roshnak

To be fair, in some gamemodes, War Thunder can be about as realistic as Arma is.

So, what, you're just arguing in circles now?

I believe that I have been very clear and drawn adequate parallels between demos and trailers and excerpts. There's really no reason to delve into that any further. While BIS certainly could label DLC content in the editor, they haven't done so. I'm really not sure why you are so vehemently defending this strategy. You're acting like people want BIS to just give them things for free, and that's not what anyone is saying. They're just suggesting that the current system is maybe not the right solution. Really, if the current system rubs people the wrong way, maybe it's not the best marketing strategy in the first place. I would also appreciate it if you fixed your second quote, since I did not post that. Would you consider posting suggestions for improving the current system? Maybe they're really great ideas and someone will see it and make a change. As for your claims that people are voting out of self-interest, while I'm certain that plays some part, there are many people in this thread whose posts don't bear out that claim. Many of us have bought DLC from BIS in the past, are planning or already have bought the current batch of DLC, but still have misgivings about the current system. People have stated that they are going to buy the DLC, but are still unhappy about the in-game pop-ups and overlays. Others have stated that they have already bought the DLC, but are concerned they will be unable to use it since it will likely be difficult to balance the restrictions on players who do not own it in missions. I, personally, have stated that I'm not sure that DLC is necessarily the best method of gaining more revenue from the game. I understand that there will likely never be a solution that makes everyone happy, but the current situation offends my sensibilities and makes me not want to play the game at all. We can at least try to minimize those kinds of feelings. Edit: The problem is that the proposed system kind of splits the community, anyway. It really renders the DLC content largely unusable for players who don't own it, which is fine. But the problem, as a few others in this thread have stated, is that if I don't own the DLC and a mission uses a DLC helicopter as necessary method of transportation, and no one else playing knows how to fly, the mission is unplayable. That forces mission designers to either never use DLC content in a mission critical way, or to just accept that people wh don't own the DLC can't play their missions. In which case, what is even the difference between the proposed system and not having the content at all?

Why not? It doesn't hurt anything to include it, and it's not like previous games haven't included silly assets.

First of all, you're being needlessly pedantic. A demo is an advertisement in the same sense that an excerpt from a book or a trailer for a movie is an advertisement. Second of all, there is much less distinction to be drawn when the content being demoed is seemlessly merged with a full game that I have purchased. I didn't choose to install a demo and try it out. I'm placing down a bunch of civilian vehicles in the game I just bought and woops one of them apparently I can't actually get into or has a dumb icon or overlay on my screen while I'm using it. This system is obnoxious. Pergor said it feels like blackmail and I agree. It's just kind of a gross marketing strategy and I think there has to be a better solution.

Yes, it is. A game demo is an advertisement.

Fair enough. I'm just not certain that some people are aware how intrusive it gets. I'm sure that someone will say that it's better than not being able to use the assets at all, but it's really, really not. I honestly have no idea how that was the message you took from my post. I specifically stated that the new system is more intrusive than the old one.

I mean... seems like a fair description to me.

It's a good thing that serving in the military isn't the equivalent of an arm wrestling contest, then. Maybe we could try to put aside whether men are stronger than women or whatever for a little while and recognize that women are serving in militaries around the world and have served in combat roles in conflicts throughout history.

If that's your reason for buying the DLC, maybe it would be better to go with the NS2 strategy I suggested earlier and sell badges and patches. You're really overreacting to the concerns people are having about the proposed DLC system. Nobody is saying they think the content should be free. Very few people are saying that Arma 2's system was ideal. People have legitimate concerns about being able to include DLC content in their missions. Someone said that perhaps the system was working as intended if it forced friends of players who own the DLC to buy it, but I would argue (from experience) that people who aren't going to buy the DLC for themselves probably aren't going to buy it because their friends did. As I stated earlier, I own almost all of the DLC for Arma 2 and only ever used BAF once or twice because no one I played with wanted to purchase it and they didn't want to deal with the low res assets. The new system is even more restrictive. That is just anecdotal evidence, sure, but I have no reason to believe that the new system will change anyone's mind, so I probably won't be buying any of the DLC. One my personal concerns is that I find the way the DLC is implemented to be obnoxious. Now, we don't know how the helicopter DLC will work quite yet, but I find the advertising in the Karts DLC incredibly irritating. I don't appreciate gameplay interrupting advertisements asking me for money in a game I've already paid for. I really don't want Free To Play style microtransaction ads in my $60 video game. If they are going to render DLC content practically unusable, I'd rather not be forced to download it. Please note: None of what I've stated in any way implies that I want free content. I recognize that monetizing the ongoing development of a game like Arma is difficult, and while I may have certain feelings about DLC as a concept and whether or not Arma should need ongoing development in the first place, they don't reflect the reality of the situation. What I have done is voiced some concerns I have with the proposed system of distributing DLC, and suggest that perhaps BIS should look into alternate solutions.

I have been posting in those threads. What's wrong with being a fanboy is that it prevents you from logically examining a situation and seeing both sides of an argument because you are too emotionally invested in one side. Edit: I never said he got it for free. I just said he got it.

It doesn't matter which method is used. He bought the Supporter Edition and thus gets the DLC without any restrictions whatsoever.

It's good to see that you have such a progressive attitude.

The system of including DLC in expensive special edition releases of video games? This has nothing to do with Bohemia's new DLC system. You're really starting to sound like a fanboy.

The question, though, is why? Like, those games already exist.

Go-karts aren't vanity items, though. They're gameplay items. Vanity items are things like hats or skins that you can utilize in normal situations. The go-karts are vehicles require their own gameplay situations and missions designed for them.

Out of curiosity, what video games do you think are more expensive than Arma 3?

I guess my concern with a radar system, which is that same concern I have for TGPs, is that, as far as I know, it's pretty much impossible to control both the radar and the airplane at the same time. Do you know if that problem has been solved?

This was a tiny thing that a single developer made. Probably in his spare time. Unless you think that developers should spend every waking moment working, it's pretty hard to argue that this took any time away from development of Arma 3. It was also pretty obvious it was going to be released eventually. The only thing that is surprising is that they decided to charge for it.

This is the core of the problem with DLC in this franchise as I see it. I'm just not sure that there is a good way to monetize premium content in a game as open to third party content as Arma is. Most of the best premium content systems offer cosmetic additions -- cool hats or new uniform colors or whatever -- but that kind of thing is undermined in Arma because the community can make many of the same cosmetic changes that BIS can for free. The only people who would buy that stuff are people who just want to donate money to BIS. You can release special vehicles and weapons like they are doing now, but, as long as you aren't restricting features, what is to stop community members from making their own versions of those things? And you can't restrict features to DLC (I'm not talking about Arrowhead style expansions) because that will breed enormous amounts of ill will, as you are basically holding customers hostage for more money. Personally, I haven't been a huge fan of either Arma 2's or the current DLC systems. I bought all the DLC for Arma 2, with the exception of the ACR DLC, because I wanted to support the company, but I only ever wound up using any of it a couple of times becuase no one I played with bought it and they didn't want to deal with the low res assets and the low res optics were unusable. There's a really solid chance I won't even be buying the new DLC because it's pretty expensive and I know I'll never use it either since they appear to have found a way to make it even more obnoxious for people who don't own it. It might be worth considering doing what Unknown Worlds did with Natural Selection 2 and saying, "Hey, we want to keep giving you guys new stuff for free, but if you give us money you can have a cool badge next to your name or unique patches on your uniforms." Then again, UWE only raised about half of the $550,000 they were looking for. Honestly, it's a hard problem to solve, but I do know that I like the new system even less than I liked the old one.

Out of curiosity, why do so many people use purchased models in this community?

War Thunder is a really fun game. Neither War Thunder nor World of Tanks is an MMO.

So I guess the April Fools joke wasn't a joke in any sense, then? Since not only are they releasing the Karts DLC (obviously) but they are also releasing it as paid DLC. So which part was the joke? On a related note, I think it's pretty hilarious that one of Bohemia's stated selling points for their premium content system is that it allows players to "TRY-BEFORE-YOU-BUY" and a bunch of people immediately bought the unreleased DLC that they have not had a chance to try.

"Copy my stance" is just mislabeled. It's actually "Go back to choosing your own stance." It just resets the AI to default stance behavior after forcing them prone or whatever.

I guess I'm not sure why this thread gets to stay here while the thread with a video reporting a bug allowing planes to fly backwards was merged into the video thread.