Yeah, I gotta agree. There is plenty you can do with NV gear less than Gen 3. With supplemental IR light, you can get a LOT of distance out of Gen 1 and Gen II scopes.
however if you did purchase night vision equipment that is not generation 3 you are extremely dependent on your environment: Dry / humid environment, full moon / no moon, cloud cover, terrain etc.
LOL, Gen 3 is affected by all those things as well about equally proportional to the other generations, but losing 20% off 1250 yards for Gen 3 translates losing 20% off of 1000 yards for Gen 2. So higher generation NV is affected about the same, but it has greater capabilities to start with, generally speaking. I have handled some Gen 2+ gear that was better than Gen 3. So it really isn't all that simple as saying Gen 3 is better than Gen 2. There is a lot of variety between makes, models, and capabilities and some real overlap.
Here is a neat comparison of 5 models.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_18/329958_Night_Vision_Generation_Comparison_Guide.html
What is interesting to note is that the subject at 100 yards in the test was pretty well unrecognizable regardless of the generation without supplemental IR illumination. Adding IR helped all of them and some of the lower gen stuff was almost useless in the conditions without the supplemental IR. So as in this circumstance, if you are going to have to add supplemental IR to see your target anyway, do you really need to spend $2-3 grand more for the higher end scope? It will depend on the user's needs.
I supplement my Gen 1+ and Gen 2+ with long range IR illuminators. I can distinguish goats from deer from pigs at 200 yards with my Gen 1+ scope and the long range illuminator. For my situation, that is more than adequate. On my property, there are few places I can even see that far in daylight because of topography and foliage.
Having a good Gen 3 scope would be great, but the notion of go big or go home (don't bother) when it comes to night vision is pretty silly. It is sort of like saying that if your hunting rifle won't achieve a certain level of accuracy, say sub MOA, then you should not be using the rifle. There should be no reason to dissuade a potential night hunter from getting a less optimal and much less expensive unit so long as that hunter understands what he can do with the gear. In my experience, this is where most of the NV companies fail. Reading the ads, you get the impression that just about everything they offer is great, but that some products are just more great.
Personally, I find it a shame that there isn't some NV superstore where customers can come in and try various makes and models of NV gear in an outdoor environment. I would be willing to bet that if folks understood their options better, a lot more night vision gear would be sold. As it stands, they are left with usualy buying based on specs, based on reviews, and maybe even based on limited use of somebody else's gear. Unless they buy the exact same model as their buddy, chances are that they do not really know the capabilities and shortcomings of the NV scope they are purchasing and how well it may fit their situation.
. This guy's 
voice keeps saying, "Instead of buying NV or a game camera, spend another $120 and you get a Pardner." Well, I'm going to check it out.
. So I went to a few guns shops and found the same shotgun for $70 bucks more. It was enough not to buy it. I also just decided to get a trail cam, but I will go to Bass Pro next week and check them out. No to Night vision.
