Render to Texture shader ported from Take on Helicopters to ArmA 2 OA.

[welcome to hell 23]

I know this has been suggested before but I have recently seen take on helicopters trailer and it seems that they have implemented Render-to-Texture shader at last! (In helo monitor).

BI have always worked hard on their games and helped out the community I imagine they are hard at work on ArmA 3!

But seriously, how hard can it be? Setup a camera, render it, apply the result to a texture than render it again.

Please port this ArmA 2 Combined ops and let the community have fun with it.

Imagine the possibilities!!!

- 3D Scopes.

- Working vehicle mirrors.

- In-Game camera systems (UAV on laptop, surveillance cam's e.t.c..)

- Working view ports on vehicle interiors.

- In Vehicle fire control systems. (Apache, MI-24, SU-34, Warrior and many more)

- Many more!

This could really be a blast for the modding community!

VOTE FOR IT !!! AND IT JUST MIGHT MAKE IT IN-GAME !!!

Official request thread:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=121275

Community Issue tracker:

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/3626

Edited September 20, 2011 by Welcome To Hell

[PuFu 4600]

if it would be that easy, i am sure they would have got it in already...it is not the case (they already said during gamescon that they have small problems implemented RTT in A3, but they are working on it).

will happen in A3 most likely, not in A2. Oh and btw, even if BIS release it now, the vanilla content will stay the same either way. I wouldn't be having a lot of faith in RTT solving the 3d scopes issue though...

[soul_assassin 1750]

You can see R2T in the TakOH CP implemented in the Arma2++ engine. Some people made cool tests with jets using this feature in MFD's :)

[metalcraze 290]

Dwarden said that if enough people voted for it in a certain thread BIS would consider this.

Of course everyone ignored his message.

So Render-to-texture is not needed by the community, relax.

[Beagle 684]

Dwarden said that if enough people voted for it in a certain thread BIS would consider this.

Of course everyone ignored his message.

So Render-to-texture is not needed by the community, relax.

I doubt it wil be done simply because BIS has not even ported OA features to ArmA 2 units exept those that had the whole classbase updated in OA.

[dm 9]

I doubt it wil be done simply because BIS has not even ported OA features to ArmA 2 units exept those that had the whole classbase updated in OA.

Because doing that (porting OA features to A2 units) requires updating a re-distributing all those models, additional textures and quite a lot of other data.

Its no trivial task.

Not to mention there is no way to ensure that people who have not bought A2 can not use the updated content (designed for OA) to get a "free" version of A2.

[welcome to hell 23]

Dwarden said that if enough people voted for it in a certain thread BIS would consider this.

Of course everyone ignored his message.

So Render-to-texture is not needed by the community, relax.

Oh, you must be the official community spokesman, to say on what is, and what is not needed by the community.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well why not reconsider just adding it to one of the beta patches with an example item or two?

I would assume that the benefit of feed back and bug testing a new shader would outweigh the time required to include it in a beta patch.

[max power 21]

That's quite an assumption.

[RSF TheCapulet 59]

I don't see the need for them to update any assets at all. Updating any content takes time away from working on engine improvements that only BIS can do. While the community has hundreds of modders working on content creation.

If it happened, it'd be good for everyone involved. It would give BIS a way to test methods involved with RTT in a much larger scale than a community preview for a heli only game. It would give modders the experience they'll need to spit out higher quality mods on TOH and A3 release. And it will give players fancy new toys to play with via mods. A win win win situation.

[max power 21]

Since it's BISim tech, it's likely been tested quite thoroughly.

[Beagle 684]

Because doing that (porting OA features to A2 units) requires updating a re-distributing all those models, additional textures and quite a lot of other data.

Its no trivial task.

Not to mention there is no way to ensure that people who have not bought A2 can not use the updated content (designed for OA) to get a "free" version of A2.

That's bullshit and only a cheap excuse because it haas been don e for A" onyl units...but only some...like AV8B new HUD, MTVR and some HMMWV heat signature, AK-74 sights, Flares for SOME USMC aircraft TI for SOME USMC aircraft etc. Transparent viewblocks for AAVP... etc. T-72 fully updated to OA, BMP fully updated to OA...etc.

All working well in A2 still...so that argument obviously does not work as there is already a separation in OA and A2 data for the same units.

The best Example that there is no interferrecen at al are the vehicle fix mods...but as we all know such single tiny mods that don't have much support are no solution for MP gaming.

Edited September 13, 2011 by Beagle

[dm 9]

That's bullshit and only a cheap excuse because it haas been don e for A" onyl units...but only some...like AV8B new HUD, MTVR and some HMMWV heat signature, AK-74 sights, Flares for SOME USMC aircraft TI for SOME USMC aircraft etc. Transparent viewblocks for AAVP... etc.

Because the MTVR and HMMWVs were desertised for OA, meant that the data (and updated p3ds) were included in the OA distribution anyway.

Seriously, learn just how much work is involved in adding TI (let alone any of the other features) to a model before shooting your mouth off about "how easy" it would be.

Then, on top of the time spent for an artist to create all the TI stuff, it has to be tested and distributed. Every single p3d in A2 would have to be updated for TI, then they would all have to be re-distributed, along with the additional TI textures (which would run to about 1/4 - 1/3rd the original size of the A2 data, estimated)

The argument clearly does work, which is why BI havent done it.

All working well in A2 still...so that argument obviously does not work.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with this? The updated data resides within the OA data structure, so isnt used by A2?

My point was that if all A2 data was released in a patch, anyone who had not bought A2, could use the data from the patch in order to get a free copy of A2 (sans missions/campaigns)

Edited September 13, 2011 by DM

[Beagle 684]

DM

ever heard of file patching...you don't habe to provide the whole package just to add a line in a cfg. Im not talking about a whole package im talking about adding lines to .cfg so that ALL units have the same features like...TI textures excluded...the default ones just need to be toned down.

Like this mod has done.

http://www.arma2base.de/include.php?path=news&contentid=3037

It comes in the hughe size of 1MB.

All this should have beeen part of OA when it was sold as Expansion to OA "updating" A2...well only a third of A2 is actually updated...some unique A2 features are in fact broken now since 1.50

Edited September 13, 2011 by Beagle

[dm 9]

Still doesnt add proper TI to the vehicles, anything that doesnt have the TI textures will not display "proper" TI (which seemed to be one of the key things you were complaing about, but now it can be skipped?)

Applying proper TI would need updated p3ds and additional textures. There is no two ways about it, thats just how the system works.

To go somewhat back on topic: adding RTT would be engine only changes (as can be seen with the TKOH preview) but no A2/OA content would feature it, so we'd be back at square one of people like Beagle complaining that "we have this new tech in the engine, why isnt all your content automatically backwards compatible with it??!?!"

[PuFu 4600]

That's bullshit and only a cheap excuse because it haas been don e for A" onyl units...but only some...like AV8B new HUD, MTVR and some HMMWV heat signature, AK-74 sights, Flares for SOME USMC aircraft TI for SOME USMC aircraft etc. Transparent viewblocks for AAVP... etc. T-72 fully updated to OA, BMP fully updated to OA...etc.

That is no cheat excuse. You clearly don't understand that the files you talk about have OA versions as well, and things have been inherited from those. The data IS present.

ever heard of file patching...you don't habe to provide the whole package just to add a line in a cfg. Im not talking about a whole package im talking about adding lines to .cfg so that ALL units have the same features like...TI textures excluded...the default ones just need to be toned down.

Oh, now you contradict yourself and want some some middle ground solution...not gonna happen.

The files you call updated are that way because those are part of OA.

You need to understand that backward compatibility for free is not gonna happen..The time and work needed to update A2 content is just not worth it.

If you're happy with the said mod, why don't you use it?

[metalcraze 290]

The time and work needed to update A2 content is just not worth it.

Why won't BIS stop releasing patches then? They are not worth it, just concentrate on ArmA3

I'm perfectly sure that the community themselves would fully update AA2 units to OA standards if it's too much for BIS (like making a few thermal textures) had BIS released the sources for models but it ain't gonna happen until AA3 when nobody will care anymore

[dm 9]

Why won't BIS stop releasing patches then? They are not worth it, just concentrate on ArmA3

Flawed logic is flawed.

Content updates require much more involvement than pure engine fixes. (Not to shine a bad light on the programmers work, their work is essential)

Its already been said by Marek and other BI staff, (cba to find the quote tho), that no content updates will be made for A2 now, only engine fixes.

[PuFu 4600]

Why won't BIS stop releasing patches then? They are not worth it, just concentrate on ArmA3

You are well aware of the difference between fixing things as well as optimizing the engine and UPDATING 2GB plus of content at the OA standars., But you still bother to post in your specific ignorant manner. You are the prototype of flawed logic around those forums.

Now I wonder why you are not my ignore list yet...will fix it

I'm perfectly sure that the community themselves would fully update AA2 units to OA standards if it's too much for BIS (like making a few thermal textures) had BIS released the sources for models

When you create your own addon, or TI texture for that matter, you might have the right to judge.

And i am sure even if mlods would be released you would be the first lad to jump on them and make all the updates yourself, no? /sarcasm

(why would BI do that instead of having all models hiddenSelection ready in the first place),

but it ain't gonna happen until AA3 when nobody will care anymore

By knowing the amount of realism you preach around here, one would think otherwise: no juice for you in a future setup, you need your trusty M16 to have a game...You should joyful that you'll then have the chance to update/brings those models up to A3 standard yourself...

[welcome to hell 23]

My suggestion has nothing to do with updating backwards compatible units. Or even updating existing OA units.

Provide 1 example item with a patch. Such as a UAZ with working mirrors

or something simpler for example a laptop model with a RTT texture and camera script.

Using an example as a model community could spent time testing and experimenting with all kinds of new uses for this shader! It is very beneficial allowing the fan base mod their game, it is a win-win!

Ideally it would work by creating a new texture and material. Than setting up cameras for each view in config.

Obviously no p3d editing should be needed otherwise future modding projects would require the community to recreate everything from scratch!

[ACPL Jon 68]

The link that MetalCraze send me:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=121275&page=5

Let's just (massively) vote for "yes", shall we? I think everyone here should do it.

[PuFu 4600]

Ideally it would work by creating a new texture and material. Than setting up cameras for each view in config.

Obviously no p3d editing should be needed otherwise future modding projects would require the community to recreate everything from scratch!

addin a new material and texture is done from within the p3d. Afaik setting up RTT (using TKOH engine for instance) is a bit more complicated that re-writing a config mate.

So whatever the case, you still can't escape without editing the existing content (3rd party or BIS).

[ACPL Jon 68]

It's better to have it, then don't.

VOTE "YES" FOR RTT HERE, people!

Edited September 13, 2011 by JonPL
link corrected

[soul_assassin 1750]

It's better to have it, then don't.

VOTE "YES" FOR RTT HERE, people!

link broken

[ACPL Jon 68]

Thanks for heads up, corrected.

If there's a CIT ticket, post it here as well.

[kuIoodporny 45]

I'd add this one.

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/3626

And corrected link.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=121275