Realtime immersive - Militar simulator cryengine

[Flash Thunder 10]

If its anything like Americas Army I dont want a part of it.

blah cryengine when we see some arma 3 footage it will probably look 2 times better.

[nodunit 397]

I doubt you'll have a part of it anyway ;)

[Heatseeker 0]

More like a kewl Crysis mod in its infancy, if you ask me you guys give the "serious game stuff" too much credit. Military standards are pretty low... do i see a simulation anywhere? Not at all..

[Defunkt 431]

Meh, I predict a lot of wasted money for not much result and if anything BIS will likely end up smelling of roses. If the brass behind this knew anything at all (as opposed to having their head turned by the prettiest booth at the trade show) they'd be pouring that money (and lobbying for the other services to invest similarly) in a truly next-gen combined-arms solution based on something like Outerra. That would be cause for BIS to worry.

[icebreakr 3157]

US military commission $57m virtual reality training sim powered by CryEngine 3

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/05/31/us-military-commission-57m-virtual-reality-training-sim-powered-by-cryengine-3/

..... I bet they have a more nice GUI map editor :)

[walker 0]

Hi all

It would be nice for VBS to have a competitor but as it will be controled by Primes and have to serve them profits as well as the developers and will have reduced capability much under that of VBS from the start I do not think it will fly.

Before it is even developed it will cost the US Army $57 million. Where as VBS was delivered to the US Army actualy working from day one for just $17 million and has been continously upgraded since.

As to developing the whole CryEngine based simulation product under Cost Plus that is just a system designed to increase costs in order to maximise profits.

There is already doubt that the package will make it through US Congress defence cuts as the Republican party is heavily involved in reducing US Spending.

Is there information on view distance and entity counts for the proposed CryEngine based simulation yet?

Kind Regards Walker

Edited June 1, 2011 by walker

[bobocz 10]

..... I bet they have a more nice GUI map editor :)

Did you see this? I think that you will like it.

Now we can dream about something similar for Arma3.

added: Regarding Dismounted Soldier, isn't it designed mainly for Virtual Reality? See http://www.intelligent.net/idweb/company/dismountedsoldier/Dismounted%20Soldier%20-%20Trianing.jpg , that how I understand it.

Edited June 1, 2011 by BoboCZ

[txalin 2]

Did you see this? I think that you will like it.

Now we can dream about something similar for Arma3.

Just wow.

[rfc 10]

Did you see this? I think that you will like it.

Now we can dream about something similar for Arma3.

:eek:

Funny thing is you can't deny the engine, when you look close as the camera looks at certain angles on the terrain, it exhibits this annoying texture morphing bug :)

[dm 9]

VBS2 has limitations that the more highly advanced CryEngine 3 doesn't. Especially when it comes to off-the-shelf terrain possibility, physics, animations, general graphics, interaction and simulation of specific tools, weapons, vehicles and systems.

(From the closed offtopic thread)

Wat?!?!

As BISim proved at ITEC last month, they can develop real world terrain in an incredibly short period of time (Bin Ladens Abbottobad complex was demo'd at the show, and the raid happened like what, a week before the show?) Can the

Crysis editing system import real world elevation and satellite data? (I honestly dont know) and can it use shape data to rapidly populate the terrain with roads, buildings, vegitation etc etc? Or do you have to spend years placing objects with the brush tools?

As for physics, sure crysis has the explodey barrels (which is pretty much the only thing you ever see in the demo videos) and some nice, but very limited building destruction. But beyond that? For all the actually important things (bullet drop, that kind of thing) VBS/RV already does it. So having shiny eye-candy on top of that isnt really a huge advantage for a simulator...

Animations, well sure. The crysis engine is certainly much more flexible when it comes to animations. But the quality of the animations is down to who makes them. The RTI promo video with the soldier who voices the intro looks rather goofy. And could easily be reproduced in VBS, its just motion capture afterall...

General graphics, yup, crysis certainly looks generally prettier.

"interaction and simulation of specific tools, weapons, vehicles and systems" Not sure what you mean at all here... You drive vehicles, shoot weapons and use tools exactly the same in both systems - with a keyboard and mouse, or a joystick, steering wheel or wearable pc with motion tracking (and force feedback, in the case of VBS)

The only thing the cryengine has over VBS2 at the moment is its shiny graphics. It has no real time editor, it has no after action review, we dont know if it has admin or authouring tools, we dont know if you can rapidly create terrain using the librarys of existing height, satellite and shape data (unless someone can point me to an example?) And it sure as hell doesnt have the same size database of vehicles and equipment (not to mention all the third party content for VBS).

It'll go the same way as the last multi-million dollar project (I think it was 40 that time, cant find any references at the moment), in that they'll spend the money and a few years developing it, and at the end of the project they wont have anything that really works, let alone works for what the Army wants. So it'll get cancelled (if it doesnt before then) and they'll go back to using good ole VBS...

[Dwarden 1125]

i think this whole thread become moot the second VBS upgrade it's visual engine to A3 or beyond ...

but vice versa forget about this being capable of fraction features VBS can do already now ...

[walker 0]

Hi all

As I pointed out the major problem is that it is still following the Prime's old fashioned concept of the military simulation market.

...The Prime's market is the Bespoke Government Pork Business of: secure a contract to do a research project, secure another contract to expand it into test environment, secure another to create a product based on the test environment, secure increased costs to test it, secure bigger costs to implement it on a small scale, secure, bigger costs to implement it on a medium scale plus a support contract that the costs are kept to maximum to ensure the maximum cost, on which to the base the cost plus percentage on so that profit is maximised. And also ensuring the product is out of date when it comes to market, so that the process must now be repeated so that the gravy can continue to flow in...

Before the Cryengine vapourware product has even been created, it already costs four times the cost of VBS2, and for what? Zero capability, the CryEngine proposal, for that is all it is, is just a beta test product that does not work. As such it will probably never be delivered, hense why I think it will be cut in the Republican congress's defense cuts. And as I say the business model is fundamentaly flawed and out of date, under its current guise it is white elephant designed to extract money from the US tax payer.

Where as VBS is a COTS product, that worked from DAY ONE and does exactly what it says on the tin. The result of whicj is if you look at what serving soldiers are saying about VBS that is reported in the VBS thread then you see that VBS clearly the ground breaking and superior product.

Kind Regards walker

Edited June 3, 2011 by walker

[Heatseeker 0]

This whole product comparison debate is just as absurd as those numptyâ„¢ threads sugesting BI to make the next Arma game with the cry engine.. it makes the brain cry.

[nodunit 397]

Eh, they don't usually know much of the modding differences between the two, all they see are the graphic and physics comparisons then become awed and think every game should have that engine.

The problem with comparison..well..there really is no comparison, considering one is cheaper and has considerably more content, purpose and is proven tech.

Edited June 4, 2011 by NodUnit

[purepassion 22]

enough said.

army obviously doesnt know who they sould give their millions....

just imagine what BIS would be capable of with an budget of this level?!

GREAT!

[Daniel 0]

enough said.

army obviously doesnt know who they sould give their millions....

just imagine what BIS would be capable of with an budget of this level?!

GREAT!

Imagine that in a full scale mock-up, with several crew members, practicing opposed landings with enemy AI, medivacs with human casualties, etc. I imagine that would be seriously useful too, and obviously incredibly cheap when you factor in the fuel and maintenance costs of the real deal.

Edited June 4, 2011 by Daniel

[froggyluv 2136]

The day my wife spots me with that contraption is the day I fall out of the jock/geek category and firmly into the latter.

Outrageous technology there.

[purepassion 22]

well shame on you army for beeing such a crysis fanboy!

[maturin 12]

Outrageous technology? It looks like a Wii Remote hooked up to VBS2. And it works great.

Which is why paying $58,000,000 to Crytek is a stupid idea.

[Flash Thunder 10]

VBS 2 will clearly be the victor, the Army is wasting alot of money with this project.

Obviously shinny graphics doesnt equal better simulation.

Army is better off giving BIS 20 million and have them upgrade VBS 2 to the newer RV build and getting some added functionality rather than contracting a whole new project.

[froggyluv 2136]

Outrageous technology? It looks like a Wii Remote hooked up to VBS2. .

LOL, I was speaking generally as an old gamer from the Commodore 64 and before era....:p

I've never even seen a Wii and didn't know they had the capability to track movement so precise. Looking across the span of gaming from then till now -it's pretty amazing.

[4 IN 1 0]

Like always, US Army want it all new and fancy, most importantly made in US.

[Mr. Charles 22]

I wouldn't understimate the power of direct Sketchup-model Implementation and the really easy terrain/map editor.

[Dwarden 1125]

I wouldn't understimate the power of direct Sketchup-model Implementation and the really easy terrain/map editor.

both already part of VBS2 1.5 (some even earlier) and various toolsets ...

so the point is?

---------- Post added at 21:51 ---------- Previous post was at 21:49 ----------

Like always, US Army want it all new and fancy, most importantly made in US.

ironic then the engine comes from german company instead of way better Epic UE 3.9 / 4 ;)

[PuFu 4600]

I wouldn't understimate the power of direct Sketchup-model Implementation and the really easy terrain/map editor.

have YOU actually tried creating game content with sketchup?