I cant believe people think teh destruction is top notch in this game when its not. i ask again how can you blow a hole on a side of a building using a tank?
how come the LOD of the grass is soo low deeming it "useless" from a distance as you cant hide on it?
Arma 2 engine is decent but not as good as cryEngine with its brilliant physics, texture quality and overal presentation.
Honestly I find Cryengine 3 capable of handling what ArmA 2 needs. I've used both editors before and Cryengine 3 does almost everything better than ArmA 2 other else than bullet physics(gravity only, no bullets going through walls) and the AI. You can very easily make 225^2km maps inside Cryengine 2 as well. It also doesn't have that annoying problem of drawing shadows through the mountains or hills(it calculates sky accessibility). But I know this isn't going to be a possibility though but we all know that BIS will just revise their engine for more current games!
People have run 2000 AI in ArmA 2, you won't find any servers that size because, who wants to pay for all of that bandwidth? The rest of your post just highlights what you don't understand about ArmA 2.Originally Posted by Sniperdoc
---------- Post added at 02:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:24 AM ----------
Do you see what is wrong with this post? You state,paraphrasing, "Crytek is superior except that it lacks in every area that is relevent to my interests."
No need for a new engine. BI's engine is more or less sufficient. It just needs some key improvements like:
- better physics
- better AI (except for the known problems I still miss them using/searching buildings effectively)
- breaking some limitations (walking in vehicles, weapon system, inventory system, hitpoint system)
- some visual stuff that is years behind (animation system, dynamic lightning)
- better performance (full quadcore support)
That's practically all. I think, with the speed BI are working, it could be in ArmA 4
Last edited by IronTrooper; Oct 17 2009 at 10:47.
Are you going to call us dull who have fun hours and hours without missing what you call "key improvements"?No need for a new engine. BI's engine is more or less sufficient. It just needs some key improvements like:
- better physics
- better AI (except for the known problems I still miss them using/searching buildings effectively)
- breaking some limitations (walking in vehicles, weapon system, inventory system, hitpoint system)
- some visual stuff that is years behind (animation system, dynamic lightning)
- better performance (full quadcore support)
That's practically all. I think, with the speed BI are working, it could be in ArmA 4
You sure that you are asking for something that COULD be done in an afternoon, are you? Blaming BI to only be able to do this in Arma4?
You sure show us a milsim where everything you blame BI for that it's missing now - is already working bugfree? At best "since years"?
And at the same time doesn't need a more-than-high-end-pc?
Sorry, but I found it so arrogant ... just assuming BI developers are normal persons, I wouldn't mind them, calling you right like that.
Last edited by Herbal Influence; Oct 17 2009 at 10:58.
Before we were forced to use "just another datacollecting and advertising imposing machine on users machine like steam" my signature went like this for many, many years:
"There was once a dark age when players were herded like cattle down rigid gaming paths - and Bohemia Interactive Studios were the Che Guevara types who set them free."Watch n' listen: Thank you, Bohemia for fascinating games since 2001. Engine: Win8 32-Bit on AMD64 6000 X2 (2 x 3100 MHz) * NVidia 9600 GT 1024 MByte * 1920 x 1080 pixels * 27'' TFT * RAM 3 GByte - it all works very smooth especially because of SSD!
Why would I call you dull for enjoying the game as it is? They're just suggestions for the future engine.
And these "key improvements" is a sum of stuff most people complain about on the forums, not something I just made up "coz it wud b c00l"
I'm not blaming anyone for anything. I know these things are some major engine changes and I don't expect them anytime soon. ArmA4 is an estimation based on their progress so far, as much as objective as I can be.
Each part of that is already working in some other game, but it's nowhere as a whole. Wouldn't it be nice to have just one game where everything is possible? And again, I don't blame them for anything, I only expect them to keep improving the game.
High-end is relative. We'll see when it's done.
I'm not trying to be arrogant.
From my POV it's people who suggest BI to throw away their engine they've been working so hard on and buy a new one.
I'm just saying that improving their engine is sufficient.
Dam... at the Video
1:10> 1:17
imagine we could have that Physics effect on Nuking a City!! imagine.. ArmA3: Armageddon AirStrike xP
So they can maybe make some money? instead putting all the eggs into the PC market, and letting the vast hoardes of filthy stealing PC pirates take profits away from them ?
Switch on your brain!
Maybe something is wrong with your game. Almost every building can be progressively destroyed until the whole thing turns into a pile of rubble. It's not a super advanced destruction model with nice physics, but it's still better than a lot of games.
Last edited by randir14; Oct 17 2009 at 17:56.
they day i see a Cry3 mod with a real veiwdistance and or over 36 AI fighting in a urban area well, is the day i DL that MOD. But the C2 C3 can not do what A@ can do.. no matter the guys who say they mod for both.(How do you mod for C3...) Yeah i hope they keep tuning up the engine for more real world action DUH.
...Free people unbanable...
Posting Permissions
HOME 
