Make Tanoa Publicly Available!

[Justin Waters 0]

There is a very large issue with the Apex DLC. I agree with all the weapons/vehicles being restricted...though the map is causing a huge issue in the community. The general mass doesn't own Apex. The content creators/players that would like to enjoy playing with the public are restricted to a small crowd.

 

The number of people that try to play King of the Hill on Tanoa and are turned away is staggering. Its now nearly constantly dead because no one wants to play low population KotH. Wasteland on Tanoa is generally dead also for the same reason. 

 

I'm working on a Helicopter Training program that will take place on Tanoa....Though once again population will be limited because of the Apex requirement.

 

I really hope BI figures out they divided their community by making this map require a DLC and made those who buy it suffer and those who don't buy it...turned away.

[Belbo 462]

11 minutes ago, Justin Waters said:

The general mass doesn't own Apex.

We noticed for our community and all the communities we play together with, that the opposite is true. Most community players own Apex.

In the beginning we gave forewarning before we played on Tanoa, so every player knew that he would have to have Apex to opt in. But only a couple of months in we don't have to do that anymore since almost all players that show up on our doorsteps own Apex.

 

I suppose the problem with those public missions on Tanoa isn't the ownership of Apex but the general performance of the island. Tanoa is quite heavy on server performance - and since most KotH and Wasteland servers are not only terribly set up but also use missions that clutter their player's performance with crappy scripts that slow down even the best computers, it's rather up to the server hosts to create missions that run smoothly even on high performance terrains such as Tanoa. Playing KotH or Wasteland on Altis can be terrible performancewise already - Tanoa makes it even harder on the mission's performance.

 

Giving away a costly asset such as Tanoa is not only not necessary in my view, but it's a terrible choice from a business point of view. Some customers not being able to play KotH or Wasteland on Tanoa really isn't something I'd consider a business risk.

[Justin Waters 0]

5 minutes ago, belbo said:

We noticed for our community and all the communities we play together with, that the opposite is true. Most community players own Apex.

In the beginning we gave forewarning before we played on Tanoa, so every player knew that he would have to have Apex to opt in. But only a couple of months in we don't have to do that anymore since almost all players that show up on our doorsteps own Apex.

 

I suppose the problem with those public missions on Tanoa isn't the ownership of Apex but the general performance of the island. Tanoa is quite heavy on server performance - and since most KotH and Wasteland servers are not only terribly set up but also use missions that clutter their player's performance with crappy scripts that slow down even the best computers, it's rather up to the server hosts to create missions that run smoothly even on high performance terrains such as Tanoa. Playing KotH or Wasteland on Altis can be terrible performancewise already - Tanoa makes it even harder on the mission's performance.

 

Giving away a costly asset such as Tanoa is not only not necessary in my view, but it's a terrible choice from a business point of view. Some customers not being able to play KotH or Wasteland on Tanoa really isn't something I'd consider a business risk.

 

All the core members of our community and the communities that play with us also have Apex. That isn't the problem. If we schedule an event on a Tanoa map it will populate. Though the servers are dead without scheduling is what I'm getting at.There are more BattleEye kicks for missing DLC than anything. This obviously isn't an issue for private communities or ones that play off of events.

 

Altis map is very bland and is a eye sore after playing Tanoa. I personally stopped playing King of the Hill when after sitting on the Tanoa KotH server day after day without the population getting above 10 at any point because everyone just got bored and went to more populated servers. If it has to do with cost of asset design etc. Then maybe split Apex into 2 DLC? Apex items and Apex Map? $10/ea instead of the $20? 

 

I use a bottle of the barrel laptop to play Arma 3 and prefer Tanoa any day of the week. The FPS difference is easily fixed with a few tweaks to some CFGs outside of the game. 

[R0adki11 3949]

7 minutes ago, Justin Waters said:

Altis map is very bland and is a eye sore after playing Tanoa. I personally stopped playing King of the Hill when after sitting on the Tanoa KotH server day after day without the population getting above 10 at any point because everyone just got bored and went to more populated servers.

I think you must be playing on the wrong servers, ive seen plenty of KOTH Tanoa servers nearly full.

 

Anyway its far too late to moan about APEX, its been released and its quite unlikely to change what with the Jet DLC on its way. 

[EO 11277]

That would go down well with everyone who paid money for the Apex expansion, especially when Tanoa was the centerpiece of the DLC...

Apex expansion has also been on sale many times since it was released. 

 

 

 

[Justin Waters 0]

6 minutes ago, R0adki11 said:

I think you must be playing on the wrong servers, ive seen plenty of KOTH Tanoa servers nearly full.

 

Anyway its far too late to moan about APEX, its been released and its quite unlikely to change what with the Jet DLC on its way. 

I just did a server browser search and they are european servers. I guess I need to move to Europe!

 

I didn't think about the complexity of doing it. 

Quote

That would go down well with everyone who paid money for the Apex expansion, especially when Tanoa was the centerpiece of the DLC...Apex expansion has also been on sale many times since it was released. 

Most DLCs get cheaper as time passes to over the years get the buyers who are cheaper to buy in to it. When Arma went on sale I pleaded my friends to buy the entire game. I couldn't get anyone to buy even the base game they all thought it was too expensive. Which it is a premium game for how long its been on the market. Though that is a different discussion.

[rekkless 240]

Use:

Lingor, Nam or N'Ziwasogo as the map. You don't have to use a PAID Expansion map to have a jungle mission.

[EO 11277]

1 hour ago, Justin Waters said:

Which it is a premium game for how long its been on the market. Though that is a different discussion.

 

It's still regarded as a premium game 4 years after release because development hasn't stopped yet, SPOTREP 66 and counting......

[Tavish 41]

Most Arma fans own APEX, it's the new or casual players who don't want to buy it or don't feel the need.

 

I can only see Tanoa "going public" if BIS decides to update APEX with a huge bucket load of more premium content (vehicles, weapons, items and objects). I very much doubt that this will happen as the new DLCs will surely have priority.

 

6 hours ago, Justin Waters said:

I couldn't get anyone to buy even the base game they all thought it was too expensive. Which it is a premium game for how long its been on the market. Though that is a different discussion.

 

I tell folks that if you like Arma, and play Arma a lot, then buy the DLCs and be happy. If necessary, wait for a Steam sale. When not on sale, it's the same price as 5 pints of good beer, yet will provide many hours more entertainment.

 

Arma 3 will continue to be a premium game as long as BIS develop it. APEX will drop in price faster than Arma 3 will.

 

Compare the game now (v 1.68/1.70) to how it was on release (v 1.0). Think of all the glorious features that have been added to the base game, and ask yourself if it should be less expensive or regarded as non-premium.

 

ArmA is like a fine wine. Gets better with age.

[FallujahMedic -FM- 867]

Where do I begin? APEX launched on July 11, 2016. It is now May 14 2017. Have you noticed the almost one year gap @Justin Waters ? As a Supporters Edition purchaser, I have no sympathy for those that hope to cash in on the later stages of development without any contribution. 

[BroBeans. 279]

I'd hardly say Arma 3 is overpriced. 

 

It has so much more content and replay-ability than just about any other game on the market. Why should they lower the price when the game is still being actively developed and they're releasing new content for it? What's changed between release date and now? Everything, and its still changing, why would they drop the price if they're still putting just as much (if not more) work in as before release. 

 

From someone who has owned the game since Alpha (and OFP), all I can say is its bloody bang for your buck. If you're friends are too stubborn to fork out a couple of bucks for a game (which I'd much rather pay for again for another 5000 hours of gameplay, instead of some shitty COD) then don't blame it on Bohemia. 

 

And seriously? Making premium content free makes absolutely no sense. It's basically just a spit in the face to the majority of players who paid $30 (much expensive, much wow, much too much) for Apex. It's like saying, we don't care that you support us and we're gonna release it regardless of who paid for it. It would just make future DLC's less appetising; if people thought, oh we might as well wait for it to be free.

[warden_1 1070]

Or, and here's a novel idea, you could just spend the $30 on Apex like most people did and stop complaining. If you actually enjoy the game you should be more than happy to support Bohemia. I let them rape my wallet all the time.

What an absolute joke of a thread....

[BroBeans. 279]

41 minutes ago, warden_1 said:

I let them rape my wallet all the time.

 

It's not rape. I consent to it.

[JD Wang 352]

Oh the entitlement is real.

[Von Quest 1163]

@Justin Waters

Did you sleep through Economics? No paid Expansions, No BIS. No BIS, No Hobby. If anything, ArmA is woefully, surprisingly, generously underpriced!

[Varanon 892]

Given how often Arma 3 is on sale on Steam, you could have picked up APEX for a fraction of the price others paid several times already. It really always surprises me how people complain about Arma being too expensive while at the same time having  spent hundreds and even thousands of hours in it.

I bought the supporter edition back then for 75 Euro. So, in essence, I spent 2 cents on each hour I spent in Arma 3

[I'mJimFuckingSterlingSon 10]

I think the real question here is, how can we populate KOTH/WASTELAND servers that run the tanoa map. 

 

CCG seems to be the only wasteland server that runs tanoa and does it fairly well. I have been banned from their servers (dont worry not for cheating)

But i have respect for the way they maintain their servers, Armajunkies also has a tanoa wasteland server but they made it in a way admins always win. it's very hard to make some $ and you start with 0, a jet will set you back 110k and you can make about 200 selling an offroad, this is the wrong way to do it. 

 

If there are ppl intrested, im willing to fork up the money for a server but only if we can truly populate it. and this is where it gets hard, how are you going to intice ppl to start playing? 

 

It has always been my wish to have an awsome wasteland tanoa server

 

Edited May 15, 2017 by I'mJimFuckingSterlingSon
misspelling

[Justin Waters 0]

I actually personally agree with everyone here. It's just really frustrating that so many people refuse to pay for the content. I personally paid over $100 for all the content and didn't flinch because when I saw the gameplay I knew it was worth every penny. (even if I'm really poor and have a family)

 

Probably the real challenge is properly promoting the gameplay that attracts the general masses.

[gavc 28]

surely the original concept  the OP posted of dividing the community is a real one though?

 

Gav

[mistyronin 1181]

On 2017-5-13 at 9:20 PM, Justin Waters said:

Most DLCs get cheaper as time passes to over the years get the buyers who are cheaper to buy in to it. When Arma went on sale I pleaded my friends to buy the entire game. I couldn't get anyone to buy even the base game they all thought it was too expensive. Which it is a premium game for how long its been on the market.

I'm now lost. Has Arma 3 being ever priced as a premium game? Not in my experience.

 

Ok. Let's start by defining a premium game, I guess we will all agree that we are talking about Call of Duty, Battlefield 4, Sims 4, etc. They are usually priced at €70-80.

 

We are not going to talk about simulator games like DCS, where a module itself (a plane) is already €40-50 and a map is €60. 

Arma 3 costed €20 few before the release. The 1st DLC pack, totally optional if you ask me, costed less than €20 before the release. APEX costed like the main game about €20 few before the release.

 

So we are talking about €70 including the 1st DLC pack or about €50 without it. Way more cheaper than a premium game. And completely affordable by the average folk. To all that you could add that most DLC features are free, so you don't really need most DLCs, you only need to find good mods. And you can even find many junglish maps for free. 

 

In any case, I play with three or four different communities. And I still have to see someone that doesn't own APEX. 

[dragon01 902]

The problem with jungle maps is that since Apex was released, they started switching to Apex vegetation... so in the end, you end up needing Apex anyway. I would love to see more non-Apex dependent jungle maps, but they're on a steady decline.

 

Also, 70 euros is not affordable to an "average guy" when considering the whole world. In Poland, it's more akin to having to pay 280 of your money of choice (when considering most non-computer purchases, prices between countries tend to be "numerically" similar, except in cases like Russia or Hungary, where they have an additional zero or two). This is a serious amount of money that most people tend not to have to spare. In countries like Russia, it's even worse. Ever wonder why Russians pirate games so much? Because an average Russian gamer can't easily afford most games he'd like to play. A Russian friend of mine recently put together a high-end (good and up to date, but not a monster by Western standards) gaming rig which costed about half of an average yearly salary in his country. If you're in on of those countries that are screwed by currency exchange rates, paying an equivalent of 30 euros (what Apex costs on Steam) can easily break your bank. Regional pricing helps a slight bit, but a boxed copy of ArmA2 (my first contact with the series) still set me back a lot.[/rant]

 

I haven't bought Apex yet partially because of that (and partially because the SP campaign was so bungled that I refused to pay for it on principle), and while I'm hoping to get it eventually, it'll have to be a gift from my father (and he likely won't agree to buy it until it's on a sale, because he's got better things to do with over 120 Polish Zloty). 

[PuFu 4600]

4 hours ago, dragon01 said:

The problem with jungle maps is that since Apex was released, they started switching to Apex vegetation... so in the end, you end up needing Apex anyway. I would love to see more non-Apex dependent jungle maps, but they're on a steady decline.

 

Also, 70 euros is not affordable to an "average guy" when considering the whole world. In Poland, it's more akin to having to pay 280 of your money of choice (when considering most non-computer purchases, prices between countries tend to be "numerically" similar, except in cases like Russia or Hungary, where they have an additional zero or two). This is a serious amount of money that most people tend not to have to spare. In countries like Russia, it's even worse. Ever wonder why Russians pirate games so much? Because an average Russian gamer can't easily afford most games he'd like to play. A Russian friend of mine recently put together a high-end (good and up to date, but not a monster by Western standards) gaming rig which costed about half of an average yearly salary in his country. If you're in on of those countries that are screwed by currency exchange rates, paying an equivalent of 30 euros (what Apex costs on Steam) can easily break your bank. Regional pricing helps a slight bit, but a boxed copy of ArmA2 (my first contact with the series) still set me back a lot.[/rant]

 

I haven't bought Apex yet partially because of that (and partially because the SP campaign was so bungled that I refused to pay for it on principle), and while I'm hoping to get it eventually, it'll have to be a gift from my father (and he likely won't agree to buy it until it's on a sale, because he's got better things to do with over 120 Polish Zloty). 

besides the rant in itself, gaming is a hobby, just like going to movies, tennis, airsoft, skiing, golfing or sailing etc....not everyone affords it.

Also, if you ask me if you cannot afford 70EUs for a game that gets you thousands of hours of game-time with endless posibilities, much less so the PC to run it, maybe you should do something else with your free time, something that will earn you that extra buck...

 

demanding that the main piece from a DLC, the one were most time and money was spend into by a commercial entity that is in the gaming industry, is foolish to say the least. This business does not run itself on charity

[dmarkwick 261]

14 hours ago, gavc said:

surely the original concept  the OP posted of dividing the community is a real one though?

 

Gav

 

No, the idea of DLCs splitting the community is not a real one IMO.

[dragon01 902]

10 hours ago, PuFu said:

besides the rant in itself, gaming is a hobby, just like going to movies, tennis, airsoft, skiing, golfing or sailing etc....not everyone affords it.

Also, if you ask me if you cannot afford 70EUs for a game that gets you thousands of hours of game-time with endless posibilities, much less so the PC to run it, maybe you should do something else with your free time, something that will earn you that extra buck...

So, you're asking that every Russian simulation fan that is not upper/upper middle class find himself another hobby? It's very annoying that people from US or EU always say "it doesn't cost that much!" when in fact, it does as soon as you step out of Eurozone.

 

BI store, in particular, doesn't offer much in terms of regional pricing (Steam is better about it... slightly). FIY, market-based pricing tends to actually increase revenue, as long as you have a reliable system for preventing people from richer countries taking advantage of lower pricing for foreign market. This could alleviate the problem somewhat, at least as far as foreign market goes.

 

For most ArmA DLCs it's less of a problem, because BI's DLC strategy is very lenient towards non-owners (likely because they're Czech themselves). However, Apex is an exception, as non-buyers get neither the island nor map objects, on which an increasing amount of jungle maps depend on.

[PuFu 4600]

27 minutes ago, dragon01 said:

So, you're asking that every Russian simulation fan that is not upper/upper middle class find himself another hobby? It's very annoying that people from US or EU always say "it doesn't cost that much!" when in fact, it does as soon as you step out of Eurozone.

you don't seem to be able to follow: hobbies are not necessities: to quote SA from someplace else, you NEED air, water, food and shelter, all the rest are extras.

And without talking about social classes, yes, if you cannot afford a hobby (even with making some financial sacrifices), maybe it is time to change the hobby to something less expensive or do something more productive with the free time you have (and to be honest, out of all the hobbies i listed above, gaming is one of the least expensive ones). No one is forcing hobbies on anyone. If at the end of the month you don't have money to spare for a hobby, or for personal entertainment, but you do have plenty of free time for it (time=money btw), then it is the moment to seriously think about what you are doing with your life...

 

And if you want to push this discussion even further into the off topicness, hobbies are white man problems to be honest. You keep bringing the fact that in Poland, or in Russia or some other places video games are expensive in relation to the average salary and living costs...How about other places, where people barely have electricity, shouldn't they be allowed to play arma as well, and get tanoa free?

 

I won't argue about regional pricing, but this topic is not about that. Just so you know, a certain product has a pretty fixed manufacturing cost. That's usually why it also has a fixed price. Surely you can argue that it is always better to sell the product rather than keep it on the shelf. and with digital downloads, you also have 0 logistics cost as well (which means keeping it on the shelf costs absolutely 0, so there is less incentive to push stuff into sales).
UT do understand that this spiked revenue model is used to pay the salaries of multiple people for longer periods of time, so stuff CANNOT be released for free, and the discounts offered can only cover so much from the manufacturing price, excluding the profit margin altogether