British Troops DLC released & Official 1.01 Update

[Guest]

Shouldn't IED's and other game functionality be included in patches?

All engine features etc, are to be included in patches to anyone who doesn't buy DLC. (That's what one of the staff said earlier in the thread)

But this DLC is just half a force, a short campaign and a couple of really cool features that we should have had from the start. Not to mention the fact that BIS admitted themselves that their only references for most equipment in this DLC is from P:UKF content.

Where did you learn it's just a short campaign? Please expand!

Where did you read that they said they used UKF content? Please expand!

Richie.

[Luomu 10]

Where did you learn it's just a short campaign? Please expand!

Where did you read that they said they used UKF content? Please expand!

Richie.

Fact: "Short campaign" is on the feature list. Speculation: It's a 9€ mini-expansion, the length of the campaign is likely somewhere between EW and OA.

As for "used content from X", I haven't seen that either. Well, of course the content is based on real life :)

[Guest]

Good point.

If 2 people model a circle, is one copying the other?

Or is it just a case of, no matter who makes the circle, it's always going to look like a circle?

People should think a little more before making bold claims. :)

[Pathy 0]

http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1693365&postcount=117

[SeamanStaines 10]

I'm glad they are including all engine features in patches. That definitely makes the situation much better than I thought.

It says it's a short campaign in the first post.

* New single player campaign

o Player will command a mobile observation team of British troops into battle with Takistani insurgents. Short campaign will focus on depicting asymmetrical warfare with a guerilla force and counterinsurgency operations.

I didn't say that they have used UKF content, I said they used UKF content as references. BIS have communicated with UKF, and have said that they used their stuff as references when UKF asked them about it.

[Guest]

http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1693365&postcount=117

Well that seems fair enough to me! :)

Now can people stop all these stupid claims? :)

[SeamanStaines 10]

Good point.

If 2 people model a circle, is one copying the other?

Or is it just a case of, no matter who makes the circle, it's always going to look like a circle?

People should think a little more before making bold claims. :)

The mistakes that UKF made in their models are repeated in the BIS models, because BIS only used the UKF models as their references. Instead researching, they've simply rebuilt their own models while looking at pictures of UKF content, repeating any mistakes they have made.

[Pathy 0]

It's something they're well within thier rights to do. And I wouldn't say that; we don't know what additional reference they used - it's obvious they've done research of thier own, but they have unfortunately repeated some of the errors that we made in our VBS2 work. Either way, this is an uncomfortable discussion so, lets move on.

Edited July 24, 2010 by Pathy

[SeamanStaines 10]

Well that seems fair enough to me! :)

Now can people stop all these stupid claims? :)

It's not a stupid claim. Basically, BIS have just rebuilt stuff that was made by other people for VBS2, without actually doing any more research and referencing.

It's something they're well within thier rights to do.

Yes, they are will within their rights to do it, but it's pretty poor quality DLC if they can't bothered to research anything themselves. The content made by modders is much better quality, personally, I'm just going to use that.

I'm just disappointed, I was completely prepared to pay for DLC if it was the quality that BIS usually give us, I just expected more.

Edited July 24, 2010 by SeamanStaines

[Guest]

The mistakes that UKF made in their models are repeated in the BIS models, because BIS only used the UKF models as their references. Instead researching, they've simply rebuilt their own models while looking at pictures of UKF content, repeating any mistakes they have made.

I wouldn't say "instead of researching", they are a big company and cannot afford to release completely random stuff. But yes, perhaps there are some areas they have overlooked.

Or maybe it was coincidence?

just maybe :p

[SeamanStaines 10]

Is it just too much to ask that they put some effort in before presenting a product that is half the price of the Operation Arrowhead?

Edited July 24, 2010 by SeamanStaines

[MontyVCB 0]

Nope. And neither do they. DLC is a cheesy way to deliver a game.

In your opinion it is, there is nothing wrong with 'DLC' at all. Look at the flight sim community, they seem to get on just fine and their are countless amounts of DLC/Commerical payware floating about for it.

You've still yet to justify why you should have it for free, your not entitled to it. You paid for ArmA2:OA not ArmA2:OA + free british addon pack at a later date.

You've also been told that BIS plan to do both paid for and free DLC. So your arguement about BIS not doing free DLC is mute. It won't break MP either, if you want to see what games are not using DLC you use that wonderful filter tool in the MP browser.

[Guest]

Is it just too much to ask that they put some effort in before presenting a product that is half the price of the original game?

So you are saying they put no effort in?

I think you should spend a day working with them. Then you will see they actually put a large amount of effort into everything they do.

Even if it's not perfect, they will have put much effort into it.

[mattxr 9]

Ill surely be buying them! Business is Business!! :D and tbh there prices are way way cheaper than any DLC i have seen on this scale!! with any other game... Dont like it haha dont buy it Simples!

Definition of Business

Economic system in which goods and services are exchanged for one another or money, on the basis of their perceived worth. Every business requires some form of investment and a sufficient number of customers to whom its output can be sold at profit on a consistent basis.

Edited July 24, 2010 by MattXR

[SeamanStaines 10]

So you are saying they put no effort in?

I think you should spend a day working with them. Then you will see they actually put a large amount of effort into everything they do.

Even if it's not perfect, they will have put much effort into it.

I like BIS, and I like the Arma series. But this time, I don't think they have done their best. I don't think they put in enough content and enough effort to justify the price.

[Guest]

I like BIS, and I like the Arma series. But this time, I don't think they have done their best. I don't think they put in enough content and enough effort to justify the price.

Fair enough, but at this stage we only have a rough idea of what they are putting in, so we should save judgements at least until after it's released.

[MontyVCB 0]

I think we'll have to wait until we see a full unit list, and/or if they take on board any feedback and make some changes. Release is over a month away still, the best way of making and paid for DLC sucessful is to release well detailed and researched units or they may not get the positive sales they were after.

[Blake 0]

I somehow think UK troops "belong" to OA setting so buying them is a no-brainer as the price is very affordable.

But if future brings yet more country-spesific units like the French and Germans I'm not sure and it will definately not depend on units themselves but other content.

What would be really lovely is something like 20€ DLC concentrating on Cold War, Vietnam or WW2.

[mattxr 9]

I like BIS, and I like the Arma series. But this time, I don't think they have done their best. I don't think they put in enough content and enough effort to justify the price.

Well you show me 1 game which has cheaper DLC with more content and scope that BIS is doing?

[Prydain 1]

I wouldn't say "instead of researching"

Edge would. He says a few times that they didn't properly research all of the content.

It is obvious that little, if any, research was done.

[BeerHunter 0]

Will the DLC be available in ArmA2 as well or only in OA?

[DomZ 15]

Artillery sounds good. Some questions I have about games setup in the mission editor are:

1. Will high command be able to order artillery strikes by clicking on the map though an artillery strike menu option? This might be for the selected units that have artillery or mortar pieces.

2. Will a squad commander be able to order artillery strikes by units under their command?

3. Will a squad commander be able to request artillery strikes under the same high command automatically.

4. Will it be possible to order the type of ammo and number of rounds to fire without third party scripts?

5. Will the artillery modules be required or will the artillery just work automatically?

6. Can artillery strikes be setup by pointing in the 3D view?

7. Will gunners have a long range aiming system in the standard GUI?

[Guest]

Edge would. He says a few times that they didn't properly research all of the content.

It is obvious that little, if any, research was done.

No, it's not obvious.

They obviously did research, or they wouldn't even be able to develop the product, duh. I don't even know how you come out with such babble, haha.

All you do is bash their work, so your opinion is obsolete anyway. When you start working for them, I will start listening to your stupid comments. :rolleyes:

[MontyVCB 0]

I would say Prydain is correct, some aspects of the equipment has not be researched as well as it could of been. There are numerous errors with the equipment shown so far. I am however hoping that for the release some of the more obivous ones are corrected.

[Kristian 47]

Takes place 2 years in future.. How can people claim it to be unrealistic? :j: