ARMA 2: OA beta build 73116

[rksl-rock 1300]

a bit unrelated but wouldn't that simulate the parralax effect on eotechs?

Yes it would.

[roberthammer 582]

Thats great for Planes or helis hud , but for weapons like eotech optic - it will work ,but you will see the reticle outside of the optic and if you try that arma1 trick with alpha channel tunnel - in arma2 is not working properly

[KeyCat 131]

Only had limited time with this build so far but did the flickering (Z-fighting) while looking at buildings/objects thru binocs/scope at longer distance go from bad to worse, anyone else noticed this or is it just my imagination?

/KC

[rksl-rock 1300]

Thats great for Planes or helis hud , but for weapons like eotech optic - it will work ,but you will see the reticle outside of the optic and if you try that arma1 trick with alpha channel tunnel - in arma2 is not working properly

Its no different thant the existing setup anyway. the target ques on guns are down to the UI driven stuff anyway. Not the HUD command.

[ast65 10]

Thanks a lot for finally fixing the shadows :bounce3:

[Bulldog72 10]

Only had limited time with this build so far but did the flickering (Z-fighting) while looking at buildings/objects thru binocs/scope at longer distance go from bad to worse, anyone else noticed this or is it just my imagination?

/KC

No its not your imagination. Flickering is still BAD. Cant really say if it became worse or not but it still is horrible. :/

[hailstorm 4]

As the player viewpoint is being moved around due to G, manoeuvring or just trackIR/Freelook the target que is being moved around the cockpit. Which is not realistic This moving target que is effectively moving the guns around as if on a turret. Which is just unrealistic and makes it a hell of a lot harder to use ingame.

Rock, I agree with most of what you're saying, except this part. There's a big part of the dynamic of the cockpit portrayed in arma which you seem to be taking for granted, and that's assuming that the pilot's viewpoint is completely static in the cockpit under all circumstances, where in fact it's far from the truth.

When the pilot looks around the cockpit, the game actually moves the head itself, moving the eyeballs and thus the viewpoint in the cockpit. It's hard to notice, but looking through the HUD is the easiest way to tell (as you've noticed rock) from the difference between the HUD target pipper and the game crosshair.

You say that the moving game crosshair means that the guns aim at different parts, but that's not correct. The game crosshair is 100% accurate under all circumstances - what's happening is that the pilot's viewpoint is slewing laterally in the direction of head twist and causing parallax error through the HUD.

Here's some visual proof:

To get this image, an A-10 is parked on the top of the hill to the south of the airstrip (because the gun is angled down we need to elevate the aircraft to get a far-distance target). The plane doesn't move an inch for the next two images.

Note two things:

1. The virtual crosshair is aiming at the furthermost corner of the Hangar.

2. It is also is in the dead centre of the HUD.

Now, I look several degrees to the left:

Now look at the crosshair.

1. The virtual crosshair is still aiming at the furthermost corner of the Hangar.

2. It is however, now shifted to the left side of the HUD.

Why? because the head of the pilot has twisted to the left. The pilots' viewpoint, which originates from the front of the pilot's head, shifts slightly to the left as their head rotates. this causes everything in the cockpit to appear to shift to the right, which includes the HUD and everything displayed on it. Thus, the HUD target pipper will appear to identify that the gun will aim the the right of the game crosshair, which is exactly what we see in the 1.54 version of the game.

Now I look to the right:

1. The virtual crosshair is still aiming at the furthermost corner of the Hangar.

2. However, it now shifts to the right side of the HUD.

3. also note how the light-grey bracket on the side of the HUD seems to be slightly more compacted as opposed to the front-on view.

Now the same effect happens, but in the opposite direction. the pilot's viewpoints shifts right, HUD moves left, HUD target aims to the left of the game crosshair. The game crosshair still points to the exact same target, which by logic of a fixed weapon on a static aircraft, should hit the exact same target. Yet, somehow, the HUD target will move about when the only moving part on the aircraft is the location of the pilot's eyes.

I drew a diagram explaining the above issue and how the game crosshair is the real target and isn't slaving a turret:

Essentially, in the above diagram (and in every version of the game until this beta) the HUD is a fulcrum for the line-of-sight from the pilot, a changing eye position equals an opposite deviation in where the fixed weapon is perceived to be aiming. The beta eliminates the fulcrum, but means the HUD image no longer appears to be fixed to the HUD device itself.

A simple experiment to replicate this is while staring at your screen, place your finger about a hand lengths' away from your nose. Note what part of the screen you're pointing at. Then twist your head to the left and right while keeping your eye's locked onto that same part of the screen, and observe how your finger moves in the opposite direction your head does.

If you guys have flown one of the vanilla fighters with OA installed, you can't tell me it wasn't a damn nightmare. To try and shoot down another plane, especially in a turning dogfight, the HUD would basically shift up and into the direction of the turn, rendering the entire device more than useless; it became an active distraction when trying to aim at a target with the game crosshairs. For someone who only plays vanilla, the fixed HUD is a massive boost in playability, especially if they play on servers without game crosshairs enabled.

By NO way am I saying that I'm an expert on HUDs - in all my flying experience I've looked through a HUD once, and that was a C-130J parked on the ramp. All I'm doing is talking about the problem as I see it, and what is and isn't wrong (from a game perspective). As far as I can see the beta patch looks like it corrected the HUD problem and did so in a correct method, but the programming method used has caused problems in it's own right (and is possibly unrealistic).

As a pilot I can tell you any pilot will try to keep their head as still as possible while flying for multiple reasons, parallax error being one of these. If anything needs to be argued, it's why there is such excessive head movement while flying.

[bensdale 0]

@KeyCat

look here: http://dev-heaven.net/issues/1771

[[frl]myke 14]

Don't mess up the weapons crosshair with the HUD. This is not part of the HUD or related to it in any way.

Edited September 5, 2010 by [FRL]Myke

[msy 22]

I find a problem that at night when the AA vehicle opens fire, the FPS drops abruptly, from 60 to 30 in the desert map. until the vehicle was destroyed or stops firing the FPS returns to 60.

[Nephris1 10]

I discovered a new old bug introduced with the latest beta, i already had with a beta in Arma2 vanilla times.

When i shut down ArmA2 OA the game hangs again, so i ve to close it via Alt-Tab-entf.

Anyone else expierienced that one?

[TheCrusader 10]

My 2 cents,

first of all gj with the tank driving ai, seems better now, although I noticed the ai sometimes seems overeager to leave the road to cut some corners, which unnecessarily puts them in a tight spot to maneuver.

Cheers

Crusader

Edited September 5, 2010 by TheCrusader

[Nephris1 10]

When i shut down ArmA2 OA the game hangs again, so i ve to close it via Alt-Tab-entf.

Have to correct myself, this happens not everytime.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Also the beta is constantly loosing focus while playing in windowed (a necessity for me due editing). Means that if I'm holding w to walk forward, I may find my code in UltraEdit to have a bunch of wwwwwwwww's in it because of the temporary change of focus. This was completely fixed in the full patch, but now it's back.

I once got a BSOD and recovered my dialog.hpp which I was editing. Thought I'd only had some notes in there that was worth recovering, but now the game would crash everytime I loaded my mission. Reason: SizeEx = 0.31;w where the added w came from loss of focus. And that w wasn't obvious to find. PLEASE fix this...

[Alwarren 2765]

I seem to have a weird issue with multiplayer and weapon magazines. I'll try tomorrow to create some easy to reproduce test.

Basically, my brother and me were playing Cipher. When the client player switches to another team member and then switches back to his original character, that character has unloaded ALL weapons, including pistol and SMAW. It does not seem to happen in single player, and AFAICT it doesn't happen on the server.

Anybody else noticed this?

[old_painless 182]

Rock and Hailstorm - you two should seriously consult for BIS!

I used to fly Falcon4. From my brief encounter with Arma2 airplanes, there is room for improvements. Not that the fidelity of Falcon4 is required, but just to fix the obvious things.

Keep up the good debate, gents - hopefully BIS will pick up some pointers from you.

-OP

[KeyCat 131]

@KeyCat

look here: http://dev-heaven.net/issues/1771

Thanks for the pointer but I'm well aware that this flickering/Z-fighting is an old issue and if it was easy to fix I'm sure BIS would have done it long time ago, my concern was that it got even worse in Build 73116.

/KC

[maddogx 13]

Thanks for the pointer but I'm well aware that this flickering/Z-fighting is an old issue and if it was easy to fix I'm sure BIS would have done it long time ago, my concern was that it got even worse in Build 73116.

I suspected the same thing, but wasn't sure. The z-fighting does seem more noticable in the latest build, though it's hard to say how exactly it is "worse".

I wonder what caused this.

[rksl-rock 1300]

Rock, I agree with most of what you're saying, except this part. There's a big part of the dynamic of the cockpit portrayed in arma which you seem to be taking for granted, and that's assuming that the pilot's viewpoint is completely static in the cockpit under all circumstances, where in fact it's far from the truth.

When the pilot looks around the cockpit, the game actually moves the head itself, moving the eyeballs and thus the viewpoint in the cockpit. It's hard to notice, but looking through the HUD is the easiest way to tell (as you've noticed rock) from the difference between the HUD target pipper and the game crosshair.

You say that the moving game crosshair means that the guns aim at different parts, but that's not correct. The game crosshair is 100% accurate under all circumstances - what's happening is that the pilot's viewpoint is slewing laterally in the direction of head twist and causing parallax error through the HUD.

Here's some visual proof:

[/url]

To get this image, an A-10 is parked on the top of the hill to the south of the airstrip (because the gun is angled down we need to elevate the aircraft to get a far-distance target). The plane doesn't move an inch for the next two images.

Note two things:

1. The virtual crosshair is aiming at the furthermost corner of the Hangar.

2. It is also is in the dead centre of the HUD.

Now, I look several degrees to the left:

Now look at the crosshair.

1. The virtual crosshair is still aiming at the furthermost corner of the Hangar.

2. It is however, now shifted to the left side of the HUD.

Why? because the head of the pilot has twisted to the left. The pilots' viewpoint, which originates from the front of the pilot's head, shifts slightly to the left as their head rotates. this causes everything in the cockpit to appear to shift to the right, which includes the HUD and everything displayed on it. Thus, the HUD target pipper will appear to identify that the gun will aim the the right of the game crosshair, which is exactly what we see in the 1.54 version of the game.

Now I look to the right:

1. The virtual crosshair is still aiming at the furthermost corner of the Hangar.

2. However, it now shifts to the right side of the HUD.

3. also note how the light-grey bracket on the side of the HUD seems to be slightly more compacted as opposed to the front-on view.

Now the same effect happens, but in the opposite direction. the pilot's viewpoints shifts right, HUD moves left, HUD target aims to the left of the game crosshair. The game crosshair still points to the exact same target, which by logic of a fixed weapon on a static aircraft, should hit the exact same target. Yet, somehow, the HUD target will move about when the only moving part on the aircraft is the location of the pilot's eyes.

I drew a diagram explaining the above issue and how the game crosshair is the real target and isn't slaving a turret:

Essentially, in the above diagram (and in every version of the game until this beta) the HUD is a fulcrum for the line-of-sight from the pilot, a changing eye position equals an opposite deviation in where the fixed weapon is perceived to be aiming. The beta eliminates the fulcrum, but means the HUD image no longer appears to be fixed to the HUD device itself.

A simple experiment to replicate this is while staring at your screen, place your finger about a hand lengths' away from your nose. Note what part of the screen you're pointing at. Then twist your head to the left and right while keeping your eye's locked onto that same part of the screen, and observe how your finger moves in the opposite direction your head does.

If you guys have flown one of the vanilla fighters with OA installed, you can't tell me it wasn't a damn nightmare. To try and shoot down another plane, especially in a turning dogfight, the HUD would basically shift up and into the direction of the turn, rendering the entire device more than useless; it became an active distraction when trying to aim at a target with the game crosshairs. For someone who only plays vanilla, the fixed HUD is a massive boost in playability, especially if they play on servers without game crosshairs enabled.

By NO way am I saying that I'm an expert on HUDs - in all my flying experience I've looked through a HUD once, and that was a C-130J parked on the ramp. All I'm doing is talking about the problem as I see it, and what is and isn't wrong (from a game perspective). As far as I can see the beta patch looks like it corrected the HUD problem and did so in a correct method, but the programming method used has caused problems in it's own right (and is possibly unrealistic).

As a pilot I can tell you any pilot will try to keep their head as still as possible while flying for multiple reasons, parallax error being one of these. If anything needs to be argued, it's why there is such excessive head movement while flying.

Hailstorm, I'm sorry I wasn't particularly clear. But as Myke says "don't confuse the weapons crosshair with the HUD". You are correct re the parallax, but you are ignoring the HUD.

Imagine a rifle with iron sights fixed to a bench. 300m away you have a target. The rifle is perfectly aligned on it. Sight down the rifle. Move your head around from behind the rear sight. What happens to the placement of the front and rear sight in relation to the target? Think of these sights as the HUD elements.

What I am saying is the function of the existing HUD is wrong. The way the static gun aim point in the HUD works is wrong . I'm not arguing that the in game parallax is wrong just the function of the display. And allowing the display to move around doesn't fix that. What i'm asking for is a change in the way the HUD command works.

[bensdale 0]

Ups sry KeyCat I've misunderstood you a bit.

Now i know what you mean.

Edited September 6, 2010 by bensdale

[Protegimus 0]

I also noticed this immediately after I started testing 73116. Not just on buildings and objects, but also flickering on trees.

Wonder if it's graphics hardware related as to what extent it is noticeable - spec's in the sig.

I haven't done an image quality comparison test yet, but the visual quality appears 'sharper' for the same settings - at some cost in performance?

Only had limited time with this build so far but did the flickering (Z-fighting) while looking at buildings/objects through bino's/scope at longer distance go from bad to worse, anyone else noticed this or is it just my imagination?/KC

Protegimus

[langgis08 10]

might not be a big issue, but this cp http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1449789&postcount=1

doesn't show up in CP-Menue ("no entry 'Campaigns\pullercamp\description.ext.Campaign".) and cannot be loaded with this beta.

Everything's working with A2 (standalone) latest patch and with CO 1.54 official /hotfixed

[ast65 10]

might not be a big issue, but this cp http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1449789&postcount=1

doesn't show up in CP-Menue ("no entry 'Campaigns\pullercamp\description.ext.Campaign".) and cannot be loaded with this beta.

Everything's working with A2 (standalone) latest patch and with CO 1.54 official /hotfixed

Confirmed, but "Pirog" doesn´t show up also, so the problem might be on bardosys side.

[AnimalMother92 10]

I think something has changed with this beta regarding campaign description files, because I have similar errors popping up regarding custom campaign stuff I was working on.

[Zipper5 74]

Yes, bardosy's latest campaign was having similar issues.

Can anyone from BIS confirm/explain?