tilen

"Looking at ArmA 3 communities I have not seen one that uses vanilla assets." Notice how the point of reference is me; my experience. This is from my first post in this thread that began this discussion. "Modding has been the main value for the main consumer base for sure, but I'd be grinning if looking at the numbers I'd see the majority playing Altis Life." From my second post, implying that I do not actually know the numbers. "If you use everything vanilla except the ACE 3 and ACRE etc, basically functionality increase addons, then your community is one of the few as I see it. This I have acknowledged and so my question pertaining to the vast majority (conjecture), stands." Written in the very post you quoted. I think I have made it fairly clear that I am not basing this on any empirical evidence other than my personal experience derived from some sources that could be considered empirical. Adding to that, however, I am certain that this is common and that I am not special in these experiences, given the nature of the game and my sources. Thus my conjecture. As for the rest: quality then. Fair. I already pointed put the fallacy in that, but I digress as proceeding with this discussion, while I do value your input, seems to be fruitless.

Yes and no. Yes, because it supports the company and no, because there already are you-name-it-stan maps in the Steam Workshop. There could very well be a Tanoa if a modder or the community expressed enough intereset. Again, all of that which you are buying can be produce and downloaded free of charge via modding. On top of that, various degrees of that which you are buying will be modded anyway. So then, why? Anyway at this point I am just repeating myself and getting the same answer(s) so I don't see this discussion going further unless someone else provides their insight. Thanks for your replies, guys, but I remain unconvinced.

I did not check every single community, no, nor did I claim to have. I did say that it is conjecture and point out that these are things that I percieve as such. Where and how? I (have) watch(ed) many YouTube videos, Twitch streams. I read both these forums and Steam Discussions on ArmA 3 as well as other places where discussions about the game take place. Generally speaking, as someone above pointed out, ArmA 3 is considered to be a platform for modding which speaks for it self, does it not? I can safely say--withing reason--that it is the general sentiment and a generally accepted view on this game. I have also searched for ArmA 3 communities. I made a post not so long ago and have seen the reactions. All of the communities that responded heavily modded their assets--none of them used plain vanilla game. I have read and watched reviews of this game. I have seen the in-game server browser. I have watched the development of this game and have witnessed the interest for the new DayZ mod. And so on.

I did not pick on those two. I acknowledged that there may be some, albeit very rare, communities that actually do use vanilla assets. But at the same time you admit that CiA: "have their predefined set of addons, so does CiA, and most of the missions that our mission makers produce make use of these." going on to say that you play missions on vanilla. This confuses me. What do you mean by that? The map, the vehicles, the weapons, soldier uniforms; only some of the mentions and others not? If you use everything vanilla except the ACE 3 and ACRE etc, basically functionality increase addons, then your community is one of the few as I see it. This I have acknowledged and so my question pertaining to the vast majority (conjecture), stands. I have searched for ArmA 3 community videos on YouTube and except for ShackTac most of them use their own assets entirely, including the map itself. All of it from the Steam workshop which means that theoretically Tanoa can be modded in as well. Or am I missing something? Also, you can stop being so defensive. I like that BIS are making new content and I hope they get compensation that they wish from it. What I don't see is the point in buying such content as it either will be changed (modded) or not used at all/ replaced, or could be modded in in the first place.

None of you answered my question, really. @Mistyronin: "It will add stuff that can be further modded." This I know, and this is not precisely the issue. It is that it likely will be moded beyond recognition AND that there already are a ton of civilian assets etc. in the Steam Workshop with certainly more to come. So you're paying for what can (!), has and will be made for free. Why? @Chortles: "The game features assets resembling real-life ones, which can be modded to further portray realism." Why are there so many communities that don't simply rename the rifle names for example. Is there a community that uses just straight up vanilla assets with possibly ONLY the name change (ACRE etc not included, I am talking mainly about visuals)? If there is, why are they so scarce? Again, why buy content that will either not be used or changed anyway so that you could just as well grab it from the Steam Workshop? Since you both, I am sorry to say, failed to answer my question, I'll take a guess. Perhaps it has something to do with quality that is expected from BIS. If so, I don't see a particularly prevailing opinion in the community that the quality is on par with what people expect, visually and technically (see modding for example). Further, people will play on lower texture maps etc. precisely because the vanilla assets are too taxing on performance. There are various reasons why in theory you buy Tanoa and its new assets, but are going to end up playing complete reskins and rehauls of them on a different map. Why? edit: this is severly offtopic, sorry.

I realize it's a relatively great deal and that the content will be awesome, but this is not what I'm disputing. Modding has been the main value for the main consumer base for sure, but I'd be grinning if looking at the numbers I'd see the majority playing Altis Life. For me, vanilla assets is where it's at. But that's the thing. If everything is allowed to be modded and is--as you've pointed out--expected to be, then: 1.) why purchase content that can be modded in 3.) why purchase content that will rarely, if ever, be used Again, I am curious. I am not bashing on anybody here.

Question: why is anyone looking forward to this new content when you know that just about everyone will mod the shit out of the game and you'll never actually get to experience it? Looking at ArmA 3 communities I have not seen one that uses vanilla assets. Ifrits? Nah, Humvees etc. because "realistic modern blah blah"... Don't get me wrong, tropical islands are my thing and if modding wasn't so widespread in this game I would've jumped on this expansion like an American footballer on a cheerleader in the dressing room after a match... uh... yeah... I am genuinely curious.

I think in their next ArmA game they'd need to make a selling point out of performance improvement for me to consider. But looking what ArmA 3 is, how much fun I am having with it, how much support and how many free updates it's getting... yeah I am leaning toward yes. :) Good on you, BIS. :*

I am impressed!

The reason VAC bans, or any effective bans for that matter, are delayed is also stated on the wikipedia article that you've read.

Fair enough. I have been thinking about that as well. It's nice to see the AI attempting to blind-fire or inspect the last known location but I've had the AI shoot me through a bunch of treetops, or crowns if you will, and I'm pretty sure none of them were looking at me. Also, if the AI sees you and is alert, when you approach from a different angle there is a big chance that it will immediately start shooting at you. While a human is able to predict such things (i.e. the angles of attack) the AI seems to do it past the point of acceptable. I think.

I was not referring to ArmA 3 as the game, as far as I'm aware, does not have any official Anti-Cheat measures enabled yet. I meant games like Team Fortress 2 or Left 4 Dead 2. Games that I've played a lot and haven't come across anyone cheating in them while I've seen cheaters in other PunkBuster protected AAA titles such as Battlefield 3. My experiences with VAC are purely positive.

I'm for VAC. Haven't encountered a cheater/hacker in a VAC-supported game yet. And banning such people from joining VAC-secure server? What's there not to like?

I don't particularly dislike the AI's accuracy. After all, it's supposed to be realistic and if I can aim properly, why couldn't they? What I really don't like though is the AI shooting at you with an assault rifle from like a kilometer away and the AI seeing you through objects.

I love it. :) I am surprised it runs that well and has so much content actually, being in Alpha stage and all. Can't wait for some good mission and mods like Wasteland and er... zombie related. :)