ARMA 2 (OA) : DLC discussion thread

[Killerwatt 0]

As I said in the past, I wouldn't mind paying for a full, official rework of OFP and ArmA1 to the A2:OA engine.

I would be at the front of the line for them!

[Guest]

I would pay double price for OFP with updated graphics/engine!

[majorfatal 10]

Hello,I had a French (localized version) can I use the British module?

Thanks

[Joseph Archer 10]

With regards the online multiplayer MP players. It's a bit of a problem that ACE are saying they wont support the DLC. Means that for online players using ACE that the DLC is effectively out of reach no matter the demand for the DLC. Recommend BIS talk to ACE to ensure access to this group of customers within the online community.

A second observation is that BIS should focus on the infantry/vehicle models for DLC content rather than SP missions. For example, as a MP Arrowhead player I would prefer a more complete British army content without the campaign missions. Although I do recognise that this would exclude SP customers and the above issue with ACE is a barrier for MP customers using ACE.

Edited July 26, 2010 by o0Jedi0o

[VariousArtist 19]

Scrap money-making with crappy, overpriced DLCs. Do a useful addon instead! Im sad that BIS is falling so low to think about that, but money rules, I guess...

[nettrucker 142]

With regards the online multiplayer MP players. It's a bit of a problem that ACE are saying they wont support the DLC. Means that for online players using ACE that the DLC is effectively out of reach no matter the demand for the DLC. Recommend BIS talk to ACE to ensure access to this group of customers within the online community.

A second observation is that BIS should focus on the infantry/vehicle models for DLC content rather than SP missions. For example, as a MP Arrowhead player I would prefer a more complete British army content without the campaign missions. Although I do recognise that this would exclude SP customers and the above issue with ACE is a barrier for MP customers using ACE.

BIS is not responsable for ACE therefore they won't change release programm just while ACE doesn't support the DLC. Second there are a lot of people who are indeed interested in a SP campaign myself included.

kind regards

[mrcash2009 0]

I would love to see all the shock horror posters about this DLC approach's faces if BIS moved on from Arma franchise as it was not commercially viable anymore and then discontinued. No more patch support or updates or any prospects of a Arma3 long term, at least we have modders for free though, thanks for the current only sandbox lads ... Goodbye, happy job hunting! At least you didn't rip us off and were noble to our cause, we will mod it until its out dated at least for free.

They are a business not a hippie commune open source love-in camp (although even as a business they have struck a fine balance so far).

Making something like what people want IE: Arma3 and no DLC's coasting on income from just the basic sales of A2/OA has been open and clearly stated it wouldn't work.

I think there should be a "My business model" thread where all the rip off shouters should post their business plans and forecasts suggestions to justify not having DLC, that would be fun, kind of like BIS dragons den thread, have all the DLC haters make pitches and watch them cave and break a sweat.

Id have Maruk down as a Duncan Banetine, or Peter Jones?

kslNaEjnpYg

:)

Edited July 26, 2010 by mrcash2009

[Mafia101 0]

Exactly! You all wanna A3 with new engine, but you know how expensive is develop new engine? Where this money should come? BIS is pretty much alone, and Arma is not mainstream title, so where money should come, if you cry for paying proper DLC even...

[mrcash2009 0]

What would be worse is BIS then dont do DLC and then get taken over or have investors have more of share by a company/business that were pro DRM online permanent and dictated many changes, much like a record company dictating to a Indie band how to write and deadlines, it could be so much WORSE than people think it "supposedly" is now.

I think people see DLC, see all the other "cases" react swiftly and dont really step back and look at the bigger pictures, just way to quick knee jerk reactions.

Lots of posts of "this way is wrong" but you dont see many logical suggestions of which way would be right given the financial standpoint.

Lets put it another way if "free" moders had little or not enough income in their personal lives (rent, bills, outgoings etc etc etc), would they be on thier PC's for hours making detailed addons for a game so we can be happy? Point is, they would not have the free time, due to life issues, but when their personal situations like this are ok they then have the "free" time to do it. Everybody needs funding & no one can last if whats coming in doesn't cover what needs to go out in order to have such time, time in this case = BIS spending all of it making ARMA3.

Edited July 26, 2010 by mrcash2009

[NoRailgunner 0]

DLC's could be a nice pack of addons but many publishers/developers had spoiled their customers with small and crappy releases. From this viewpoint its somehow understandable that people are general afraid of "DLC kills games".

But what is more "killing" - no support/patches/upgrades or free/paid DLCs?

Is the community dying because of X amount of mods and addons?

Keep in mind its 100% your own choice to buy a DLC or not. BIS arent forcing mission/addon makers or server admins to use A2+OA only with DLC content.

Its simple:

If you are interested in British Troops DLC from BIS - buy it.

If you are interested in another DLC from BIS - suggest + buy it.

If you are not interested in any DLC "cuz of killing all" - dont buy and enjoy A2+OA without paid DLC from BIS.

[mrcash2009 0]

4) Everyone boycott them for ripping off people and watch them fold before they start, in a self fulfilling prophecy

:)

DLC's could be a nice pack of addons but many publishers/developers had spoiled their customers with small and crappy releases. From this viewpoint its somehow understandable that people are general afraid of "DLC kills games".

Yes this is the "cases" im referring too. All BIS have to do if anything is to make sure they dont follow any paths like this, do their own thing and make it worth while, learning off those other mistakes. In other words its "Crap half assed DLC's in the past ruin companies reps, which in turn make the term DLC a demon" .. more like.

If BIS can turn this notion around for themselves its the Rep they will keep above all others ... the DLC savior gang :)

Edited July 26, 2010 by mrcash2009

[BlackLord 0]

What I'd really like to see in upcoming DLCs:

-Proper physics engine.

-Proper reload animations.

-Proper vehicle interiors, ability to move around in and shoot out of vehicles.

-Better damage system especially for armor.

-Ability to lower handguns, binoculars and laser designators and to be able to change stance with binoculars in hand without weapon swapping.

[bensdale 0]

What I'd really like to see in upcoming DLCs:

-Proper physics engine.

-Proper reload animations.

-Proper vehicle interiors, ability to move around in and shoot out of vehicles.

-Better damage system especially for armor.

-Ability to lower handguns, binoculars and laser designators and to be able to change stance with binoculars in hand without weapon swapping.

Realy good points

I would pay for such useful things!

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/11758

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/6891

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/7610

[NeMeSiS 11]

What I'd really like to see in upcoming DLCs:

-Proper physics engine.

-Proper reload animations.

-Proper vehicle interiors, ability to move around in and shoot out of vehicles.

-Better damage system especially for armor.

-Ability to lower handguns, binoculars and laser designators and to be able to change stance with binoculars in hand without weapon swapping.

I would find it rather odd to pay for changes in core features.

[mrcash2009 0]

What I'd really like to see in upcoming DLCs:

-Proper physics engine.

-Proper reload animations.

-Proper vehicle interiors, ability to move around in and shoot out of vehicles.

-Better damage system especially for armor.

-Ability to lower handguns, binoculars and laser designators and to be able to change stance with binoculars in hand without weapon swapping.

As been stated core features would be implemented via patch and general engine updates separate to any DLC "content". If you included these spread over DLC you would have the most fragmented engine versions/online mess of the decade. Nor would I pay for this, if BIS (which they are not anyway) introduced carrot on a stick situations with engine updates, then people really would have a point who scream rip off :)

Edited July 26, 2010 by mrcash2009

[rübe 127]

It's easy: if you wanna see such engine improvements, buy the DLC pack(s) even if they are mostly content for now (and you're looking for other stuff). It's really silly to ask for engine updates as DLC or an editor upgrade as DLC and so on.. This may be what you want most, but really, stop beeing so shortsighted. Besides the obvious problems mrcash2009 already mentioned, guess how would an editor upgrade DLC or some engine improvements sell, compared to content-heavy DLC?

If you want to see Arma beeing supported longer, buy the DLC pack(s) - no matter what's in it (I'm sure you wont be disappointed). It's that easy. And no, this is no fanboyism, this is how it works. (or it wont, we'll see)

I for one hoped that the DLC would include not only a new faction, but with it also a new island (a new island form BIS is simply so much value!). Still I will buy the british pack, that's a no-brainer. What do you think the chances are, that more DLC and continued support gets done, if this first DLC doesn't sell too well, for whatever reasons? And that in mind, I completely understand that this first DLC pack isn't too big (as I whished it would be) and first needs to be evaluated how things did go.

Also try to imagine what might happen with BIS, if they successfully manage to sell their software directly to the enduser.

[jblackrupert 14]

Bohemia's money troubles are because they have a niche game that they refuse

to put any money into advertsing which drives it further underground.

I have nothing against DLC but for gods sake ADVERTISE the game

there are literally thousands of people who would buy the game if only

they knew it existed.

Stores won't carry it because Bohemia hasn't put any real effort into advertising it

stores aren't going to do it for them.

The community can only do so much to get the word out. Buying DLC is a bandaid solution to the problem.

Look at the demo MP numbers. I haven't seen over 100 people online since it's come out

and I've checked at different hours of the day.

Edited July 26, 2010 by jblackrupert

[Villain. 11]

jblackrupert - I think i'd have to disagree with that.

Advertising might raise sales at launch, but it could also effect the long term sales in a negative way.

If it was advertised as much as other big name titles, it would result in alot of people buying it with little to no knowledge of the series or what to expect. Let's face it, people are stupid and will buy things before doing the research because of pretty pictures or fancy features.

We see this on an almost daily basis here at the forums - Someone watches a youtube vid of A2 and think it's all guns and glory. Next minute they're here telling us the game sucks because they can't jump.

So yes, it would raise sales at launch, but look at the flip-side. Let's say (random number) 10,000 people buy it as a result of the advertising. As we know the game isn't for everyone, so we'll assume that about 30-40% loved it.

That leaves over 5,000 people who didn't care for it. I'm sure more than a few would be foaming at the mouth with anger too, and alot of them will go around to various forums, including this one, to vent their anger and warn other people not to buy the game.

As mentioned earlier, people are stupid and don't research themselves. There may be another 10,000 people out there wondering if they should buy the game and these people might stumble upon the negative reviews from people who bought it purely on impulse, and end up ignoring the game entirely.

I realise that advertising could help, but i would actually argue that the best form of advertising is and always will be word of mouth. For games like this you want a mate's honest opinion, not some exaggerated piece from a reviewer who doesn't own the game and only plays it for a week.

Every business wants to make money, but i'm glad to be supporting a developer who puts developing a quality game ahead of their desire to make money off the general public who buy things without thinking.

[Tonmeister 14]

Ok, I think its time to move past the fractious arguments of paid DLC aesthetics. We all have our likes and dislikes. I know I've certainly commented in this vain, but its not productive.

Its not about questioning your motives for buying a particular game way back when it was introduced onto the market. Much like anything these days as a consumer you have the power of choice: If you like the idea of the DLC buy it, if you don't then don't.

Besides, the community will always support the efforts of those, whether its from BI or that of a passionate member, regardless of aptitude. And the beauty of a community is that it can adapt quickly given the right tools and conditions.

And stop treating BI like they're some baby company suckling on mummas swollen teat for the past 10years.

[xxbbcc 6]

Scrap money-making with crappy, overpriced DLCs. Do a useful addon instead! Im sad that BIS is falling so low to think about that, but money rules, I guess...

Why would it be scrap money making? BIS is a business - they have bills to pay, employees to pay and (understandably) they want to make some profit, too. As long as they do a decent job, what's wrong with that?

So far we benefited from their committment and if they have trouble in the current economy, I'm willing to help them out.

I'd like to remind everyone what happened to A1 at the release: BIS was running out of money and they released a half-baked game that eventually pissed off everyone. It was a sneaky, underhanded move, something I wouldn't tolerate again.

This time, however, they're trying to do the right thing: they said clearly that they don't have enough revenue and they're actually asking us, customers / players if we'd be willing to pay for extra content. As far as I'm concerned, it's a win-win situation: we get more stuff, better engine, more features and they get revenue that they can use to reinvest.

Just because they plan to give away core features for free, it's not free for them to develop those features. If anything, it's a nice gesture that they try to keep the community as a whole by not introducing different core features for paid players. Plus, when new content is released, everyone will have a chance to decide whether to buy it or not. As much as I want to support these guys, I'm not blind and I'll only pay for quality. If we get quality, I'll be glad to buy it.

[GoOB 0]

Bohemia's money troubles are because they have a niche game that they refuse

to put any money into advertsing which drives it further underground.

I don't know what insights you have into the financial situation of BI... But unless they are significantly different to every other company in the world, releasing and developing new content is not a sign of "money troubles". If BI were dissatisfied with the sales of ARMA II, we would not be seeing the release of OA, if they were dissatisfied with the sales of OA, we would not be seeing any DLC. If they are happy with the sales of the BAF DLC, it is likely we will see more similar releases. My interpretation of the explanation we've had from BI is not that they haven't made a profit off of sales, but rather that the profit has not been big enough to fund free content like we've seen with patch 1.5.

The lack of advertising for the ARMA series is, I think, not as lamentable as it may seem. Plenty of niche developers get by quite swell without it, Paradox Interactive, 1C and a handful of others are all pretty healthy by the looks of things.

Edited July 27, 2010 by GoOB

[cole 0]

(Zipper5 asked me to post this, as he's on vacation and forgot his forum login)

BIS have been advertising OA. PC Gamer had two issues with a full page OA ad, and Maximum PC had a full page backpage ad for OA

I've seen both of those

in friggen Brussels, Belgium of all places

so it's not like BIS aren't advertising

people just don't give a shit if it's anything other than a mainstream FPS

Edited July 27, 2010 by Cole

[BeerHunter 0]

Jesus..still arguing over a few bucks for DLC?

How much did you pay for your upgrade to run ArmA2??

How much are you going to pay in a couple of years when all you hardware is obsolete??

How much are you paying PER MONTH for the ability to come on here and whine?

If BI produces 10 DLC packages over the next couple of years at the same price you are going to be about about $100.

If that is going to break the bank then maybe you should be looking for another hobby.

[jblackrupert 14]

That don't be cheap thing is getting old

[dm 9]

That don't be cheap thing is getting old

So are the "omg they're ripping us off" and the "omg its gonna split the community" and the "omg this is the end of arma/bi as we know it" things ;)