Jump to content
progamer

PhysX Discussion (dev branch)

Recommended Posts

This is all very interesting stuff. Voted on the issues. Is a mod solution possible, or is this only something BIS can fix/implement? Do you personally think BIS will ever get around to it?

No unfotunately not. The workaround with the fake gears that zGuba came up with improved the problem with the engine not reving up (for forward travel) but produces the stuttering at slow speed. This is the only method so far that can be done using mods. I think it would be a very easy fix if BIS programmers actually wanted to spend some time on it.

I've suspected the lack of physical gears for some while and while we may have physx, vehicle handling and terrain interaction seem to pre-date this millenium and although the recent addition of traction parameter were welcome step forward

This is not a problem with lack of physical gears. They exist (fake gears are additional gears to the regular ones). It's a problem of fine tuning the physx implementation in A3

Edited by Fennek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can be done. It takes time, and detail. I have hope that all these will be fixed by the time Expansion comes around we will have fluent driving, and the likes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the case since fake gears where implemented. Additionally to normal gears, the tanks in A3 now have many (up to 8) additional gears with extreme high gearratio. It was done to allow the engine rpm to go up at all.

However, if you drive at slow speed (below 15kph) the automatic gearbox constantly changes gears, as the ratios are so short that they only work for like 2-3kph.

The real reason why the engine does not spin up however is because the clutch (which is simulated in physX) closes automatically as soon as you apply any form of throttle. This is not a physx Problem, its a controll problem. This prevents the engine to go up in rpm and get some torque. The workaround made by zGuba is those fake gears, but they produce those problems.

The real solution should be fairly easy, and that is to delay the closing of the clutch after you apply throttle. Either by a fixed time amount, or better yet, a linear curve (from open (0) to closed (1) in a time period of x - for example 1s).

Let's vote:

Vehicle Stuttering

Engine cant rev up Problem

I agree with you that physx for vehicles is severely lacking because it seems to be neglected. It was implemented and then not cared about once it got to a semi working state... There even is the option in physx for manual shifting, but the controlls for it are lacking, so we cant use it ... apparently flyboys seem to be more important then fixing ground vehicles :j:

Do you have a video of that? I have observed another effect that causes vehicles to severely reduce speed on my custom tank, but not on vanilla tanks yet, it might be related

Thanks for the explanation and new tickets.

One thing I noticed yesterday is that wheeled vehicles (Gorgon) seem to be easier to drive at slower speeds using analogue throttle. Is there a difference between the transmission on wheeled and tracked vehicles, or is it perhaps they have spent more time tweaking some vehicles than others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wheeled Vehicles do not have those extra gears that tracked vehicles have. They have less rolling resistance and lower mass then tanks, so the issue with engine not reving up is not so severe, so it wasn't deemed necessary i think.

That's why they dont stutter at low speeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wheeled Vehicles do not have those extra gears that tracked vehicles have. They have less rolling resistance and lower mass then tanks, so the issue with engine not reving up is not so severe, so it wasn't deemed necessary i think.

That's why they dont stutter at low speeds.

They do too, but that's problem of wrong values and messed up classWheels.

Can be fixed, but needs time and love into detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really appreciate the release of the diag_mode, but I have a question:

Is this diag_mode hardcoded into the game engine, or is it "modable" as well?

Another point: is it possible to position the window somewhere else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree about the position, it could be moved to the side as it almost totally blocks vision on the road

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone noticed worse ragdolls after recent patches (like two weeks ago)? Bodies are too soft now and curve easily into unrealistic positions. What is this regression?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have created an Independence class LCS 2 ship for Arma 3 and even if the PHYSx interaction is quite good the intaraction with class Man entitites is horrible.

Could any of the developers enlighten us wether the infamous 60 meter limit for Roadways and GEOmetry LODs is going to be modified ?

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

vehicle physics in general are becoming a bit of a joke for me now. Physx implementation feels like an after thought and BI seem to have no interest in properly going over all the Physics of Tanks, cars etc and making them handle at least as good as Arma2. I still play Arma 2 and it makes me shake my head every time I drive an abrams and remember how awesome tanks handle in OA. What is the point in a new system being implemented if it's worse than the Previous method (same could be said about sound I guess)? Are we going to be expected to pay for some Vehicle DLC to see this being addressed? Or maybe Arma4 they will get around to looking at it?

Arma3 has been out for over a year now...Please, can we at least have even some slow progress on it...where a vehicle (or class) is looked at every patch or something? I think your going over kill on the infantry, helis got looked at...now how about vehicle PhysX?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the thank track simulation has to be changed. It feels more like a wheels and not behave like track.

There are multiple tickets for that:

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=15788

The most annoying is this: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=12056

Imo the wheeled vehicles behavior is quite good if you not push it to some extreme conditions. I think you should not compare the Arma 2 vehicle behavior to Arma 3 ones, because in the A2 wasn't physics simulation. It was more arcade than the A3 ones.

Extreme situations not handled properly. Sometimes the vehicle should flip and roll on the ground like the rally car do, but they didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Danczer this is a great video really showing how we really do not have a workable PhysX system at present. Come on DEVs, look at all the points raised in the video and fix please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that the thank track simulation has to be changed. It feels more like a wheels and not behave like track.

Because in the simulation they are wheels. It's not possible to have real tank track simulation with PhysX. Real simulation of tank track movement is too calculation expensive. And some of the reports /videos are outdated, they improved traction and glitchy stuck-between wheels problems at some point.

And the reason why you can't accelerate properly is because the clutch system in PhysX is not physically correct. Nvidia is at fault here. But they are not magically going to improve it unless a real developer contacts them/ talks to them. They are not going to change anything just because i, a nobody, wrote some wall of text they may or may not have read.

Edited by Fennek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldnt the tanks use a set of invisible wheels in between the normal wheels to give a better illusion of tracks? It should help the tanks from getting stuck and it would look like the track itself is supporting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

physx only supports 20 wheels maximum (because each wheel has to be calculated about 2 times per second for each vehicle on the entire map). And if you count Kuma wheels... its already at 18. So no, no easy workaround.

Besides, the extra wheels would influence vehicle behaviour a great deal, even if not in contact. We already have something that partially prevents getting stuck between wheels if you havent already noticed

Edited by Fennek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So arma3's much hyped (and so far pants) Physx implementation will never give us Tracked vehicles that behave as well, or are as fun to drive as the Tanks physics from Operation Flashpoint? If this is true, it's the most depressing thing to come out of Arma3 yet...

Screw Physx...give me back my "crap" OFP/Arma/arma2/ tracked vehicle physics.... So they bounced into the air sometimes when they collided with some things (and provided me many laughs)....I'd rather have that than live with Arma3's clunky, uninspiring, unresponsive, glitchy, Tracked physics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So arma3's much hyped (and so far pants) Physx implementation will never give us Tracked vehicles that behave as well, or are as fun to drive as the Tanks physics from Operation Flashpoint? If this is true, it's the most depressing thing to come out of Arma3 yet...

Screw Physx...give me back my "crap" OFP/Arma/arma2/ tracked vehicle physics.... So they bounced into the air sometimes when they collided with some things (and provided me many laughs)....I'd rather have that than live with Arma3's clunky, uninspiring, unresponsive, glitchy, Tracked physics.

It can be both (keeping the vehicle physx weight) , just remove physx wheels on the tanks - that should do it :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This video is so outdated. Current situation is much better.

Not at all. Every time I drive in Arma 3 I see pretty much everything shown in the 1st ten minutes of that excellent video. What parts are better? There is still digging into ground, poor transmission simulation, centre of gravity issues, Horrible suspension setup, etc.

Since that video, they tweeked a couple of vehicles (that had serious problems, like the box truck). Other than that it's the same, especially for the tanks.

If BIS only fixed the things in the 1st ten minutes of this video, Arma3 would have much improved vehicle simulation.

g9suNMHrMhg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the tanks, the only issues i have, are breaking the tracks on objects that shouldn't break tracks of a tank, and when you go over a small bump or go airborne, your tank immediately stops to 0 speed and starts up again. Fix those, and all will be golden. I mean seriously, i've seen a t-90 fly and keep on going after it landed. It even bounced slightly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the stopping to 0 is a sideeffect of the drive-on component that was introduced to improve vehicle grip when climbing and obstacles and reduces chance of getting stuck with stuff between wheels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow... than i can see a hard time finding a way around something like that... =/

Unless they were to add a key bind for the tank to activate it during climb, or during a time when your in need of a drive on component, maybe left shift?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not at all. Every time I drive in Arma 3 I see pretty much everything shown in the 1st ten minutes of that excellent video. What parts are better? There is still digging into ground, poor transmission simulation, centre of gravity issues, Horrible suspension setup, etc.

Tanks now takes damage from falling. Vehicles are able to successfully pass the rocks (most of the time). Overall, the situation has improved.

And this was fixed

Edited by Danil-ch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×