Maps and locations

[dm 9]

the map in my link is from the dem of kabul or a video here (not realistic mission but the dem is )here

Just because the DEM is, doesnt mean the rest of the terrain is. Kabul as a city has a population ~3 million. There is NO way that is even remotely simulated on the Kabul map.

Quote[/b] ] must have missed all of those co-ops over the last 4 years then. Most of the ones I know of are either loosely based on real world events (WW2 mods etc) or simply fictional (often without back story) battles. The ONLY real-world missions I can think of off the top of my head are the OIF series done a couple of years ago and even they have a huge chunk of "creative freedom" in them.

because you didnt play them they didnt exist ?, what is this attitude with you, because you didnt know about or havent heard it never happened ,is it vbs or being part of a "studio" that creates this arrogance ?

What arrogance? Just because I'm posting the truth that makes me arrogant? I havent seen ANY real missions which re-create operations with 100% fidelity, simply because there is no terrian that simulates the area those operations took place in 100%.

Quote[/b] ]IED's and mission style have little to do with the politics thread. Thats simply the style of warfare which is currently happening in Iraq, not very fun IMHO. Much better to play some fictional combined arms mission than to get blown up in a convoy...

so there is no missions to be had around this scenario ? no recon ,inteligence gathering , no nothing ?

Sure, there are plenty. I just don't see the fun in the prospect of being taken out by an IED. Its a little too close to the current horrific events to be truly "enjoyable".

<span style='font-size:10pt;line-height:100%'>Edit: All this bitching aside, its not technically possible to do create real world areas with 100% fidelity, due to engine limitations. You simply can not have the object count and density required to recreate a large scale, real world environment.</span>

[Average Joe 0]

Military Simulation, Suma once said "War is not funny, we want to portray this in arma" [something like that].

I think the more realistic a war game is the better. There have been many games made popular just because of the theatre of battle [COD, MOH etc] and those games have never been made to shock and disgust.

Its not about the type of battle, who fought in it or why. Its just some peoples cup of tea thats all.

[Ironsight 1]

because you didnt play them they didnt exist ?, what is this attitude with you, because you didnt know about or havent heard it never happened ,is it vbs or being part of a "studio" that creates this arrogance ?

Wondering what's this attitude with you? What gives you the right to accuse a respected member of the community of arrogance (which is clearly not the case here)? And please just drop the VBS or studio argument, you're new.

[oneoff 0]

Quote[/b] ]Wondering what's this attitude with you? What gives you the right to accuse a respected member of the community of arrogance (which is clearly not the case here)? And please just quit about the VBS or studio argument, you're new.

If I were a moderator I would give you a whack with the banning stick.

lol ,sorry i shall come back when i got more posts.

i am sorry but i didnt realise this ws about 100% accuracy.

my bad lol

phew somedays you just cant get anything right , its a bummer.

whatever was i thinking messing with peple with so many posts.

[Heatseeker 0]

You cant have realistic and acurate real world locations in a video game, you cant have human alike a.i. in a game, you cant have 100% acurate equipment in a game, etc.. thats all irrelevant though.

The idea betwean game and mod also got mixed. A game based on the Iraqi situation would plain suck, i mean Iraq is the biggest f*** up of the milenio.. and its not even over yet.

[klasodeth 0]

The big problem with having a campaign based on the Iraq War?

GAME BALANCE.

When the US invaded Iraq, Iraq got steamrollered. Saddam was overthrown in a matter of weeks by a force that many considered to be undermanned and moving toward Baghdad too fast. In terms of US casualties, this is the safest war the US has ever fought. To balance a fictionalized version of the invasion, it would be necessary to either A: severely weaken the US forces, or B: dramatically increase the strength of the Iraqi forces. Either way produces a combat scenario so far removed from what actually happened, that it is impossible to call it realistic--even when taking place in a city with a layout identical to the real one. And if the conflict is modeled after the fight against the insurgency, a lot of variety is lost. There will be no battles against enemy tank divisions. There will be no downing of enemy combat helicopters. There will be no fleeing from enemy artillery barrages. There simply won't be much of anything except largely one-sided infantry battles.

[Ironsight 1]

Quote[/b] ]Wondering what's this attitude with you? What gives you the right to accuse a respected member of the community of arrogance (which is clearly not the case here)? And please just quit about the VBS or studio argument, you're new.

If I were a moderator I would give you a whack with the banning stick.

lol ,sorry i shall come back when i got more posts.

i am sorry but i didnt realise this ws about 100% accuracy.

my bad lol

phew somedays you just cant get anything right , its a bummer.

whatever was i thinking messing with peple with so many posts.

Great job on editing your post! Hope the right post was reported to the moderators. Expect your stay to be short.

[smiley nick 51]

I dont think there should be a huge debate about this at all

Simple fact

Some people dont have the time to make real world locations, or chose not to.

Others on the other hand might, and may choose to.

Ofp is about freedom, hence the huge selection of addons we have, we should say its wrong or no if people want real world locations, in come cases it might help peoples awareness, and why the hell is it always about iraq?

Lets just say that i where to make a real life terrain environment of the Isle of man, or the isle of white,

For one it would allow people from all over the world to experience it, yes you might say its "in game" but you'll be suprised what games can do now, take a look at vbs1, its being used for training, you might say its "Not a game" you could be right, but at the end of the day, its a bunch of pixels on a screen.

Hell the flk mod are doing a pretty close job at making real world locations, i think it was 200 new objects just for port Stanley!

We should have open arms to people who want to do such things, and not just dismiss it.

I think its quite controversial regarding the "respect" factor, re in acting real life situations and areas in a "game", i cant see the problem myself, but others might feel offended, x service men, i know a few and some would be offended, some wouldn't, its called different opinions, but we shouldn't rule it out, for me it allows "teaching", letting people experience as close as they want to get to war, and i think that was one of the quotes of the review from PC gamer back in the CWC release.

"As close to war as you want to get"

If you are one who is offended, then just dont use it, simple. You might think im quite aragoent, as i am not a service man, so i have "no right" to talk about such things, but if that is the case why do we all play ofp?

That was my $2

Nick

[shinRaiden 0]

There is one, and only one, project that came any where close to simulating real locations in the OFP engine, this research by Defence Gaming

http://www.defencegaming.org/downloads/kvarn/OFP_UAV.jpg

http://www.defencegaming.org/downloads/kvarn/OFP_UAV.jpg

The problems start in planning. Are you trying to make a happy / entertaining product, or are you trying to enjoy a depressing disaster?

Next in development, do you have any idea the amount of data required to start development? The image data files alone require dozens of gigabytes of storage, and are either government or commercially restricted. Most GIS data outside the US is not available without hefty licensing fees. There's also the issue of content age. Real life is dynamic, how do you propose to make a static model of that, especially in a rapidly evolving environment like a combat zone?

Then there's the issue of fidelity. Is 10m detail enough for your virtualization, or do you need 1m? Is 10cm desireable or a requirement? Is the purpose to test systems requiring hyper-accurate degrees of fidelity, or are plastic army men more than sufficent? What about frames per second? Are you going to simulate 'everything'? What is 'everything'? How do you you decide which bush to model? Can you reuse models, or do they need to be accurately unique? What functionality is required? Do they just serve as a visual backdrop, or is it required to model every mechanical process of a flush toilet in a particular house?

I think this is a few of the points Bals was trying to impress, that it's not real, therefore there are inherently some differences. And the other unmentioned item is that in light of games being used as tools for analyzing and treating PTSD, there's some merit to deliberately obsfuscating real locations to minimize the negative impact on those who would directly connect them with actual experiences. In those cases, the more fake the more enjoyable, and the more real, the more negatively traumatic, and thus not fun.