ARMA 2 (OA) : DLC discussion thread

[jw custom 56]

So, as long as its something brand new after release, and pretty expansive, yeah why not? They know when their ripping you off though, so as long as they dont rip us off.

I have the feeling you have the brits in mind but who says it's already done? Who says they aren't still working on them and will for quite some time after OA has been released?

[RogueScotsman 10]

I have the feeling you have the brits in mind but who says it's already done? Who says they aren't still working on them and will for quite some time after OA has been released?

I havent gotten to read up on that yet actually. So I guess their making a playable Brit faction?

I'm American, I wouldnt buy it anyway :p. So thats cool if they are, I'd think unless they put in new UK arms and vehicles with the units it should be free though.

[kremator 1064]

I really don't care for new units or exact what camo they are wearing *YAWN*, what I do care about is improved functionality. Picture in picture, proper deformable terrain, a game master interface for on the fly battles and after battle review would do lovely TYVM.

I also don't get why they can't release this content electronically (and NOT go through distributors)

[pauliesss 2]

I dont want to destroy your dreams but I am not expecting any new features as DLC, probably it will be "only" things like units, vehicles, helis, small island etc.

[jblackrupert 14]

I also don't get why they can't release this content electronically (and NOT go through distributors)

Sprocket (Czech republic)

http://www.sprocketidea.com/

"SprocketIdea.com is owned and operated by IDEA games, an association of independent developers. Our aim is to promote the games developed by our member"

[Wolfstriked 11]

BIS just gives us a DLC example.

[maddogx 13]

Okay, let's cut the smack talk get this thread back on topic before it derails. :)

DLC all the way.

[W0lle 1044]

All stupid trolling removed. With the next troll attempt or taking the thread off-topic we start spreading infractions or post restrictions.

[A Smed 0]

All stupid trolling removed. With the next troll attempt or taking the thread off-topic we start spreading infractions or post restrictions.

It wasnt a troll. :bored:

(to do with DLC)

Just mainly looking forward to M14 with OA but the LA80 is pretty awesome too but not a big fan of SUSAT

Edited June 20, 2010 by A Smed

[Specialist 10]

Exactly. My wishlist for a british DLC from BIS would be:

(All Vehicals in Woodland and Desert)

- Troops AND Weapons (Woodland/Desert/MTP)

- Landrovers (WMIK, Ambulance, General Service)

- Challenger II

- scimitar

- Warrior

- Bulldog (FV430)

- Mastiff

- Viking

- Jackal

- Vector

- AS90

- MAN Trucks (6t/9t/12t, Repair/Rearm/Refule)

- Lynx (Army/RN)

- Merlin (RN/RAF)

- Puma

- Apache

- Chinook

- Gazelle

- Tornado

- Harrier (RN/RAF)

- Eurofighter

- C-130

-Various RN Ships (Ocean, Illustrious, Destroyers etc)

I know its alot, but it is just a wish list :p

If all that was to be included, I would pay up to £15 for it, aslong as the quality was top notch ;)

Me too, I would pay for that and like I said before, I would only pay for Britsh units & equipment/Vehicles. Im not interested in any other armed forces enough that I would pay for DLC including them. I think most people would only pay for DLC if it includes their own country.

(Im from the UK)

Edited June 20, 2010 by Specialist

[STALKERGB 6]

Exactly. My wishlist for a british DLC from BIS would be:

(All Vehicals in Woodland and Desert)

- Troops AND Weapons (Woodland/Desert/MTP)

- Landrovers (WMIK, Ambulance, General Service)

- Challenger II

- scimitar

- Warrior

- Bulldog (FV430)

- Mastiff

- Viking

- Jackal

- Vector

- AS90

- MAN Trucks (6t/9t/12t, Repair/Rearm/Refule)

- Lynx (Army/RN)

- Merlin (RN/RAF)

- Puma

- Apache

- Chinook

- Gazelle

- Tornado

- Harrier (RN/RAF)

- Eurofighter

- C-130

-Various RN Ships (Ocean, Illustrious, Destroyers etc)

I know its alot, but it is just a wish list :p

If all that was to be included, I would pay up to £15 for it, aslong as the quality was top notch ;)

Actually, was just thinking about this, and I have only payed £16.99 for the whole game so £15 for a DLC faction would by comparison be pretty expensive.

[RogueScotsman 10]

I hope they do make the DLC available in stores, like in a bundle or something. I hate things like Steam, I tried a demo on it once and I never used it again. But maybe downloading from BIS own site straight to where you installed the game would work, might be too much trouble though because you'd have to have BIS accounts and register the game and everything.

[TKTom 10]

The only reason I HATE DLC is because most games come out at release with some already ready. in other words, they leave stuff out of the game you just paid for in order to charge you more. So, if they dont leave whole chapters out of the game (Assassins Creed 2) just for DLC, and they just come up with new stuff *after* the game is done, and its something worth paying for, not a new set of camo or something.

Releasing DLC at the same time as releasing the game doesn't necessarily mean that you are being charged an unfair price.

If we consider ArmA2 as an example; There is (likely as not) a group of people who bought this game and never played the main campaign. However, the main campaign cost BIS money to make it. The cost of the game included an amount to cover the cost of making the main campaign. This group are paying for something they will never use. If the game was split up into [ArmA2 - Main Campaign] and [DLC consisting of the Main Campaign] then this group could pay a fair market price for what they are going to use and other users could pay a fair market price for what they are going to use( [ArmA2- Main Campaign] + [DLC] = [ArmA2] ) where in that is anyone being ripped off? Quite the opposite, the alternative means that someone (either BIS paying to produce something which they then provide for free or the end user paying for something that they never use) is being "ripped off" in a way.

The element of unfairness comes in when the price for DLC content is not a "fair market price." Perhaps there is a bit of weight to this argument, if elements of the game are withheld in such a way that the absence of them is felt in a DLC-less version of the game. Then an impetus to buy, of which he was not aware at the time of first purchase, is implanted into the end user meaning that the provider of the service will be able to charge a higher price than they would have if the content was released with the game (due to this extra want introduced by playing the base game.)

In conclusion, I do agree that DLC can be misused, telltale signs of which are referances to the DLC left in the DLC-less game, but I also would say that a responsible developer can provide content at a fair price, even at release. And I wouldn't want anyone thinking that BIS is unfair, simply because they do this.

[That guy 10]

i have the perfect solution: dont call it DLC

BIS follows through with thier plan to make bundles of products, then releases them a "mini expansions"

see? mini expansion. sounds much nicer and looses much of the stigma, and sounds less like a coin vacuum. that way they will also be able to release additional game play features with them, in addition to units/weapons/campaigns/maps or what ever

[Asso 0]

Please, please, PLEASE don't make it a Steam/Impulse/Younameit exclusive.

I so hate having to be connected the whole time, having to count activations, having to rely to third party software, be it intrusive or not, and so on.

Maybe I mess with my computer a little too much, but I enjoy reformatting regularly, so losing activations because of this is a real pain.

Check out how Battlefront does it with their games (a couple of simultaneous activations MAX, you can deactivate as much as you like).

Or make an activation check via server, too many activations in a small time frame -> probably pirated.

Or as someone suggested you could make some kind of retail bundle every once in a while, without online stuff, just as you're doing right now.

Anti-piracy is becoming too much of a hassle for us honest gamers, and pirates get away with it anyway.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Please, please, PLEASE don't make it a Steam/Impulse/Younameit exclusive...

Well, they will have to figure out a way to distribute it without it being easy to redistribute. It's actually a dilemma. If they make it too restrictive not as many people will buy it, but if it's not restrictive enough people will just pirate it. Either way BIS loses money, so they have to find the correct balance to maximize sales.

[Asso 0]

Seeing as the community held up in all these years I would think that the majority of BIS' customers, returning or new, come from a well defined niche.

This isn't some over-hyped game from some popular game studio which shocks the masses with a series of interchangeable 5 hours-plus-multiplayer rollercoaster rides every year or so. Those are the games that are heavily pirated and abused.

I'd think piracy with BIS' games would not hit them as hard as it hits EA, Ubi, etc.. And even their losses could be debatable.

Take Silent Hunter 5. Ubi screwed with the other two games in the form of bad copy protection, bad long term support. This one didn't even activate on its first day. I don't know how things are going for them, but I saw a lot of bad blood when it got out. People doesn't buy broken stuff, especially if you try to sell stuff to a niche.

They just think about selling the most in a short period of time before getting their s**t ruined by pirates. In this case copy protection schemes work as intended (take for example Splinter Cell + StarForce). The moment the pirates get down their protection, and this hits their sales, they come out with a sequel using a new protection scheme.

BIS instead has a lot of "dedicated customers" (and for a good reason, I must say). It sure has a lot of curious potential customers that gets discouraged by the harder-than-CoD gameplay that could pirate the game (would they buy it in the first place?). So selling their products shouldn't be so hard.

Sure, services like Steam have the huge bonus of skyrocketing your game sales simply because of its huge user base. But it has its share of detractors, too. So having options is a must, for me.

To point out again their fans dedication: mods for Operation Flashpoint are still being made, the game is still being played... People like good games, even if they are old. Having your stuff tied to some online service means that it couldn't be used anymore if the service goes down (check out Hellgate: London and other games or add-ons). So having direct control over your products is a great thing, in my eyes. Shouldn't be hard work to make a patch that unlocks your games indefinitely, in case you go down.

Hell, I don't want to rent your games. I like 'em and it's good to get back and play Resistance years later, just as if I was re-reading a good book. There's some kind of affection.

[DaveP 66]

I'm not particularly sure what the detractors are for using steam; I used it to buy Armed Assault 2, and as long as any mod or patch I install works fine from them (I mean ArmA's odd like that since it's one of the few games I've got on steam that doesn't even need to chat with Steam at all to launch) I don't see the issue

I'm always doubtful when I've got to use a different download service when Steam's available. I just have more experience and trust for it

If Railworks can sell through steam and do alright, I'm sure OA can too with its DLC and All

[AnimalMother92 10]

I hope the DLC is on Steam, it's the most convenient way to buy stuff for me at least.

[Asso 0]

I can't speak for every Steam detractor out there, but...

I don't really know about the changes Steam has gone through up until now. Always preferred Impulse to it (there were more games I liked on it and I always liked Stardock PR more than Valve's). What I care the most now is how long the games will "live". I like keeping a small library of games I play now and then, and don't want to have some internet service keeping me from playing what I want, even 10 years from now. I don't envision Steam going under and I realize it's a great place to sell your products, but I'd like an option more in line with my preferences.

Plus, I do not know how many "rights" has the developer when its game is published over it. I liked Impulse, but I almost exclusively bought games made by Stardock. There are many games distributed using technology licensed to the developers, so they are in full control of where the game is going, the support is only up to them, etc..

It's more to my liking, and I don't think I am the only one.

[hamm 10]

I can't speak for every Steam detractor out there, but...

I don't really know about the changes Steam has gone through up until now. Always preferred Impulse to it (there were more games I liked on it and I always liked Stardock PR more than Valve's). What I care the most now is how long the games will "live". I like keeping a small library of games I play now and then, and don't want to have some internet service keeping me from playing what I want, even 10 years from now. I don't envision Steam going under and I realize it's a great place to sell your products, but I'd like an option more in line with my preferences.

Plus, I do not know how many "rights" has the developer when its game is published over it. I liked Impulse, but I almost exclusively bought games made by Stardock. There are many games distributed using technology licensed to the developers, so they are in full control of where the game is going, the support is only up to them, etc..

It's more to my liking, and I don't think I am the only one.

Steam have already commented on this, saying that in the case they do close up shop / go down under, they'll release a patch that deactivates the need to have Steam running for games. They've also said they've tested it before and that it works 100%.

[Asso 0]

Steam have already commented on this, saying that in the case they do close up shop / go down under, they'll release a patch that deactivates the need to have Steam running for games. They've also said they've tested it before and that it works 100%.

Got it! Thanks.

Damn, you make me feel like a black bloc... I just can't trust enough those damn capitalist pigs!

:yay:

Back on topic: price should be proportional. Some vehicles, some weapons, a bunch of missions to test them out, or a mini-campaign like EW... About 10€, maybe?

[Maio 293]

Back on topic: price should be proportional. Some vehicles, some weapons, a bunch of missions to test them out, or a mini-campaign like EW... About 10€, maybe?

Yeah add 1-2 extra game play features to that and I say it's worth the 10 euros .

[Flash Thunder 10]

Yeah add 1-2 extra game play features to that and I say it's worth the 10 euros .

gameplay features would be too hard to use as DLC, unless they were free because everybody would need it.

Any thing specific you can think of? I been thinking but havent came up with anything significant and worth the effort.

[Richey79 10]

I like Steam. However, forcing people who bought from a different download retailer or the boxed game to install Steam just to get some DLC is an idea that is simply not going to fly.

It would also cut down the amount of profit Bis can take from the content and would psychologically remove the advantage Asso speaks of - the feeling that Bis engages directly with their community.

Would it even be feasible to use Steam copy protection in conjunction with non-Steam copies of the game? If not, Bis would have to release another form of copy protected files for other customers.

I'd like to think that there is a lot of good feeling towards Bis as a developer of PC-orientated products amongst Arma fans, and people would actually feel guilty for pirating the content, as long as it represents good value. That relationship is something that Bis won't want to jeopardise.