r/arma • u/Mr-foreskin-regrower • 1d ago

DISCUSS FUTURE Arma 4

Why remove the most beloved features like workshop and editor just to appease console players? Does The leadership hate their fanbase of 15+ years that much? I hope the devs don’t act shocked when it inevitably flops and is DOA

227 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

122 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-17

u/KillAllTheThings 1d ago

FYI, BI uses the exact same tools for creating their game content as they provide in Arma/Reforger Tools. There's nothing special anywhere for "modders". We are all modders in BI's eyes.

For this reason, BI is HIGHLY incentivized to make the game content creation tools the best they can be. Time is money, after all. BI has been able to generate content for both Reforger & A4 at a much higher rate than they ever were able to for legacy Arma games.

And let's not forget it took BI something like 15 years to evolve Real Virtuality & make Eden Editor possible. Eden was made so they could do the Apex Expansion in a more reasonable time frame. That was several years after we got Arma 3. Everyone had to put up with the 2D editor until then.

18

u/Brootaful 1d ago

No matter how many times you or anyone else describes how much more powerful Arma Tools/Enfusion Workbench is the simple fact remains: They do not and should not replace the Eden Editor. The former is for building mods and maps. The latter is for building missions.

Eden editor is just over 10 year old now. It released in 2016, so 3 years after Arma 3's initial release. I wouldn't call that "several". Even if we're to agree that it took 15 years to make Eden possible in RV, does this mean we're meant to wait 15 years for Eden in Enfusion? I certainly hope not, because even waiting 5 years (we've already waited nearly 5 years since Reforger released,) really defeats the whole purpose of having Enfusion, and Reforger as a testbed.

-4

u/KillAllTheThings 1d ago

BI has 20 years of experience with RV. They have put that corporate experience to good use making Enfusion. They are not making a game engine that only has to deliver once, they are making one to last for years, like RV has. Because of this, things are actually progressing faster with Enfusion than with RV in the past. There's no way to please all those who lack patience.

If you look at the game code that's already been released for Enfusion, you can see it is doing things RV could never do at a fidelity exponentially higher than EOL Arma 3. For example, look at the difference between A3's VON (ingame chat) & Reforger's radio channels for ingame chat. (Yes, they've borrowed concepts from TFAR & ACRE to do it) Ditto for the medical features.

4

u/Brootaful 1d ago

Let's assume you're right and Enfusion is progressing faster than RV was (which isn't some great feat, considering it should be a given...) where is the proof of all of this? Like I've said in previous comments: if Reforger is this testbed, why haven't we been able to test a more fleshed out Game Master? Why don't we have an even basic Eden editor to test? We still don't even have tracked vehicles that have been teased for- what? 2 years now?

Even if we're to assume this is all going to be available in Arma 4 this, again, defeats the purpose of using Reforger as a testbed because we haven't been able to actually test some of the most significant parts of an Arma title, and will have to test them later in Arma 4.

You keep telling us to be patient but Reforger's almost 5 years old and the game literally runs and looks worse with each new update since 1.6 last year. That doesn't inspire confidence, and neither do all these PR-speak statements you keep making, to run defense for BI.

1

u/I_Maybe_Play_Games 1h ago

Reforgers team got gutted. They are closer in size to the A3 maintanance team then DayZ or A4 team