Arma ]|[ Development Tools

[ramirez 10]

So I have been searching up an down on nearly every Arma ]|[ involved website. I have been looking to see what kind of tools will be released for community modification. What will the tools be, Oxygen "3", Visitor "4", or will there just be patches for the present tools? It would be nice when and if B.I. comes out with A3 that the new modelling program involves a render of the model within the program instead of running buldozer. I think this would greatly decrease the amount of frustration that is dealt with when creating a model. Many of times my buldozer has crashed causing frustration, but with a sort of render within the program (ex: zmodeler, 3dsmax, blender) these stressors could be eliminated. But back on topic, does anybody have any info what so ever about new B.I. Dev tools come Arma ]|[?

[Nicholas 5]

A little searching may have helped you, but I figured I would be nice and help you. :)

Here is the interview video where Ivan talks about new tools being released. Skip to around 2:10 if you are impatient.

Ivan Butcha: "We will be releasing new versions of tools."

Although, I swear I remember him saying that it wouldn't be available right away. I guess I must have remembered wrong!

[PuFu 4599]

A little searching may have helped you, but I figured I would be nice and help you. :)

Being a smart ass for nothing here. New version can mean as much as bi tools 2.0 versus 2.5 - not much in terms of tools provided, but rather an updated bulldozer version (note that v2.5 of the tools was released about 1 year after OA release). But how would you know in the first place....

@ramirez: a non-rt render would be useless. It would be ten times better to have a RT environment available just like we do today, but being able to switch to it way faster, and having it docked in one of the viewports (optional) - similar to UDK, CE3 SDK, Unity etc.

No matter what, a proper set of plugs for industry standard software would be ten times better if you ask me. Especially since you can get adsk software for free nowadays for non-com projects, as well as blender...I have been buggin dwarden for those max and maya shaders since A2 was released without success.

[Nicholas 5]

Being a smart ass for nothing here. New version can mean as much as bi tools 2.0 versus 2.5 - not much in terms of tools provided, but rather an updated bulldozer version (note that v2.5 of the tools was released about 1 year after OA release). But how would you know in the first place....

I never said I knew anything, did I. Please post the quote where I said I knew about the tools. No one really knows anything about the tools. Although searching probably would have helped him find more information, I was going to be nice to take my personal time to search and post for him what little information I had found, that the new tools will be released. I wasn't being a smart-ass. But, now you are being the "ass".

I'm not quite sure how stating "I suppose I'll be nice and help you" is being a smart ass.

Edited June 10, 2012 by Nicholas

[wipman 1]

Hi, new (better) tools would be almost useless or pointless without good refference MLOD models and textures libraries IMO. Let's C ya

[slatts 1978]

Hi, new (better) tools would be almost useless or pointless without good refference MLOD models and textures libraries IMO. Let's C ya

So.....the only use for O2 is to edit Arma 2 MLODs and not to create new models? :j:

[mr. bravo 17]

I agree with PuFu. Some nice plugins would probably be the best solution, as the biggest "problem" imo is the clumsy and tiring workflow from exporting it to O2, and having it working ingame. O2 is still great for implementing, although it could use a few better functions for weighting and a proper gizmo, especially now that objects are getting even more detailed. But minimizing the work you have to do in O2, letting people set things up with LOD's, materials and animations in whatever program they prefer (3dsmax, Maya, Blender) as far as possible, and then simply export it to O2 for final touches, rigging and conversion. I think this would make a huge difference for our work, and less effort for BIS.

But to be honest, I think BIS-tools are still amongst the best modding-tools out there. There are many games that are SO much worse in this matter, especially when it comes to importing 3d-models. So I'm not really complaining about the current tools, since they at least do their job as far as I know :)

[maddogx 13]

I never said I knew anything, did I. Please post the quote where I said I knew about the tools. No one really knows anything about the tools. Although searching probably would have helped him find more information, I was going to be nice to take my personal time to search and post for him what little information I had found, that the new tools will be released. I wasn't being a smart-ass. But, now you are being the "ass".

I'm not quite sure how stating "I suppose I'll be nice and help you" is being a smart ass.

You got called a smart ass by Captain Smart Ass himself. Nothing to write home about. ;)

As far as the tools are concerned, the earlier the better. Some example MLODs from the get-go would also be helpful.

Edited June 11, 2012 by MadDogX

[ramirez 10]

I do agree with MadDogX. It would be rather difficult to work things into Arma ]|[ without any MLODS. It would be nice to see a MLOD pack containing: A wheeled vehicle, A tracked vehicle, helicopter, plane, boat, and character models. Maybe somehting like this could be packed into the tool installer and is auto installed into the P: drive? Even a standalone DL of it would be extremely helpful. I also wish that a pic or video of the new tools would be released, get to see what most of the devs can look foward to using! :)

[rstratton 0]

So.....the only use for O2 is to edit Arma 2 MLODs and not to create new models? :j:

it can be used to create models but takes 10x longer than purpose built modelling programs

[STALKERGB 6]

So.....the only use for O2 is to edit Arma 2 MLODs and not to create new models? :j:

I think wipman was meaning that (like with A2/OA) the process for getting fully functional, working models in game takes longer without samples/tutorials as reference.

Personally I'm not going to be in any hurry for BIS to release tools when A3 is out. Actually would rather get a good amount of playing in before I get down to the modding. That said, I'm sure I'll see how easy it is to dump an OA addon into A3 right at the start.

[pettka 694]

I think wipman was meaning that (like with A2/OA) the process for getting fully functional, working models in game takes longer without samples/tutorials as reference.

Imagine there were some tutorials to make transition form A2 to A3 modding easier. What would You need to know? There is a plenty of devs around reading every post on the forum :icon_twisted:

[b00ce 160]

How is the modifiable clothing/chest rigging/ helmet system implemented on the model/config side? I want to get a head start with my USCM mod. ;)

Then again, when I get back, all the kinks will probably have been worked out.

[Messiah 2]

Imagine there were some tutorials to make transition form A2 to A3 modding easier. What would You need to know? There is a plenty of devs around reading every post on the forum :icon_twisted:

Personally, a modding 'change log' would be ideal. Along the lines of 'CHANGED' and 'ADDED' or a breakdown of the various classes (Weapons, Avatars, Vehicles etc) where the main changes/additions have occured. A section about PhysX and its effects, if any, on setting up addons correctly. The last few transitions between games have always left a chunk of guess work as well, or confusing details. I realise BI have to be careful with the reference models they hand out, lest they end up in the wrong places, but I think the average modder wouldn't care less if the example model was just a grey box, with the relevant selections, memory points, configs and model.cfg's in place. We don't need the real model to work out how things are put together, just a correctly working example.

[[aps]gnat 28]

A couple of working MLODs with their own model.cfg and config.cpp (and any new special files) would help a huge amount, as Wipman has suggested.

Doesn't have to high quality Resolution LODs

Will need 1 of each vehicle type, preferably ones with "maximum" included features.

Soldier female

Soldier male

Helicopter

Prop aircraft

Jet aircraft

Tracked

Armoured Wheeled

Car

Motorcycle

Pushbike

Boat

etc

[slatts 1978]

I guess I misread wipmans point, reference models would be great have. It's just I use O2 to make new models so I would to see it updated :D

[Smurf 12]

We still don´t have A2's MLODs, you expect A3 ones to be released when?

[nodunit 397]

With all the theft of BI's content I somehow doubt we will be seeing any MLOD's anytime soon.

[maddogx 13]

All they need to do is make example models, not release the actual MLODs.

Such examples can be low poly and have 8x8 pixel textures for all anyone cares. The point is to show how things are done.

[Sniperwolf572 758]

With all the theft of BI's content I somehow doubt we will be seeing any MLOD's anytime soon.

What I find funny is that it's not fairly difficult to rip the model out and use it in a different game (as we can already see by the thieving bastards using ArmA2 content in other games and similar idiots bringing other game models into ArmA2), but the same process is useless to legit mod makers who wish to learn as they cannot retrieve any useful information regarding selections and whatnot.

Sure, making MLODs available for studying would make it even easier for the thieving bastards, but this would not hinder the legit mod makers' ability to learn.

I'm probably missing something here, but the way things stand, BI needs to and does chase after thieves anyway. Letting mod makers have easy access to learning material in the process would be a huge benefit in my opinion.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Sure, making MLODs available for studying would make it even easier for the thieving bastards, but this would not hinder the legit mod makers' ability to learn.

I'm probably missing something here, but the way things stand, BI needs to and does chase after thieves anyway. Letting mod makers have easy access to learning material in the process would be a huge benefit in my opinion.

Exactly. And releasing a limited amount of typical sample models was already done and it wasn't the end of the world.

[[aps]gnat 28]

A few people a missing the point expressed by several here;

The sample models don't have to be high quality 3d meshs!

Just something of low to average OFP quality ......

..... no ones going to be worried about rips then.

[Messiah 2]

Gnat;2170339']A few people a missing the point expressed by several here;

The sample models don't have to be high quality 3d meshs!

Just something of low to average OFP quality ......

..... no ones going to be worried about rips then.

Precisely, people seem to be missing my and other people's point. An example MLOD can quite simply be a 6 sided box with a few things bolted on to demonstrate how things are put together, the correct selections, the correct memory points, animations, etc. No one needs the complete ingame model to understand the mechanics of the new features. Gnat's list is also a good idea, an example low poly, low quality, technically useless MLOD for each type of vehicle, person, weapon, that demonstrates every possible (within reason I guess) combination of features.

[jagheterjan 10]

Doesn't even have to have OFP-quality meshes, just some placeholder geometry and a set of thoroughly annotated configs.

[slatts 1978]

Doesn't even have to have OFP-quality meshes, just some placeholder geometry and a set of thoroughly annotated configs.

I'd be happy with this

BTW your avatar scared the crap outta me :p