Arma 3 dev team decreasing?

[bars91 956]

inb4 other old-farts show up:

 

SET ARMA 4 AROUND 1979 so JETS, HELOS, TANK FCS etc. systems are still relevant, but none of that future shit.

 

With other titles moving away from future and into the past (WW1/2 and 'NAM) there's clearly a huuge market for retro-setting at this time.

[andersson 285]

Korean war would be a change.

[bars91 956]

Not rly - just WW2 equipment w. NK instead of IJA vs almost the same coalition in the same terrain )

[ProfTournesol 956]

1 minute ago, andersson said:

Korean war would be a change.

 

I would love this.

[bars91 956]

But it would make lots of tech developed for A3 irrelevant - 70s/80s are (IMHO) perfect for future ArmA title, since it's retro AND has first/second gen. versions of tech we still use today (FCS, radar, helo AFM, jets, NV, UGL, ATGM)

 

EDiT: but more importantly - great excuse to do a true orchestral and/or synth/retrowave soundtrack )))

[andersson 285]

3 minutes ago, bars91 said:

But it would make lots of tech developed for A3 irrelevant .........

Very true. and that's why I don't mind BI doing modern high tech stuff. Mods can always use the engine as they see fit for their era.

[bars91 956]

Just now, andersson said:

Mods can always use the engine as they see fit for their era.

 

Exactly - except for the very fact that I hate futuristic settings outside of SW, retro-futurism and cyberpunk, and would do many things to get another proper late-Cold War ArmA  any tactical game 

[Maio 293]

Nothing about Arma 3's functionality (gameplay features) is futuristic... nothing (IMHO). The designs (vehicles, units, wepaons) are to some extent, but they are just that... designs. We have similar hardware now. 

 

Also, the team is shrinking because they are making a "Life" game... DUH...  QUICK! START PANICKING!!!

[bars91 956]

2 hours ago, Maio said:

Nothing about Arma 3's functionality (gameplay features) is futuristic... nothing (IMHO). The designs (vehicles, units, wepaons) are to some extent, but they are just that... designs....

 

Exactly - functionality is pretty much 80s-00s level of tech, but the design is (for the fictional stuff) shit. To put it VERY mildly. See Xian and Mi-48 for the absolute worst examples ///

 

Recently JETS DLC was good in that the fictional jets didn't make me puke and Grippen was awesome as IRL )

[dragon01 902]

19 hours ago, bars91 said:

Not rly - just WW2 equipment w. NK instead of IJA vs almost the same coalition in the same terrain )

Do yourself a favor and watch some MASH, at the very least. Korean War was nothing like WWII. Nothing. They used some WWII-era equipment, but that's it. Jets, helicopters, battle rifles and many more technologies were used there on large scale for the first time. Even if those things were around during late WWII, their potential was not fully realized, unlike in Korea.

 

Really, if BIS is going to go back into the past, I suggest either Soviet war in Afghanistan or Gulf War (possibly both). ArmA was always about modern era, and those two are the earliest wars that can be called that. I think that they'll stick to "modern/futuristic" setting, though.

[dmarkwick 261]

"Relevent" vehicles & weapons will probably be the domain of mods from now on if only for one reason: licensing. BIS own all the IP for the designs of their vehicles, weapons & equipment. To develop for real-world equipments means an expense & PITA they need to deal with. I know of one guy who, when he became frustrated at not being able to get his mod to work, decided to email the Colt company (or some similar company) about ArmA's use of their design. Yep, asshole. So RL assets are now probably mod-only affairs unfortunately guys.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Probably not Korean war thingy, nope ?

[andersson 285]

52 minutes ago, dmarkwick said:

"Relevent" vehicles & weapons will probably be the domain of mods from now on if only for one reason: licensing.

Yep no doubt. I understood the reason/choice for the 2035 from BI when they told us, it makes sense. As long as they give us the tech...

[bars91 956]

Actually, as long as you don't use the actual company names (Colt, KAC, HK, AK etc) and stick to fake/military designations (M27, M4, 6P20 (Ak-74 arsenal designation) etc) legally you can make whatever (see various real-life equipment in ArmA3 w. fake names)

[dmarkwick 261]

20 minutes ago, bars91 said:

Actually, as long as you don't use the actual company names (Colt, KAC, HK, AK etc) and stick to fake/military designations (M27, M4, 6P20 (Ak-74 arsenal designation) etc) legally you can make whatever (see various real-life equipment in ArmA3 w. fake names)

 

Yeah but why would you do that as a serious game company? If you can't do it "properly", then do it your own way IMO. There will always be complaints regardless.

[bars91 956]

25 minutes ago, dmarkwick said:

 

Yeah but why would you do that as a serious game company?

 

Because everyone does that and it's ok as long as the actual equipment works/looks as expected? See every CoD after MW1 and all the modern BFs.

It's actually an accepted practice to make RL equipment and just slightly bend the name + exclude any trademarks on the textures.

 

MoH Warfighter actually got alot of shit because they tried to use actual trademarks... so yeah, i'd rather get RL M4s and AK w. names like Mk4 and FK4.7 over fictional shit any day )

[drebin052 324]

14 hours ago, bars91 said:

Actually, as long as you don't use the actual company names (Colt, KAC, HK, AK etc) and stick to fake/military designations (M27, M4, 6P20 (Ak-74 arsenal designation) etc) legally you can make whatever (see various real-life equipment in ArmA3 w. fake names)

 

Eh...this isn't necessarily true nowadays as even changing the name of a gun is not sufficient WRT using them legally in a commercial game.

 

Arms companies are starting to trademark (not copyright; big difference between the two) the appearance of their products as well. For example, see Glock trademarking the shape of their pistols as just one case of this in action.

 

And it's not limited to just guns either. HyperStealth for instance, are pretty iffy about anyone using their camouflage patterns. IIRC there were several times in the past few years where they even issued C&Ds to mod makers (yes, mods!) for using their camo patterns when they found out about them.

[bars91 956]

IKR - Kalashnikov Concern recently did just that. Disney as well - anything SW not directly involving SW games (SW themed mods for other titles) are a big no-no since they decided to milk the living shit out of the brand by all means necessary, including shutting down mods.

 

At the end of the day - it's all about the cash for them. Always has been, always will be...

[TrueMonolith 13]

I bet ArmA 4 will be a Cold War revisit, set in the late 80s or early 90s. As for the battlegrounds, Tanoa has grown on me so I'd like to see an Asia / Pacific scenario. North vs. South Korea would be a nice scenario. A US West Coast scenario (World in Conflict vibes!) would be quite fresh too.

[kremator 1065]

Wow .. and to think this thread was called 'Arma 3 dev team decreasing' not 'What I want for Christmas'.

[M. Wolf 288]

Although people are right in assuming the next ArmA game is in development, I think ArmA 3 still has life left in it. The developers have learned a lot from this game (this is really the first ArmA to become very popular among "casuals" and greatly expanded its player base) and are likely creating the tools and features we expect nowadays for ArmA 4. Things like zues, eden, ArmA tools are great and there will be many angry people if they aren't part of the next base game. ArmA 2 came out in 2009 and ArmA 3 in 2013 (about a 4 year gap), but the next game will probably take longer to develop for that very reason and that is why parts of the team are "moving on" and content is created by B01 and other devs.

 

These are my thoughts on the matter,

and sorry for the essay.

[bars91 956]

I also think that ArmA 3 still has at the very least a full year of relevance left. And that's despite me hating the Vanilla setting (esp. the BIs own "designs" like Mi-48).

 

That being said, I really hope BI continues to support A3 post Tanks at least until E3 2018 around which time they could announce ArmA 4 and then leave A3 to live it's life till A4s release.

 

But that's just me thinking out loud... or in text... no hard evidence for any of this - just what I would do.

[kremator 1065]

All we need to be worried about, with the team size decreasing is to what extent Arma3 will be supported in the future (and for how long).  Long after Arma2 development there were still patches, even through the team was then tiny.  I would assume that we'll see the same thing happening with Arma3 - but not for at least a couple of years.

 

It makes sense for BIS to start diverting the main team into other avenues (Arma4 or something else) in the very near future.  We still do have some major and minor DLCs to come - so it is by no means a death-knell just yet :)

[Sniperwolf572 758]

8 hours ago, kremator said:

All we need to be worried about, with the team size decreasing is to what extent Arma3 will be supported in the future (and for how long).  Long after Arma2 development there were still patches, even through the team was then tiny.  I would assume that we'll see the same thing happening with Arma3 - but not for at least a couple of years.

 

It makes sense for BIS to start diverting the main team into other avenues (Arma4 or something else) in the very near future.  We still do have some major and minor DLCs to come - so it is by no means a death-knell just yet :)

 

There is nothing to worry about. Arma 3 team handles communication beautifully and whenever they plan on stopping the patches, you will be guaranteed to know. Compared to ArmA 2 and older products where you couldn't really guess when a patch would hit or what it would even contain. Arma 3 team has spoiled us on the communication front.

Spurred by the incoming 16th anniversary, I'm compiling some data on the Arma history right now but as a sneak peek, average time between the 45 non-hotfix patches we have had is:

Pre-release: ~17 days
Post-release: ~ 1 month
Post APEX: ~2 and a half months.

[Callsign 128]

3 hours ago, Sniperwolf572 said:

I'm compiling some data on the Arma history right now.

 

Ooh, please publish!