ArmA 2 site hacked

[Steakslim 1]

If you want useful information check the wiki:

http://armaenigma.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

Beyond that all there is, is speculation on trying to piece together all the clues.

[Tom1 10]

I hope this next game is modern not set in the cold war (yn)

[tupolov 520]

HOOD and NOTTINGHAM are/were HMS ships...

[jakerod 254]

I hope this next game is modern not set in the cold war (yn)

I'm fairly sure its modern. I wish it was Cold War though. I would love to do an all out World War III Fulda Gap type thing.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

If you want useful information check the wiki:

http://armaenigma.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

Beyond that all there is, is speculation on trying to piece together all the clues.

Indeed, there's not a lot of evidence there to support some of the speculation I've been seeing. Perhaps after the Take On announcement BIS decided to step up the difficulty of their ARGs. TBH, I personally don't care much for these games; they tend to create a lot of speculation. In my experiences on this forum, speculation usually leads to disappointment. Not that I don't believe BI could be working on something nice, but they're really good at surprising us.

---------- Post added at 02:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:01 AM ----------

I hope this next game is modern not set in the cold war (yn)

I'm not one to speculate, but if this so-called Captain Miller is the main protagonist, and his supposed birth year being 1992 is correct, that would seemingly set it in the near future.

That said, I'm still hoping to see BI return to the Cold War period. It's just not explored enough in games anymore; at least nowhere near as much as modern or WWII settings (which dominate all military themed games). Also, leaving the modern scene would allow BIS to polish/perfect more of the fundementals of traditional warfare rather than concentrate on more modern/hi-tech aspects.

[Tom1 10]

Well making a modern mod would be extremely difficult and would be low quality due to all the additional technological stuff that needs to be added whereas Cold War and WWII mods would be a lot easy because the basics have already been taken care of and ot as much needs tpo be made/implemented correctly and well. Cold War is great fun but a modern game would just be so much better, especially with the arma community who always spit out great quality mods :)

Edited May 14, 2011 by Tom1

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Cold War and WWII mods have been great, but I just don't see modern mods being as successful, atleast with the current engine super high tech huds and targeting systems have mainly been really well pieced together UIs, hint boxes, dynamic crosshairs and post processing/ other visual affects (TV "fuzzyness" for mando missles) and that stuff is always done best by developers.

On the contrary, I would say that it'd make more sense for BIS to fine-tune the fundamentals, then expose enough things to allow modders to add intersting new content based on modern hi-tech stuff. It's harder to add missing fundamentals than it is to simply provide new content. I mean, all sorts of interesting UIs and effects could potentially be created by users if BI provided a flexible enough framework. That's also one benefit of choosing the 1980s period; it's right around the time where hi-tech equipment started being used while more traditional doctrines were still in place.

In other words, BI could spend all their time developing detailed representations of a few choice pieces of modern military hardware, but it couldn't be enjoyed to its full potential if more fundamental systems were missing. For example, a really neat top-attack missile with multiple stage warhead wouldn't really be all that necessary (at least not with that much detail) without a more detailed armor penetration system. Continuing to focus on the present will also make it harder to implement said fundementals later on (the more you build on them, the harder they become to change).

Anyway, this has already gone way off topic. Should probably continue with the hacker ARG.

Edited May 14, 2011 by Big Dawg KS

[Varanon 892]

This thread is so full of speculation that there is little room for useful information (even if there's not much to be found).

Since no solid information has been released at all, what else do you expect except speculation ? I mean, there is no telling what BIS will release, it might be a washing machine simulator for all we know.

[Tom1 10]

See your point, but arma 2 didnt really have heaps of technology at all compared to operation arrowhead so the whole game pretty much needs those fundamentals to be worked on anyway, it didnt miss out due to the super high tech apache gun cams in arma 2 :D .

To any BIS workers please please please make factions 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0, so we can set each faction to a number and set which faction is fighting which, which faction is friendly, which is neutral and which will only engage if neutral/enemy get too close (last one not too important). This can be done in the same place that resistance is set to blufor, opfor, none or both to make it easier for new players.

[scajolly 14]

So far, the most obvious is that the new campaign will center on fighting as a guerilla against a Sino-Persian occupant force in the area of Greece (which, with its many islands, should be BIS's dream theater). We'll be on the side of NATO/Britain, but I guess the "Don't trust this guy" points to some subversion and infiltration.

Because of the immense possible scale of the conflict (which sees China just buttfuck the whole of Europe save Scandinavia), and the antagonists involved, the use of WMDs is IMO very likely. Whether part of campaign story or actually in the game, that remains to be seen.

Very little else has been said that we can draw concrete assertions from, other than the ambigous ASCII wall of potential PhysX-like handling. It's either purely symbolical, or a real clue as to new improvements. However no other improvements have been overtly hinted to.

[maddogx 13]

"Don't trust this guy"

Where is this from?

[purepassion 22]

i think hes referring to the miller picture...

but SCAJolly, it doesnt say "dont trust this guy"....

Edited May 14, 2011 by PurePassion

[Muahaha 10]

no one actually certain what it actually says apart from "this guy" and "R". Unless some handwriting expert is able to shed some light.

[purepassion 22]

no in fact we really dont know what it says there

maybe we can try to figure it out till the next hack incoming in T-06h 08m

---------- Post added at 09:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:52 AM ----------

ohh and to the armaenigma page at the Friday, May 13th 2011, 00:00 CEST hack on the date 1962, December 10 it says that the The film 'Lawrence of Arabia' is released

but i think this is much more interesting

December 10 – In the United States, the X-20 Dyna-Soar spaceplane program is cancelled. Also on this date: Chuck Yeager "while testing an NF-104A rocket-augmented aerospace trainer, he narrowly escaped death when his aircraft went out of control at 108,700 feet (nearly 21 miles up) and crashed. He parachuted to safety at 8,500 feet after vainly battling to gain control of the powerless, rapidly falling craft. In this incident he became the first pilot to make an emergency ejection in the full pressure suit needed for high altitude flights.â€

and for 2003, July 1: The book 'The Bielski Brothers' is published i think this is also much more fitting to the topic

In Hong Kong, 500,000 people march to protest the rush into legislation of Hong Kong Basic Law Article 23, the anti-subversion law. Critics say the law is both too broad and too vague.

they might fit to the names that were found but the dates itself contain more

Edited May 14, 2011 by PurePassion

[mattxr 9]

Someone mentioned PhysX or something well I read vbs2 page yesterday and they integrated that onto the units! Maybe the same will be done here! Look at what happened to FLIR :)

[purepassion 22]

link?

[scajolly 14]

link?

http://vbs2.com/docs/Readme_VBS2_1_22.txt

-------

PhysX

-------

NVIDIA PhysX is a powerful physics engine which enables real-time physics in leading edge PC and console games. When combined with CUDA-enabled GeForce GPUs, PhysX will deliver the computing horsepower necessary to enable true, advanced physics in the next generation of game titles.

BIA is currently working on PhysX-optimizing VBS2 to enable physic features such as creating rigid objects, chains, ropes and trailers. This process is still in prototype and implementation is limited in this release.

Current PhysX enabled VBS2 vehicles have a "X" at the beginning of their display name and at the end of their classname.

Some examples include:

Display Name Classname

X Freightliner FLD120 vbs2_us_army_zz_fld120_w_X

X M1151 HMMWV - M2 VBS2_US_ARMY_M1151UAH_D_M2_X

X M1151 HMMWV - Mk19 VBS2_US_ARMY_M1151UAH_D_MK19_X

X Unimog U1700L VBS2_AU_Army_Unimog_W_Mag58_X

This is a 2010 pdf: http://www.teamorlando.org/gametech/downloads/2010/presentations/Virtual%20Battlespace%202%20-%20The%20Future.pdf

It mentions PhysX used for articulated trailers and for handling ropes. Very rudimentary features so far.

Edited May 14, 2011 by SCAJolly

[mattxr 9]

Video of it working here with a Trailer..

But when you think about it! wont it have to be implemented into Take on Helicopers though for the sling loads and attachments etc?

[purepassion 22]

thx

really interesting!!! but i sadly have an ATI GPU :(((

like propably MANY more

Edited May 14, 2011 by PurePassion

[carlostex 38]

No not physx

[mattxr 9]

Its really strange that doesnt ATI work with PhysX? Strange that a huge company wouldnt make something then also sell it to Rivals to make the Industry more Open, Easyer for Developers to expande their titles. with newer features

[Tonci87 163]

No NVidia wants to have the whole cake for itself without sharing.

They coded that phsicx thing in a way that you need an Nvidia GPU.

Off course the ATI GPUs would be able to do the calculation as well, but Nvidia doesn´t want that to happen.

[themaster303 22]

No NVidia wants to have the whole cake for itself without sharing.

They coded that phsicx thing in a way that you need an Nvidia GPU.

Off course the ATI GPUs would be able to do the calculation as well, but Nvidia doesn´t want that to happen.

just plain nonsens ;) see link:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1917293&postcount=3223

---------- Post added at 11:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:51 AM ----------

for physix:

mirrors:

Edited May 14, 2011 by themaster303

[scajolly 14]

Four hours left!

[NeMeSiS 11]

just plain nonsens ;) see link:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1917293&postcount=3223

---------- Post added at 11:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:51 AM ----------

for physix:

mirrors:

You do know that we already had working truck/trailer addons in fucking OFP right? ;)