Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

roshnak

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1130

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Posts posted by roshnak

  1. Posted · Edited by roshnak

    I can be defined as a hardcore pro-realism fan and I'm against the current implementation of the sway because it's unrealistic, feels fake and artificial and has nothing to do with how weapons are handled in real life.

    Don't use realism to defend this implementation, because that just shows that you don't know how this stuff works in real life.

    Video games are not real life and there is currently no way to accurately recreate the experience of aiming and shooting a firearm in a video game. I don't see how arguing about the realism of those aspects is very helpful to either side.

    Mandatory but minimal forced free aim would go around solving this.

    It works wonders in Insurgency and Red Orchestra 2.

    Those games don't support TrackIR, and freeaim with TrackIR can be a bit disorienting.

  2. Posted · Edited by roshnak

    This is true for three reasons:

    They had the game in Alpha release so they had more people to test it than any other title.

    I'll grant you this, but:

    They built off the backs of the older games.

    With, the exception of OFP, when has this ever not been the case?

    They added so few things that there were bound to be less bugs.

    Are you talking about content, or features? Becuase as far as I am aware, Arma 3 had as many as or more new game mechanics than any previous title (again, with the exception of OFP). Why would you expect there being fewer car models to cause there to be less bugs?

  3. Posted

    I paid ~£30 for ArmA3, ~£15 for the DLC Collection Pass thing, and nothing for a set of mod tools (and of course the freely available mods) that have allowed me to edit this game into what I want/need it to be. What other game(s), allow you to have a T80 vs M1A1 duel one minute, a helicopter insertion into enemy occupied territory the next, and then fire a god-damn chicken gun at the side of a house the next..

    While I agree with the general sentiment of this post, I do think you should compare Arma 3's price as it is right now ($60), not as it was in a prerelease state.

  4. Posted

    Maybe when they make you a mod you'll have a mandate to decide what's up for discussion and what's relevant but until such time I'll continue to post what I consider pertinent and relevant. BIS can fund their patches however they see fit but that doesn't change the fact that the added value from spending $15 (over not doing so) amounts to just two helicopters. Maybe they need to change what they're doing if people don't see voluntary support of the additional features as sufficient motivation to purchase.

    You seem set on arguing for the sake of it all over this forum.

    The fact that I don't agree with you doesn't mean that I'm just arguing for the sake of it, and that accusation doesn't invalidate any of my points. But since this debate can't contribute in any productive way to the topic, I'll excuse myself from it.

  5. Posted · Edited by roshnak

    I've already donated to RHS (and haven't bought the DLC either) but this isn't really pertinent to the discussion which is proposing that a mechanism should be considered to allow mod makers to sell their creations rather than rely on voluntary donations. You might not like the proposition but the discussion and the point about relative value (compared to BI's DLC) is still valid.

    First of all, the discussion wasn't about relative value. It was an accusation that BIS deliberately released an unfinished game with the intention of making money of of modders backs.

    Second, I don't see the point of comparing mods to DLC when the relative value of those products are not easily comparable and highly subjective.

    And again, and most importantly, and stop ignoring this: It is incredibly misleading to say that the Helicopters DLC was just 2 helicopters. Several imporant features were developed alongside the DLC as part of that package, but released for free with the intent of the purchases from the DLC helicopters supporting the development of those features.

    RHS is a cool mod. If you want to pay for high quality mods like that, then fine. This thread is supposed to be for discussing how such a system could be implemented and the pros and cons of paid user content. What does complaining about not being satisfied with the DLC have to do with that? At the end of the day, this whole line of discussion was started by a guy who just posted a thread about how he thinks DLC should be free because BIS apparently didn't give him everything they "promised" and he has arbitrarily decided that DLC content that was never advertised or shown off prior to release should have been in the game in the first place.

    Edit:

    No mod can belong 100% to one person/team. Gong to stroke my own ego for a second but even something like my apache has to rely on outside assistance http://mechmodels.com/mas/downloads/ah64v2/manual/ah64dv2_manual.html

    So if someone comes along and creates a fully custom vehicle (like I did) and uses a script function to perform a major component, even if we did the majority of coding, all of the modelling and just about all of the texturing, outside sources still proved to be a very important aspect to which a particular function would not have been possible.

    What then?

    I would assume that things like this could be taken care of with deals before release. But you're right, it could potentially cause problems with collaboration or building on other people's concepts.

  6. Posted · Edited by roshnak

    I don't see why it's ridiculous, his point is clear, he'd rather pay $15 for the RHS mod (numerous vehicles, both ported and wholly original) than BI's Helicopters DLC (2 vehicles).

    I would too.

    Then do it. You don't have to buy the DLC and the RHS team has a donation link on their site. But it's still silly to get mad that the DLC only has 2 vehicles when the reason that this is the case is because BIS made a decision to release the majority of the DLC content for free, including numerous props, a new helicopter texture, a new variant of the MH-9, and several game features.

    Why is DLC even a part of this discussion? It has nothing to do with the topic.

  7. Posted

    You have played A3, lets say simplicity in play, dummy heals, run anywhere with any weight without consequence, driving, AI, multi shots to kill.. I'll finish there.

    Overall its the feel of A3 when compared to playing A2CO, if you can't see the difference then you weren't playing A2CO to its fullest potential, I can't change that, but A3 is a lite version in every respect, but that's only my view, based on the way I play the game.

    What are you even talking about?

    I'm going to ignore the "simplicity of play" comment, since I'm assuming it was just a preface to the actual gameplay aspects you mentioned.

    Arma 2 had the same "use heal action to restore a portion of HP" mechanic that Arma 3 does. All Arma 3 did was add another intermediate level healing kit that is carried by individual soldiers. Arma 2 also had an optional medical system module that was complete garbage. All it did was turn killing shots into incapacitating shots Left 4 Dead style.

    The weight and fatigue system has already been covered, but I'll reiterate. There was no weight system at all in Arma 2, and you could literally jog forever. Prior to the introduction of the new fatigue system, Arma 3 had the exact same weight and fatigue system that Arma 2 had.

    Driving is exactly the same as it was in Arma 2. Exactly the same.

    From the outside, the AI are almost exactly the same as they were in Arma 2, with some minor improvements.

    Multiple shots to kill -- you mean BI's attempt to approximate the body armor that people are wearing in game? Have you tried shooting unarmored targets? They die just as fast as people did in Arma 2. There are certainly problems with the body armor simulation, but do you think it was more realistic to treat civilians wearing T-shirts and shorts as having the same level of protection as soldiers wearing plate carriers and helmets?

    When was the last time you played Arma 2 without mods? Because, as far as I can tell, you think vanilla Arma 2 is a game that it isn't.

  8. Posted · Edited by roshnak

    Unfortunately I've now got to say goodbye to Arma after many years of enjoyment and many hours of creating mission and gameplay. As previous posts have stated, Arma needs a major engine overhaul. I'm not going to bore you and bang on about it, but when you build a high-performance gaming rig that costs a shed load of money and get 11-20FPS it's a no-brainer what BIS have to do. I don't know if it's true, but if Arma doesn't utilise multicore processors it needs to be scrapped if the current engine cannot be modified to support multicore.

    I've put a lot of money and time into Arma what with creating missions, learning to code and maintaining a dedicated server, but if I can't enjoy playing the game myself unfortunately it's time to move on. BTW, I had a bash on DCS World last night and was blown away - not just by the immersion, but at the level of detail, not to mention the performance. With that said, I'm also prepared to pay £30 for a highly detailed model of aircraft because of the attention to detail and realism of the aircraft. I do after all get what it says on the tin and it's clearly what it says it is and that's a Digital Combat Simulator.

    It sucks that you are getting such bad performance. All I can say is that I have a relatively high-end PC that doesn't have nearly as much trouble running Arma as yours apparently does. Arma doesn't fully utilize multicore processors, but very few game do.

    Just so you know, DCS doesn't utilize multicore processors any better than Arma does and also struggles to make full use of modern hardware. They are apparently working on an updated (not new) graphics engine that should allow for more detailed terrains and better hardware usage, but it has been in development for more than 4 years and as far as I know there is no ETA on the release. Flight sims are not known for timely updates.

    Either way, I don't know why you're even comparing Arma with DCS. They are completely different games, in different genres, with different goals. Even if they were to flesh out the ground game more, you would still have the problem of there being an incredibly bare bones AI, and the game relying heavily on mission scripting. I mean, if you really like flipping switches, then DCS is definitely the game for you, but that's not what Arma is about, and it never has been.

    Edit:

    If I was into air combat, then DCS would be the one to have. But this series is not about that, its mostly all types of war with a heavy lean towards infantry. So what arma does, DCS can't do i.e. infantry. That's what this series is.

    This I agree with.

    With A3, BI took a different route, they tried to pull in mainstream players from titles such as BF3. It did work to a degree, but that left it in an odd place really, halfway to nowhere. I think many of the initial players it brought over have dripped away because of the problems, most of us are used to to these problems, but some just can't be doing with it and move away.

    This I really don't. What changes did BI make in an attempt to "pull in mainstream players from titles such as BF3?"

  10. Posted

    Yeah? I paid 20 dollars for ArmA III and got 7 helicopters, but if I didn't have to pay for RHS and got 7 helicopters, and on top of this even if I were to pay 15 dollars I would still have seven helicopters whereas the helicopters DLC for 15 bucks has two helicopters.

    Without a game to plug them into, the 7 helicopters you got for free from RHS would be pretty useless. It seems to me that you are primarily interested in art assets. Again, there is much more to a video game that how many or what kind of helicopters and cars you can drive.

    they should have been in the game in the first place.

    Why do you say that?

  11. Posted

    Arma 3 is basically the same game as Arma 2. It just has different vehicle and weapon models. What changes have been made to Arma 3's gameplay to drag it into this middle ground that you speak of?

    As for this comment:

    Of course, there will be some who find the balance right, but pressing the 'Q' button to start up an aircraft kind of puts things into perspective. That's Battlefield, but the flying isn't.

    Do you find the core experience of driving a car in real life to be the act of driving it, or adjusting your seat and mirrors, buckling your seat belt, and turning the key in the ignition? Would you say a driving simulator that features realistic driving, but does not allow you to do those other things is confusing or unrealistic?

  12. Posted · Edited by roshnak

    I'm pretty sure they both add tanks to. Just because FR4NCH3K's point was statstically inaccurate, doesn't make his point any less valid.

    Well, his whole point is invalid. Art assets are not the only thing (or even the most important thing) that goes into a game. Just because the game only has one MBT for each faction doesn't mean the game is half-baked. I'm not saying there aren't content problems in Arma 3, because there are. There are re-used assets, and what I would consider to be gaps in the vehicle lineup (lack of HMMWV equivalents), but what game doesn't take shortcuts and re-use art assets? And it's not unreasonable to think that a military unit would deploy with MRAPS instead of HMMWVs.

    It certainly doesn't seem fair to take a developer's statement acknowledging the role the modding community plays in the succes of the game as offloading of responsibility onto modders. Arma 3 has a full singleplayer campaign and a fairly robust and innovative multiplayer gamemode in the form of Zeus. The game has tons of problems, but it's not any more half-baked than Arma 2, Arma, or even OFP were.

    edit:

    A3 Helicopters DLC ($15): CH-67. Mi-290 (2 helicopters)

    Fair enough, I didn't realize that he was referring to DLC.

    On the other hand, that's only a valid point if you don't consider that the Helicopters DLC was essentially an optional purchase you could make to help finance the continued development of Arma 3 game features such as the AFM, slingloading, and firing from vehicles, which would be released for free to everyone.

  13. Posted · Edited by roshnak

    Hell, at this point I'd rather have my money go to some of the community members (Red Hammer Studios, for example) rather than to Bohemia, because at least if I were to pay 15 dollars for escalation I'd get a whole lot more than two helicopters.

    Arma 3 (no DLC): Wy-55, CH-49, MI-38, PO-30, A/MH-9, AH-99, UH-80 (7 helicopters)

    RHS Escalation: AH-64, CH-47, UH-60, Ka-52, Ka-60, Mi-24, Mi-8/M (7 helicopters)

  14. Posted

    Nah I get the point in that he made the thread to discuss experiences of people who have used various alternatives to the donation, hence the mention of the paypal fee, patreon, all of the information pertaining to the income and money alongside a mention of hurdles and what have you.

    That's why I still want to know what kju meant by "do donations work?" Work in what sense? Make enough money to be worth having a donation link? Obviously if you make any money at all then it was worth it, since having a donation link is essentially free. Make enough money to create a sustainable living? Obviously not, and it seems a little silly to have thought that it would be possible given the size of this community and the nature of donations.

    As far as I can tell, there isn't much room to discuss anything but kju's situation, since he is the only person to have come forward with any real expectations for donations.

  15. Posted

    Consider how many of those mods are any good/worth while additions. Consider how many of them were rush jobs just to get in within the deadline. Consider how many of those projects wont be finished because the creators rushed them for the deadline and simply can't be bothered to finish them (or quit releasing anything further because they don't win). Consider those 8 guys, working solidly for a year on an official DLC and compare the standard of the end result to the "standard" of some of the submissions made for the MANW. I'd have rather that money be kept inhouse for BI to work on DLCs rather than some of the half-arsed attempts submitted for MANW.

    Basically, this. What MANW actually resulted in was a bunch of poorly made or rushed addons by people attempting to cash in on the prize, and a bunch of better addons made by people who would have made them anyway. Plus, unlike an expansion or DLC, there is very little return on the investment, unless you think that something that was submitted to MANW was so good that it will cause a substantial number of people who would not otherwise have bought Arma 3 to purchase it just to use the MANW content.

  17. Posted · Edited by roshnak

    I explained how it is similar to what Life server owners are doing. I never said it was similar in every way or that it was at all similar to selling other people's content. It is similar to what Life server owners are doing in that it is operating under the guise of openness, while actually granting priveges to users who pay money. Also, limiting noise from people you don't agree with is a good way to create an echo chamber.

    The only people who win in your scenario are modders who think they are above criticism, or that people need to pay them money in order for their feedback to be worth considering.

    By the way, there is very little real criticism on these forums. Are naive feature requests and people eagerly asking for updates or release dates really so bothersome to you that you feel you need to filter them out by charging people money?

  19. Posted

    I really doubt it - it's just pie in the sky thinking.

    Ive literally lined up the same exact units with the same exact view distance and settings on the same map on both Arma 3 and VBS2 64 bit and my 16 gigs of ram pipin' to go.

    Result: Performance was far exceeded on Arma 3.... Ive mentioned this before but far be it from actual tangible results to interfere with the "...but VBS2 does it!!!!!! Wahhhhh!" tantrums.

    This is not a good test. As you yourself pointed out, Arma 3 is not VBS2. While built on the same base, they were built and optimized differently. The only way these test results would be valid is if you tested Arma 3 with a 32-bit .exe and a 64-bit exe, VBS2 with a 32-bit and 64-bit .exe, or some other game in both 32-bit and 64-bit.

  20. Posted

    Setup a public website where people can download your releases for free (as is enshrined in BI's TOS), promote it with single thread/post on this board but don't otherwise post about the work here and grant posting rights on your own forums only to contributors, donors and your modding peers (whose feedback you welcome because it's knowledgeable both technically and in terms of understanding the massive effort involved in creating quality content). Plenty wouldn't like it but they're probably the ones who you don't really want to hear from, let those who're actually invested in your outputs provide feedback on how you spend your creative time.

    This is a great example of why people would think that getting money involved in modding, even in the form of donations, is a bad idea.

    I don't have a problem with donations, but this is a terrible idea. It's the same kind of shady stuff that those Life server owners do - charging people money to be a part of your community and to have their opinions heard.

  22. Posted

    nice darkhorse, you made that post in multiple threads now, the problem is, it consists of completely false accusations, he didnt ask for "thousands upon thousands" lol wtf... he stated clearly that his primary goal was to make the donations help covering his social security to make sure he can go to a doctor if he get ill while modding, and so that he doesnt starve... aka minimum of sustainability to pursue his modding goals and all of that while scraping a career as a industry professional as whom he would have earned litterally "thousands upon thousands", maybe get you facts straight...

    Assuming that .kju's goal was actually to make a living wage from modding Arma, saying that he was hoping to make thousands of dollars is an accurate statement, depending on the time frame that we are talking about here. He would certainly have needed to make thousands of dollars over the course of a year, and probably more than $1000 over the course of a couple of months. I don't know what country .kju lives in, but I doubt that he would have needed much less than $1000 a month to live on. A quick check of Wikipedia suggests that one would need to make more than $600 a month just to be living above the poverty line (60% of median income according to the EU) in just about every country in Europe. I could be totally wrong about this, of course, since I don't live in Europe and for all I know it could cost a ridiculously small amount of money to live on in whatever country .kju lives in.

    Either way, expecting to make enough money to live on through donations for Arma mods (or donations for just about anything, really) is unrealistic at best.

    And I have to ask again, is this thread supposed to be about whether donations can help modders make some extra money on the side, or whether modding Arma can be an actual career?

  23. Posted

    I guess my main question is, what is your end goal here? You mention things like social benefits, hourly wages, and how modding is still seen as a hobby. Is it your intention to try to make modding Arma into a career? A sole or primary source of income? Because if you are, then asking donations definitely seems like the wrong way to go about it.

    I can understand if you love Arma and love modding it and want to be able to do it more, and I understand the time investment and skill involved in creating high quality content for games, but the simple fact of the matter is that, with very few exceptions (FSX, X-Plane), modding is a hobby. I kind of doubt that the problem with your donations is that people didn't know that you were asking for them. I suspect that the only way to make any substantial amount of money would be to just outright charge for your addons.

    But if your goal is to just raise awareness for donation links so that modders can make a few more dollars, and not so that they can feed themselves or pay rent, then perhaps you could talk to addon hosting sites like Armaholic about adding large-ish donation banners to download pages. It would probably pick up a few more donators from the pool of people who get their addons from offsite and don't visit the forums.

  24. Posted · Edited by roshnak

    Probably A3 MP is never going to happen how any of us may want it or imagined it, so you just need to get over it and move on.

    Who are you replying to? The OP? Because it sounds like that's exactly what happened.

    Also, what do you mean by "how any of us want or imagined it?" I think what everyone wants is a playable frame rate, or to not have degraded performance in multiplayer compared to singleplayer. Are you saying that will never happen?

  25. Posted

    Well you answered the question yourself - the AI in the game is a real performance killer, but so are large maps with lots of objects on them. Add to that advanced physic simulation, dynamic weather changes, large view distance and various scripts and you bring down performance on every system. It wouldn't be really fair to compare the game to some other open world games out there which have a lot more primitive AI and such. The CPU utilization and MP performance issues were debated and it was mostly agreed that they'd have to be improved upon.

    I'm not really sure what this means. What is so advanced about Arma's physics simulation? Why should dynamic weather changes be resource intensive? View distances are configurable. Yes, AI in Arma is a performance killer, but that wouldn't explain why people get worse FPS in a KOTH mission than they do in a large single player mission.

    I also never compared the AI in Arma to any other game, and actually specifically excluded it from comparison (hence the part of my post that reads "other than AI").

×