[Poll] Arma 3 Third-Party DLC

[Wiki 1558]

Hi guys.

 

With the Arma 3 Third-Party DLC thing, what is your opinion about it?

 

Concerning choice 3, can you please specify which amount for which content?

Thx

[Wiki 1558]

1 hour ago, Wiki said:

Concerning choice 3, can you please specify which amount for which content?

Thx

 

[bars91 956]

*subtle market research 

[Wiki 1558]

1 hour ago, bars91 said:

*subtle market research 

More or less subtle ahah.

It's mostly to help those who wanna make DLC to have an overview of the market.

[Grumpy Old Man 3546]

Thing is, with DLC like that being very specific, it still has to take the sandbox aspect of arma into account. Seeing how all the anti-air assets that we got with Jets DLC stick out like a sore thumb because they lack woodland/arid textures for placement on terrain/forest DLCs need to account for that.

It's also kind of self defeating if you advertise dynamic loadout for armed aircraft, toss a full sized aircraft carrier on top of that, yet there's no vanilla way mid mission to dynamically change the loadout...

Also the fact that AI choppers won't land on the carrier, same as movement issues of infantry on it is another thing that really needs to be looked at, at least for the next iteration of the arma series.

 

It also took the devs almost 2 years, since the release of tanoa, to fix AI taxiing issues on tanoa, that made most planes stuck in the trench by leaving the runway through the meadows instead of the taxiway.

 

Something similar like Jets DLC for artillery, where you actually have FO, JTAC, Gunner, Fire Direction Control Roles for players baked into the core game would be neat (with low angle fire, it can be done, no need to wait 3 minutes for rounds to finally impact after reaching 40km+ altitude).

Also a logistics heavy DLC would get all my cash.

 

Cheers

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Old Man said:

 

It's also kind of self defeating if you advertise dynamic loadout for armed aircraft, toss a full sized aircraft carrier on top of that, yet there's no vanilla way mid mission to dynamically change the loadout...

 

Cheers

 

why pay a dev to do it when unpaid modders will do it for them? :)

[xSCAR45 5]

9 hours ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

 

why pay a dev to do it when unpaid modders will do it for them? :)

Yes, you can get most of what the DLC brings with the Workshop but I rather like the amount of polish BIS does on their DLC. If they release new DLC, I'm usually interested and buy it. If I find its too expensive I wait for it to go on sale. Not to mention, I like to support BIS as I love ARMA. I paid $95.00 for ARMA 3 with all the DLC. I'm more than happy with my purchase and will most likely continue to support BIS.

[Wiki 1558]

It would be nice if you guys could specify the amount you are willing to spend for which kind of DLC.

As it wouldn't be the same for a campaign or a full conversion mod for example.

[lordfrith 401]

I'm hoping whatever it is it'll be something to expand on the vanilla setting of arma, not so into the total conversion idea (personally).

i'd pay anything from £5 for a good addon to usual DLC price (£10-£15) for a full faction/map mod.

 

aside from factions and gear it would be good to get something that adds these recurring themes from the scripting community i.e. unit spawning/garrison/patrol modules with better functionality, ambient civilians/animals, improved support modules etc. Currently all these things i have to set up for each mission, usually from scripts, which is fine but it would be great to see this sort of thing added to main game

[joostsidy 685]

I am mostly interested in small scale thematic vehicle/props addons to fill some missed opportunities. Examples of things I would be interested in:

- a landing craft that can move vehicles between islands

- an oil rig

- a motorcycle

- a functional fishing vessel

 

I would pay E5-E10 euros for packs including these items combined with some other vehicles, props, clothing etc. bound by a certain theme. The items should be highly polished and without bugs to fit seamlessly into the Arma 3 universe.

 

[Wiki 1558]

3 hours ago, joostsidy said:

I am mostly interested in small scale thematic vehicle/props addons to fill some missed opportunities. Examples of things I would be interested in:

- a landing craft that can move vehicles between islands

- an oil rig

- a motorcycle

- a functional fishing vessel

 

I would pay E5-E10 euros for packs including these items combined with some other vehicles, props, clothing etc. bound by a certain theme. The items should be highly polished and without bugs to fit seamlessly into the Arma 3 universe.

 

 

Thx, that is exactly the kind of answer I expected.

[EfytheAce 3]

I would like to see a new campaign like the east wind in length...

 

The only expansion I would pay for would be a total faction that fits in with the lore of the Armaverse (maybe for use in a campaign?)

 

I would pay 10 euros for all of that..

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Yeah ill buy one, probably most likely if it adds something to the game that is otherwise missing (Attack Boats, or Logistics), i'd spend any amount as long as it adds great quality and content to the game.

[Mynock 244]

Something like Tac-Ops I'd spend money on. Felt like I got my $5 USD worth out of Tac-Ops. Assuming it would be 3rd party and the trade-off would be more content for less money (since, in theory, it's not being produced by a full sized company like BI), I'd probably give it a go. Maybe 7 or 8 missions for $5. Sure why not. Everything else I want to play with for the most part is already covered by mods in existence. Some mods might be lacking one or two assets I'd like, but why whine about then when you have so much else.

 

Doubt I'd spend money on another map unless it was something really unique (was thinking a winter map, but there are already several good mod ones anyway). Don't really like the whole 2035 thing anyway so assuming new faction DLCs or whatever need to be in line with vanilla Arma 3, I doubt I'd purchase it (unless it added more, like LoW did with the new logistical stuff). I can't do air, vehicle, or sea combat to save my life, so not too interested in that stuff in terms of assets. Idk. Single player infantry based stuff is basically all I do. I'm a simple guy.

 

Edit: I'd pay $5 for a "Tac-Ops Tanoa" type DLC. Feel like I never use a map I paid $30 because the campaign was short and "meh" in single player, and I've only played a couple half decent user-made scenarios that use the map. Not using CTRG though, but like NATO regulars.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

I would spend money on what most brings to the game what has been missing, namely Logistics. Right now we have so much stuff like assets that are only accessible via. scripting from the editor selection, otherwise none of that stuff is capable of being in the game by design. If someone were to make an addon that brings the ability to expans existing features, i would drop a decent amount of money on that. Up to 35-45$

 

Example:

-Expands the use of Ammunition, Fuel, and Repair vehicles to incorporate actual features of the game.

=This includes things like Jets and Helicopter munitions, Tank Armor/Protection being accessible in game from assets such as Vehicle Ammo Boxes and Ammunition Trucks without scripts.

-Expands the use of physical objects such as H-Barriers and other Fortifications, as well as the ability to move these assets around.

=This includes a more fleshed out feature such as "VIV" that was supposed to have the ability to load crates in vehicles, but was left out in the end. The use of this feature benefits greatly the former.

-Making use of fluent features berried in scripts, that are under-represented and barely used. Such case would be possible solutions to interactions mechanics that greatly boosts both usability, and immersion without compromising gameplay, or functionality. This serves to benefit the former two.

 

Best example would be akin to this demo showed off quite some time ago.