Anyone Remember ITV? It's Happening Again...

[DetCord 96]

Jesus...Gonna have to go through their other videos to see if they're using video game footage (A3) there as well, and probably are. I'm also fairly certain that slapping a Property Of graphic across your video while using open source DoD footage and someone else's IP (BI/Arma 3) is fairly illegal.

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/arma/comments/ofy3du/its_itv_all_over_again/

 

 

[kibyde 64]

Seriously. Whoever os trying to sell ArmA clips as real world footage at least set the graphic settings to "Ultra".

[Valken 621]

More power to the seller if news companies are so dumb they don't vet their sources.

[martin_lee 33]

I was once forwarded an ArmA3 clip, about an attack aircraft taking on a C-RAM on the ground, passing as real footage. Part of that clip was used on the video linked by OP (Around 1:35).

 

The title of that video was something in the line of 'Mig-25 attacking forces on the ground and destroyed' (forgotten the real title it has). The friend who forwarded it to me wasn't into military stuff or Arma, so his red flags wasn't raised. At the very least it should be Su-25, which is a ground attack aircraft, but later on in the video it looked more like an A-10. Also, a single aircraft without wingman, doing a gun run on ground forces that has a C-RAM? That's not how they would do it in real life. Okay, if you somehow missed the presence of the C-RAM, you won't go back for a second gun run when it opened up on you! That has to be fake, and with this suspicion I looked closer at the video and find out that it is in fact from Arma 3, with the highest graphics settings and maybe some visual mod?

 

For casual viewing, without knowledge of tactics and all, probably wouldn't be able tell that it is fake. The details and the feel are good. I mean, the light from a town further away was visible, the sound is good (sound's travel time is there, you hear the impact before the brrrrrt), tracers cast light. Those are not the details one would expect a mainstream video game to have. Add to that, if the video was a little bit compressed and reduced in resolution (like the one I was forwarded), I won't be too surprised if someone thought it was real. As a layman, where do you start debunking the video?

 

Don't get me wrong, I am NOT defending them, at all. My line of work, as a researcher, do not take this type of behavior well. I am now writing a paper (not good at it...). I may have general idea about the topic, But whenever I want to make a point, I have to at least check a bit of literature to see if it is actually true now or not, and make citations and all. It is a time-consuming and grueling process, that is giving me a big deal of stress lately. But even so, getting your idea right and sources straight is definitely your responsibility.

 

I am just kind of amazed that how Arma got many of the details and feel right, to the point that casual viewing may not immediately distinguish it from real footage. It goes on to show that how much easier some people can misusing information nowadays. All you need is something one can't readily debunk, slap a label on it, and off you go...