Unleash the MLODs!

[biggerdave 56]

EDITED - 04/12/10

This has probably been requested before, but, a quick search didn't show anything in this section (ArmA.2/OA)...

BIS should release the MLOD and model.cfg files for ArmA.2, OA. They should also consider releasing the MLODs for BAF and PMC (of course, not immediately after the packs are released)

Why?

1. It'd invigorate the modding community. I realize I'm a modder, so my perception may be slightly skewed here, but it's no big secret that the main reason the ArmA series has been such a success was OFP's huge modding community. Look at the increase in both quality and quantity of modding projects with the release of the ArmA.1 MLODs, and they're still being used for a lot of projects today!

2. It's the only way ArmA.2's units, particularly infantry, are going to be brought up to OA's standards. Let's face it, everyone saw the uproar when PMC's campaign was accidentally included in the patch. BIS can't re-release the ArmA.2 units for OA without seriously pissing off everyone who already owns ArmA.2 (if they make it free, they'll complain about how users with just OA are getting something they paid for, for free, if they make it a DLC, they'll complain because they have to rebuy something they already have)

3. It'd remove all of the legal complications of hex-edited reskins of ArmA.2/OA content (never mind the technical complications!). A few noticeable projects have been stalled because of this.

Of course, this'd hardly be a good argument for something unless I addressed the reasons against it! :butbut:

1. It'd give people content they haven't paid for - Except, it wouldn't. BIS have already given people the ODOL models for BAF and PMC with the "lite" versions anyway. For stuff in ArmA.2 that isn't in OA, and stuff in OA that isn't in ArmA.2, most of OA's content won't work in ArmA.2 without serious modification, even then, the texture work to get them ingame at a decent standard would probably be difficult for most modders (not that I mean to say "most modders aren't that good", but let's face it, would you go to the trouble of remaking textures for all the stuff in ArmA.2? I know I wouldn't!)

2. It'd make stealing BIS's models much easier - This I can't really argue with. But people have attempted to steal content in the past, so not releasing the models in MLOD format isn't really a deterrent for this.

3. It'd 'cheapen' addon making - A full set of MLODs do give people the means to create certain addons a lot easier, but is this really a bad thing? It can help add a lot to larger projects as well. For example, right now, if a large project wants to add something like an EOTech to one of their rifles, they have model the entire unit from scratch, adding to the devolpment time (we're not just talking about one model here, either, most attachments will need at least 5 resolution LODs, a shadow LOD, textures and materials). This is also kind of a elitist argument, but I won't get into stuff like that here! :p

DISCUSS!

Edited December 4, 2010 by BiggerDave

[dm 9]

Yes, because BIS should release the source models for their currently active revenue-earning projects...

I really wonder sometimes where people got this sense of entitlement from...

[biggerdave 56]

Yes, because BIS should release the source models for their currently active revenue-earning projects...

I really wonder sometimes where people got this sense of entitlement from...

Refer to reason against deconstruction point 1.

You should probably actually read what people have said before you're so quick to dismiss valid suggestions.

MLOD models are completely useless to people who don't have the full version of the game, for some mind-numbingly obvious reasons:

1. People who don't own ArmA.2 or OA can't use them. MLODs aren't like 3DS format models you'd find on turbosquid or similar, they can only be run by VR engine. So, yeah, maybe they could mod them into JCOVE (for which they would need to be one of the engineer's who made JCOVE, and would probably be court-marshalled for doing so) or VBS2 (which is futile in itself, because for the cost of VBS2 you could probably buy BIS :p ).

2. People who don't own OA/ArmA.2 can't use the OA/ArmA.2 mlods. They're just models. The textures, materials and configs for them are in the OA data files. If someone's committed enough to get all of these illegally, they've probably pirated the whole game anyway.

3. People who don't own BAF or PMC already have the models from BAF and PMC ingame. They were included in the "lite" versions for MP compatibility.

[ravendk 25]

"BIS should release the MLODs for ArmA.2, OA, BAF and PMC."

I would be happy with plain simple ArmA2 mlods..

[dm 9]

You should probably actually read what people have said before you're so quick to dismiss valid suggestions.

Uh hu, to be honest I dont even know where to begin with how wrong your assumptions are. Needless to say, using the argument "well everyone already has the models, so they may as well release the source" is rather ridiculous.

MLOD models are completely useless to people who don't have the full version of the game, for some mind-numbingly obvious reasons:

1. People who don't own ArmA.2 or OA can't use them. MLODs aren't like 3DS format models you'd find on turbosquid or similar, they can only be run by VR engine.

Except that having the editable source models makes it considerably easier to port them to any other format/engine.

So, yeah, maybe they could mod them into JCOVE (for which they would need to be one of the engineer's who made JCOVE, and would probably be court-marshalled for doing so)

Except JCOVE was made by BISim, so the MoD can have fun trying to courts-martial civilians...

or VBS2 (which is futile in itself, because for the cost of VBS2 you could probably buy BIS :p ).

Wonderfully missinformed again.

2. People who don't own OA/ArmA.2 can't use the OA/ArmA.2 mlods. They're just models. The textures, materials and configs for them are in the OA data files.

And its not rocket science to de-pbo the data to get the textures.

If someone's committed enough to get all of these illegally, they've probably pirated the whole game anyway.

So thats enough reason that BIS should release all its revenue earning data in an open and unprotected format?

3. People who don't own BAF or PMC already have the models from BAF and PMC ingame. They were included in the "lite" versions for MP compatibility.

See my initial point about wafer thin reasoning.

Seriously, all your "painfully obvious" reasons are either so wafer thin you can see right through them, or so totally uninformed as to completely nullify the whole post...

Edited December 2, 2010 by DM

[DaveP 66]

I would love to see the MLODs released, mainly as honestly I don't see the situations of doom which people are sabre rattling with ever happening, the absolute worst you might see if the DLC models were released was people making higher res replacement textures, but for the basic content in the game it really isn't an issue

The benefits would far outweigh the 'risk'

[biggerdave 56]

Uh hu, to be honest I dont even know where to begin with how wrong your assumptions are. Needless to say, using the argument "well everyone already has the models, so they may as well release the source" is rather ridiculous.

Again, MLODs aren't "source models". The models are first created in 3DS format, then converted into MLOD.

Except that having the editable source models makes it considerably easier to port them to any other format/engine.

A valid point, but it falls apart when you realize anyone with the technical expertise to do this could easily do it with an ODOL format model.

Except JCOVE was made by BISim, so the MoD can have fun trying to courts-martial civilians...

...

Wonderfully missinformed again.

I'm not afraid to admit I'm not fully aware of the office politics behind who actually makes what when it comes to VBS. The point is that it uses a format that isn't available to most people, so unless your point is "You are wrong about this, therefore, everything you say must be wrong", it doesn't really relate to the subject at hand much beyond what I've already said.

And its not rocket science to de-pbo the data to get the textures.

So thats enough reason that BIS should release all its revenue earning data in an open and unprotected format?

This is true. It wouldn't rocket science. It'd be f*cking magic. People wouldn't be able to de-pbo the files, because they don't have the files.

People who do have these files without buying the game, would only be able to obtain them through pirating the game. At which point, they don't need to reconstruct anything from MLODs, because they've pirated everything. It's not rocket science.

Seriously, all your "painfully obvious" reasons are either so wafer thin you can see right through them, or so totally uninformed as to completely nullify the whole post...

Listen pal. I'll admit I'm not the best informed when it comes to business, economics, what I do understand though, is the MLOD format. If you have to move the argument towards any of these, frankly, irrelevant subjects, then that just tells me that you simply don't have the means to build an argument around the facts at hand, which are:

1. Releasing the MLOD format models would greatly aid the community.

2. BIS stands to loose nothing releasing the MLOD format models. (Refer to the BIS release of the ArmA.1 MLODs, and the subsequent commercial success of ArmA.2) The only real thing BIS does loose, is the man-hours it'd take to package and upload the files, which is minimal compared to the amount of revenue they stands to make should ArmA.2 prove to a long-running success, in a similar vein to OFP. (I know I wouldn't have brought ArmA if OFP didn't have such a great modding community, and I'm sure a lot of other people can admit to being in the same boat, the very fact that these forums even exist in the way they do is testament to this)

(Also, if you look, I said "mind-numbingly obvious", not "painfully obvious", just sayin')

Edited December 2, 2010 by BiggerDave

[dm 9]

Again, MLODs aren't "source models". The models are first created in 3DS format, then converted into MLOD.

I'm glad you have such all-encompassing insight as to how BIS works.

In terms of ArmA-specific data, an MLOD can be considered as "source" material, purely for the fact that it is in the editable, workable format. ODOL models, released with the game content are not source, as they are not directly editable in the sanctioned tools.

A valid point, but it falls apart when you realize anyone with the technical expertise to do this could easily do it with an ODOL format model.

I fail to see how this supports the release of the MLODs? Its the same as the tired old argument in the encryption thread. Just because its possible doesnt make it right, nor does it mean that it should be made easier to do.

People wouldn't be able to de-pbo the files, because they don't have the files.

So, you're suggesting that BIS should release the models to the community as a whole, a large portion of whom do not have the original data either. What exactly are you supposed to do with these textureless models? What is the advantage of having a whole selection of p3ds and nothing else? Where is the sense?

the facts at hand, which are

I'd love to see the supporting data which proves these as facts, until then they are nothing more than opinion and conjecture...

1. Releasing the MLOD format models would greatly aid the community.

How exactly? The "community" seems to be doing just fine without them?

2. BIS stands to loose nothing releasing the MLOD format models. (Refer to the BIS release of the ArmA.1 MLODs, and the subsequent commercial success of ArmA.2)

I would LOVE to see supporting data that the release of the ArmA1 mlods directly lead to the financial success of ArmA2.

And you have the gall to accuse me of plucking things from the sky :j:

It really boggles my mind that people expect BIS to release the source/editable versions of all of their active projects, why on earth should they do it? Where did you get this sense that BIS owes you the release of their models? How do you come to the conclusion that BIS will lose nothing by releasing free, editable, versions of their latest (not even a day old for fucks sake) product?

Marek said it well in another thread:

"Back in OFP times, the community gave us months, then weeks, now not even days"

[dmarkwick 261]

If it makes ArmA/OA better then I'd be for it. I don't have any interest in the modelling side of things, I just tend to use what's there or what's available, but I know some people really like to get particular features and versions in to the game. But I doubt BIS would do it for the reasons already laid out, however I suppose they might release them toward the end of ArmA2/OA's product life, particularly if there's no ArmA3 forthcoming.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Mmmm... D@VÅ, it's no need to discuss that subject with DM, he doesn't even try to understand modders' needs of sample models. It's like discussing with a wall.

[NZXSHADOWS 0]

I dont think it necessary. An DM knows alot more shit than you think.

Edited December 2, 2010 by NZXSHADOWS

[dm 9]

Mmmm... D@VÅ, it's no need to discuss that subject with DM, he doesn't even try to understand modders' needs of sample models. It's like discussing with a wall.

How little you know.

I understand completely the need for sample models.

What you don't understand is that the entire model library for ArmA2, OA, BAF and PMC DOES NOT equal SAMPLE models.

There is already an ArmA2 sample model for soldiers released, with backpacks and all that jazz. Tell me, what technology in vehicles, buildings, vegitation, weapons etc etc is so ground breakingly new that you simply can not make addons without having access to all of them?

Are you unable to make a rifle without looking at every single p3d available in A2? Are you unable to make a vehicle without looking at every single vehicle ingame? What possible technology has been added recently that requires you have access to every single model in the game before you are able to implement it yourself?

Answer me that, rather than making snarky comments.

[[frl]myke 14]

Mmmm... D@VÅ, it's no need to discuss that subject with DM, he doesn't even try to understand modders' needs of sample models. It's like discussing with a wall.

Not entirely true. D@VÅ asks for all MLOD's, including BAF and PMC.

One have to be aware that with the MLOD's of BAF and/or PMC available, it would probably take just a few weeks until a BAFlite/PMClite replacement pack would be available, making the DLC unnecessary. This would harm BIS as no one would buy their DLC.

and D@VÅ, get informed before going into discussion. It is more than obvious that you've never started O2.

To add to the topic: i would love to see some MLOD's released, the more the merrier. But i also know that such MLOD's must been chosen carefully so it wont harm BIS. At the end, with the money from these sales BIS can continue their work.

[biggerdave 56]

How would MLODs aid the community? Do you seriously have to ask that question?

Well...

The MLODs contain models which can used as a basis for a lot of addons. People requested BIS add one of the older style SA80s with BAF. With the MLODs, creating such a weapon would be child's play. People have requested an SVD with a thermal scope, again, with the MLODs, a simple copy/paste job. The big nail in the coffin? Almost all infantry addon models have been built on either the ArmA.1 soldier MLODs or the ArmA.2 sample MLOD.

I'm not going to argue with any further posts you make in this thread. I'll leave you with your thoughts on the first tool available to edit BIS's work. If you really now feel that such potential should be locked away forever, then I guess there's nothing I can say that'll change your mind.

What i'm really asking, is with the impending release of p3d edit, would people like to see a definitive pack (similar to say, satchels sound pack) with the base units' p3d's, edited with p3d edit to make them more realistic, and then repacked into the "data3d.pbo" so that mp does not consider it as cheating (only the model will be changed), and the game feels/looks more realistic.

My ideas for editing the units include:

Basic Soldier;

Helmet enlarged and edited to look more like a k-pot, webing added, bedroll removed, bergen/assult bergen (smaller than a normal bergen) added, extra detail to the model such as kevlar vest.

Pilot;

Helmet improved, so it actually looks like a helmet used by pilots (with shielding for the visor when its in the "up" position, additions to the model, such as gun holster, survival gear/life jacket.

Black Op;

Improved webing, kevlar vest added etc...

The east units would have the same improvements (but to eastern specs)

Vehicles;

Jeep with MG;

Improvements to the model so that it looks more like the gun is mounted onto the jeep rather than stuck on the end of a 4 foot piece of scaffolding.

BMP/M113;

External cargo proxies added, possibly remove the armour turret on the m113, just have open m2, general model improvements e.g. wheels made more round.

Aircraft:

UH-60;

General model improvements, the uh-60 is lacking in real detail, which can be improved (considering there are some 2500 poly to play with)

AH-1;

General model improvements, actually model the pitot tube (so it's not fuzzy due to alpha channels), extra model details.

Mi-17;

Remove the machine gun from the nose - which doesn't actually do anything.

Thats most of my ideas, but don't get me wrong BIS made an excellent job of OFP , but due to the powers that be they had to rush to meet their release dates (as do most game makers), so some of the models suffered for it, its allways the way. Also BIS modellers did not use the full potential of the game engine . For example the UH-60 is only 1500 polys, where it could easily be up to 3/4000 polys , giving it that extra detail and realism. A lot of the soldier models are not right, as most soldiers would tell you, for campaings like Malden/Everon islands they would allways go in with bergens for ammo and supplies.

Well thats my speech over, anybody with any other ideas for model improvements fire away:

cheers :

I will admit, though, that I might have been a bit hasty suggesting that BAF and PMC mlods should be released. Guess I got a bit carried away...

Myke;1802837']and D@VÅ' date=' get informed before going into discussion. It is more than obvious that you've never started O2.[/quote']

Wait, what? Where did you get this conclusion from!? I don't mean to sound my own trumpet here, but I've been using O2 since before you even joined these boards! :butbut:

Edited December 2, 2010 by BiggerDave

[ProfTournesol 956]

Myke;1802837']To add to the topic: i would love to see some MLOD's released' date=' the more the merrier. But i also know that such MLOD's must been chosen carefully so it wont harm BIS. At the end, with the money from these sales BIS can continue their work.[/quote']

I agree 100%. We don't need every single model of the game, that would be ridiculous, only SAMPLE MODELS of the main categories.

[[frl]myke 14]

Wait, what? Where did you get this conclusion from!? I don't mean to sound my own trumpet here, but I've been using O2 since before you even joined these boards! :butbut:

A quote from your second post:

1. People who don't own ArmA.2 or OA can't use them. MLODs aren't like 3DS format models you'd find on turbosquid or similar, they can only be run by VR engine.

It takes ~5 seconds to export a MLOD to 3DS format. But since you're using O2 for such a long time, you surely knew this already.

On a sidenote: i've registered 05-27-2007, O2 is available since 08-14-2009 so i would be interested how you could use O2 before i registered in this Forum.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Myke;1802856']On a sidenote: i've registered 05-27-2007' date=' O2 is available since 08-14-2009 so i would be interested how you could use O2 before i registered in this Forum.

He meant Oxygen released in 2002.

[icewindo 29]

How exactly? The "community" seems to be doing just fine without them?

[/Quote]

Oh yeah. I'm doing that fine I didn't release atleast 2 addons of which I would have needed an sample model. And for the vehicle addons I actually had in working state, I had to read in alot and go for the tedious way of upgrading ArmA1 mlods. And even then alot of stuff doesn't work like it could do. Best way to scare away new modders.

In contrast to ArmA1, BIS released no sample model for vehicles. There's small steps (sample models) and there's big steps (releasing all mlods). BIS didn't went for the (complete) small step in 1.5 years.

Edited December 2, 2010 by Icewindo

[[frl]myke 14]

Oh yeah. I'm doing that fine I didn't release atleast 2 addons of which I would have needed an sample model.

In contrast to ArmA1, BIS released no sample model for vehicles. There's small steps (sample models) and there's big steps (releasing all mlods). BIS didn't went for the small step in 1.5 years.

Please don't misunderstand me, i'm just curious: could you ellaborate what issues you have with these 2 unreleased addons which would have needed sample models?

No offence, just trying to get as much info to get the full picture.

[biggerdave 56]

Myke;1802856']It takes ~5 seconds to export a MLOD to 3DS format. But since you're using O2 for such a long time' date=' you surely knew this already.[/quote']

In the original version of O2, released for OFP, you could only import models, not export them (the export menu did exist, but all the options were greyed out), so you could only save stuff in p3d format. I guess I didn't check in the newer versions... :o

AFAIK, installing O2 requires an installation of the game, so my point still kinda stands. I've also never seen nor heard of anyone converting any of the mlods released thus far to other games, and the EULA clearly forbids it, so anyone who did try would find any released files being pulled pretty quickly.

[Zipper5 74]

Careful now, Myke. ;)

[soul_assassin 1750]

AFAIK, installing O2 requires an installation of the game, so my point still kinda stands. I've also never seen nor heard of anyone converting any of the mlods released thus far to other games, and the EULA clearly forbids it, so anyone who did try would find any released files being pulled pretty quickly.

Alot of BIS models (even from A2) have already made an appearance on Turbosquid and other sales points.

[[frl]myke 14]

In the original version of O2, released for OFP, you could only import models, not export them (the export menu did exist, but all the options were greyed out), so you could only save stuff in p3d format. I guess I didn't check in the newer versions... :o

AFAIK, installing O2 requires an installation of the game, so my point still kinda stands. I've also never seen nor heard of anyone converting any of the mlods released thus far to other games, and the EULA clearly forbids it, so anyone who did try would find any released files being pulled pretty quickly.

AFAIK Oxygen light doesn't work for ArmA 2.

And no, O2 can be installed standalone.

And in the past there were already ripped 3d models ported to other games.

And never ever point to my join date, else i start pointing at postcounts aswell.

:EDITH:

@Zipper5

Careful? Why?

Edited December 2, 2010 by [FRL]Myke

[Zipper5 74]

Myke;1802891']@Zipper5

Careful? Why?

Just... Don't jump to conclusions. ;)

D@VÅ's been active in the community for quite a long time now, he's just always been a .info guy. :p

[[frl]myke 14]

Just... Don't jump to conclusions. ;)

D@VÅ's been active in the community for quite a long time now, he's just always been a .info guy. :p

Sorry, he makes the same mistake that also happens quite often to myself: not getting the informations right.

Porting p3d -> 3ds is not a major problem

ArmA 2 doesn't have to be installed for installing O2

ArmA 2 models already has been exploited and converted to other games

Having BAF & PMC MLODs would make the DLC's obsolete in no time

:EDITH:

..and myself i've been also active quite some time, since the release of OFP i created mission, then moved slowly towards scripting to finally land at addonmaking. So i'm not a noob at this either.