Picture in picture rendering for helicopters, planes and tanks - BIS please add!

[Thirdup 0]

edit: nevermind

Edited August 4, 2009 by Thirdup

[Fiya 10]

This is not what the discussion is about Fiya, as already stated earlier, can't you read? We know you voted No. Adding it over and over won't add anything. Your point was made clear the first time, but the poll's question is within a certain scope, as explained earlier.

Why are you so closed minded? Perhaps your the one who should learn to read, and realize whats going on.

First, you actually ASKED WHY WE SAID NO. I do, in a pretty detailed way, exactly WHY I voted this way. Adding to what I told you, explaining it better. (Apparently anyone against the idea is not supposed to post much here.) Some VERY good points in Thirdup's post, yet you don't understand that.

Second of all, I was agreeing with someone else and their very good post.

Finally you cannot say that 'Its not about that'. IT IS. The way you are trying to do this is BIASED. It can be a dirty politicians way of doing things.

The timing is a huge part of ANYTHING like this. I don't know how you can shrug it off. You remind me of a few people I used to know who did this type of thing, then after it was 'very successful' basically demanded it of the developers, because it had 'tons of support'. Disregarding many things that they 'shrugged off' so to speak.

I realize your not saying you want it right now, (Yet) but there is always the issue of other things coming before unnecessary things. OR, this replacing things which could have been in place of it. (That would have been a way better OFFICIAL addition to the game. *Reference to my quote of Thirdup's post, one of the most important points to me.*)

[p75 10]

Why are you so closed minded? Perhaps your the one who should learn to read, and realize whats going on.

First, you actually ASKED WHY WE SAID NO. I do, in a pretty detailed way, exactly WHY I voted this way. Adding to what I told you, explaining it better. (Apparently anyone against the idea is not supposed to post much here.) Some VERY good points in Thirdup's post, yet you don't understand that.

Second of all, I was agreeing with someone else and their very good post.

Finally you cannot say that 'Its not about that'. IT IS. The way you are trying to do this is BIASED. It can be a dirty politicians way of doing things.

The timing is a huge part of ANYTHING like this. I don't know how you can shrug it off. You remind me of a few people I used to know who did this type of thing, then after it was 'very successful' basically demanded it of the developers, because it had 'tons of support'. Disregarding many things that they 'shrugged off' so to speak.

I realize your not saying you want it right now, (Yet) but there is always the issue of other things coming before unnecessary things. OR, this replacing things which could have been in place of it. (That would have been a way better OFFICIAL addition to the game. *Reference to my quote of Thirdup's post, one of the most important points to me.*)

You are simply hopeless, and not willing to read and listen, I won't even go into all of the above, your remarks are out of place, as stated earlier it is a question with a certain scope and you simply don't seem to get that.

[Fiya 10]

You are simply hopeless, and not willing to read and listen, I won't even go into all of the above, your remarks are out of place, as stated earlier it is a question with a certain scope and you simply don't seem to get that.

I always found that defense amusing, as what they accuse me of, is exactly what they are doing.

You have absolutely no argument left, so you pull that out. (I have seen it before. You sound like 'Panguins' from another forum.) In actuality, I read, and listen very well. Aswell, I try to always keep an open mind to everything. (You do not it seems.) I do confront people taking unfair advantage of situations, or ignorantly passing 'facts', among other things.

Please read what I have written again. (Specifically Thirdup's quote.) Your 'scope' completely ignores VERY important facts.

[p75 10]

I always found that defense amusing, as what they accuse me of, is exactly what they are doing.

You have absolutely no argument left, so you pull that out. (I have seen it before. You sound like 'Panguins' from another forum.) In actuality, I read, and listen very well. Aswell, I try to always keep an open mind to everything. (You do not it seems.) I do confront people taking unfair advantage of situations, or ignorantly passing 'facts', among other things.

Please read what I have written again. (Specifically Thirdup's quote.) Your 'scope' completely ignores VERY important facts.

No, please...Shift to another paradigm, I simply choose to not discuss the matter anymore with you, because you can't accept the reality of this thread. And that is that it has a certain scope. You want to broaden the scope, which is simply not the purpose of this poll. Besides that, your teenage like arguments, which have an accussing and immature tone are simply offputting.

So, sorry, but I decide I won't waste any time on you as you have a hard time accepting things as they are.

[andersson 285]

you can't accept the reality of this thread.

What is the reality of this thread? Can we handle the truth, can you? ;)

[p75 10]

What is the reality of this thread? Can we handle the truth, can you? ;)

Reality is that there is a certain scope to this thread. And for the very last time it is a simple yes or no question.

I would have broaden the discussion if I would have opted for that in the poll, wouldn't I? But I choose not to do that.

Just keep it on a mature level.

[Fiya 10]

No, please...Shift to another paradigm, I simply choose to not discuss the matter anymore with you, because you can't accept the reality of this thread. And that is that it has a certain scope. You want to broaden the scope, which is simply not the purpose of this poll. Besides that, your teenage like arguments, which have an accussing and immature tone are simply offputting.

So, sorry, but I decide I won't waste any time on you as you have a hard time accepting things as they are.

Hey my friend, you accuse me of many things, such as not being able to read or understand things... Yet I am not the one who put this SUGGESTION, in the general thread.

I have said the exact words which should notify you that I understand. Then I added some very simplified explanations, you still don't even accept their existence.

You, really are ignorant.

[andersson 285]

Reality is that there is a certain scope to this thread. And for the very last time it is a simple yes or no question.

I would have broaden the discussion if I would have opted for that in the poll, wouldn't I? But I choose not to do that.

Just keep it on a mature level.

Ok, a clear answer. Thank you.

What I dont get is if its a simple yes or no, who would NOT like to have FLIR?

No sane person would not like to have that feature ingame.

I guess thats why people voting no wants to explain as just a "no" makes no sense. Another reason for people explaining might be that I asked them to explain, and you agreed that it would be interesting.

[p75 10]

Ok, a clear answer. Thank you.

What I dont get is if its a simple yes or no, who would NOT like to have FLIR?

No sane person would not like to have that feature ingame.

I guess thats why people voting no wants to explain as just a "no" makes no sense. Another reason for people explaining might be that I asked them to explain, and you agreed that it would be interesting.

Yes, I did, but I'm not asking for individuals to explain why they asnwered No over and over. It doesn't add anything nor does it change the poll.

I'm not asking the people who answered Yes as to what their motivation is, because the lists of posts in this thread would be much longer and the No posts would be lost.

Edited August 4, 2009 by p75

[andersson 285]

Yes, I did, but I'm not asking for individuals to explain why they asnwered No over and over. It doesn't add anything nor does it change the poll.

Fair enough.

I'm not asking the people who answered Yes as to what their motivation is, because the lists of posts in this thread would be much longer and the No posts would be lost.

And we really dont need an explanation about "yes".

Imho this poll is alittle strange. "Yes" is abvious, "no" needs an explanation. Thats why I never used the poll. It seems that the question should be about the level of importance for BIS to implement it. "How much should they prioritize this feature?" would make more sense I think.

Regardless, you gave me a clear answer and I thank you for that.

This is a feature wanted since many years and the engine in itself doesnt support it. The system for huds, overlays and animations cant do much (we had moving maps on some huds in OFP, but that was an animation and no real picture rendered).

So unless BIS do something about it I dont think we will see it. If they do implement it, it will probably mean less focus on other important things like bug-fixing and optimising for performance. A big change in the engine like this will probably mean that new problems and bugs arise. If it was easy for BIS and without much risk I guess BIS would already implemented it??

I guess the only hope we have is for someone to use some Kegetys on this issue ;)

So my personal answer is; Yes, I would like that feature. No, its not worth it for BIS to implement it IF it means that they have to take manpower from fixing the existing issues (bugs, performance) or if it means big rewrites of the engine is necessary (much time=money spent for BIS for only one feature when they could use that on other issues).

[Fiya 10]

Fair enough.

And we really dont need an explanation about "yes".

Imho this poll is alittle strange. "Yes" is abvious, "no" needs an explanation. Thats why I never used the poll. It seems that the question should be about the level of importance for BIS to implement it. "How much should they prioritize this feature?" would make more sense I think.

Regardless, you gave me a clear answer and I thank you for that.

This is a feature wanted since many years and the engine in itself doesnt support it. The system for huds, overlays and animations cant do much (we had moving maps on some huds in OFP, but that was an animation and no real picture rendered).

So unless BIS do something about it I dont think we will see it. If they do implement it, it will probably mean less focus on other important things like bug-fixing and optimising for performance. A big change in the engine like this will probably mean that new problems and bugs arise. If it was easy for BIS and without much risk I guess BIS would already implemented it??

I guess the only hope we have is for someone to use some Kegetys on this issue ;)

So my personal answer is; Yes, I would like that feature. No, its not worth it for BIS to implement it IF it means that they have to take manpower from fixing the existing issues (bugs, performance) or if it means big rewrites of the engine is necessary (much time=money spent for BIS for only one feature when they could use that on other issues).

Perfect post! Maybe you can convince p75, since my arguments are taboo.

With a little fore-thought, one could come to the conclusion that if people thought this was important and needed they would vote it a higher priority. (On your poll based on importance/priority.) This would replace the bland 'Yes' answer with something of more value that gives alot more information aswell.

Since this thread doesn't have those type of options, p75 does not know what 'the voters' think about its importance or 'should be priority. The most he can assume (Without having any doubts) is that they would want it if time was absolutely not relevant. (Since that is the 'Scope' he wants to put it in.) If BIS had nothing to work on at all except this. If he assumes any more, he could be stepping on toes.

This poll currently proves nothing of substance other than what was stated above (The bold) which isn't likely to happen. Therefore this poll is more likely to be taken advantage of and used the wrong way, since it has no real use otherwise.

Finally, I am NOT just stating 'no' over and over again. I am agreeing with someone and trying to enhance my explanation aswell as trying to discuss it.

Thank you Andersson, your post was a breath of fresh air.

[p75 10]

Fair enough.

And we really dont need an explanation about "yes".

Imho this poll is alittle strange. "Yes" is abvious, "no" needs an explanation. Thats why I never used the poll. It seems that the question should be about the level of importance for BIS to implement it. "How much should they prioritize this feature?" would make more sense I think.

Regardless, you gave me a clear answer and I thank you for that.

This is a feature wanted since many years and the engine in itself doesnt support it. The system for huds, overlays and animations cant do much (we had moving maps on some huds in OFP, but that was an animation and no real picture rendered).

So unless BIS do something about it I dont think we will see it. If they do implement it, it will probably mean less focus on other important things like bug-fixing and optimising for performance. A big change in the engine like this will probably mean that new problems and bugs arise. If it was easy for BIS and without much risk I guess BIS would already implemented it??

I guess the only hope we have is for someone to use some Kegetys on this issue ;)

So my personal answer is; Yes, I would like that feature. No, its not worth it for BIS to implement it IF it means that they have to take manpower from fixing the existing issues (bugs, performance) or if it means big rewrites of the engine is necessary (much time=money spent for BIS for only one feature when they could use that on other issues).

Well, the point is, if many people want it, we'll make it happen with the help of BIS. I posted this poll to see if there is a serious interest for it or not. Sofar, it seems so.

I'm not sure if BIS needs to spend time on it themselves or not. The modders could do it, but what I'd like to do, is, to discuss this issue with BIS.

If there is enough appeal, I hope they will help us with providing information as to what and how to change the code to allow render to texture features. After all we don't have any sourcecode. I don't think a whole engine overwrite is needed. The engine seem flexible enough. I think it was more a case of focus. Meaning to keep things in balance and ready for a release date. Really old engines can do it easily. These are some issue which I would like to discuss with them.

This approach will allow BIS to focus on the core bug issues while improving the product and its appeal for its fanbase and future customers. This topic has more angles to it than just us as Fans. It also has a commercial value, as some soon to be rival products will allow for this functionality, which will be of influence on consumers when they make their choice if they are bound to spend money for just 1 game.

What, how and when needs to be seen. This poll is just a poll to see if people want it or not, I hope this clarrifies my view on things.

Edited August 4, 2009 by p75

[dm 9]

I hope they will help us with providing information as to what and how to change the code to allow render to texture features. After all we don't have any sourcecode.

I lol at the BS in this thread.

So you want BI to tell you what "code to change", in the sourcecode you dont have, in order to allow render to texture?

:crazy_o:

[p75 10]

I lol at the BS in this thread.

So you want BI to tell you what "code to change", in the sourcecode you dont have, in order to allow render to texture?

:crazy_o:

No, did you read it properly? We just need some help of their knowledge of the engine (an inside peek sort to speak).

Well, the point is, if many people want it, we'll make it happen with the help of BIS. I posted this poll to see if there is a serious interest for it or not. Sofar, it seems so.

I'm not sure if BIS needs to spend time on it themselves or not. The modders could do it, but what I'd like to do, is, to discuss this issue with BIS.

If there is enough appeal, I hope they will help us with providing information as to what and how to change the code to allow render to texture features. After all we don't have any sourcecode. I don't think a whole engine overwrite is needed. The engine seem flexible enough. I think it was more a case of focus. Meaning to keep things in balance and ready for a release date. Really old engines can do it easily. These are some issue which I would like to discuss with them.

This approach will allow BIS to focus on the core bug issues while improving the product and its appeal for its fanbase and future customers. This topic has more angles to it than just us as Fans. It also has a commercial value, as some soon to be rival products will allow for this functionality, which will be of influence on consumers when they make their choice if they are bound to spend money for just 1 game.

What, how and when needs to be seen. This poll is just a poll to see if people want it or not, I hope this clarrifies my view on things.

It could be some addon module, but you need their knowledge as how the current engine operates, not? And what is preventing this feature, besides the timelimit for a relasedate, which was in place.

Edited August 4, 2009 by p75

[dm 9]

I'm not sure if BIS needs to spend time on it themselves or not. The modders could do it, but what I'd like to do, is, to discuss this issue with BIS.

And you've been told, that [aside from some Kegety's magic, but he doesnt really count since he hacks around with dll's and other fancy nonsense :D ] it is not possible without engine changes from BI. How hard is that to understand?

If there is enough appeal, I hope they will help us with providing information as to what and how to change the code to allow render to texture features. After all we don't have any sourcecode. I don't think a whole engine overwrite is needed.

Again, why would they need to tell us what code to modify if we dont have access to the source code? You make no sense...

[p75 10]

And you've been told, that [aside from some Kegety's magic, but he doesnt really count since he hacks around with dll's and other fancy nonsense :D ] it is not possible without engine changes from BI. How hard is that to understand?

Again, why would they need to tell us what code to modify if we dont have access to the source code? You make no sense...

Listen, mate, did I not say we'll discuss it with them. There are soo many factors which why it is not standard in there. It could be alot of things. But I don't believe it is technical limit. We'll need to discuss it with them first. And then we can see when BIS has resource issues if we could deliver some dedicated modder to do the actual coding under the guideance of BIS. Meaning that he can specify what to consider when trying to achieve texture to render while knowing the specifics of the source code.

Makes sense?

Btw, this is my last comment here, the purpose of this thread is explained clearly.

Edited August 4, 2009 by p75

[dm 9]

Listen, mate, did I not say we'll discuss it with them.

We'll need to discuss it with them first.

Makes sense?

Not really, no...

And then we can see when BIS has resource issues if we could deliver some dedicated modder to do the actual coding under the guideance of BIS. Meaning that he can specify what to consider when trying to achieve texture to render while knowing the specifics of the source code.

Because teaching someone who is new to the code is quicker and easier than having someone internally do it? ESPECIALLY when it comes to something as complex as rendering multiple viewpoints.

Plus it would be unprecidented for someone outside of BI to get access to the sourcecode...

[p75 10]

Not really, no...

Because teaching someone who is new to the code is quicker and easier than having someone internally do it? ESPECIALLY when it comes to something as complex as rendering multiple viewpoints.

Plus it would be unprecidented for someone outside of BI to get access to the sourcecode...

I think BIS is limited in it resources, and an experienced coder will pick it up quicly after some sound advices from their side. And the sourcecode does not have to be exchanged, it is not an absolute must. Besides that, a small contract would solve that issue. And I trust BIS and some beta testers could do some quality testing. Anyway, this is not about discussing what, how and when. This is just about a simple poll as stated earlier. The outcome will depend on the results of the poll

[An-225 0]

I don't really understand the point of adding this. If you want optics - press NUM0. Is there anything so wrong with the gunship optics that requires render-to-texture?

It simply serves no purpose, especially without realistic avionics which require you to pave the target with a targeting pod (since most air-launched guided weapons in this game are laser guided).

You also state that you would be able to select multiple targets, as in real life - which is incorrect, at least from my own experience in LOMAC and DCS. The KA-50 can only select one target at a time - the same goes for the A-10A. I would assume the same would be true for the AH-1Z and AH-64. F-15s can track and fire upon multiple airborne targets at one time however.

Edited August 4, 2009 by An-225

[p75 10]

I don't really understand the point of adding this. If you want optics - press NUM0. Is there anything so wrong with the gunship optics that requires render-to-texture?

It simply serves no purpose, especially without realistic avionics which require you to pave the target with a targeting pod (since most air-launched guided weapons in this game are laser guided).

You also state that you would be able to select multiple targets, as in real life - which is incorrect, at least from my own experience in LOMAC and DCS. The KA-50 can only select one target at a time - the same goes for the A-10A. I would assume the same would be true for the AH-1Z and AH-64. F-15s can track and fire upon multiple airborne targets at one time however.

Hi, thank you for your reply. The realistic avionics is another subject although related.

Some russian Attack Helicopters can indeed not do that, but I was refering to the AH-64 as seen in the movie and for example the MI28 or other addons which will come.

They can acquire more targets and shoot at them in a sequence (ripple fire).

Edited August 4, 2009 by p75

[An-225 0]

Of course, most helos can fire a salvo of missiles...but I somewhat doubt that even an Apache can track two targets at once, on its own. Perhaps a Longbow, but that would be a moot or irrelevant point considering we don't have any Longbows as standard vehicles.

[dm 9]

I think BIS is limited in it resources, and an experienced coder will pick it up quicly after some sound advices from their side. And the sourcecode does not have to be exchanged, it is not an absolute must. Besides that, a small contract would solve that issue.

Clearly you have much to learn on how BI operates...

Anyway, this is not about discussing what, how and when. This is just about a simple poll as stated earlier.

You're beginning to sound like a previously banned member. Who kept on and on about how "we dont care how, what or why, we just want to see the poll results"

The how, what and why are just as important as the results of the poll. Its all about context.

Your poll is basically the equivalent of "would you like to be given free money" OFCOURSE almost everyone is going to vote "yes" because there is no reason to vote no.

The outcome will depend on the results of the poll

No, the outcome will depend on whether or not Marek or Ondrej deem it worth the effort of adding. Not on what some random poll on the forum says.

[TimRiceSE 10]

Whoa. this guy has no clue about what goes into programming, and what ArmA addons actually can do..

[p75 10]

Clearly you have much to learn on how BI operates...

You're beginning to sound like a previously banned member. Who kept on and on about how "we dont care how, what or why, we just want to see the poll results"

The how, what and why are just as important as the results of the poll. Its all about context.

Sorry, but I meant this about the discussion with BI. And if you read all, I care about the No's.

Your poll is basically the equivalent of "would you like to be given free money" OFCOURSE almost everyone is going to vote "yes" because there is no reason to vote no.

Well, some people vote No, don't they

No, the outcome will depend on whether or not Marek or Ondrej deem it worth the effort of adding. Not on what some random poll on the forum says.

Well, shall we let the poll speak for itself?

And please keep it on an adult level.

---------- Post added at 12:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:43 PM ----------

Whoa. this guy has no clue about what goes into programming, and what ArmA addons actually can do..

Thank you for your quick assesment.