foffy

Of course, of course. There is no must or end period for this stuff. I was just curious. I hope I don't come off as demanding. What's out now is fine enough, friend.

As long as your not on a developmental timetable of Square-Enix, this is fine! :P

Is there an ETA on that? What exactly will be different between beta and final? Just a cease on updates and fixes?

I do know of the push for 2013. Even so, why September? There are still months before the end of 2013. Wouldn't the game have more fleshing out and content prepared to for launch if say, it officially released in November? I am not saying to hold the entire game back to 2014, but seeing as Bohemia has aimed for 2013 in some fashion, I do expect to see the campaign completed in the year. Why not say "well, we will not have the game out until everything we're cooking up for a launch is ready" instead of having a launch window period? It gives off the impression that things are not really ready. I brought up this point before, but how will reviewers handle the game when it launches on Tuesday? What can they say of the campaign? Assuming it's in episodes that don't feel like actual episodes (they've said very little on how the campaign flows) are reviewers going to hold back on talking about it, or mention the fact that it's only a part and the rest is presently not ready? I know ArmA II was hammered by a number of sites for the buggy campaign, so it's not too far-fetched to assume reviewers will look at that and make a call on it.

I would suppose that too, but it's to also get feedback on a lot of stuff. Even so, ArmA II has been in some fashion on the top sellers on Steam for well over a year, with specific releases varying. I would have assumed ArmA II over the years netted the company a very large return...how much of that was used on ArmA III? I don't want to use money as the argument for issue, because I assume they have more money to put into ArmA III than any of their other projects. Money means absolutely little if you don't have the internal resources and planning to accomplish things. Look at AAA game development: they often have staff into the two-hundreds, and that's low-balling it. I know a lot of people who dislike AAA games because they feel limited in scope and gameplay, but you have so many people working on them...it's a poor use of human resources in that sense. Resident Evil 6 had, and I kid you not, over 500 people working on it, and that game is an incredibly inconsistent, unfocused experience. I would be willing to firmly bet that Bohemia has a smaller staff working on ArmA III than EA does with Battlefield 4, despite the former having far more open gameplay and scope. But again, this all goes down to how internal resources are used. Wiping content and having two main staff members held in another country can be a major setback for a games development. It's why I can understand a bit of the lazy feeling the main chunk of content seems to have, and the pipeline the expected launch content is coming in. That being said this is to explain past events to reason the present. This should not be replicated in the future.

If I can chip in my thoughts here...I promise I won't try to offend! Honest. I feel the reuse of content is just another blemish and an indicator that ArmA III, even presently, is undercooked. I have no idea if I am alone on this but despite the fact the game officially launches on Tuesday, it still seems like a beta, a "taste" of the game, with the only central change now is the term you want to give the build of the game. From the campaign, to the delays of the game as far back as 2012, to the asset reuse, to the tragic holding of staff, I feel that it all adds up that ArmA III in its present state still needs to be built upon. This is what Bohemia has said they plan to do, and for the time being I will believe them. They are some of the best when it comes to supporting products. My personal concern is why release ArmA III as "gold" status on Tuesday. Why couldn't the declaration be made for the game when you have a full experience for launch? The fact that the campaign is coming in chunks only shows to me that this is being officially released way too early, as they don't have all of the pillars one expects with a game launch to be in place. With all of that being said, I am sure they will use the time they have after launch to start dealing with all of this, assuming that the central thing launch accomplishes is a canvas that will no longer be majorly changed under the hood (but still improved upon). I do hope that whatever expansions are released for ArmA III are announced well after the current underpinnings of the game are all changed. I think you would find it hard for people to be down buying more content that just seems like it's all universally shared between everything else. We should not, under any circumstance, see this type of asset sharing and reuse for any future purchasable content for ArmA III. I can buy the setbacks to the game, but to anything expanding on the game, it must be crucial, almost essential, to not repeat this again. I can buy it for launch, but that's because I know the development hurdles Bohemia has had with ArmA III. I can't buy it if they announce new islands and we're seeing this type of concern all over again.

I'm not getting it to work either.

I am not sure what causes this issue but when I just use CBA with ArmA III, all of the text/subtitles that the AI have in the bottom left corner vanishes. Any idea why this happens? Without even using any other addon, CBA disables this.

Right now there is TPW EBS, which acts presently as a substitute for TPW CAS.

Hopefully more Android platforms come soon. I have a Galaxy S4 which sort of has me sitting out on playing it (though it is playable on S4s).

I have a question about ASR AI. I noticed an issue a few times now but I can cite it to this addon after testing. To put it bluntly, why do civilians automatically see human players as a threat? The reason I say human because if I try this with content that starts the player out as a civilian, the AI sees me as a threat and will begin to engage me if they have weaponry. For this type of content, it breaks the game. Is there a solution outside of not mixing the two together? For those that wish to try what I did, try having ASR AI enabled when starting the CWR2 Resistance campaign (ASR AI supports CWR2) and you will have people getting out of their cars and cops shooting at you. Refuelling the motorcycle breaks the cutscene because the friendly you are to speak to deems you a threat, and the other means in the mission (riding the bus) scares the driver, causing him to leave. I am on version 6 according to the hpp, by the way. I figure I would cite that unless that has been greatly updated. Edit: Downloading a revision fixed my issue. I do have a question about faction variables in the hpp. Why are some 0.9 and others 1.2? I assume the higher the value, the more the ranked stats are taken into account for the AI's skill. What does putting it at 0.1 do? Make the AI 100% inaccurate?

You can currently try TPWEBS, which attempts to offer something very similar for ArmA III.

This is pretty great, and if I recall, something like this was added when starting up CWR2's Resistance campaign. On that note, is there an addon similar to this for ArmA II? I know there's JTD Ambient Civilian Traffic, but that requires being added via the editor.

I wanted to know if anything like TrueMods has been made for ArmA III, or something at the very least that handles zooming with guns. I don't want to have to hold down a button to zoom (and I think it zooms too far anyway).

Oh, I found that out by asking about it. The TPWLOS embedded in TPWCAS applies the LOS system to AI-to-human engagement. TPWLOS on its own (NOT in TPWCAS) does that AND AI-to-AI engagement. What this means is if you use the one in TPWCAS, the LOS system will only work on AI fighting human players. TPWLOS on its own applies it to every engagement, human AND AI. Why the difference, I do not know. Does that help clarify?

Actually, regarding TPWCAS and TPWLOS, it is best to load them separately. From what I understand, the TPWLOS addon in the TPWCAS config file only enables the LOS system to human players. TPWLOS on its own applies it to everything, AI and human players.

This may be silly of me to mention, but it just dawned on me that in the SP missions pack, the mission Counterstrike is the same mission as Counter Strike from the Cold War Crisis campaign, minus a change in briefing and image icon. Why are there two versions of this mission? :P

Hey Gunter, if it's no trouble, do you have a list of all of the mods this compilation has? I know there's a lot to this mod collection, but I was curious to what exactly everything is. Diving into it makes it a little hard to grasp it all at surface level. :P

I've heard of SLX. On such a note I have a question. Of the AI modset I use (ACE, ASR, ASR AI, TPW CAS, TPW LOS) how well does SLX (and to a greater extent GL4) overlap with that? I've heard of these being used as well, but I really want a clean set of addons with very little in terms of hiccups and tinkering with. I know stuff like SLX, GL4, and Zeus haven't been updated in a year at the earliest, so I was curious if they have compatibility with ACE and various other mods still getting updates. I do believe ASR AI has usurped Zeus in many ways already, which only supports the question I am raising here.

This sounds phenomenal! I haven't given it too much tampering yet, but I do hope it meshes well with the ASR/TPW addons.

I have a question, and I would like to formally apologize if it's been asked or it's too dumb. At present, is TPW EBS similar to the core experience one could sort of get with TPW CAS? Offline, of course. What are the main differences?

That's pretty cool. Do we have a list of what community guys have ended up working with Bohemia as developers over the span of the series?

Man, that is some dope ass additions to the core game. I hope you continue working on this in the future, be it as a standalone thing or to see it implemented in something like ACE 3.

Maybe the delay of the campaign has to do with that. The main island was renamed, and after that BIS got awfully silent on the forces that weren't BLUFOR. OPFOR used to be Iran, but now they're known as Red, so maybe they changed the OPFOR. Could they be redoing much of the campaign in a response to the Greece situation?

We can, sure, but will reviewers? Will there be enough single player content to explain the depth of everything at launch so multiplayer will be easy to get into? I fear in a lot of ways it will be a trial by fire without a campaign to ease people into it all. This will make reviewers and players unfamiliar with the series lambast it right out of the gate. I suppose my solution is pretty easy; I won't be touching the game until the campaign is out. The Beta is cool, but it seems a lot of the modding community is waiting for a more stable build with less under-the-hood changes before they start ramming out lots of new stuff. At the very least, gold guarantees a more fixed framework for the community. I do hope we see the campaign before we see ACE 3 though, because that would be a little embarrassing that a conversion launches before any official campaign does. :P