[OA] Enhancing ArmA2 Content with OA Features

As someone is inevitably going to try to do this, I figured I'd bring this up now before it gets messy.

Assuming BIS doesn't do it, there's going to be a need for modders to update the A2 content to take advantage of new OA features. Some of it will be simple (ie, config tweaks), and some more difficult (textures, model edits). But if it's going to be done, it needs to be done right. So, I guess then that is is a proposal on how to do it. This is not a request per se, nor an announcement of a project currently underway, but a set of guidelines to follow. That being said, it might turn into either.

First, it should not be a port. OA already integrates with ArmA2, and this should be the only way for OA users to use ArmA2 content. What this mod needs to do is instead override the existing ArmA2 content with updated content. This will also ensure maximum compatability with existing missions, campaigns, etc...

Second, it should one single mod, and should only contain enhancements that are present on BIS's OA content. No need to get creative and add more features, simply bring the old content up to speed with what's already in OA. The specific values/scope of the enhancements should be based on set by BIS's content in OA, as to get as close a match as possible with the vanilla OA content. It needs to be a unified effort, to prevent a bunch of people just going out on their own creating conflicts or incompatability, and to ensure that everything uses the same standards.

Third, some enhancements will likely require source content or guidance/documentation/tools from BIS. I have no doubts that BIS would be willing to help, but they obviously have their own priorities and so ths must be worked out with them. In the event that some things cannot be obtained, they may need to be recreated.

Finally, it'd be nice to hear from BIS about this. I know they have expressed that it's not necessarily on their agenda, so it's very likely going to have to be a community effort. Now, the scope of something like this isn't as big as say CWR, so it should be relatively easy to pull off. Still, if it is going to be done I would like to see it done somewhat professionally.

Also, I want to form a list of new OA features that the ArmA2 content currently does not take full advantage of. Let's start with these:

-Thermal Imaging (this is going to be the big one)
-Backpacks
-Weapon optics/weapon zeroing (if any ArmA2 exclusive weapons qualify)
-Flashlights/lasers/night optics (if any ArmA2 exclusive weapons qualify)
-Multiple muzzle positions (for vehicles - now natively supported to some extent in OA)
-Modules/scripts (ex: AH1Z integration w/ ULB)

Now, OA's only been out for 2 days now so this list is likely to change. Feel free to make additions/corrections. There are bound to be some little things that OA content has and ArmA2 content doesn't that aren't immediately obvious.

Out of the back of my head:

1. TI: those are textures that needs to be added to models. Even if this community will undertake such a job, there is little one can do without source models (hex editing is an option there, but well..). Plus the size of it would be HUGE (all models would need to be redistributed

2. Backpacks - no comment as i don't really know how it is implemented

3. WO, sights adjustments - i am sure this can be easily done

4. FL, Lasers, Night Opti s - uncertain. Just a note, no A2 model features NO sights model

5. Multiple muzzle positions - uncertain, but doubt it without source MLODs

6. Modules - more than possible.

Now, that you started this thread, does it mean that YOU are willing to participate in such an endeavour?

Edit:Oops got the wrong end of the stick....

I think the key problem of this idea is that BIS have released arrowhead so you can buy these mods.... And just getting people to release it as their own individual mod would be copyright infringement/theft..... and a few of these have been done by various mod makers anyway......

Uncertain of what you actually mean...And yes, i have read OA Eula

Out of the back of my head:

1. TI: those are textures that needs to be added to models. Even if this community will undertake such a job, there is little one can do without source models (hex editing is an option there, but well..). Plus the size of it would be HUGE (all models would need to be redistributed

2. Backpacks - no comment as i don't really know how it is implemented

3. WO, sights adjustments - i am sure this can be easily done

4. FL, Lasers, Night Opti s - uncertain. Just a note, no A2 model features NO sights model

5. Multiple muzzle positions - uncertain, but doubt it without source MLODs

6. Modules - more than possible.

Now, that you started this thread, does it mean that YOU are willing to participate in such an endeavour?

My testing with thermal images show even with ported Arma1 content it works, mig29, Su24 etc etc

when the jets are off they are dark, when the engines warms up they glow :)

So if you could adapt the scripting to work it Arma2 it should be ok.

No need to reword every addon created.

Erm FLIR does work with ArmA 2 units!! not cutsom made addons though!

Damage effects are there also there!

Out of the back of my head:

1. TI: those are textures that needs to be added to models. Even if this community will undertake such a job, there is little one can do without source models (hex editing is an option there, but well..). Plus the size of it would be HUGE (all models would need to be redistributed

2. Backpacks - no comment as i don't really know how it is implemented

3. WO, sights adjustments - i am sure this can be easily done

4. FL, Lasers, Night Opti s - uncertain. Just a note, no A2 model features NO sights model

5. Multiple muzzle positions - uncertain, but doubt it without source MLODs

6. Modules - more than possible.

Yes, I came to these same conclusions. For those enhancements requiring source models, this is where BIS's support comes into play.

Now, that you started this thread, does it mean that YOU are willing to participate in such an endeavour?

Perhaps. If it is deemed possible and there are enough capable people willing to contribute.

---------- Post added at 11:01 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:58 AM ----------

I think the key problem of this idea is that BIS have released arrowhead so you can buy these mods.... And just getting people to release it as their own individual mod would be copyright infringement/theft..... and a few of these have been done by various mod makers anyway......

I'm not aware that BIS ever explicitly announced their intention to perform these upgrades as DLC. Nor did they explcitly state it would be an infringement of the EULA to do such a thing with mods. As long as we're not porting ArmA2 content to be usable in OA standalone, I see no problem.

---------- Post added at 11:02 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:01 AM ----------

Erm FLIR does work with ArmA 2 units!! not cutsom made addons though!

Damage effects are there also there!

It works, but only with default values. It's not as detailed as the OA units. To make them so would require modifications to the textures.

My testing with thermal images show even with ported Arma1 content it works, mig29, Su24 etc etc

when the jets are off they are dark, when the engines warms up they glow :)

Sorry, i was unable to check it myself since i haven't even touched my gaming rig after installing sprocket OA on the 27th...

If that is the case (again, i am unable to check it myself), OA TI is different than this one:

http://developer.vbs2.com/onlinehelp/Content/Adding_Models/How_to/AMHT_Thermal_Imaging_How.htm

backpacks are probably going to need a proxy. I know how to enable them, but that's it.

Sorry, i was unable to check it myself since i haven't even touched my gaming rig after installing sprocket OA on the 27th...

If that is the case (again, i am unable to check it myself), OA TI is different than this one:

http://developer.vbs2.com/onlinehelp/Content/Adding_Models/How_to/AMHT_Thermal_Imaging_How.htm

Yeah your right, when i say thermal imaging works for my addons, I mean in respect of when the engines are off they are dark (as is everything else)l.

when the engines comes on, they warm up but the who addon does, not just the engine placement.

So in a way they work, but not exactly as intended etc.

-Thermal Imaging (this is going to be the big one)

For my (short) experience of the TI in game, all models will have it by default, if no thermal imaging map is defined units still appear to have one in game. Obvioulsy it is more basic than the proper OA stuff but it is still there. The main issue seems to be when you shoot someone the thermal map dissapears/changes because of the wound RVMAT.

EDIT: seems you do need the models,

class StageTI

{

texture="STKR_BritMTP\data\antitank_ti_ca.paa";

};

is just added to the RVMAT (in notepad or whatever) and the unit will use the thermal image texture (defined with ti_ca). This needs to be done with the wound textures too so that there isn't a change when you shoot someone.

Even so, it would be a massive undertaking to add this to all A2 units if they need it.

EDIT: Nevermind, seems i was right at my first assumption.

It is still a pretty long and boring thing to do for only one man, but nevertheless possible *thinking about delivering as well*

backpacks are probably going to need a proxy. I know how to enable them' date=' but that's it.[/quote']

More than likely. Again, quite a few of the features will require access to source models/textures. This is why we would need BI's support.

Yeah, sorry, you are right, looking over those again, seems the file doesn't need to be aplied to the model, it just needs and entry in configs, which makes things easier overall.

It is still a pretty long and boring thing to do for only one man, but nevertheless possible *thinking about delivering as well*

Yeah I think I would jump off a cliff if I tried to re-work all the materials :) You never know, BIS may still do it. I dunno if it could be automated in some way?

Yeah I think I would jump off a cliff if I tried to re-work all the materials :)

You never know, BIS may still do it.

I guess they are thinking about that same cliff. :rolleyes:

I feel sorry for the poor sod that'll have to do that over at bis (if they think it's worth it)

I dunno if it could be automated in some way?

I really doubt it.

We are talking about work on top of UV maps. It is very random-like in terms of parts that would need the "heat" layer.

Perhaps a good approach would be to break it up into stages. For example:

Stage I (Fairly simple to implement)

-Config tweaks - these should be simple

--Ex: adding CM or enabling the use of TI/night optics fall under this

-Modules - we have everything we need

Stage II (Possible to do, but difficult)

-Texture tweaks

--TI stuff

Stage III (Requires source files from BIS)

-Model tweaks

--backpacks

--weapon muzzles

--weapon sights/optics/lights/lasers

Clasified by how easy/difficult they are to implement.

Bringing 'TI' to A2 default BIS content (like character models for instance) would be a little more involved than just adding a TI stage to the external .rvmat file I believe. Especially if you do not have the mlod's & model.cfg's.

The 'thermal profile' along with the .rvmat information gets baked into the .p3d at binarization time unless there's something on that front I'm not aware of.

In all A2 models there is the possibility of bringing that feature 'online' in an odol model but... it would require hex editing the existing A2 model, thereby creating a 'new' variant of a default BIS model. Thereby requiring a 'new' config definition for this new variant, TI enabled, A2 model.

At that point you have at least 3 new files needing to be .pbo'd up. The new .p3d, a ti texture and a config for each model you'd want to enable from A2.

Then you'd be faced with the dilemma of people without A2 acquiring 'enhanced' (but modified nonetheless) default BIS content if you served it up publicly that only have A2OA.

Just some thoughts...

Thereby requiring a 'new' config definition for this new variant, TI enabled, A2 model.

And why would you need a new config? We can just override the model token for the existing configs if we need to.

Then you'd be faced with the dilemma of people without A2 acquiring 'enhanced' (but modified nonetheless) default BIS content if you served it up publicly that only have A2OA.

Well, honestly it's really no different than someone opening up ArmA2 pbos, pulling out the binarized models, writing a new config and putting them in OA.

That's why the simplest solution would be to enlist the help if BIS, get MLODs and then replace (override) the existing ArmA2 content.

Well, good idea... But that's a lot, lot of work.

What about creating a "loose" team who will slowly do the work mentioned above. These step/stages are fine idea...

I may help with the configs lill' bit. Also with some other things, depending how complicated they are...

Maybe I'm not so talented, but one more mouse and brain is always needed, right?

Well, I would be willing to put a team together, but first I want to know if this has any chance of suceeding. So the first step would probably be to consult with BIS...

Getting the MLODs is hardly gonna happen. That is my POV, no reason to argue on this one.

Hex editing is sort of out of the question, especially since the 'character length' rule cannot be kept here.

Even with MLODs released, we are talking about A LOT of content to be updated. Even if in a community effort it is done, the size is around 5GB is i am not mistaken. Hosting and delivering this is a huge effort in its own.

And why would you need a new config? We can just override the model token for the existing configs if we need to.

That's what I meant. Overriding the existing A2 model's classname and pointing it at a new .p3d. Symantics.

Well, honestly it's really no different than someone opening up ArmA2 pbos, pulling out the binarized models, writing a new config and putting them in OA.

True. The reason I mentioned that was to illustrate the amount of content your starting to talk about re-releasing. Although, there appears to be alot of the default A2 content already included with OA. There is quite alot that isn't. Mainly I'd say because the look'n'feel of the model's topology may not fit nicely into the environment context of OA.

This could be mitigated to a certain extent by your re-texturing suggestion.

That's why the simplest solution would be to enlist the help if BIS, get MLODs and then replace (override) the existing ArmA2 content.

And how would that be served up to OA customers?

@pufu: It's only 2.6GB... Still much but acceptable imo...

And could be done as packs - infantry, wheeled, armored, weapons...

I think we should try doing one example thing of each type, then decide is it worth or not.

;1666240']@pufu: It's only 2.6GB... Still much but acceptable imo...

my bad' date=' i wasn't able to check on my gaming rig

And could be done as packs - infantry, wheeled, armored, weapons...

True

I think we should try doing one example thing of each type, then decide is it worth or not.

can't really do that as it is now, since you would be needing MLODs.

Of course one could try using A1 MLODs for some vehicles

Hex editing is sort of out of the question, especially since the 'character length' rule cannot be kept here.

Not really, I'm quite confident the 'character length' rule you refer too wouldn't apply in this instance.