Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: BigglesTrevor May 23 2007, 12:51

Personally im starting to become a little cheesed off.

Watching the vidios of the new features VBS2 will contain blows my mind. To put it simply there awsome. Real-Time editing, Veicle interaction and advanced ai amongst other features promise to deliver a soldier sim far in advance to ArmA. Aswell as being mouth watering for "game2" it has also slightly annoyed me. Why should we, the paying customer who gave BI the cash flow in order to produce the original VBS, be relegated below military contracts. To me ArmA is starting to feel just like a big BETA test for VBS2, letting the paying customer play a, lets face it, unpolished game. This is apperent with the many features promised left out, huge differences between different published releases and even half made fearures such as the Javelin Missle launcher. I, and perhaps others, am begining to feel alienated by BI, distinctly rejected in favour of the worlds military, who at best see VBS as a niche training method, where as we, the ArmA/OFP community see it as a untouchable forbidden fruit.

Posted by: Brendan May 24 2007, 21:13

What they are saying is, they released ARMA as a half assed game to fund it more for VBS2.

Posted by: Elliot Carver May 24 2007, 21:16

Lo buddy

Hows you? Hope all is dudy your end. Your probably right. ArmA is a big beta test for VBS2. Ofp was basically a big beta test for VBS1. Bohemia are very clever in flogging the beta test to the market getting the hundreds of thousands of us to test it for them whilst making millions. Then they can sit back and patch the two programs at the same time. I expect we will get VBS2 as Game2 with a new graphics package, re-written engine and VBS3 tests. We are just Bohemias beta testers for their main product. Its not your normal user company realtionship but then Bohemia isnt a normal company

rock on dude,
Carver

Posted by: ChrisVCB Jun 6 2007, 14:57

How much did you pay for ArmA?

How much does VBS2 cost?

Exactly...what, you expect to get all the things an expensive military simulator has for your £30? Get real.

Besides, ArmA and VBS were developed by two seperate companies: BIS and BIA. There is no conspiracy. BI as a whole are obliged to give us nothing. Be grateful that you have what you have.

Posted by: Lt. Earth Apple Jun 6 2007, 16:37

very true mate
We are grateful

Posted by: Elliot Carver Jun 6 2007, 16:38

Lo dude,
Erm im real enough thanks lol.
Yes ArmA has less in it than VBS. Mostly becuase VBS is their flagship product. Military isnt going to spend $500 a pop on VBS if they can get the same for 30 with ArmA
BI made em all just with ofp they had Codemasters as a publisher.. http://www.bistudio.com/ conspiracy doesnt come into it anywere.
welcome to the boards
carver

Posted by: Helping Hand Jun 6 2007, 17:16

Then we'd be better off polishing OFP or making our own game.

Posted by: BigglesTrevor Jun 8 2007, 00:40

yes, if we all took this attitude then i dread to think how buggy arma would still be. Frankly im still not overly impressed. Arma is a great platform to build off, but why shouldnt we, the dedicated fans, get some of these awsome new features at the same time as the military's. + BIS and BIA are pretty much the same thing. They use the same staff, the same offices, the same PC's.

Posted by: Wittmann Jun 8 2007, 06:35

ArmA cannot be used for commercial use however, so it cannot be used for dedicated military training. And I own VBS1, I can honestly say while its pretty, OFP has the greater potential and graphics have surpassed VBS in many regards with later addons and mods released. Its probable ArmA will also do this.

Oh ye of little faith.

Posted by: ChrisVCB Jun 8 2007, 14:59

Errr. No. They don't.

Sorry, but your obvious ignorance, when combined with your determination to be correct, strips your argument of all credibility.

Posted by: Elliot Carver Jun 8 2007, 15:16

[rant]
Dude, your new on the boards. First you dig up an old thread then you start insulting its members. This isnt the BIForums, we have discussions here. If were wrong we politely correct one another, not talk of their "obvious ignorance". If you want to fit in around here then wise up and loose the attitude!
[/rant]

sorry to everyone else, now back on topic

Posted by: ChrisVCB Jun 8 2007, 16:25

Oh dear.

1) So what if i'm new on your boards, 'dude'? The only thing that proves is *your* attitude towards non regs around here. Which to be quite honest you might want to 'wise up' and 'lose'.

2) It's not an old thread.

3) That he doesnt even know that the companies involved are based in two different continents (ie, they don't use the same office, PCs or Staff) strips his argument that BIA and BIS are one and the same of complete credibility. Thats not an insult. It's a statement of fact; he is obviously ignorant. This is without going into any further depth.

4) I really don't give a flying monkeys about fitting in here, and you're arrogant to think i would. As for my attitude, i've earnt the right to have it, and i'm not going to drop it.

As far as i know, we were on topic?

Posted by: D@V£ Jun 8 2007, 16:59

Well, you're arguement is right Chris, you should probabley not have put it in such an aggressive manner (although, to be fair, I agree with all your points).

As for you Biggles! If BIS and BIA use the same computers, then they must be bloody big computers to be used in the Czech Republic and Austrialia, right? They're pretty much on the opposite side of the world to each other.

And then yourself, Carver, I know that time is relative and all that, but, a time difference of 11 hours hardley makes something "old". Does it?

Anyway, enough of this ranting. You can hardley say that VBS2 and ArmA are comparable. They aren't. Sure, VBS1 might have some of these fancy new features that haven't yet made it in ArmA (but, they'll probabley be patched in, won't they?), but let's consider the things ArmA has, that VBS2 won't:

-Campaigns (ArmA has a storyline, from what I've heard of VBS1 it's just a big collection of missions)
-Affordable price (or, at least, for most people, I dont' know how many people spent £400+ on VBS1 and all the additions. They weren't cheap!)
-MP (let's face it, if you do manage to get your hands on a copy of VBS2, there won't be many servers, and if there are they'll probabley be run by various military institutions)
-This great community!!! (Yeah, try finding one like it for VBS1/2... £200 says you can't)
-This very arguement.

Posted by: BigglesTrevor Jun 8 2007, 20:04

ok point made on BIS i made a mistake. However the communication between the two is probably very strong.

Im not arguing i want VBS2, far from it, i want some of the features in VBS2 i feel we deserve. I want the real time editing and other features in this great ArmA community. Yes @ Wittman the community can do a hell of a job with ArmA, but BIS shouldnt just rely on it for new ArmA features.

and also at chris, what gives you the right to have a bad attitude?

Posted by: ChrisVCB Jun 8 2007, 20:45

Bad attitude = me telling you you're wrong?

And you are wrong.

Posted by: BigglesTrevor Jun 8 2007, 23:56

well thats just arrogence and i have no time for that. good day

Posted by: Wittmann Jun 9 2007, 14:49

24hr PR for flaming issued to ChrisVCB.

As for not wanting to fit in, well, enjoy your most likely short lived stay. You get along in this community or you get out.

Now back on topic.

Posted by: Messiah Jun 9 2007, 22:22

Pray tell, what makes you think you deserve anything from VBS2? Your £30 went to BIS, not BIA.

Posted by: Linker Split Jun 9 2007, 22:25

just to be really realists: we will never see VBS2 features implemented in ArmA.

Posted by: Elliot Carver Jun 10 2007, 00:16

Lo folks,

Ill start with an apology to all. Was a bad day and my rant was out of char. I kneel with my fingers interlaced behind my head to that one - My bad - @ChrisVCB: I hope we iron things out and have fun, which is what were all here to do ^^. Its too nice outside to be ranting

Ontopic:
* If the VBS 2 engine is the same as we have in ArmA with even more platers on it ** could we not implement our own features of VBS2?

* Without breaking rule 2.1 ref reverse engineering
** Trying to word it correctly as not to break VBS info rules 2.11

Also i think that wittmanns FIRST comment was spot on ^^

cheers
Carver

Posted by: JdB Jun 10 2007, 00:56

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.

Posted by: BigglesTrevor Jun 10 2007, 01:18

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)

Posted by: Elliot Carver Jun 10 2007, 01:57

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

Posted by: JdB Jun 10 2007, 02:06

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.

Posted by: Elliot Carver Jun 10 2007, 02:17

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

Posted by: JdB Jun 10 2007, 02:28

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.

Posted by: Elliot Carver Jun 10 2007, 02:42

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...

Posted by: Linker Split Jun 10 2007, 10:10

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.

Posted by: Messiah Jun 10 2007, 10:52

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

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.

Posted by: JdB Jun 10 2007, 15:22

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.

Posted by: Messiah Jun 12 2007, 11:32

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

Posted by: BigglesTrevor Jun 12 2007, 12:23

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.



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.



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.

Posted by: Messiah Jun 12 2007, 12:41

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

Posted by: BigglesTrevor Jun 12 2007, 12:58

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

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

Posted by: D@V£ Jun 12 2007, 16:13

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!

Posted by: BigglesTrevor Jun 12 2007, 16:48

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

Posted by: JdB Jun 12 2007, 16:55

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.

Posted by: Monk Aug 7 2007, 19:18

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)

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!:)

Posted by: JdB Aug 7 2007, 21:50

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.

Posted by: Monk Aug 7 2007, 22:01

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.

Posted by: JdB Aug 7 2007, 23:25

Since Seventh is their teamleader, and he used to work for OFPN along with BIS people that also worked on VBS1 (and 2?) like Sith and DnA + Placebo in that same team, there seems to be alot more connection than most people assume.

Posted by: Linker Split Aug 8 2007, 01:42

do you ppl know who really is DnA????

Posted by: JdB Aug 8 2007, 16:30

Posted by: UKGBlazero Aug 8 2007, 18:20

been looking at this post and i to have VBS1 and it is a lot better than OFP so i think that VBS2 will allso be a lot better than ArmA but have a look at it just to see wot we will not get in ArmA and how much it will cost you if you do think of geting VBS2

http://www.virtualbattlespace.com/store/

Posted by: mrjfin Aug 8 2007, 22:20

The worst scenario is if BIS isnt works ArmA so great that they could for purpose. I mean if they have many features already done and let those features to in VBS2 instead of Arma.
I dont like this style that BIS will not yet release tools to ArmA coz they wanna make money by expansion whit them own models so community cant reach them now. This tools are ready to VBS2 so they will treat us like second class users. Why BIS cant just say goodbye to BIA and will not share anything them own whit BIA even they got some money from it. VBS-VBS2 hasnt given anything new to ArmA or OFP only stolen the best things. BIS have absolutely made many mistake after year 2002. First they began the conversation OFP to Xbox what rly wasted time from developing new games to PC. They drop off whit Codemaster was good move because now they will get absolutely more bigger incomes from every sold games. In OFP codemaster took some 80 % of money and gave only some 20 % to BIS when now those new publishers like Atari got only some 30% of the money from every sold games. CM business didnt allowed much money to Game 2 developing. But Codemaster forced BIS make better more bugless and working games so we lost the guarantee of flawfree products. BIS isnt making great deal of marketing this games either and they have unsuccesfully in their strategies to offer the most authentive wargames realism without any flaws.

Posted by: UKGBlazero Aug 8 2007, 23:07

if you go back to 2002 when OFP came out it wos just like ArmA no tools most of the tools that did come out where from us the user who made tham and not BIS take a look at the addon packs that BIS made for OFP did we get any thing new no not a lot ya got more missions and we got the AH64 and a SU25 and one or two things aswell but did we get any thing als no not from tham but we did off the addon makers new tanks jets guns to me it is us lot that made OFP wot it is to day and i can see us lot doing the same with ArmA wot i think we need to focus on is the Campaign i think we need to remake it with some of the new addons that been made how many would like to play on the RACs or the SLA id love it if i can play the Campaign on the SLA side and @ carver yes we do need stuff like UAV's, arty, rapier missle defences/AAA, torpedos/Anti shipping, field communications etc we need stuff like that well thats my 2p

Posted by: Linker Split Aug 8 2007, 23:30

Well, you are right, but VBS2 is for the US Army (and others), not civilians like us... that's why...


yeah you are right, BIS made the basic game, the community and addon makers like us had the job to imporoving it.
OPnly that if you play VBS1 with modules, it's completely a new game.

Posted by: JdB Sep 22 2007, 23:51

I'm locking this thread, as VBS is outside of the scope of this site, and forums.