Adding physx to beta patches

[papoose244 10]

Hi

Ive read Bis added physx to VBS2 it would be a good idea if you added it to Arma 2 OA so we could beta test it so its perfect for Arma 3 ofcourse if this is even Possible.

Edited August 31, 2011 by papoose244

[CameronMcDonald 146]

If you were BIS, would you do this before the game is even released?

...although the ToH beta thread seems to give my words the lie. Hell, I'm all for it, but I don't think it will happen.

Edited August 31, 2011 by CameronMcDonald

[papoose244 10]

they added it to VBS 2 so it most be possible no?

[msy 22]

Did you say ARMA3?

[ACPL Jon 68]

they added it to VBS 2 so it most be possible no?

Of course it's technically possible, tho it would "just" require some extra work, testing and would be very unreasonable as they focus on ArmA 3.

So I guess it won't happen, like Cameron already said. And blah, RTT would be a better feature then PhysX, probably (just a guess) also easier to include.

[[frl]myke 14]

There is a major patch announced to be released in 2012 which will include PhysX and some other major improvements. It will also replace the "2" by a "3".

[old_painless 182]

That's some patch

[PuFu 4600]

Myke;2014714']There is a major patch announced to be released in 2012 which will include PhysX and some other major improvements. It will also replace the "2" by a "3".

summer to be precise...looking forward to it, although is gonna be a commercial patch, one of its kind

[max power 21]

BIS doesn't usually change much data in the beta patches. It stands to reason that if they put in PhysX, they would have to configure the vehicles and units to use the engine. How many units and vehicles are in OA (nevermind CO, and/or RFT).

I think there is 0% chance of this happening.

[metalcraze 290]

Let BIS fix 2 years old bugs at least instead of PhysX.

PhysX won't help the game much as you will learn in ArmA3.

It still want to see the damn AI at least crouch instead of standing when firing in the open desert.

[MavericK96 0]

I'd love to see this but I doubt it will happen. They'd have to rework all of the animations/models/etc. to support the new engine, right?

[Rough Knight 9]

I think it would be a waste of resources ATM to be honest. BI's efforts are hopefully focused on bug resolution including MP AI interpolation IMO. Although it would be nice to have Physx we will get it next year with ARMA3.

MP lag resolution is a bigger issue from which ARMA3 will benefit also from it being resolved.

[MavericK96 0]

Yeah, I'd definitely prefer MP VSI working properly over PhysX.

The only thing that bugs me about ArmA2 physics currently is that you can walk off a tiny (6-12 inch) drop and start bleeding in ACE...Kinda doesn't make any sense and is annoying.

[metalcraze 290]

Physics has nothing to do with that

[Gera_CCT 12]

The 2 things that are never fixed in ArmA are Physics and NetCoding. The first one we will have in next game but what about the netcoding warping lag problem?

[[frl]myke 14]

The 2 things that are never fixed in ArmA are Physics and NetCoding. The first one we will have in next game but what about the netcoding warping lag problem?

Following latest beta patches would have revealed to you that BIS is actually working on it.

[RSF TheCapulet 59]

What if they included it in an experimental patch, but didn't actually connect anything to it? Just included the PhysX framework and a bit of documentation to see what the modders could pump out as a preview and warmup to A3. This way they have a horde of testers stretching the capabilities of the engine to help them find more ways to improve. And it'd also give animation and vehicle modders a taste of what it will require to port over and make new physX based mods in A3. Sounds like a win - win scenario.

[[frl]myke 14]

What if they included it in an experimental patch, but didn't actually connect anything to it? Just included the PhysX framework and a bit of documentation to see what the modders could pump out as a preview and warmup to A3. This way they have a horde of testers stretching the capabilities of the engine to help them find more ways to improve. And it'd also give animation and vehicle modders a taste of what it will require to port over and make new physX based mods in A3. Sounds like a win - win scenario.

Isn't PhysX implemented in the TOH community preview already?

[-)rStrangelove 0]

And it'd also give animation and vehicle modders a taste of what it will require to port over and make new physX based mods in A3. Sounds like a win - win scenario.

If physX would work in ArmA2 via a beta patch (even partly) and addonmakers would start re-releasing their greatest addons with physX enabled it could hurt ArmA3 sales.

[Dwarden 1125]

)rStrangelove;2019248']If physX would work in ArmA2 via a beta patch (even partly) and addonmakers would start re-releasing their greatest addons with physX enabled it could hurt ArmA3 sales.

i dont think it would hurt sales in fact it would help sales cause it would be even easier to adopt A3 engine for modmakers / transfer addons etc.

anyway atm. this is is extremely unlikely to happen cause the OP don't understand how complex such 'step' is

[CarlGustaffa 4]

A small step for players, but a giant leap for the devs :p

[maruk 80]

I'd love to see this but I doubt it will happen. They'd have to rework all of the animations/models/etc. to support the new engine, right?

This is very close to reality, yes.

It is not like you include PhysX or any other library and everything works as charm. Moving to different physical simulation is a massive task in a game of this scope and it is one of the main efforts for the sequel called Arma 3.

[Tonci87 163]

PhysX will definately add a whole new level of realism to the series. I´m really looking forward to see how it will work in Arma 3

[papuanuevaguinea 10]

i thought physx was implemented in PMC

[maddogx 13]

i thought physx was implemented in PMC

Two years from joining to your first post... and then this?