view mirrors on vehikles thermal, fog

[jgbtl292 0]

the tanks in armed assault - looks modern

the funtions is world war 2

grount funktion on all taktik vehikles . tanks , abc, ....

is lay a fogwall for defence.

viewmirrors for better sight, ( the driver in arma has 20 crad sight a hole for look. ) this is shit.      i driving  -i cant see

in the t72- i cant in arma driving over the door. wehre ?

i will mirrors on tanks - for  a better sight in protecting.

this is real.

modern tanks , javelin, combathelicopters ... have thermals sight.

in vbs2 the have - great !  in arma nothing wehre ?

this a modern funktion off all tanks !

and this is not a world war 2 game - or ??!!

make it better - please.

[opteryx 1562]

A cat is fine too.

[ricoadf 0]

Precisley what ive been trying to say in my what arma II needs topic, things like thermal imaging and smoke countermeasures so that tanks can hide etc, this is meant to be the modern army, so modernise it!

[Apo-TTCC 0]

@JgBtl292

You have to keep in mind that ArmAII is not a simple copy of VBS2. If all features from VBS2 (Military Training Sim) would be included in ArmAII (Tactical Computer Game) it would be much more expensive...

[NeMeSiS 11]

Seriously, these polls are more useless then shit, of course everyone wants as much features as possible but we just cant have everything, its impossible.

[xnodunitx 0]

Not as much as you might think, DX8 or 9 came with a thermal based feature that can be implimented into games, most avoid it because it's just another thing to add and its not their thing.

It would be nice to have this and a "Secondary camera" so to speak, it would give the function of certain display devices a bigger role take for example a community Stryker gunner and driver would be able to see things correctly with their screen while remaining in the interior view.

This would also highly benefit both aviation factors, however considering that in general aviation is just a "atmosphere prop" I don't think we'll see this happening.

So I guess we'll just have to cross our fingers and wait to see what they dish out.

[ricnunes 0]

@JgBtl292

You have to keep in mind that ArmAII is not a simple copy of VBS2. If all features from VBS2 (Military Training Sim) would be included in ArmAII (Tactical Computer Game) it would be much more expensive...  

There are many PC simulations out there that models realistic avionics (like for example Jane's Apache Longow 2, Enemy Engaged, etc...) which when they came out their price was in the same range as the price of ArmA and which weren't simulations specifically made for military forces (and of course didn't cost the same as one)!

[jgbtl292 0]

Quote[/b] ]You have to keep in mind that ArmAII is not a simple copy of VBS2. If all features from VBS2 (Military Training Sim) would be included in ArmAII (Tactical Computer Game) it would be much more expensive...  

arma - its a sim !   or will a simm ....

and simply grount simply componetns of a modern tank integratet, is not a problem !

ok arma is not a

   klick me

ilove the sound in the tanks , the interior view. this make a big atmosphere.

arma has tanks , and this tanks are not good.

more funktionality or more eye candy ?

more taktikal deep - ore more shooter ?

new game, new funktions ! and the gamers will a modern tank - not a modern looks ww 2  tank .

the game lives from long  multiplayer  !

give us the funtionality for a long multiplayer live.

and the full funktionality weapon systems

and kompletly armys.

marines avv and patton .

army bradley and m1.

arma m1 and avv ... ?? where the mix ?

and i will not 1000 comunity addons.

servers with addons - i see nothing.

balced complitly community armys - nothing ........

this must be in the basic  programm.

puh my english ....

- im not a child i 30 years old.

a littlebit realer tanks and features and arma 2 is perfeckt

for oldis

[ricoadf 0]

@JgBtl292

You have to keep in mind that ArmAII is not a simple copy of VBS2. If all features from VBS2 (Military Training Sim) would be included in ArmAII (Tactical Computer Game) it would be much more expensive...  

That is the dumbest excuse I have ever heard. They CAN do it and easily, they simply wont, and thats why I wont be getting ArmA II unless they start pulling their finger out and selling us what they claim. I'm not asking for the 'training' moduales that allow us to view players as they play or or USB key etc, just the useful features that we have modded into OFP and now ArmA. BIS either start listerning to the community or else the community will vote.... with our wallets.

As for the cost, thats simply licensing and what they put on the cover.

And I know they can do it because I have VBS1 (not every modual) and even that had more of the useful stuff them arma and it's using the older OFP version of the engine.

Ah well, hope this rant is useful  

[Apo-TTCC 0]

@JgBtl292

You have to keep in mind that ArmAII is not a simple copy of VBS2. If all features from VBS2 (Military Training Sim) would be included in ArmAII (Tactical Computer Game) it would be much more expensive...

That is the dumbest excuse I have ever heard. They CAN do it and easily, they simply wont, and thats why I wont be getting ArmA II unless they start pulling their finger out and selling us what they claim. I'm not asking for the 'training' moduales that allow us to view players as they play or or USB key etc, just the useful features that we have modded into OFP and now ArmA. BIS either start listerning to the community or else the community will vote.... with our wallets.

As for the cost, thats simply licensing and what they put on the cover.

And I know they can do it because I have VBS1 (not every modual) and even that had more of the useful stuff them arma and it's using the older OFP version of the engine.

Ah well, hope this rant is useful

Then just pull out your wallet and get yourself VBS2, all inclusive...

You just can't expect the same features from a software that costs way over $1000 in another one that is just $49.99, that was my point. Of course it would be nice to have as much as possible but we can't expect everything to be in ArmAII that we know from VBS2.

[ricoadf 0]

Err mate, the $1000 cost is mostly for the USB key system (which requires it to be 'custom coded' per usb key) as well as extras that we wouldnt want, and dont forget that since its already coded in VBS and ArmA II is using VBS engine then its already in there, if they dont include it then they will have taken it out, thus we will have been ripped off. This is meant to be a simulator. As for voting with my wallet, I bought VBS1 and a few moduals, i aint buying VBS2 to get what I want in ArmA II, if ArmA II dont have it then I'll just go OFP2 because I'm sick of headbutting a wall and waiting for addon makers to do the job that the developer has been to lazy to do  

On a brighter note, there is alot of time left, so BIS has a good chance to redeem themselves and keep the community with them, its a fight they can win, if they want  

Remember BIS "great graphics alone do not a great game make" - quoted from a gaming mag

[NGFT 0]

Many things you claim are not true.

You want to be in a mod team and call the developers lazy for providing us things in THAT great quality?

You can't expect to have the same features in a Skoda as in a Ferrari.

You would screw the people with that and do you know why VBS2 is that expensive?

Of course you do, all the modeles, fast roping, everything is tested, bugfree (SP and MP) and made ALOT work.

Thats the price and I'am happy that they sell it for whats worth.

To call developers lazy, tz, even many addons of your mod are basing on the sample models and the rest does not reach BIS Standart Quality.

[Raphier 0]

@JgBtl292

You have to keep in mind that ArmAII is not a simple copy of VBS2. If all features from VBS2 (Military Training Sim) would be included in ArmAII (Tactical Computer Game) it would be much more expensive...  

and OFP2 will implent them all for a same price!

[NGFT 0]

Are you sure....

[xnodunitx 0]

Pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

[ricoadf 0]

And thats the problem with text, hard to determine the context at times lol.

For one a mod and a game are 2 different things, the game developers are paid, I mod for enjoyment and if you dont like the mod then its tough coz you ain't paying for it .

My point is that because the abilities have already been coded the testing would be alot less because by removing the coding they need to make sure that it hasn't caused bugs, so it actually takes more time and effort. However this is assuming that they are working off the VBS2 engine, which would make logical sence .

True a skodka wont have a farrari's features, but a program that calls itself a "realistic simulator" must do the best it can to acheive those goals, I have train/ship/plane simulators and they all go as far as possible to be accurate within the cost of a normal game, now I'm not asking for that sort of extreme, but the least we can get are the features that have been around since before ArmA 1, Battlefield series has alot of features that ArmA is missing, so you can't say that I'm asking for a '$1000 feature' when it was sold for $90 AUD years ago. I just wish that the focus would stop being on 'make it pritty' and be more on 'what good features can we offer to make it feel more real', thats all I ask.

Now to get back on topic:

Although I would love to see smoke for tanks as a countermeasure ive been thinking that it could be hard, modders in OFP had issues getting it working (tho they did eventually) so if they can do it then the developers should be able to  

[shinRaiden 0]

Err mate, the $1000 cost is mostly for the USB key system (which requires it to be 'custom coded' per usb key) as well as extras that we wouldnt want, and dont forget that since its already coded in VBS and ArmA II is using VBS engine then its already in there, if they dont include it then they will have taken it out, thus we will have been ripped off. This is meant to be a simulator. As for voting with my wallet, I bought VBS1 and a few moduals, i aint buying VBS2 to get what I want in ArmA II, if ArmA II dont have it then I'll just go OFP2 because I'm sick of headbutting a wall and waiting for addon makers to do the job that the developer has been to lazy to do

On a brighter note, there is alot of time left, so BIS has a good chance to redeem themselves and keep the community with them, its a fight they can win, if they want

Remember BIS "great graphics alone do not a great game make" - quoted from a gaming mag

Er, you're welcome to develop your own project, and ask the USB key vendor for a quote for your own software, and then you'll find out how little the USB key contributes to the actual cost. But simple business logic suggests that an auxiliary component like that should not be more than a trivial percentage of deliverable cost.

By and large, the vast bulk of the content development for both VBS1 and VBS2 is just that, it's all content, meaning maps, scripts, configs, models, and textures. While there is some engine tweaks for convenience, in several cases the BIS developers have developed in parallel their own 'competing' system that has nothing to do with the scripted code used by the BIA version. Case in point is the Battlefield Clearance system. BIA had a version already in development prior to SLX's ArmA community version, and now BIS is creating one for ArmA2, independent of BIA's or SLX's code.

If all you understand is the end-result presentation, then undoubtedly you're going to be much happier with OFP2 than ArmA2. CM is shoveling money by the bucketload to make sure it measures up to the Codpiece4 level of shiny. BIS has never made it a priority to deliver the last 1% of the shiny, instead they have made a platform, where in OFP, the community content typically was exponentially 'better' than what BIS delivered, because BIS's focus was on the platform. If that is still not obvious to you, then you need to rationally reassess your fetish with what isn't what you think it is.

It's been said quite a few times before, but as I'm beating a dead horse here I might as well state it again. VBS2 uses the ArmA1 engine, with various relatively trivial tweaks. ArmA2 uses the newer engine, with its renderer enhancements and other improvements. It's not a linear progression, VBS branches off of the game trunk to specially focus on its unique requirements.

[ricoadf 0]

bah, hard to explain things when this tired. I'm trying to say is that ArmA II needs to bring more features to add to the realism (such as firing out of vehicles, for example) to help open up the battlefield in a more realistic way. If I just wanted shiny I wouldn't still be playing OFP with mods   , OFP modders brought in alot of features that ArmA doesn't have, BIS should be looking into bring some into ArmA II (they did a good start by replicating CTI in ArmA with warfare).

Since ArmA II is reworking the engine again then adding in new features would be possible, if BIS has the will to do so.

Btw NGFT, comparing the fact that I use ArmA models is irrelevant, I'm talking about whats under the hood of the game, the models don't matter as long as the features are there