lol
#creator_dlc_discussion
ashen belfry
devout turtle
instead of explaining the same points over and over
molten shard
People will ask a question 10 posts after its been answered
ashen belfry
More like 2
devout turtle
there are about 5 points of interest in the whole thread since last wednesday
open mulch
- the CDLC politics itself
- my Community won't get it but i like it
- the Price is too much
- there will be no free mods more
- repeat the above stuff every day a week
Is this a ToDo list for some people? π
wraith sleet
We also still don't have answers to our questions about how it works fully. So I am still not 100% on the detail of how this will be technically deployed and the extent to which players without will be excluded from the server.
ashen belfry
Thats been answered in detail already
wraith sleet
No it hasn't, it is speculation it isn't confirmed by homesick. We have gone over this, my and dedmen's questions have not yet been answered
open mulch
Actually, you need to buy it when you want the Content, when you don't buy it, it wouldn't be downloaded at all @wraith sleet
ashen belfry
Upon release it will be as indicated. Don't have it can't play it.
wraith sleet
That isn't what we asked, you know this.
devout turtle
? it's rather obvious ```
- if sig checking is off - "you cannot play or edit this mission it relies on downloadable content that is missing"
- if sig-checking is on - "you were kicked from the server"
- when you try to join the server using the launcher "CDLC required - buy now - link to steam"
red saddle
- if sig checking is off - "you cannot play or edit this mission it relies on downloadable content that is missing"
Nope. Not if content is not placed in mission
Same as with mods
devout turtle
I'm assuming the yare joining the terrain or a mission using the content, naturally
otherwise, no problem
red saddle
Yes. But we know how that works. Which is why we are not asking that question
wraith sleet
Just surprises me we have gone a full week without the technical details that were asked for on day 0
ashen belfry
Yet, you got an answer on Day 1
wraith sleet
I say surprise, annoyed is the word I am looking for, nothing BI doesn't do surprises me
No we didn't, homesick himself says he will come back to us on it and hasn't yet
red saddle
How often do we need to repeat that we didn't get an answer to the question?
devout turtle
explain the question
ashen belfry
Technical Details possibly not, but an answer was given.
red saddle
but an answer was given. Homesick said he didn't know and needs to ask about it. Nothing since then.
You play on server, with owners and non-owners.
Owner takes DLC weapon out of arsenal.
What happens now? Non owners don't have the weapon model and can't display it.
wraith sleet
ashen belfry
I'm using CTRL F for you guys, so give me a min
devout turtle
ah I see. a fair question. well what happens with a mod? the player has nothing in his hands, and the clients get a popup message saying cannot load model uns_m14_test.p3d" or whatever
red saddle
With a mod weapon is just invisible
And with unforms the player body is invisble and bugs into ground I think
devout turtle
ok, I'd think it fair to expect the exact same event
I wouldn't go expecting some custom new technology to avert any issues seen with mainstream mods
wraith sleet
I am trying to ascertain how it is deployed and the impact of playing non DLC content on a server that contains it. If acting like a mod the player can't join without that mod enabled, so if they don't own then they can't join the server - ergo necessitating two servers on differing branches (from answer 1). Obviously no other DLC works that way.
red saddle
Official sources so far have said "if dlc content is being used you can't join" Which is different from "you'll see invisible people with invisible weapons running around"
devout turtle
It's probably wisest to withhold judgement until the community can get hands on a copy, and run some tests, and post vids about it. Not much point speculating - seems like a waste of effort to me.
wraith sleet
But if it isn't like a mod and its not like a DLC then BI needs to define how it works in the middle.
ashen belfry
"if dlc content is being used you can't join" <- Which is what I was referencing with "you got an answer "
open mulch
The current state, Arma will only Download the Data for the Addon if you buy it. So you only get the Data to join a Server which requires the CDLC when you buy it.
But some people wants that the CDLCs should work like past Arma 3 DLCs, so the Data is downloaded already.
This Decision is made because the way thie Signature-Verification is working. If you have the DLC loaded and VerifySignature is on, you need the DLC to join (correct me if i am wrong).
red saddle
That is an answer. But not an answer to the question
ashen belfry
We'll find in in what 4-5 days?
wraith sleet
It is a answer to a different question.
red saddle
This Decision is made because the way BattlEye is working with Signature-Verification on.
That's not battleye. That's plain signature verification
wraith sleet
Would be nice to know if we need to setup a second server before that point?!
ashen belfry
the extent to which players without will be excluded from the server.
open mulch
Yeah sorry mixed it up
ashen belfry
Dont have it, excluded, thats the way I read it
red saddle
^ That would be the "Once someone takes a DLC weapon in hand, every player who doesn't own it will get kicked from the server" solution
ashen belfry
Or they're prevented from joining if they don't have it
The way it was explained to me is thats its completely "OPT IN". If you're not in, you're out.
red saddle
How to prevent from joining if the DLC is not used yet?
wraith sleet
The problem with that mechanism is it wont scale very well with a future CDLC. You need a branch per CDLC and each combination, so you'll have 3 branches just to support 2 CDLC and at 3 it is going to go up again exponentially. If that is what BI intends to do they are in trouble.
red saddle
Why prevent people from joining the server. Because they don't have something, that the server/mission isn't even using. That doesn't make sense
wraith sleet
It also means those that run public servers now have effectively potentially 2^n +1 servers to run. It is like there is a vanilla server and then 2^n CLDC based ones with each individually and then the combinations.
That is insane, but it is what is implied by the answer you quoted.
That is why the answer they gave about a separate branch is "important", it is a weird way to do this and causes an explosion of issues regards ownership.
open mulch
The easiest way should be, when CDLCs should work like past Arma 3 DLCs but this Topic was also discussed already many times.
wraith sleet
The community needs the details so plans can be made for infrastructure and comments on the details can be properly made.
ashen belfry
And they've (so far) chosen not to go down that route.
You should have answers on the 29th.
When you try it yourself
wraith sleet
I am not buying it if I don't know how it works and whether its deployable for us or not.
ashen belfry
Its not optimal, I admit, but its what we have. The general information has already been presented, but the further technical details you're requesting, just isn't there.
wraith sleet
We have been promised an answer we just haven't gotten it yet
ashen belfry
I'm sure they can wait a few extra days for you to decide
wraith sleet
I am wonder dedmen how conversations have gone in your community around this? Because mine isn't showing a lot of enthusiasm given the necessity for 100% ownership
ashen belfry
I'm sure one will come and I bet they didnt give you a time when you'd have the answer as well.
red saddle
Also if DLC works same as mods aka invisible weapons/uniforms and stuff.
Does the mission.sqm remove requiredAddons stuff work the same too?
Can we just build a mission with DLC assets, then just remove the requiredAddons and everyone can play?
@wraith sleet 100% consensus between the leads. We won't play any missions with it.
velvet arch
open mulch
Maybe regarding the Discussion in the Community, BI maybe evaluate their CDLC politics and changes their mind.
tepid lance
I've raised this specific question with Bohemia again. They'll get back with some info to me shortly. Also, there's some more communications regarding CDLC planned for today.
wraith sleet
I would consider deploying a second server temporarily but then I am not seeing the value for the paid mod given we would play it so little, not worth the effort.
If we were above 50% really wanting this then maybe we could push that to 100% but right now its a big fat "meh" from all but a few
Everything about this is telling me there is no point me or anyone else in our community buying it because we just wont get to utilise it in a real sized game.
red saddle
As I heard so far, we have about 4 people who definitely will buy the DLC.
We can't play on our usual playsession days because we don't want to exclude anyone.
So DLC missions might only be played mid-week.
When 3 of the 4 people won't have time to play. So that guy alone isn't gonna play any DLC missions π
Ergo. 0 dlc missions
tepid lance
Situation like that would be either way, since the missions would use the terrain. Same exact deal as with APEX.
wraith sleet
Yep same. So we end up with zero sales when it would have been 5.
red saddle
"since the missions would use the terrain"
I can just place DLC assets on Celle and play on there
tepid lance
Yeah right. Not gonna go down to that level of convo.
red saddle
My main problem is just the questions about taking weapons from arsenal and what happens then.
Because I might need to actively prevent the players who do own the DLC, from loading it in.
tepid lance
Yup, this is currently being clarified and I'll have an answer for it today.
wraith sleet
Given that it is a branch I wont even deploy the server but I have no idea what happens to those that own it then, do they get rejected because they have it enabled?!
inner oyster
having it enabled shouldn't affect your ability to join a server not running it
red saddle
We don't really know yet if it will be a branch or not
wraith sleet
If they don't it is going to cause chaos with the arsenal
Well they did confirm the server is coming in a branch, that is solid answer. It is a bad one, I think they should reconsider, but that is what they said would happen.
tepid lance
As far as I know so far, the reason for CDLCs not being default content is indeed the potential size of Arma 3 installation. For now it is "just" an extra 22GB of data that would be forced upon everyone. If it were just GM as CDLC, then there would be a good argument of baselining the conent.
However, other CDLC candidate projects exist. If they make it to a release is unclear, but assuming they do, more and more big data packages of more varying quality and size would have to be baselined into A3. Since that is clearly not a desireable option, things are how they are now.
wispy lynx
I'm pretty sure arsenal uses the items from the server, not the client
wraith sleet
We understand the reasoning but the breaking of the model without fixing the game to accommodate it is going to produce a lot of bugs/pain.
narrow meteor
I can't afford a car so I'll just steal one
ashen belfry
π¨
open mulch
If it's a full Arsenal, it uses the Content locally available.
wispy lynx
Thanks for the discussion. I'm not happy the way things are handled with the DLC and I'm happy I'm not alone thinking this is not a good thing
Some valid points have been made and I know this is not an easy thing to decide on
open mulch
About quality, should CDLCs have maybe minimum the same quality as base Arma 3 Content? If yes i personally wouldn't have any problems to have a Arma 3 Installation with 100+ Gigs at all π
but i can only speaking for myself
wide steppe
Havent read anything, just popped on but
@wispy lynx arsenals use items fromclients, not servers, if you join a server without keying, you can load in anything
red saddle
Yes they do. They go through BI QA
wispy lynx
Imagine buying a game for 10β¬ and downloading 100GB, but you can only play 30GB of it
open mulch
like a free2play game π
molten shard
Players would see it as paywalling of they didnβt understand
hard hazel
Better to play at all than to scour for a server that doesn't use the other 70gb right?
wispy lynx
They should actually make Arma 3 basegame F2P tbh
That would make so much sense
Well
Lifeservers would benefit too much, pls dont
open mulch
Cheaters too
molten shard
the base game of arma 3 is enough to cost money
open mulch
But back to Topic we're drifting apart
dense wraith
you can see them doing a cheap bundle with creator DLCs and the base game to try and sell more of their own DLCs/APEX if they're attracting brand new folks with new settings.
open mulch
Try before buy is the best selling Point at my opinion. So the new way that Arma 3 was go with all past DLCs was a good decision.
narrow cradle
With our community we're in a dilemma, as a vanilla community the current setup is like adopting mods. Between the core group of people, there is a lot of enthusiasm about the content because we've been starved of cold war era stuff and are really tired of the near-future stuff. But we're waiting and watching to see how BI handle this, as we do encounter people without Apex or other DLCs, and we can't guarantee more than 10 people will get it at launch. As an open community, this makes it potentially dead in the water.
So maybe we keep it out of our main session for a few months, maybe we treat it like an extreme version of Apex where all GM missions require the GM map, and we run one mission on it per session, or just once per week, and let people organise ad-hoc sessions outside of our main ones.
For us the ideal situation would be the Apex model along with an optional download, so it doesn't download for everyone (and BI are happy about the size of the base install) but people can still opt-in content to try (sans the map + missions) and moreover it remains compatible with any missions that use the assets (not to mention derivative mods).
Because shit we really want to use the assets in our missions.
And big props to the GM duo (trio?) for remaining true to the spirit of the community! π»
tepid lance
Indeed, an optional download for a CDLC without having it bought would be a convenient solution: It means BI can say "Don't download if you don't intend to use it", but also keeping the door open for any group to passively require it without the paywall.
open mulch
But for Servers, that we need different branches, i think space on a server would be a problem at all, even when the Server will growth with further CDLCs. The easiest way there should be that CDLCs must be activated manually with -mod=<MyCDLC>; but downloaded by default.
wraith sleet
im gonna buy all CDLC, especially when they are the same size as GM
Im a proud SP player, so i dont have to care about "XX of XX players in our community wont buy it, so i wont" or "dis will split A3 players !!11!1"
every new quality content is welcome for arma 3
chrome crown
thinks HDD SSD space is a non-issue
wraith sleet
I agree on the server front, a mod line if it acts exclusively in some way, makes the most sense
chrome crown
everyone I know has at least 200GB of mods
would be interesting if BI has any statistics on "how many mods active" π
open mulch
5 itterations of RHS on my disk because friend community using differnt names for dirs and i am to lazy to work with simlinks or similiar workarounds π
chrome crown
though active does not mean there is not a giant pile resting without usage additionally
timid mountain
say it as it is... you just love rhs so much you have it five times just because you can xD
wide steppe
If one can afford a PC that can run arma with mods, then how couldnt one afford more storage?
1TB HDD cost little-to-nothing compared to the rest of a PC, and SSDs are not required for neither arma or many other things
red saddle
I could afford my PC 4 years ago. I can't anymore today.
Actually took me half a year to get money for a new HDD π
inner oyster
Yeah I was gonna say, buying a PC says nothing about how long it took you to make up the money required
red saddle
Just because someone has a PC that can run arma, doesn't mean he has unlimited money constantly
wide steppe
Also true, but in the end it's expensive to maintain a up-to-date gaming setup
open mulch
I Personally haven't much money, but when i want i have the 40 bucks for a 1 TB HDD
red saddle
"but in the end it's expensive to maintain a up-to-date gaming setup"
Yes. But if you don't have money, you won't maintain it.
open mulch
but thats also a personal point ^^
red saddle
I play on a 8 year old monitor which I got as a gift, and a second one which a friend found on a garbage dump which was working fine and gifted it to me.
Mouse and keyboard are the old ones from my brother and also about 8 years old now.
Besides the HDD I bought a couple months ago I put 0 money into my setup in the last 2 years
wide steppe
Not maintaining something you pay alot is very wierd in my eyes - also I was reffering to buying more storage at the same time one buys the whole PC - in your case - when you had the money
"Pay cheap - pay twice" or something like that
red saddle
conclusion If one can afford a PC that can run arma with mods, then how couldnt one afford more storage?
^ That's how.
wide steppe
I guess its just different ways to look at things, so nobody will be able to change their views here
timid mountain
ssds are getting really cheap nowadays too
and ssd does a LOT for performance in arma
more than any other game i have ever played
wide steppe
Try Tarkov, with an HDD you can only play in the smallest map reliebly. Literally cant even load on the 2 biggest maps at all))
untold oracle
that's a very very low line to walk π
mild solstice
If one can afford a PC that can run arma with mods, then how couldnt one afford more storage? Surely if that was true, people would just buy the DLC and the whole "splitting the community" thing wouldn't be valid in the first place
Seems I don't actually have enough room on my SSD to add GM on top of it without displacing parts of my mod development stuff π 17GB free
timid mountain
i bought 2x ssd just for making mods and arma
tepid lance
Same. π
timid mountain
have 700gb space dedicated to arna :3
and it is n ot enough
still have to free up space once in a while
wraith sleet
but doesnt SSD die fast if you use them for modding? because of the limited lifetime due to the total byte written and modding for arma surely raise the TBW very fast
wraith sleet
hm ok, because this prevented me from modding any game and learn modding for arma lol cause i was afraid
wide steppe
@ da12th - Im not one of the people that say the CDLC will split the community, so I agree with you
molten shard
Yea I donβt get the whole split the community thing
This either prospers or flops
Doesnβt cause a dlc civil war
timid mountain
all i know is.. ppls who don't buy it also miss out on my terrains :3
cause just having some not greek assets for maps is 12/10
wispy lynx
You can use cup assets π€
timid mountain
cup assets suck
all credit to cup team for bringing it forward
but to me it is just to get the old maps working
they are too dated to be interesting to make maps with
turbid lotus
@tepid lance just read up a bit, thank you for your efforts clarifying things with BI. I am incredibly keen to use this stuff with the guys I make missions for, but the community admins have so far said they can't really totally close the door on people who don't pay for it. An optional download with something closer to Apex model would be a massive win in my opinion, and probably get this moving with our lot. Cheers dude.
tepid lance
Don't worry. This situation is well known and we are all aware. Lets wait for the next official statement from Bohemia about this. I think we have brought up some good ideas and BI is certainly listening.
dense wraith
This is after all the first go, there is room for a rethink if it really turns out to be problematic.
turbid lotus
Aye dude, it's good that the conversations are being had.
tepid lance
Indeed we are. I can't say what BI will do, but I am fairly optimistic about this. π
dense wraith
yeah, and i'm sure BI have the perspective and know about the technical challenges etc. (assuming everyone isn't off working on something new π )
vital dome
But can u Tell us when bi is giving a statement? π
tepid lance
Beware: Old pictures!
untold oracle
@tepid lance hope for the best! π
turbid lotus
Yeah, thanks for your effort on this and hope this gets resolved.
austere ocean
sharp lance
How will the new DLC work with such a tank control? Driving control from the commander will be disabled? https://youtu.be/MD75xw2LBOs
tepid lance
No
sharp lance
How will the problem of losing driving control be solved? I do not see a reaction to this problem from BIS.
wraith sleet
@tepid lance but how did your mod made it into CDLC with that amount of content ? ive read in the forum from one of the devs that the CDLC should be somewhat like laws of war in terms of size
tepid lance
@sharp lance We did not do any engine changes, since that was never part of the CDLC programme.
@wraith sleet Because BI was convinced.
wraith sleet
so will your CDLC be the only DLC with that large amount of content?
tepid lance
I don't know. I cannot say what other projects there will be and what they contain, because I don't know. π
sharp lance
@tepid lance Thanks for answers. I got it. BIS activity looks passive. π
red saddle
Other projects that I've seen that will probably become CDLC looks like they will be roughly about same size. Atleast 2 projects that might be working towards CDLC
wraith sleet
oh wait, maybe im mistaken something
i think the size in terms of content doesnt matter, but how many DLC each year get released
sorry my bad
red saddle
Not known
DLC get's released when it's ready
It's 3rd party devs working on it. BI can't force them to be ready in say half a year
wraith sleet
@tepid lance >Overall CDLCs will be allowed to change way more than we did. Other projects might change UI and such, while we wanted to seamlessly integrate into Arma 3 and it's established UI and UX.
I hope not, especially not the UI.
Moreover, I hope some day all those people who deemed acceptable to enforce their revolutionary vision of UI through their mods will see their day in the International court.
UI is something that absolutely should not be changed. It's okay to introduce new elements to it where necessary (e.g. ACE3's menus, TFAR radios and RHS'es ballistic computers) but mods should not be able to change the existing UI, maybe with an exception of optional minor changes.
yes i know, i meant i mistaken the information
Quote from topic:
Lastly, we know from experience how difficult it can be to bring a project to completion. With that in mind, we currently anticipate that probably only a few third-party premium DLC packs will get published each year. Our intention is to ensure a steady flow of exciting new Arma 3 content over the next few years, while also making sure not to clutter the game with an excessive amount of premium DLC.
tepid lance
"Per year" is also very optimistic here. Probably "overall" is more likely.
dense wraith
until you make millions and its a new gold rush π
wraith sleet
are the other projects who tries to be part of CDLC already public in terms of informations? or is it needed to keep it secret ?
ashen belfry
See the pinned FAQ
dense wraith
They've implied they're not going to talk about it until they're closer to release
ashen belfry
ie See the pinned FAQ
wraith sleet
yeah i know it, but i meant for example:
devs (not BI devs) from project X created a topic in biforums and posted infos and screenshot about his mod, but no release yet, and decided to apply for CDLC and informed the public of that step
like GM, i think it was supposed to be a free mod first
mortal plaza
**I hope not, especially not the UI.
Moreover, I hope some day all those people who deemed acceptable to enforce their revolutionary vision of UI through their mods will see their day in the International court.
UI is something that absolutely should not be changed. It's okay to introduce new elements to it where necessary (e.g. ACE3's menus, TFAR radios and RHS'es ballistic computers) but mods should not be able to change the existing UI, maybe with an exception of optional minor changes.
** I have to agree with you. When mods start to change the look and feel of the GUI it always ends up in inconsistent garbage.
dense wraith
@wraith sleet don't think anyone has confirmed in public - there was some info on who went along to the bootcamp etc. but i'm not aware of anything more concrete than that.
mortal plaza
@tepid lance I spent a week in Paris impersonating a chemistry PhD student. What? π
ashen belfry
but i'm not aware of anything more concrete than that. There isn't anything public. And those who may have something in the works cannot and will not say due to Non Disclosure Agreements.
tepid lance
In their FAQ they explained that a public announcement of any CDLC will happen only once it's done and ready, as happened with GM last week. π
wraith sleet
so the dev of the project isnt allowed to tell the public that he has apllied for CDLC
then we wait and drink tea until -i hope- more large projects like yours apply
dense wraith
depends a bit on when they sign the NDA i guess. but it would be foolish for them to annouce something they 'might' get to make.
wraith sleet
more large projects like yours apply
That would be the death of Arma as we know it.
why? fresh quality content is always welcome. Or do you mean because of community split?
But arma 3 is dead anyway, it was plagued with life RPG kids from the beginning. There are only small communities left who plays arma as it should be.
>Or do you mean because of community split?
Yes. This approach might work with military-grade sperg games like DCS but with Arma? Forget it/.
>But arma 3 is dead anyway
No. But let's not get into that.
arctic seal
Over 20.000 active players at 21:00 CET two days ago...
This game is sooooooo dead /s
wraith sleet
well, since im a SP player and im not related to the MP part (which is filled with life RPG kids), i wont feel the community split, so i dont bother that much.
In the end, its up to the player, either they buy it or not. I can understand content creators if they apply to CDLC program, as its hard and time consuming creating quality content and the CDLC program makes sure that only quality content will be accepted.
lmao
Since that doesn't bother you, let's end that discussion here.
agree
steady nest
Mondkalb mentioned somewhere that GM - CWG only had this content level because of CDLC
tepid lance
True. Becoming a CDLC gave us the motivation and peace of mind about our data that let us proceed with what we originally wanted to do.
shadow patrol
I imagine if other mod teams got the opportunity to become DLC that would spur them to completion because they then have some measure of security against life kiddies
tepid lance
Against general content/asset ripping. Which was the main driver for us for going this way.
steady nest
There's this too: https://www.reddit.com/r/arma/comments/be76av/comment/el42zk0
`GM Dev here: This is correct. GM started as a mod project before BI announced the Creator DLC option. We went for it and made it through. It is the main reason GM went fairly strictly silent for over a year.
Ultimately I would say having the backing from BI to do this properly meant we could push the limits of what we thought was doable by being able to dedicate time towards the project with a clear goal. I am not sure if GM would ever have seen a public release without this opportunity.`
wraith sleet
>Mondkalb mentioned somewhere that GM - CWG only had this content level because of CDLC
And Virtual Battlespace has this content level because of government contracts and a ridiculous price, now what?
That's great and all but if one of my friends doesn't have an asset that's required for some mission, we're not playing this mission. If by buying GM CDLC I'm effectively restricted to toying with it in Editor because I can't find friends to play, I don't need GM, no matter how good it is.
red saddle
Correct. That's the problem which has been discussed a dozen and one times now
Mondkalb said BI is thinking about it again @wraith sleet
There's still hope
wraith sleet
Precisely. However due Arma's setting being a ridiculous crap and Arma's general reliance on mods, if, say, RHS or CUP becomes CDLC in A4, I'm not buying A4.
steady nest
It came up over a year ago back when CDLC was announced... BI went ahead anyway
wraith sleet
I mean, I'm actually probably buy the GM but if it becomes widespread... yeah nah, it's the death of Arma.
red saddle
" CUP becomes CDLC in A4" CUP is ported content for which the source files are freely available.
Already disqualified for CDLC
steady nest
Plus a bunch of community content donated specifically on the promise of no monetization
wraith sleet
CUP availability is beyond the point. RHS isn't becoming a CDLC either.
vocal pawn
I wonder if A4 CUP would include Arma 3 assets, or if they only care about bringing stuff from A2 forward because of people not liking the setting
(not relevant just π€ )
red saddle
It would only if A3 source files will get released
which we don't know if they will
If they do get released then the answer is yes. IF a cup team member feels like porting it instead of spending time on other things.
vocal pawn
I meant philosophically more than technically, obviously they can't do anything without the files
steady nest
@wraith sleet Truthbetold I don't see a 'if RHS becomes CDLC' problem as a widespread thing for A4 because most mod proposals may not qualify anyway
wraith sleet
Content and quality-wise RHS would definitely qualify I think, their problem AFAIK is that they don't have the copyrights in order because they never planned on making money off the mod.
red saddle
They also have lots of content from authors who don't want monetization of their work
wraith sleet
Basically, they haven't lawyered up.
steady nest
If the existing policy holds for A4 then I believe they'd essentially have to 'not do RHS' (free version) and due to NDA we might not find out anything until it was release time
@red saddle So both CUP and RHS have this (and RHS' own use of A2 ports previously) preventing CDLC...
dense wraith
the implication is certainly that it has to be original work. so RHS could (and indeed may have) pitched new work based around a new scenario or similar, but couldn't use the stuff that is already out there with significant enhancement
wispy lynx
Maybe Arma 4 basegame will be so good that we dont need mods/dlcs? π€
arctic seal
Never...! Modding is on of the most important game selling features
cedar chasm
Arma as a whole i believe provides a strong base to be worked off of. Rather than being shuck full of stuff, you can make whatever you want because the toolset allows you to
dense wraith
100% - it was a platform and a sandbox almost before it was a game. Folks modded the OFP demo!
narrow cradle
Arma 3 was peculiar in the sense that mods filled a void that BI left
But they still existed during the previous titles, so even if the base game content is something people are happy with, then mods will certainly try something new as well
wraith sleet
is there any proof of arma 4 ?
even devs said they have no plans nor do they work on a new arma title and arma 3 is going to stay for a long time
mortal plaza
Who knows.
arctic seal
No official word on arma 4
mortal plaza
Most likely not even all devs know what comes next.
wraith sleet
then i dont understand the arma 4 talk here lol
mortal plaza
Dreams.... π
timid mountain
sweet dreams are made of this
steady nest
Mods would continue to be no matter how 'contemporary' (more like retro) Arma 4 went simply because dammit people want their 'National Armed Forces' pack that Bohemia would never greenlight
willow dragon
imo unused settings are a lot better, that's why upcoming DLC seems so good too.
steady nest
?
willow dragon
there aren't many games with east vs west germany during cold war, same with greek army/terrains π
wraith sleet
unused settings: korean war, WW2 japan vs china war, vietnam vs china war after the vietnam war (or called sino-vietnamese war), iran-iraq war....
willow dragon
for main game such setting would be a waste though, a lot of features like drones, TI etc. wouldn't be present
but for DLCs why not
wraith sleet
yes, also i dont have a problem to see some fictional settings with real life content ofcourse, for example australia vs france war, something different. Not futuristic but not always russia vs usa stuff
vocal pawn
the problem with that is that there's a limited number of conflict types you can realistically expect to happen
to get France and Australia to go to war, you'd have to diverge from reality to an extent that would probably make a lot of people unhappy
wraith sleet
or east germany vs west germany vs nazi germany, creating an alternative story of the whole WW2-coldwar story that relation between soviet union and usa broke during germany invasion and U.S created west germany, soviets east germany and some remaining parts are still german reich
since its a game, i dont see a problem with fictional events
vocal pawn
I don't oppose having French or Australian units and equipment in the game, of course, but like...the sort of war where they're on opposite sides is massively unlikely (and I am aware France/Australia was a non-specific example, but the same applies to many other possibilities)
wraith sleet
yes, some people are unhappy with fictional events, and some people (like me) are also unhappy to have always real events or -can-happen-events
in the end its up to CDLC devs if and what they develop, as its in the end just a game with lots of possibilities where people can turn their ideas into something, and its up to the players if they buy it or not
in this case, its even good that the community will be split, imagine someone develop a CDLC with unreal or unlikely events which will make realism fannatic players unhappy and BI accept the entry and release the files for everyone, the realism fannatic community then would scream why BI makes the CDLC available for everyone and its eating up their harddrive space and they want get rid of it
small raft
i feel like the next CDLC isn't going to be the same scale as CWG
something like a fully fleshed out country's military as a faction could realistically be the next CDLC, it's small enough in filesize and thus price, and it's unique enough to allow for weapons and vehicles seldom seen in mods, depending on which country would be depicted in a faction CDLC
CWG has been in development for a while from what I gather
willow dragon
2014 iirc
ashen belfry
I've always said a Korean War setting was / is needed..... @timid mountain
ashen belfry
LandhelgisstrΓΓ°in?
timid mountain
more than particular settings i'd like to see packs that suit many settings
arctic seal
what about the meme wars?
timid mountain
too busy fighting that battle on the daily.. can't do that for recreation
ashen belfry
@arctic seal @timid mountain Why are you still awake?
ashen belfry
Oh, but it is π
timid mountain
damn drunk tweaker
arctic seal
haven't found good porn yet, still searching. can't sleep until successful
ashen belfry
Β―_(γ)_/Β―
knotty ore
π΅ I'll take that hint and head to bed
ashen belfry
Dissertation crunch time
oblique fable
people arent interested in Korean war because they know nothing about it π
narrow cradle
Korean war would be cool! But i'd prefer BI do that for A4 as a first party thing
timid mountain
you should probably test GM before you say that
narrow cradle
wot u mean
timid mountain
you have no basis for saying if bi content is better or worse than 3rd party
narrow cradle
that's explicitly not what i meant
I just meant I'd like that to be the base game for A4.
timid mountain
oh nevermind then :3
tho have to say if arma 4 is korea then i'd be hugely disappointed
tribal folio
Why's that? (I wouldn't.)
timid mountain
cause i can't imagine a more boring setting
plush geyser
the creative brain power of all life users all combined into one terrain
small raft
come on, first war with helicopters and widespread jet use
would be interesting just to be able to use early versions of those
like WW2 era weapons combined with all that
molten shard
More likely would be a modern korean conflict
arma has alot of tech in place that having a korea exclusive game would be weird
tribal folio
That's a bit touchier than the cold war from a post-CW perspective (OFP) or making up a faction for NATO to fight against in 2035-verse
So historical Korean War makes more sense to me
molten shard
Yea but then we dont have any modern systems in place by default
No guided munitions
No handheld radios
All have to be modded into a new engine apparently
tribal folio
timid mountain
jets in arma = totally not interesting to me. helicopters from korea = rubbish
untold oracle
Someone is going to be disappointed in whatever setting it is
And I don't care, there are always mods that bring other settings to life
timid mountain
which works the same in reverse...
dense wraith
yeah, it'd be a fairly bold commercial decision to set a flagship title during Korea. Not really one that'd capture the public's imagination you fear.
small raft
maybe the next CDLC could be a cold war turned hot kinda thing in korea during the 70s?
tribal folio
Which is also possible with GM's future plans
small raft
you had stuff like this going on lmao, it's a miracle things didn't escalate to a crazy extent
knotty ore
While this is not the A4 speculation channel, whatever A4 setting is it should be made so that the base engine allows far more widespread units and vehicles to be made.
shadow patrol
support for both cavalry and laser weapons would be cool 
faint jay
mech horse tanks
delicate pumice
not that BIS ever does real locations but I think as a map the 38th parallel in korea would be great. even better (and relatively inexpensive devtime-wise) if they included it in two versions c1950 and today.
red saddle
"not that BIS ever does real locations" well altis,stratis,chernarus π
atleast built after real thing, just with different name
timid mountain
they all use real world terrain data
just scaled and modified to suit the game
and with fictionalized locations and names
delicate pumice
ofc i know they use real-world geographic data but 'fictionalized' rather than 'real' locations
timid mountain
at any rate. if you're so interested in korea, why not make the map yourself?
delicate pumice
would love to, but too many other things on the go, will leave it to the experts ^
delicate pumice
maybe one day, but no time atm, mainly because i'm drawn to things other people aren't already working much. am also terrible at finishing things (something new and shiny always catches my eye)
faint moss
A4 will be set in the 1800's and we'll all use whatever counted as a firearm at that time.
red saddle
pours oil over arm and sets it on fire π₯
timid mountain
this just in, a4 will be set in the roman empire
faint moss
Close but no cigar.
It'll be set in the Stone age.
We'll be throwing rocks at each other and slicing each other up with stone knives.
all while making caveman sounds.
Best to start practicing those combat stances now for when that time comes.
turbid lotus
Still too modern - how about dinosaurs? Hugh diversity of land creatures, airborne assets, and space for an original put politically neutral plot.
timid mountain
well llet's just say bi follow the creationist history
that could actually be interesting
cavemen riding dinosaurs chucking spears at oneanother
turbid lotus
Have we just designed Ark though...
shadow patrol
this definitely isn't creator DLC territory but horses should really be in A4, cavalry has had such a huge use throughout human history and conflict right up to the present day that it's weird that they haven't been done officially already
dense wraith
I suspect a more flexible 'skeleton' sytem would probably be on the list for the new engine. might make that sort of thing a bit easier
muted narwhal
one can make a proper horse model and its skeleton in A3
and actually have it work ok, using existing animation system
problem is with the rider
dense wraith
ah, no provision for using proxies etc. in the right way?
(its been a very, very long time since i modded, so i may be catastrophically out of date)
vivid lynx
someone said horse? https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1470493486
arctic seal
It's not cool anymore i guess
narrow cradle
@sullen sapphire #general_chat_arma
surreal drift
"general chat about Creator DLC" = A4, horses and exile. π©
arctic seal
Ups, didn't realize it was the dlc channel π
south mica
Hi, I have a question that the future DLC of about 50 GO, will be like other downloaded forcibly even if have not buy it ?
red saddle
They don't exist yet. So we don't know yet. BI probably also doesn't know
Wait.. Maybe I missunderstood your question. What do you mean?`
dense wraith
i think he's asking if it'll be a 'forced' download + unlock like the other DLCs, to which the answer seems 'not currently'. although there is a degree of lobbying for an 'opt-in' for MP server reasons
south mica
Exactly, I would like to know if when the DLC will come out even if I do not pay it it will make me download the 50go
red saddle
The answer about forced download is quite definitely "no". Because there will be more CDLC's and they are just way too big.
Currently it's optional download. And I hope it stays that way, and BI also said that they don't want to bloat the Arma install with stuff.
south mica
Okay, thanks for help π
waxen lynx
they could make a "forced" download via the A3 launcher
join a "DLC server" (better mission but they dont support that) and dont have the DLC, get the "buy DLC" option, or to download the free base version to be able to join
(similar ingame when DLC is required)
the tech for that should be present for the most part in the engine already anyway
dense wraith
that is the plan...
(although obviously everyone rushing out and buying this one and getting it up the charts will assist in that endeavour)
muted narwhal
there are more C-DLCs in the works yes, if these gets released or not depends ion their developer ability to finish the work and BI QA greenlighting it for publishing.
also, since the pitch process is still open, there might be even more than the ones i am aware of
no
ashen belfry
They will not be announced until they are complete and have gone through the entire process.
muted narwhal
^^that - mainly because even though some are in the works, doesn't necessarily means they will be accepted
the process is - a dev team pitches an idea towards BI, including a few other things as well (eventually demo/WIP stuff) and these are accepted or not by BI, that includes signing a contract. That doesn't 100% necessary mean that the developer will be able to produce and deliver that content and/or pass BI QA. so until BI consider it worthy of being published as a C-DLC, there is no point of making that public
yes or no
GM has been in development since 2014
if you start today from scratch, yes, it will take some time
if you already had content in the works and/or had a proper team working on it for the past year (this submission process has been announced October 30, 2017 - https://forums.bohemia.net/forums/topic/211488-arma-3-third-party-dlc-pitch-invitation/
it could be as well released this year
ashen belfry
But, as a part of the "the entire process" the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement is mandatory.
So, even if a project has been greenlit, neither you nor I will ever know of it.
Definition of "few": While many people would agree that βfewβ means three or more, the actual dictionary definition of βfew' is, βnot many but more than one.β So, a βfewβ cannot be one, but it can be as low as two.
And even with that, one may not make it through the entire process.
muted narwhal
a lot of people confuse a couple with few btw
ashen belfry
All it takes is a team member to quit/die/get caught stealing/whatever and it (can be) cancelled.
muted narwhal
not necessarily, but at least it gets timelines and roadmaps pushed back
ashen belfry
Yeah, but my point is "Sh*t Happens", so it makes sense to announce it only when its done.
muted narwhal
precisely
dense wraith
'we've got a release candidate' seems like a good moment to tell folks
tepid lance
Once a Release Candidate build went through testing and all issues have be fixed, it can be considered Gold Canidate (A terminology from back when gold master needed to be pressed). Only once the GC is in the bag and all it takes is to push a release button, BI wants to announce the project along with a release date, ideally right away since there is nothing else preventing it.
GM is a bit special in that regard, as it paved the way and ironed out the kinks in the process, as well as having a delayed release to allow a bit of discussion and communication about what CDLC is before it hits the stores.
chrome crown
sooo no last minute changes huh
explains why you have time to answer every and the last question
tepid lance
Don't worry, last minute release stress is happening elsewhere for me. π
ashen belfry
Would love to know what time I can press the "BUY" button on Monday π
muted narwhal
@ashen belfry lol why, do you think they'll run out of copies?
vital dome
First of all it would be nice to Hear something from BI regards of all the feedback and critism. But Yeah i will buy instantly 5 Version of this cdlc as soon there is the buy Button .
muted narwhal
are you one of these blokes that are queuing for black friday?
vital dome
Na
muted narwhal
was at FM
vital dome
I supporting gm since day 1 thats why im buying 5 copies instantly After the launch π
ashen belfry
I have a business meeting on Monday, so need to be able to take care of it before I leave.
chrome crown
tepid lance
(note: expect it to become available on Steam in the evening hours European time).
dense wraith
kind of them to avoid the misery of having to sit at work knowing its out
red saddle
Just keep in mind that the optional download is not the problem.
A optional download with watermarked assets not existing is the problem.
The sitrep makes it sound like we want the data included in the base game, without optional download which is not the case
tepid lance
Specifically regarding the concerns about split content we are looking at a very neat solution, but the feasibility and exact details will need to be sorted out still, so for now it's not definitive, while I remain optimistic about it. :)
In response to your feedback, we're currently investigating one last potential work-around together with the Vertexmacht team. However, we also want to be careful not to give out any false hope, since this might very well prove not to be a viable option. If it does turn out to be feasible, we should already make clear that it would be unlikely for this to be available for Global Mobilization's release on Monday April 29 (or, again, if at all).
It will not be default data.
red saddle
perfect! The sitrep really makes it sound like the only solution is adding data to the base game..
tepid lance
To me it doesn't read like that. But I may also know more about it. π
dense wraith
also "Tier-One Creators", check you out. you need that on a hat π
tepid lance
"I made a DLC for Arma and all I got was this hat."? π
ashen belfry
Lol
muted narwhal
hopefully not
chrome crown
What could that solution be I wonder. A mirrored version with assets being visible but locked? 
wraith sleet
So the sitrep still doesn't answer the precise questions but it does answer the economic one I answered (will BI be ensuring the paid mods work in the future), the answer is no they are not ensuring future compatibility with each other nor with the base game.
So all the Skyrim arguments now apply fully, there is no guarantee it will continue to work, that is on a third party that is not contracted to ensure that it does.
No idea if the mere presence on the server will be necessary as they are still working out the details. I am going to go with definitely at launch, so you will need two servers on differing branches and that might not change.
wraith sleet
It should be noted under EU law that BI is required to ensure their product continues to work, so this I think is legally on questionable ground. Anyway given that answer we are now a hard no chance, not now not ever.
wraith sleet
I predict BI just got the front page in tonight's gaming site news as the second company to try paid mods without fixing the model. Review bombs and all that jazz should be expected. I think it is going to get ugly for BI over this weekend.
wraith sleet
Because the sitrep just washed its hands of ensuring this works into the future. By finally confirming the questions from last week were as we feared the news has an article to refer to
The outrage has already started on the arma subreddit, this is going to explode. My community just exploded.
delicate pumice
What exactly are you exploding about again? With A3 in its twilight it seems extraordinarily unlikely some future patch (if there are any after 1.92) is going to break a CDLC (and then that team additionally declines to fix it - I expect they are all far too pro for that).
wraith sleet
Same paid mod model as Skyrim, also in its twilight when Bethesda introduced it on Steam. I didn't think given the QA and everything else BI was doing they would not stand behind the product, it looked like the CDLC thing was going to ensure quality and support, really surprised they went this direction with it.
knotty ore
@dense wraith but if it came out when you were at work and you had left computer on at home you could buy it and steam would DL it for you
molten ice
the paid model on Skyrim allows you to take free content and make them pay to access, while Arma 3 does not allow you to do that
I dont think they are the same
delicate pumice
Skyrim was a free for all, don't recall anything like the QA involvement BI has already committed to for CDLC.
tawdry kestrel
Kong is correct.
red saddle
the sitrep didn't change anything for me
tawdry kestrel
Me either.
red saddle
just a bunch of empty information
tawdry kestrel
My team is small and will have the DLC for the map alone.
and the extra building supplies it offers.
wraith sleet
It answered my question 4 on economics and I take it as confirmation the CDLC is required to match on server and client so answering 2 and 3 sort of.
tawdry kestrel
Now I'm just a little confused to be honest. You were saying people were exploding about cdlc but now you're saying that it's because it's required to match on server and client?
tepid lance
I am not sure we read the same news here...
tawdry kestrel
I'm not really either.
ashen belfry
molehills/mountains, making one into the other
red saddle
@wraith sleet it didn't answer our question
wraith sleet
I had 4 questions detailed out on the forums about how this technically worked and one on future support. The first was answered with branches, so separate games branches for the CDLC server to the normal server. 2 and 3 were technical about whether the CDLC was required client side even if content was not being played, which this confirms is the initial model but might change. The 4th was whether BI was ensuring support, that is now confirmed as no they will not be supporting the product into the future to be compatible with other CDLC or the base game. So I think it answered my queries.
red saddle
nothing has been said about server at all.
And nothing about match either
I haven't see a "for sure" answer about branches
the one I read was "maybe, we'll figure it out later"
"which this confirms is the initial model but might change" we already knew it was the initial idea. And we hoped for change. Only thing that is new is that change is now semi-confirmed
wraith sleet
It wasn't a maybe in response to me, homesick clearly stated in the forums it would be a separate branch. This thing about a slightly different model suggests to me it is client and server matching.
red saddle
4 is true. If the DLC devs don't want to work on it anymore then noone will update it
wraith sleet
The separate support for example treating it as a mod, it works as a paid mod there is no further integration
ashen belfry
counting chickens before eggs hatch
wraith sleet
The initial model is how it will release anyway.
red saddle
maybe homesick meant a different meaning of "branch" ?
tawdry kestrel
To be honest bright you're taking information before it's been confirmed and speaking to other people "exploding" about it.
pearl willow
Sure not? Thats what i read in the Sitrep: However, it does also mean that players who do not own certain Creator DLC cannot join multiplayer servers or play content that makes use of that DLCβs assets (e.g. its terrain or weapons and vehicles). In response to your feedback, we're currently investigating one last potential work-around together with the Vertexmacht team.
Looks pretty clear and repeats the statements from before: If you dont own it, you cant play on servers using it.
red saddle
"The initial model is how it will release anyway." and if they then fix it end next week? doesn't matter?
wraith sleet
Yep I think that is pretty clearly stating an answer to my query, required server and client side.
But it is the economics of future support that people are angry about. Anyway I lost 100% interest in this thing now, no way I buy it under those conditions.
red saddle
Okey bye then o/
tawdry kestrel
o7
ashen belfry
that people are angry about I'm not angry
tawdry kestrel
Me either.
ashen belfry
I'm sure a lot of others arent as well
red saddle
I don't care about support either
tawdry kestrel
I think you're angry about it and that's ok.
tepid lance
I'm just confused about what just happened. π
red saddle
I'm still playing mods and terrains that have literally not been supported for 5+ years
tawdry kestrel
lmao
pearl willow
Other games would by now just left the game without any support and started the next version. I think not continuing many support after 6 years is no reason to rage.
red saddle
so... Why should I care about this one π
tawdry kestrel
Cosmo's point is well made.
tepid lance
Codemasters' OFP2 only lasted 6 months before it was abandoned.
wraith sleet
Big, huge difference in law between something provided free and something you pay for.
tawdry kestrel
BI cares about it's community and they go above and beyond anything anyone else would even attempt to do with this.
Can you send me a link to this law you're talking about?
pearl willow
This is nothing about law. BI has done more to Arma and its community over the years then any gamedeveloper i know of. And you want to argument with some laws?
red saddle
So what do you wanna do? sue BI for bugs that they've not fixed?
Might aswell do that now. No difference if it's now because of 5 year old bugs.
Or in 5 years because of a bug in a CDLC that hasn't been fixed
ashen belfry
counting chickens before eggs hatch
Don't sell the skin before you've caught the bear.
Never sell the bear's skin before one has killed the beast.
The die hasn't been cast (yet).
The final/last word hasn't been said/spoken.
It hasn't all been said yet.
It ain't (all) over (and done) yet.
One must not be too hasty in one's rejoicing.```well said FM
ashen belfry
For the love of all thats pineapple on Pizza, the thing drops Monday, quit speculating so hard.
If it doesn't live up to a person's expectation then dont F###ing buy it. SIMPLE!
tawdry kestrel
I feel like dad just slapped mom at the dinner table.
ashen belfry
There is only so much inanity that I can take in one day, and I got it in less than 10 min.
tawdry kestrel
I'm 100% in agreement with you here. Getting angry is like strapping a watermellon to your head and running at full speed. It's pointless and eventually painful.
ashen belfry
Unless you are Gallagher
https://www.whataboutwatermelon.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/gallagher1.jpg
molten shard
I still donβt understand the issue at hand π
wraith sleet
about the compatibility between each CDLC incase some CDLC arent compatible with another one: im sure modders will release compatibility mods like it happened with IFA FOW and CUP ACE and RHS ACE etc
molten shard
Are people expecting bi to patch content they did not produce
pearl willow
Not people, one person
molten shard
Oh lole, theyβve stated in previous devblogs they donβt have the manning to do such a thing
no suprises in this devblog
tepid lance
It's in the CDLC's developer's interest to keep it working of course. There is also some agreement between us and BI regarding notice of upcoming engine changes that impact our product. Also, in case it got lost, we can't just update the DLC as we wish. BI has a say in that via quality control of CDLC patches.
stable raft
Will there be new unit's brought along the way with updates?
I'd like to see more vehicles rather than what the DLC has to offer.
aka Include vehicles in Updates .
ashen belfry
I believe that has already been mentioned in one of the pins.
Also, lets let it be released first...
timid mountain
FM you and your pizza pineapples! .. You are the worst
sharp lance
@red saddle The problem is that no one is tracking errors. Errors become the property of updates, for months and years. There were no updates that did not bring new problems. As a result, updates fix some problems and introduce new problems. We have a broken game. It is broken in some parts of it and in some content. There are small problems and big ones. Missions or scenarios that focus on the use of all content have the maximum collision of players with problems in certain situations, they collide there, collide a little here and so on.
Players learn to work around problems or not to use problem content. But there are problems that are difficult to circumvent and not to face. This gives the impression that the game is completely broken. And this is a problem.
If CDLC scripts were created without considering existing problems, this is also a problem.
Often, changes in Arma3 force MoDs manufacturers to make adjustments that take time, and not always fixes happen quickly, and this is also a problem.
In this whole story very big doubts are born. Doubts about what players will get when they get CDLC.
crisp blade
This is clearly going to be more than 3GB though
BIS consumer friendly model for previous DLC's is just seemingly shocking people when what i'd consider an expansion isn't going to give them more free things
lone smelt
It's not giving people free things, it's allowing people with the DLC to play with everyone else
open mulch
The past DLC strategy was good because it wasn't split the community as hard and people was have the ability to try before buy. Today, Game-Demos are rare you usually buy a pig in a poke and you need to trust in Screenshots and Videos before you buy.
On the other Hand, i can understand why BI want to go a different way for CDLCs i hope the work-around they mentioned will succeed.
ashen belfry
BIS =/= BI
waxen lynx
BI was previously named BIS, however there is also BISim
ashen belfry
Yes, but BIS is not BI anymore, so BIS =/= BI
chrome crown
anything known if there will be a startup command for the DLC? wonder how third party launchers will handle DLC activation π€
graceful willow
Most likely there will be, but it's just my guess
willow dragon
@chrome crown you will be able to launch it like a mod, I've asked Mondkalb about it already
chrome crown
"like a mod" .. thats interesting π€
vivid lynx
arma 3 autoloads the argo, expansion, heli, jets, kart, mark, orange, tacops and tank folders π€·
waxen lynx
the auto load is done via product.bin from arma3\dta folder
from dev branch:
profilePathDefault = "Arma 3";
profilePathCommon = "Arma 3 - Other Profiles";
extensionSave = "Arma3Save";
extensionProfile = "Arma3Profile";
extensionWizardMission = "Arma3WizardMission";
extensionAddon = "Arma3Addon";
defaultMods = "A3;curator;kart;heli;mark;expansion;jets;argo;orange;tacops;tank;dlcbundle;dlcbundle2";
officialMods = "A3;curator;kart;heli;mark;expansion;jets;argo;orange;tacops;tank;dlcbundle;dlcbundle2;GM";```the A3 launcher seems to be able to override that now with the DLCs tab
vivid lynx
so the new stuff is set as autoload then I mixed up dlcbundle and GM π
waxen lynx
no clue how its handled. we find out on Monday i guess
vivid lynx
yeah
steady nest
@sharp lance Often, changes in Arma3 force MoDs manufacturers to make adjustments that take time Bohemia stated that the end of 'platform change' updates for Arma 3 (the last being the one accompanying the Tanks DLC) was supposed to cut down on this; there will not be such an update accompanying Global Mobilization - Cold War Germany for example
While you're correct that If CDLC scripts were created without considering existing problems, this is also a problem that would seem to be a general problem with any script-heavy DLC proposal and I imagine 'script compatibility with vanilla' would be part of the official QA that goes into each CDLC. (Whether or not that QA is checking on compatibility between CDLCs on the other hand...)
tight lodge
Imagining BI doing proper QA only leads to disappointment.
crisp blade
I just keep being shocked at people bashing a game they play so much
arctic seal
You will get it If you play it long enough π
wraith sleet
By Allah, this β
narrow cradle
i guess if all you do is play the game then you won't feel the need to bash it
but if you create content for the game then you run into things to be frustrated by
arctic seal
Even playing the game can be / is frustrating to a level. But you're right, modding makes you go from loving it to nuke the shit out of it in milliseconds π
narrow cradle
mission makers too, dealing with locality and AI...
steady nest
Which is why I imagine a bunch of people are hoping that Enfusion means a better content-creating workflow... you'll have to ask DayZ modders how well that worked out for asset-making though which has been happening for months now (idk if they have any mission functionality)
minor sable
is the new dlc on the dev build?
tepid lance
No.
tepid lance
Not before it releases.
lunar flame
https://dev.arma3.com/post/sitrep-00233 gone? where they said it would release on european afternoon?
radiant cedar
Pardon my restlessness, but does anybody know when the DLC releases?
narrow cradle
today
lucid depot
Today, around 22:00 (utc+2). Atleast it's what written on Steam
waxen lynx
we need a bot to link people to the FAQ π
late meadow
Hype
tepid lance
@lunar flame Should be fixed again.
lunar flame
Yes, much sad for europeans.
lunar flame
20β¬ 25$ or so
covert granite
Not too bad
lucid depot
20-25.-
covert granite
Especially for a map almost double the size of altis!
lunar flame
I would say a lot first, but yeah 400km^2 pure terrain and 40vics
And quite some missions, singleplayer/coop
steady nest
Nah in USD it's $23
covert granite
Only 23?
tepid lance
That's right. π
covert granite
Worth it
open mulch
i want to buy it now!
eager rock
Will you need to use any new launch parameters to launch with GM and future CDLC outside of the regular launcher?
willow dragon
-mod= would launch it too
vivid lynx
probably -mod=GM
guessing based on info from products.bin
defaultMods = "A3;curator;kart;heli;mark;expansion;jets;argo;orange;tacops;tank;dlcbundle;dlcbundle2";
officialMods = "A3;curator;kart;heli;mark;expansion;jets;argo;orange;tacops;tank;dlcbundle;dlcbundle2;GM";
Ok
Guess that A3Sync and other launchers will need a bit of an update to support that by default.
eager rock
Yeah, but it will be a bit of extra setup compared to what it is now. Not much, but it is something.
vivid lynx
hopefully they will add CDLCs as options
obtuse cargo
Bought
lunar flame
someone:
"Arma wants us to pay 25 dollars for something we can get with mods
Classic arma"
how is that classic?
pseudo flare
What would the next creator dlc be? π€
red saddle
I think ************* seems to be quite far in development and they'll probably be next
vivid lynx
wow, I see that as hunter2
red saddle
#widthRailway
lunar flame
I would like something modern, just more vics, actual hmmves
narrow cradle
Modern
Humvees
π€
sweet otter
How can I install the dlc using steamcmd onto my server?
vivid lynx
you have to wait π
but eventually app_update 233780 -beta creatordlc
or select branch creatordlc in steam arma 3 server
sweet otter
Okay I will try the beta one π
fleet bear
nope forgot it
vivid lynx
it won't work yet
sweet otter
Can you tag me once it works?
vivid lynx
someone is making a lot of changes to the server app on steam now π
cunning nacelle
Apologies if this has been answered 50 times before, I've searched around and there are a lot of conflicting answers to this and the FAQ leaves some ambiguity: does this have the server signing requirement between clients and server mod list requiring any connecting client to have GM on a server loading GM, or is it only enforced via the addons/patches requirement of a mission, similar to how a normal mod works or how they updated the tanoa terrain to work?
wide yacht
is the dlc worth it?
crisp blade
I absolutely think so
muted narwhal
@cunning nacelle similar to how any other mod works
cunning nacelle
thanks
tawdry kestrel
@wide yacht I think so
wide yacht
does it have any multiplayer functionality?
vocal pawn
That's a sticky question
All the units, gear, and maps can be used in multiplayer as if it were a mod (NOT like previous DLCs)
Except that as far as I know, the server files required to install it on a multiplayer server aren't available yet
wide yacht
o
ebon linden
No bikey?
timid mountain
cring0 basically you need mod files on the server for it to be able to run dedicated
peer to peer works
local host and ppls join
vivid lynx
server files are available now
frail vine
Now thats what i call passive defense
frozen sphinx
haha
frail vine
I mean are you gonna shoot at the guy carrying that?
frozen sphinx
265mm 1Rnd potato
sick falcon
its munchhausens handgun
frozen sphinx
carrying a potato canon in to war
ashen belfry
bet it makes a LOT of VODKA
wraith sleet
When I activate the DLC, I do not hear the sounds of other players vanilla weapons? bug ?
wraith sleet
Yes, only activated the DLC, no mods (i play on official server) and I do not hear other players weapons
lean turtle
The reviews of Global Mobilization is just sad
raven urchin
Glad i didnt waste my time on this "DLC"
Seems rushed and pushed out before it was even finished
narrow cradle
i smell a troll
red saddle
Nah. Measured on the number of bugs that's about correct
restive socket
βRushed and pushed out before finishedβ hasnβt played a modern game I see.
raven urchin
What lol
Theres terrain glitches
No snipers
Anti air
But what the hell you gonna use it on cause there is no air
Should have stayed in the oven longer imo but i guess im just a "troll"
Shitload of clipping issues
wild tree
you know that you can mix CDLC and mods?
raven urchin
Low quality textures
wild tree
or even vanilla?
red saddle
Low quality textures? I heard of all you mentioned but not that
raven urchin
No vehicle interiors
wild tree
not true
restive socket
π People are hard up for 20 bucks huh?
red saddle
IMO some of the textures are overkill quality.
No interiors? They have interiors
raven urchin
Well i wouldnt say low quality
wild tree
but you said
wraith sleet
i can understand the negative reviews, no 3d interior for tanks, no zeus, no air units, low quality textures. But the devs said they will update with fixes and even new content, and they admitted that they needed to cut some content in order to make it to the release date, SO THEY SHOULD LEARN SOME PATIENCE AND START READING WHAT DEVS SAID
wraith sleet
again: they needed to cut some stuff to make it into the release date
and FREE PATCHES will come, dont worry
restive socket
Apex is better value. Lawlz.
raven urchin
Sounds like they just needed some extra cash to finish it
Apex is a beter value
Better map
Better content
Id buy it again for the VTOLs alone
restive socket
Good thing this isnβt required in anyway then...
raven urchin
Its required to play on a server with it
Which kind of breaks like what ever other dlc stands for
And separates people
wraith sleet
20 euros / 22 dollars for that DLC with a theme which is barely used in games is nothing
do you know what is a bummer? that RHS won 200k MANW contest:
- with a overused war theme (russia vs usa, almost in any game)
- no 3d tank interior either
- reused arma 2 content
- low quality textures for some vehicles (the arma 2 ports, they just used some filters to make textures look better)
Yet everyone would rather pay for RHS than for a DLC which actually brings really something new compared to RHS
oh wait, people actually rather spend 45β¬ on cs:go or fortnite skins, but complain about 20β¬ new content with rarely used war theme
and for the community seperation: blame BI, not GM devs
raven urchin
Hey man you wont catch me spending money on fortnite or CS GO
Those are just consumers
wraith sleet
GM devs just develop their content, BI did the CDLC model
raven urchin
And most of the content is in RHS
wraith sleet
not sure why everyone downvote GM for BI CDLC model
restive socket
Itβs require on servers that use the content...but you just said you thought the content isnβt worth playing...obvious troll is obvious
raven urchin
I said it breaks what arma and their dlcs originally stand for
Which is being able to be used on every server if you have the dlc or not
red saddle
BI might change that still. We'll see
restive socket
Watching the same stuff being posted over and over is pretty funnt as well
restive socket
When I read the same bullet list being rehashed in the same order sounds like a parrot not a rational complaint.
raven urchin
Are they supposed to complain about something else
narrow cradle
@raven urchin no, it's only required to play on a server running a mission that is using GM assets.
raven urchin
You know what would be a cool creator dlc that arma 3 could actually use and would fit in the base game
A naval dlc
narrow cradle
Lol
There's exceedingly little use case, not to mention the engine doesn't handle naval very well.
narrow cradle
And well if someone's interested then they'll probably pitch it to them
arctic seal
The engine lacks support for naval warfare....
narrow cradle
Yeah it's likely a hacky work around
raven urchin
Well do what you need to do
narrow cradle
Not something they'd sell for money
raven urchin
If they did it theres no reason someone with BI support cant
arctic seal
As said, the engine is not set up for naval warfare
raven urchin
You say that yet i do naval warfare with HAFM
narrow cradle
Did you miss what I wrote above
narrow cradle
And CDLC isn't going to intro engine level changes as per BI
raven urchin
Guess ill have to wait for arma 4
arctic seal
Good luck
wraith sleet
Funny the little gamemod , find the suspect
molten shard
they were making them before the mod came out to supplement people till the real thing
it's alot easier to retex rhs than to make new vehicles from the ground up
mild solstice
And goes without saying that the two helicopters we have in RHS that are the basis of that mod, are themselves Arma2 ports
And then there are a few inaccuracies in those A2 models that would not be in a project seeking to make the exact versions used by German forces in the 1980s
lethal coral
i mean i would pay for $20 for it if it was used like the other DLC and can be used on servers if people have the DLC or not just seems like such a strange changed by BIS
molten shard
this dlc is a change aswell, the content is completely optional and not forced upon all clients
fringe python
@raven urchin there exists no such piece of software that does either hydrodynamics or naval warfare nor combined
there is however calculation software for hydrodynamics, not realtime
<=== Bachelor of Maritime Technologies, Naval Architecture
wise crane
Boys and girls prepare yourself for a Panzer rant
I have just finished playing the new campaign from the new DLC, I did not complete it but I could not stand to even attempt that. This new DLC does not allow us to implement it in the server with its current configuration so only servers dedicated to this DLC work with it. So that for me rules out most of the multiplayer element of it. Next I tried to play the single player campaign.
After sitting there and playing with the DLC for a while I have come to realize that really the artwork and design of it is comparable to CUP weapons and vehicles which does not bod favorably for the DLC since CUP's only claim is that they port over Arma 2 items to Arma 3.
Next the DLC exposes and forces you to look at all the issues vanilla Arma has in a highly frustrating manner. Both as a foot soldier and as a tanker you have no armor. This means any shot that is fired at you will kill you 9 times out of 10. This feature combined with Arma 3's aimbot AI really make it quite fun to play this campaign(sarcasm implied here).
Following on to this their are elements of this mod that don't even work correctly, during one part of a mission you are ambushing a armored convoy with a brdm-2 at the front. You play an AT trooper armed with an 84 mm HEAT weapon. Now the BRDM does not have any real armor and as such that rocket should blow it to smithereens right away. Instead I have fired 3 shots at it including one from an RPG-7 and not killed it yet other times hitting the same spot fired one shot and blown it up.
Lastly the overall campaign is as boring as can be, this is the height of the cold war and pretense of this campaign is that eastern Germany has invaded the West. The scope of the fighting felt like I was fighting a minor disturbance created by a local militia instead of the Eastern block invading the west. There in the tank battle 2-3 tanks and the same number of BMP's and the West German side only has 4, thanks to Arma AI that is equal to 1 but yeah, and it just feels utterly anti-climactic.
In conclusion if you don't have this DLC I would honest to god not recommend getting it. Yes it does have elements that some wish we had on our server but they took that from us so their is no point there. The graphics are horrid, the models don't work as they should, the gameplay is god awful and overall it just feels like a stripped down version of CUP they are trying to get you to waste money on.
narrow cradle
@wise crane your first point about the server is incorrect. Are you sure you didn't just watch an operator drewski video and come here to rant about it? ;)
wise crane
No I didnβt I currently run a server and can access any of the dlc content despite updating the server
I have yet to even watch anything he has said about this DLC
However this DLC seems like a slap in the face to me
We have so many amazing mods that go way beyond what this dlc gives us and they do it for free
narrow cradle
Well, we also updated one of our servers and we had no problem connecting as non owners
wise crane
All I know is that I bought it to insure I could use new stuff for my unit
And I completely and utterly disappointed
narrow cradle
....it was already stated that non owners will not be able to use the assets
I'm not sure why that's a surprise
They're trying to bring it in line with other first party DLCs in terms of content licensing, but there's no guarantee that it'll happen
wise crane
Yes well I was hoping they could fix that cause I love the leopard it is a ridiculously sexy tank and the having the mg42 effectively was cool but now
I couldnβt care less if they do or dont it wasnβt worth the money I spent
narrow cradle
I mean, that's fair if you don't feel like it was worth it
Get a refund if you can
But a lot of us have found the assets and map quite excellent
And we're also not going to hold Vertexmacht to a higher standard than BI - every BI DLC has had bugs etc that have taken a while to smoothen out
I'm pretty sure that the bugs etc that aren't on the engine's side should be fixed in due time
molten shard
I still donβt understand the rhs and cup comparisons, is it because East Germany has russian vehicles because you cant get any west german stuff normally, well sept for demo truck
ashen belfry
I'm 5 or 6 missions in now. Just finished the one where you have defend from enemies attacking from the south. Player is located at a train station with sandbags. I had multiple BRDMs and at least one BMP attack (and not to mention multiple infantry). OMG, what a furball that was! I was literally ducking at my PC and trying to will my physical body to make my on screen avatar do the same. Yes, I died quite a few times, but only due to stupidity and a lapse in correct tactics. He who flanks farthest wins, but never flank farther than your cover (or ammo supplies)!
To put it bluntly. I haven't felt this way about Arma since OFP. I got the very same feeling of immersion! Thank you @tepid lance and team!! Put me down for a pre-order of your next project! If its anywhere near this it will be AMAZING!!
tepid lance
Thanks! Glad to hear you enjoyed it!
The campaign definitely has some issues currently but those are already being addressed. π
delicate pumice
Man, you need a thick skin to do game dev. Don't know if I could handle the inevitable negativity (from some sectors).
crisp blade
You need a thick skin to do something different and I think this is clearly that. I've had nothing but fun so far. Yea theres bugs, but IDK why we are suddenly holding them to a higher standard than BIS let alone other developers jesus fuck
they're being incredibly responsive on here and their discord about them fixing
they're actively asking for us to show them issues
delicate pumice
Thought Drewski's video was a pretty cheap shot mainly intended to drive clicks, total sell-out. The guy has played more than enough Arma to know what a mixed bag it can be in meeting the mainstream notion of what a video game is and does. It's easy to poke fun at if at the same time you just ignore all the ways in which it blows away just about every other franchise (open world scale, user-made missions, modding).
tepid lance
Deliberately unfavourable, explicitly provoking and focussing on platform bugs.
knotty ore
Thats what gets views these days.
ashen belfry
And a great way to ruin ones reputation amongst a community
muted narwhal
i just seen that video, what a total fucking wank
crisp blade
Cool so, really great tip chief. Don't abuse people if you're trying to get your point across. Super creative use of insults though, I'll keep the chalk eater one for later and re-use it.
re-uses are you saying they have assets that exist in exact form elsewhere?
basically hated by the majority you mean minority right?
take what they made and say its good yea thats called an opinion and like, everyone has one man. What people are here defending though, is that the content is not the trailer trash people are clicking it up to be. Most of the issues i've seen some people have so far is them having their settings on potato
red saddle
@copper palm have a read of #rules before you continue.
Btw it doesn't reuse anything. All is made from scratch
tepid lance
Yeh, I'd like to see some evidence, too.
ornate ridge
@narrow cradle are you saying I can upload the DLC to my server and those without it can join in, but can't use the content?
So basically they use Vanilla assets in the server and fight alongside and against players using the content?
I was hoping to add the mod to my server and use the factions to add even more flavor on who we fight with and against.
crisp blade
No, so they won't be able to use a mission if GM content is in it and they don't own it
ornate ridge
Okay
crisp blade
But if its on the server, but the mission doesn't have any GM content, they'll be able to join
ornate ridge
Oh well
crisp blade
so basically, it saves you as a server admin, having to load and unload it every time
Can just switch between
Its the same as any mod behaves
crisp blade
aye papi
wraith sleet
Don't get me wrong, I hate drewski greatly, but his points are valid (mind you, I haven't watched his video, but from reading above, I think I get the point). On a quality note, the equipment looks like pre-rework cup, which is notoriously bad. The map looks unfinished, and the only thing I can give it is the buildings. On the bugs... well it's arma, we don't have the phrase "I got arma-ed" for no reason, but it's just broken. For example, I have a friend that refunded the dlc because he was unable to progress at all in the campaign. To me, and countless more, the price tag made no sense. It would be so forgivable if it wasn't $20, but it just isn't. I, admit I haven't bought the dlc, my experience is first hand accounts by close friends of mine.
Wall of text completed
Those are just some "small issues" the community has
And sure, it's just come out
But you expect more at launch from something for $20
ornate ridge
I bought the DLC, but haven't got to try it out due to my long work hours. Even if the DLC isn't at 100% yet, what we got for $20 is still leagues above what we get from Bethesda and other companies from their creator content. So I'm content.
wraith sleet
I have over 800+ tied up in the game, trust me, I enjoy it. But to me this just seems like an iron front v.2
ornate ridge
Though my only gripe is how it splits the player base from what I'm hearing
But that's a BI issue
Not the devs who worked on the mod
wraith sleet
It pisses me off they would make it a paid for mod And not a dlc. At least with dlc you can see the assets without buying it
I agree
ornate ridge
Yeah, I'm down* for optional download DLC. Like how Halo MCC let's you choose what halo game you want downloaded and doesn't force you to download all 6 halo games
dry pilot
I wish BIS make home patreon like stuff to handle donations for mods and get % from it, instead of making some special dlc with questionable future and no guarantees
wraith sleet
Exactly
What will this end up becoming? Will it be one of the best things to happen to arma 3 like all the hype? Or will it be another marksmen, or helicopter dlc?
I'm just not about to spend $20 for something ((((not finished))))
It dosent help that when people have complaints
You have die hard BI guys telling you your opinion is incorrect
ornate ridge
My question will be is "What will this mean when Arma IV drops, what will the DLC model for that be?"
wraith sleet
I don't think they will drop another arma
ornate ridge
Oh?
crisp blade
Its like you expect people to just accept your opinion as fact with no counter point
wraith sleet
They are to busy releasing these types of things
wraith sleet
Do you think I'm 14? No of course not, you can't not have an argument.
But it gets to the point of borderline harassment
Because I said something that went against the BI codex
ornate ridge
Have we gotten there in this conversation? Maybe I missed it
crisp blade
constructive*
Well no. Ofcourse thats why its an opinion. But some people post things and pretend its fact. When its not. and its wrong.
and no. not really.
wraith sleet
Epic
ornate ridge
Yeah, this chat has seen pretty civil to me. We are all adults here
wraith sleet
No really what?
crisp blade
@ornate ridge currently yea. Doesn't take many scrolls up to see some people haven't been
wraith sleet
That I can't be entitled to my own opinion based on facts?
ornate ridge
@crisp blade point taken
wraith sleet
Or that the (((dlc))) is just bad
delicate pine
@copper palm could you elaborate why this anim doesn't fit?
crisp blade
the ((())) thing. The somehow claiming that because people want to be paid for their work is jewish is very odd
ornate ridge
That people have been harassing people here. I didnt see it, but then again I missed it
wraith sleet
The thumb hovers
delicate pine
I made it
wraith sleet
You remember the ak12 thumb hover
Yes
The Jewish are behind everything friend @crisp blade
Anyhow, jokes aside
delicate pine
They are not hovering on my end
wraith sleet
I have explained the point
delicate pine
it looks fine here too https://www.reddit.com/r/arma/comments/bj594l/theyve_done_it_spar16_and_17_no_longer_look/
wraith sleet
We had four people with "hover hand" yesterday
So I guess it's just on and off or some shit
delicate pine
it could be indeed because of mods
ornate ridge
My thing on this Creator DLC is there should be a optional "Creator DLC light" that allows players who haven't bought the DLC to join servers that have it active (not including servers using DLC maps like how Apex is with Tonoa). They can't use any of the assets or drive them, but they can see/shoot/kill/be killed by them. This way mission makers will be able to use the assets for their missions for their communities without splitting them, and those who actually bought the DLC will have far more situations where they get to use content they spent money on and get actual real investment and enjoyment out of it.
Because I'll be serious, I'll buy these DLCs because I want to and want to support the developers who are working hard and trying to make a name for themselves.
But how the way things are, I'll never get to truly enjoy these DLCs, for I'll only get to use them in singleplayer and not for my ARMA 3 community that I run. Many of my members are on the fence about getting these DLCs like they were for APEX. But I know a lot of people in my community got the APEX DLC for when I did Vanilla ops, they wanted to use the APEX weapons and Uniforms but couldn't really do that, while those who did could. So it created a "I really want to use that" effect on them, so many of my members finally cracked down and bought it. Which helped for I finally ended up with enough members to make doing ops on Tonoa worth it, which in turned finally caused the rest to buy APEX so they could play with us. I don't force my community members to buy DLC, but the peer pressure of missing out ends up causing people to by things that they would normally not even think about buying.
sorry for the wall of text
muted narwhal
@dry pilot I wish BIS make home patreon like stuff to handle donations for mods and get % from it, instead of making some special dlc with questionable future and no guarantees lol
donations do not work for anything but servers, but even so, due to monetization policies, people have got used to expect something in return
simple as that
@copper palm you are actually entitled to both criticize the product as well as not buy it, or get a refund
as long as you do it in a decent manner
ornate ridge
There's problems with that for how many of these DLCs will there be
It can get pretty big real quick
I dont want all 500gb of my internal HD to be ARMA 3
muted narwhal
well, to be honest, considering backlash, the i don't see many here buying a couple of assets for 10EU price-range
by a couple i mean i actually mean a few, rather than 2 in this context
ornate ridge
Also the size limit can really handicap how much effort these teams can put into their mod
muted narwhal
yes and no
ornate ridge
You'll end up with the Bethesda Creation club all over again
muted narwhal
my 2 cents on the subject
25% is optimistic, considering everyone got entitled and used to getting custom content for free by now
apex was also launched when there were more arma players
where do you get these numbers from btw?
50% of what? active players or all A3 users?
ornate ridge
I don't think you will persuade people to spend $10 on a handful of items. It's hard enough to get people to spend $20 on the 1st DLC mod and it's stack full of content compared to what Bethesda does with their Creation club. Selling a single Power Armor frame for $10. Like WTF
muted narwhal
@copper palm lol my dude
no modder is creating content for anyone else but himself
not for someone else
muted narwhal
@wraith sleet alright, fair enough, i have some other (more official numbers)
and these % are lower if you use A3 users as 100%
@copper palm nope, i am saying that people have no idea how much time, money and effort is put into these "free mods"
i said it before, a lot of these have a monetary value in tens of thousands of $
despite being released for free
yes of course i do
show you what?
i used RHS as base
we have a rough estimate in terms of man hours used
lol
you have no idea how games are made
if you take the average freelance fee per hour or per model
and you multiply that by the number of assets available, which is what one does when it starts a new product
you end up with a value
ornate ridge
Lol. Think this conversation has gotten out of hand
knotty ore
for reference PuFu there is one of RHS makers
so he has first hand knowledge how much he pays for his tools
and what he earns as afreelancer
/employee
timid mountain
it's not only about tools.. which are expensive.. but man hours that could otherwise be put into actual work
you gotta eat
muted narwhal
yes, this random guy has been modding for more than you have been playing this franchise, this random guy also does this for a living, and has worked before on official products with BI
but obviously, he has no idea what the duck he is talking about
because he is not willing to provide some other random guy internal private data
i don't have data on other cases
as in man hours, number of assets etc
take 35-50$/h as average, take 60h per weapon, take 120h for vehicle, take 120h per character and about 40H per individual gear asset and you can sort of make your own estimation
tepid lance
^ GM would not be financially viable with these modest rates, btw.
muted narwhal
i know
and yes, the above has nothing to do with the existing GM release, i am talking about all other C-DLCs in general
knotty ore
and mods in general
muted narwhal
i have a excel table someplace i can share with it
mild solstice
Watch a twitch stream of someone modelling and see how many hours it takes to make something to completion, then multiply it by an average hourly rate for skilled professionals in a creative/arts field. The sum will always be in the region of several thousand dollars
ornate ridge
Man, good thing I saw that hand grenade approaching and didn't jump into it. I work with the mod team who work on the Operation Trebuchet mod, acquiring reference photos for them, and I know how much time and effort they put into it. Modding is no easy work and you can end up seeing people spend dozens, if not hundreds of hours on a few models. It's no easy task. And for them to do it for free, even as a passion project, is very stressful. Especially when the community is all like "I want it noooooow, why you taking so long"
muted narwhal
if they are doing it for anyone else
but their own satisfaction
they are doing it wrong
ornate ridge
That is true
muted narwhal
we are going back to the point at hand
people got entitled and used to receiving free stuff
ornate ridge
Yeah. Took me a while to type my response
tepid lance
@wraith sleet Pricing to recoup costs for CDLC with the given distribution and publishing politics by BI make CDLC as a whole not a financially viable entity.
muted narwhal
@tepid lance do you have any sort of data on GM sales?
or access to that later on?
nevermind, i'll PM you about it if you can share some data, out of my own curiosity
because i have seen some numbers myself, and these made no sense whatsoever
ornate ridge
Why my "CDLC Light" thought was a pretty good idea on getting people who are on the fense exposed to the CDLCs
For they would see them in action in person and not off some stream or YouTube video
tepid lance
Anyone going into the CDLC with a formed company and the intention to make profit needs to rethink their marked research. GM was started as a mod project and kept under wraps to prevent content theft. We built it because we enjoyed building it. CDLC initiative came around and we decided to go with it, taking into account the extra time BI would demand to flesh it out and polish it.
Only because of these circumstances it happened.
No data on GM sales, and I doubt BI will release them publically.
muted narwhal
yeah, unlikely for public data
mild solstice
Keep an eye on mond's driveway, see if he buys a speedboat
muted narwhal
π
knotty ore
or a Tank
muted narwhal
also, what people fail to comprehend for some reason, is that most teams are not made up from 2 blokes, but a lot more
mild solstice
Yes! Should buy a Leopard friend for Edita
muted narwhal
@tepid lance do you have a guesstimate about some financial numbers in terms of manhours for GM CDLC?
or just manhours put in it?
i can do some conversion myself
tepid lance
Nothing accurate. But we'd have to probably sell 100k units at least if we were a traditional studio.
That is 100k sales for a an expansion to a 6 year title with a niche setting.
muted narwhal
there aren't 100K active A3 players to begin with
muted narwhal
fair enough
last i checked there were about max 40K concurrent A3 daily users
you are right
that usually translates to 4-5x more active users
so around 200k then or so, my bad
and i said active, not owners
@copper palm rephrase
what first mission?
delicate pine
Pufu, fix pls
muted narwhal
π
surreal vault
