PhysX

[purepassion 22]

I can assure you both Nvidia and ATI (including others) will be supported. No panic, please. :) Nothing is going to be changed, except the world. :D

And thanks to all people for all your kind words. It keeps us excited for our work.

before you all go buy Nvidia cards and flame about lefting ATI users out, wait until they release some more information!!!!

Edited May 22, 2011 by PurePassion

[msy 22]

Maybe in E3 we will see how good the physx is in ARMA3

[Damu 10]

Maybe in E3 we will see how good the physx is in ARMA3

Yes, there will be some presentation of PhysX too, but note we have almost a year to do much more/better. :)

[purepassion 22]

one year in the gaming industrie is like almost a decade for most other industries, so it is very likely we gonna see plenty of new and awesome stuff by the time it will be released. Which is still a lot. So we can be very confident that people like Damu exactly know what we want and try their best to give it to us.

[mrcash2009 0]

I haven't followed this entire thread so sorry if it repeats, where is the line drawn between physics implementation & "animation improvements"?

What I mean is how much is the physics tied to anims? Is it that BIS re capture all new anims and reloads and then the link to these are death animations only? Wasnt entirely sure on where one starts and the other ends. IE is physics "taking care of anims" or is it a merge trick of both?

[DaveP 66]

I haven't followed this entire thread so sorry if it repeats, where is the line drawn between physics implementation & "animation improvements"?

What I mean is how much is the physics tied to anims? Is it that BIS re capture all new anims and reloads and then the link to these are death animations only? Wasnt entirely sure on where one starts and the other ends. IE is physics "taking care of anims" or is it a merge trick of both?

An engine like PhysX generally doesn't handle player interactions beyond ragdolling, for character physics-manipulated animation you'd be looking for an engine like Euphoria to be implemented

My only guess would be that they've switched over to a more industry friendly animation format

The bigger questions will be: Will building destructability be implemented using PhysX, will elements like vehicle suspension be more intricately modelled, will we see features like fastropes upon release

[Primarch 10]

I haven't followed this entire thread so sorry if it repeats, where is the line drawn between physics implementation & "animation improvements"?

What I mean is how much is the physics tied to anims? Is it that BIS re capture all new anims and reloads and then the link to these are death animations only? Wasnt entirely sure on where one starts and the other ends. IE is physics "taking care of anims" or is it a merge trick of both?

I think the PhysX is used to blend the animations so it won't be as "raw" looking as in ArmA 2. Think of the "jump" animation, which happens when you press V.

[neokika 62]

An engine like PhysX generally doesn't handle player interactions beyond ragdolling, for character physics-manipulated animation you'd be looking for an engine like Euphoria to be implemented

Hey,

You mean something like this? :D

_yGJPoTnK6c

_neo_

[420Marine 10]

I doubt it would be accelerated if VBS is any indication.. So a physx card would do absolutely nothing..

It all depends if BIS puts in the option to accelerate, and even if they did it would only be for extra visual features that would have no bearing on game play.

I'm a huge graphics whore, so ideally BIS would implement APEX PhysX. I understand PhysX has no bearing on gameplay, but it would help immersion and graphics quality which help sell the "realistic, futuristic war-simulation" theme better.

Edited May 22, 2011 by 420Marine

[PuFu 4591]

I'm a huge graphics whore, so ideally BIS would implement APEX PhysX. I understand PhysX has no bearing on gameplay, but would it would help is immersion and graphics quality which help sell the "realistic, futuristic war-simulation" theme better.

imerssion has very little relation to GFX...my 2 cents anyways

What is VBS?

Google was invented

[420Marine 10]

imerssion has very little relation to GFX...my 2 cents anyways

Google was invented

I dunno, it'd be pretty hard to feel immersed in a game that looked like Counter-Strike in this day and age.

A combination of gameplay depth/control + graphics + intuitive control all steer torward immersion, especially if you're able to play with nVidia 3D Vision to add depth-perception to a game.

Arma III seems to increase the first two (gameplay depth + graphics in animation and graphical processing functionality). Honestly the two biggest things Arma III needs is:

1.) Significantly better netcode

2.) Smoother animations, even if clientside only to compliment above mentioned netcode. I hope this is what they mean by new animations.

Edited May 22, 2011 by 420Marine

[dunedain 48]

imerssion has very little relation to GFX...

I personally think that graphics play an important role in immersion as well as animations, physics, AI, sound engine ect... The difficulty is to find the optimal balance to have both immersion and playability.

I hope BIS will accomplish this with Arma3, I was disappointed that most improvements on Armed Assault and Arma2 were purely cosmetic though.

Edited May 22, 2011 by dunedain

[DaveP 66]

Hey,

You mean something like this? :D

Not quite; in that system there's a very simple implementation of it, but more care would need to be taken as to blend in/out events as compared to:

Ae3fgj2x1aI

Edited May 22, 2011 by DaveP

[420Marine 10]

I'm REALLY huge on Particle Effects. If the Arma III engine could allow you to change the amount of particle effects, that'd be awesome:

I3jjW6-tuaw

Edited May 22, 2011 by 420Marine

[dmarkwick 261]

I'm REALLY huge on Particle Effects. If the Arma III engine could allow you to change the amount of particle effects, that'd be awesome:

There are definately a few tweaks I would like A3 to give to particle effects that's for sure :)

[420Marine 10]

There are feniately a few tweaks I would like A3 to give to particle effects that's for sure :)

I'm not sure what the relationship between BIS/BIA and nVidia is, but depending on what it is and what kind of development kit they'll be getting for PhysX support, it could be possible that particle PhysX will be done by CUDA/GPU Physics via PhysX program...

[dmarkwick 261]

I'm not sure what the relationship between BIS/BIA and nVidia is, but depending on what it is and what kind of development kit they'll be getting for PhysX support, it could be possible that particle PhysX will be done by CUDA/GPU Physics via PhysX program...

That would be nice. Could do fuel spills for example.

[420Marine 10]

That would be nice. Could do fuel spills for example.

4vbfLEMcfgw

:D

[Haystack15 10]

Who said that arma 3 will use hardware physx ?

Infact wait a second. I remember I've played a game called "Joint Task Force" where it had software physics. If I recall the program it will install for that was called "Ageia Physicis" (Today know as PhysX by NVIDIA) Don't know if this still happens today with today's games.

If so, Happy gaming to those who don't have good hardware. (Sadly you still need some for Graphics)

@420Marine Nice find on that video. That made my day.

Edited May 22, 2011 by Haystack15

[nodunit 397]

speaking of Crysis, if Arma3 has options for physics like it had then it should be no problem for anyone.

Basicly with physics either off or at the lowest it only effected the bare essentialls, you couldn't destroy the improvised houses for example, and on the lower settings the collision was less effective in detection and movement was a bit more limited.

That was a great video, I'm not sure which is better, the footage or the music chosen.

Edited May 22, 2011 by NodUnit

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

imerssion has very little relation to GFX...

I think this is true to a greater degree than most gamers realize. Battleground Europe's battles are extremely immersive, while the graphics are highly outdated.

[SPC.Spets 21]

Imo Arma doesnt need physx, for the character they can use just animations. since we dont going to have terrain or building destruction, I dont see any other aplication for a physx feature. Even the vehicles, we use them to transport units, not to make some rally races. Bullets with physx? no need either. although this could simplify the work of the CPU making the game with better performance with more AIs (?)

Also, anyway, it would be good to see some walls destruction, or maybe some trees and bushes when you need to clear the way of your vision or a landing zone, fire base, etc.

Maybe physx for the smoke and dust, I dont know

[ziiip 1]

For me, this is the biggest feature for ArmA3 and I hope that it will be as extensive as possible. Pushing thing over, throwing thing around etc has always brought joy to me.

[Pyronick 21]

Imo Arma doesnt need physx, for the character they can use just animations. since we dont going to have terrain or building destruction, I dont see any other aplication for a physx feature. Even the vehicles, we use them to transport units, not to make some rally races. Bullets with physx? no need either. although this could simplify the work of the CPU making the game with better performance with more AIs (?)

Also, anyway, it would be good to see some walls destruction, or maybe some trees and bushes when you need to clear the way of your vision or a landing zone, fire base, etc.

Maybe physx for the smoke and dust, I dont know

Vehicles wouldn't need reworked physics (or PhysX for that matter) if they didn't fly 1 click high after a collision with a tiny rock or sth.

I hope that ArmA 3 will get it's own Garry's mod. Simply because it's the perfect game for such a thing.

[froggyluv 2130]

Can you imagine the new BattleBus with a Garry's mod in Arma :D