Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mbbird

Reality Check

Recommended Posts

Bis have had a slow time of it, there will be tons of Dlc with variety. If your insulted go play Cod and leave us enjoy a proper game. Know one cares for your petty observations on a war sim in its birth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
reality check people.

The reality check here is that BI owes you [the "community" as a whole] nothing.

You buy your game, you get your game. It doesn't have things in it you think it should have? Well tough titties my friend, you are not the Co-Creative Director at BI, so you have NO say in what content should be there or not.

THAT is the reality of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dwarden, I meant that in a very positive way. You will survive the nuclear holocaust, make your way to the Bohemia HQ, and live out the rest of your days cackling in a triumphant yet evil yet depressed manner, while training mutant rats to go out and bring you food and training a dog to search for surviving women. The day the world ends will be the day I lose faith in BIS. (I'm disappointed though. You guys should have a giant underground complex where all your community can ride out a nuclear holocaust while hooked up to VR sets with ArmA 17.)

I was just saying I wouldn't believe Bohemia would turn against the community like he was implying. I can see a paid DLC of ArmA 2 content, to give everybody the "Current" equipment they miss, but first we will need them to provide more content, for free, in future updates so that we can fill out the ORBAT the way it should've been filled out if events hadn't prevented them from doing so.

yeye ... see my answer... too early at morning, no coffee ;)

p.s. you forgot the FTL spaceship escape route

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The reality check here is that BI owes you [the "community" as a whole] nothing.

You buy your game, you get your game. It doesn't have things in it you think it should have? Well tough titties my friend, you are not the Co-Creative Director at BI, so you have NO say in what content should be there or not.

THAT is the reality of it.

The last time companies went in with that attitude, they either went bankrupt or were mauled by the community.

Imagine you are at the restaurant. You are offered a delicious foot with a bunch of nice things.

The food tasted ugly in the end, a bunch of promised nice things are not added and you still pay the full price.

Don't critize the chef, he owes you nothing.

Edited by Brain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The reality check here is that BI owes you [the "community" as a whole] nothing.

But people are free to point out the obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The reality check here is that BI owes you [the "community" as a whole] nothing.

You buy your game, you get your game. It doesn't have things in it you think it should have? Well tough titties my friend, you are not the Co-Creative Director at BI, so you have NO say in what content should be there or not.

THAT is the reality of it.

Uhm Yea it does?

Look: I am totally not oke with the behaviour that is being portrayed the last couple of days but all things aside.

Promises were made and i plan to wait for them patiently unless BIS announces that they basically "Screwed the pooch" on this one.

But legally speaking :j: its not liable for anything ofcourse.

Its more of a formality right about now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people really need to chill out. It's 6 days before release after 5-6 months open alpha+beta phase. While I was disappointed after checking out the dev-version this week (copy & paste modells + textures) I still have no doubt more things will be included later on. Complainers should image what would happen if BIS included 25-50 % finished things (functions, missions, vehicles, ...) that will cause error messages, crashes and even more ranting. This nasty discussion could be ended if Maruk would make a statement

--> official A2 content to A3 porting in 2014 - yes / no / maybe

--> more vehicles / units / stuff in 2013 - yes / no / maybe

--> A2 content redone as DLC in 2014 - yes / no / maybe

--> changes of already created A3 content (tank interiors, turrets, ... ) - yes / no / maybe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Legislator;2491778']This nasty discussion could be ended if Maruk would make a statement

The only statement you will ever get, if one at all, will be "Maybe, but I can't promise anything". ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the OP as my thread discusses this also but well done :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This:

They may never give us everything we want, they may take our money and have a little evil laugh every now and then about giving us all little badges on the forums, but they DO listen, and they DO respond.

This:

Patience

And:

who of us plays without mods.

I do and a lot of other people do as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only statement you will ever get, if one at all, will be "Maybe, but I can't promise anything". ;)

its-something.jpg

No, seriously ... if they have no intention to do so, they should answer with a big red no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Legislator;2491829']http://jsx.ms/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/its-something.jpg

No' date=' seriously ... if they have no intention to do so, they should answer with a big red no.[/quote']

It's never smart to axe or confirm too many features from the company POV.

So this "Maybe, won't promise anything" is actually smart from the company POV, but annoying from the customer/fan POV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no problem with it very very weakly armed jet - if it is an option to other in the fraction - not alone

no problem with it copy and paste or fantasize weapons on each side - if it is an option, to other in the fraction weapons in the fraktion - not this is all what your side have have in a vanilla version

no problem with the light commance ( and the other fraktion have a heavy all kill copter with load capability ) if it is an option to other in the fraction and not a full unbalanced air fight park.

you know bohemia ? thats all !

I think someone like

I think of operation flashpoint .... that was a weapon mix - dream .... tanks with interior ... a light and a heavy tank on all two main sides .... copters / at weapons / ifV and jets in balance an all twoe sides ..... ..... bis you know ? that was a weapon mix for single plaer pvp coop and all the others .... that was your game ! you can this !!!!

Edited by JgBtl292

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad I only paid about $30 for this game in early alpha because at the current stage I wouldn't pay the $60 dollar price tag. It's a great game that's fun to play, but the fact that each country seems to be buying from the same arms dealer really takes some of the fun away from the game. The way that it currently sits (only partially because of these multi-faction weapons) it's way too balanced. It feels like they've gone to great lengths to make it Call of Duty style gameplay where it's all based on luck. Even if it has a different model and texture it handles the exact same as it's Blufor/Opfor/Indep counterpart. Quite a few people here have said "get over it it's better than ArmA II..." but is it? One great thing about ArmA II is that since it was set in modern day they couldn't fudge statistics so that everything was neat and tidy in terms of balance, but since ArmA III is set in 2035 everything is balanced out completely and it comes down to luck of the draw and whoever shoots first wins. The game needs to be tweaked so that each faction has its strong points and its weak points, because everything being the exact same in terms of balance and the island being 60 shades of brown makes me feel like I'm playing Battlefield 3 on a larger scale but less fun (something I shouldn't be feeling because I thought BF3 was trash compared to A2.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quality over quantity and rushed release = It now feels like that 33% of the land vehicles aren't ready.

I really hope they got 3d models already but they just haven't configured those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The game needs to be tweaked so that each faction has its strong points and its weak points"

Make a mission, give blue 20 heavy tanks, and red few ifrits and some infantry. There you have it.

Both have "similar" systems. Heavy armor, light armor, support, anti-air, static, artillery, choppers, uavs ..

You, as a mission maker, take what you need, and make totally unbalanced survival battles, or totally balanced "who's the fastest draw" -missions or something in between, it's up to you, totally.

I do not understand what is the problem.

Edited by Azzur33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you know bohemia ? thats all !

I guess no one knows. I at least have no idea what you are talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"The game needs to be tweaked so that each faction has its strong points and its weak points"

Make a mission, give blue 20 heavy tanks, and red few ifrits and some infantry. There you have it.

Both have "similar" systems. Heavy armor, light armor, support, anti-air, static, artillery, choppers, uavs ..

You, as a mission maker, take what you need, and make totally unbalanced survival battles, or totally balanced "who's the fastest draw" -missions or something in between, it's up to you, totally.

I do not understand what is the problem.

That's assuming I'm making a mission as compared to playing online in a mode such as Invade and Annex, Insurgency, or Domination. I can MAKE an unfair fight, that wouldn't be hard to do, but it's unfair to say they have 'similar' system when half of the systems are the exact same and the other half are the same with different models and textures. Most of the guns even shoot the exact same caliber. What I'm saying is that everything should have its own unique standout points and drawbacks, but the way the game currently plays is that everything and its counterpart is the exact same thing but looking different. The MX is the same as the Katiba, the M2A1 is the same as the T-100. They look different but are pretty much exactly the same once you get past the looks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, if they had made another game set in the modern day against well known enemies and it wasn't as fictional as Arma 3 is, they wouldn't have been able to get away with all this copy and paste stuff on vehicles and giving different sides the same assets. Makes you wonder if part of the reason they picked a setting like they have is so they can do something like that and get away with it more easily, not that they are really getting away with it since so many people are pissed off about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with some points stated here.

First things first: It's a great game. The graphics are fabulous, the movement is smooth and the modding functions are endless.

But: The current range of vehicles is not quite wide. OP is totally right there. Can't understand why e.g. Hunter and Ifrit have the same turrets? Thats totally banana. I don't know why this is, but I do hope BI is going a bit against this issue.

Next thing are imported assets, like Arma2 L-139 or M2 HMG on the Offroad for the Indie's. I do get the point that BI may was under pressure to release their milestones, but I don't like to get reheated meals if I order a new cooked one in a restaurant

Same goes for inside views of vehicles. I know that they are very hard to model, but I can remember BI said once that they want an interior view for every vehicle (don't know if thats right). That would be totally cool.

Whether it was more consuming related to time, money or work, is something I don't know. But with this manner they seem a bit, well, "lazy" to me. Don't get me wrong, I like playing Arma a lot, which is the reason I am doing mods.

Then: Small things. Like the yet named gunnerview. It's incredible that It didn't change much from A2 to A3. Yes, PiP is something very very cool, But why not use it in some kind of gunnerview? That would make the game very very cool.

And last but not least: Optimization. I do have a rather strong rig, but Arma doesn't have more than average 10-15fps if I play on an Altis multiplayer server with several other people. And I play there with lowest settings. In SP, I can put all to ultra and I still have around 40-45fps. I have to say thats totally unacceptable. I love Altis, it's a great island with lot's of things to explore. But instead of just snooping bugfixes to increase the performance, BI releases even more content. Which makes they game in terms of performance way more worse. I had a great round of Warfare yesterday, but after about 1h30min performance was so extremly bad I had to quit gaming.

Again, don't get me wrong. I love the game, I love BI for the work they do, but I get the feeling that BI set themselves wrong goals to achieve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, if they had made another game set in the modern day against well known enemies and it wasn't as fictional as Arma 3 is, they wouldn't have been able to get away with all this copy and paste stuff on vehicles and giving different sides the same assets. Makes you wonder if part of the reason they picked a setting like they have is so they can do something like that and get away with it more easily, not that they are really getting away with it since so many people are pissed off about it.

Interesting point, and i would add more. Is this game focused on the same type of gamers?.

Edited by VanZant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great another one of these threads. At least my ignore list is getting a workout....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, the content is not really that important. The gameplay mechanics and bug-less funcionality is what I except to be the most important when I pick a game. The AI, the tactics, the speed of movement, the fatigue and the weight system, the physics - that are the most important parts of a good milsim game. Visuals and quantity of content are not (not that they are not important at all). I personally could not care less if the assets are visually similar (or almost the same) because they fulfil their role - a tank is armoured and hard to beat, a car is fast and good for recon, a soldier is a soldier. What assets do for gameplay is what matters to me. Just my two cents.

PS: I have never used every single unit in past OFP, ARMA games although I play mainly for the editor part of the game...

PS2: Of course I would not mind more variety of the models, but I wish that BIS will not make it a priority. There are much worse issues with the game now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×