Imagine What Next Gen In Arma Would Look Like

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Ok, as the title suggests (because some people don't read original post), what would you expect Arma 3/4 to look like using Next Gen? This simply means visuals, Engine performance, Physics, and game models. Weather, land features, all the things. What would you expect Arma on Next Gen to feel like? I'n my opinion, i'd love for it to feel like your in it. Tree's blowing in the wind properly, weather effecting vehicles and ballistics, and particle effects such as smoke in a very visually enhancing way. Probably over haul the mechanics of interaction, so i can walk up to an object, and instead of just scrolling, now, your character can literally grab and open a door, or perhaps if the situation is right, kick the door open. Walk up to a vehicle, and have a smooth transition into the drivers seat instead of a very glitchy looking exit/enter script. Weather would allow for great visual integrity. Having better looking clouds, and even more types of clouds depending on the weather. Low clouds, high clouds, both. Ground fog. Mountain occlusion. All of these packed in with improved terrain features, like less buggy rocks you can climb about on with appropriate animations (maybe you accidentally trip and roll off the rock face), and Arma's unique sandbox ability and war time assets, as well as some great civilian assets. And one cannot forget, sounds. Professionally engineered sounds with land features effecting every one of them in a unique way depending on the environment.

This Topic provides an escape from all the Hype topic's, and a break from the crazy topic's. What do you guys think? Keep it interesting, keep it realistic, and don't go too Sci-Fi, nor too "Good ol' Days". Talk about what kind of immersion you would expect from a Next Gen Arma experience, and most of all, KEEP ON TOPIC!

GO!

[Tonci87 163]

Next Gen? Are you serious *walks out of room laughing

[nmdanny 22]

What is next gen?

[Bee8190 10]

Whether next gen or the same reworked engine - I think the devil is in the details. Yes arma is a very pretty game but some of its features still feel archaic and feels dull but I think all or most of it can, I think, be done still on current gen of the engine. I 'm talking about details like mentioned wind with appropriate wind and weather effects, environment sounds like dog barking ( or wolf howling at night - for illustration ) and good bit of attention to terrain interaction, like ( partially and for the immersion ) destructible environment and mud - traction difficulty simulation for vehicles. Again, more attention to detail and environment ( rivers and bridges would be nice too )

[DJankovic 401]

I just hope we will stick with 21st century and not go even more futuristic!

But the game by it self will be beautifould as always.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Yes, most of those things can be done on Current Gen. I was however referring to a more complex enhancement. Laughing at the concept "Next Gen", isn't what i expected, but perhaps that phrase doesn't touch on exactly what i'm getting at. An engine that can do very complex things, more complex than RV4 in it's current state. If they could make Arma (Preferably 4, because 3 is already too much into release) with an engine that is of further capabilities, what would you expect that Arma to be like, with the more complex things that Engine is capable of producing, in other words.

[Wiki 1558]

Want to return to current era!

Mission Apaches and Abrams, or Tigre and Leclerc!

There are many other armies that BIS didn't use - should have tried.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

^ Sort of off topic. It's less about content, more about Engine Capabilities.

[Wiki 1558]

Well, in that case, I'd rather see something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEK8tNROCEjRn0S0WrtCctg

[Tonci87 163]

Yes, most of those things can be done on Current Gen. I was however referring to a more complex enhancement. Laughing at the concept "Next Gen", isn't what i expected, but perhaps that phrase doesn't touch on exactly what i'm getting at. An engine that can do very complex things, more complex than RV4 in it's current state. If they could make Arma (Preferably 4, because 3 is already too much into release) with an engine that is of further capabilities, what would you expect that Arma to be like, with the more complex things that Engine is capable of producing, in other words.

Well then you shouldn´t have used the term "next gen", because we are already past that with Arma 3, or do you think that any of the "next gen" consoles could run this behemoth?

Expanding the engine to have proper multicore support, implementing stuff like rivers, or mud like in Spintires that would be awesome. And those are things that I would really expect from Arma 4 wich should be due in 3-4 years (if they make it).

[CaptainObvious 95]

Well then you shouldn´t have used the term "next gen", because we are already past that with Arma 3, or do you think that any of the "next gen" consoles could run this behemoth?

Next gen is literally next generation, it has nothing to do with the new consoles in this thread.

Anyhoo, at some point I'd like to see fluid and volumetric particle simulations as well as some degree of terrain deformation.

[katipo66 94]

I really love the look and feel of Arma now, she looking amazing at times, I'd like to see some particle destruction especially on timber, but on everything i guess, bieng able to blow holes in buildings would be nice.. more fog/smoke/mist options.. Simply using only Sakura Chans recoil and zooloo75 ragdolled give the game so much more immersion.

Even the subtle things like the ambient insects, flies and things have been improved and really help sell it... Also I'm not sure but seems like there's been some improvements to animal animations? At least with the dogs, Ive only noticed using TPWs ambient animals script.

One thing i'd really like to see is the effect of the sun breaking through clouds and highlighting parts of the terrain.. Kind of like when fast moving cloud creates shadow on ground and sun breaks through from time to time.

Dunno bout Arma 4 but hopefully this game will be even more amazing in 2-3 years, I'm really hoping for some civilian assets/improvements in future, good times!

[Fushko 59]

Hmm, let's see...

-A visually consistent experience, meaning no flickering, no noticeable level of detail switching, no stupid low res stencil shadows, etc

-Physically based rendering, come on BIS, old-gen consoles could run real-time reflections instead of baked ones...

-Terrain casts shadows

-Attention to little details, those that make you think "Wow, the devs even thought about that, amazing!"

-Global illumination (:S)

-Dynamic shadows

-Movement inertia

-Better destruction physics (big objects flipping is a joke)

so much stuff...

[PuFu 4600]

-Physically based rendering, come on BIS, old-gen consoles could run real-time reflections instead of baked ones...

lol what? physically based rendering means exactly what to you? Because in my head it is unbiased rendering solution (for IBL/ procedural HDRI and other lights sources)

care to put down a console game that is has such a lighting solution implemented? (because this sort of un-biased solution is soooo far way from real time render engines - case of point Vray RT (cuda), mental-ray(cuda), renderman, arnold ect). the only one closer (if you can call it that way) is octane...

btw: RV4 can handle real time reflection no problem, it just misses the shaders for it. (VBS3 has real time reflection/refraction and that runs of RV4 just as well). Hell even OFP can handle it with the right .dll tweak ;)

-Global illumination (:S)

You can NOT have non-biased rendering without GI....

-Dynamic shadows

just as above

PS: this belongs to of-topic section, next or merged with ArmA4 thread

Edited June 23, 2014 by PuFu

[Fushko 59]

Care to explain what "BL/ procedural HDRI and other lights sources" means? IBL means image based lighting I think? HDRI?

And by PBR I was referring to the fact that I remember a game from 2005 on the Xbox 360 (PGR3) that had real-time reflections on vehicles. Isn't that physically based? But Arma 3 in 2014 still has pre-rendered reflections... and what do you mean by unbiased rendering? Sorry I'm ignorant.

[pulstar 55]

The best course of action might be to scrap everything and start from scratch, with a bigger budget.

[PuFu 4600]

Sorry I'm ignorant.

I have noticed, hence the reply.

Care to explain what "BL/ procedural HDRI and other lights sources" means? IBL means image based lighting I think? HDRI?

procedural means it is not a bitmap image (be it jpg/tga/tiff/png etc). It is procedurally generated by the engine (pre-compiled and/or on the spot).

IBL means image based lighting, yes

HDRI are usually bitmap files (usually in .exr, .hdr or other files formats developed for a specific engine or rendering solution) that can handle and store high dynamic range images. Google is your friend for more info on the subject.

Arma lighting is based on a HDR map. (has always been afaik).

other light sources do work in arma, but due to the fact that it doesn't support deferred shading/lighting, they do not cast their own shadows.

And by PBR I was referring to the fact that I remember a game from 2005 on the Xbox 360 (PGR3) that had real-time reflections on vehicles. Isn't that physically based? But Arma 3 in 2014 still has pre-rendered reflections... and what do you mean by unbiased rendering?

Yeah well real reflections does not mean PBR. dot.

ArmA doesn't have pre-rendered reflections. It used an environment map for scopes and alike. Put as i said it, that is due to how the shaders are set-up. Shaders are not written in the backbone of any engine afaik.

All the other reflection (all of which are fresnel btw), and (someone correct me if i am wrong), i cannot create a mirror type shader with ArmA. Yes, the shaders remained more or less the same since OFP/ArmA, but it seem the engine can handle a lot more.

That being said, PBR is far far far away from getting a foot in real time engines anytime soon (RT <mostly CUDA> rendering has been around for quite a while, and certain software developers are trying to push it as a viable rendering solution for visualisation/VFX etc industries for some time 4-5 years with little success)

---------- Post added at 00:38 ---------- Previous post was at 00:37 ----------

The best course of action might be to scrap everything and start from scratch, with a bigger budget.

yeahh...except not.

[Fushko 59]

Thanks for the detailed explanations, I appreciate that.

And by the way there's a game called Star Citizen that is already using PBR, and it's in pre-alpha. It's on Cryengine and it runs very good on my 750 Ti, high settings and PBR on.

[roshnak 41]

That being said, PBR is far far far away from getting a foot in real time engines anytime soon

Doesn't UE4 support phyically based rendering?

A quick search also seems to indicate that Remember Me used PBR in UE3 as well.

[DJankovic 401]

This is one of videos that amazed me and i thought this was part of arma when i just started to learn and hear about Arma series :) And that video amazed me... would like to see something like this when time comes for Arma 4.

[PuFu 4600]

i am not trying to be picky or anything, but with an emphasis on aproximate in the link provided...that is not unbiased PBR...which is the point i'm trying to make.

moreover, using real lighting values (lms, lxs etc) is just a matter of exposure and gamma calibration of the engine (more or less) same goes for color management.

all in all what i said still stands

[subs17 9]

It would be good if Arma had the ability to join maps together like on DCS EDGE so that larger areas could be covered and maybe the ability for DCS to connect in mp. Also a dynamic campaign like in Falcon4 would be cool on a map the same size.

[roshnak 41]

i am not trying to be picky or anything, but with an emphasis on aproximate in the link provided...that is not unbiased PBR...which is the point i'm trying to make.

moreover, using real lighting values (lms, lxs etc) is just a matter of exposure and gamma calibration of the engine (more or less) same goes for color management.

all in all what i said still stands

With the caveat that I'm really not well versed in the tech side of game art, it does seem a little picky to me. PBR, in terms of game art, seems to be shorthand for this general method of rendering materials.

[Smurf 12]

How I'd imagine a next-gen ArmA with fancy everything?

Oh you gonna love it :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv9XUsG8zy0

:868:

[Foxtrop1 10]

should this be an arma3 thread or it should be an ARMA4 wishlist?

If its for ARMA4 it should be made taking the best of the futures APIs, in arma3 is not used all the tricks available from directx11 neither from physx, also even when the huge map is awesome i dont see anyone using all of it, maybe if we have ships and aircraft carriers and trains or proper misiles not scripted like the scud from arma2 if the map will get exponentially bigger we need better vectors. And something that is missing from all arma series.. virtual systems, radars, firing directors systems, comunications systems(like ACRE) but implemented directly into the game engine, the "nextgen" ARMA should have the inputs to create the more important systems in todays battlefields information systems with less scripting, we need awacs, longrange radars linked(maybe via modules) to AA stations, also the capability to transmit information from one vehicle to another, in aircraft the datalink is something that cannot be missing