Community driven Bug&Issue Tracker (CIT) for ARMA 2: Operation Arrowhead and ARMA 2

[Muahaha 10]

great, now at least the cutscene will at least have some sort of expression instead of the "stoned" faces

[gossamersolid 155]

Now what would be great is if BIS could give us the MLODs, we could fix the issues and then submit them for an official patch. That way BIS has almost no work to do, we do it for free and then EVERYBODY gets to enjoy it.

I'd for one love to see the BTR-90 windows fixed, backpacks (models showing) on A2 units, proper TI imaging on all A2 content, Zeroing on all A2 content, engineer repair ability on A2 characters, etc.

Even some simple reskins or new units make their way into patches? I know there's a pretty good BMP2 reskin with Russian camo.

[nyles 11]

That would be fanstastic indeed. But the key here really is that this fixed content would be released via an official patch, otherwise there is no point for online gaming since no-one will download it. Simple but sad truth.

We could even go further with this: (click!) :omg:

[.kju 3241]

A working merge config implementation or addon sync or MLOD of p3ds

would be more meaningful to see though IMO.

The content delivery is the key problem. This is why I think any effort on the side on BI should focus on it.

As first step until a3:

> Provide a simple interface to support community addon download tools

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/17496

And for a3 if still necessary:

> Implement Addon Syncronization

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/5520

[Coffeecat 10]

even if its not my favourite one,

shooting a person 500-800 distance in the face, 2-3 times without any effect is really something which should not be in a milsim;)

[mr.g-c 6]

When i read that list of the OP, i get goosebumps all over my body in a fear that all those endless and often "very old" (since OFP or Arma1) bugs and design-flaws will persist in ArmA3 aswell :-(

Thats why i fully agree with the statement by the OP later:

# The fixes of this list should be seen an investment in the future.

The reason is as almost all of them will most likely apply also for TakOH and ArmA III.

I actually wanted to write down some suggestions for ArmA3, in which actually one was the top one, maybe the only one i would have written down -> It was to simply fix ALL Bugs/Design-Flaws and add "some of the features" listed in the ArmA2:OA CIT for ArmA3.

Its the same i asked for during ArmA2 development, but the main thing i received was being bashed by the endless, mindless, loud-screaming fanboys here on that Forum. Even though i just told the truth, like its done very "natural" on other ArmA realted Forums.

So this time i keep my mouth shut, my expectations for ArmA3 on this side (to have finally fixed all old ArmA2 and older Bugs/Design-Flaws) are simply "none", even though i would highly suggest BIS to do this.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Make it simple:

1) Select/find the 10 most important engine bugs and post/vote them here + DH.

2) Select/find the 10 most annoying content bugs and post/vote them here + DH.

No discussion - just action.

[GROM64 10]

When i read that list of the OP, i get goosebumps all over my body in a fear that

all those endless and often "very old" (since OFP or Arma1) bugs and

design-flaws will persist in ArmA3 aswell :-(

Yes, my feelings are pretty much the same.

It is generally depressing, to see: this amount of bugs and issues,

in a game that has a potential.

I, bought a game through steam some months ago. Then found out, that

development is still ongoing, and product still suffers from many bugs and other issues.

I decided to give it some time and come back later. I see progress, but not enough IMO.

I understand BIS'es need, to finance further development through DLC's.

But, it's like paying someone to paint my car, while it's the engine, that needs fixing.

Hopefully BI's devs will take it seriously, before ArmA 3 is released.

If not..., hopefully free market will. :)

[Tankbuster 1733]

What's frustrating is that a good proportion of these bugs could be fixed by a line or two of code. A minute or twos work. Yet, BI spend time on setMimic. Crazy.

Take one dev guy off the line, lock him in the room with the CIT and tell him he's there for a week to fix as many of these simple ones as possible.

[.kju 3241]

There are some content bugs (mostly config ones) that are true to your statement.

Most others require first confirmation of the issue, the change/fix and testing - along with

a working dev environment for OA. Most/all work on ToH or ArmA III for a long time by now I'd assume.

And I think you underestimate the effort involved with packing, patching and delivery.

Edited July 26, 2011 by .kju [PvPscene]

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Take one dev guy off the line, lock him in the room with the CIT and tell him he's there for a week to fix as many of these simple ones as possible.

Isn't that Dwarden's job? :p

[Muahaha 10]

Now what would be great is if BIS could give us the MLODs, we could fix the issues and then submit them for an official patch. That way BIS has almost no work to do, we do it for free and then EVERYBODY gets to enjoy it.

I'd for one love to see the BTR-90 windows fixed, backpacks (models showing) on A2 units, proper TI imaging on all A2 content, Zeroing on all A2 content, engineer repair ability on A2 characters, etc.

Even some simple reskins or new units make their way into patches? I know there's a pretty good BMP2 reskin with Russian camo.

+1 on this. To save BIS from extra work and have the community satisfied, why not allow the communities fixes those content issue that are none engine related be made official maybe via a BIS-Community released patch ?

[Rough Knight 9]

One of the problems...It seems Suma and Dwarden are the keys to resolving programming issues. I am sure they are being used on ARMA3 stuff as well as the new interpolation features being investigated + existing bug problemsoving.

There are only so many hours in a day, and quite a lot of bugs to filter through. I imagine just trying to manage the evolving bug list even from CIT is a nightmare because the most important engine bugs to fix are not nessesarily the most popular or voted for ones.

I don't think they are going to be able to please us all at once purely becuase I doubt they have enough immediate time, man that list is extensive.

[sickboy 13]

+1 on this. To save BIS from extra work and have the community satisfied, why not allow the communities fixes those content issue that are none engine related be made official maybe via a BIS-Community released patch ?

There should be no need to involve BIS with such patches, I think it would nullify the point of not having to do content patches.

[alef 0]

I'm happy to see so much activity in this time by the lead programmer, thank you BI.

About the quality of tickets. If you players see an issue you want fixed, also if not your ticket, please read this and try to provide a good "repro", which means a detailed description of how to make the issue happens.

You may take for granted that when describng a problem to people like developers, who wrote the game, they will understand "on the fly" the problem. But it's not always the case. Just think if you can remember what you exaclty wrote down somewhere 5 years ago, and try to remember about a grammar error in a particular sentence in there. This is how it works also in programming, with the difference that you, as player, don't know exactly the "sentence" the programmer wrote, but you know there is an error.

Translated for other devs: "sentence" here doesn't mean the source code, which is available, I meant the design, or better, the reason why the code was written that way, the purpose.

I personally did repros for other people CIT tickets in the past, because I know what does it mean for a dev to recreate the issue in his lab. Just imagine he needs to "copy" the result you got when your bug happened, but this time he has some instrument attached to the game to spy exactly what's happening. Whit that, the dev can modify the code in seconds, or start a day long analisys to find the root causes, with the result that he may refuse to fix it because too difficult or will cost so much time & money that in their opinion it doesn't worth the effort. Now, they are producing ArmA3, so probably they even need to branch, merge and backport things, which is another difficult aspect for me to explain with examples.

We play the game. Give away time to work for free for BI it's not something everyone can or want to do. But this may change along the time, expecially when you see the results coming back.

alef

[sickboy 13]

Nice post Alef!

I would like to supplement that it's important for people to vote on important issues, as it is one of the main uses for BIS; getting a 'feel' of important issues.

Also it can be a long process, between posting an issue and actually having it fixed - so no immediate response/fix is no cause for alert - documenting the issues is half the work, and an important step,

often leading to workarounds and insight.

[nyles 11]

Without BI there is no chance for any community effort to be able to reach the majority of the players and be in widespread use on online servers (where it's really needed). Just take a look at all the problems that persist to this day with many (new) players not managing to connect on Combined Ops servers.

In my opinion, any discussion about possible content updates or additional community-provided content (fixes, reskins, etc) has to go hand in hand with the distribution method - be it a free DLC, patch or other official channel.

Ideally this is process is combined with further code fixes and rolled out over the regular and proven patch process.

[sickboy 13]

100's of servers use mods, 100's if not 1000's of users use mods, mod distribution/installation/updating tools etc are improving as well, so personally I don't see that high need for official distribution, but I suspect not everyone agrees :)

[[frl]myke 14]

100's of servers use mods, 100's if not 1000's of users use mods, mod distribution/installation/updating tools etc are improving as well, so personally I don't see that high need for official distribution, but I suspect not everyone agrees :)

Hmm...personally i do think that bugfixes should be provided by BIS as official patches. More Mod's/Addons would only improve the already existing confusion and making the "required Mod's" list on servers even longer.

Let me just dream for a moment: it would be nice if some of the minor bugs (which most are just annoying but do not break anything) could be fixed by community members and then sent to BIS for including in the next patch. Maybe a central point (website/Community Bug Solving) with a trusted member being in direct contact, giving source files to trusted community members....well, i guess you get the main plot how this could go.

As said, this was just dreaming a bit, well aware that nothing of this will happen as even if the community would be involved this way, there would be still much effort be required by BIS....but i guess a little dreaming is allowed.

[Dwarden 1124]

but some of the modules and script / functions fixes provided by community were and are already used ...

so while it's not happening as often as You wish, yet it is happening ...

[[frl]myke 14]

but some of the modules and script / functions fixes provided by community were and are already used ...

so while it's not happening as often as You wish, yet it is happening ...

I'm sorry, didn't knew that.

:EDITH:

Any chance to volunteer for fixing model bugs? Out of my head i know quite one i could fix within minutes. ;)

Edited July 27, 2011 by [FRL]Myke

[sickboy 13]

Well yes, the ideal solution comes from BIS.

But as many other things in life, the most ideal option isn't always possible / going to happen.

IMO it is unlikely that content fix patch will come from BIS, looking at history, and that A3 is scheduled for in 1 year.

Even if the fixes would be provided by the community. But I could very well be wrong, BIS has surprised us before ;).

I personally find it unrealistic and useless demands of people, to expect+demand such patch, and even using it as a reason not to buy A3 or whatever.

BIS has always supported their games, and IMO much better than most if not all other companies out there, so you do get your money's worth, and more times over if you consider the scope and possibilities of the game.

I stick with my opinion; content fixes, additions etc, can be handled by community (regardless of mod management/distribution complexity, it is possible).

Where-as engine issues cannot be solved by the community, and they are therefore IMO of greater importance, also considering that AFAIK most content bugs are rather minor.

Edited July 27, 2011 by Sickboy

[[frl]myke 14]

Well yes, the ideal solution comes from BIS.

But as many other things in life, the most ideal option isn't always possible / going to happen.

IMO it is unlikely that content fix patch will come from BIS, looking at history, and that A3 is scheduled for in 1 year.

Even if the fixes would be provided by the community. But I could be wrong.

I personally find it unrealistic and useless demands of people, to expect+demand such patch, and even using it as a reason not to buy A3 or whatever.

BIS has always supported their games, and IMO much better than most if not all other companies out there, so you do get your money's worth, and more times over if you consider the scope and possibilities of the game.

I'm sorry, didn't meant to expect nor demand anything at all. Was just stating my opinion about "community made & distributed fixes", that's all. Also i'm well aware that a lot of non-critical bugs probably wont be addressed anymore, as you say, A3 being announced.

And about supporting: preordered ToH, not that i'm overly interested in that game but "to make sure" that BIS will not run out of money and development of A3 would have to be stopped. :D ;)

EDITH:

Bah, Sickboy, shameless edit. ;)

I do agree to your opinion fully, also realizing that we're stuck to config fixing as we don't have the MLOD's which would be required for model-related bugs. I don't expect (nor do i demand) BIS to release the MLOD's to the public and this is a point where some trusted community members could come into play. But as said previously, it's a dream, dreams are surely allowed and i do not expect nor demand it to happen.

Edited July 27, 2011 by [FRL]Myke

[sickboy 13]

Wasn't meant personally, I was speaking in general, 'people' :P

I even agree with the wish for an official community content patch, but also think like you pointed out that it might not come for the same reasons.

MLOD's would be useful in any case, with or without an official community content patch :)

Hopefully we will see these near or after A3 release, though perhaps, as iirc BIS had issues with their models appearing in other commercial products, we might never see them :)

Edited July 27, 2011 by Sickboy

[[frl]myke 14]

Hopefully we will see these near or after A3 release, though perhaps, as iirc BIS had issues with their models appearing in other commercial products, we might never see them

Aye, i do remember that. That's why i fully understand that BIS will not give the MLOD's out to public.