official complaint to BIS

[Raptor 10]

BTW Balschiouw and others, has anyone of you tried contacting Suma by Private Message and ask him all the questions you want to about the release etc and confront him with what everyone (with imagination) has been discussing with eachother?

Did your really think that they would get any answer from BIS headmasters.

[Dallas 9]

They wont especially if they don't try.

[sickboy 13]

Perfect example of guessing and taking for granted:

BTW Balschiouw and others, has anyone of you tried contacting Suma by Private Message and ask him all the questions you want to about the release etc and confront him with what everyone (with imagination) has been discussing with eachother?

Did your really think that they would get any answer from BIS headmasters.

I had answers from them on my questions, why shouldn't they answer yours?

A properly written, normal toned message without shouting, screaming, trying to make fun of them and make problems instead of talking....

I wouldn't know why they would not answer this So I would say; try it.

I have said it with the Hardware / Performance problems 'guessings' ... There is 99,9% speculation all over the place... If there would be some verified sources or people that KNOW something instead of guess/think/expect this & that, it would render half of the discussions obsolete so we could work on teambuilding something instead of starting thread 2055 with another guess and idea about the situation

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

lol sickboy!

If I remember correctly you are an realistic guy.

How do you come to the point that Suma is answering questions?

I asked once somthing about turret parameters and he answered partly and then left me alone. AND they would never tell the truth like "we fucked it up".

BI and BI community admins even pushing away helping hands because they claim they know their business and everything is under control. And each announcement of a new patch (that will fix less then 10% of the issues) is enough to make the complete community enthusiastic singing the "BI is the best , yea they will make it " - song.

Sickboy, you should know that:

- do you have a 99% correct and complete description of all ArmA parameters and their usage?

- all missions made for ArmA or ported from OFP, are they correctly working after the meanwhile 2nd patch and 3 month gone?

I mean BI might be small and both BI and publisher underestimated the problems, but this constant sound that WE are wrong in demanding what we paid for makes me SICK-BOY :-)

And - yes - Morphicon is my contract partner and yes Morphicon fucked it up and is with its 4 employees not able to deal with those problems. If I would drag Morphi to court - it's mother is a british limited btw - Morphi would simply dissappear when it becomes to hot.

And I prefer to bother BI since they are the root cause and they picket small weak publishers on purpose.

[sickboy 13]

...

Quote[/b] ]If I remember correctly you are an realistic guy.

Sure

Quote[/b] ]How do you come to the point that Suma is answering questions?

I asked once somthing about turret parameters and he answered partly and then left me alone.

How would one know that Suma is answering Questions....   How about having asked a few questions AND gotten replies back?

Quote[/b] ]AND they would never tell the truth like "we fucked it up".

Sure, let's just keep guessing and asuming, besides, why would we need to hear that they fucked up, we wanna know the reasons and the plans right?

Quote[/b] ]BI and BI community admins even pushing away helping hands because they claim they know their business and everything is under control.

Link?

Quote[/b] ] And each announcement of a new patch (that will fix less then 10% of the issues) is enough to make the complete community enthusiastic singing the "BI is the best , yea they will make it " - song.

Sure, that's called looking things from the brightside, and having trust in something... The new patch will probably be released at the 505 Release, and from what I have seen and heard, it will contain quite some improvements So for me it has no use in being the little dick in every thread to complain... I rather build my stuff and finish my projects i'm working on, and wait in the meantime for the next patch that will fix quite some stuff

Quote[/b] ]Sickboy, you should know that:

- do you have a 99% correct and complete description of all ArmA parameters and their usage?

What are you trying to say here? I think the BIS Community Wiki Covers most in this parts?

Quote[/b] ]- all missions made for ArmA or ported from OFP, are they correctly working after the meanwhile 2nd patch and 3 month gone?

There are some things that are working better after the 2nd patch. But I know of many things that are still not working perfect, true. I'm just not complaining every single day, which is pointless IMHO, and just wait patiently...

Quote[/b] ]I mean BI might be small and both BI and publisher underestimated the problems, but this constant sound that WE are wrong in demanding what we paid for makes me SICK-BOY :-)

I'm not saying you guys are wrong, i'm just saying it's lame, unnececairy and pointless to keep argueing eachother on all these points, I mean ... please take all the posts that have been made about these issues since the release of this game... Then calculate how much time has been put into these pointless discussions, and then think about what you could've done with all that time... Productiveness is just 0,0% and I don't know about you guys, but I got better things to do... Do I really need to say more?

Quote[/b] ]And - yes - Morphicon is my contract partner and yes Morphicon fucked it up and is with its 4 employees not able to deal with those problems. If I would drag Morphi to court - it's mother is a british limited btw - Morphi would simply dissappear when it becomes to hot.

And I prefer to bother BI since they are the root cause and they picket small weak publishers on purpose.

Sure, let's bother the wrong party for our problems because we like to do that... And Sure BI is picking small publishers on purpose, to what end??

[Kode 0]

And I prefer to bother BI since they are the root cause and they picket small weak publishers on purpose.

It's still the publishers choice to publish a game or not, what you say makes no sense

[Dudester 0]

Why we need such a big island? 99,9% of all game modes (execpt cti) need only a local area. This is the same mistake that SSW had already made.

That is the funniest complaint yet. What bad is there with a big island, save that it brings OFP's islands to shame?

I think he's saying with the island been so big, it has made the Fps worse.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]BTW Balschiouw and others, has anyone of you tried contacting Suma by Private Message and ask him all the questions you want to about the release etc and confront him with what everyone (with imagination) has been discussing with eachother?

First of all it would be Marek who would answer the questions, not Suma.

Second, I have my experiences with BIS info policy, we have visited BIS some years ago and did a comprehensive Q/A on the sucessor of OFP back then. When we returned home I compiled it into a document and sent it back to Marek for clearance. The document I got back was so crippled and censored that we decided not even to publish it. So yes, I´d say I have my share of experience. Placebo was more open and tried to find a way to share info while keeping the BIS policy of no-info. I guess that´s what made his job a hard one. I´ve also talked to journalists who are/were in regular contact with BIS on their new products and visited their booths at conventions. They tell the same story. It´s kind of an iron-curtain-mentality they were facing all over and over again.

This is the BI community page and as BIS claims, even in Arma ads, that it´s the community that is a very important part of the sucess behind the product but they fail to make a simple statement on why the european version that were released last year turned out to be that incomplete and bugged ?

If there is a place to speak out, it´s here and not in a PM with the attachement of secrecy.

I already have some BIS non-disclosure agreements at home, I know how they look.

If the community is so important for BIS as they tell they should act accordingly and talk to us.

If you were unable to find some statements on what was supposed to be in Arma final, check these out:

Developer Bohemia Interactive briefs us on its successor to its ground-breaking military sim Operation Flashpoint

BIS Arma E3 2006 press release

[Clavicula_nox4817 0]

Why we need such a big island? 99,9% of all game modes (execpt cti) need only a local area. This is the same mistake that SSW had already made.

That is the funniest complaint yet. What bad is there with a big island, save that it brings OFP's islands to shame?

I think he's saying with the island been so big, it has made the Fps worse.

But...that's not how it works.

[TheReddog 0]

The critics that have slammed the functional quality of Arma either refused evaluate the product on BIS's standline systems, had technical issues of their own irrelevant to the product development but negatively impacting performance, or judged the product in light of it's current state.

This deserves a quote.

The fact is that when a new game comes out it is reviewed based upon the state it is released in, and that is the way it should be. You just can't just go and write a rave review on a newly released game overlooking all of its technical and qualitive problems because it will probably be fixed up through half a year of patching. Do you not see how unethical writing such a review would be?

A reviewers job is to inform the potential buyer of the quality of said product, which in the case of PC games means reviewing what is released on the disk in the bloody box on the store shelves, warts and all. Anything else is just misleading. In this respect the critics that are slamming ArmA have every bloody right to as what was released is basically an incomplete, bug ridden, poorly optimised beta.

No matter how much you blind fanboys don't like it the fact is that any game which is released needing a shitload of patching to get it up to an acceptable level deserves to be slammed.

Honestly what planet do you live on? Is the weather nice there?

If you have a complaint about XYZ, fix it yourself. Arma is a platform, not a finished product.

There you said it yourself, strange as it may seem to you I don't think people like purchasing incomplete products...

[sickboy 13]

Quote[/b] ]This deserves a quote....Honestly what planet do you live on? Is the weather nice there?

Making a review of a game version v1.0 ... while there is already a v1.02 out, IS simply retarted... Because the buyer of the product can upgrade right away to v1.02 too, and there is also no additional payment involved to get v1.02... it's product support....

Of coarse if the review was written at the time there was only a v1.0, that's completely normal and nothing wrong with.... But if they find many bugs, altough the game in general seems to be very good, feature rich etc....

Then to me it would be fair to give the game a low score, but not neglecting to mention that the score is low due to the bugs, while the reviewer still thinks it's a great game

...

Quote[/b] ]First of all it would be Marek who would answer the questions, not Suma.

I sent my question to Suma, and I received answer from Suma, that is why I took him as an Example. Let's just say 'BIS-Official' to make it easy

Quote[/b] ]Second, I have my experiences with BIS info policy, we have visited BIS some years ago and did a comprehensive Q/A on the sucessor of OFP back then. When we returned home I compiled it into a document and sent it back to Marek for clearance. The document I got back was so crippled and censored that we decided not even to publish it. So yes, I´d say I have my share of experience.

I can't say nothing about that, I simply do not have any experience with this

Quote[/b] ]Placebo was more open and tried to find a way to share info while keeping the BIS policy of no-info. I guess that´s what made his job a hard one.

Sounds plausible, but again a guess, as I read in another thread where you connect Placebo's leave with BIS-Policy/ArmA-Release... Assumptions assumptions, I guess noone will (officialy) know why Placebo left?

Quote[/b] ]They tell the same story. It´s kind of an iron-curtain-mentality they were facing all over and over again.

That sucks indeed, I wonder why this is though, would be nice to hear/know some day...

Quote[/b] ]If there is a place to speak out, it´s here and not in a PM with the attachement of secrecy.

Sure it is, but my best guess was that the whine threads are in their ignore list by now, so by my thinking... you would more likely receive a response that way, and maybe if they answer 1 guy, he can relay the info

Quote[/b] ]This is the BI community page and as BIS claims, even in Arma ads, that it´s the community that is a very important part of the  sucess behind the product but they fail to make a simple statement on why the european version that were released last year turned out to be that incomplete and bugged

Of coarse BIS is quiet about some things and reasons. Let's take an example... If they would say that Idea-Games release schedule sucked and that they choose to release the game even in unfinished state... they would probably receive a law-suit for harming Idea-Games... But I'm sure that more general stuff should be able to get answered by them, and sending it by PM just makes it more direct

Quote[/b] ]If the community is so important for BIS as they tell they should act accordingly and talk to us.

Here is 1 point I agree with you... Altough it seems that BIS is taking many things into consideration... the communication towards the community is simply to cry about.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

I think it's pretty far-fetched by the developers to talk about enormious multiplayer sessions with that many players, when they obviously haven't tried anything near that. But then again, we are the betatesters this time. Just like back in OFP.

If that maybe doesn't work right now, but works in the next upcoming patch(es)? Then it's fine aswell right? Why is everyone throwing away the game after the 2nd patch? As said .. looking at the demo changelogs... we're going to be in for a hell of a ride with the upcoming patches...

I would like to see proof/interviews/links to where they are talking about persistent game worlds and coop multiplayer campaign...

I have read it now at 100 places that it was so called 'promised' but I never seen the text...

btw... I thought we would finally be done on this subject, and everyone would just wait for the next incoming patch I'm already sorry that I replied again

Hehe...

I am in no doubt that the game will be incredible nice, and as you know I still play it on your server.

But the whole topic is about BI released it too early. Granted, I wanted the game - but I must admit I thought they were a bit longer in the development stage as it was released one year after first official release-date.

[sickboy 13]

But the whole topic is about BI released it too early. Granted, I wanted the game - but I must admit I thought they were a bit longer in the development stage as it was released one year after first official release-date.

Then the topic is useless Why keep repeating something that is not true? It has been pointed out now at least 2394 times that the publishers release a game, and not BIS... So if someone could move the thread to morphicon.de or idea-games.cz?

[4 IN 1 0]

you better wish that BIS crew are working very hard to fix problems and get things works better that they are too busy to answer all these bulltalk here, they dont need to answer all your question after watching them, a patch, or a fixed world wide release, on the other hand, will speaks for it, if not......well they may got RPGs and stuffs but its not that hard to find ourself one too

BTW just a guess, maybe its we who screw ourself up by letting publisher think that we want to game so badly that they push the game out?

[TheReddog 0]

Quote[/b] ]This deserves a quote....Honestly what planet do you live on? Is the weather nice there?

Making a review of a game version v1.0 ... while there is already a v1.02 out, IS simply retarted... Because the buyer of the product can upgrade right away to v1.02 too, and there is also no additional payment involved to get v1.02... it's product support....

Of coarse if the review was written at the time there was only a v1.0, that's completely normal and nothing wrong with.... But if they find many bugs, altough the game in general seems to be very good, feature rich etc....

Then to me it would be fair to give the game a low score, but not neglecting to mention that the score is low due to the bugs, while the reviewer still thinks it's a great game

Point taken, but I must digress 1.02 still has huge problems.

[sickboy 13]

Point taken, but I must digress 1.02 still has huge problems.

Sure 1.02 got a lot of bugs, but the reviewers did not only write about bugs that were still in 1.02, but they also wrote about bugs in v1.0, while they were fixed in v1.02, and this patch was already available for at least week(s)+day(s)....

In my eyes this is very unfair, and at the very least unprofessional to test a game that way, put out the bad laundry but forget to mention that the laundry is already cleaned

I agree that many bugs remain in v1.02, but the game is still a great game in my eyes, despite the bugs... Still I agree that any reviewer may give it a low number, as long as they e.g: don't forget to mention that the score is mainly so low due to game bugs, and that they will re-evaluate and give you an after-review after some patch

...I am sure that the next patch will resolve many of the pressing matters, and BIS will continue to do so, aswell as add features troughout the next months, mark my words!

[dm 9]

There you said it yourself, strange as it may seem to you I don't think people like purchasing incomplete products...

That means there are a LOT of pissed off M$ Windows users [read: all of them], becuase every version of windows to date has been FAR from finished

[privatenoob 0]

Quote[/b] ]

i'm quite sure as long are USMC and other US and non US military orgs customers of BIS (and it's division) due to military simulation products ...

then there is no way they committed financial suicide

Its probably here they are making all the money anyway.

Looking at one of swedens biggest online store for games its NR 7 on order-for-presale, that is pretty good.

Now I can understand that some people will boycott this game

for whatever reason but one person or even more persons

subjective views doesnt count for everyone.

Just because I dont like a game doesnt mean it will not sale.

The demo is perfectly playable, even more after the update,

if people got crappy computers dont blame the product cos you cant play it. And Im talking about the DEMO.

Still waiting for 505 edition.

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

lol sick,

with your last replies an icon is fallen from socket.

I mean you are realistic, but to devoted to the "as it is"

Sure there is a Biki, but usually the supplier writes the doc.

Sure they will fix one day some bugs, what I crying for is an entry for the community to report bugs and ask for changes. The Biki I consider as a joke, if this shitty list is meant serious it proves that BI is clueless (hey! Thats my name! or heinous.

You can present your opinion like you know the world and how it usually works - yep, you are right in all points.

But without trying to change something...

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

I am still very certain that publishers won't publish games that the developer says isn't ready yet. Especially when the publishers havent been there from the beginning but is merely a last-minute addition.

This is neither Morphicon, 505 or Idea Games fault. It's BI who made the game, and it's BI I want to make my patches.

That people make reviews based on earlier versions - well, what did you expect? Most of the reviews released are weeks old before putting up on the big pages. That is common knowledge, and I am quite certain that the gaming magazines would have patched their game if the patch was out while writing the review.

The 1.02 version of ArmA still contains so many bugs, that it deserves to be slammed. We can only hope that some of these will be fixed within a couple of years - just like with OFP. Maybe we might one day see ArmA as it was supposed to? As stated in 2006 press-release:

• A game from creators of 2 million+ bestseller

Operation Flashpoint

• 400 square kilometres to explore

• 20 mission singleplayer campaign

• 15 multiplayer missions

• 2 players cooperative gaming mode

• 40+ realistic weapons from modern battlefields

• 2-5 kilometres view distance

• 30+ battle vehicles including APC's, tanks, boats, helicopters and fighter planes

• 100+ players on one battlefield in join in progress multiplayer battles

I still have faith, though. Don't worry

[dm 9]

Sure there is a Biki, but usually the supplier writes the doc.

...The Biki I consider as a joke, if this shitty list is meant serious it proves that BI is clueless (hey! Thats my name! or heinous...

Actually, these statements proove you to be somewhat true to your name (the clueless part at least)

ArmA is a GAME.

Most (like 99% of) GAMES come with the following documentation:

1. How to install the game.

2. What the default key mappings are.

3. Possibly some basic info on the units in the game, a class tree or similar.

4. Possibly, and I mean REALLY possibly some limited doco on how to edit.

Even HL2 which is hailed as "the editors game" has poor documentation (mostly obscure comments in the SDK source code)

You really MUST stop treating ArmA like a piece of professional software which will come with a bible-esque user manual. Its not, its ENTERTAINMENT software, and it is provided with suitable documentation.

If you want uber-documentation, along with tools and lessons on how to do stuff, look to spend ~$1 million, like the USMC has on VBS (which IS "professional" software, and is marketed and priced accordingly)

[deanosbeano 0]

Quote[/b] ]The 505 release is proving to have many more features and will be a mega improvement over the current state of the German and Czech versions. Markus says, “It is unfortunate that the German, Czech and Polish versions were released so earlyâ€.

your all right , they released to early and now they fixing it.

The only rant about the already purchased versions is simply that we are playing 1.02 and the demo(free) is 1.03.

my2pence

[whisper 0]

Quote[/b] ]The 505 release is proving to have many more features and will be a mega improvement over the current state of the German and Czech versions. Markus says, “It is unfortunate that the German, Czech and Polish versions were released so earlyâ€.

your all right , they released to early and now they fixing it.

The only rant about the already purchased versions is simply that we are playing 1.02 and the demo(free) is 1.03.

my2pence

SO BIS is going to release a patch for each minor change and test they put on demo (like the grass change that I'm sure they put on demo to have some feedback) for the full game, and you'll see cries about "stop patching every week, we can't play online because we never have the correct version", blablabla..

It's just that people can never be happy. They are always, de facto, ignored, and trashed by big companies, whose only purpose is obviously to make people life harder.

Read Balshoiw posts, it's written all over there : "BI are making me angry purposefully".

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Read Balshoiw posts, it's written all over there : "BI are making me angry purposefully".

Yeah sure...

At least I want to have that things we were told before it was released and that are now magically missing in the retail version.

Even an explanation from BIS would be enough.

If you had followed my posts over the last years you´d know that I was one of those guys who always kept people from pushing BIS into releasing a bugged and unfinished product and tried to spread word about Armed Assault whenever I could. Now that it´s here it´s just a really big dissapointment and I can assure you that I haven´t had my hopesup too high, but as I already said, bugs that were there in OFP 1.0 definately shouldn´t have a second run in Arma. Face it, Arma is bugged, Arma has been sold incomplete, features that were proposed are not in but there is no single word from those who are responsible for this to explain or to lay out their thoughts.

You´ll be certainly not the one who will put me into a box along with all that bugseekers and nitpickers as I´m simply not one of them.

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

@DeadMeatXM2

lol u are wrong, that is just the excuse of lazy hackers.

I mean if you sell an engine suggesting you have a kind of programming interface, then you have to describe it.

BTW it is BI claiming they are a professional SW developer.

Since there are ties between VBS and ArmA the Q is:

Do they just do not give the doc to us? Or will an VBS owner get a similar NON-documentation.

Do not tell me it is difficult to create a reference guide for all ArmA functions/commands/parameters. They are just to lazy.

They burn our lifetime to find out how it works which takes x times longer then creating the related docs.

I mean I would spend a part of my holidays if I would get the chance to be the ghostwriter for one those developers to assemble the first draft of such a docu which is then easier to maintain once the structure is there.

Should I tell you the BI answer for that offer? No, I guess you know the answer.