wgaf

There is some seriously bad news in the latest dev sitrep ""And there are yet more brand-new vehicles being sculpted by the artists.""

You want to hear the really bad news? "And there are yet more brand-new vehicles being sculpted by the artists." from here http://dev.arma3.com/sitrep-00026

Don't try to make sense out of the game, the developers didnt.

A new low. :dead:

So there is no key for this?

I've had zero luck on many attempts using an UAV to laser guide in artillery, one more disappointment.

This has bothered me since the alpha, but is only troubling now that it's been included in the release. The reticules and functionality of the sights in the game are mismatched. The tan RCO type sight has a model of an ELCAN Spectre 1-4x battle scope thing, complete with the throw lever uses to change between magnified/unmagnified modeled on the side. But, it doesn't have this functionality, instead the "MRCO" does. Why isn't the ELCAN Spectre model used for the "MRCO" functionality? The MRCO model has windage and elevation knobs on it which are used to adjust the zeroing, so why can't you do that? Attention to detail! DETAIL! Should be easy to fix, just shuffle around which sights use which models!

Which is *exactly* what makes arma2 such a popular and excellent game. Its enormous amount of content... This is the first release where we've been robbed of content from previous games.

Are you counting reskins as separate vehicles?

I'm glad they're doing the right thing by releasing the arma2 content to the community to port into arma3. It would have been inexcusable for them to prevent it being ported in. It's still lousy that people will have to download and activate this stuff as addons, rather than have it included in the core of the game, and will limit the number of people who will play on arma3 servers, but it's better than the nothing the game 'shipped' with.

So is there confirmation that BI is doing the right thing or what?

Nice :D

Maionaze confirms they are giving refunds to people who ask for them. If you aren't satisfied with what you were sold, do what you think is right.

What's the story on this troll?

Let's lay off the personal attacks, "DM". What indications are you talking about, specifically? I suppose it ought to be pointed out that the poll is currently 75% "more content, even if it's from arma2." Do you know what good companies do, DM? Also DM, I asked you a question which you quoted and didn't answer. Which other BI release had cheap lazy reskins as the only thing setting the factions apart?

Yup, it's only sandbox is there is stuff in the sandbox to play with. There isn't. I think the "future war" idea is stupid to begin with for a simulation game, but I could learn to live with it if it were done well. The problem is, it has been executed so poorly. Not only is it so implausible as to actually insult the intelligence of players who are military buffs (and surely THEY have never been much of BI's market...), but it is just shoddy, lazy, low quality work. If it were fleshed out at least, if there was some diversity, different strenghts and weaknesses for different things, etc, then it could be fun. But it's just a tiny amount of uninspired, hideously ugly stuff with identical abilities, attributes, and even models copy-pasted 3 times and retextured. I really, really want to know what happened to BI. They used to be a detail oriented, quality oriented, serious mil sim developer. When did their mind change, what went wrong?

But in Arma3, the equipment the various factions use is identical. Some of them have different models, if you're lucky, most are just painted different colors.

Are they happy with the sales they're getting? A3 isn't yet a failure, but the release version is a failure, and it will be a failure if the enormous, glaring problems with quality and quantity of content aren't fixed soon. Which other BI release had cheap lazy reskins as the only thing setting the factions apart?

BI has done very well until now. The problem is here, now DM. No amount of reminiscing can fix problems that are here, now, can they? Did BI stockpile money from its previous successes to carry on indefinitely if future products flop? If not, then they need to do something to ensure a future, don't they? For example, to correct the mistakes made developing Arma3. It doesn't seem like some people are really grasping how big of a disaster this is. BI is my favorite game developer, I got hooked with OFP. I don't want them to fail, I want them to change course and to succeed, and to keep making *great* games. Let's be honest, Arma3 is at best still in a beta phase of development. There is time to correct the very serious mistakes with the content, but that time is not unlimited, and they need to act fast, or at least pledge fast to act. I want what all fans want, a true and good successor to Arma2. Not this lazy, sloppy, uninspired, boring, who-cares? junk. Why did they spend so much time making such an exquisite map and then tack the rest of the sloppy junk on as an afterthought?

There is no such content, sorry.

Who cares? At what point in the magical timeline did the different factions just start using repainted/reskinned copies of one another's equipment? This isn't how Arma / OFP games work.

The comanche helicopter was cancelled 9 years ago. But, alas, here it is, the "blackfoot." :j:

Porting over the Arma2 content is the only way they can save their game and thier company. If their precious "vision of the future" is so important to them, they can exclude it all from their campaign. But it needs to be available in the editor. Before they do anything else, before they put five minutes of work into their campaign, they need to port the arma 2 stuff over.

And BI needs to fire someone, publicly.

Ah yes, the L-159, which the armies of the free world have been replacing their A-10s with for a decade now.