ArmA Vs. VBS2, not a comparison Options

[JdB]

O.....k *steps over the carnage of the previous flamewar*

There is no room for comparison beyond "It's both loosely based on the same idea/theme, the companies working on them are somewhat related and they both cost money".

VBS2 does not support normal maps (or so I read from Nephilim). Objects are far more simple than would be allowed by the community in ArmA. I.e. I saw a screenshot of a parking lot full of cars a while back. All cars were very basic models, but alot of different types and colors. This is exactly what the party that signed the contract needs: the military. They don't care about excessive graphics or "entertaining" missions, they're looking for something to train their soldiers with, not to entertain them. Where as we in ArmA would say "engage that UAZ", the vast array of vehicles and objects available in VBS2 makes it possible for the trainers to go into enormous depth to create a simulation of a possible combatenvironment that is as close to reality as possible.

The community tends to go overboard with graphics and detail all the time, and forgets what really matters, the gameplay. There is no point in having beautifully made environments when no one can run it smoothly during any kind of scenario, it would destroy any advantage that the system would have over any off-the-shelf game (at least trying to compare ArmA and VBS2).

The lod-system and streaming technology should bring us closer to what VBS2 can do in terms of environment, of course other things are out of our reach due to having been hardcoded into VBS2, which for a huge pricetag is reasonable to expect when compared to a €40-ish game.

This is why ArmA with the current wide-spread community-vision of graphics first will never be able to surpass VBS2 as the ultimate warfare-simulator.

Loads of addons were made for OFP, but when you consider that number, and compare it to the amount of missions created for these addons, the comparison turns rather bleak. Over the last 4 years the community has largely changed into a Combat Photography community, constantly bitching and whining at everyone that disagrees with it, rather than being the most realistic combat-simulator community that many claim it to be.

[BigglesTrevor]

O.....k *steps over the carnage of the previous flamewar*
Loads of addons were made for OFP, but when you consider that number, and compare it to the amount of missions created for these addons, the comparison turns rather bleak. Over the last 4 years the community has largely changed into a Combat Photography community, constantly bitching and whining at everyone that disagrees with it, rather than being the most realistic combat-simulator community that many claim it to be.

very true, all of your post, but on the last point, concider the Clan play. (which is where most of the created missions also lay)

[Elliot Carver]

JdB reliable and spot on as always
The last 4 years is a little long tho me thinks. Alot of peeps settled down into modding work, myself included and started shaping the game into what they wanted. Its the last 6 months or so with the slow down and limbo of the community that we've started chewing on each others slippers. You just need to look at the WIP of the community. Its rearing to go...all we need is the tools and BOOM, commuity will be 110% back to normal.
Question is how many times will people be happy moddeling the same old addons into the next line in the series before we get board?
Carver

[JdB]

...all we need is the tools and BOOM, commuity will be 110% back to normal.

That's exactly what I'm afraid of, people investing large amounts of time into addons that will serve as CP-thread fodder for a few weeks, then to be surpassed by another addon focussing on the exact same subject with doubled texture-resolutions, polycount etc, making it even harder to play. Already with the old OFP engine, it would have been far better to invest in improving the gameplay as opposed to constantly trying to e-dick eachother in terms of graphics. With slightly improved visuals over the BIS standard, the amount and variation of objects, weapons, buildings, vehicles etc could have been enormous. Instead everyone keeps redoing stuff endlessly when they have learned to use ever more CPU-wasting visuals. There comes a time when you stop looking at graphics in a game, and actually want to experience the gameplay (at least that is why I am assuming we're all here, and not playing BF or CS:S on a 24/7 basis).

There were only very few teams that actually made something original, especially FDF and CSLA teams, many of the others just regurgitated the US and Russian equipment over and over again in one form or another. Everyone can work on whatever he wants, but then people should stop whining about how great VBS2 is, and how ArmA should be like it, because if they really felt that way then they would prefer "gameplay" over graphics like the military does when making addons.

[Elliot Carver]

Ah yes i see where your coming from now (im slow tonight!)
Would i be right in saying 'gameplay' you would be looking for things like UAV's, arty, rapier missle defences/AAA, torpedos/Anti shipping, field communications etc? Things that really 'beef out' the scope of the game not just the peripheral 'units'? Put more 'tech' into the game so to speak...

lol yes. Peeps cant have it both ways

[JdB]

That too, but I was more meaning to actually make the islands like they're inhabited, not the clean place they were and are. Have vehicles standing around, obstacles like roadblocks, large diversity in buildings (not villages that consist of 3 different buildings), being able to actually send someone somewhere over teamspeak by describing that (more or less) unique object. Less of a generic feeling to the battlefield.

You can have many objects for one excessively detailed tank (are you gonna shoot that enemy with your polygons?), which is far more detailed than is needed for a clear identification of the object. All serious simulators share this lack of graphic overkill, something which you'd expect at least the addonmakers that strive for realistic gameplay to appreciate.

Also the things you mentioned should at least partially be worked out, they add realism, gameplay-options, and give the player more of a feeling of how busy and stressfull it can be to be in a battle, having to do and monitor many things at the same time. You can get a small taste of this in FFSX when you are being engaged and while seeking cover whip out the map in order to locate your own position and that of the enemy in order to call in fire support. While that map is out you're totally defenseless, so you want to complete it as soon as possible to return to your normal FOV again.

[Elliot Carver]

See told u i was tired lol.
It will be interesting to see how Codemaster's game2 works out. If it supports dx10 and the properties that would bring to our genre we could see that generic look go. I was chatting with the team today talking about how much detail could we go into with ArmA building scenery. Possiblity of scripting leaves and stuffs and weighing it out against framerates etc. dx9 just doesnt support that sort of detail where as dx10 does. sorry if im talking bollocks dude its 3am here in the uk and we were on the beach all day...

[Linker Split]

I agree when JdB said that we must not focus on graphic... or beter, I agree 50%.
Yes because, we still have to test the real power of this game, but not in an excessive way.
I don't love to see addons thich add only new units with lotta polygons. Yes they are eyes-candy, but only run on a power PC.

F.E. See Ast Walker work on multiturret:
He has just made multiturret for OFP as KLK did. But with a low res poly, and I like it!

F.E. See my HDT island for OFP:
My purpose was to create a new environment, detailed, but that would not kill PCs.
I tried and I succedeed. I got good FPS on my shitty PC.
The same thing we must do for ArmA. I'll import my Mogadishu map in this game only when optimized for OFP (no more lag, good playability and so on)
Everything must be optimized in order to make this game better than the other ones.

[Messiah]

And here i thought that no one could see the light. It's refreshing to see people actually realise and understand the differences in the two products and their associated price tag, and that we really have no justification to demand content from them both

All cars were very basic models, but alot of different types and colors. This is exactly what the party that signed the contract needs: the military. They don't care about excessive graphics or "entertaining" missions, they're looking for something to train their soldiers with, not to entertain them.

Also remember that the military expect as little lag/desync etc as possible. They want to be able to place 100 soldiers on a map and play it, not have the computer die in a heap of melted plastic. Removing all the pretty features like normal and specular maps enables this, as does a correctly lod'd model.

I hope that the CP whoring ceases in ArmA. I for one was just as guilt as every other addon maker for using a gross amount of oversized textures with the UK stuff for this purpose. It will soon be clear that such resource hogs are going to be nothing but CP candy, as they'll be unplayable unless optimised properly. From what I've spoken and heard from some of the more memorable addon makers/teams out there, alot of them have also finally come to realise that missions are a key component for any addon. I'd say you should expect a few more mini and full campaigns with your pretty addons this time round.

or at least I hope so. JdB - thanks for restoring what little faith I had in the intelligence of some of the ArmA community. It was getting rather dull reading the 10 millionth un-informed vbs bashing thread.

[JdB]

I hope that the CP whoring ceases in ArmA. I for one was just as guilt as every other addon maker for using a gross amount of oversized textures with the UK stuff for this purpose. It will soon be clear that such resource hogs are going to be nothing but CP candy, as they'll be unplayable unless optimised properly. From what I've spoken and heard from some of the more memorable addon makers/teams out there, alot of them have also finally come to realise that missions are a key component for any addon. I'd say you should expect a few more mini and full campaigns with your pretty addons this time round.

I have little hope to see this happening. Of the people that like ArmA I'd guess that 85% have played OFP, and liked it for the reasons that we like it, the remaining 15% being new recruits tired of unrealistic games. Those that don't like it mostly whine about the graphics being underpar with the most current games, so I'm hoping they stop playing ArmA soon to achieve the goal of less CP-pics and more emphasis on the realism, and enrichement of the environment.

I guess this kind of signal has to come from the addonmaking community (seeing as how many addonsmakers and BIS get bitched at I have personally begun to consider the addonmakers to be part of a seperate community since nearly all of them actually have the capacity to appreciate the effort required to make an addon, as opposed to many of the whiners, both old and new). Addonmakers have the power to stop producing unbalanced, excessively detailed addons, rendering CP impossible or dull. Many new addonmakers won't see the light at the end of the tunnel for some years to come though sadly enough.

I have personally never experienced VBS1 or 2, or Steel Beasts Pro for that matter, but one thing that all of these have in common (besides me liking the videos of them online) is simplicity and greatness (number of units, distance you can see, unrestricted movement (except for things like minefields) etc), something that I also want to experience when I play OFP/ArmA.

I never ever discuss VBS1 or 2 on the BIS forums, even when the moderators leave the threads open, because you'll only end up being yelled at and called names by some 12 year olds, and they say THAT is the serious forum... at least I can talk normally here without being attacked.

[Messiah]

lol - the official forums amuse me, they always have - can't beat them for some entertainment

I guess this kind of signal has to come from the addonmaking community (seeing as how many addonsmakers and BIS get bitched at I have personally begun to consider the addonmakers to be part of a seperate community since nearly all of them actually have the capacity to appreciate the effort required to make an addon, as opposed to many of the whiners, both old and new). Addonmakers have the power to stop producing unbalanced, excessively detailed addons, rendering CP impossible or dull. Many new addonmakers won't see the light at the end of the tunnel for some years to come though sadly enough.

Indeed, you can spot those who've never made an addon or a mission to completion - also i think addon makers should sometimes take a step back and now show progress shots of their work at the instant they finish the primary LOD - normally because it means there's an entire config, features, testing and set of LODs to still produce, which takes, or at least for me, 80% of the time

[BigglesTrevor]

lol - the official forums amuse me, they always have - can't beat them for some entertainment
Indeed, you can spot those who've never made an addon or a mission to completion - also i think addon makers should sometimes take a step back and now show progress shots of their work at the instant they finish the primary LOD - normally because it means there's an entire config, features, testing and set of LODs to still produce, which takes, or at least for me, 80% of the time

Theres always going to be seperate communitys in ArmA, People play it in different ways. ArmA does not have the dedicated community that OFP has had in the last few years. Many people who play ArmA (at the moment itleast) really arnt that interested in addons. ArmA has quite a big CTF community, addons are fun to them, but its not why the bought they game. However to me if theres was no community theres no game. Addons are what keep me interested in the game. I dont particularly do anything with them apart from if there on a server, but its fun just playing with them in the editor none the less. People want different things out of ArmA. Some people like making photos, some people like playing as accuratly as possable using real tactics, some people want to make addons, some people just want a deathmatch.

Indeed, you can spot those who've never made an addon or a mission to completion

No one questions what skill addon makers in the OFP (and now ArmA) communtiy have. Some of the work is great, really great. But why should it matter that some people dont make addons or missions? Some people simply dont have the time and skill. I have never made a addon, but why should that mean me, or anyone else is not qualifed to have a view? I mean fair enough if someone produces an addon and somone says, "thats crap", thats not fair game, but it dosnt give the right to discount anyone else's view on certian aspects of ArmA.

There were only very few teams that actually made something original, especially FDF and CSLA teams, many of the others just regurgitated the US and Russian equipment over and over again in one form or another. Everyone can work on whatever he wants, but then people should stop whining about how great VBS2 is, and how ArmA should be like it, because if they really felt that way then they would prefer "gameplay" over graphics like the military does when making addons.

I'll re-explain my first post. I dont want VBS2, I want ArmA. Advanced ai and real-time editing could be put into ArmA without having to change the graphics or really any of the integral parts of ArmA. I believe this will make ArmA a better experiance. I am not whining about how great VBS is and how bad ArmA is. ArmA is a great game, but if some of the features that have been made in VBS2 could be ported to ArmA i think it will be even better.

[Messiah]

explain to me how you have come to know of this 'advanced' AI in vbs2?

[BigglesTrevor]

i might be wrong but i think this vidio shows how the ai is being re-worked

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN4WxLWwhHY...ted&search=

[D@V£]

That looks like it could easily be simulated on ArmA using scripts.

In fact, that looks like it could easily be simulated in OFP with scripts.

Hell, that looks like it could easily be simulated in DooM with scripts!

[BigglesTrevor]

well i suppose it all depends what this 'agent ai' is.

[JdB]

No one questions what skill addon makers in the OFP (and now ArmA) communtiy have. Some of the work is great, really great. But why should it matter that some people dont make addons or missions? Some people simply dont have the time and skill. I have never made a addon, but why should that mean me, or anyone else is not qualifed to have a view? I mean fair enough if someone produces an addon and somone says, "thats crap", thats not fair game, but it dosnt give the right to discount anyone else's view on certian aspects of ArmA.

There is nothing wrong with non-addonmakers or missionmakers giving their opinion on matters, as long as it is respectfull towards the person dedicating alot of their free time to produce something. Most of the times when you see people bashing addonmakers or mods, they're n00bs when it comes to making addons, they think addons pop out of the ground, they expect complicated addons and mods to be completed in no-time. They often have biased and totally clueless opinions on things they have never dealth with in any way, making their comments either laughable (through persistance) or more often offensive.

I should know, Invasion 1944 had a large crowd of haters and uninformed idiots who thought they could do better, but never showed any signs of their own superiority when it comes to producing anything more than childish whining and flamebaiting.

@ Messiah: Yeah, the BIS forums are indeed fun, my most recent experience is that I apperantly smell like a foreskin in someones' opinion after I tried to help someone XD

@ Giggles & Dave: You can talk all day long about the improvements by looking at videos, but as long as you haven't actually tried the game or simulator, you can only speculate as to the exact behaviour of Ai. Unlike graphics, scripting and Ai routines do not translate too well to video.

[Monk]

Just seen this thread while passing through and thought id give my few cents worth,

I own both Armed Assault and VBS2,ever since first firing up VBS2 and giving it a quick run through,ArmA was removed completly from my machine,this training tool just blew me inside out,Yes its a very steep price tag for those outside the "intended" use for VBS2 which has been mentioned,its for the Armed Forces,hence the hefty price tag,

As for those asking about why stuff from VBS2 was not included in ArmA,first of all for those that dont quite grasp the fact that we are talking about 2completly different companys,aswell as there were some seriously major tweaks made to the ArmA engine from the VBS2 developers so addon makers/scripters etc will certaintly struggle as they will not be able to "tweak" the game engine in this manner,

Lastly for all this "bashing" of VBS2,im affraid you cannot really comment on that matter as you dont have the "hard facts" sitting on your machine because i could assure you,if you had so,ArmA wouldnt even be on your PC either.

To quote the poster above (jbD)

@ Giggles & Dave: You can talk all day long about the improvements by looking at videos, but as long as you haven't actually tried the game or simulator, you can only speculate as to the exact behaviour of Ai. Unlike graphics, scripting and Ai routines do not translate too well to video.

He's spot on,cant lay down the "hard facts" on a product you dont even own

P.S Very nice website/forum layout you have here!:)

[JdB]

I've always wondered, no matter how hard and often people say that BIS and BIA are two completely different companies, why do both these acronyms stand for virtually the same (Bohemia Interactive Studios and Australia)?

Kind of similar for two completely different companies, I wouldn't be suprised if we saw some of the technology currently exclusive to VBS2, like the ability to switch between personal and mounted weapons in a vehicle, in Game 2.

[Monk]

Im not 100% positive with this but im sure its because BIA baught the rights to use and alter the BIS game engines(if im wrong then someone correct me)...

Cheers.