tet5uo 4 Posted March 24, 2013 Hey, look everyone! A bunch of irrational fanboys that can't even accept HYPOTHETICAL changes to their beloved game. Even changes that would improve performance?! "New engine? Nah, screw that. You trying to ruin my game with your improved engine? We LIKE low framerates and having limitations in our game that make it look like something out of 2003!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dm 9 Posted March 24, 2013 Yes, because a new engine is the magical solution to all the performance issues... FPDR Its funny, the threads where people suggest replacing the engine are always, and I mean always, full of people who have NO idea what they're talking about... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ProfTournesol 956 Posted March 24, 2013 (edited) Yes, because a new engine is the magical solution to all the performance issues... FPDRIts funny, the threads where people suggest replacing the engine are always, and I mean always, full of people who have NO idea what they're talking about... Moreover, most of the things asked can already be done with the actual engine. May i add that calling people "irrationnal fanboys" is nothing more than flaming, which doesn't help any civil discussion here. Edited March 24, 2013 by ProfTournesol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tet5uo 4 Posted March 24, 2013 I'm sorry, but the responses to most of these threads by the "Forum regulars" are usually no better than my "flaming" tone either. They're not warned about it, though, since they're doing it in "support" of the game when they tell people they're idiots. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sandy* 10 Posted March 24, 2013 Hey, look everyone! A bunch of irrational fanboys that can't even accept HYPOTHETICAL changes to their beloved game. Even changes that would improve performance?!"New engine? Nah, screw that. You trying to ruin my game with your improved engine? We LIKE low framerates and having limitations in our game that make it look like something out of 2003!" I'm sorry, but the responses to most of these threads by the "Forum regulars" are usually no better than my "flaming" tone either. They're not warned about it, though, since they're doing it in "support" of the game when they tell people they're idiots. Troll posts? The point here is that it's entirely possible for BIS to optimize the current engine to use GPU better in rendering graphics, that is something that is probably a lot more cheaper resources-wise than developing a new engine from scratch, not to mention the flood of new problems brought by such. As for these "hypothetical changes", none has been mentioned. GPUs will surely be utilized in many new ways for games in the future but right now the practical examples are quite simple and not really something that Arma could benefit from. GPU AI and such have been mentioned, but the solutions for stuff like that will probably come from the GPU manufacturers instead of BIS allocating resources and running into dead ends. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SmallBlackSheep 0 Posted March 24, 2013 - Shooting out of vehicle windows needs to be in Arma 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bee8190 10 Posted March 24, 2013 - Shooting out of vehicle windows needs to be in Arma 3 No, walkable interiors needs to be in arma 3! :) Please check http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?150995-Request-Walkable-Interior-of-Vehicles/page2 thread and vote up Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
guiltyspark 10 Posted March 24, 2013 Have you skipped everything that's been posted on this thread? A lot of CPU tasks are ill-suited for the GPU in a game. Naturally I can't predict what they come up with in the future, but with current hardware this fantasy of yours about CPU tasks being magically offloaded for the GPU to process just simply isn't happening.Humor me. Alot of the CPU tasks are ill-suited for the GPU in the game because that is how the engine is designed. Its designed to use the CPU because back in 2001 when this engine was created the CPU was a more powerful asset for game developers. The GPU and CPU Are hardware wise the same exact thing , they are both number crunching machines which game developers can allocate code to, they can perform THE EXACT SAME TASKS , if the engine is designed to do designate these tasks appropriately. The current engine we have now is from 2001 , there is no optimization or incremental improvements BIS can do that will fix this , they would have to rewrite the foundational parts of the games engine to "optimize" it and at that point it would be so much un-needed work that they should just make a new engine in its entirety. You are all being irrational children , you dont understand how game engines work or how computer hardware works. Arma needs a new engine badly , this isnt really an argument. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sandy* 10 Posted March 24, 2013 Alot of the CPU tasks are ill-suited for the GPU in the game because that is how the engine is designed. Its designed to use the CPU because back in 2001 when this engine was created the CPU was a more powerful asset for game developers. The GPU and CPU Are hardware wise the same exact thing , they are both number crunching machines which game developers can allocate code to, they can perform THE EXACT SAME TASKS , if the engine is designed to do designate these tasks appropriately. Can you give me examples of games that run AI, gameplay physics or any other tasks that Arma 3 runs on the CPU? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mmaruda 20 Posted March 24, 2013 The AI and physics are not what impacts performance the most. 3D objects detail and view distance are and some of this stuff can be handled by GPUs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
guiltyspark 10 Posted March 24, 2013 Can you give me examples of games that run AI, gameplay physics or any other tasks that Arma 3 runs on the CPU? no because that is the point , the CPU is not used for those things anymore Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sandy* 10 Posted March 24, 2013 no because that is the point , the CPU is not used for those things anymore Sorry I typoed that, let me rephrase - can you give me examples of games that run AI, gameplay physics or any similar tasks (that Arma3 runs on the CPU) on the GPU? ---------- Post added at 14:45 ---------- Previous post was at 14:41 ---------- The AI and physics are not what impacts performance the most. 3D objects detail and view distance are and some of this stuff can be handled by GPUs. What? A large number of AI units (and their physics) are a huge strain on performance in Arma. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dm 9 Posted March 24, 2013 (edited) The GPU and CPU Are hardware wise the same exact thing Actually, they are not. GPUs are optimised [finally, a legitimate use of the word in such a discussion] to perform huge numbers of parallel computations. CPUs, however, are less streamlined for parallel processing, but more flexible for out-of-order processing. But you clearly know that, being an expert and everything (see below). The current engine we have now is from 2001 Whats your point? If you trace any engine's heritage you often go back more than a decade. Your favourite engine, frostbite 2 (the number ought to give it away there) is relatively young, coming from 2008. But just the same way RV has been evolving, so has frostbite. CoD is based on the IW engine, which in turn is based on the idTech engine, which dates back to 1995... You are all being irrational children , you dont understand how game engines work or how computer hardware works. 1. the only person being irrational is you: "throw away your crappy engine and write a new one!1!!11!!1!!!" 2. No, clearly it is you who does not understand how game engines and/or computer hardware works. Because if you did, you would know that GPUs while great for things like graphics (duh) and physics, are pretty much useless for things like AI. And no matter how much you "re-write" them, things like AI will never be well suited to GPU processing. Arma needs a new engine badly , this isnt really an argument. You're right, its not an argument because it really doesn't. Sure, the current engine needs a lot of work, but, like I've said, you never start from scratch. no because that is the point , the CPU is not used for those things anymore Actually they are. There are no games that use only the GPU for AI. There are no games that run their core physics on GPU. The core physics are run on CPU, with GPU acceleration for all the extra effects (particles, cloth, etc) Edited March 24, 2013 by DM Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mmaruda 20 Posted March 24, 2013 What? A large number of AI units (and their physics) are a huge strain on performance in Arma. Yes, but unless you create an overkill mission, most current gen CPUs can handle the AI, they cannot handle 4000m view distance though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[frl]myke 14 Posted March 24, 2013 We had countless similar threads in the past and they all ended up the same: one faction insulting the other and vice versa, Moderators handing out infractions and closing the thread. So please forgive me if i prefer to skip the insulting parts and the infraction and directly move to the closing part. And for those skilled programmers usually found in such threads, this might be of interest for you: http://www.bistudio.com/english/company/careers -Closed- Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
