Bohemia Interactive's ambitions are always set too high.

[Tyl3r99 41]

problem is that if people want arma iii running with one of the last generation game engines, we will all need a nasa computer.:d

even nasa would have issues running this game

[calin_banc 19]

I don't think there is an engine out there that can handle Arma-type games for the sheer size of the terrain.

The thing is: they weren't trying in the first place. Few modifications here and there and you may end up with a similar capable engine. After all Avalanche pull it off with JC 2, you have IL 2 Sturmovik, DCS, WT, etc. Even Cry Engine 3 goes back to the old Far Cry game, waaaay back.

The thing is, they can still improve this one... if they want. The jump from Arna 2's engine is massive and the recent implementation of HDAO shows that it can be done. You can add all the shiny stuff that other games have and then some more. Even better concurrency.

even nasa would have issues running this game

Of course it won't, it's not design to use all the hardware available.

[Alwarren 2767]

well, one thing saying: rv engine suxxzorz! Frostbyte gives me 120fps! BI should get rid of that engine! Another, to say, rv engine is really the one engine, what can handle arma needs, yet it's quite old, and needs a big update. Thus game engine "experts", are quite amusing, they want to put a formel 1 car engine, in to a mining truck, because they want more speed. ;)

Well saying everything is fine with the current engine isn't going to make things any better either. As I said, the truth is somewhere in between.

I wish people would be less biased into one or the other direction. Take headless clients. One half (the defenders) will tell you what a great new feature this is, while in reality it is just a band-aid, a crutch to help over the fact that the game does not multithread its AI. On the other hand, there's the attackers that tell you that a game engine is crap unless you have 120 FPS and can see every single nose hair on a face.

Both are wrong. There is a middle ground, and people need to recognize that this is the only walkable way. The engine is the right one, it just needs some urgent modernization that are long overdue.

I really wish people would be a bit less biased towards one side or the other. This topic is a prime example were bias pulls into two opposite directions and everybody loses.

---------- Post added at 11:20 ---------- Previous post was at 11:17 ----------

The thing is: the weren't trying in the first place. Few modifications here and there and you may end up with a similar capable engine. After all Avalanche pull it off with JC 2, you have IL 2 Sturmovik, DCS, WT, etc. After all, even Cry Engine 3 goes back to the old Far Cry game, waaaay back.

That's pretty much irrelevant. Try or not, the fact is they don't handle this terrain size. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the VBS competitor of the US Army based on the cry engine cancelled because of just that - terrain size restrictions?

Yes. they might be modified to support it, but then, so could RV.

The thing is, they can still improve this one... if they want. The jump from Arna 2's engine is massive and the recent implementation of HDAO shows that it can be done. You can add all the shiny stuff that other games have and then some more. Even better concurrency.

Indeed, that's the point. It doesn't do everything to get were it wants, and it's sad because I am quite sure that they COULD add a lot of things if they would want to. But seeing the success of DayZ, I suppose that's more of a focus for them right now.

Edited January 23, 2014 by Alwarren

[[evo] dan 79]

+1 to that Alwarren

[calin_banc 19]

It's pretty relevant actually. Roberts delayed the dog fighting module for Star Citizen just so he can make his own back end for multiplayer, with netcode and all. Kindomcome devs will make their own RPG dev tools. Every engine needs to be worked a little bit if you want to make something different. Same goes for RV, but they need to start doing it (the R&D part) in a way that can actual grow into something nice, not just small steps that can take you from now to the day after.

Also, big maps are irrelevant if you cannot populate them properly and especially in MP, you have a serious problem on that part.

[g00d69 2]

There is already an engine based on CryEngine and dedicated to simulation and serious games called "Realtime Immersive".:D

[3instein 10]

And what makes simulators so special that they don't have to run well? I suspect you are referring to civil flight sims, which are slower paced and do not involve players rapidly panning the camera, when low FPS becomes most evident.

Then again, maybe I'm reading things wrong and you guys are actually being sarcastic.

Most flight sims have a hellava lot more terrain to compute than any arma game,factor in all the computations of advanced flight dynamics,missile dynamics and all the rest,also when you are flying in a flight sim,the one thing you want to do is keep your head rapidly panning in all directions.

Simple really the Arma engine is a totally different beast from any flight sim out there,meaning it just wouldn't cut the mustard of a flight sim.

Mick. :)

[NeuroFunker 11]

usually, flight sim games, have smowhat low detailed terrains, so it actually allows them to make very large worlds. But thats just tradeoff, i guess you could make a terrain in arma the size of flight sim, with samd amount detalization as this games have, but who needs it? Arma 3 is now infantery combat focused, so having huge terrain with little bits of detail is useless.

[[evo] dan 79]

usually, flight sim games, have smowhat low detailed terrains, so it actually allows them to make very large worlds. But thats just tradeoff, i guess you could make a terrain in arma the size of flight sim, with samd amount detalization as this games have, but who needs it? Arma 3 is now infantery combat focused, so having huge terrain with little bits of detail is useless.

We'd also need transport planes to get around. :D

Also, since AI are (or at least in A2 were) having their pathfinding partially based on terrain grid size, extending the grid size would make them useless.

[Brain 12]

There is already an engine based on CryEngine and dedicated to simulation and serious games called "Realtime Immersive".:D

Isn't that the one Alwarrren was referring to with "cancelled"? It got pretty quiet around RTI the last year...

[novahot 1]

Czech game developer 'Warhorse Studios' is producing a large-scaled open-world MMO called 'Kingdom Come' using Cryengine. Lead designer is Viktor Bocan, former lead designer/project manager at Bohemia Interactive.

Maybe .....

[nikiforos 450]

Wow what a find Novahot, that game looks incredible!!! Some former BIS employees with great skills working over there.

[calin_banc 19]

The world only has about 9 sqkm because they want to handcraft everything. No maybe there. But everything looks good, more so when you have guys who work on games like Mafia, OFP, H&D, Crysis 3 and so on. :)

[ProfTournesol 956]

Czech game developer 'Warhorse Studios' is producing a large-scaled open-world MMO called 'Kingdom Come' using Cryengine. Lead designer is Viktor Bocan, former lead designer/project manager at Bohemia Interactive.

Maybe .....

Already discussed here : http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?171950-Kingdom-Come-a-realistic-RPG-by-the-former-creators-of-Mafia-and-Arma

[Opticalsnare 12]

Isn't that the one Alwarrren was referring to with "cancelled"? It got pretty quiet around RTI the last year...

[Tyl3r99 41]

and this....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoXZMudSxX4&list=UUEK8tNROCEjRn0S0WrtCctg

BIS wake up mannn look at this beauty

[JackusCTB 10]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYUrbOvzlsQ&t=0m45s

That's one explosion...

This simulator is indeed very well done, at least in the visual sector.

BI, take example.

[novahot 1]

Ignore my comment #61. It's not a MMO. So it doesn't matter in this discussion.

[Robertk 10]

I dont think they would of gotten here if they never!

[NeuroFunker 11]

and this....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoXZMudSxX4&list=UUEK8tNROCEjRn0S0WrtCctg

BIS wake up mannn look at this beauty

what about map size? I saw BF sized maps only. Maybe BIs could make similar if they wanted, editing map size utes, pumping it up with lots of details.

[Failberry 10]

Oh yeah, the BI apologists again. If you ever decide to open your eyes and actually try and appreciate what BI could be doing better and how a thoroughly modern engine scales across multiple CPU cores try reading these results on Frostbite 2 (an engine which is now more than 2 years old): http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18459152. There's nothing about what ArmA does that wouldn't benefit from the same ability to multi-task, in fact given that so much of what is unique about ArmA is AI decision making and a non-player-centric simulation I should think it should benefit far more from threading than an action-centric shooter like BF3.

You are so utterly wrong. What bis does and the logistics involved uses practicality no short cuts, and I feel strongly that they should not use short cuts. They create a simulation that is logistically better than anything on the consumer market. Cry engine failed and I know not of any other engine that accomplishes what this iteration of arms brings to the table. Bis is at the forefront; I do dought you can argue one engine has done it better. If th fundamentals needs to change than they know that, and that should be the communities focus. Bf4 can't simulate the logistics of war. BIS makes Sims for army's and that is why we play. We make arma not war. Let us not forget the creators

[roshnak 41]

What bis does and the logistics involved uses practicality no short cuts

Haha, what?

Cry engine failed

Haha, what?! This is the epitome of fanboyism. I also like that you don't seem to even know what a game engine does, since it has nothing to do with "simulating the logistics of war," which Arma doesn't do, either, so I'm not sure why you think it's so important.

Edited January 24, 2014 by roshnak

[jaemn 10]

You are so utterly wrong. What bis does and the logistics involved uses practicality no short cuts, and I feel strongly that they should not use short cuts.

I agree. Whereas some lazier developers would have settled for last-gen stationary houses, BI have went the extra mile, providing us with the cutting edge in burrowing domicile technology.

[dm 9]

Cry engine failed

Haha, what?! This is the epitome of fanboyism.

Actually, he's telling the truth. RTI competed against VBS in the last two rounds of US Army simulation competitions. VBS (i.e. RV engine) won both. Ergo, cry engine failed to do what RV does. That's a fact you simply can not deny.

RTI also tried to put cry engine on the DSTS system, and after 50 million dollars and about 5 years, it still uses VBS (i.e. RV engine) because cry engine couldn't do what they wanted/needed it to do. Ergo, cry engine failed to do what RV does. That's another fact you simply can not deny.

I also like that you don't seem to even know what a game engine does, since it has nothing to do with "simulating the logistics of war," which Arma doesn't do, either, so I'm not sure why you think it's so important.

Almost everyone in this thread has no fucking clue what an "engine" is/does. ;)

[roshnak 41]

Actually, he's telling the truth. RTI competed against VBS in the last two rounds of US Army simulation competitions. VBS (i.e. RV engine) won both. Ergo, cry engine failed to do what RV does. That's a fact you simply can not deny.

RTI also tried to put cry engine on the DSTS system, and after 50 million dollars and about 5 years, it still uses VBS (i.e. RV engine) because cry engine couldn't do what they wanted/needed it to do. Ergo, cry engine failed to do what RV does. That's another fact you simply can not deny.

Almost everyone in this thread has no fucking clue what an "engine" is/does. ;)

He didn't say anything about RTI and wasn't responding to anyone who said anything about RTI, though? Nothing about his post suggests he is referring to RTI, and, in fact, also mentions BF4 in his post, which was never in any running to be adopted by any military. He made the blanket statement that Cryengine had failed, without any qualifiers, which is an absurd statement to make. It's no Unreal Engine, but Cryengine is still fairly popular, and has been used in several big budget games, while RV has been used in basically nothing except in-house projects at BIS. So, unless we are speaking strictly about who has had more success selling products to the US Army, then Cryengine has objectively not failed.

I can't personally make any statements one way or the other about whether Cryengine has failed to do what RV does, because I am not familiar with any projects that have tried to do what RV does on Cryengine. The only thing I know is that some company has put out a few Youtube videos trying to sell software to the military. For all I know all they did was put some modern military assets into Crysis and make a video. I don't know anything about the team that was working on it, to what extent they modified the engine, or what the scope of their project was in the first place.

I will grant you the point about most people not understanding what game engines do, though. It's a pretty huge problem from both sides of the argument, frankly. There seems to be a lot of posters on this forum who think that a game engine is just some static thing that you drop models and textures into and then it's a video game. Game engines are frequently extensively modified to suit the developers' needs. At the very least it seems a bit silly to make concrete statements about whether certain other engines can or cannot do what RV does, since, to my knowledge, no one else has ever tried to do what BIS does with Arma.

Although this whole discussion is pointless, since there is no way that BIS is going to throw out an engine they have spent more than a decade developing and start all over from scratch.

As a side note: Some posters on this forum display a great deal of hostility towards any game that is not Arma. You guys know you are allowed to like more than one thing, right?

Edited January 24, 2014 by roshnak