Making sandbox games can be an ungrateful job

[Bloc]

THAT is exactly why they are not officially announcing Arma4 -yet...But it is known they are transferring it over to their new but modified Enfusion engine. So carry on -keep barking
Protip -dont google spite information on Arma 4 and bring in a PC Gamer article from 2018

Protip- Don't assume while building your argument. Are they officially saying that they are working on Arma 4? No. End of discussion. It's not comparable with Bannerlord in that sense. Bannerlord announced officially in 2012. And started to work on it even way before than that date. So 8 years we are talking about not hypothetical years. If you want hypothetical years, Bannerlord engine changes were already in the head of Armagan and Serdar ( Who is now in Ubisoft ) in the same year of Warband release. They knew that they could change the engine in a way that it can look better but they choose not to go that way because Warband was pretty much stable and Paradox was putting too much pressure on their shoulders for release. After Warband, they started to work on that prototype right away and once they have something on their hands, they wanted to move on with gameplay changes and later in 2012 they announced the game officially. So in that sense, this game is under development since 2010.

It's not for a project of this size and everything they had to do. And development studios don't put same people on the same projects if it's dual development, one group of people works on one and the other on a different project. And yes, people can pump out games fast but it all depends on the scope and size on the project, like I already said, the amount of time they took is completely reasonable considering it's a complex sandbox game and they had to start over with the engine.

If you are calling Starcraft, Diablo, Counter-Strike, Team Fortress a pump-out-games, then I'm not sure if we need to discuss at all.

Development studios indeed don't put the same amount of people on each project. Because they have several projects. Several fanbases to focus on, which makes management even harder for them. Taleworlds had one game and one game only to focus on. Yet they failed.
Furthermore, Bannerlord is not as complex as you think in terms of a sandbox game. And if you add up already have know-how by Taleworlds (~12 years of know-how), it should become less and less complex for them. Yet, Bannerlord isn't even at the state of Warband at the moment and it's heartbreaking.

I guess the point was : they could have done another cake (same game, better graphics, some fixes), but moreover they are trying to add new possibilities, (better) modding tools, mechanics, ... that are more complex to implement in a sandbox for it to be balanced.

No his point was: TW made the cake, modders only put the cream on top. They are not same. Making the case is harder.
Which makes no sense in context of what I said. I was comparing the pace of TW fixing issues vs modders.

---

Regardless, they will fix Bannerlord. I'm sure of it. I'm not sure when this will happen with this pace though, but it will happen. They also need to do that- financial wise. Otherwise next game won't sell this much and they will go down. I think no one in this forum would want that. Keep your feedback coming. Good or bad, doesn't matter. Just stop shutting people down with random arguments. As long as they are inside the forum rules, they can "cry" about anything they want.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

For the sake of comparison, let's take some of the Call of Duty games that have a similar price tag like Bannerlord. Making a story based singleplayer shooter game, even with multiplayer is much less demanding than making a sandbox game like Mount & Blade with so many elements involved.

If this was true there would be tonnes of low budget singleplayer story games, but even a quick glance will tell you that practically all nonlinear systems-based games like citybuilders and strategy games are low budget, while high budget games are dominated by linear, undynamic, story based singleplayer campaigns.

Dynamic games have a lot of moving parts, but balancing them is infinitely easier than creating cutscenes, or designing a bunch of levels to last 5+ hours of playtime. Consider how little effort went into something like minecraft compared to even a single level of a game like God of War 4, despite the fact that the former made more money.

 

[froggyluv]

Protip- Don't assume while building your argument. Are they officially saying that they are working on Arma 4? No. End of discussion.

Like i said - those who know know. There is no assumption. Im willing to fashion $500 bet with you right here right now that they officially announce within a year. So bookmark this page. Theyve already released a video with hints in it the same as they did for arma 2 opting to play an ARG with their fanbase before officially announcing it.

When you create your own forums, your welcome to choose when to tell me my discussion is over until then, sorry but you dont have a say in the matter son.

 

[Revverie]

what kept you playing then, was the 50 hours you spent in the game afk time?

it already has a lot of content

Half of the time in my playthrough was going from town to town doing tournaments to earn money. Every tournament was the same, every town I visited, while they were different in aspect, was the same in valuable content, like people living in there. That half of my playthrough was boring, it felt like I was doing nothing in this world just making money to sustain my army in peace time, all I did while playing was thinking how lackluster this game was and thinking what things could be added to make it fun. I wished it had a lot of content, if you're trying to defend the price tag, I honestly dont care, I knew what I was getting myself into, what I dont expect is people trying to bellitle my opinions of this game just because its a sandbox and its hard to make, I know they've improved the graphical side by millions, for me this game looks and feels fantastic while being in combat but it dies as soon as you dont have no fighting to do. It dies. Literally the game is dead in peace time, and that my friend is lack of content.
Now what I'm trying to do in my posts is to show this problem to the devs, which I hope they already addressed before I even told them. I'm realistic about game development and I dont expect this game to add new content in the next week, but in a couple of months new content MUST be added, it's a MUST

 

[Gambles]

Like i said - those who know know. There is no assumption. Im willing to fashion $500 bet with you right here right now that they officially announce within a year. So bookmark this page. Theyve already released a video with hints in it the same as they did for arma 2 opting to play an ARG with their fanbase before officially announcing it.

When you create your own forums, your welcome to choose when to tell me my discussion is over until then, sorry but you dont have a say in the matter son.

I don't think you're in the "know" at all, because you seem to not even have the basic information of bohemia's development what so ever. For instance, Arma 4 will be on the enfusion engine which launched on DayZ in 2018, except it will be supposedly even a newer iteration of that engine. Implying that they've been developing Arma 4 since the Arma 3 launch on an engine that didn't even exist at the time let alone in a state that would allow them to develop a game on it... Yeah. You do you.

 

[Bloc]

When you create your own forums, your welcome to choose when to tell me my discussion is over until then, sorry but you dont have a say in the matter son.

---

I don't think you're in the "know" at all, because you seem to not even have the basic information of bohemia's development what so ever.

Don't bother. He clearly indicated that he is up for discussing randomly without having a proper basis or even an argument.

 

[Gambles]

---

Don't bother. He clearly indicated that he is up for discussing randomly without having a proper basis or even an argument.

I know but it's ridiculous, there's videos of them from 2016 with a very raw enfusion engine and them JUST starting to implement it with DayZ. Implying that Arma 4 has been in development since 2013 when the engine didn't even exist, and when it did it was clearly being designed for all their future games from DayZ to Take on Mars to whatever comes next, it's just disingenuous. This information you need to be in the "know" about, they have youtube videos on it for Christ sake lol

 

[froggyluv]

I don't think you're in the "know" at all, because you seem to not even have the basic information of bohemia's development what so ever. For instance, Arma 4 will be on the enfusion engine which launched on DayZ in 2018, except it will be supposedly even a newer iteration of that engine. Implying that they've been developing Arma 4 since the Arma 3 launch on an engine that didn't even exist at the time let alone in a state that would allow them to develop a game on it... Yeah. You do you.

Oh you mean how like Dayz existed even before ENFUSION? Shocking reality!! Certain aspects of Dayz were adopted into Enfusion like Animations and rendering but not all of it. It just dont work that way migo. DAYZ was a mod from arma 2 built entirely in sqf and they slowly migrated aspects of it over to ENFUSION

 

[froggyluv]

I know but it's ridiculous, there's videos of them from 2016 with a very raw enfusion engine and them JUST starting to implement it with DayZ. Implying that Arma 4 has been in development since 2013 when the engine didn't even exist, and when it did it was clearly being designed for all their future games from DayZ to Take on Mars to whatever comes next, it's just disingenuous. This information you need to be in the "know" about, they have youtube videos on it for Christ sake lol

"One of the largest changes that the DayZ team began in 2014 was to rewrite the core engine. Improving the engine will have significant long term benefits to DayZ and all of DayZ's 3,000,000 players. The name of the new engine is Enfusion. The main benefits to reinventing the core engine are in the upgrades to the renderer, as this will enhance performance for players, and also vastly improve the visual aesthetics of particle effects. In the long run these improvements to the engine will enable DayZ to utilize DirectX 11, which will further enhance the experience of console versions of DayZ. Enfusion will also bring upgraded tools for both the DayZ team and content creators, improving the efficiency of creating official content and modifications. Currently DayZ is still mostly using the Real Virtuality engine, however throughout 2015 DayZ will progressively switch to utilizing Enfusion to a greater extent." ~Bohemia

Here ya go slice. It was a gradual transfer both during and after the fact.

PS: Have fun spite googling all day!

 

[Gambles]

"One of the largest changes that the DayZ team began in 2014 was to rewrite the core engine. Improving the engine will have significant long term benefits to DayZ and all of DayZ's 3,000,000 players. The name of the new engine is Enfusion. The main benefits to reinventing the core engine are in the upgrades to the renderer, as this will enhance performance for players, and also vastly improve the visual aesthetics of particle effects. In the long run these improvements to the engine will enable DayZ to utilize DirectX 11, which will further enhance the experience of console versions of DayZ. Enfusion will also bring upgraded tools for both the DayZ team and content creators, improving the efficiency of creating official content and modifications. Currently DayZ is still mostly using the Real Virtuality engine, however throughout 2015 DayZ will progressively switch to utilizing Enfusion to a greater extent." ~Bohemia

Here ya go slice. It was a gradual transfer both during and after the fact.

PS: Have fun spite googling all day!

I literally just said they were implementing a very RAW version of that in 2016 and there's videos of them doing it. This also has sweet **** all to do with them working on Arma 4 since 2013. The enfusion engine by that own statement you just posted was in development for DayZ and their games going forward. They have not been developing Arma 4 on the engine it's being built on since 2013 and that's a fact. They've been busy with Arma 3 DLC, Dayz, Take on Mars, Vigor, and the like. Any work that has/is being done on Arma 4 was certainly started on the enfusion engine after it's completion, though most likely not on the current iteration we now know as they're supposedly using an even newer version for it.

So what, exactly, is your point here mister inside knowledge?

 

[Doctor_Noob]

I'm not going to lie this thread is very off topic at this point . But all Videogame devs have hard jobs but I will complain with the problems I have with the game which is the mutiplayer combat, and if they listen they listen (which they did listen) and if they makes changes to it (which I don't know if they will).Atleast with singleplayer stuff will be added over time but who cares 2-3 years from now this game will be in better shape so why not just complain about the issues you find with the game and just wait.

 

[Apocal]

Protip- Don't assume while building your argument. Are they officially saying that they are working on Arma 4? No. End of discussion. It's not comparable with Bannerlord in that sense. Bannerlord announced officially in 2012. And started to work on it even way before than that date. So 8 years we are talking about not hypothetical years. If you want hypothetical years, Bannerlord engine changes were already in the head of Armagan and Serdar ( Who is now in Ubisoft ) in the same year of Warband release. They knew that they could change the engine in a way that it can look better but they choose not to go that way because Warband was pretty much stable and Paradox was putting too much pressure on their shoulders for release. After Warband, they started to work on that prototype right away and once they have something on their hands, they wanted to move on with gameplay changes and later in 2012 they announced the game officially. So in that sense, this game is under development since 2010.

I was under the impression the 2012 announcement was because they wanted to avoid having people think Chivalry was the sequel to Warband?

 

[froggyluv]

I literally just said they were implementing a very RAW version of that in 2016 and there's videos of them doing it. This also has sweet **** all to do with them working on Arma 4 since 2013. The enfusion engine by that own statement you just posted was in development for DayZ and their games going forward. They have not been developing Arma 4 on the engine it's being built on since 2013 and that's a fact. They've been busy with Arma 3 DLC, Dayz, Take on Mars, Vigor, and the like. Any work that has/is being done on Arma 4 was certainly started on the enfusion engine after it's completion, though most likely not on the current iteration we now know as they're supposedly using an even newer version for it.

So what, exactly, is your point here mister inside knowledge?

LOL now who as all the inside knowledge

Fact is you have no idea if they started Arma 4 the day after arma 3 was released on some capacity. They have shown they are willing to transfer over to other engines mid or post production -so how can you say for sure?. Their record is certainly stronger than your whim. And its apparently going to be on a hybrid engine of the old Real Virtuality and Enfusion -not pure Enfusion. So again you have no clue. Good try though sport.

Also DLC's have been primarily modder produced or contracted out. The other games you mentioned are on fully different teams.

 

[Bloc]

@Gambles Seriously, don't bother. This thread is also not about Arma. Let him play the part of Arma Whistleblower role in somewhere else

but in a couple of months new content MUST be added

You would expect at least have some new scenes, right? It's not rocket science after all. It's either they are lazy and not creating new scenes or new engine's map editor is extremely hard to work with. If its the second case, then this contradicts with their blogs where they state new engine is so easy to use when it comes to create maps and such. They even removed the on-the-fly battlefield generation which we had in previous Mount and Blade titles and now we are stuck with 8 maps with zero spawn point rotation where you feel like you are having Dejavu over and over in each battle.

I was under the impression the 2012 announcement was because they wanted to avoid having people think Chivalry was the sequel to Warband?

I never heard that before and I think it's quite clear that Chivalry looks way different than Warband. And it wouldn't make sense for a company to announce their game for that.
As far as I know, they announced the game because they were working on it and Paradox was pushing them for release. Paradox also had War of Roses coming up that timeframe - which failed miserably- and they didn't want that to come into way. Also Fire&Sword ( which is hardly a TW product ) Designer Mikael Yazbeck did this

 

[Gambles]

LOL now who as all the inside knowledge

Fact is you have no idea if they started Arma 4 the day after arma 3 was released on some capacity. They have shown they are willing to transfer over to other engines mid or post production -so how can you say for sur?. Their record is certainly stronger than your whim. And its apparently going to be on a hybrid engine of the old Real Virtualityand Enfusion -not pure Enfusion. So again you have no clue. Good try though sport.

Well I certainly have more than you, I've played every single game in the arma series literally on release. I've been active in that community for years. I was there for the DayZ mod in 2012 and watched Rocket himself totally blow of the popularity of Arma single handedly with a mod. I was there for the ****ass DayZ standalone launch with a botched part arma part take on helicopters engine that was royally trash and I even stuck around playing the game through all of it's iterations and bouncing on to Arma 3 for some king of the hill and the odd milsim server.

And as someone whose coming forth with the "Arma 3 was in development since 2013" you have the burden of proof, that's how an argument works. You can't just say "UnIcOrnS ExIsT YoU Don't HaVe ProOf ThAt ThEy DoN't" no that's on you to prove it. And everything we know about them working on the enfusion engine in tandem with DayZ and implementing and testing it on there and the fact that it isn't even the same enfusion they've stated their using for Arma 4 would imply otherwise. You're just back peddling at this point.

 

[froggyluv]

Well I certainly have more than you, I've played every single game in the arma series literally on release. I've been active in that community for years. I was there for the DayZ mod in 2012 and watched Rocket himself totally blow of the popularity of Arma single handedly with a mod. I was there for the ****ass DayZ standalone launch with a botched part arma part take on helicopters engine that was royally trash and I even stuck around playing the game through all of it's iterations and bouncing on to Arma 3 for some king of the hill and the odd milsim server.

And as someone whose coming forth with the "Arma 3 was in development since 2013" you have the burden of proof, that's how an argument works. You can't just say "UnIcOrnS ExIsT YoU Don't HaVe ProOf ThAt ThEy DoN't" no that's on you to prove it. And everything we know about them working on the enfusion engine in tandem with DayZ and implementing and testing it on there and the fact that it isn't even the same enfusion they've stated their using for Arma 4 would imply otherwise. You're just back peddling at this point.

Can i prove Arma 4 was started in 2013 - of course not. I stated that they started Arma 4 back then after Arma 3 was released but there is no verifiable way to prove that as an absolute until they release further information. The main point I was making was against the other poster stating that there is "no official Arma 4 planned" and then came forward with a magazine article from 2 years ago.

As far as backpedling, thats exactly what your doing on your "But DayZ didnt even exist until blah blah blah enfusion". Your already busted cause you thought DayZ was built entirely on Enfusion until i told you different -you know it, I know it. Also way to just dodge when you are caught dead wrong -like on the outsourced DLCs and the other games having separate teams. Own up.

The engine "they stated they using for arma 4" is still part SQF -so they could have easily been working certain aspects in SQF for a long time. As far as going back many Armas and knowing Rocket -woopty for you -im Operation Flashpoint Day 1 2001 Son -so double woopty for me. Come introduce yourself on their forums sometime i dont member seeing your name around. Actually dont -no offense but your abit of a mook

 

[Gambles]

Can i prove Arma 4 was started in 2013 - of course not. I stated that they started Arma 4 back then after Arma 3 was released but there is no verifiable way to prove that as an absolute until they release further information. The main point I was making was against the other poster stating that there is "no official Arma 4 planned" and then came forward with a magazine article from 2 years ago.

As far as backpedling, thats exactly what your doing on your "But DayZ didnt even exist until blah blah blah enfusion". Your already busted cause you thought DayZ was built entirely on Enfusion until i told you different -you know it, I know it.

The engine "they stated they using for arma 4" is still part SQF -so they could have easily been working certain aspects in SQF for a long time. As far as going back many Armas and knowing Rocket -woopty for you -im Operation Flashpoint Day 1 2001 Son -so double woopty for me. Come introduce yourself on their forums sometime i dont member seeing your name around. Actually dont -no offense but your abit of a mook

You're so full of **** it isn't even funny, how the hell did I think DayZ was initially built on the enfusion engine when it hit early access in 2013? You don't know ****. I said DayZ LAUNCHED with the Enfusion engine in 2018. You clearly lack reading comprehension in addition to being a bold face liar. The quote you posted was from 2015, the game launched in 2018 out of early access, what is so god damn hard to understand about that?

The ENGINE they're using on Arma 4, which they have stated themselves will be the engine they use for every game going forward. Is the enfusion engine, that same engine they were developing in tandem with DayZ. An engine they've been continually working on since they built it from the ground up for DayZ and probably are still working on.

You're full of absolute crap. You have no proof of them working on Arma 4 since the launch of Arma 3. Not to mention the fact that you think Bohemia was developing content for arma 3, while patching it, while adding dlc, while making DayZ, while making Take on Mars and also had a team developing enfusion on the side in tandem with DayZ but ALSO somehow, some ****ing way, working on an Arma 4 that they had no idea what would look like cause enfusion was basically nothing. Yeah, good luck spreading that crock elsewear, how about ya hit up the bohemia forum with that? I'm sure the Arma lads would have a good laugh at how Arma 4 has been in development since 2013 on the enfusion engine.

 

[froggyluv]

Actually its you that lacks comprehension - they have teams for everything. And you've still never conceded that Arma 4 will be on a hybrid sqf/enfusion so AGAIN - do you think Enfusion must be 100% complete before they can write Code Line #1 for Arma 4? If so you know nothing. Patching crew for Arma 3 very small -i can tell you there exact names. Take On Mars - totally different Team. Vigor -different team. DLC's mostly Modders or outsourced. You keep missing these somehow...

Come on over Arma forums -most people there are also pretty certain Arma 4 will be announced soon due to a new video. Been there for 17 years - they all already know me -whats your name there again? What have you built for it?

keep being that old man with your fist raised up screaming out the clouds "LIAR!!!" -youll only give yourself a headache

 

[Gambles]

Actually its you that lacks comprehension - they have teams for everything. And you've still never conceded that Arma 4 will be on a hybrid sqf/enfusion so AGAIN - do you think Enfusion must be 100% complete before they can write Code Line #1 for Arma 4? If so you know nothing. Patching crew for Arma 3 very small -i can tell you there exact names. Take On Mars - totally different Team. Vigor -different team. DLC's mostly Modders or outsourced. You keep missing these somehow...

Come on over Arma forums -most people there are also pretty certain Arma 4 will be announced soon due to a new video. Been there for 17 years - they all already know me -whats your name there again? What have you built for it?

keep being that old man with your fist raised up screaming out the clouds "LIAR!!!" -youll only give yourself a headache

Right the dev's of arma 3 didn't work on it post launch. Right... right..

You're full of **** i'll see you on the the forums over there then, I look forward to your "Arma 4 has been in development since 2013" post and all the evidence you provide for that statement and the dev's response. Should be great you damn damn liar. And people have been assuming Arma 4's launch since 2018, them launching next year isn't the same as them developing the game since 2013, they're already 7 years in to Arma 3 I imagine there will be some announcement soon. Don't forget to make the post.

 

[momcilo94]

Half of the time in my playthrough was going from town to town doing tournaments to earn money. Every tournament was the same, every town I visited, while they were different in aspect, was the same in valuable content, like people living in there. That half of my playthrough was boring, it felt like I was doing nothing in this world just making money to sustain my army in peace time, all I did while playing was thinking how lackluster this game was and thinking what things could be added to make it fun. I wished it had a lot of content, if you're trying to defend the price tag, I honestly dont care, I knew what I was getting myself into, what I dont expect is people trying to bellitle my opinions of this game just because its a sandbox and its hard to make, I know they've improved the graphical side by millions, for me this game looks and feels fantastic while being in combat but it dies as soon as you dont have no fighting to do. It dies. Literally the game is dead in peace time, and that my friend is lack of content.
Now what I'm trying to do in my posts is to show this problem to the devs, which I hope they already addressed before I even told them. I'm realistic about game development and I dont expect this game to add new content in the next week, but in a couple of months new content MUST be added, it's a MUST

So you spent 50+ hours, haven't experienced more than half of the content the game has to offer, and it's their problem?

---

Don't bother. He clearly indicated that he is up for discussing randomly without having a proper basis or even an argument.

Ironic, considering you and your buddy use ad hominems to fuel your arguments and don't use facts to back up your statements.

Also people, please don't stray off topic with the Arma argument.