FMOD in ARMA 3

[swtx 42]

FMOD is a audio creation software suite designed especially for video games. It's really a audio standard that includes editing software and a framework that can be integrated into game engines like UE4 and Cryengine.

In my humble opinion the firing rates of weapons in ARMA 3 are lacking a sense of smoothness and realistic cyclic rates in automatic weapons in game. I think FMOD would solve that problem. It offers hyper realistic fire rates in both burst and full auto.

With that being said it's going to be interesting to see how the new sound engine is going to help with the ongoing issue of accurate cyclic rates when the Apex DLC is released.

I'm a patient guy and I'm willing to wait and see.

Would the community and Devs support the integration of FMOD ? That's the question I'm asking.

[john111 76]

A very good thing to do....

[I give up 152]

Well, since atm the sound samples and effects are not the besr, I think FMOD or similar could bring some improvement.

I was Here (this is after FMOD) when it was implemented and I can say that it was a nice improvement

[twisted 127]

yes, i notice that there's often a stutter when firing in arma3. especially on higher rate weapons. not good and seems to lag a little when this happens.

[Jackal326 1158]

yes, i notice that there's often a stutter when firing in arma3. especially on higher rate weapons. not good and seems to lag a little when this happens.

Perhaps its the "lag" (FPS drop) that is causing the sound stutter, and not the other way around...

[twisted 127]

Perhaps its the "lag" (FPS drop) that is causing the sound stutter, and not the other way around...

Very possibly. There's a lot happening in the background which could cause this. But my rig doesnt struggle with arma 3 - only when firig a weapon for the first time or high volume weapon fire - where the sounds 'stuttering' is the most obvious symptom.

 

is this what fmod helps out?

[swtx 42]

 

is this what fmod helps out?

Yes it does. The FMOD standard actually streamlines the weapon sounds in full auto into a package that is easier on the engine to process.

If we can get enough support from the community and the developers it is actually realivily easy to integrate into the engine.

I will see if I can post an example of both the ARMA 3 standard and the FMOD standard so everyone can see the difference between the two and how much improved FMOD truly is.

[devilslayersbane 28]

hyper realistic.

How is it more realistic than realistic?

 

At any rate, I'm pretty neutral about it. I can see the benefits, but I'm not sure it'd solve anything.

[I give up 152]

The lack of quality with sound is not related with ARMA 3 and no matter the efforts and goodwill to make it better, I doubt it can be made.

It is in fact related with lousy sound API from (Windows/DirectX).

Those who travel a little more time will know that after removal of D3D and X2 integration in Windows, the sound quality went down to toilet.

That's why, in fact, several game engines already have integrated FMOD.

But there are more solutions, as a matter of sound engine, like Wwise for instance.

[x3kj 1247]

rate of fire issues have nothing to do with sound. ROF is tied to framerate so anything that affects framerate does affect ROF as well. Your <insert magical thirdparty thing> does not fix core issues.

[swtx 42]

rate of fire issues have nothing to do with sound. ROF is tied to framerate so anything that affects framerate does affect ROF as well. Your <insert magical thirdparty thing> does not fix core issues.[/size]

 

 

That is true but I'm simply presenting an alternative standard to the existing weapon rate of fire in A3.

 

See the short video for a comparison.

[Dwarden 1124]

I suggest you try RC/DEV branch first cause whatever sound related you discussing now in relation to stable, is obsolete soon

[swtx 42]

We will wait and see what the Apex DLC has in store for us first.

Thx

[alanford 27]

Well, since atm the sound samples and effects are not the besr, I think FMOD or similar could bring some improvement.

I was Here (this is after FMOD) when it was implemented and I can say that it was a nice improvement

 

that video is fake for sure. ac never sounded that good.....

[I give up 152]

Please consider this option.

I will pay it as DLC, if needed.

[megagoth1702 251]

rate of fire issues have nothing to do with sound. ROF is tied to framerate so anything that affects framerate does affect ROF as well. Your <insert magical thirdparty thing> does not fix core issues.

+1.

 

All sound engines like FMOD/WWISE/Arma3's sound engine (old and new) works with "game events" to trigger sound sequences.

 

For example such a game event is "player gun has been fired". In arma this event is linked to FPS though, which is why your ROF is faster (and you hear a faster cycling rate) when you look at the ocean compared to the city behind you. This is why the RoF is changing so much, it has nothing to do with the sound engine.

 

An alternative approach is tracking mouse events like "LMB has been pressed" and "LMB released" to start/stop playing loops. We already have this for some miniguns in arma. But the problem here is - if your loop sound has a RoF of 600 and you shoot and stop shooting after HEARING 5 shots it is no guarantee that the gun actually fired 5 shots because of the mentioned FPS issue. All you did was press the LMB and hold it until you heard 5 shots. Some might think it's okay because the illusion is great and it works, but for a simulation this is a bad approach for most weapons.

[I give up 152]

rate of fire issues have nothing to do with sound. ROF is tied to framerate so anything that affects framerate does affect ROF as well. Your <insert magical thirdparty thing> does not fix core issues.

Having 120 fps we have higher ROF?

Having 60 fps we have lower ROF?

Show me a evidence of what you are saying.

[PuFu 4591]

Having 120 fps we have higher ROF?

Having 60 fps we have lower ROF?

Show me a evidence of what you are saying.

he's right

[laxemann 1673]

Having 120 fps we have higher ROF?

Having 60 fps we have lower ROF?

Show me a evidence of what you are saying.

 

 

 

 

I'm not saying what we currently have is better or worse than FMOD, however pretty much all your arguments were related to "issues" that have nothing to do with the API at all and just prove that you have no understanding of the core-mechanics you criticize.

[I give up 152]

 

 

 

I'm not saying what we currently have is better or worse than FMOD, however pretty much all your arguments were related to "issues" that have nothing to do with the API at all and just prove that you have no understanding of the core-mechanics you criticize.

So, this is the reason why you are claiming that ROF is tied to FPS. Well, at minimum, is hilarious.

What you have in your video is the delay (lag) caused by your GPU because is not rendering the frames under acceptables timings (required by the engine) and that applies to everything in game (every action or movement), just because is delay (lag). That has nothing to ROF being tied to FPS, when ROF is tied to FPS (as it is being claimed here) we have higher ROF when have higher FPS.

Show me a evidence where I can see that we have higher ROF having higher FPS, like 60 FPS vs 120 FPS, for instance.

Also I suggest you to find (in game engine) from where we start to have delay (lag), meaning bellow which FPS or above which Ms the engine starts to render with delay.

But the most hilarious is, these people are the ones who are setting the standards for sound quality in game. Dear God.

[Greenfist 1863]

You could limit the fps to 5 by left shift+numpad minus and typing 'fps' a couple of times.

That way your GPU/CPU won't be creating a lag.

 

And no, the ROF can't be higher than fps.

 

edit. nevermind, it only goes as low as 20fps with the fps command. But with RTSS limit:

[laxemann 1673]

 

So, this is the reason why you are claiming that ROF is tied to FPS. Well, at minimum, is hilarious.

What you have in your video is the delay (lag) caused by your GPU because is not rendering the frames under acceptables timings (required by the engine) and that applies to everything in game (every action or movement), just because is delay (lag). That has nothing to ROF being tied to FPS, when ROF is tied to FPS (as it is being claimed here) we have higher ROF when have higher FPS.

Show me a evidence where I can see that we have higher ROF having higher FPS, like 60 FPS vs 120 FPS, for instance.

Also I suggest you to find (in game engine) from where we start to have delay (lag), meaning bellow which FPS or above which Ms the engine starts to render with delay.

But the most hilarious is, these people are the ones who are setting the standards for sound quality in game. Dear God.

 

 

Of course FPS are not a direct modifier of the ROF (this would be weird indeed), but they affect it and the ROF is therefore directly linked to it - it's a factor you can't ignore.

The original argument was that sound lags behind because the sound engine can't process it in time and this was proved to be wrong.

I will stop arguing with you now. You're like this little kid that keeps on bitching around just for the sake of bitching around and not losing a pointless argument it once started.

Cheers

[x3kj 1247]

Show me a evidence where I can see that we have higher ROF having higher FPS, like 60 FPS vs 120 FPS, for instance.

Easy. Mod the reloadtime of a weapon to be 1/120 of a second. Reloadtime caps the ROF when high enough FPS is achieved, but i'm sure you already knew that...

You are trying to argue against a well known fact.

[I give up 152]

Of course FPS are not a direct modifier of the ROF (this would be weird indeed), but they affect it and the ROF is therefore directly linked to it - it's a factor you can't ignore.

The original argument was that sound lags behind because the sound engine can't process it in time and this was proved to be wrong.

I will stop argumenting with you now. You're like this little kid that keeps on bitching around just for the sake of bitching around and not losing a pointless argument it once started.

Cheers

Then stop arguing and stop making nonsense claims in a attempt to justify what it has no justification.

I can understand and accept if some one says that FMOD (or similar) is not feasible in ARMA 3 for whatever reason, I cannot accept absurd arguments trying  to put XAudio2 at same of level of those audio engines.

What we have now with "new audio engine" are some effects similar to those who were added with some mods. That makes the sound better? Not even close. Even more when most of the users with their sound software could simulate the effects of those mods and now of the "new audio engine". Still the sound quality "under several aspects" remains low.

Probably the person who have opened this thread about FMOD know the benefits that could come from there, also we do need to be an "audio geek" to know that. It is just a matter of knowhow based on several experiences under these audio engines.

You may think that you are helping the game, but you are not. If was not the Life thing this game would be dead, do you think that those people who play Life on 200 men servers with 15 FPS cares about sound? Do you really think that are these people that are going to buy the expansion when 99% of Life servers use custom content such islands, vehicles, etc?

I can tell you, those that I know and play this game as military sim are not going to get it and you know why? Well. the sound is one of the reasons.

Anyway, the time will tell who is right or wrong.

[Jackal326 1158]

I can tell you, those that I know and play this game as military sim are not going to get it and you know why? Well. the sound is one of the reasons.

Well, in contrast to the "opinion you're posting as fact", I too know many people who play ArmA - many of whom have already pre-purchased the expansion and the majority of the rest are planning to do so. They are all MILSIM'ers, and not a single one is a 'Lifer'.

 

 

Anyway, the time will tell who is right or wrong.

You are wrong....Again.