Unleash the MLODs!

[biggerdave 56]

Myke;1802891']And in the past there were already ripped 3d models ported to other games.

And never ever point to my join date' date=' else i start pointing at postcounts aswell.[/quote']

Postcount only goes to show how big your mouth is, not how experienced you are ;)

Anyways... if ArmA.2 models are being ripped and pirated, already, that just goes to prove that not releasing the MLODs is no effective deterrent against theft of content. Which brings us back to why BIS has little reason not to release the MLODs.

[icewindo 29]

Myke;1802877']Please don't misunderstand me' date=' 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.[/quote']

Sure, the addons in question would be my work on post-apocalypse cars and a port of the stargate malp pack from bxbx.

For the cars, lacking ArmA2 vehicle models I used the ArmA1 car models and edited them/added new parts.

I could get the cars to move and the wheels to spin, but with the settings I tried from the ArmA1 config/model.cfg and the extracted ArmA2 config/model.cfg of the respective vehicles I couldn't get the damage rvmats to work, so glass and car would stay undamaged.

Quickly lost motivation after looking around for an hour, and another, and another... I guess the cars are waiting for the real apocalypse now.

______________

For the malp addon I couldn't get the turret of the armed malp to spin correctly. I first used the settings of the original addon, but as it didn't move at all, I used selections and settings of ArmA1 models. Then the turret would turn, but if you fired bullets, it would fire directly at 0° and not turn with the turret. I then left the armed malp out of the package. ( http://www.stargateassault.net/forum/units/malp-package/ )

______________

Also, for my work on the BSG ship pack I needed the ships to transform into a wreck when they reach the ground, like the BIS vehicles. I found it out on my own by using eliteness to see there was a "wreck lod" and it had to contain a proxy.

Now, how is a newbie supposed to find all this out? Can he be expected to find this out for his own, fiddle around with ArmA1 models? A sample package would have helped I guess.

Also, the glass on the bsg ships still doesn't break. I added damage_hide selections and other stuff like I saw in the ArmA1 mlods and also tried damage config settings of ArmA2, but I couldn't get them to work.

Edited December 2, 2010 by Icewindo

[[frl]myke 14]

Postcount only goes to show how big your mouth is, not how experienced you are ;)

Point for you. :p

Anyways... if ArmA.2 models are being ripped and pirated, already, that just goes to prove that not releasing the MLODs is no effective deterrent against theft of content. Which brings us back to why BIS has little reason not to release the MLODs.

We (we = lot of users in here) already had this discussion in another topic. Basically, releasing the MLOD's would just making it worse since the effort to porting it to other games would be lowered so more "not-so-experienced-users" can do it. Without the MLOD's it takes more time, effort and knowledge which gives a certain protection.

Basically i agree on requesting MLOD's but not necessarly all (although i would love to have them, just to fix some bugs that BIS doesn't seem willing to fix) and surely not BAF/PMC content, at least not at that point, maybe somewhere in the future.

[NZXSHADOWS 0]

OK I get this now. Its simple, We should all collaborate together an make tutorials an sample files. Taking things that each modder knows about an making a sample of tutorial. OH an we could place em on a site maybe call it OFPEC or something. Instead of proposing BIS give up there there files.

[ProfTournesol 956]

OK I get this now. Its simple, We should all collaborate together an make tutorials an sample files. Taking things that each modder knows about an making a sample of tutorial. OH an we could place em on a site maybe call it OFPEC or something. Instead of proposing BIS give up there there files.

Mmm...You never spent hours reverse-engineering any BIS file or model, did you ?

[NZXSHADOWS 0]

Mmm...You never spent hours reverse-engineering any BIS file or model, did you ?

Is that a serious question? or are you messing with me?

[ProfTournesol 956]

Is that a serious question? or are you messing with me?

Nah my bad, i was just meaning that community tutorials are nice, but are not enough, BIS releasing things we can look into is a much quicker way in some areas.

[NZXSHADOWS 0]

hmmmmmmmm

Edited December 2, 2010 by NZXSHADOWS
sorry

[JdB 151]

hmmmmmmmm

And when he says "look into", to a lot of people that equals "copy paste" (into their own addons).

It makes perfect sense for BIS not to release all MLODs, it would be an insane business decision. Releasing like one model of every class/type (especially if it contains a feature that is new to the series) would be nice though, even if it is only the selections needed for special functions, without primary model, res. lods etc (so the artwork can't be sold, only the technology can be transferred, and that is restricted to the series).

Some people say well, the MLODs are available anyway through reverse engineering, why not make it official. That is something to do with the legal side of things I think. Even with the best license saying that the MLODs can't be used outside of ArmA2, and cannot be sold, you will run into difficulties when going to court if someone is selling your work. A judge might reason that although you are technically right, you shouldn't have released them in an open format (no action other than double clicking the file required) for free in the first place if you really didn't want them getting exploited.

Edited December 2, 2010 by JdB

[Fox '09 14]

you don't need to reverse engineer or any of that crap, there are public tools to debinarize.

but that's not the point. I don't think we need any mlods , I've learnt all from the arma 2 and 1 mlods. That's my case , at least.

[JdB 151]

you don't need to reverse engineer or any of that crap' date=' there are public tools to debinarize. [/quote']

No tool was ever released by BIS to debinarize pbos, therefore any community tool that enables debinarizing is reverse engineering BIS' binarize process. Similarly, BIS has never released a tool to convert ODOL to MLOD either, the community did that. If BIS had wanted to give the community either of these options, they would have given us a tool for it (or options in the current tools).

I can't blame BIS if the continuous development of "community" tools to crack open their work has caused them to be more selective about what they release for learning and/or editing purposes.

Edited December 2, 2010 by JdB

[PuFu 4600]

please note that a lot of A2/OA models have been developed outside bis, by 3rd party members. You and I will never know what was the clauses on the the contracts.

i do agree we would need more samples (as those were released back in the day for A1). Even more so for all the creatures/animals available with A2. (bones, etc).

I actually don't believe that, with MLODs there will be more creative content, but rather the other way around.

Without a new system for weapons attachments for instance (proxy setup), you would need a p3d of its own for each new variants.

[vilas 477]

all MLODs ? are some people calling themself moders only can copy-paste or import ?

for P85 soldier i had the same MLODs as you all

i have soldier without vest , soldier in PASGT, soldier with full US webbing + alice backpack, i have soldiers from Poland with 4 types of tactical vests...

i started from Arma1 models as all people here

what for all MLODs from A2 ?

to have another version of easy-reskin called big mod and people woooow when something changed like "added one pouch more, changed helmet to baseball cap, but shadow of helmet left" ?

of course it would be good to have units with collar, units with hood etc. but hey, if i could, why others need copy-paste instead of do it like i ?

2S1, Dana, Leopard 1 and 2, T64, T80 , BMP1... etc. i made all without samples from BIS

i even had more detailed weapons than BIS, so what for ? to have another addon aka "i pasted another BIS sight on BIS M4 or AK, i am hero" ???

BIS still has no RPG with optics, i have PGO7, why others can't ?

99% of my models are made in Oxygen without any 3DS, from YAC i get Octavia and some more things

during period of half year i had several requests for CDF 2S1, it is available as green , textureselection is on it, why anyone can't just put brown camo spot and green star ?? half year, dont say that making from green solid texture CDF version is big job ?

in past i had 5 times repeated ask from one man for EOT, he wanted release BIS M4 with EOT (althought it was already in my addon), five times mailed to me and get "what for double?" , he wanted "copy and paste, one second work addon that already exist"

we really can do much from Arma1 models, just some stretching and UV work on it

Edited December 2, 2010 by vilas

[PuFu 4600]

come on vilas. Why do you have to advertise your work over and over again everywhere you post. I (and a lot of others) know the amount of work you have released. Then again, quantity != quality.

Anyways. I'd be glad for sample models, just as much as i would be for mlods.

Even so, the reason i am not actually missing the mlods is because there are the A1 ones as reference. What i miss though are the new features and skeletons newly release that could allow things like working horses to be released based on cow bones or whatever. Even more so for the missing SCI FI addons, that could create pretty amazing things based on A2 creatures

[NZXSHADOWS 0]

Wow Vilas, Wonder why I haven't tried out any of your stuff yet.

[oyman 0]

tl;dr

cool story bro

[biggerdave 56]

all MLODs ? are some people calling themself moders only can copy-paste or import ?

for P85 soldier i had the same MLODs as you all

i have soldier without vest , soldier in PASGT, soldier with full US webbing + alice backpack, i have soldiers from Poland with 4 types of tactical vests...

i started from Arma1 models as all people here

what for all MLODs from A2 ?

to have another version of easy-reskin called big mod and people woooow when something changed like "added one pouch more, changed helmet to baseball cap, but shadow of helmet left" ?

of course it would be good to have units with collar, units with hood etc. but hey, if i could, why others need copy-paste instead of do it like i ?

2S1, Dana, Leopard 1 and 2, T64, T80 , BMP1... etc. i made all without samples from BIS

i even had more detailed weapons than BIS, so what for ? to have another addon aka "i pasted another BIS sight on BIS M4 or AK, i am hero" ???

BIS still has no RPG with optics, i have PGO7, why others can't ?

99% of my models are made in Oxygen without any 3DS, from YAC i get Octavia and some more things

during period of half year i had several requests for CDF 2S1, it is available as green , textureselection is on it, why anyone can't just put brown camo spot and green star ?? half year, dont say that making from green solid texture CDF version is big job ?

in past i had 5 times repeated ask from one man for EOT, he wanted release BIS M4 with EOT (althought it was already in my addon), five times mailed to me and get "what for double?" , he wanted "copy and paste, one second work addon that already exist"

we really can do much from Arma1 models, just some stretching and UV work on it

So... you're arguing for the ArmA.1 MLODs, but against the ArmA.2 ones? You're also arguing people should do simple work, but against the means to allow them this? I realize this sort of high profile discussion may sometimes feel like a courtroom battle, but I wasn't aware there was any reason to go for an insanity plea?

Copy/Paste is the lowest common denominator when it comes to models, I'll accept that, but there are a lot of stuff the community wants that can be effectively achieved through such means. To be frank, the idea that even such simple addons should only be created from scratch is... well... snobbish.

It also denies new addon makers the means to create good content, almost all of the "high profile" addon makers, yourself included started out with simple copy/paste models based on BIS's work.

(I hereby declare today to be "nostalgia guilt-trip day"! :p )

[vilas 477]

Then again, quantity != quality.

it is myth regarding my work, taken from time when OFP tools were only tools and Arma tools were not released so no RVMAT could be applied and 8 bit texview

repeating it only annoys me, taking under account many addons i have seen and tested, i dont know why people have wrong view not testing and not trying something , or propaganda spread by some of ACE (last action for example when someone wanted to be my boss and retag my pack to call it his with him as a boss , when i refused changing tag, nearly started war and banned/deleted topics etc. ) or other people who not get MLODs with permission to re-release

i know that you make detailed rifles too , but look at all addons of people, i know people who released 2 or 3 addons full of mistakes

in past some people wanted to be my boss and very very angry that i am not obeying them kissing their ass and working hundreds hour for their "leadership"

when i refused to give to someone P85 , he started flaming all forums in regard of my addons

it happened few times , if someone do not get permission - writes in revenge posts about low quality and bugs (P85, Polish addons etc)

if someone made 100 it doesnt mean his addons are poor

http://www.armaholic.eu/vilas/scr/groz6.jpg

http://www.armaholic.eu/vilas/scr/groz9.jpg

http://www.flashpoint.ru/newsimages/Wass/a2_vil_weaps/aek_2_b.jpg

http://www.flashpoint.ru/newsimages/Wass/a2_vil_weaps/4-nspu3_b.jpg

http://www.armaholic.eu/vilas/scr/1p21.jpg

http://www.armaholic.eu/vilas/scr/rw_wip_3.jpg

bad ? or proper receiver and details oposite to CS imported ?

---------- Post added at 01:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:40 AM ----------

[/color]

Wow Vilas, Wonder why I haven't tried out any of your stuff yet.

than try and see weapons packs, P85, Polish pack to note thing

first download , check models and than say about quality , realism etc.

Edited December 3, 2010 by vilas

[DaveG 0]

I'm no modder, nor even a frequent poster here, but I have been enjoying these games since OFP.

Couldn't BIS release some kind of documentation for these special features? Then no reverse engineering would be needed to get your addons working as they should. Or does this exist already?

[max power 21]

Lots of information does exist, it just takes some effort to get. I hear that there is needed information out there that does not exist however I, myself, have not run into such a problem yet.

all MLODs ? are some people calling themself moders only can copy-paste or import ?

/ENDOFTHREAD

[soul_assassin 1750]

Vilas, relax, the discussion here is not about ur addons so don't take it so personally. I know ur frustrated that no one has made CDF 2s1, but it's not wHat the topic of the thread is.

[galzohar 31]

This whole "but then people will make low quality copy-paste addons" argument is just retarded. If they make bad addons, give them appropriate feedback and don't use them, just like you would for addons made from scratch... Besides, having stuff easier to make means those who can make stuff from scratch have more time on working on actually new stuff, rather than re-making existing stuff because they can't modify them.

Now we all know that there are a lot of things, be it bugs or just missing features, that would be much easier to fix by editing the existing stuff rather than just re-making the whole thing from scratch. The biggest example for this is Arma 2 content looking like !@#! on thermal vision. Of course I don't say this based on my non-existent modding experience, but rather based on what experienced modders (some posting in this very thread) have posted many times in other threads.

The only argument brought up here that I consider valid is the legal one. But eventually BIS needs to consider which stuff they can release and benefit by enhancing the game more than they lose by having their stuff stolen. A decent example is probably the Arma 2 vanilla stuff, since Arma 2 vanilla is pretty much dead and its content is simply not up to par with OA and thus doesn't have a lot of use.

In fact the only reason I make missions without worrying about using an object or 2 from vanilla creating a CO requirement is because basically everyone I know who have OA also have A2. If there were a lot of people that have only OA and not Arma 2, I would never even think about making missions that require CO. There's just no real benefit with the current state of vanilla content in OA.

Of course, if legal issues are BIS's top priority here, then this thread is as good as locked... And IIRC last time I've seen someone from BIS posting about this subject the only reasoning he brought up was legal issues, so without them they would have probably happily released the MLODs.

[max power 21]

This whole "but then people will make low quality copy-paste addons" argument is just retarded.

It's not an argument against but a flimsy motivation. The argument is that the community doesn't need every last model in MLOD format. That argument is sound.

[vilas 477]

Arma2 is dead and only OA ?

hmm.... what about all WW2/NAM and woodland/Russian mod/addons missions etc. ?

i know that some people want only "special forces on desert area" but not all

Arma2 is not dead, some people prefer woodland and historic scenery, some prepare only last US wars (desert area, hi-tech), other want winter scenery

it would be good to have Arma2 FLIR ready, but if BIS will do it, they will do it by DLC, giving MLODs they would lost money

cause now they see that community turned from OFPish to CoDish and want DLCs

doing from scratch is possible , some time must be spent on it, shame that some people want to copy-past only and jerk of how great they are

S_A it is not matter of 2S1 CDF, but matter of people's laziness , they made tens of request instead of easy reskin but noone did it (can you call it other way than laziness)

some MLODs would be welcome, i don't say that not at all (specially some units cause making collars, hoods, jackets properly sectioned is time effort)

also MLOD of building would be good to have - to understand destruction mechanism when making custom own buidling :)

MLOD of unit with backpack proxy, MLOD of units with some features which are after A1

Edited December 3, 2010 by vilas

[Zipper5 74]

Tell me why people shouldn't be allowed to do reskins? If that's what they want to do and they enjoy it, then why should you be telling them no? If they're doing reskins as a stepping-stone on to greater things with modding, as I'm sure all of you addon makers also started off doing, then let them learn more and eventually they might feel confident enough in their skills to start making their own models. Same goes for cut-and-paste addons.

I know that in OFP times some of my most favorite and most used addons were reskins or cut-and-paste addons, particularly the Winter Nogojev unit reskins, the FDF units (as far as I'm aware they were based off the OFP civilian models, and some other inclusions), and the huge number of reskins of the default Soviet models to make Russian Federation units. I still enjoy playing with those a hell of a lot more than I have with anything else released since the ArmA days. Just because they're reskins and cut-and-paste doesn't make them bad.

Edited December 3, 2010 by Zipper5