Bohemia Interactive's ambitions are always set too high.

[chortles 263]

Maybe you could list some actual examples of what makes RV so great and why nothing else can replace it instead of using vague analogies and marketing speak.

... because other game developers just aren't interested in leveraging what RV outperforms their preferred engines at, much less making a game designed around those differences?

[g00d69 2]

I am not agree when you say that RV engine is the more powerfull engine and the only one who can make what it does.I am sure that some other engines can make same but they are not used for same kind of games or sames objectives.Its like if you say only Ferrari motors can make a car running at 300km/h, its wrong, other constructors can make it also but they dont have the same functions and goals and because a familly car for example doesn't need to reach this kind of speed.

[Sealife 22]

i don't think i did get it at all you just said.

I am saying the stats you provided as "look ive just been online with 110 people" only prove that the engine can provide slots , after 1 hour of being online the engine isnt tested when only 19 people actually took part in the scoring and of them 19, 3-4 were responsible for 25+ % of the action that effected the mission. all died once so no respawn i persume ? so how many were actually playing at any one time and askign the server /gam,e to make calculations and send to all clients ?

110 people in a good deathmatch would be more convincing or 110 people in a co-op , i am sure even OFP can provied such numbers in a TVT across a wide range its not proof positive things are improving at all .

Edited January 25, 2014 by Sealife

[NeuroFunker 11]

I am saying the stats you provided as "look ive just been online with 110 people" only prove that the engine can provide slots , after 1 hour of being online the engine isnt tested when only 19 people actually took part in the scoring and of them 19, 3-4 were responsible for 25+ % of the action that effected the mission. all died once so no respawn i persume ? so how many were actually playing at any one time and askign the server /gam,e to make calculations and send to all clients ?

110 people in a good deathmatch would be more convincing or 110 people in a co-op , i am sure even OFP can provied such numbers in a TVT across a wide range its not proof positive things are improving at all .

wat? 110 people is not impressive? How many games are out there, except shitty MMO, what can provide 120 slots and large maps like in arma, with pretty fluently gameplay? Also WoG is open for everyone, anyone can join games, which are nearly every damn day, and try themselves. I can't belive, some people are just THAT much negative about arma, they don't believe some obvious things? I was there, playing, recording, while you say: 19 ppl blah-blah, eh, wasting my time here lol.

[Sealife 22]

I think you cannot see the woods for the trees

You are asking people to justify statements that are not even in thier posts , its incredulous what I see here , where did you get the impression people were here to be impressed ?

Edited January 25, 2014 by Sealife

[windies 11]

How are people still getting trolled by Neurofunker at this point?

[Sealife 22]

How are people still getting trolled by Neurofunker at this point?

Its the only true game mode 100s can play with full constants ;)

[NeuroFunker 11]

How are people still getting trolled by Neurofunker at this point?

maybe because they aren't?

[Sealife 22]

maybe because they aren't?

then prove that it is unproven? What engine can do same or even better?P.s if you wait about 30 minutes (20 mins left to upload, and will take like 10 to process if not more) you can watch 1 hour gameplay video of me and our squad with 110 people on server. 2 other vids still to come in hours.Here is the link, which will be active in like 30-40 mins***

I think he has a point , I dont think your video answers any post really , its 12 minutes of map screen followed by 5 mins of desync chain followed by looong car journey followed by senic tour of 7 people around the terrain finally desyncing swimmers under water .

Slots are a lot but again that was possible looong time ago including walking in on vehicles andmass fire fights , show me that vid of the mass action pleaseso I may believe as you do

[NeuroFunker 11]

maybe here

and here

and like i said before, on takistan it was a bit laggy, because map maker placed civilian cars around, strangely or not, they are hurting the performance a lot.

[Sealife 22]

Chernarus and takistan are old technology from arma 2 , you are only serving to kinda strengthen the op

Its documented they play nice , im interested in A3 tech and wether bis pushed engine too far and the bottlekneck is finally maxed out .

[NeuroFunker 11]

Chernarus and takistan are old technology from arma 2 , you are only serving to kinda strengthen the op

Its documented they play nice , im interested in A3 tech and wether bis pushed engine too far and the bottlekneck is finally maxed out .

chernarus is even more detailed, cause of huge forests and stuff. I can't play arma 2 on ultra on chernarus, and it runs fine on ultra under arma 3 engine, so thats a pretty improvement.

[nikiforos 450]

NeuroFunker do you have any "negative" to say about Arma 3 and the current engine? You seem so happy with the current status :)

[Sealife 22]

chernarus is even more detailed, cause of huge forests and stuff. I can't play arma 2 on ultra on chernarus, and it runs fine on ultra under arma 3 engine, so thats a pretty improvement.

Not the question being asked by anybody here though is it reaaly ?

The fact old tech runs better on a new Engine is almost a given , the question is have the benchmark of PHYSX , Lighting , Smalller cell size , Additional laters on terrain materials Et al and including AI calcultions etc etc on Altis or any Terrain built with RV4 tech in mind become too much for a stable game for the average player in MP /SP or was the benchmark set to high .

all you are saying is that well i have a video where 110 slots is possible but there isnt much action in the mission , it includes desync and lag with frame Pauses , however if you use OLD tech and dont spawn cars of a certain kind you can shoot a few people and still get away with a decent game on old terrain technology .

thats all for a different thread or you have to declare it as proof positive that the OP was indeed correct in his/her opinion , take your pick .

[NeuroFunker 11]

like i said, i'm wasting my time here anyway, i'm enjoying among with other 100+ people games nearly every day, with good performance, and no major lag, and all of you who don't, can stay with your sceptice, if thats ok for you, thats your thing. You can't prove me i'm wrong, as i can't, cause you won't play with us, and we don't want to share your sceptise. Stay in your box.

[Sealife 22]

like i said, i'm wasting my time here anyway, i'm enjoying among with other 100+ people games nearly every day, with good performance, and no major lag, and all of you who don't, can stay with your sceptice, if thats ok for you, thats your thing. You can't prove me i'm wrong, as i can't, cause you won't play with us, and we don't want to share your sceptise. Stay in your box.

The problem is , you have not read the questions here and merely added to you own self gratification or as in English " I am alright Jack" , you see obviously you cannot be happy or you wouldnt be here trying to post answers to questions that are not asked but playing ??

anyway to put civility on it , thanks for the videos it is great to see such slots and also see at least 100 are happy there genre of gameplay is good . however i think i am among a larger group who wishes BIS to compromise there goals and create something stable for all .

too many things you can attach the saying .... is a journey not a destination , for me where gaming is concerned the journey should start in a sound vehicle that may need servicing along its life . this car is now a 2006 car which has added sat nav , ABS , power steering , air contioning , chipped Engine management and i think the Car just cant handle it , but i do have faith than in next 18 month BIS will make enough Band Aid so it is playable and wher all can enjoy , problem is by this time they will be thinking hmm a new gadget is on the market i wonder what our car will look like with this attached to it and we call it A5 ;).

[NeuroFunker 11]

NeuroFunker do you have any "negative" to say about Arma 3 and the current engine? You seem so happy with the current status :)

Well, if you ask me, for sure i'm. I'm playing it smooth on ultra, on beautiful island, with pretty looking graphics (i'm pretty much aware, arma was never meant for eyecandy, since OFP), recording and sharing my videos of large pvp events. What can i say negative, as i mentioned in audio thread, i was never happy with audio engine and sounds it self in arma series. Since i'm sort of audiphile (having studio monitores here yamaha hs50m along with hs-10 woofer :P) Audio in arma games is really miles ahead of current or even most older games, and lacks typical features like reverberation, distant filtering, where i have made a ticket of. (must readd it to my sig) Luckely, we are having j.s.r.s.2.0 now, which fixes this issues to me (not entirely). Also i wished to have wind and bullet interraction and weapon resting along with bi-pods, like we had in ACE 2. All in all, i'm pretty positive with arma 3, no other game made me spend 600 h in a year for many years, beside arma 2 (which feels pretty dated to me right now).

I agree that maybe i do sound to fanboish at times, and missread/understand some of the critics posted here, and maybe i should just ignore it and go along, enjoy my games, also maybe people do missunderstand me as well, (few years school english, rest learn from the internets and gaming). I just say "fanboys", should not overreact on pessimists/sceptics, while sceptical people, shouldn't overreact on "fanboys". I do appritiate people, who pointing out in adequate manner to us and the devs, some obvious and major problems our favorite game has, and i do agree if all of us would say: yey bis, everthing is perfect, just go on! etc., won't help to improve the game, but imo. its sometimes just to much of "nay saying" in threads.

Oh, and by the way, just got the infro from my clan mates, next week we gona play massive TvT campaign, with like 500 peope! I'm excited to see how it goes, gona record and share if you guys are interrested. ;)

Edited January 25, 2014 by NeuroFunker

[dale0404 5]

Oh, and by the way, just got the infro from my clan mates, next week we gona play massive TvT campaign, with like 500 peope! I'm excited to see how it goes, gona record and share if you guys are interrested. ;)

Please do!

[Opticalsnare 12]

The problem with Fanbois is that anything they say is pretty much just aload of text-to-screen diarrhea. And therfore you cannot take anything they say seriously or even have a decent discussion with.

Please do!

Hmm that should be interesting seeing 500 players in a mission when the engine only supports 256.

Edited January 25, 2014 by Opticalsnare

[Alwarren 2765]

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 .....

That game looks pretty awesome, but from what I heard from the video the initial map is nine square kilometers. Even if you increase that by a factor of ten, you're still a Far Cry (pun intended) away from the almost 300 square kilometers of Altis.

(Having said that, I am really looking forward to "Kingdom Come")

---------- Post added at 21:48 ---------- Previous post was at 21:47 ----------

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

No idea whether it was cancelled, I believe it was, but I am not sure.

---------- Post added at 21:56 ---------- Previous post was at 21:48 ----------

Or how about this way: If RV is so much more amazingly powerful and capable than all of those other engines out there, why aren't companies breaking down the gates trying to license it?

Well there is always a difference between a company aiming at making an engine to be licensed out, and one that doesn't. A lot of proprietary engines exist, not every company seeks to license them out to other developers. And in general, game developers look for what they need. If you aren't doing large-scale terrains, then Cry Engine or Unreal 3 is probably a good deal for you, since they offer excellent support and tools. People tend to forget that most development, regardless of game engines or other software systems, is mostly demand-driven. You don't implement something just for fun, but because you need it. Time is money.

So popularity of engines does mostly tell you that the company is good at supporting it.

[roshnak 41]

So popularity of engines does mostly tell you that the company is good at supporting it.

I actually understand why RV isn't being used by other companies. I was responding to the people who say things like, "RV is the most powerful engine out there," which is just not correct. RV is pretty good at a few things and really bad at a lot of other things.

Again, I have no problem with Arma using RV. I think it's the right engine for the game, it's just lacking in a lot of areas where progress has been made by other engines and needs a lot of work to bring it up to modern standards.

[Alwarren 2765]

I actually understand why RV isn't being used by other companies. I was responding to the people who say things like, "RV is the most powerful engine out there," which is just not correct. RV is pretty good at a few things and really bad at a lot of other things.

Alright, I misunderstood you then.

Again, I have no problem with Arma using RV. I think it's the right engine for the game, it's just lacking in a lot of areas where progress has been made by other engines and needs a lot of work to bring it up to modern standards.

Yeah... the sad part is, I am quite sure it would be possible. It just isn't happening.

[Sealife 22]

Rv is used by others most noteably VBS unless now we gonna hear its same company lol

The map size thing in the post of Al warren is actually a good point in many ways it justifies the concer of the OP

Warhorse have actually took the desicion to start small and sensible , obviously cryengine can reasoably fit a hell of a lot more in those 9x9 that is interactable and physx activated and remain stable even at 2m cells which when you consider 256km x 256km is the max size in that engine iirc and worldstreaming that allows unlimted worlds as seen in some mmos that use CE3 its not fair to dissmiss 9x9 starter map as a bad thing ! Remember rhamadi ? Utes ? Stratis ? Good starter maps to test :)

I also agree RV is right for Arma and upto AO but I dont believe its doing a good job with A3 and the amount of workarounds and fixes will be too much this is seen very early on where fps fixes to Altis left a lot of unconfigged structures and objects and damage to the parralax leaving floating stones and clutter .when close up

[chortles 263]

Rv is used by others most noteably VBS unless now we gonna hear its same company lol

I actually remember this story about how Havok partnered with other companies to bid for the US Army Games For Training (GFT) recompete, but that they pulled out because according to a Havok VP they felt that "it" (the requirements?) favored BISim, suggesting that -- like RealTimeImmersive before them -- they were offering certain things ("advantages" over BISim's VBS2/VBS3) while the US Army was interested in other things (namely, what BISim was already bringing to the table)... I always found it an interesting take between "what the customer is willing to pay (and be contracted) for" versus "what developers/publishers seem to want to produce"... notice how I didn't say "what developers/publishers are selling"?

I would take the rest of what you said, Sealife, and say that in the future, "BI: Arma Division" (so to speak) needs to seriously reconsider the idea of such large maps as Altis insofar as the idea that such largeness, such scale, has any inherent value in and of itself. Alternately... the whole "humongous scale" aspect of Arma has about as much value as the underwater aspect of Arma 3, and possibly even less. :p

[windies 11]

Do we need 300 sq. km maps though? I love big maps, I love lots of area's to explore, but do we need these sized maps in ArmA for ArmA to be interesting, and I mean at the cost of performance, playability and stability? Wouldn't it be better to have smaller but detailed maps that fulfill the both the trouble area's as well as being interesting and functional within the scope of ArmA? What's the fascination with increasing the size of the maps if the engine can't handle it, beyond the fact that you're increasing the size of the map for the sake of increasing it's size and that WOW factor. In that regard, I definitely feel like BI's ambitions were too high in a negative way. I'm talking from the perspective of the road we are on right now which is heading in the direction of ArmA 4 in the same boat as ArmA 3 currently or whatever sequels/DLC/Expansions that are coming after ArmA 3.