Arma 3 engine

[Dreahack]

Need some informations about what engine will you use for A3
Is it a new engine or the A2 one improved (if so i won't buy A3 ^^)

Thanks,

[PurePassion]

dude you cant say something like this!

It is a heavily improved version of the RV engine with stunning new features such as full PhysX and DX11 support. It will contain volumetric clouds, new animations way bigger terrain capacities, more viewdistance, the possibility do dive and explore the sea.
The AI is also going to be way much better than the current one.
And it will have even more great features which are currently just not officially confirmed yet!

Also an engine switch would not make any sense at all. The RV engine is capable of so many awesome things like huge terrains, massive AI etc..
and with arma 3 the devs are going to add "mainstream features" you know from other popular games which will have a huge impact on graphics.

so please wait some more time, atleast after E3 and the first Trailers before you judge Arma III and its stunning engine!

but hey if this reason is good enough for you not to buy Arma III, well then i guess its pointless and you kind of dont deserve to play it....

[ziiip]

Farwell then, enjoy Frostbite.:bye:

[wolfbite]

Need some informations about what engine will you use for A3
Is it a new engine or the A2 one improved (if so i won't buy A3 ^^)

Thanks,

Oh shit BIS will be sorely dissapointed.....
Out of interest why does a madified RV engine bother you so much?

[Zipper5]

http://www.arma3.com/#screenshots

Do any of those look like it isn't RealVirtuality? I feel as though you made this thread simply to make a point, and a rather lame one at that.

Anyways, yes, it's a new engine. It's RealVirtuality 4. Or were you insinuating something different? :rolleyes:

[NeMeSiS]

Anyways, yes, it's a new engine. It's RealVirtuality 4. Or were you insinuating something different? :rolleyes:

This is how it should be worded from now on.

[VIPER[CWW]]

Farwell then, enjoy Frostbite.:bye:

Hahaha well said....

I cant wait to see what changes have been made to RV, its a great engine after all....

Hopefully the sort of AI changes mean they will have a sense of self-preservation rather then running up to you and shooting you :p

[metalcraze]

Why does ArmA2 with its 200 sq. km maps and hundreds of AIs demands more from my PC that can run CoD with its 5 bots at once in tight corridors without any problem?

Shitty engine!

[nuxil]

Why does ArmA2 with its 200 sq. km maps and hundreds of AIs demands more from my PC that can run CoD with its 5 bots at once in tight corridors without any problem?

Shitty engine!

shitty engine. no way you cant be seriouse :p
all 5 pre scripted bots do a hell of a job on the 1kmx1km map :p
run & gun :)

at OP. if you dont like A2 ,. you will for sure will not like A3,

[NodUnit]

shitty engine. no way you cant be seriouse :p
all 5 pre scripted bots do a hell of a job on the 1kmx1km map :p
run & gun :)

at OP. if you dont like A2 ,. you will for sure will not like A3,

Pretty sure he was being sarcastic there.

[nuxil]

Pretty sure i was too. maybe my sarcasm was not that obvious

[Big Dawg KS]

Anyways, yes, it's a new engine. It's RealVirtuality 4. Or were you insinuating something different? :rolleyes:

Has BIS actually called it that, or is that speculation? For all we know it could be RV3.5 or something. Of course it really doesn't matter what number it is, all that matters is that it's still a great engine and BIS is continually improving it.

[NodUnit]

Pretty sure i was too. maybe my sarcasm was not that obvious

Well that'll teach me not to post early in the morning.

[OnlyRazor]

Actually every engine past (and sometimes before) the 1.0 mark is a modified version of the previous engine. If BIS went off to serve you spoiled kids and made an engine from scratch, the release date'd be somewhere around 2015 :rolleyes:

[CarlosTex]

boo boo i won't buy it boo boo

REAL VIRTUALITY ROCKS!!!!!!!!

[PurePassion]

XD nevermind my mind is playing tricks on me

but i think from now on sarcasm is overused ;)

[Deadfast]

Has BIS actually called it that, or is that speculation? For all we know it could be RV3.5 or something. Of course it really doesn't matter what number it is, all that matters is that it's still a great engine and BIS is continually improving it.

Alright, RealVirtuality 3+x then ;)

[NouberNou]

I like how most people do not realize that most game engines have been around for a long time.

Most FPS games run on almost the same three engines, and most of them have been around for over a decade. Source, Unreal, and Quake (and Quake is getting WAY UP THERE). Even the Cry engine is getting pretty old!

That doesn't mean they are old tech, it just means they have many many years of improvements in them. Starting from scratch isn't always the answer.

[MoS]

I like how most people do not realize that most game engines have been around for a long time.

Most FPS games run on almost the same three engines, and most of them have been around for over a decade. Source, Unreal, and Quake (and Quake is getting WAY UP THERE). Even the Cry engine is getting pretty old!

That doesn't mean they are old tech, it just means they have many many years of improvements in them. Starting from scratch isn't always the answer.

Completly agree with that one.

But I can also understand people suggesting to switch to another engine. It is because they see that many current flaws of ArmA II were there since OFP and not much has changed since then.
Their conclusion is that the reasons for this can only be found deep inside the core, letting the engine appear unsuitable for further development of next-gen-games.

To clarify my point: The call for switching the engine is just an indirect and (my guess) amateurish way of stating that the current engine needs some urgent and heavy overhaul in some basic key points like animation system, artificial intelligence, multiplayer-netcode or physics to name some of them, to be able to keep up with current game-technology.

Thats surely something we all would love to see. :)

[metalcraze]

To clarify my point: The call for switching the engine is just an indirect and (my guess) amateurish way of stating that the current engine needs some urgent and heavy overhaul in some basic key points like animation system, artificial intelligence, multiplayer-netcode or physics to name some of them, to be able to keep up with current game-technology.

Current game-technology is irrelevant. Gameplay must come first.
I can easily live without opening doors in cars, rolling barrels (which engine can do btw) and reload animations as long as the gameplay is being improved.

As for AI - I truly don't know any other game out there that provides AI on a par with what we have in AA2 right now. So basically AI in BIS games is 'current game-technology'.
Of course I'm not saying they shouldn't make it life-like - a point which it is still far from.

As for netcode. I don't really know any other engine that can have, say, 80 human players running around all while sending hundreds of bullets with proper ballistics out there and back - lag free.

[Dreahack]

Of course i will buy arma 3

But just want it to be better,arma 2 is a monster game but some "stupidities" in the engine killed 20% of ts success.

[Big Dawg KS]

But just want it to be better,arma 2 is a monster game but some "stupidities" in the engine killed 20% of ts success.

And the capabilities of the engine are what allowed it to be successful. Nothing's perfect, but saying that the engine killed any part of the game is just stupid; IMO the RV engine is what makes ArmA.

[mant3z]

Need some informations about what engine will you use for A3
Is it a new engine or the A2 one improved (if so i won't buy A3 ^^)

Thanks,

It's brand new engine 5.8ltr V10 double charged :D

[4 IN 1]

It's brand new engine 5.8ltr V10 double charged :D

Wait what? I always thinks RV engine are one of those turbo charged v6 monster bolted to a manual gearbox that have 1000's of BHP and required a man of steel to drive before F1 ban it.:p

[Ebolavirus]

Need some informations about what engine will you use for A3
Is it a new engine or the A2 one improved (if so i won't buy A3 ^^)

Thanks,

I think you should rephrase your question to;

"Due to my own sense of inadequacy and failure to do any online research into the question I am about to propose, please understand I am about to publically show my ignorance. I expect you should never answer my question and i shall self-combust in Tminus 15min"

[Sam75]

Battlefield 3 is the most realistic I ve ever seen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UwOrl036_A

I hate scripted game so if arma 3 could be anything close to that in terms of graphism/animation/FX/sounds it would be great.

[CameronMcDonald]

graphism

Awesome.

[RobertHammer]

Battlefield 3 is the most realistic I ve ever seen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UwOrl036_A

I hate scripted game so if arma 3 could be anything close to that in terms of graphism/animation/FX it would be great.

lol - since when is Battlefield realistic? :rolleyes:

anyway its offtopic

[metalcraze]

Battlefield 3 is the most realistic I ve ever seen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UwOrl036_A

I hate scripted game so if arma 3 could be anything close to that in terms of graphism/animation/FX/sounds it would be great.

Lots of post filters and soldiers telling you how awesome you are all the time coupled with you driving a tank with one hand and blowing enemies that don't fight back with another is very realistic.

[Archosaurusrev]

IMO ArmA3 has better graphics than BF3.
DID ANYONE SEE THAT AWESOME LANDMAP TEXTURE??!!! OR THE WATER?!?!?!?
Jizz in my pants.

And ofcourse unrivalled gameplay.

[eddie247]

There arent ANY maps in Frostbite2 that are 1x1km.

There arent any AI in it either

or planes, boats, editing facilites, mods allowed, no climbing into vehicle animations.

The 40mm grenades are OP. Blowing holes in 2 layer thick brick walls, i think not!

Frostbite 2? I say Frostbite POO!!

:yay::yay::yay::yay:

Battlefield is Battlefield. End of.

[Sam75]

Lots of post filters and soldiers telling you how awesome you are all the time coupled with you driving a tank with one hand and blowing enemies that don't fight back with another is very realistic.

again I am not interested at all by BF 3's gameplay (I won't buy it), I was referring to the visual/sound aspect of the game.

[RobertHammer]

again I am not interested at all by BF 3's gameplay (I won't buy it), I was referring to the visual/sound aspect of the game.

By Visual is not that nice - reason? - consoles

By Sound - that's only thing good on Bad Company and BF3 - in arma 3 there could be improvement ,but we will see

[metalcraze]

Visually it isn't realistic at all.
It looks nice with fancy shaders, post filters and lens flares - I won't deny that of course. But reality doesn't look like that.

The sound... well... yeah.
Voice-overs and FXs go along with a pre-recorded route. On one hand.
On another hand we could've had those kind of fxs for all dynamic stuff (like noises inside the tank which sound great). But unfortunately sound is the weakest point of BIS.

BIS also removed EAX from the engine instead of making it work properly which is a pity.
During those rare times when it actually worked in OFP even stock sounds sounded impressive. Imagine tanks battling in the large valley with thunderlike echoes spreading all around from cannon bursts and you get the idea

[PeterBitt]

By Visual is not that nice - reason? - consoles
...
unlike the guys from bethesta who stated that skyrim is a console production which will be ported to PC later on, Battlefield 3 is a PC game that will be ported to consoles!
on german gamestar they stated that the PC version will look much better than the consoles version and the videos and screens did look very nice to me!
however this game is not my cup of tea, me wants ARMAAAAAA :D

[4 IN 1]

Those BF3 "FLIR" (or so they call it) are ugly as fuck.

[Primarch]

Those BF3 "FLIR" (or so they call it) are ugly as fuck.

Not at all... Seems like all you guys wish to bash the game just for the sake of bashing it. How about we find good sides of ArmA 3 and not the bad sides of BF3?

[DM]

Those BF3 "FLIR" (or so they call it) are ugly as fuck.


Not at all...

Visually it looks quite nice.

On a technical level its useless... As bad as the "thermal" in dr/rr

Terrain has no heat, vehicles have uniform heat all over and are considerably hotter than the surrounding buildings and terrain (none of which have heat, meaning all vehicles and infantry are basically lit up "here I am, I'm a target!" which is not how it works in real life), vehicles dont leave hot tracks, dust they kick up is cold, the A-10's cast a crisp clean shadow...

So yeah, there is plenty wrong with the BF3 "Thermal"

[Primarch]

Visually it looks quite nice.

On a technical level its useless... As bad as the "thermal" in dr/rr

Terrain has no heat, vehicles have uniform heat all over and are considerably hotter than the surrounding buildings and terrain (none of which have heat, meaning all vehicles and infantry are basically lit up "here I am, I'm a target!" which is not how it works in real life), vehicles dont leave hot tracks, dust they kick up is cold, the A-10's cast a crisp clean shadow...

So yeah, there is plenty wrong with the BF3 "Thermal"

The same as Arma 2.

[Big Dawg KS]

http://images.cryhavok.org/d/16995-1/Can_t%20Tell%20if%20Trolling.jpg

[Maddmatt]

unlike the guys from bethesta who stated that skyrim is a console production which will be ported to PC later on, Battlefield 3 is a PC game that will be ported to consoles!

That's just the crap they talk to appease fans. In reality most multi-platform games are developed for all platforms at once. There is no "porting".
The development tools scale down textures and models for the console versions, and certain things are made separately (like adding graphics options to the PC version).

[Windexglow]

Terrain has no heat, vehicles have uniform heat all over and are considerably hotter than the surrounding buildings and terrain (none of which have heat, meaning all vehicles and infantry are basically lit up "here I am, I'm a target!" which is not how it works in real life), vehicles dont leave hot tracks, dust they kick up is cold, the A-10's cast a crisp clean shadow...

So yeah, there is plenty wrong with the BF3 "Thermal"
There's nothing wrong with it, because bf3's thermal is made for gameplay. Not realism.
Bf3 and arma3 are totally different games with even further gameplay goals, comparing them is pretty stupid.

[OnlyRazor]

That's just the crap they talk to appease fans. In reality most multi-platform games are developed for all platforms at once. There is no "porting".

God, there is a bunch of slack-jawed faggots immature people around here. Battlefield 3 is going to be a fine game, now can we stop raging over that fact and get back on topic. This is Arma 3 we're talking about here :p

[bus]

I don't think anyone would say BF3 is a realistic game and definitely not anywhere as close to realistic as A3 will be or this series ever has been. That's not DICE's goal. They're making a game that looks great and is fun to play for their audience.

But you can't deny that BF3 looks and sounds good and that's not to say that A3 won't look good, some of the movies and still shots coming out are simply amazing, it's just to say that in some gamers perfect worlds, it'd be nice to have the graphics and dare I say it, smoothness, of BF3 and the logic, gameplay and function of A3. I think DR tried to do that and just utterly failed...on both efforts.

But the reality is that with the scope of BIS's worlds, there simply are limits but it looks like with A3, BIS has made some incredible progress and pushed those limits further back. I just hope it runs well :-)

[SpetS15]

some little thing I notice watching the Alpha version in the E3 presentation, was, that there was not flickering textures, 3dobjetcs rendering LOD glitch whatever. Everything seems fluid and perfect. I want to see how the sound works, distant shots, explosions, vehicles

[MoS]

some little thing I notice watching the Alpha version in the E3 presentation, was, that there was not flickering textures, 3dobjetcs rendering LOD glitch whatever. Everything seems fluid and perfect. I want to see how the sound works, distant shots, explosions, vehicles

Yeah but this has always been the case for BIS presentations/trailers.

Guess all it takes is a pc with current medium to high spec hardware and a clean, defragmentated HDD to achieve the same results.

But it would be still interesting to know the specs and especially the size of the monitor of the equipment used at E3.

[jonneymendoza]

That's just the crap they talk to appease fans. In reality most multi-platform games are developed for all platforms at once. There is no "porting".
The development tools scale down textures and models for the console versions, and certain things are made separately (like adding graphics options to the PC version).

wrong. explain why their hasnt been a single BF3 console footage and explain to me why at e3, the demo and the MP demo they allowed people to try was ALL run on a pc?

yup, BF3 is a console port

[Innomadic]

wrong. explain why their hasnt been a single BF3 console footage and explain to me why at e3, the demo and the MP demo they allowed people to try was ALL run on a pc?

yup, BF3 is a console port

Because DICE can pick and choose what they show to garner a specific reaction, i.e: THE ENTIRE PC crowd who need to be satiated by footage that their baby is PC central? They're a games company, and its obvious the PC developed ploy has worked so far.

Would be kinda hilarious if it did turn out to be a 360 port.

[jonneymendoza]

There arent ANY maps in Frostbite2 that are 1x1km.

There arent any AI in it either

or planes, boats, editing facilites, mods allowed, no climbing into vehicle animations.

The 40mm grenades are OP. Blowing holes in 2 layer thick brick walls, i think not!

Frostbite 2? I say Frostbite POO!!

:yay::yay::yay::yay:

Battlefield is Battlefield. End of.

what a very immature and terrible post by you. hardly nothing has been announced about bf3. we dont know how big the maps are and no planes? vehicles? what are you smoking? it has all that. No climbing into vehicles? check out the tank bf3 footage.

pfff

---------- Post added at 07:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:33 PM ----------


Because DICE can pick and choose what they show to garner a specific reaction, i.e: THE ENTIRE PC crowd who need to be satiated by footage that their baby is PC central...

Would be kinda hilarious if it did turn out to be a 360 port.

And here is me thinking bf/cod fanboys are bad. some of the people here are worse!

You believe that post of yours? serious? come on it dont take a rocket scientist to know that the reason why they showed the pc version is because its the BEST version to show :rolleyes:

You know what, i wont bother defending BF3 to fanboys. i will enjoy BOTH arma 3 and BF3 when they arrive.

[vfn4i83]

That's just the crap they talk to appease fans. In reality most multi-platform games are developed for all platforms at once. There is no "porting".
The development tools scale down textures and models for the console versions, and certain things are made separately (like adding graphics options to the PC version).

They have texture streaming ? so, yeah; its a port!

[Innomadic]

what a very immature and terrible post by you. hardly nothing has been announced about bf3. we dont know how big the maps are and no planes? vehicles? what are you smoking? it has all that. No climbing into vehicles? check out the tank bf3 footage.

pfff

To be fair we can't be 100% certain that tank BF3 footage, nor any other campaign footage, is 100% in game and real (unless it was played on stage) and will occur all the time, everytime, and is not a scripted event.

Reminds me of the first Killzone 2 "trailer", though i'd be pleased if i were wrong.

[jonneymendoza]

To be fair we can't be 100% certain that tank BF3 footage, nor any other campaign footage, is 100% in game and real (unless it was played on stage) and will occur all the time, everytime, and is not a scripted event.

Reminds me of the first Killzone 2 "trailer", though i'd be pleased if i were wrong.

Jesus.

You kidding me? the TANK demo was played LIVE at E3. You had a guy in middle of the stage sitting infront of a pc controlling the tank and aiming!

What if bf3 had huge maps? what excuses will people make then?

Also the campaign videos. You can see a HUD ffs. it dont look fixed or fake to me.

im 99% sure thats the real game played. O and killzone 2 trailer?? it was a trailer/teaser. the other gameplay trailers where identical to the actual game.

pff maybe the gametrailer walkthrough of arma 3 is fake? ;)

Also, scripted? campaign modes are usualy scripted! Also people tend to forget that BF series are pvp games! i.e player vs player. no AI involved.

Compare apples to apples mate. how awsome is Arma 3 going to be via pvp is the question you should be asking mate.

arma 2's pvp is shocking. so shocking that project reality is stepping it to fix it.

[vfn4i83]

Jesus.

You kidding me? the TANK demo was played LIVE at E3. You had a guy in middle of the stage sitting infront of a pc controlling the tank and aiming!

What if bf3 had huge maps? what excuses will people make then?

Also the campaign videos. You can see a HUD ffs. it dont look fixed or fake to me.

im 99% sure thats the real game played. O and killzone 2 trailer?? it was a trailer/teaser. the other gameplay trailers where identical to the actual game.

pff maybe the gametrailer walkthrough of arma 3 is fake? ;)

Also, scripted? campaign modes are usualy scripted! Also people tend to forget that BF series are pvp games! i.e player vs player. no AI involved.

Compare apples to apples mate. how awsome is Arma 3 going to be via pvp is the question you should be asking mate.

arma 2's pvp is shocking. so shocking that project reality is stepping it to fix it.


How was the Nintendo Box? I heard that the Line was humongous to see teh "Wu".

[mikelt006]

same engine as arma 2 right?

[Derbysieger]

Not exactly. It's vastly improved from what I've heard and seen so far. It is the RV engine but it has now physx, volumetric clouds, it will feature render to texture, you'll be able to dive and drown yourself and it will most likely support DX11. Sounds like a lot improvement to me.

[Maddmatt]

wrong. explain why their hasnt been a single BF3 console footage and explain to me why at e3, the demo and the MP demo they allowed people to try was ALL run on a pc?

yup, BF3 is a console port


They ran it on PC because that was how they chose to demonstrate it. So what?
How does that disprove what I said? I'm talking about how game developers develop multi-platform games.
If you think you know better then how about you explain how game development works?


They have texture streaming ? so, yeah; its a port!

WTF has that got to do with a game being a port or not? Or are you just trolling for fun?

People throw around the word "port" without knowing what it means. Porting is covering a game to another platform AFTER is has been made for the original platform(s).

[jhoson14]

Jesus.

You kidding me? the TANK demo was played LIVE at E3. You had a guy in middle of the stage sitting infront of a pc controlling the tank and aiming!

What if bf3 had huge maps? what excuses will people make then?

Also the campaign videos. You can see a HUD ffs. it dont look fixed or fake to me.

im 99% sure thats the real game played. O and killzone 2 trailer?? it was a trailer/teaser. the other gameplay trailers where identical to the actual game.

pff maybe the gametrailer walkthrough of arma 3 is fake? ;)

Also, scripted? campaign modes are usualy scripted! Also people tend to forget that BF series are pvp games! i.e player vs player. no AI involved.

Compare apples to apples mate. how awsome is Arma 3 going to be via pvp is the question you should be asking mate.

arma 2's pvp is shocking. so shocking that project reality is stepping it to fix it.

PR is steping to fix the MP? There's no need to fix it.

And they come to ArmA for the only reason that BF3 wont have mod tool's, just it.


And we all have seen by now that you are a BF3 blindfanboy who wont accept the fact that BF3 is just a BC2 with makeup.

[vfn4i83]

...
People throw around the word "port" without knowing what it means. Porting is covering a game to another platform AFTER is has been made for the original platform(s).

Indeed

[SpetS15]

offT: About PR, I hope they finish the project before Arma3 otherwise... lol

[Steakslim]

PR is steping to fix the MP? There's no need to fix it.

And they come to ArmA for the only reason that BF3 wont have mod tool's, just it.


And we all have seen by now that you are a BF3 blindfanboy who wont accept the fact that BF3 is just a BC2 with makeup.

You two girls need to stop fagging up this thread with your multi-paragraph posts of bickering.

[chris64]

PR is steping to fix the MP? There's no need to fix it.

And they come to ArmA for the only reason that BF3 wont have mod tool's, just it.


And we all have seen by now that you are a BF3 blindfanboy who wont accept the fact that BF3 is just a BC2 with makeup.

You do know it's possible that both games can be good? You don't have to defend ArmA against any game that could also be fun. I for one will be buying both (crazy I know!!! :eek: )

[NodUnit]

Jesus.

You kidding me? the TANK demo was played LIVE at E3. You had a guy in middle of the stage sitting infront of a pc controlling the tank and aiming!

He may have been referring to the interior which is probably true, I doubt they will include it in multiplayer but what harm is that, if battlefield started taking more steps to reality it would cease to be battlefield, a quick action game..and there is nothing wrong with that, if everything was Arma we wouldn't enjoy it as much.

[paecmaker]

I like Battlefield, its a good game.

I like ARMA 2 its a good game.

So come on you cant possibly compare these two games, they are equally good games with very different gameplay.

I thought that this was a serious and mature forum and not just a bunch of whining basterds.

[Big Dawg KS]

There's nothing wrong with it, because bf3's thermal is made for gameplay. Not realism.
Bf3 and arma3 are totally different games with even further gameplay goals, comparing them is pretty stupid.

This, now can we stfu about BF3? Thanks.

[Sam75]

would be nice to have volumetric clouds casting shadows on the ground.

[richiespeed13]

would be nice to have volumetric clouds casting shadows on the ground.

This is confirmed isn't it?

[Liquidpinky]

would be nice to have volumetric clouds casting shadows on the ground.

They are and they do, Jay already mentioned it for ToH and I think Ivan mentioned it for A3.

[Innomadic]

Edit: Responding in appropriate thread

[4 IN 1]

Here is the thing: I never say that the game is going to sucks, nor did I compare it with ArmA2/3; I just say that those "FLIR" just look ugly as fuck~;)

[jonneymendoza]

PR is steping to fix the MP? There's no need to fix it.

And they come to ArmA for the only reason that BF3 wont have mod tool's, just it.


And we all have seen by now that you are a BF3 blindfanboy who wont accept the fact that BF3 is just a BC2 with makeup.

If im a fanboy of BF games, why do i play arma 2 more?:j:

[the_antipop]

As for netcode. I don't really know any other engine that can have, say, 80 human players running around all while sending hundreds of bullets with proper ballistics out there and back - lag free.

1. ArmA 2 struggles with AI with <20 players...
2. Battlefield 2 supported 128... :rolleyes:

I'm also interested to see if it's RV 3.5 or 4. I'm hoping on many more engine improvements over the E3 demo, otherwise, well, I won't be unhappy, just disappointed. BIS doesn't need to rush this game, the amount of time people spend of A2 still is crazy, BIS can take their time and create the best Mil-Sim to date, I just hope they don't fudge it...

[PuFu]

1. ArmA 2 struggles with AI with <20 players...
2. Battlefield 2 supported 128... :rolleyes:
128 what? I've played 120+ PvP games in A2, but never in BF2 (64 max afaik).

[jonneymendoza]

You do know it's possible that both games can be good? You don't have to defend ArmA against any game that could also be fun. I for one will be buying both (crazy I know!!! :eek: )

well said.

---------- Post added at 09:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 AM ----------


128 what? I've played 120+ PvP games in A2, but never in BF2 (64 max afaik).

Thats another thing. many dont like pvp in arma 2 and this IMO is where BF series shine

[the_antipop]

128 what? I've played 120+ PvP games in A2, but never in BF2 (64 max afaik).

Na, it did support 128. 64v64. But that doesn't matter.

The netcode does need to be fix. Not for PvP, but for Co-op, the main gamemode the majority of A2 players play.

[Primarch]

128 what? I've played 120+ PvP games in A2, but never in BF2 (64 max afaik).

Project Reality: Battlefield 2 supports up to 256players, playing smoothly.

[CameronMcDonald]

We play co-ops in A2 with 60+ people every Saturday, and they run just beautifully.

Improve the netcode sure, but don't claim A2 can't handle it.

[Mr. Charles]

yea, if i play 16 players PvP and the dude right next to me is warping, everything is fine :j:

[RobertHammer]

yea, if i play 16 players PvP and the dude right next to me is warping, everything is fine :j:

it also depends how strong server you got :icon_twisted:

[the_antipop]

We play co-ops in A2 with 60+ people every Saturday, and they run just beautifully.

Improve the netcode sure, but don't claim A2 can't handle it.

There's a difference between running one ArmA 2 server on a i7 beast with 1000gb's of ram, and running 10x BF2 64 player servers on a dual core Xeon with 4gb of ram...That's netcode right there.

And there is a major difference between the MSO and a stock standard Co-Op. Try running a MSO with 60 players....

[PuFu]

There's a difference between running one ArmA 2 server on a i7 beast with 1000gb's of ram, and running 10x BF2 64 player servers on a dual core Xeon with 4gb of ram...That's netcode right there.

And there is a major difference between the MSO and a stock standard Co-Op. Try running a MSO with 60 players....
god fucking christ, give it a break. BF2 server doesn't take care of the AI, does it now? I7s are not server CPUs either way

[4 IN 1]

Now COOP is another matter, what they are talking about is PVP

[z0rrer0]

Current game-technology is irrelevant. Gameplay must come first.
I can easily live without opening doors in cars, rolling barrels (which engine can do btw) and reload animations as long as the gameplay is being improved.

As for AI - I truly don't know any other game out there that provides AI on a par with what we have in AA2 right now. So basically AI in BIS games is 'current game-technology'.
Of course I'm not saying they shouldn't make it life-like - a point which it is still far from.

As for netcode. I don't really know any other engine that can have, say, 80 human players running around all while sending hundreds of bullets with proper ballistics out there and back - lag free.

Absolutely true

+10

[Primarch]

Absolutely true

+10

No it is not, the game is never lag free. Can you tell me a server that has no lag or almost no lag/warping in Arma 2/ OA with over 10 players? You can not.

[metalcraze]

I played on Dao.nu a few times and it had 50+ players then and I never noticed any lag.
Despite also being on ADSL connection which usually doesn't provide the best ping either.

AI warping on the other hand felt more like a random thing.

One time when playing in coop we had 30+ players and 200-300 AIs and they weren't warping around (although FPS was terrible for obvious reasons), but the other time when we had just 10 and 60 AIs they were warping

Of course I'm not saying that warping shouldn't be fixed but the netcode I liked since OFP. In games like UT anything higher than 40ms is a gamebreaking ping, in OFP/AA I could play, survive and kill with 100+ without problems

[neokika]

No it is not, the game is never lag free. Can you tell me a server that has no lag or almost no lag/warping in Arma 2/ OA with over 10 players? You can not.

I guess you've been playing in the wrong servers then.

_neo_

[paecmaker]

can we please get back into the thread now.

[jonneymendoza]

No it is not, the game is never lag free. Can you tell me a server that has no lag or almost no lag/warping in Arma 2/ OA with over 10 players? You can not.

the UO servers are lag free for me 9/10

[njmatrix]

Yeah I won't be buying it until it hits the 10 dollar bargain bins. I learned my lesson with the last 3 installments. I don't know about the Fanbois but as a consumer I am tired of games that don't run upon release, requiring more updates than Microsoft Windows and being laggier than a epileptic with Parkinson's. I just refuse to buy it this time around.I haven't been happy with a BI product since OFP so I am done. I wish em well and maybe after 3 crap releases they will finally get it right. I doubt it but we can wish.

[Zipper5]

ArmA, Arma 2 & Arma 2: Operation Arrowhead all ran for me on release, completely fine.

I think the issue most of the time is people need to take better care of their PCs, or learn how they work better.

[AstroMan]

^same here, i had a pretty low end computer back when arma 2 game out and i was still able to play it on lower settings.

[NodUnit]

EDIT: blah

[njmatrix]

This whole thread is silly, it began with someone complaining that if A3 used the same engine then they wouldn't buy it, threads like this usually get closed day 1 why is it still open? O.o

ArmA 3 - GENERAL Discuss our newly announced game ArmA 3.

I think this topic falls under that category. And it is legit as to the fact alot of people had problems and/or were not happy with how the game turned out. '
Its kinda like watching TV. IF you dont like what you see you can always change the channel...


^same here, i had a pretty low end computer back when arma 2 game out and i was still able to play it on lower settings.


Yeah thats its all the people who had problems was due to the fact that they are idiots and dont take care of their systems... read the forums people arent idiots because you dont agree with them or they are having problems. If you ever took took the time to read the forums you would see that it didnt matter the system specs that the game ran differently for various people with various systems and it didnt matter high end or low end. I have a pretty decent system and it ran and always has like crap.

[NodUnit]

How often do you install/uninstall programs, did you defrag before installing? did you run virus checks for malware and the like, clean registry etc? Also what was your video card and processor? Processor being more important but since Arma doesn't have the option to disable shaders currently, a card that cannot run 2.0 etc would easily bog down.

[njmatrix]

How often do you install/uninstall programs, did you defrag before installing? did you run virus checks for malware and the like, clean registry etc? Also what was your video card and processor? Processor being more important but since Arma doesn't have the option to disable shaders currently, a card that cannot run 2.0 etc would easily bog down.

Another one that thinks everyone is an idiot....

[NodUnit]

Do you always get defensive when someone asks a few simple questions for curiosity sake? If I thought you were an idiot I would have been insulting about it and if your reaction was due that last bit that slipped in then it was not my intention to speak s if you didn't know anything on the subject, I was going to remove it in hindsight but you quoted me before I could.

[the_antipop]

ArmA, Arma 2 & Arma 2: Operation Arrowhead all ran for me on release, completely fine.

I think the issue most of the time is people need to take better care of their PCs, or learn how they work better.

But they run better now then they did on release? For me, they ran fine on release, but not as well as they do now. Which should have been how they ran on initial release.

[Steakslim]

Sure ATOC isn't jacking your fps? Was implemented in the last patch which you may want to disable if so.

BIS has been trying and implementing new things since release all the time in beta patches and such.

[Mr. Charles]

it also depends how strong server you got :icon_twisted:

i think a i7 920 with 100 mbit should be able to handle 16 players :rolleyes:

[neokika]

i think a i7 920 with 100 mbit should be able to handle 16 players :rolleyes:

And it doesn't? :eek:

[SQB-SMA]

the UO servers are lag free for me 9/10

Yes, but with a server fps of 10-20. It is fairly noticeable.

and yes, UO do do a better job than many other squads, but that is part of the point, one should not have to be good nor rich to run a good server.

Edit: typo :)

[the_antipop]

Yes, but with a server fps of 10-20. It is fairly noticeable.

and yes, UO do do a better job than many other squads, but that is part of the point, one should not have to be good nor rich to run a good server.

Edit: typo :)

My point exactly.

The thing is, I know ArmA 2 is a powerful game, spawns AI etc. But the netcode is annoying. Desync, Lags when someone joins, AI warping, players shuttering etc.

You shouldn't have to buy, as SQB-SMA states, a expensive server just to run one ArmA 2 server. At the moment, a few of us at AusArmA have bought a new Dual Core Xeon 3.2Ghz, 4GB ram, 15k 80GB HDD to run one MSO server, and still it eats 100% of the CPU, and runs at 15Fps...

I may be asking a lot, but netcode has been an issue ever since the start of OFP back in 2001 and it's getting worse with improving graphics. Some of you aren't experiencing it sure, but a vast majority of us are. Let's just hope BIS can some time out and look at it and improve it where they can.

------------------

Back to the engine. The engine itself is very powerful. But, as stated by many others, there are just niggling things here and there that need improving, and I'm sure BIS are working on it. The main thing I want to see is that BIS release a non-buggy game at launch, so when people buy it, they don't need to wait for a patch to get rid of a bug in the engine or campaign. A lot of the things that brought reviews down for A2 was bug problems on launch, if this is fixed, A3 reviews will skyrocket, thus bring a bigger player base, leading to more money for BIS to keep doing their thing! :)

[AstroMan]

they said they were improving netcode.

[MrXToTheN]

I was one of the people who thought they should create a new engine. I changed my mind after seeing what they did so far with ArmA III.
They put everything that I wanted into their newest version of RV. I just hope AI will also be improved in CQB and AI warping in network games will be fixed.

[metalcraze]

Adding PhysX, ragdolls and improving graphics are only things a game needs to have a good gameplay.

[HKFlash]

I was one of the people who thought they should create a new engine. I changed my mind after seeing what they did so far with ArmA III.

And your not the first one to change your mind. Alot of people simply believed that RV's time was over and it had to be replaced with an engine made from scratch. Before OA came out people also didn't believe BIS would be able to implement FLIR. Guess who was wrong?

From what I've seen from ArmA3 it is pretty clear to me that ArmA2 was a commercial success that granted BIS the necessary funds to implement new technologies into RV.

*Object physics
*Ragdolls
*Underwater environments
*Ultra huge map
*Huge towns with enter able buildings
*3D Editor

If ArmA3 only introduced the features above it would already bring more to the series than ArmA2 and more so ArmA ever did...

[wipman]

Hi, i fear that the ArmA3 engine gonna have many of the current limitations that we've been suffering of from the OFP:R times; twelve years ago. Let's C ya

[HKFlash]

... :butbut:

(just to let me post)

[4 IN 1]

I think it is quite clear that the engine will needed some major overhaul sometime in the future, it just the question of when will they do that.

[Rye]

Hi, i fear that the ArmA3 engine gonna have many of the current limitations that we've been suffering of from the OFP:R times; twelve years ago. Let's C ya

A lot of people are worried of this. Cosmetic make-up but no real changes to current underlying issues that haunt us. :yay: Oh well, I still get to shoot stuff.

[DunnoDunKe]

hi, guys, just wondering it would be great if the engine support a firefight such in the Rainbow Six: Vegas (it's that the right name?).. a lil bit of realism i think..i dont know much about gaming engines, but is it possible to implement it in BIS' RV?

p/s: and plz don smash me because of this question...just asking out of curiosity due to my ignorance lol :)

[Big Dawg KS]

I think it is quite clear that the engine will needed some major overhaul sometime in the future, it just the question of when will they do that.

Erm, right now? It may not be immediate, but this is definately a huge step compared to previous titles.

---------- Post added at 11:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:51 PM ----------


hi, guys, just wondering it would be great if the engine support a firefight such in the Rainbow Six: Vegas (it's that the right name?).. a lil bit of realism i think..i dont know much about gaming engines, but is it possible to implement it in BIS' RV?

p/s: and plz don smash me because of this question...just asking out of curiosity due to my ignorance lol :)

Why? Vegas was a joke...

[NodUnit]

hi, guys, just wondering it would be great if the engine support a firefight such in the Rainbow Six: Vegas (it's that the right name?).. a lil bit of realism i think..i dont know much about gaming engines, but is it possible to implement it in BIS' RV?

p/s: and plz don smash me because of this question...just asking out of curiosity due to my ignorance lol :)

Not smashing you but what kind of firefight do you mean? Never played vegas but I see this brought up many times mostly when used as an example for a cover system.

[Rye]

One where you hug a wall and blind fire. Hehe.

[DunnoDunKe]

As Rye said, what i meant was to get behind a wall and shooting from cover:cool:....a system where makes you stick to wall or any nearby cover available....it's not neccessarily blind fire, you can aim down your gun...


Why? Vegas was a joke...
why's that?:( it think it adds a lil bit more realism....

but i guess, different people, different preferences, lol....:)

[Flash Thunder]

I really dont understand how people can say that Arma 3 engine: Real Virtuality 4.0 is not a big enough change from previous versions.

Just look at the features:

RV 3 supports only DirectX 9

RV 4 supports DX10 and maybe in the future DX11

*Physx integration

*New Animations

*Render to Texture

and new Under water mechanic

How is this not enough? :o

We still havent heard anything on AI or Lighting engine, and im already stoked.

[Rye]

How is this not enough? :o

For me it's not the features that have been added that will satisfy me. But old engine issues that must be fixed e.g. hitlocations and hitdetection, I'm sure modders can give you 1,000 other problems.

And it's the fact that it may or may not be up to par. It may not be enough if the quality just isn't there.

Although I friggen' love the idea of underwater ops and shooting someone who will drop off a building - I would must prefer engine issues that they may have and potential issues with these new features to be fixed and tweaked.

[Maddmatt]

why's that?:( it think it adds a lil bit more realism....

but i guess, different people, different preferences, lol....:)

Being able to hide behind a wall, and using a 3rd person view to magically see around the corner without exposing yourself, is not realistic at all.

[metalcraze]

hi, guys, just wondering it would be great if the engine support a firefight such in the Rainbow Six: Vegas (it's that the right name?).. a lil bit of realism i think..i dont know much about gaming engines, but is it possible to implement it in BIS' RV?

p/s: and plz don smash me because of this question...just asking out of curiosity due to my ignorance lol :)

...Realism... In Vegas? Lawl


As Rye said, what i meant was to get behind a wall and shooting from cover:cool:
You can do that in ArmA


....a system where makes you stick to wall or any nearby cover available....it's not neccessarily blind fire, you can aim down your gun...
But you can do that in ArmA. It just doesn't glue you to wall with a stupid boolean variable of "invincible" (glued) / "exposed" (unglued)

ArmA lets you choose your own cover - why do you want something as inferior and unrealistic as Vegas' system?

Cover systems are there not because they are "realistic" (which they are not) but because with a gamepad on consoles you don't have precise movements and can't move behind objects just as well as you do it with kb+mouse. Sticky cover ruins the freedom of movement in console games for the sake of giving console players a chance to actually survive even in the arcadiest of shooters by providing that stupid boolean of "invincible/exposed". Why do you think when just crouching behind the wooden table in games like Mafia 2 or GTA4 you always get shot but as soon as you press the Magic Button bullets stop penetrating even wood.

[Billy Bones]

Tried a search on this thread ? Destruction = will Arma3 have building destruction not the 4 walls falling in on each other kind, but being able to blow hole in buildings.

[Buzz_Fledderjohn]

I really hope that BIS will do a LOT of optimizing and improving, because the current engine runs far from smoothly. Not saying that it's a bad engine, just that it would give BIS a lot of bad press if they'd keep the same engine and not make it run a LOT better.

[Primarch]

I really hope that BIS will do a LOT of optimizing and improving, because the current engine runs far from smoothly. Not saying that it's a bad engine, just that it would give BIS a lot of bad press if they'd keep the same engine and not make it run a LOT better.

They have done something very critical to campaign that will smooth out the experience a lot; De-activating enemies that are on the other side of the map so they won't use resources and only activate if the player is getting close. This makes it so that there's no stupid bugs that are not easy to reproduce due to AI decisions and that close AI to player is working much more efficiently. This is going to be a module probably because it won't be on by default in editor.

[NouberNou]

So, its AI caching, like people have been using in ArmA and ArmA2 for ages. :p

[PuFu]

Tried a search on this thread ? Destruction = will Arma3 have building destruction not the 4 walls falling in on each other kind, but being able to blow hole in buildings.
as said in the ARG, there won't be advanced destruction for buildings, over the ones existing in A2 (i guess the layered levels of bd destruction already present)

[jonneymendoza]

So it wont be same like bf3?

[CameronMcDonald]

No. It will be pretty much the same as it already is.

[jonneymendoza]

damm thats terrible.

[PuFu]

damm thats terrible.
each with his priorities i guess...
on my part, it isn't terrible at all

[jonneymendoza]

i see. i would have thought they would improve it a bit? when will we finaly see realistic destricble environments? Arma 10?

[PuFu]

i see. i would have thought they would improve it a bit? when will we finaly see realistic destricble environments? Arma 10?
BF3 destruction is all good and fun too look at, but it isn't realistic either. Let's not start, yet again comparison in terms of size and scope.

If BIS makes all buildings with destruction layers, that would be enough for armaverse

[jonneymendoza]

BF3 destruction is all good and fun too look at, but it isn't realistic either. Let's not start, yet again comparison in terms of size and scope.

If BIS makes all buildings with destruction layers, that would be enough for armaverse

its more realistic then what BIS has at the moment.

[Trips]

You can't have it all, there aren't enough cycles on your CPU or bytes in your RAM. Compare BF3 to ArmA in terms of map sizes or AI versatility, for example.

I'd expect more destructible subsections and stages per building but there are probably better (by that I mean have a bigger effect on gameplay) things to spend CPU time on than dynamic destruction.

[EricM]

We all dream of having BF3 destructible environments, with Euphoria animation, with Crysis 2 realtime GI, with ID tech 5 megatexture, with Lionhead's mega meshes, with outerra's infinite procedural world, all running 60fps with Kinect (Track IR is sooo last year) on a tablet, right ?

BIS isn't the kind to slack, but they can't licence or recreate all the cutting-edge techs on the market with their financial and man power. This is hard core programming. In a few years it'll be more common place and better documented, but you can't ask so much so soon. They already have to harness the power of DX11 and they've got plenty on their hands with that.

[Aussie_Osiris]

Things I want to know about the new engine/ARMA III are

Is grass a compulsory render so that regardless of your settings there is always grass so people can't turn it off and more importantly so that the AI doesn't see through it.
(Also from the videos it appears the vegetation render distance has been greatly increased)

Will it advantage of geometry instancing v2 introduced in DirectX 10 so it can render the same object with varying textures? (And make the game look awesome)

Will there be animations for boarding/un-boarding vehicles?

Will there be tessellation?
If so will it be used on as many things possible or just characters, objects, landscapes and/or buildings?

Will fog have weight? (So that it's thicker at the ground than a few metres (or meters for you Americans) up)

Will there be shader subroutines? (To make the shading engine much more efficient)

What kind of texture mapping (bump, normal, parallax, displacement ect.) will there be?

Are you only going to be using the CPU library of PhysX or the GPU library as well?

Also does PhysX give smooth animation transitions? (I know Havok calculates transitioning between one animation to another but I've never looked into what PhysX can do)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For the people who don't have much knowledge about the API that is DirectX 10/11 or people who would like a refresher.
Microsoft started from scratch in making the DirectX 10 API. DirectX 10 Hardware can actually use DirectX 11, as DirectX 11 is more like an extension of 10 and is backwards compatible. One HUGE thing they fixed is that much of the code that choked the CPU in DirectX 9c and earlier versions was taken off and put onto the GPU or doesn't exist anymore. This will greatly help relieve the pressure off the CPU that was so intense for ARMA II. Microsoft made DirectX 11 multi-threaded, previously developers could only do so much at making the game multi-threaded but DirectX 10 and earlier still choked the line as it was still only single threaded, so that too will make the engine more efficient.

(Developers and community please correct me if I'm wrong on the above paragraph as it's been some time since I studied this stuff for uni)

Any questions regarding DirectX 10/11 I'll gladly try to answer to give the developers less time explaining and more time developing. :)

PS. I fully support the decision to make the game DirectX 10/11 only. This will make the game run much better and make development much easier for the developers. This is what the industry needs to push itself forwards and leave the past behind.

[whisper]

damm thats terrible.

You know what? I'm going right now at BF3 forums whining ENDLESSLY that their maps are freaking TINY (yes, even the "much larger" they so boast in E3 previews), can't handle 10kmx10km and that is freaking TERRIBLE and INNACCEPTABLE in 2011, when a simple engine like Virtual Reality can do it for years now, then whining endlessly on how their AI handling in the open is completely poor.....



Should I go further, or do you get the picture ?


there's a distinct difference between "it's terrible and unacceptable because game X already does it" and "it could use improvement".

Every engine could use improvement, you can't have it all packed together. If it was as easy as you paint it, another company would have done it already! BIG NEWS : only 1 has tried so far, and failed badly!

If what you seek if BF3 engine only, then by all means, go play BF3 when it's out, and stop playing A2/A3, BF3 is going to be an excellent game by the look of it.
If you like ArmA specific : scale, then this specific comes with a price. You should accept it, as simple as that.

* I have ArmA scale
* I want a lag free game
* I want BF3 destructible environment
Typical mutual exclusive

You probably notice BC2 hit detection is not really the best, and not on par with previous Dice titles. Could it be due to server being slightly more loaded by physics, and notably, destruction calculations?
Could you now imagine said destruction calculations transposed in ArmA scale? which is like what? 5x BF scale at the very least? What kind of magic will BI pull to get this done? Or is there any reason to not take into account the scale, and hope that you'll never have 15 simultaneous building collapse on a single server, for example?
Or, perhaps you don't care about scale, in which case, why play ArmA? (if I'm going to resume ArmA to scale, which is imho its main specific)

There's room for improvement
Terrible? Not really

[SpetS15]

its more realistic then what BIS has at the moment.

realistic?
making holes in a wall with a 203 grenade? lol
Carrying infinite healing/ammo magic box? wtf?
Deploying a parachute everytime you jump from a building? WHATA FOOK!!??
and so on...

I like and I have BC2 already, and Im going to buy BF3 for sure, but... cmon!
Long time playing Arma1 and Arma2 Coop and TvTs and I never needed to destroy any building to get in or kill any enemy inside. For that, we use C4, satchels, rocket launcher, CAS, Tanks, Artillery, etc, etc NOT a rain of 203s or grenades.
I admint it would be nice new visual effects, like more smoke dust and debries flying, big explosion, shock wave, very loud sound, when you throw a JDAM for example

[DMarkwick]

realistic?
making holes in a wall with a 203 grenade? lol
Carrying infinite healing/ammo magic box? wtf?
Deploying a parachute everytime you jump from a building? WHATA FOOK!!??
and so on...

I like and I have BC2 already, and Im going to buy BF3 for sure, but... cmon!
Long time playing Arma1 and Arma2 Coop and TvTs and I never needed to destroy any building to get in or kill any enemy inside. For that, we use C4, satchels, rocket launcher, CAS, Tanks, Artillery, etc, etc NOT a rain of 203s or grenades.
I admint it would be nice new visual effects, like more smoke dust and debries flying, big explosion, shock wave, very loud sound, when you throw a JDAM for example

You should filter for context, JM was commenting on the building destruction, not every single thing.

[antoineflemming]

realistic?
making holes in a wall with a 203 grenade? lol
Carrying infinite healing/ammo magic box? wtf?
Deploying a parachute every time you jump from a building? WHATA FOOK!!??
and so on...

I like and I have BC2 already, and Im going to buy BF3 for sure, but... cmon!
Long time playing Arma1 and Arma2 Coop and TvTs and I never needed to destroy any building to get in or kill any enemy inside. For that, we use C4, satchels, rocket launcher, CAS, Tanks, Artillery, etc, etc NOT a rain of 203s or grenades.
I admit it would be nice new visual effects, like more smoke dust and debries flying, big explosion, shock wave, very loud sound, when you throw a JDAM for example
I thought the discussion was on destruction, not on a carbon copy of BFBC2. The comment was that the DESTRUCTION was more realistic that what BIS currently has, which is true. It'd be nice for a change if you super fanboys would stop getting offended every time someone says some aspect of some other game is better than BIS. Grow up and act mature.

[maturin]

BFBC destruction isn't realistic, but it could be optimized to be so. But if you can make holes in walls with M203s and destroy entire sides of houses with HEAT rockets in BFBC, Arma is worse with its sabot rounds and autocannons that take out entire houses, or fortifications that simply vanish in an instant, leaving the occupants in the open.

[chris64]

I thought the discussion was on destruction, not on a carbon copy of BFBC2. The comment was that the DESTRUCTION was more realistic that what BIS currently has, which is true. It'd be nice for a change if you super fanboys would stop getting offended every time someone says some aspect of some other game is better than BIS. Grow up and act mature.

Well said.

In an interview Marek Spanel was saying that with this iteration they really want to iron out the things with the engine that annoyed the community, I certainly hope this is true, if BIS can fix some of the niggles then I will be playing for a long long (long) time.

[NodUnit]

If only certain projectiles say a tank, could when the round hits say a brick wall, puncture but form an alpha decal that 'simulates' the hole rather than blow the entire wall out. Perhaps if the damage system could be based on projectile strength more closely such as say dropping an LGB from an A-10 vs a MBT HEAT or SABOT.

[Steakslim]

I could live with the Arrowhead building damage system in ArmA3, however, they really need to do something about the glass in the windows, they need to be breakable. I've found it frustrating at times to shoot through windows with the indestructible glass constantly meddling with the bullet path, which it should do...but the glass doesn't break so this constantly occurs and you sometimes cannot find a better vantage point. It was easier with Takistan because most of the buildings had open windows, but there were still a few that didn't. For the actual building damage they can just pretty it up with some better particle effects.

However if they do go for a more advanced damage system for the buildings, then all the better.

[Flock]

I was glad to hear that arma 3 is supporting underwater environments. One game, by a fellow Czech developer that i think bis could learn a lot from is hidden and dangerous 2. Even though it is about 8 years old it still leads the way in a lot of areas imo. I know that the biggest maps are only like 8km but it's still worth comparing.

For a start the physics are really something which would work well in arma 3 i think. For instance you can shoot weapons out of peoples hands or shoot soldiers hats off. There are some really good examples of under water missions. On the topic of hats, the h&d2 gear selection really gives a lot of customization and arma 3 could learn a thing or two from it.

Ragdolls, are done pretty well and work in multiplayer (co-op ai and pvp) by going "stiff" after about 5 seconds. Climbing and stamina systems are also areas that i think arma could do well to follow. The sounds and music (sp) were also very well done.

Anyone else who's played h&d2 think that similar features that it had could go down really well in arma 3?

[Kernriver]

I was glad to hear that arma 3 is supporting underwater environments. One game, by a fellow Czech developer that i think bis could learn a lot from is hidden and dangerous 2. Even though it is about 8 years old it still leads the way in a lot of areas imo. I know that the biggest maps are only like 8km but it's still worth comparing.

For a start the physics are really something which would work well in arma 3 i think. For instance you can shoot weapons out of peoples hands or shoot soldiers hats off. There are some really good examples of under water missions. On the topic of hats, the h&d2 gear selection really gives a lot of customization and arma 3 could learn a thing or two from it.

Ragdolls, are done pretty well and work in multiplayer (co-op ai and pvp) by going "stiff" after about 5 seconds. Climbing and stamina systems are also areas that i think arma could do well to follow. The sounds and music (sp) were also very well done.

Anyone else who's played h&d2 think that similar features that it had could go down really well in arma 3?

Yes, especially gear selection with weight constraints, that was really good, and I think it also affected your stamina.

[maionaze]

Can a dev confirm that the Arma 3 engine will be RV 4 ?

[mant3z]

Unfortunately no.
Last rumors says that it'll be engine which was used in Duke Nukem Forever :D

[NeMeSiS]

Can a dev confirm that the Arma 3 engine will be RV 4 ?

Does it really matter what number it will be called? If it makes you feel any better, they can also call it RV 8.:rolleyes:

[maionaze]

Does it really matter what number it will be called? If it makes you feel any better, they can also call it RV 8.:rolleyes:

Why yes, it does . A bigger number at the end means a better game . Just look at COD :rolleyes: .

I was just curious . We got a sudden burst of info with E3 and now it's all quiet on the central front . The features thread is starting to catch dust :D .

[mant3z]

It's silence before massive storm :)

[Big Dawg KS]

Can a dev confirm that the Arma 3 engine will be RV 4 ?

It's RV over-9000.

[ziiip]

I wish that creating custom animations was user-friendly. I dont know a anything about creating anims for ArmA2, but the number of anim packs should tell thats the current system is not very good. For example if I could use Messiah to create some custom stuff, I could spice up my missions, and I'm sure you could do the same with yours.

[DM]

should tell thats the current system is not very good.

Lols.

There is a galaxy of difference between good and easy.

The current system isnt really any different to any other game [character] animation system (in that you make the [character] animations in something like motion builder or 3ds max, then export them to the game)

The trick with animations is that they are incredibly hard to get right. Oftentimes you'll end up with things looking like total ass.

There are a limited number of animation packs because it is incredibly hard, time consuming, work to make them. Not because "the system" is bad ;)

[ziiip]

Well pardon my stupidity then, although I'm pretty sure that PuFu said something like "if you could do anims in external programs [i guess ouside o2?] than things would get more lively.

[Windexglow]

The quality of animations is not a huge concern anymore. Blending and creating varied animations ingame has become more and more important, it makes things look far less mechanical.

[Big Dawg KS]

Yea, ArmA 3 should ship with its own mocap studio. C'mon BIS, you know you want to. ;)

[MengJiao]

Visually it isn't realistic at all.
It looks nice with fancy shaders, post filters and lens flares - I won't deny that of course. But reality doesn't look like that.


Good Point. I sometimes wonder if people who claim there's something substandard about ARMA VR x.x have looked very much at the real world away from urban environments.

[BobcatBob]

Yea, ArmA 3 should ship with its own mocap studio. C'mon BIS, you know you want to. ;)

Well I think the blending of animations can be done using something like ANT (BF3) Im not sure if its just a matter of coding it into the game or if it has to be done for each combo of anims.

[Kridian]

..they really need to do something about the glass in the windows, they need to be breakable. I've found it frustrating at times to shoot through windows with the indestructible glass constantly meddling with the bullet path, which it should do...but the glass doesn't break...

Oh for god's sake YES! Most annoying thing ever! They need to have a melee option so you can use the but of your gun to clear the glass out.

[Steakslim]

Oh for god's sake YES! Most annoying thing ever! They need to have a melee option so you can use the but of your gun to clear the glass out.

or a break glass command in the action menu (similar to some addons that allow you to push out broken windshields on vehicles)...or I don't know, make the glass break after so many shots depending on size of the pane vs size and type of round hitting it.

[KorpeN]

or a break glass command in the action menu (similar to some addons that allow you to push out broken windshields on vehicles)...or I don't know, make the glass break after so many shots depending on size of the pane vs size and type of round hitting it.

F.....g yeah!! and then you break a bottle of vodka, sneak on your enemies and cut their throats. Yes BIS, plz include breakglass feature in ArmA3.

[Steakslim]

F.....g yeah!! and then you break a bottle of vodka, sneak on your enemies and cut their throats. Yes BIS, plz include breakglass feature in ArmA3.

That's not exactly what I ment and I'm not sure if you are mocking me or not..

[KorpeN]

That's not exactly what I ment and I'm not sure if you are mocking me or not..

I am very serious. This feature can give us many possibilities.

[Doatg]

My brain is getting ready to explode from reading all these good and negitive postings is there any BIS guys in here to elaborate and put this to bed. I dont really care about all this BF3 and Arma 3 graveling going on both games will be great in there own right. This is about Arma 3 there is a forum over at
EA site... Please BIS say something in this post!!!!!! for my eyes bleed red......... lol :)