Wolfie

@Macadam Cow - Yeah, its somewhat flat now, but I don't see THAT much of a job to get it better. Its just going to take some time with an editor and some manpower. The grass textures would probably take the biggest hit in power. But I still play Arma2/ACE2 on my low level laptop at decent speeds. And it takes more power than Crysis. So yeah, I think a high end computer with a high end graphics card could easily manage both DCS and an Arma world. I think the BIG Question here is, would it be profitable for DCS to do it, considering it would take time and effort, and it would have to be aimed at people with higher end PCs. I would DEFINITELY have to upgrade to play such a game, but I think it would be AWESOME. Especially if we could get ACE2 people to get in on it ( think realism so real, you have to learn to sight in, load, calculate, and fire 105mm artillery). Arma is AWESOME!

I agree. Were not far from the level of Arma 2 right now. Just increase hills, water sources, and put down some more thought out villages with grass, and we'd be there. I was walking around a little the other day (after I ejected) between some buildings, as was rather startled that they actually had some detail to them. I don't see what is stopping us from a good Arma 2 landscape. Its not CPU/GPU power. I play warthog on a low level notebook. Maybe its the people who want everything at 200 fps.

Yeah, the big posters seem to be "protected". Probably how they got all their rep. Reminds me of certain government workers. Personally though, I wish they would get rid of neg rep. It just starts personal fights and pisses people off, and the big posters use it to destroy any beginner they don't like. In a word, you end up losing new guys from the board, and your products.

Yeah, but having to "V" over a 1 - inch concrete step is pretty bad. And when moving prone, your guy suddenly (and automatically!) jumps up to clear a pebble is life altering. Two BAD bugs.

Yes, but sometimes you want to take the village intact, with the civilians still alive... :thumbup: We can call in air support, etc in Arma. I'm pretty sure we have B-52's as well. The only problems I have with Arma are some character movement and unrealistic flight sim. If you want to do the strategic move, you can put yourself as high command and guide whole battalions, even divisions into battle. Its pretty amazing and the AI are pretty realistic in their decisions (they just need a little push sometimes). Watching 4 A-10's attack a village defended by 2 Tunguska's and a motorized infantry battalion is pretty interesting. Then you tell your tank company to move in. As for Arma 3, I think I'll be sticking with Arma2/ACE2 for the foreseeable future. The ACE mods will still be far more realistic. My biggest thing now is that I want to see realistic flight sim like DCS come into Arma.

Lol, how would you know? You haven't even tried it yet. People like you are a fail before you even start. I think guy's like you just don't want FPS linked with flight sim. Which is the future. Arma's TOH. Even MMOFPS's are starting to come out now. Dust 514. This is the future. The days of flight sim only are done. Eventually, flight sim only will become such a extreme niche that it will no longer be profitable to pursue. And I'm for its demise. I like some human intelligence on the ground, and I like to be able to get out of my jet, etc, with as much realism as my CPU/GPU can handle.

Infantry, especially Special Forces types, are EXTREME threats in Arma2/ACE2 if you are flying low. Usually, someone has, at the least, an RPG-7, which could be used in ambush against a low and slow heli. Not to mention 7.62 MG's, tripod belt feds, and even 25mm M109 rifles. There's usually at least a few MANPADS down on the ground as well, and carried inside some of the vehicles. Arma's VERY detailed. As for someone above mentioning view distance, its pretty decent for heli's and low flying A-10's keeping below about 5000 -7000 feet.

We would definitely need higher end computers. Arma 2 with ACE mod is harder to run than Crysis 1. But my mid end laptop still manages to get about 15 fps.

Thats because its GROSSLY complicated. I've never seen more realistic and aggresive AI. And you can put in whole DIVISIONS of them! The Village scenario is awesome to watch if you put two opposing battalions of mixed armor and infantry against each other. The only thing I've never liked about ARMA is their supposed flight engine. Its crap.

It was in the P-51D poll.

Thats the point!

Lol, proof or it didn't happen.

For some shots, you'll have to come down. You can't stay up there forever! Especially when were using human shields, and housing our troops in the hospitals! :thumbup:

Yeah, DCS:Arma. That would be great. /me watches incoming A-10, while I hide in the ARMA bushes with an Igla. Bye Bye A-10! In the end, I think it will be the DCS pilots yelling FOUL!

I wouldn't worry about scaling. I'd worry about that shilka hiding in the forest, or in an alleyway is going to do to your aircraft when it ambushes you. BMP3 and BTR-90 can also be nasty surprises, not to mention that solder in the bushes with an igla. The world of DCS is pretty serene with little cover. Not so in Arma. The bushes and leaves in the forest can blind you till you literally run into a tank at the forests edge (done that!). Villages are a rats nest of hiding places. And even if you do manage to do some mass damage, Arma players are used to that. You won't see many complaints there. Like DCS, damage is passed out in a pretty realistic way. You can die or be horribly wounded from one shot in the right place. DCS and ARMA would go very well together. BF3 players need not apply.

Personally, I think DCS (after releasing its jet module ) should start taking a look at putting more complex terrain and fps into the game. Walking around after you eject, things don't look too bad. With some work, you could probably get this game up to ARMA II level ground graphics. This would bring in a LOT of 3rd party modders. You might even get someone like the A.C.E. team to try to port over some of their mods. If this can't be done, I'd certainly like to see data sharing between the engines. The land of Chernarus is fine for FPS / driving distances, and would be just a small patch on DCS Baltic map. Its even fine for long range missles / radar. What more could an FPS guy want? And yet, the DCS players would still have the whole DCS map to fly in, which gives us a little elbow room. For those who think ARMA II is unrealistic, download the A.C.E. II realism mod. Now you even have to learn how to load and fire 105mm artillery. If DCS is an flight sim, ARMA2/ACE2 is an infantry, artillery sim. I would love to see these two companies come together on a project.

Were AMERICA! We don't follow no stin'kin rules. :thumbup:

When I was in JROTC ( many years ago! ), my unit was connected to a National Guard Armor Company. We had one M60 Tank ( Vietnam Era ). We were warned never to step behind the tank when the engine was on, or we would be roasted. Engines on tanks are HOT! I doubt if turning the engine off for a minute or two would do much to mask its heat signature. Were talking red hot metal.

Or on wikipedia? :music_whistling::lol:

QFT!

And there's where you go wrong. We don't want MSFS. We want virtual instruments simulated to REALITY. Not some guess at what they might be. Thats the reason I stick with DCS. If I wanted a GUESS, I could just download the F-35 mod for MSFS or whatever cheap sim. There's already a cheap SuperBug sim out for MSFS if I recall anyway.

Yeah, think more like F-18C.

As I always have said, if you want something done, send in the FPS/SIM players. They're like Pizza Hut delivery. Faster and better armed. SCARY SHIT!!!

Lol, oh, I should try to see if I still have any video of a Ka-50 turning my A-10 into metal shreds. Never get too close to a heli anywhere within its plane of movement. Their fire-control computers can easily computer your lead once the shkval gets a good lock. And their vhikers can reach out to 7km at a good speed.

That's called Point Cloud graphics. I forget exactly whose working on it. They're keeping it pretty hush hush. All I know is that its takes a TON of video card memory. That's the catch. And I don't think its a scam. Maybe its just making some of the people who want to remain with the good ol' standard somewhat nervous. It appears that a lot of math is done in very fast Vram and only the dots that are going to be drawn on the screen are sorted out by some algorithm. Probably something our alien overwatcher's decided to give us. Or Obama. Same thing.