Arma and VBS2

[matt714 2]

VBS2 is a simulator.

ArmA is a game.

And what BIS really imho doesnt get, is just that, people want the simulator... its the same reason people buy Flight Simulator. I know they wouldn't make money on the licensing, but couldnt they restrict mass usage? I dont know but anyways, I hope we can get more simulation, its what makes Flight Simulator fun.

I agree but it is highly probable Armed Assault wouldn't sell as well if it was a full-fledged simulator. Operation Flashpoint's more than usual attention to realism actually prevented it from gaining a community the size of the one of the Battlefield series exactly for these reasons.

Don't wonder why Bohemia Interactive spent more time on the graphic aspect of the game, their main aim is to reach a larger audience and ultimately gain more revenue.

These days you can market shite gameplay computer games as long that they have most advanced graphics available.

[sniper pilot 36]

Quote[/b] ]Don't wonder why Bohemia Interactive spent more time on the graphic aspect of the game, their main aim is ultimately to make profit.

Im not wondering that. What I am wondering is why doesnt BIS think it will make profit? They can still keep the OPTION to have the Arcade side of the game, just like Flight Simulator has Realism settings...

I dont know if i am saying that correctly or if you get what im trying to say, I know I use FS as an example, but they make a profit out of Realism, why cant BIS? Sure MS is a multibillion dollar company, but BIS has to get there some how right?

EDIT: Thats it My F5 button needs a rest, iam putting too many commas lol

[matt714 2]

Quote[/b] ]

Im not wondering that. What I am wondering is why doesnt BIS think it will make profit?

It won't make as much.

For the same reason the three Combat Mission titles combined were less popular than Company of Heroes. Holywood explosions FTW !!one111eleven!111

[Yeb 0]

Rather hard to compare company of heroes and combat mission, one is a rts whereas the other one is a wargame, and wargame is really a specific game type and can be very frustating for most of the gamers. And when you add the graphic comparison...

[whisper 0]

Quote[/b] ]Don't wonder why Bohemia Interactive spent more time on the graphic aspect of the game, their main aim is ultimately to make profit.

Im not wondering that. What I am wondering is why doesnt BIS think it will make profit? They can still keep the OPTION to have the Arcade side of the game, just like Flight Simulator has Realism settings...

I dont know if i am saying that correctly or if you get what im trying to say, I know I use FS as an example, but they make a profit out of Realism, why cant BIS? Sure MS is a multibillion dollar company, but BIS has to get there some how right?

EDIT: Thats it My F5 button needs a rest, iam putting too many commas lol

If you see the combat sims market decline in the past years, you soon realise there is way too few profit to get out of it.

Check the potential number of sales for Black Shark. It's awefully low.

BI target was OFP-style. They did 1 million+ sales with this title. It's not even in the dream of ED.

[shinRaiden 0]

What the entertainment market refers to as a 'simulation' is what the military market would in large part consider to be a visualization component of a simulation 'system'. Here is a good link found through Google for initial reference for 'simulations' : US Navy Web Site

Now it is theoretically possible to plug the config values used in VBS2 into ArmA, and ignore all the other contract-driven development done by the BIA programming team independent of the ArmA programming team. That in of itself does not constitute a manged simulation in the scope of what many of the VBS2 military customers expect.

Rather, the purpose of military simulations is to train and assess skills in a quantifiable manner. Let's take a third-party example here :

Now compared to Lock-on, Falcon4, ArmA, or even OFP, the imagery here is t3h suxor. The separate panels imply unique image generator channels for breaking the single fov block, but that's a hideously technical topic that gets into bio-optics theory.

So what's being trained here? It's not "whee, eyecandy". Rather, there is a set of assessments, essentially a virtual version of a flight data recorder that is used to evaluate the pilots technical skills. Skills are taught, then assessed. The purpose of this training cycle is that by using virtual environment, the costs and risks are lower, and an increased and expanded training program can be effectively achieved.

Now let's get back to the VBS2 context. There's a variety of inquiries that BIA receives about niche applications of VBS2, wondering about it's usefulness in very narrow situations. Again, the 'cool toy' mindset, hardly any different from the 'cool toy' mindset that drives the entertainment market. Of course BIA will support that endeavor as best as possible, but in some ways that is missing the bigger potential.

There's a number of papers published by the VESL group at ADFA indirectly illustrating a new paradigm in potential training methodologies. Instead of static learning, or pseudo-interactive (multiple choice), truly dynamic applications like VBS2 give the potential for wide-scale immersive learning in a multi-user integrated environment. Obviously this is in all actuality an epic mind bender, because humans have traditionally used static memorization and recitation learning methodologies for millenia.

[Rocco 0]

i cannot understand why the sounds and the tracers of vbs2 arent in arma.

There are plenty of sound mods available for ArmA, and realistic tracers will be modded into ArmA inevitably (some good ones were made for OFP).

Quote[/b] ]lol but VBS2 has everything ArmA has.

Yes, but it also costs 50 times the price, and the extra features probably wouldnt be used by most people.

pls show me such realisitc tracers for arma...

[max power 21]

=- @ Aug. 06 2007,23:30)]

i cannot understand why the sounds and the tracers of vbs2 arent in arma.

There are plenty of sound mods available for ArmA, and realistic tracers will be modded into ArmA inevitably (some good ones were made for OFP).

pls show me such realisitc tracers for arma...

in·ev·i·ta·ble /ɪnˈɛvɪtəbəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-ev-i-tuh-buhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–adjective

1. unable to be avoided, evaded, or escaped; certain; necessary: an inevitable conclusion.

2. sure to occur, happen, or come; unalterable: The inevitable end of human life is death.

–noun

3. that which is unavoidable.

[liljb15 0]

Lol no offense rocco but you should've read that post carefully rather than just skimming it.

in other words you got pwned

[Col. Faulkner 0]

...the absence of [normal maps] in the content makes for faster, cheaper, smoother, and more quantity of content.

A very good point which many modders might be wise to bear in mind.

[MehMan 0]

I don't find normal maps that essential, nice touch, but I can play without them.

I also have to, otherwise it kills my machine as soon as I look through some bushes .

[opteryx 1562]

So that's how VBS can handle the ridiculous amount of statics in urban areas, by the absence of normal maps?

[stun 5]

Is there any way to disable normal maps in Arma? Or would all the models have to be redone without them? I would be happy to lose them if it meant a boost in performance.

[shinRaiden 0]

So that's how VBS can handle the ridiculous amount of statics in urban areas, by the absence of normal maps?

Not entirely, part of is is the lower unique object count, higher repetition rate, also simpler model structure. The target tunings on the broad spectrum of content dev are significantly different. For example, all the content that went into the VBS2 maps was tuned for high-FPS long range view distancing. ArmA content on the other hand looks much prettier up close. It's not really practical to have the content be able to meet both situations. You kinda get one or the other.

[opteryx 1562]

I see, so VBS relies a lot on instancing and low poly counts per object, hmm doesn't sound like there's much room for making Samawah sized cities in ArmA with the default objects.

[Bracken 0]

Forgive my ignorance, but I always thought Normal maps where there to improve performance?

Please understand, I am not questioning your comment ShinRaiden, I am merely trying to understand what normal maps are for, if not to 'fake' polygons and lower the overall count, in the name of better performance?

I am very new to all this and am in the process of trying to generate a normal map for the first time, so any insight on this would be very helpful.

Regardless, thank you for taking the time to share all this information, ShinRaiden.

[shinRaiden 0]

I see, so VBS relies a lot on instancing and low poly counts per object, hmm doesn't sound like there's much room for making Samawah sized cities in ArmA with the default objects.

No on the instancing.

Rather, the maps were done by a close collaboration between artists and map makers, doing high level automated engine analysis to determine lag zones, and model optimization. There was a target view distance roughly double that of a typical ArmA environment, and the content was developed to meet that target in a team effort.

[max power 21]

Forgive my ignorance, but I always thought Normal maps where there to improve performance?

Please understand, I am not questioning your comment ShinRaiden, I am merely trying to understand what normal maps are for, if not to 'fake' polygons and lower the overall count, in the name of better performance?

I am very new to all this and am in the process of trying to generate a normal map for the first time, so any insight on this would be very helpful.

Regardless, thank you for taking the time to share all this information, ShinRaiden.

They are faster to calculate than geometry of the same detail, but slower than not having them at all. So in a sense, they are a performance friendly feature for high levels of detail. On the other hand, they have a performance overhead, and simply having them is a drain on system resources.

[Sevan 0]

About this arcade vs realism sub-debate on this thread: What makes OPF and ArmA stand out is the fact that it isn't another arcade shooter. Am I wrong or is this why we have been playing OPF and now play ArmA? If you wanted BF2, you would play BF2.

Military simulation games, not including Air simulators, are almost non-existent. That is why in this case I think it would benefit BIS even more to specailize in simulation and not go in the arcase BF2 direction. A BIS clone of BF will never be as good as BF.

[BLSmith2112 0]

Question: If someone owned VBS2 and ArmA, can they create/edit their mission in real-time and import it into ArmA?

[USSRsniper 0]

VBS2 is not simulator, real simulatos that military uses soldiers axctually hold weapons not keyboard and mouse....

ArmA can be modded to level of VBS2, but its not going to make game a "simulator". VBS2 is a joke, compared to real military level simulators.... But there is one thing about VBS2, it costs less, ofcourse its cheapers because you dont connect real equipment to computer...

[twisted 128]

About this arcade vs realism sub-debate on this thread: What makes OPF and ArmA stand out is the fact that it isn't another arcade shooter. Am I wrong or is this why we have been playing OPF and now play ArmA? If you wanted BF2, you would play BF2.

Military simulation games, not including Air simulators, are almost non-existent. That is why in this case I think it would benefit BIS even more to specailize in simulation and not go in the arcase BF2 direction. A BIS clone of BF will never be as good as BF.

that is exactly what makes Arma so great. and the closer to combat simulator the better it can own that territory and attract people (here are a lot of them) who want a very good combat simulator.

i was looking at VBS1 which got me to buy OFP which lead me to buy Arma. If VBS2 was more affordable (like $200 for a full private license that doesn't expire) I'd buy it in a flash. But i think the addon makers for ArmA can exceed VSB if BIS PROVIDE THE right TOOLS and SUPPORT - which i think BIS are smart enough to do.

it's the striving for more reality that made WGL so damn good.

[shinRaiden 0]

As I've said before, VBS isn't about the config params, it's the bigger picture. VBS2 is a managed and scalable simulation environment. VBS2 is a customer driven platform designed for the specific requirements of military training organizations. VBS2 is a framework for conducting evolution of forces research. Now the config params happen to be pretty good imho, but that's not the real magic of VBS2. VBS2 is about changing the ability to learn and train. To do that requires a lot of 'boring' features, and stuff that just doesn't work in entertainment settings.

Quote[/b] ]real simulatos that military uses soldiers axctually hold weapons not keyboard and mouse....

VBS2 does that too Pics here

Now if you want to have a fun time with good config values, WGL is a better bet for you. If you are looking for a platform for modernizing learning methodologies, well that's what VBS2 is for.

[ht-57 0]

VBS2 is not simulator, real simulatos that military uses soldiers axctually hold weapons not keyboard and mouse....

The first military customer for VBS1 was the United States Marine Corps (USMC), who were provided VBS1, a USMC addon pack and MOUT training facilities modelled to a high level of detail in late 2001. The majority of development work was carried out by BIA, with distribution and limited development conducted by Coalescent Technologies.

So I guess the usmc isn't a Real military force? I guess my friend who is in the usmc special forces, and almost lost his leg when his humvee ran over an IED in iraq was just a funny gag?

I'm gonna reach here and assume that you have purchased  VBS2 for $1500.00usd and even some of the addon disc's for 300.00ea. Because it certinally sounds as if your making an intelligent post based on personal expierience.

[Törni 0]

Quote[/b] ]you mean that vbs2 has walk on moving vehicles and its just not activated

Well I happened to make it so that tank crew actually exits their vehicle walking on top of the tank. It works. Only thing that you do not see it in game beacuse you cannot normallly climb on vehicles (from ground level).