New VBS2 features

[lone.wolf 80]

Hi guy'z,

If anyone know this,

Is it possible to do fast roping (rapel) and waterinsertions from heli's and other speciel helicopter insertions...And is it possible to do HALO jumps...

Thanx

[General Barron 0]

There are many, many features cited in it that can be done in ArmA1 via scripting and mod development.

By the same token, about 95% of the "new" features that have been implemented by ArmA mods, could have been implemented in OFP.

Some examples: I had reloading while moving working in OFP, as well as battlefield clearance; tank fire control had already been done; dogs had already been made; destructible buildings were possible; tanks with multiple turrets had been created; VTOL simulated; and on and on.

I dare anyone to find one "feature" that has been modded in ArmA that could not have been done in OFP, one way or the other.

The difference is in the quality of the implementation, which is both what you see in-game, and what goes on 'behind the scenes' in the code.

ArmA added more features to the OFP engine, allowing for things to be modded with much more quality and much less "hacking". The same would be true for VBS2. The same will be true for ArmA2.

Quote[/b] ]Still, at the end of the day, even with all of these improvements, I cannot see how anyone who isn't military could justify spending $1500 for VBS2. $1500 for VBS2, or $30 for ArmA + tons of community content.

People don't seem to grasp the economics behind the pricing.

VBS2 and ArmA are sold in different markets. Different markets command different prices.

In the entertainment market, you can sell a million copies of your software, so you can afford to price it at $30.

In the simulations market, you wouldn't even sell a tenth of that, so your price must be set over 10 times as high to still bring in the same profit.

VBS2 also has effectively twice the development team of ArmA (BIS + BIA), and it has to provide much more customer support compared to the entertainment market, so it costs more to produce.

The pricing is set by basic economics, just like the price of everything else in the free world.

[jakerod 254]

Hi guy'z,

If anyone know this,

Is it possible to do fast roping (rapel) and waterinsertions from heli's and other speciel helicopter insertions...And is it possible to do HALO jumps...

Thanx

There are ways to do it in OFP and ArmA. I would imagine there are ways to do it in VBS.

[dslyecxi 23]

Quote[/b] ]Still, at the end of the day, even with all of these improvements, I cannot see how anyone who isn't military could justify spending $1500 for VBS2. $1500 for VBS2, or $30 for ArmA + tons of community content.

People don't seem to grasp the economics behind the pricing.

VBS2 and ArmA are sold in different markets. Different markets command different prices.

In the entertainment market, you can sell a million copies of your software, so you can afford to price it at $30.

In the simulations market, you wouldn't even sell a tenth of that, so your price must be set over 10 times as high to still bring in the same profit.

VBS2 also has effectively twice the development team of ArmA (BIS + BIA), and it has to provide much more customer support compared to the entertainment market, so it costs more to produce.

The pricing is set by basic economics, just like the price of everything else in the free world.

I don't think that's even the issue here. The point is more that some people see VBS2 as a magical cure-all for anything wrong with ArmA, and somehow manage to work themselves up to the point that they can justify spending an absurd amount of money on it.

It's simply not worth it for a civvie, due to ArmA's existence. I never said that the pricing is too high - it makes perfect sense for the market it's aimed at. That market is not the same one as what ArmA is aimed at, obviously, but as I said... I don't think that was ever brought into question in this thread.

[RN Malboeuf 12]

Quote[/b] ]I never said that the pricing is too high - it makes perfect sense for the market it's aimed at. That market is not the same one as what ArmA is aimed at, obviously, but as I said... I don't think that was ever brought into question in this thread.

Why not ? financinal question can be thrilling

1500 is sure very high price, but why there's no demo or smth ? Usual people can only see screenies, read some reports (i saw a thread at armaholic), read advertismen. there's just no way to get healthy opinion out of it... that's where myth about super simulator game appears.

Quote[/b] ]AFAIK none of the VTK features will be included in ArmA2 as like the article says they were sponsored by the USMC and UK MoD for VBS2.

let's imagine i'm an insane millionaire who wants smth to be implemented in Arma/Arma2 (fast ropes or thermal vision). What amount of money i need to 'sponsor' feature devepment in arma ? or i misunderstood all this completely ?

[General Barron 0]

I don't think that's even the issue here. The point is more that some people see VBS2 as a magical cure-all for anything wrong with ArmA...

...I never said that the pricing is too high - it makes perfect sense for the market it's aimed at. That market is not the same one as what ArmA is aimed at, obviously, but as I said... I don't think that was ever brought into question in this thread.

Ok, I do see your point. I suppose I was reacting more to other general 'complaints' I've heard about the price of VBS, I do now see that wasn't what you were doing.

Anyway, I'm really not trying to take this thread off track.

This thread should really remain about the new VBS2 features, and their relation to ArmA, not about product pricing or anything else.

[mattxr 9]

1500 is sure very high price, but why there's no demo or smth ? Usual people can only see screenies, read some reports (i saw a thread at armaholic), read advertismen. there's just no way to get healthy opinion out of it... that's where myth about super simulator game appears.

Quote[/b] ]AFAIK none of the VTK features will be included in ArmA2 as like the article says they were sponsored by the USMC and UK MoD for VBS2.

let's imagine i'm an insane millionaire who wants smth to be implemented in Arma/Arma2 (fast ropes or thermal vision). What amount of money i need to 'sponsor' feature devepment in arma ? or i misunderstood all this completely ?

Well for one there's no demo because a demo is not needed, its not aimed at entrainment industry.

two some features of the VTK are going to be in Arma too so that makes that article void because we have seen videos of the AI doing hand-signals in Arma II video.

And an insane millionaire cant beg or demand anything like everyone else here he will have to learn how to mod his favorite add-on into the game unless he pays a massive cash sum to some add-on maker who accepts.

And if you try to pay someone to make add-ons this is what happens

The Result = Banned. :s - Look what happened to this guy.

[JdB 151]

Well for one there's no demo because a demo is not needed, its not aimed at entrainment industry.

Exactly. We're talking about business to business here, not business to consumer. The main groups at which the product is aimed at, governmental, law enforcement and military organizations, represent such an large potential buyer, that I can imagine that BIA, or the representative in the area will send someone to demonstrate the product, help in evaluating it, and try to convince them of the need to buy the product.

It works nothing like what the average consumer deals with on a daily basis.

[MehMan 0]

I believe that the demos they conduct are on a rather larger basis and are called trials, no? The army doesn't DL demos to see how it works and if it's worth buying, but they conduct smaller trials and then if they see improvments in the soldier quality they go full scale.

[W0lle 1050]

There is a trial version available. Like all other versions the content is encrypted thus you need an USB-Dongle to use it. No idea how much BIA charge you for a trial version, if anyone is interested you better visit the BIA website and contact their sales department.

[dslyecxi 23]

I believe that the demos they conduct are on a rather larger basis and are called trials, no? The army doesn't DL demos to see how it works and if it's worth buying, but they conduct smaller trials and then if they see improvments in the soldier quality they go full scale.

That's the basic idea, yeah. There are 'trial' versions of VBS2 that use HASP keys that only have a limited amount of 'life' to them. You demo the software to someone with your company's personnel, help them learn it and show them the potential, then leave them with a system + copy of VBS2 + trial HASP key and let them play around with it for a bit. They show it to other people, the other people evaluate it, you come back for more questions and demonstrations, and finally they buy it and get a full HASP key and the full set of software, hardware, etc.

[Heatseeker 0]

In the end both the military and Arma gamers want the same. Content creation tools, more overall realism/acuracy and even visual recording and spectating options (AAR).

The major diference is we (gamers) demand better graphics and playable content (in the shape of missions) .

[MehMan 0]

The god mode that the instructor has over his trainees is one thing that would be really cool in ArmA/II. This could probably be scripted in right now, but it could create for some amazing action because it'd be unpredictable.

I wonder how that feature works out in VBS2.

[RN Malboeuf 12]

Quote[/b] ]That's the basic idea, yeah. There are 'trial' versions of VBS2 that use HASP keys that only have a limited amount of 'life' to them

i wonder for how much ? 1000$ instead of 1500$ ?

Quote[/b] ]The major diference is we (gamers) demand better graphics and playable content (in the shape of missions)

and we get it (( better graphics, easy gameplay (look at the dispersion) etc- arma is already quite far from simulation ( arma2 can be even further away.

[MehMan 0]

I have my doubts that you can get your hands on the trial version, because I bet it's a package deal that only an army that's evaluting VBS2 can afford. As Dslyecxi said you get a free VBS2 slave/instructor for a week and then you get to wake him up in the middle of the night asking how to delete multiple things in the editor without floating over each one pressing delete.

[khagler 0]

I'm one of those civilians who bought VBS2. My main hobby is photography, so I think my perspective on spending $1500 is probably a bit different than someone whose main hobby is $30 computer games. ;-)

So far I've just been playing scenarios other people created, and slowly learning the mission editor. Some things that I like about VBS2 over ArmA so far:

1. The AAR tool. Worth the entire cost all by itself.

2. Grenade launchers are much better done in VBS2. Instead of having a useless but pretty iron sight, you "lock on" a target by right clicking, then elevate the weapon until a diamond appears around the target signifying the correct elevation. I can actually hit things with an M203 in VBS! Also, you get a realistic grenade load.

3. Suppression for players. A near miss makes the screen flare white and your aim point jumps.

[RN Malboeuf 12]

Quote[/b] ]1. The AAR tool. Worth the entire cost all by itself.

what's this ?

Quote[/b] ]I'm one of those civilians who bought VBS2. My main hobby is photography, so I think my perspective on spending $1500 is probably a bit different

i wonder how many such customers are there...

[Maddmatt 1]

2. Grenade launchers are much better done in VBS2. Instead of having a useless but pretty iron sight, you "lock on" a target by right clicking, then elevate the weapon until a diamond appears around the target signifying the correct elevation. I can actually hit things with an M203 in VBS! Also, you get a realistic grenade load.

Haha

Adding that feature in ArmA would just take a couple changes in the config. I could make a mod to do that in a few minutes. There is a simple config setting for that. I've seen it done in OFP. And it isn't exactly realistic.

Realistic grenade load is done in an addon as well as certain mods.

Quote[/b] ]3. Suppression for players. A near miss makes the screen flare white and your aim point jumps.

The XAM mod for ArmA does that. Not sure about the aim jumping part, but it wouldn't be too hard to add it if it's not already there.

Other upcoming mods will have similar features.

@Astabalt: It's kinda like the 'replay' you can watch in racing games

Although it includes detailed statistics and stuff. Useful for the military. But no more than a toy to the average person.

ArmA by itself lacks realism in places. But mods change that. NWD's ballistics addon gives realistic ballistics. ACE mod adds features, some of which are in VBS2 and some of which are not. Dslyecxi has already said more on that subject.

1500$ to use VBS2 as a game is just not worth it.

[khagler 0]

i wonder how many such customers are there...

When I ordered it through their web store for civilians, the invoice number was 36. So, probably not too many. :-)

[W0lle 1050]

I suggest we get back on topic, which was about the new features of VBS2 - and not about the pricetag which has been discussed to death already or if its reasonable for a private customer to have it.

[-RE-Monk 0]

I own both products(VBS2 and ArmA) and I use VBS2 on a "professional" Basis aswell as using it for fun at weekends etc,I have ArmA installed and I agree with everyone that for a normal "joe Blogs",they will probably find alot more intrest in ArmA,VBS2 is aimed at a different market completly,if civis who have the cash want to buy it then so be it,they will enjoy it,

As for the VTK,its looking farkin good,gives it another edge to an already well build sim...

[shinRaiden 0]

I have my doubts that you can get your hands on the trial version, because I bet it's a package deal that only an army that's evaluting VBS2 can afford. As Dslyecxi said you get a free VBS2 slave/instructor for a week and then you get to wake him up in the middle of the night asking how to delete multiple things in the editor without floating over each one pressing delete.

uh... First off, while trial keys do exist, they're not just handed out on a whim. I'm not aware of any cases where a trial key has gone out that there wasn't the serious expectation of a minimum of 5 to 15 sales, not counting LaserShot, Calytrix, or content development license additions. You can run the numbers on international shipping for your local postal or courier service, but in all cases you're looking at express shipping costs for the key and software to be comparable to what ArmA would cost retail. That doesn't actually cover the cost of procuring the key itself

Second, the guy who's phone rings in the middle of the night isn't free either. Phone and shipping bills have to be paid, airlines - hotels - rental cars all need to be paid, and those costs add up. Again, you're free to price those out yourself with any random company off of Google. Airlines don't take Skittles as payment-in-kind.

Quote[/b] ]3. Suppression for players. A near miss makes the screen flare white and your aim point jumps.

The XAM mod for ArmA does that. Not sure about the aim jumping part, but it wouldn't be too hard to add it if it's not already there. Other upcoming mods will have similar features.

Hence both Dslyexci and General_Barron's point about the vast bulk of the goodies can be largely done in content. Just because in theory they can be, doesn't mean that in practicality they can be realized. Citing Ondrej,

Quote[/b] ]

Even worse, when current terrain representation was created, most of the design and editing work on Sahrani was already supposed to be completed. The whole island was designed as fictional, and therefore there never existed any real-world data for it. It was not possible to build a whole new world at that stage. As a result, Sahrani does not use the technology as well as it could.

...

While it can be a quite interesting psychological exercise, to observe the reactions of artists when you explain to them a few weeks before the game goes gold "Look, all those gears and gadgets could be moving. Now sit and rework all vehicle models so that this works", one should really reserve such a exercise only for very special occasions.

...

As a result, it usually takes at least one cycle (generation) since the technology became available, before it is used well.

...

I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to complete a timeline with 1-4 stages as above for those technologies.

The last point I want to try and impress here, and I know it's going to go way over the heads of most, but it needs to be emphasized, is the convolutions of the buzzword 'Serious Games'. The traditional approach in training is to use what's called 'Modeling and Simulation', where you are trying to get a visual representation of your proven statistical data. For example, a certification / qualification flight simulator has all the real world equations built in, and is designed using a validated model. The pretty picture is an attempt to visualize the numbers going on behind the scenes. You know what the numbers are, you want to see what they look like.

Serious Games goes the other direction, you have a nice pretty picture but have no idea what it's representing. You need to work backwords, and try to extract sample statistical data from the representation, then see if it conforms to validated models. Just because the data conforms however, doesn't mean that the model conforms, so there's the risk of anomalies popping up and spoiling the data.

Let's take optics for a random example. With classical M&S, you have all the numbers for what the optical effects are, the challenge is figuring out how to make a picture of the numbers. With Serious Games, you have a nice pretty picture, but no idea and no numbers to prove that it conforms to reality.

However, there is argued to be a middle ground where perfect fidelity is non-critical, that representative data is sufficient. That's where VBS comes in. 'Corridor shooter' type engine design inherently doesn't allow for the reconfigurability and fidelity required in a dynamic FPS setting, and they seldom scale well to vehicle capacity. Flight Sims on the other end lack the fidelity and functionality to make FPS level activities visually appealing, and event data is often insufficient.

[MehMan 0]

uh... First off, while trial keys do exist, they're not just handed out on a whim. I'm not aware of any cases where a trial key has gone out that there wasn't the serious expectation of a minimum of 5 to 15 sales, not counting LaserShot, Calytrix, or content development license additions. You can run the numbers on international shipping for your local postal or courier service, but in all cases you're looking at express shipping costs for the key and software to be comparable to what ArmA would cost retail. That doesn't actually cover the cost of procuring the key itself

Second, the guy who's phone rings in the middle of the night isn't free either. Phone and shipping bills have to be paid, airlines - hotels - rental cars all need to be paid, and those costs add up. Again, you're free to price those out yourself with any random company off of Google. Airlines don't take Skittles as payment-in-kind.

That's what I'm saying in slightly different words...

[General Barron 0]

In the end both the military and Arma gamers want the same. Content creation tools, more overall realism/acuracy and even visual recording and spectating options (AAR).

The major diference is we (gamers) demand better graphics and playable content (in the shape of missions) .

That isn't quite true.

For the most part, gamers mainly care about "realistic" features relating to blowing stuff up and killing people. Other forms of realism or features aren't really as important.

For the military, blowing stuff up and killing people is just secondary. There is a lot more to mission accomplishment then just that.

Small example: turn signals/indicators are CRUCIAL to military users. Gamers would only regard such a feature as 'oh, thats nice'.

Non-lethal / escalation of force scenarios are also crucial to the military. Most FPS gamers would find it boring to play a mission for an hour and not fire a single shot.

After action review is perhaps THE most important component for the military, and the AAR phase is more important than the actual in-game mission itself. Not so for gamers, hence the lack of AAR in video games, and the limited interest in modding a high-quality AAR.

Inter-sim compatability is also very important for the military; while I've never heard a gamer request that ArmA be able to play MP with Steel Beasts or Close Combat.

Gamers want a 'game', aka an entertaining competition (either pvp or pvAI). The military wants 'training', which is about the process, not the competition.

[Heatseeker 0]

In the end both the military and Arma gamers want the same. Content creation tools, more overall realism/acuracy and even visual recording and spectating options (AAR).

The major diference is we (gamers) demand better graphics and playable content (in the shape of missions) .

That isn't quite true.

For the most part, gamers mainly care about "realistic" features relating to blowing stuff up and killing people. Other forms of realism or features aren't really as important.

For the military, blowing stuff up and killing people is just secondary. There is a lot more to mission accomplishment then just that.

Small example: turn signals/indicators are CRUCIAL to military users. Gamers would only regard such a feature as 'oh, thats nice'.

Non-lethal / escalation of force scenarios are also crucial to the military. Most FPS gamers would find it boring to play a mission for an hour and not fire a single shot.

After action review is perhaps THE most important component for the military, and the AAR phase is more important than the actual in-game mission itself. Not so for gamers, hence the lack of AAR in video games, and the limited interest in modding a high-quality AAR.

Inter-sim compatability is also very important for the military; while I've never heard a gamer request that ArmA be able to play MP with Steel Beasts or Close Combat.

Gamers want a 'game', aka an entertaining competition (either pvp or pvAI). The military wants 'training', which is about the process, not the competition.

I disagree .

Gamers want overall realism, they want a.i. with realistic behaviours, equipment with realistic configuration/characteristics, realistic worlds and even realistic gameplay. If Arma was a "high fidelity" combined arms simulator it would be a even better game.

I think gamers actually demand a higher level of simulation than the mil since military training is more about procedures than handling virtual equipment (they have the real toys to play with) and im positive that not every soldier is a great game/sim enthusiast..

I think the major diference here is in the use of the software, thats all.