for a year or more, which means that we (mission makers at least) can still start working on new stuff, without needing to fear that most of the players will jump on the next game anytime soon.

 

That said, I'm absolutely happy with Arma 3's life span. Much better than the A2 support. 

[x3kj 1247]

I am a modder and i cant wait for arma 4. Ill gladly convert my totalconversion project to the new engine. Multithreading improvements, light improvements, less legacy bullshit issues, less silly undocumented features, ...

 

 

Edited June 14, 2017 by x3kj
OP is from february... i was deceived by mr. undeceived...

[Undeceived 392]

And I was by Mr. Dinger. 

 

That said:

 

On ‎26‎.‎05‎.‎2017 at 11:14 PM, Heimer Dinger said:

There are a lot nice things waiting with a newer gameengine.

 

I'm already looking forward (in a sense of "seeing it coming") to the huge expectations from the community that will probably (again) lead to big disappointments. As much as I'm hot for the next title, from the past I learnt that the series is a evolution, not a revolution.

[AV8R_Six 110]

No need to react or respond...just my two cents worth.  I voted YES and I would like to see ArmA (next version) be a version of VBSII on Steroids.  Sandbox, Combined-Arms MIL-SIM with realistic flight models for both Rotary and Fixed-Wing aircraft, naval surface and surface vessels that you can drive and launch torpedoes, cruise missiles, and large gun rounds from.  I'd like to see working RADAR and SONAR, along with the outstanding ground troop capabilities of ArmA III.

 

Or, I'd like to see a retro-ArmA of WWII, KOREA, and VIETNAM on an official development status.  Either way, the opportunities of limitless!

 

AV8R

B01 Dev Team Support Squad

[AV8R_Six 110]

On 6/14/2017 at 0:13 PM, x3kj said:

I am a modder and i cant wait for arma 4. Ill gladly convert my totalconversion project to the new engine. Multithreading improvements, light improvements, less legacy bullshit issues, less silly undocumented features, ...

 

 

I am hoping they don't use 4 or IV in the title but come up with something sexy like ArmA Extreme, or ArmA Hero, ArmA-Elite Task Force...or something along that line!

 

[PuFu 4600]

2 hours ago, AV8R_Six said:

I am hoping they don't use 4 or IV in the title but come up with something sexy like ArmA Extreme, or ArmA Hero, ArmA-Elite Task Force...or something along that line!

you should have thought about that when you picked your nickname....

[Gunter Severloh 4052]

On 2/1/2017 at 3:16 PM, lato190 said:

Some people are annoying with theyr "can arma 3 have realistic waterwaves please" , "can arma 3 have breakable wings on planes please" , "can arma 3 have physics destruction like battlefield please" , "can arma 3 be like VBS please". GUYS BE HAPPY WITH WHAT ARMA OFFERS TO YOU! YOU WONT SEE THAT IN ANY OTHER GAME! And too much realism = bad for gameplay = less fun. Most of those complex and arcadish features people are wishing here arent really needed in arma, so technically it isnt worth creating a new arma for features/content and graphics in arma 3 are awesome aswell. Graphics also doesnt count, people even play ofp or bf1942 nowadays.

Most of your quotes here are already in the game, either through mods or with A3 itself.

As far as "to much realism = bad for gameplay" if Bi sets the options in the game like it currently is where you can adjust the level of realism or simulation of various planes,

helicopters, and other misc things, then I see no issues or reason not to have that level of actual simulation as the player can choose what they like to play, Arma was always about giving you options.

    As far as graphics go, imo being used to average graphics due to the limits of what my computer can handle, better graphics only adds to the immersion and realism of the game.

[Baraz 10]

An  Arma 4 implies making players pay again for the core game and waiting years to obtain all the goodies now available in Arma 3.  Not good!

 

I strongly believe that various user-friendly tweaks and new simple functions can maintain Arma 3 is the current competition.  Other FPS games still do not offer anything close the Eden Editor/Zeus.  Like a new action menu and a different system to manage saved game (just two big examples: many other tweaks also).  For the multiplayer aspect, the option to save all current map/player/inventory data (preventively in case of crashes or to allow a save and continue some other time).  Easier mission creation tool (little or no written scripting) and better AI settings.  With a few important changes like those, the game could be marketed again, along with their DLCs. 

[Valken 622]

TLDR - I voted yes because I was an early backer of ARMA 3 when it was in Alpha ONLY because I wanted to play with the engine using .kju's ALL in ARMA mod to play ARMA 2 / CO content. With all the subsequent DLC, I feel ARMA 3 is near complete and a great game. 

 

PS: I only purchased Apex for Tanoa because it fits my style of playing.

 

I would be happy to do it again for ARMA 4 Alpha, since we can "eventually" allow port forwarding of our favorite mods into ARMA 4, allow BIS to fund the development of ARMA 4 "content" and still have input into the Engine.

 

Heck, BIS can save time and just release a Franken-DayZ SA Fusion engine + VBS3 feature set stuffed in with a demo map, advanced OPENCL physics support, OPENAL Audio, OPENGL + Vulken API support (I am big on open formats),  MULTI-THREADING AI + Script support via OpenCL (oh please Jebus!) and with evolving development tools (updated terrain building, scripting tools, 3D model import / export, sound shader editor, graphics shader editor) and I would be glad to drop Steam Early Access money right away.

 

The actual theme can go either way - official BIS or community mod support. 

 

I personally want to see BIS go all the way SciFi this time and still rooted in hard core military plausibility with Hollywood Michael Bay style  effects such an alternative 80's military universe with both aliens or ET initiated conflict.

 

My dream game would be a huge hardcore X-Com + ARMA mixed game with eventual off (alien) planet conflict to wrap up the story.

 

Maybe this would be a better paid for user made DLC instead but that multi-threading scripting is a must for ARMA 4 engine.

 

 

[ProfTournesol 956]

16 hours ago, Baraz said:

An  Arma 4 implies making players pay again for the core game and waiting years to obtain all the goodies now available in Arma 3.  Not good!

 

Nope mate, next game will not use the same engine.

[lao fei mao 21]

BI may learn ED to treat the DCS world. No need to set up brand new islands for each generation Arma, just evolve the game engine  and update old islands. Like dcs 1.0 to1.5 then 2.0 and  then 2.5, and all dcs pilots were amazed  at the 2.5 's big change upon 1.0. As the time gos by, the PC hardware performance improves vastly, we may use new engine to expand area of Chernarus  /Takistan /Altis, or Improve their terrain details to GTA5 or Ghost Recon Wild's level.

[mrwesley 11]

Real or fake? 

 

https://m.imgur.com/a/gOryp

[Greenfist 1863]

15 minutes ago, mrwesley said:

Real or fake? 

 

https://m.imgur.com/a/gOryp

Fake. You can put anything you want as a game title. 

[andersson 285]

I want A4 as I can't trust A3 while making missions. All the reasons can be read in the development branch so no need for me to open up that discussion here. All other versions I gladly updated to because they were better looking and had more features, this time I want to change so I can leave A3 behind. Sad to say.

[spookygnu 563]

If BI decide to make an arma 4, they should consider a number of options that have plagued players modders and themselves for years, but like someone said earlier in the thread, A3 is here for a while yet. 

 

They could however shock everyone and announce something sooner than we think, but I'd say just be happy with what you have for now and don't set your expectations too high, you could be disappointed. 

 

I mod for my own personal enjoyment and I would love to see an improvement not only in the game itself but for the toolkits I have to put up with. Maybe slotting in more vbs tech into the current toolsuite would be nice, but I'm not holding out hope. ATM they have something that works and works well to produce the content we all play and produce.