Apparently Day Z players are not the only ones sick of Arma's engine

[Bad Science 23]

Looks like the US Army would like to upgrade to a new standalone as well. Can't say I blame them.

http://www.pcgamer.c...aining-shooter/

Edit:

And I think I found it's main competition.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/05/31/us-military-commission-57m-virtual-reality-training-sim-powered-by-cryengine-3/

Edited August 1, 2012 by Bad Science

[suspense 210]

Looks like the US Army would like to upgrade to a new standalone as well. Can't say I blame them.

http://www.pcgamer.c...aining-shooter/

VBS 2 is not running on the "same" engine, its a modified engine made specifically for the army, but its dated.

If you had played VBS 2, you would know it feels nothing like arma 2. In fact, its much more smooth, has many more features, much better support, but slightly less graphics. Because it aint about the graphics for the army.

[void.false@gmail.com 300]

BI's losing their positions. That's crap news.

[ripbabyg@hotmail.co.uk 125]

One door closes another one opens, They don't supply for the army, instead they make DayZ the main focus and generate alot more money, seem's a fair trade.

[z64dan 17]

They just want a new engine, that's all. This is typical of government organizations. If they want something made for them, they'll put out the specifications, and companies will try to meet their specs.

Wouldn't be surprised if BIS added a lot of this stuff to a modified ARMA 3 engine and submitted it.

[Hawk24 94]

Must have something to do with the engine and not the ever-growing list of needed features that come through new types of guerilla conflicts....absolutely

[alyas 14]

VBS 2 is not running on the "same" engine, its a modified engine made specifically for the army, but its dated.

If you had played VBS 2, you would know it feels nothing like arma 2. In fact, its much more smooth, has many more features, much better support, but slightly less graphics. Because it aint about the graphics for the army.

they wont listen. They need their drama

[Ankhenaten 111]

Bohemia are likely to bid again for this one, as are other commercial game developers, so leafing through the specification gives us a glimpse of what we might see in the future.

Isn't it standard procedure for any public institution that they have to make an official competition to get the best price or deal?

I hope Bohemia wins, loads of work and effort is better than i.e. Presagis

http://www.presagis.com/products_services/products/modeling-simulation/visualization/vega_prime/

Programmed that once, boring, expensive and no end of license issues.

Edited August 1, 2012 by Ankhenaten

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

Uhh, I really don't see anything in either the article or proposal to indicate that they are "sick" of the engine. They've simply issued an updated requirements spec, which I'm sure Bohemia is in a better position than anyone to fulfill on time and budget. But the Army can't just sign them up for the contract, they need to open bidding.

In fact, this seems to indicate they're quite satisfied with VBS2 as they expect the new engine to provide the same functionality: The new FPS based game and tools should include, but is not limited, to the components and capabilities of the current FPS game, Virtual Battlespace 2 (VBS2), as described in the Program Description.

So basically any competitor would have to build VBS2 from the ground-up before they're even ready to get started on the new engine... by that time Bohemia will have left them in the dust.

If they have any interest in maintaining the relationship, I'm sure they will be the ones to take the reigns. Who else even stands a chance?

Edited August 1, 2012 by ZedsDeadBaby

[Ankhenaten 111]

Uhh, I really don't see anything in either the article or proposal to indicate that they are "sick" of the engine. They've simply issued an updated requirements spec, which I'm sure Bohemia is in a better position than anyone to fulfill on time and budget.

There will also be a lot of time invested in scenarios by the military, so just looks won't count.

Just agreeing with you :)

[thomas.scriven@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk 4]

I heard that the Taliban kept alt-f4ing.

[dallas 5195]

Best of luck to BIS, they can draw of more than a decades experience and a engine that can provide 1st person perspective, RTS and now with DayZ also add mmo to the list.

[Tuggo 25]

I guess the Army couldn't keep the grunts off DayZ long enough to accomplish some virtual war training.

Getting a new engine is a way to make it happen =P

[a sleeping dog 3]

After reading this I now believe that we should be able to scrounge up parts to make IED's and place them on the roadsides to blow up vehicles. Other than that, the Army offering a specific dollar amount for a product they want to see made is no different than your local grocery store putting an in store brand product out to bid.

[Bad Science 23]

It is probably true that the army is not exactly "sick" of the program but it did make a good headline. Of course, the two army officers I have spoken to about it think its shit, worthless, and a poor replacement for field exercises. It's mostly me and other Day Z players who are sick of the broken monkey on Day Z's back. If there is enough money in it, whoever has the most friends and lobbying power will get the contract, not necessarily Bohemia. As a final comment, if it wasn't broke no one would be trying to fix it (unless someone has a financial interest in seeing it replaced).

[Cooperal 16]

Bohemia already appear to have ARMA III well under way. It could very well be convinient to model a new training simulator off of its mechanics. Likely with extra features to meet the requested specifications. Likely less graphically intense though.

I imagine it would be well in their interest to maintain the title of a developer that creates up-to-date software for the military. Especially as their popularity has recently spiked to former glory if not better.

[SwagNYC 11]

Isn't it standard procedure for any public institution that they have to make an official competition to get the best price or deal?

I hope Bohemia wins, loads of work and effort is better than i.e. Presagis

http://www.presagis....ion/vega_prime/

Programmed that once, boring, expensive and no end of license issues.

all government contracts have to go through a competetive bidding process as per GSA regulations

3 bids minimum and priority goes to minority owned small businesses

been like that for over 2 decades now

Edited August 1, 2012 by SwagNYC

[arx 61]

Yeah nothing anti arma engine in this article. they have been using vbs for a while. not to mention, there are other militaries in the world continuing to use ;/

get a better PC op

btw fucking LOL at the prospect of BI becoming soley a zombie game company, on hearing this news

fucking lol at you, boiz

[Bad Science 23]

Must have something to do with the engine and not the ever-growing list of needed features that come through new types of guerilla conflicts....absolutely

I missed this earlier. These types of conflicts are not new, the only new elements of insurgency are more accessible telecommunication, social media, and cyber warfare. I was recently reading about the Rhodesian Bush War, a great example of modern insurgency, before Pong or Super Mario.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

As a final comment, if it wasn't broke no one would be trying to fix it (unless someone has a financial interest in seeing it replaced).

Dude, just read the synopsis of the proposal. It has nothing to do with anything being "broken" or needing to be "fixed" and everything to do with adding on to the existing capability of the system with new features and game modes and up to date equipment.

It is a response to emerging needs, not shortcomings of the existing system.

If you want to talk about the proposal lets talk about it. It's interesting in and of itself without the need for your sensationalist bullshit.

Edited August 1, 2012 by ZedsDeadBaby

[Bad Science 23]

Dude, just read the synopsis of the proposal. It has nothing to do with anything being "broken" or needing to be "fixed" and everything to do with adding on to the existing capability of the system with new features and game modes and up to date equipment.

It is a response to emerging needs, not shortcomings of the existing system.

If you want to talk about the proposal lets talk about it. It's interesting in and of itself without the need for your sensationalist bullshit.

If they simply wanted to add a few features, they would add them. They are looking for a new contract, a complete replacement program.

[dallas 5195]

"It’s intriguing stuff. The Army certainly demands a broader remit from it’s shooters than we do, and an insanely detailed one. The full request comes with a daunting 243 page list of technical specifications, as well as a 13 page checklist on what they expect to see."

Writing up a 243 page request for proposal, might actually make it very hard for anyone but BIS to compete.

USMC was looking for a new sidearm and I think one of the requirements, were that the new sidearm had to be compatibility with currently issued 7 round .45 ACP magazines, making the 1911 platform the only option.

So while they are officially looking for a "new" contract, they might just to looking to "update" their contract.

Edited August 1, 2012 by Dallas

[Bad Science 23]

"It’s intriguing stuff. The Army certainly demands a broader remit from it’s shooters than we do, and an insanely detailed one. The full request comes with a daunting 243 page list of technical specifications, as well as a 13 page checklist on what they expect to see."

Writing up a 243 page request for proposal, might actually make it very hard for anyone but BIS to compete.

USMC was looking for a new sidearm and I think one of the requirements, were that the new sidearm had to be compatibility with currently issued 7 round .45 ACP magazines, making the 1911 platform the only option.

So while they are officially looking for a "new" contract, they might just to looking to "update" their contract.

They are certainly competing from a position of advantage. And you are correct, that is an awfully long list.

[ZedsDeadBaby 2287]

If they simply wanted to add a few features, they would add them. They are looking for a new contract, a complete replacement program.

Can I ask you again to please read the synopsis or proposal?

Particularly parts like this which clearly state they are not in any way unhappy with the current product and are looking to expand upon it, not replace it:

The current GFT flagship product, VBS2, was procured in a competitive source selection in Dec 08. Over the last three years, the product has evolved to include capabilities such as terrain paging, improved graphic realism, IED training modules, insurgent methodology training scenarios, Special Operations Command(SOCOM) enhancements, an improved cultural and language training capability, and a terrain database plug-in that will facilitate incorporation of Synthetic Environment (SE) Core databases. The Government has also invested in several middleware capabilities that provide additional features such as enhanced indirect fire skills training and combat lifesaver and medic training. The required product will provide the User the ability to connect existing and future middleware via an Application Programming Interface (API) or plug-in. This will enable the

addition of new training capabilities for seamless training

using the Flagship game

as the user interface

. This will ensure the

reuse of a multitude of Governmental and Commercial Off-the-Shelf (GOTS/COTS) products and features already developed

.

I'll ask again, do you want to discuss the actual content of the article and proposal, or continue with the bullshit sensationalism? Last chance!

Edited August 1, 2012 by ZedsDeadBaby

[Bad Science 23]

Can I ask you again to please read the synopsis or proposal?

Particularly parts like this which clearly state they are not in any way unhappy with the current product and are looking to expand upon it, not replace it:

The current GFT flagship product, VBS2, was procured in a competitive source selection in Dec 08. Over the last three years, the product has evolved to include capabilities such as terrain paging, improved graphic realism, IED training modules, insurgent methodology training scenarios, Special Operations Command(SOCOM) enhancements, an improved cultural and language training capability, and a terrain database plug-in that will facilitate incorporation of Synthetic Environment (SE) Core databases. The Government has also invested in several middleware capabilities that provide additional features such as enhanced indirect fire skills training and combat lifesaver and medic training. The required product will provide the User the ability to connect existing and future middleware via an Application Programming Interface (API) or plug-in. This will enable the

addition of new training capabilities for seamless training

using the Flagship game

as the user interface

. This will ensure the

reuse of a multitude of Governmental and Commercial Off-the-Shelf (GOTS/COTS) products and features already developed

.

I'll ask again, do you want to discuss the actual content of the article and proposal, or continue with the bullshit sensationalism? Last chance!

I fail to see how I am being sensational. And I love the threats Zed. Very intimidating.

Edit:

Also, can you link the document you quote? I only ask, because that is not what I linked in the original post. It was a PC gamer article that contained none of that text. Which is kind of funny, telling me to read what I am talking about, when you link something else entirely.

Edited August 1, 2012 by Bad Science