Arma 3 - Creator DLC Discussion

[FallujahMedic -FM- 867]

57 minutes ago, Disgusting_Man said:

We all remember the situation with YuEmod and that it was removed from forum because of beggin money from community. Yesterday i saw his post in vk.com with video of his content and he said that he sent this video to Bohemia Interactive and wants his mod to became new Creator DLC. Is this true and someone can confirm it?

As someone who has been banned for commercial use of Arma, it is highly unlikely. 

[Dedmen 2696]

13 hours ago, Disgusting_Man said:

Is this true and someone can confirm it?

If it were, it would all be under NDA.

[2RGT Lux 3]

Sry guys... help me to solve my doubt....

I've ARMASYNC..... there is a way to start the game with GM ? Or it is possible only from official launcher?

[Moon_chilD 200]

If you mean Arma3Sync: Launcher Options -> Put this in Additional Parameters (Bottom right) "-mod=GM" (Without "")

[2RGT Lux 3]

Ohhh TnX!
 

I tried inserting the full path of the folder .... it didn't work ... I didn't think of the single GM folder ... thanks again !!!

[D_Donskoy 50]

Hello.
Well, I bought and played in the Creator DLS. The overall impression is positive, I liked everything. But as usual, without "BUT" failed ...
1. What I want to note - the most comprehensive and best DLС for Arma 3 is the "Law of war". It contains everything that I wanted to see in the supplement to the game, namely: the campaign - 10/5. Demonstration 100/5. The quality of the presentation of all content is just super - 1000/5! And compared to the supplement of the Law of War, your supplement does not reach its level, but surpasses it in price. The question is why? Sorry for the sincerity ...

2. For example, with the release of Malden, free DLS, I emphasize - FREE! I received a bonus topographic map - for free !!! The quality of the island of Malden - surpasses the quality of your map. I paid for your card and did not receive a bonus, again the question - why? When any DLC came out, I received a bonus in the form of soundtracks, maps, demonstrations, and I liked the presentation of content in this old school style! In your case, I did not get it! The question is why? The question arises from the fact that high-quality, comprehensive DLC like the Law of War is cheaper than yours, but ... more meaningful! Why is this not justice or such non-conformity ?! Price is the quality of the law of war and the price is the quality of GM? I do not understand.

3. Buying content from BI, I was guaranteed to be sure that 75% of the bugs that will be identified will be eliminated. I hope in your case will be the same.

I apologize for the negative emotions, but I was honest with you. 

[D_Donskoy 50]

Whoever make a remaster Arma 2 and I will buy it 100% 🙂

 

[lugiahua 26]

Just wondering, anyone played GM coop missions had prematurely victory problems?

 

When I played Autobahnmeisters and Downhill, both missions ended as soon as I engaged the enemy, I didn't even finish enemy first wave.

 

Also I feel Downhill needs more preparation time, they gave you a lot of AT mines, but even if you had full team of 12 players, there was simply not enough time to deploy them.

(consider some player didn't have a backpack to even carry an AT mine.)

[papanowel 120]

On ‎5‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 4:13 PM, Moon_chilD said:

If you mean Arma3Sync: Launcher Options -> Put this in Additional Parameters (Bottom right) "-mod=GM" (Without "")

 

The next update of Arma3Sync will add a new tab next to the "available addons" one and from there you will be able to select the dlc and move it to "addon groups" (the same as if you were adding addons to the launcher). So no more trick will be needed if you want to launch GM 🙂

[Moon_chilD 200]

1 minute ago, papanowel said:

 

The next update of Arma3Sync will add a new tab next to the "available addons" one and from there you will be able to select the dlc and move it to right windows (the same as if you were adding addons to the launcher). So no more trick will be needed if you want to launch GM 🙂

Good to hear (also good to hear that there is an active development on A3S still...seemed kinda quiet around it! ;3), thanks for letting us know

[papanowel 120]

Just now, Moon_chilD said:

Good to hear (also good to hear that there is an active development on A3S still...seemed kinda quiet around it! ;3), thanks for letting us know

 

Major is still working on it, don't hesitate to look his thread (there is a link to it on my signature). 🙂

[tortuosit 486]

On 4/28/2019 at 1:01 PM, VanZant said:

On this subject I would like BI to explain a bit better what we can expect. I really would not like to see how this community becomes a market of junk, literally, like other games where there are children buying skins and dance moves.

 

I don't see any hints we'll see that in the Armaverse.

 

The whole creator DLC thing is not a problem for me.

[BadHabitz 235]

I'd like to see new terrains divorced from big content releases. I can't persuade 50 people to spend $20 for content that we won't use 75%+ of. Cold War Europe stuff is not in our wheelhouse, but we're always on the lookout for new terrains. Would be much easier to push people to buy a terrain for $5-$10. GM would be much easier to digest if there was an option to buy the terrain and other content separate from each other. Hopefully this can be done in the future and done retroactively for GM.

[Tankbuster 1744]

1 hour ago, BadHabitz said:

I'd like to see new terrains divorced from big content releases. I can't persuade 50 people to spend $20 for content that we won't use 75%+ of. Cold War Europe stuff is not in our wheelhouse, but we're always on the lookout for new terrains. Would be much easier to push people to buy a terrain for $5-$10. GM would be much easier to digest if there was an option to buy the terrain and other content separate from each other. Hopefully this can be done in the future and done retroactively for GM.

I'd like to see it too, but I think it is unlikely to happen. Doesn't make commercial or logistical sense for BI or Vertexmacht.

[lex__1 422]

2 hours ago, BadHabitz said:

I'd like to see new terrains divorced from big content releases. I can't persuade 50 people to spend $20 for content that we won't use 75%+ of. Cold War Europe stuff is not in our wheelhouse, but we're always on the lookout for new terrains. Would be much easier to push people to buy a terrain for $5-$10. GM would be much easier to digest if there was an option to buy the terrain and other content separate from each other. Hopefully this can be done in the future and done retroactively for GM. 

Go to Steam and download as much terrain as you need.
The development team has long needed to understand that priority must be in solving the problems of the game platform and not in expanding the number of projects on a broken platform. Broken platform reduces interest even to free Mods. I think that many Mods are not released due to platform instability.
A robust and stable platform has always given more impetus to the enthusiasm of Arma fans for the birth of new Mods and Maps. It also increased the flow of players into the game.

[Wiki 1558]

I wonder what the next CDLC will be.

[Cloby 18]

Probably something like Project RACS or CSLA.

[viperBAT44 17]

On 5/7/2019 at 3:59 PM, D_Donskoy said:

Whoever make a remaster Arma 2 and I will buy it 100% 🙂

 

Arma 2 is just flat awesome! A remastered (Properly) would be a must buy!

[Tankbuster 1744]

1 hour ago, Cloby said:

Probably something like Project RACS or CSLA.

What are next weeks lottery numbers?

[Cloby 18]

2 hours ago, Tankbuster said:

What are next weeks lottery numbers?

I wish I knew that myself mate 😁.

Only guessing the next CDLC is one of those two as one of the GM devs said in their discord: "other projcts I know of actually do reuse Arma 2 assets". Both do use A2 assets and seem to fit the requirements for a CDLC. Just wishful thinking at the end of the day.

[CannonSong 688]

Project RACS has a dependency on RHS, and the legal hurdles of making paid content that relies on someone else's free work are... many, to say the least. Not to mention the moral hurdles of doing so.

It ain't happening.

[D_Donskoy 50]

4 hours ago, CannonSong said:

Project RACS has a dependency on RHS, and the legal hurdles of making paid content that relies on someone else's free work are... many, to say the least. Not to mention the moral hurdles of doing so.

It ain't happening.

I'm sure in the next part of the game, there will be no free mods.

[Wiki 1558]

On 5/11/2019 at 5:01 PM, viperBAT44 said:

Arma 2 is just flat awesome! A remastered (Properly) would be a must buy!

 

You can already have all A2 assets with CUP.

Concerning the campaign, as 50% of it was just high command shit mode (dont even remember the name of it).... well I wouldn't buy it.

[Disgusting_Man 111]

Is there any specific agreement under which creator rights as the author of the models will be protected?

[the_one_and_only_Venator 163]

General CDLC/ Global Mobilization Suggestion

 

Currently the community seems to be very divided about the new CDLC concept of BI. This has appearently to do with the fact that the CDLCs are dividing the community more than any other regular DLC ever did into those who bought it and those who didn't.
Players who did not buy the CDLC can not join servers or missions where any asset is used. Be it a vehicle, weapon or a simple piece of headgear. This is unlike the former BI DLC model where only restrictions applied.

 

I can understand the argument that it would be simply a lot to download if everyone had to download every CDLC without actually being able to use the stuff. But I believe that there is a pretty simple workaround:

This would include Players who did not buy the CDLC still not to be able to join any mission that uses the CDLC maps or map assets (the asset point is debatable as APEX has shown).

The - what I believe is the best sollution - would be to seperate the CDLC into two parts, that would still be bought together (or not?!).

 

The first and larger part would be the map and the map assets. This would be only available to those who bought the CDLC.

 

The second part would be the units, vehicles, weapons and equipment stuff. This would be available for download for everyone owning the game (while still be optional to download). For those who bought the CDLC it would include every asset with no restrictions.

 

For those players who did not buy the CDLC the same restrictions of BIs DLCs would apply.

This would solve the issue of Players not being able to join missions that use CDLC vehicles, weapons, etc. but still keep it completely optional to download any content that may apply restrictions to the player.

As a positive side effect it would also provide players who bought the CDLC with the flexibility to only download the map or the other assets (which some may find usefull but it definitely doesn't do any harm).

I would be very happy if this or any other sollution would be thought about.

 

Have a nice day everyone,

Venator