What if CryEngine was used as Arma 3 future engine?

[johncage]

looks too good to be true. i remember when dragon rising first came out with the batch of target renders(the infamous artillery "gameplay"). the end product looked nothing like that.

[Pain0815]

The cryengine is shit for the pourposes you need for a milsim.

- way to small maps for mp
- bad AI which spawn in at distance
- max playercount 32

Try build a 200km² map in the crysis editor, place 200-300 permanent, not spawning enemy and civillian AI.
Then you see the limits.

Its not an engine for such a game like arma, it fits for games like crysis/battlefield/cod and such games.

Sure it looks good and has good physics, but its too limited.

[ryguy]

Have you ever played far cry 2? That map isn't much smaller at all than Chernarus, with a decent view distance as well.

[Pain0815]

Its not a cryengine game

[NeMeSiS]

And it has constantly spawning AI, usually in the same places. Its not dynamic at all.

[metalcraze]

Have you ever played far cry 2? That map isn't much smaller at all than Chernarus, with a decent view distance as well.

Yeah and? The example is way too inferior.

That includes heavily outdated graphics which is how engines are judged.

[Flash Thunder]

This thread title should be renamed to Arma 3: Engine upgrade requests and features so we can stop this idiotic comparison of Crytek engine vs RV platform.

this whole thread has been derailed.

Basically Crytek engine is inferior because:

Non advanced AI, they state is advanced but I dont see no flanking or anything advanced being carried out by the AI, not to mention they spawn in proximity to the player (its a player centric engine).

You will never get High viewdistances with that kind of Crysis detail at Point blank to the models

32 player Max MP count

[Pathetic_Berserker]

Bottom line. Why would BIS invest in a new engine. The VR engine (probably)still has a little more give but the cruncher would be that most gamers don't invest time in this sort of military simulator making it difficult to justify.

My crystalball gazing shows ArmA2 being the mainstay of milsim players for the next 5 maybe 10 years, by wich time the american military industrial machine will have paid some project (such as those already stated) enough money to produce some beutifully enticing rubbish that under cuts the BI military market and BIS end up focusing on other game types.

I hope I'm wrong, but the murmurings from BIS lead me to think this way.
Even so I intend to enjoy Arma as long as its around.

[twisted]

Try build a 200km² map in the crysis editor, place 200-300 permanent, not spawning enemy and civillian AI.
Then you see the limits.
.

reality check needed here.

arma2 quickly slows down to a crawl with the above as well.

I've hardly ever seen large scale engagements in arma2 as the engine just can't handle that. And as for drawn distances, with my ati5870 i find 1500-3000m to be ok when not too many units (and i mean a couple dozens at most) are around. and that's with most settings at normal (shadows to high to engage gpu)

arma2 engine certainly isn't the final word in long distance large engagements. not by a long shot. and sometimes the engine looks pretty dated at longer ranges with shadows not being rendered/simulated out at distances.

i am a mad arma2 fan, but would like to see it evolve a hell of a lot more.

[Soetdjuret]

Okay max out crysis to 4 km put in several hundred scripted entities with a full battle raging and take a video of it running smoothly.........

Can be done with the right LOD and model optimizations, but not with my current hardware... Btw, Arma2 also uses LOD systems, so details isn't rendered at full in the distance. It can easily be done though...

ArmA2 graphics do that just fine. Crysis graphics have even less to do with reality than ArmA2's bloom.


But is it at least 3km view distance with that much detail? Because on some of those screenshots it looks like it's 200m at best.


Is this a joke? Crysis has your typical dumb arcade shooter AI where enemies just spawn out of thin air when you get close enough to them, then run at you shooting. No team work, no flanking manouevres, no bounding, no nothing. And when you get 100m away from their spawn point what do they do? Correct they return to their original position and... disappear when you get far enough.


LODs have nothing to do with 300 AIs being calculated independently on the whole hugeass map during the whole time doing many advanced things, other than standing in one place, waiting for the player. With every single bullet fired by them traced in real time at all times. Crysis engine isn't fit for that and optimizing it for something like this will take many many years.

Codemasters that have been there for 3 decades completely failed to handle a scale only 2 programmers handled with ease in OFP 10 years ago. Do you think Crytek is better?

I mean even 10 years later puny OFP dumps AAA Crysis when it comes to scale and AI


So what? Crysis Engine is worse at pretty much everything else compared to RV3.
And as for graphics - detail in Crysis is considerably lower than in ArmA2's Chernarus so what you are saying is still in question.


There are PC screenshots bro, they look pretty bad. Crytek isn't doing separate models for consoles and PC - no matter what shader you will slap on them they will still look as edgy and low-poly as they do now. As for DX11 effects - I'm still waiting on my DX10 effects from Crysis I've heard you can enable there. Did any Crysis community member add them after 3 years? Because I can see zero difference between Crysis under XP and 7

Crysis graphics has even less to do with reality? Care to develop that further? Makes no sense to me.

Yeah, at 3km details has to be lowered in LOD, thats true, arma2 also has it, but i'd say u can get very similar results to Arma or even better with Ce3.

Am not joking, the AI of crysis can be dumb sometimes yes, but it's fully functional and acceptive. What you said about enemies spawning out of thin air is not true. They are located already when you come there, as for the first level.. when u get down the hill in "first sunrise" the boat is there, the enemies are striving the beach, and a korean is taking a leak. And they don't just run around. They hunt you if they hear or see you from far away. If u cloak in one place after getting spotted, soldiers will come down to that position to search for you. They will try to move around to flank you, beef up to Delta difficulty and you will see.

Cryengine can easily be optimized for a game like Arma2 or 3... at least on the PC platform on decent hardware. And it's not called Crysis engine, it's called CryEngine.. let's say it together: CryyyyyEngiiiine.. Now hope u learned it this time.

"I mean even 10 years later puny OFP dumps AAA Crysis when it comes to scale and AI" dumb comment. Were talking about the engines here. Not crysis VS Arma.. You speak like a true Arma fanboy. Stick to the discussion please.

"detail in Crysis is considerably lower than in ArmA2's Chernarus so what you are saying is still in question."

Err? Are you retarded for real? Cryengine2 produces alot better graphical detail than your RV3 engine. And for all those who say "yeah but can it do 3km view distance" YES it can, with the right LOD settings, perfectly playable and great detail. You know so little about the crysis modding, the tools, sandbox etc so you shouldn't speak. You're embarrassing yourself with comments like these.

There are PC screenshots bro, they look pretty bad. Crytek isn't doing separate models for consoles and PC - no matter what shader you will slap on them they will still look as edgy and low-poly as they do now. As for DX11 effects - I'm still waiting on my DX10 effects from Crysis I've heard you can enable there. Did any Crysis community member add them after 3 years? Because I can see zero difference between Crysis under XP and 7

What screenshots are you referring to? Mine i posted? Or the released by crytek? The one i posted doesn't look bad, it's the best graphics out there. And the PC screenshots of Crysis 2? Is those what you meant? Or more specifically these:

http://www.abload.de/img/crysis2_december_2010_xqzp.jpg
http://h-4.abload.de/img/nanosuit0lns1st8l1oq6.png
http://www.abload.de/img/crysis2_december_2010_wqco.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/crysis2_december_2010_ksg8.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/crysis2_december_2010_2qab.jpg

You think they look "pretty bad" ? is that it?

No, they are not doing separate models for the PC, but they use tessellation for PC which makes objects look much better than the consoles. You need to learn a thing or two before you speak, so much BS coming out from your little mouth. About the DX10 effects for Crysis? U can enable them via C_vars or running Vista or Win7 and enabling VH settings from the ingame menu. The few things dx10 has that dx9 didnt have in crysis, the most obvious ones are Object based motion blur then theres stuff in Dx10 that Crysis has particle emitters and some dynamic lightsources that are restricted by devs to DX10 mode aswell as simple deffered lights that are used when a bullet collides with metal litting up impact surface. DX10 also has higher precision for some effects and higher sampling rate though difference there is subtle. Then Crytek style OBM only works fully correct in DX10 and particle quality is higher in DX10 using geometry shaders. If you can see zero differences between vanilla crysis in dx9 and dx10 then it's real bad, because in dx9, settings are locked to High only. But can be workarounded with cvar settings a.k.a ini files to get the Veryhigh settings under dx9, and if done so, there is little to no real visual difference to dx9 and 10, youre right about that much. Still, however u do u wont get OB-motionblur.

The cryengine is shit for the pourposes you need for a milsim.

- way to small maps for mp
- bad AI which spawn in at distance
- max playercount 32

Try build a 200km² map in the crysis editor, place 200-300 permanent, not spawning enemy and civillian AI.
Then you see the limits.

Its not an engine for such a game like arma, it fits for games like crysis/battlefield/cod and such games.

Sure it looks good and has good physics, but its too limited.

Another dumb comment. Were still comparing the ENGINES and not crysis and arma as the games themself, you talk about small multiplayer maps and MP playercounts etc. That has nothing to do with the engine itself, but to make the maps suitable for the type of core gameplay that crysis MP has. Spawning 300 enemies with AI would be possible if handled via the GPU, but the AI of crysis is calculated by the CPU, therefor there are limits yes. This can be rewritten in the engines code when the engine is licensed so theres not a too big problem.

CryEngine would fit very nice into games like Arma, it's all about optimization and doing the LOD right. But u dont know sh*t about that stuff right? U dont know about tris-counts either? Guessed that. Learn before you speak sir.

This thread title should be renamed to Arma 3: Engine upgrade requests and features so we can stop this idiotic comparison of Crytek engine vs RV platform.

this whole thread has been derailed.

Basically Crytek engine is inferior because:

Non advanced AI, they state is advanced but I dont see no flanking or anything advanced being carried out by the AI, not to mention they spawn in proximity to the player (its a player centric engine).

You will never get High viewdistances with that kind of Crysis detail at Point blank to the models

32 player Max MP count

Yes this discussion is idiotic because you guys have limited knowledge about Cryengine but speaks just as if you did, and also.. you assume things over and over again which are not correct.

Yes there's flanking. no they don't spawn proximity to the player. U can easily get that kind of high detail even at high viewdistances, just alter some cvar commands, will it be playable? Prolly not if u don't use correct LOD systems, Arma2 has LOD too, stop being ignorant. 32 player max MP has nothing to do with restrictions within the engine itself. Stop talking things without knowing.

Yeah Crytek is an awesome engine!!!!!!!

Crytek is the name of the compant, CryEngine is the name of the engine and Crysis is the name of the game itself. Get it right next time. Btw, why were u banned? For saying that the Crytek engine is awesome? hm... Doesn't sound like a fair ban to me.

http://images.bit-tech.net/content_i...eview/10km.jpg This picture is easily recreated with the Cryengine, even in the sandbox itself. Just do terrain, TOD, throw in some houses and add a bunch of pinetrees and u have it.