Sid 0 Posted November 30, 2001 This new game that is coming out, VBS, I have a few questions I hope you don't mind answering for me: -Will this take another 5 years to develope? (lol) -Hmm, these graphics look awfully Familiar, hey, will this be for OFP? (Goto thier main page and look at there 3rd Picture, THATS OFP'S WATER!!) -I do realize this game takes place in 1885, but why'd you make all the good stuff for VBS? -And why are you developing the game on the OFP Engine? I can see how, it's free to you, and the enoumous amount of freedom.. but still, why? (If you notice the jet in picutre 3 on thier site, the water they show is OFP's water!) Please explain to me this game, for I am curous, and I'll listen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Damage Inc 0 Posted November 30, 2001 It's a military simulator for the military. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NoToRiouS 0 Posted November 30, 2001 I don't think VBS is a game. It's a combat simulation for military use only. Maybe we'll see some stuff from it implemented in OFP(2??). They took the Steyr-Aug from it already. But I don't think it's ment to be released for all to buy NoToR out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Die Alive 0 Posted November 30, 2001 There's the RTS game, Real War out now, that was developed for the US Military, and now it's out for the public. Â It's not exactly the same as the military version (I think Real War has more units or something), but it was released none the less. VBS could be the same, maybe in a few years, after the military finds some new simulator to use, then maybe it will be turned into a commercial product. -=Die Alive=- Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dawdler 0 Posted November 30, 2001 But OFP IS the game variant of the military sim VBS... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Die Alive 0 Posted November 30, 2001 So maybe they'll release more units from VBS to the OFP world, or release it as a sequal or something. BTW, who's armies are using VBS? I'm too lazy to go to the site and find out, if it's there. -=Die Alive=- Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Damage Inc 0 Posted November 30, 2001 It says USMC on the main page (US Marine Corps I think). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dawdler 0 Posted November 30, 2001 Do the USMC use Steyer? And I think I saw some other quite non US weaponry there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ALDEGA 0 Posted November 30, 2001 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Sid on 5:46 pm on Nov. 30, 2001 -I do realize this game takes place in 1885, but ... <span id='postcolor'> it's 1985 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sid 0 Posted November 30, 2001 lol! Catapults vs BMP's! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
m79 0 Posted December 1, 2001 The pics also show quiet a few Australian units as well as marine ones. You can see a: Barret CH-53 AAV7 AV8B Tiger Aug AW50 Blackhawk. I think thats all of them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dawdler 0 Posted December 1, 2001 I GOT IT!!! The USMC is starting to train with Australian weaponry so they know what to face and how to destroy it when they invade Australia!!! Why else would one put USMC vs Australian weaponry? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Unl33t 0 Posted December 1, 2001 NNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!! Time for Australia to buy AK Rifles from Russia to take them all out in style, We could recruit the Viet Cong to help us! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Scooby Posted December 1, 2001 What difference does it make to you what weapon you use to kill someone? No such thing as killing someone with style... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Espectro (DayZ) 0 Posted December 1, 2001 Well, IMHO its more stylish to kill a person with a luger, then a button for the nuclear detonation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dawdler 0 Posted December 1, 2001 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Scooby on 2:19 pm on Dec. 1, 2001 No such thing as killing someone with style... <span id='postcolor'> In OFP there is! Set up two teams of 30-40 ppl each (multiplayer for some 80 ppl). Place everyone facing each other. When a signal is given, start shooting. Then tell everyone to turn around and run. The one that gets the furthest distance from original position until lag kills wins. THATS killing in style Great if one is bored. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
King Kong 0 Posted December 1, 2001 That is not a Steyr for sure Looks more like a FN MAG or a SAW to me Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyZ 0 Posted December 1, 2001 It may be a kind of lame question Could somebody give me link to this VBS? AndyZ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
King Kong 0 Posted December 1, 2001 It's an SA80 for sure Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anathema 0 Posted December 2, 2001 VBS is being developed for both the USMC and the Australian Defene Forces, so includes the Steyr, Leopard tanks etc. About the gun in the picture, if you look closely at the barrel you'll see a large, horizontal flash hider and muzzle break, which can be found on the .50 caliber Barret sniper rifle, which is in use with USMC ( & also has USMC camo on). As for BIS releasing parts of VBS for OFP this will probably never happen. Defence forces have secrets, which include computer programs as well as top secret plans, weapons etc. So when a company does work for the military (especially if it's combat related), they have to agree to sign a security/confidentiality agreement. This is why BIS have not said one word about VBS in the forum, and ignore questions about it. Â Also the US esecially would not want it availible to the puiblic, it would make a great training tool for their enemies, as well as their own forces. If the enemy can't get their hands on real US weapons, why not use the next best thing, a simulation, which not only models its appearance and charactreristics, but also how it behaves and fights on the battlefield. (Edited by Anathema at 10:11 am on Dec. 2, 2001) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MadDog 0 Posted December 2, 2001 AndyZ, try this: http://www.virtualbattlefieldsystem.com/ Dave. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theavonlady 2 Posted December 2, 2001 FBI: THIS POST HAS BEEN REMOVED BY CARNIVORE. (Edited by theavonlady at 5:04 pm on Dec. 2, 2001) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted December 2, 2001 @ Anathema There are already enought simulations on the market, that feature great realism in Battlefield systems. None of the programmers had to sign anything, because they ha ex-servicemen they could ask questions. Just for example Falcon 4.0, that was developt far beyond the point the publisher initially intended, with somen help of real F-16 Pilots. Or take "Steel Beast" as the most realistic Tank Sim. I served in a Leopard II myself, and I just can say, they modelled it exactly like the real thing, including the commands, spoken by the TC(...in german) Do you rally think they would give the designrs knowledge, that goes beyond what is actually avaible for the soldiers, that operate this equipment. And I never signed something that forbids me to speak about what I've learned in the army, exept for data like Encryptment procedures. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
m79 0 Posted December 2, 2001 King Kong , That is a Styer that the aussies are carrying , they also have a SAW and an AW50 for that sniper in the pic , it is NOT a SA80 , I think you need to go back to weps recognition cadet Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Razor635 0 Posted December 2, 2001 VBS uses the same engine as OFP but like a previous poster said the military has its secrets. We may see some cool stuff come out of it but then maybe not. Also BIS is doing the right thing by not mentioning it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites