Steakslim 1 Posted April 23, 2012 Probably the same or similar to what is in now with bounding over an object. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Clarkey1 10 Posted April 24, 2012 It'd be nice to do a "goose step" in safe mode and more of a quick "bound" in danger/alert mode. Maybe even some sort of " " or a " " or even a " ".:p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Leopardi 0 Posted April 24, 2012 So is it confirmed there's not gonna be dynamic destruction arma 2 was supposed to have? What we had:* Playable prototype of several buildings which were dynamically destructible. The destruction was very impressive, using physical simulation, and leaving plenty of permanent and dynamic debris. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maddogx 13 Posted April 24, 2012 So is it confirmed there's not gonna be dynamic destruction arma 2 was supposed to have? Yes. That was pretty much confirmed in the post-ARG Q&A almost a year ago. There's been nothing new about that topic since then. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jonneymendoza 10 Posted April 24, 2012 So no BF3 destrucible physics lol damm. i cna lvie without it to be honest Yes. That was pretty much confirmed in the post-ARG Q&A almost a year ago. There's been nothing new about that topic since then. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EuroSlave 1 Posted April 24, 2012 Not having dynamic destruction is a killer for me. What a shame. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jonneymendoza 10 Posted April 24, 2012 Not having dynamic destruction is a killer for me. What a shame. how? i got pretty bored of bf3's destructible enviornments! ---------- Post added at 05:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:13 PM ---------- Not having dynamic destruction is a killer for me. What a shame. how? i got pretty bored of bf3's destructible enviornments! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smurf 12 Posted April 24, 2012 Well the "physics" in BC2 (didn´t played BF3) are just like the ones in OA, with more FX. You have pre-determinated spots that go KABOOM and then the structure falls. Not a big deal... Also, you could level buildings using some 40mm granades, which is kind of non-sense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kimozabbi 1 Posted April 24, 2012 I could never get bored of destruction same as in video Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
danny96 80 Posted April 24, 2012 I could never get bored of destruction same as in video Wow I want to see this in multiplayer.....1 FPS. 1 000 000 pieces that would lag as hell. But If they'll made It that It will disappear in seconds I'd want this too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flash Thunder 10 Posted April 24, 2012 You serious BF3's destruction is so gimmicky you cant even blow up half the walls or sections of buildings. Only certain buildings can be leveled. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Clarkey1 10 Posted April 24, 2012 Well initially they said there would be no "intro island" and now we have Stratis! So I wouldn't take everything the devs say as the final word on the matter until the game is finished. That said destruction like BF3 is probably just not possible at the moment on RV. Look at the size of any BF3 map, and then compare that to the 300km² Limnos. Well it might be possible but the resources required to do it on that scale would probably negate even implementing it. I for one am happy with the current level of destruction, I can still hole up in a semi ruined building or take it out if enemies are using it for cover, functionality trumps aesthetics as far as I'm concerned. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
max power 21 Posted April 24, 2012 I could never get bored of destruction same as in video That looks absolutely horrible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maturin 12 Posted April 24, 2012 If BIS were ever to get serious about destruction, the first stop would have to be bulletholes, shaped charge penetrations and launcher mouseholing. Having hole buildings collapse in abstracted explosion events is fine, because the most important stuff is much smaller. The wouldn't even need to change the models for a lot of it. Imagine a brick wall that takes a 7.62, and you get a decal where the roundimpacts. The game tracks the decal, and subsequent rounds in the vicinity go straight through the weakened portion of the wall, so cover progressively dissolves. You probably couldn't do it with houses, but you could get compound walls to fall apart in chunks. RPGs would knock fist-sized holes in them, and SMAW-NE of CG rockets could blast whole sections down. I was about to defend the posted video, which clearly used jury-rigged assets for demo purposes, but then I realized how they never fired on the corner posts of the house, which clearly can't be destroyed, so as to protect the integrity of the overall structure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted April 25, 2012 That looks absolutely horrible. irony is he missed the great Havok physics showcase here which in fact has some excellent examples like the stairs with walkway, steel construction, wooden contruction, houses and bricks Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DeclaredEvol 10 Posted April 25, 2012 It is a warzone, not a nice looking neighborhood. That is why most environments in the ArmA games don't feel like warzones... I'd probably enjoy living out there because our buildings dont get knocked down easily... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
max power 21 Posted April 25, 2012 I wasn't saying that Havok is horrible, only that demo was just terrible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kimozabbi 1 Posted April 25, 2012 irony is he missed the great Havok physics showcase here I seen that one but thought the detailed destruction would be far too demanding for the grand scale of the ARMA 3 maps. Does map size have an effect on physics simulation? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted April 25, 2012 well ofcourse too detailed physics would be problem but then, culling and lod system and other methods can be applied for physics in similar way like for graphics the real challenge is MP sync of the physics ... which in case of destruction would most likely mean only some 'key' parts are synced while rest is only local ... otherwise it would be too traffic demanding or impossible sync in time ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flash Thunder 10 Posted April 25, 2012 Yeah lets wait till we all have super fast fiber optic internet and quantum computers I dont want it to take an hour to render a frame. :p Looks awesome imagine the gameplay in Arma with that destruction fidelity! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kimozabbi 1 Posted April 25, 2012 Dwarden thanks for taking the time to answer questions and provide useful information. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rye1 21 Posted April 25, 2012 Looks awesome imagine the gameplay in Arma with that destruction fidelity! :notworthy: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kimozabbi 1 Posted April 25, 2012 Looks awesome imagine the gameplay in Arma with that destruction fidelity! I'd probably spend all night blowing shit up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
J-Guid 10 Posted April 25, 2012 irony is he missed the great Havok physics showcase here"YOUTUBE Video" which in fact has some excellent examples like the stairs with walkway, steel construction, wooden contruction, houses and bricks Dwarden we praying on this feature or some like this, just do it please :)! Dynamic game enviroment be great! :pray: :pray: :pray: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MulleDK19 21 Posted April 25, 2012 I'm still hoping that one day ARMA will be using DMM. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
