djfluffwug 10 Posted December 12, 2011 I would love with the new use of physx for the rotors of the helicopter to break into pieces when hitting the ground. It wouldn't be to hard to make and it would add alot of immersion to helicopter crashing flying. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-Coulum- 35 Posted December 12, 2011 That would be cool but I would just be happy with realistic helicopter and plane crashes that don't instantaneously cumbust when they touch ground a tad to hard. Although it would be awesome, i don't care much for the visuals of the crash, and more for the aftermath and gameplay effects of the crash. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james2464 176 Posted December 12, 2011 So real Physx integration would make this possible Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nodunit 397 Posted December 12, 2011 (edited) or mehbe this?Or perhaps this 4:57+...forgot how to do the time code. Edited December 12, 2011 by NodUnit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KEVINMGXP 20 Posted December 12, 2011 fhfJDq_I1HA However its kinda dramatic but on the other hand its one of the better examples to point out to PhysX on helicopters ...kind regards Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[evo] dan 79 Posted December 12, 2011 It would be nice to be able to land aircraft on moving ships, walk on moving ships, and of course walk around the inside of a helicopter whilst its flying, will this be possible with physx? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PuFu 4600 Posted December 12, 2011 that i am afraid has nothing to do with physix. It was possible in VBS2 prior to them implementing it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
djfluffwug 10 Posted December 12, 2011 For that, couldn't you just have a collider inside the vehicle, then if the player is inside the collider, check the x,y and z speed of that vehicle, then save that to a global variable, then apply that variable as a speed to the player (Plus the players current speed)? Plus also, if the current speed of the vehicle is way higher than the players speed, you could just ignore that so they fall out. Or would it be more complicated? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dm 9 Posted December 12, 2011 that i am afraid has nothing to do with physix. It was possible in VBS2 prior to them implementing it. Possible, yes. Good? No. Desync in MP was terrible... Its much better now with physX (theres no i in physX, where has it come from?) Also, it was NOT possible to have movable/walkable/landable big ships prior to physX... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AviPure 1 Posted December 12, 2011 Have the take on helicopter physics improved since the pre alpha some months back where we could trial them inside arma? Because they were REALLY REALLY bad. Random tremors.. over banking, same instability you got in arma 2 where flaring for landing ment you ended up flying backwards at 50mph easily. They were really really bad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameronMcDonald 146 Posted December 14, 2011 +50 points for asking outside of the Take On Helicopters forum. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bee8190 10 Posted December 14, 2011 (edited) I hope that cars will also drift a little on gravel and stuff (no, i really dont mean like in tokyo drift :) ) becouse as seen in one of those 'recent' videos, the car seemed to be almost glued like to the surface, even though it was off the road. Edited December 14, 2011 by Bee8190 somebody slipped typos into my post Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
purepassion 22 Posted December 14, 2011 (edited) I think that's exactly the source of Arma's "sluggish" driving behaviour which somehow feels like you are driving on tracks. Get into a pick-up truck, gain speed and then drive slaloms and try to make it roll on the side. It doesn't work. PhysX can simulate the slickness of surfaces and could help to significantly improve this problem. By simulating spinning tires and not "gluing" the car onto the surface (propperly jumping over small bumps etc) is an example :) Edited December 14, 2011 by PurePassion Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bee8190 10 Posted December 14, 2011 Yes that would be much better :) although i have no idea how such vehicle as humvee of something like 3 tons may behive off road at high/er speeds, still seems like its either going backflip or bump and nothing in between? I'm keeping in mind ist most likely just early physx test but...still hope it will drift in mud or oversteer on gravel for example :) Dear dude in red...Xmas are coming and only wish...;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EDcase 87 Posted December 14, 2011 (edited) Yeah, You're talking about 'traction' and I hope its part of the new vehicle handling. PurePassion: That example shows improved collision dynamics but not better handling. It still looks like its glued to the ground. No sliding when turning. I like the flip at 1:56 but that should only happen with a sudden full turn of the wheel. Edited December 14, 2011 by EDcase Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nodunit 397 Posted December 14, 2011 Yes that would be much better :) although i have no idea how such vehicle as humvee of something like 3 tons may behive off road at high/er speeds, still seems like its either going backflip or bump and nothing in between? Here are a few offroad vids Weee bouncy.And here is a video of it jumping at nearly..if not more of an angle than in the video, probably broke something though. Though of all things if they do impliment traction, there MUST be a mod for this :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dmarkwick 261 Posted December 16, 2011 I would wish for the controlling mechanism to be more similar to OFP's, in OFP I can drive a landrover along roads quite effectively, in ArmA2 I cannot, even after a few years :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NoQuarter 0 Posted December 16, 2011 Wake me up when all of this PhysX-related movement talk turns to the really important -and so far uncovered area...that being PhysX-related deformation. Otherwise, PhysX will be just a waste... in game terms. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PuFu 4600 Posted December 16, 2011 i can assure it won't, the driving and feeling has been improved a lot more, even when comparing with the VBS2 vids available... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nodunit 397 Posted December 16, 2011 I would wish for the controlling mechanism to be more similar to OFP's, in OFP I can drive a landrover along roads quite effectively, in ArmA2 I cannot, even after a few years :) Yes..miss the mouse center driving :( so smooth back then.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonci87 163 Posted December 17, 2011 Yes I wonder why they ditched it.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pulverizer 1 Posted December 17, 2011 Yes I wonder why they ditched it.... Probably to make driving with a gamepad easier. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobcatBob 10 Posted December 17, 2011 (edited) Probably to make driving with a gamepad easier. Driving that way in flashpoint:Elite was awsome for me... Edited December 18, 2011 by BobcatBob Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wen 10 Posted January 27, 2012 I hope it turns out that I'm misinformed, but is it true that for Arma 3 Physx can only be handled by the CPU? Well if so it is another bad news for me because it's more burden upon my 1090t BE, which already struggles at times in OA. How come Physx can be implemented so that it cannot be handled by the GPU? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maddogx 13 Posted January 27, 2012 (edited) The basic PhysX engine is always handled by the CPU, in any PhysX game. Only some special parts of PhysX are intended to be GPU accelerated (cloths, liquid simulation etc.), so if the game does not use these features, it won't use hardware simulation acceleration. EDIT: woops, that was meant to be "hardware acceleration". :D Edited January 27, 2012 by MadDogX Share this post Link to post Share on other sites