Unigine + Euphoria Engines

[johnnygitarr 7]

hi

could this be the next engines for arma 4

BIS earns lots of money with dayz sa and arma 3,

so why not invest in new technology.

unigine engine

or

or

dev blog

http://unigine.com/devlog/

combined with the euphoria engine for animations

natural motion euphoria

possible? what do you think ...

Edited May 13, 2014 by johnnygitarr

[CyclonicTuna 87]

Bohemia have been developing the RV engine for almost 15 years now and I think they'll be hard pressed to switch to anything else. From they're prespective its very benificial to have an engine that they own themselves, saves a lot of time and money. You have to think that if they were to transfer to an engine that then haven't made themselves, they would have to educate themselves into being able to work with it. Let alone the fact that they would have to create a game from scratch, developing new code, new assets, new models new configs you name it. Having said that there are some really cool projects going on that I would like Bohemia to get on board with, even if it meant not making an Arma game.

I think, although having progressed really slowly and still in very early stages of development, the Outerra engine still looks very promesing. Integrated physics, seamless amospheric rendering, and ofcourse the projected size of the maps that could be achieved with it.

http://www.outerra.com/wgallery.html

I own the alpha of this. It runs really smooth and has excellent lighting and physics engines. Ofcrouse its still very empty, only grass, trees and sand, and it remains to be seen how its going to tackle AI, but I'm still very positive. I also think that it would be a good option for a future BI game because unlike most interesting projects being developed alongside military/simulation, Outerra is actually being developed by gamers for gamers, and is meant to be used for commercial games. Therefore it actually takes into account consumer hardware and capabilities, instead of some of the real simulation engines which do not focus on making a smooth player experience and are sometimes horribly optimized for consumer hardware.

That euphoria thing looked nice. But I question how something that script heavy would preform in a game like Arma. Imagine entire platoons being shot to hell. What they showed in that video was just a little tech demo with nothing much goig on. I doubt wether gaming is at that stage yet, but interesting concept non the less.

Edited May 13, 2014 by CyclonicTuna

[Maio 293]

Hey Johnny,

You should keep in mind that BI can't simply make the jump from the RV engine to a mix of Unigine and Euphoria without spending a massive amount of time on training its staff to properly use these two.

BI's current strategy of incrementally upgrading the RV engine makes more sense from both a business point of view and as far as giving their customers/fans something to play with in a reasonable amount of time :) Of course this is my personal opinion and does not in any way reflect BI's long term strategy.

There have been discussions on the topic of an alternate engine for Arma and to be honest, I can not recall if anything fully useful has come out of those threads.

That being said, I am going to leave this thread open for a while to allow the rest of the community to share their thoughts on what you posted.

Keep it civil folks.

Edited May 13, 2014 by Maio

[Sneakson 1]

Unigine is an old engine and has console quality graphics so I don't see it supporting ARMA4... it's barely even a game engine. Has been used in 5 or so budget titles.

[RushHour 11]

Me personally, i can´t wait for other players to come into this market, i think it will be a nice solid wake up call at Bohemia.

[CyclonicTuna 87]

Me personally, i can´t wait for other players to come into this market, i think it will be a nice solid wake up call at Bohemia.

I doubt it, like maionaze said. BI have their own plans. And they're not pressured by a publisher to compete with one title or another in certain features. Besides, even if a miracle engine appears that beats the RV engine on any level imaginable, that doesn't mean that good games will actually be developed for it. Because you can moan and bitch about Arma all you want, but If were honest, when it comes to hardcore military combined warfare simulation, there are few titles that came as close as Arma the last 10 years. And I don't think that's likely to change anytime soon because you would need to wear very firm shoes to approach an audience like the harcore military simulation type, and claim you have the game they want that accomplishes anything they wish and more. Because its a very specific audience, so if you fail to deliver, not only will you be stuck with a game that your target audience doesn't want to play, but also the rest of the gaming world.

I think people should be a little more appreciative of Arma in general, I'm not saying they can't ciritisize, but the whole "lacking features and content", and "steam sucks" argument is getting a little old. You're still playing it! I dare you to name a game that does everything Arma does, and also have such an active and lively community that literally releases free new content every day. I dread that day that developers are going to try and force money out of such a situation, which I fear will soon come. And I'm glad that BI have been so generous on that subject for so long.

That is ultimatly the strengh of BI and Arma if you ask me. The developer aren't idiots and know exactly what they can and can't accomplish, but nevertheless the whole Arma series is very ambitious, perhaps even to ambitious some might argue. Regardless, I think if you want to change BI, you have to change to get the community invovled, because they do listen, and if something is feasable, they will try to implement it.

Edited May 13, 2014 by CyclonicTuna

[RushHour 11]

Not really. All we need is a guy like Chris Roberts that is a hardcore military simulation fan and the landscape can change literally over night.

"You're still playing it!"

It´s the only one so i don´t have much choice now do i if i want to play a military simulator type game.

This is the problem, because they´re alone people assume that nobody can do it even though there´s over 7 billion people on this planet.

but the whole "lacking features and content"

I think it´s more like "when will you fix shit that´s been broken since arma 2"

I´ve never experienced a franchise of games that have been more broken then the Arma series, and that´s with a supposedly 15 full years of experience working with it. You´re right, stick with that engine because i cannot even imagine how much will be broken if they decide to all of a sudden switch engine and reset everyone´s experience.

Zeus and video competitions would not even be on the map if Arma had a competitor on the same level. It´s only a matter of time before other companies takes this niche seriously. I´ve seen it happen in the simracing industry.

[sgtsev3n 12]

from the vids, the engine looks great overall. but BI should stay on RV engine and upgrade theyr engine instead of moving to another engine.

to stay on the current engine and upgrade it makes more sense and it saves alot of money. RV if the engine for ArmA. if ArmA would be switched to another engine, i dont know if it would be still ArmA or feel like ArmA.

IMO, the RV engine is perfect for ArmA. it only needs updates, improvements, fixes etc.

fixing the RV engine and add things like underground structures support and new graphical technology and fixing things like "arma use only one core" is for BI more simple and money safe than switching to a new engine.

also, the huge terrain things like 260x260 km etc (which we see in alot of engines) works in ArmA 3 too. you can do huge terrains even if not many mappers do it.

(we need unlimited object placement for ArmA 3 so we can place unlimited objects on terrain we create)

and graphical things which we see in the videos, BI can add them sooner or later too, no big thing.

RV is good and BI should stay on RV engine and fix/improve the engine.

[enex 11]

Not really. All we need is a guy like Chris Roberts that is a hardcore military simulation fan and the landscape can change literally over night.

It´s the only one so i don´t have much choice now do i if i want to play a military simulator type game.

This is the problem, because they´re alone people assume that nobody can do it even though there´s over 7 billion people on this planet.

I think it´s more like "when will you fix shit that´s been broken since arma 2"

I´ve never experienced a franchise of games that have been more broken then the Arma series, and that´s with a supposedly 15 full years of experience working with it. You´re right, stick with that engine because i cannot even imagine how much will be broken if they decide to all of a sudden switch engine and reset everyone´s experience.

Zeus and video competitions would not even be on the map if Arma had a competitor on the same level. It´s only a matter of time before other companies takes this niche seriously. I´ve seen it happen in the simracing industry.

There is lots of guessing in your post from "we only need guy like" to "matter of time.

I really agree with tuna.Every time we praise arma franchise always someone comes forward and

play blame game with "Broken from days of Flashpoint" type of argument.And is okay to call

for improvement, but why only focus on flaws when there is so good deeds connected with arma?

I feel like we are spoiled fools sitting years on franchise dismissing all the qualities that keeps

us playing and involving with game, forum and developers!

No one is mentioning this: I bough complete arma 3 for 24€.I played arma 3 for 15 months, for

so little money, with constant improvements, to new content, to Zeus, to constant SITREPs,

SPOTREPS, TECHREPS, news, number of Official Streams, tweeter messages from BI, their

response on forums.Reminding myself that I will get gameplay features DLCs for free and new

contentin lower definition because BI staff beliefs that fracturing community is not way to go.

To me it's mind blowing and I thank god every night that they exist.

[RushHour 11]

There is lots of guessing in your post from "we only need guy like" to "matter of time.

It´s guessing on the same level as saying we´re not alone in the universe.

If you really think that the arma developers are the only people in the world capable of doing this or that their engine is the only one capable of doing this until the end of time i don´t know what to say.

And is okay to call for improvement, but why only focus on flaws when there is so good deeds connected with arma?

And i´ve pointed out multiple times what i think Arma does really good, mainly color palette, weather, graphical models, textures, animations (the ones that work properly or are actually finished) and user interface.

Absolutely brilliant work there no doubt.

and I thank god every night that they exist.

The urge to comment to this is just insane but i´ll manage.

[enex 11]

I think that both of us agree that competition is healthy.Just as I like to see AMD alongside Nvidia, I would love

to have another game in simulation FPS shooter style niche.

I'm not expert about what RV is capable but looking back to VBS,

seem like with really good programmer backbone, engine can achieve quite a

lots of things, that we don't see on AAA types of modern shooters.

If you really think that the arma developers are the only people in the world capable of doing this or that their engine is the only one capable of doing this until the end of time i don´t know what to say.

Yep disagree with this.They can't be the only developers, and RV engine is not godlike or the only one, but right now, I don't see any other.

[chrisb 196]

They are very good the vids for Unigine engine, I also follow Outerra.

Still, larger and larger isn't always the best way to go, unless of course you just want one terrain to play on all the time. There are places on terrains from Arma, A2 and of course A3 (goes without saying), that I am still yet to find and play on. Its pretty impossible to play on every part of a terrain, would take a really long time to see everywhere, especially concerning the prior titles, where there is such a vast choice of terrains.

There is always new ground to find.

Regards BI changing, doubt it, although the engine shows signs of buckling, here and there.

[roshnak 41]

Hey Johnny,

You should keep in mind that BI can't simply make the jump from the RV engine to a mix of Unigine and Euphoria without spending a massive amount of time on training its staff to properly use these two.

More time than to figure out the engine they're already using? (This is a joke)

I think it´s more like "when will you fix shit that´s been broken since arma 2"

I´ve never experienced a franchise of games that have been more broken then the Arma series, and that´s with a supposedly 15 full years of experience working with it.

First of all, there is stuff that has been a problem since OFP.

You second statement, however, is a bit exaggerated. There are plenty of more broken games than Arma. There are fewer broken games at Arma's price point, but anything that uses the trash heap that is Gamebryo comes to mind.

The issue with moving to a new engine is that Arma is most desperately in need of polish and features at this point, and I can't see switching to a new engine as acting as anything other than a reset button. The biggest upside I can see with moving to a new engine is that it might finally force BIS to move away from SQF, which I'm still hoping they decide to do anyway.

I'd really rather that BIS concentrates on updating Arma's feature set, implementing a few features which have been the most requested of the series, and at the very least implement an alternative to SQF, since they almost certainly won't replace it altogether, and that's probably the thing that would require the biggest rewrite. Overall, despite the fact that it has the most chance of getting my most wanted change implemented, I feel like an engine change would largely be a step backwards for the series.

[the_demongod 31]

Why are you even talking about Arma 4? I think it's pretty obvious that BI is building the game like an engine itself (with modular DLCs, feedback tracker and the like), and I can't imagine there being an Arma 4 for at least another 5-6 years.

[nomisum 129]

first of all i really love BIs open and community friendly approach. its very rare.

that being said, I dont believe they would switch to another engine in predictable time. even though RV is glitchy as hell and nurtures some bugs for over a decade now, resetting everything would be a huge task. i can imagine that to happen if it becomes obvious they cant keep up to current game standards anymore. imho some first signs of this are how they are struggling with shadows, multiple light sources, destruction models and physx. if they are more and more falling behind I can see them licence another engine, but not before a financial desaster. this could be through a new competitor or as said falling too much behind standards.

Sent from mobile

[CyclonicTuna 87]

Not really. All we need is a guy like Chris Roberts that is a hardcore military simulation fan and the landscape can change literally over night.

It´s the only one so i don´t have much choice now do i if i want to play a military simulator type game.

This is the problem, because they´re alone people assume that nobody can do it even though there´s over 7 billion people on this planet.

Yes, because everyone on this planet has acces to an entire dev team and has the hardware to make any imaginable game, even if they might not have acces to running water. I mean cmon, that's just silly to say.

And Chris Roberts makes entirely diffrent games than Bohemia, you can't even compare the two, I don't know why you would even bring that up. And just because you don't have an altirnative, doesn't mean you should play the next best thing. If you really think that Bohemia makes bad products, you shouldn't support them buy buying it just because you don't have any other choice.

Its like bad politics, if you feel like every politician is a douchebag, and you don't really see any viable option to vote on, you shouldn't vote for the least douchy guy. You should not vote at all, and start your own political party. Otherwise your country will be run by douchebags forever.

---------- Post added at 08:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:44 AM ----------

I think that both of us agree that competition is healthy.Just as I like to see AMD alongside Nvidia, I would love

to have another game in simulation FPS shooter style niche.

If you really think that the arma developers are the only people in the world capable of doing this or that their engine is the only one capable of doing this until the end of time i don´t know what to say.

Yep disagree with this.They can't be the only developers, and RV engine is not godlike or the only one, but right now, I don't see any other.

I agree, competition it good. But I don't think Bohemia is a game that actually does competition. Remember a few years back, that other game came out, Operation Flashpoint Dragon Rising, and everybody was claiming it was going to be an Arma killer, and that it was going to be the new franchis staple. It had a lot of similairtities: Large island map, vehicular combat, realistic ballistics, combat support etc. And look what happend. Within a year that game was dead, Arma II was released and now everyone was playing that. And peopel are still playing it regerously. Then in a final desperate attempt, Codemasters pushed out some horrible sequel that I actually bought but never finished because it was that terrible. But Dragon Rising actually had less bugs overall, than Arma 2, it had stable mulltiplayer at launch, it even had very fancy animations for a lot of gun handeling. Some things it did better than Arma to this day.

But Bohemia didn't respond in any way, they just stuck to their own agenda and kept on trucking, releasing patches and DLC, and in the end it even turned out more succesfull. So if any rival to Arma does arrise in the near future, I doubt wether its going to matter much, if the past is any indication.

So to awnser your question, I don't think that Bohemia is the only company capable of making such a game. The real question is, will there be any developer who seriously wants to challange this game and this community. And if there is, will there be direct changes to the Arma franchis because of it? Because I feel like Bohemia just doesn't really care about anyone or anything but their own community, and their own game.

[Maio 293]

Good points Tuna :)

That being said, I would like to ask all participating members to stick to comments related to the two engines and not BI's past/current development policies, unless they serve as a critical point to support your argument.

Cheers

[RushHour 11]

You second statement, however, is a bit exaggerated.

No it´s not, read the words again. It starts with "I´ve" so for you to tell me it´s exaggerated is invalid.

Yes, because everyone on this planet has acces to an entire dev team and has the hardware to make any imaginable game, even if they might not have acces to running water. I mean cmon, that's just silly to say.

Missing the point. Think about it in probability then counting how many people "has an entire dev team and has the hardware to make any imaginable game".

And Chris Roberts makes entirely diffrent games than Bohemia, you can't even compare the two,

You see when you write this you only show that you really did not read what i said. A guy LIKE Chris Roberts meaning you have a guy that´s well respected through previous games then uses kickstarter to gather over 40 million dollars without a publisher.

[CyclonicTuna 87]

Missing the point. Think about it in probability then counting how many people "has an entire dev team and has the hardware to make any imaginable game".

You see when you write this you only show that you really did not read what i said. A guy LIKE Chris Roberts meaning you have a guy that´s well respected through previous games then uses kickstarter to gather over 40 million dollars without a publisher.

How are probability and the actual amount of people that can make a hardcore simulation unrelated? Where is this "guy like Chris Roberts" who apperently already made a couple of those games, and is therefore "respected", and wants to start a kickstarter campaign. I don't know him. If there isn't anyone to develop that game, than that game isn't going to come.

You have to remember that if you claim there is a rival to Arma in the making, that players will most likely have to choose one or the other, that what competition is. And the only thing I can think of that comes even close to what you claim is around the corner, is Groundbranch. But that project is still years away, and won't really be a competator to Arma to begin with, because it focusses on CQB and counterterorrism rather than combined arms warfare.

I look at the facts, and the facts are, that Arma has been the genre staple for the last 10 years, and anyone who has made something even remotely comparable is no longer on the market. Besides, what Chris Roberts has done is exceptionally rare. It was only thrue a combination of conditions that he has managed to raise millions on kickstarter.

The fact that he has the recources the start a new studio, the fact that he already had a big dedicated following, the fact that the space and sci-fi genre is much more popular than the hardcore military sim, the fact that like Arma, Star Citizen is bascially a monopoly in its own right. Just because that occurs once, doesn't mean it will occur anytime soon again with any random developer.

You claim that a game that directly rivals Arma is imminent because there are so many developers capable of making such a game. But what do you have to support that claim? And what makes you so sure that even if those people are out there, that they won't make a completely diffrent game? So what exactly is the probability? Because I think its next to none.

Bohemia are in a very good position, they don't have to switch engines, they don't have to change they're development process, and even if this rival appears out of thin air, they probably wouldn't.

Edited May 14, 2014 by CyclonicTuna

[Maio 293]

What did I say just 2 posts ago? :)

The topic of exchanging the RV engine is a tricky one, as sides both pro and con immediately form fueled by their experiences with the engine and sometimes civility goes out the window.

So for the sake of keeping things neutral, only post things related to the two engines mentioned in the first thread.

Thanks

[RushHour 11]

How are probability and the actual amount of people that can make a hardcore simulation unrelated?

How is it not? Very different things.

The amount of people learning to make their own games today is many orders of magnitude larger then people let´s say 10 years ago. And it doesn´t show any signs of stopping looking at the game industry today.

Where is this "guy like Chris Roberts" who apperently already made a couple of those games, and is therefore "respected", and wants to start a kickstarter campaign. I don't know him.

Again missing the point, you´re making a habit of doing that. I said all it takes is for someone like that to come along.

I bet there were people just like you in the space exploration genre of games saying exactly the same thing. Then Chris Roberts came back and now there´s a new heavyweight on the market.

This is key to understand. Just because there´s nobody here right now doesn´t mean it never will be.

You have to remember that if you claim there is a rival to Arma in the making,

I´ve never made such claims.

And the only thing I can think of that comes even close to what you claim is around the corner,

Again, never made that claim either. All i said is that if you think Arma will forever be alone in this niche you are very mistaken. Also if you think Arma is the only people on earth capable of this you are once again very mistaken.

It´s inevitable that other players will come into this market, just like Simracing which is an even bigger niche then a military simulation game.

I look at the facts, and the facts are, that Arma has been the genre staple for the last 10 years,

Which says absolutely nothing that they will be "in fact" alone for the next 10 years.

It was only thrue a combination of conditions that he has managed to raise millions on kickstarter.

What he showed was that the normal way of doing things isn´t the only way. I´m quite certain that if you were to actually find out how many are fans from the old series and how many never played a Chris Roberts game but is super-excited for this new space game it would swing in the new fans way.

Just because that occurs once, doesn't mean it will occur anytime soon again with any random developer.

I think the fact that it actually happened means it´s a far higher chance of happening again then never to be seen ever again in the gaming industry. I´m sure a lot of people in the gaming industry are taking notes on what he´s doing.

You claim that a game that directly rivals Arma is imminent because there are so many developers capable of making such a game.

No i haven´t. I said it´s inevitable because the genre is growing and more and more people are born on this planet every single day and more and more people learn how to make games.

It´s incredibly ignorant to think Arma will forever be alone on the market just because for the last 10 years they had no competitor. It´s not even just ignorant, it´s downright stupid.

I for one welcome that day because it will not only bring competition but it will light some fires under the butts of the people at Arma. Right now they can sailglide because they´re alone without any real consequences of doing that.

Just imagine a big developer deciding one day to build the best military simulation game on the market. The amount of people and resources is something arma will have trouble competing against.

It´s all a matter of time...

Edited May 14, 2014 by RushHour

[SavageCDN 231]

I see where you are coming from but I think you underestimate the amount of work/time required to get a game like Arma to the state it's in today. A new startup would require years to get anywhere close to what Arma 3 provides now, and during that time require funding or some form of income through sales to stay alive.

Sure it 'could' happen but realistically.. especially after seeing the direction the gaming industry is moving over the last few years... don't hold your breath.

[froggyluv 2136]

Also important to note that CR didn't just show up from nowhere as prodigy, he (and Dave Braben) have established pedigree in their respective niche coupled with the fact that space games have always been in production by many, many developers while military cross arms games have none besides BI. Sure the FPS shooter or small squad, small map tac shooter has some notables but not wide open, infantry to ship to plane to scuba with a 3d editor to boot. Also worth noting is that CR is having heck of time getting what he wants with the Cryengine and even had to write the netcode from scratch as the engines default was oft reported as terrible and other problems exist as well. Cryengine may be a great engine but one also has to remember that engines are generally built for the initial game so straying too far can seriously stretch thin it's capabilities.

To state that someone may just "show up" and take the mil-sim world by force seems unlikely considering the head start BI commands and the current trajectory of Developer interest betrays this as well.

[RushHour 11]

I see where you are coming from but I think you underestimate the amount of work/time required to get a game like Arma to the state it's in today. A new startup would require years to get anywhere close to what Arma 3 provides now, and during that time require funding or some form of income through sales to stay alive.

Yea i´m not underestimating what it takes to do this kind of thing but at the same time it´s not like prediciting the higgs field.

The reason i´m saying this is because in simracing at one point there was two players in simracing that had the market locked down. Simbin and Rfactor.

And they had that lockdown for many many years until today where both are a mere shadow of what they used to be.

Nobody in the simracing community ever thought about that one day iRacing would come along and completely revamp the way we think about onlineracing but they did and changed the landscape forever.

So just because something has looked a certain way for very long (plenty of companies have tried simracing but failed) doesn´t mean it will stay that way. That´s all.

[Ckrauslo 12]

I Believe that is just propaganda, if you see videos of the RV engine you will also be wow...