Development Blog & Reveals

[PuFu 4600]

+1, yeah, too much Camp Maxwell, we want to see Limnos, we want to see 3D scope, we want to see JADAM explosion effect......

If by 3d scope you mean RTT scopes, i'm afraid you're in for a let down (and this has never actually been confirmed anyhow). Have you seen the RTT screens refresh rate? Same in A3 as in tkoh...

[frostwyrm333 1]

I don't see why at least forward facing RTT should be so resource demanding, same lods same view. With optics, it could render exactly the same space which is not being rendered to first.

Now for something completely different! Interview with Ivan Buchta completely in czech. http://games.tiscali.cz/rozhovor/e3-2012-rozhovor-ivan-buchta-o-arma-3-59920

stratis - made for alpha, MP, campaign(intro)

campaign:

-they changed their idea about open big sandbox, it will still be open big sandbox but it will be divided into smaller parts

-camps/bases as mission hubs - npc's, side missions, after big missions player will move to another base

alpha: will be offered for some price, they like the way it works, it was/is good for TKOH and CC (not sure about A3 feedback, there is already enough of it everywhere:D)

some "genius" asked about "grenades and trenches", IB said that trenches/craters/underground places are not yet in but they would like to have them if they will have time (as was said earlier)

Edited July 1, 2012 by frostwyrm333

[Gera_CCT 12]

Is it just me or does Crowe sound really really exhausted there.

Nice animation show, I especially like the little peek at what we can expect of the alpha.

He seems really tired or bored or both indeed

[Minoza 11]

I don't see why at least forward facing RTT should be so resource demanding, same lods same view. With optics, it could render exactly the same space which is not being rendered to first.

Now for something completely different! Interview with Ivan Buchta completely in czech. http://games.tiscali.cz/rozhovor/e3-2012-rozhovor-ivan-buchta-o-arma-3-59920

stratis - made for alpha, MP, campaign(intro)

campaign:

-they changed their idea about open big sandbox, it will still be open big sandbox but it will be divided into smaller parts

-camps/bases as mission hubs - npc's, side missions, after big missions player will move to another base

alpha: will be offered for some price, they like the way it works, it was/is good for TKOH and CC (not sure about A3 feedback, there is already enough of it everywhere:D)

some "genius" asked about "grenades and trenches", IB said that trenches/craters/underground places are not yet in but they would like to have them if they will have time (as was said earlier)

Thing is, it actually is being rendered, with RTT twice. It's not the same LOD, that would look awful once zoomed in few times.

[Panda_pl 0]

I don't see why at least forward facing RTT should be so resource demanding, same lods same view. With optics, it could render exactly the same space which is not being rendered to first.

What you described would be simple if modern rendering was based on raytracing and you could just bend the rays or manipulate them otherwise.

It is not.

RTT scope would require you to render the scene once, apply the rendered scene to "temporary" texture applied to the object and then render the object and scene.

That's almost double the calculations if you decide to render the RTT image at full resolution and framerate. The image is also delayed by full frame, causing laggy feeling.

Most games using this technique run sluggish despite being... quite outdated (RO, Source mods).

Some games trick you into thinking it is possible (MoH 2010) however they usually use the feature only when scene is sufficiently simple to render (in case of MoH only desert level has RTT scope, ACOG sight is normal CoD4 style). Games like Portal and Prey did this with relatively simple level geometry (corridor shooters).

Edited July 1, 2012 by Panda_pl

[Boostique44 1]

It looks really awesome. If AI was improved, which it obviously will be this game will be just too good.

[froggyluv 2136]

@Panda_pl: thanks for explanation but what do you mean that outdated games ie. RO can use this technique but they're sluggish? RO doesn't seem very sluggish to me :)

[Panda_pl 0]

By outdated I meant games that have low requirements by today's standard.

If you can run RO2 smoothly with 3D scopes and don't notice a thing you either have a decent machine or you have gotten used to it.

RO does not seem sluggish because you are probably running it at 60 fps. In old days when it ran at 30 or less on single core machine I used to have the performance hit and the delay of picture inside the scope were noticeable.

[Mr. Charles 22]

Why don't you look at it from a different angle? Use the scope view as main render and make the surroundings then RTT'd. You could even use a low render resolution to make the outside view of the scope blurry and save some processing power.

[onlyrazor 11]

Of course, if that doesn't work, you could always do it the 'other' way and just use zoom in the entire screen and possibly blur the outsides a la Project Reality.

[PuFu 4600]

Of course, if that doesn't work, you could always do it the 'other' way and just use zoom in the entire screen and possibly blur the outsides a la Project Reality.

indeed. I really don't get why one would need RTT for scopes. Surely, it would look cool to have only part of the screen zoomed in, just like in RO2, but then again, zooming in (like in COD NTH/BF3/MOHA etc) might not be all that bad in the first place. Especially when comparing with the black screen texture overlay we have now (and that we shown for A3 as well)

[Timmoboy 10]

indeed. I really don't get why one would need RTT for scopes. Surely, it would look cool to have only part of the screen zoomed in, just like in RO2, but then again, zooming in (like in COD NTH/BF3/MOHA etc) might not be all that bad in the first place. Especially when comparing with the black screen texture overlay we have now (and that we shown for A3 as well)

Yeah. Having scopes like in COD/BF3 etc would really be the best option for Arma 3. It would probably be a lot easier for modders to make a RTT version. I'm pretty suprised BI haven't done that already but I guess they have more important work.

[celery 8]

Yeah. Having scopes like in COD/BF3 etc would really be the best option for Arma 3.

Personally, I think they just look silly, and it would look even sillier in Arma because the game already has a zoom button that has a similar effect. A zoomed-in aimpoint in Arma is basically the same as looking down an ACOG in CoD.

[elmas 10]

Battlefield scopes dont look bad in my opinion, same as Crysis or Crysis 2 scopes, i prefer them to ArmA but as long as all scopes have a secondary sight like in OA, im fine with it.

[Timmoboy 10]

Personally, I think they just look silly, and it would look even sillier in Arma because the game already has a zoom button that has a similar effect. A zoomed-in aimpoint in Arma is basically the same as looking down an ACOG in CoD.

Well every one is entitled to their own opinion. I see your point but why not try it? If you haven't already. Who knows? If you play with the idea you might come up with something you're pleased with.

Maybe you should make a vote for regular vs bf/cod scope so everyone can express their opinions! Or just have both and let people choose in the game menu?

Edited July 2, 2012 by Timmoboy

[roberthammer 582]

Personally, I think they just look silly, and it would look even sillier in Arma because the game already has a zoom button that has a similar effect. A zoomed-in aimpoint in Arma is basically the same as looking down an ACOG in CoD.

^Exactly

Many people are thinking that Cod/Bf are using RTT ,but they are wrong - it is just zoomed view to the scope , same way as ArmA's Aimpoint

Better have 2D scopes with fully working ranges than zoomed cool view with not working ranges

[Defunkt 431]

RTT scope would require you to render the scene once, apply the rendered scene to "temporary" texture applied to the object and then render the object and scene.

That's almost double the calculations if you decide to render the RTT image at full resolution and framerate. The image is also delayed by full frame, causing laggy feeling.

I'm sure this could be optimized based on both 'scenes' having the same focal point, render just once to a buffer at an increased resolution (ArmA already does this with 3D resolution) and then scale up or down two masked versions of the scene to the frame buffer. You could even have another resolution slider so people could choose between frame rate (render at usual resolution and scale the scoped portion up = blurred view in lens) or fidelity (render n% higher and scale the non-scoped portion down = still sharp in optic and super-sampled outside).

[antoineflemming 14]

^Exactly

Many people are thinking that Cod/Bf are using RTT ,but they are wrong - it is just zoomed view to the scope , same way as ArmA's Aimpoint

Better have 2D scopes with fully working ranges than zoomed cool view with not working ranges

Well the main issue for me is this: For example, ACOG sight is 4x zoom. But, ACOGs in most games are basically Aimpoint sights with a little extra zoom. For ArmA, what's the point of having an aimpoint sight that looks like an ACOG when you can be realistic and just have an aimpoint and an ACOG (with proper zoom) separately?

[metalcraze 290]

Try playing with DM's weapons and you will see how hard it's to make a 3D scope with working ranges right.

Yes it has fully 3D ACOG but it has absolutely no ranges. It looks cool but not really functional.

[eJay 1]

New vehicle showcase

I'm really like volumetric clouds.

[-Coulum- 35]

Headshot!

Vid is nice. I find the volumetric clouds look weird though. Seems that when you move at high speed they warp and distort.

[monotone 3]

I can guess who named the title of caption:cool:

[f27sharps 1]

There is nothing really new !:(

[Steakslim 1]

Headshot!

Vid is nice. I find the volumetric clouds look weird though. Seems that when you move at high speed they warp and distort.

An age old effect with volumetric clouds. The particles that make them up move depending on where the player is facing. You can see examples of this in the E3 videos, as well as in other games with such clouds. ArmA3's are a bit more noticeable because for once they are not just round particles making up the clouds, but actually have more texture to them.

[ProfTournesol 956]

This showcase introduces the Strider, outlining some of our plans for vehicles, including the PhysXâ„¢-supported driving model, new sound effects, Forward Looking Infra Red, and more

Could someone point me where we can see PhysX impact in this video :confused: