Sound update ruined this game...

[roshnak 41]

What is a "real 5.1 channels headset?" Are you talking about virtual surround or where they cram a bunch of drivers into the headset (do they even stil make these)?

[I give up 152]

Try use a 5.1 audio system ... even a headset with real 5.1... you will be amazed for sure. In this moment I even prefer vanilla sounds over JSRS ...

There is no such thing. Headsets have some kind of virtualization effects provided by some dubious software that only contribute for a erroneous perception about directional and positional sound. No one (that knows the sound word meaning) will use such nonsense, even more for gaming.

Also, I dont use a headset, I have headphones.

For games I have a Asus Xonar as sound card and a Sennheiser HD 598 as headphones.

Also I have a 5.1 Creative surround speaker system and that's why I know that ARMA 3 does not have support for 5.1 or/and even any configuration possible.

[Excilium 0]

I like the new sounds to be honest..

 

I'm sure a lot of other people do too. But yeah, you should be able to revert if you really wanted to.

[I give up 152]

I dont like the new sounds, But Im perfectly aware that with XAudio2 when we start to mess with effects nothing good will happen.

With that said, I appreciate the effort made by the developers in a attempt to increase sound quality, but without a decent sound engine, I am sure that these efforts will be wasted.

[NeMeSiS 11]

 and that's why I know that ARMA 3 does not have support for 5.1 or/and even any configuration possible.

 

 

What do you mean by that? Shots behind me come from the speakers behind me, shots on the left come from the left, etc. And i am running on an ancient Creative X-Fi xtremegamer which hasnt had any driver support since 2012 or so, and those sucked garbage.

[EO 11225]

I have 1300+ hrs and played with alot of regulars. I hate to say it but the new sound changes really have ruined this game.

 

Please for the love of Beer and Boobs give us a client side option to revert to the old sounds.

 

Try this...... ;)

 

[I give up 152]

What do you mean by that? Shots behind me come from the speakers behind me, shots on the left come from the left, etc. And i am running on an ancient Creative X-Fi xtremegamer which hasnt had any driver support since 2012 or so, and those sucked garbage.

Software virtualization, in a attempt to make a 3D sound based on Xaudio2.

Not a "true" 5.1 as we have, for instance in Assetto Corsa, after FMOD implementation.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Software virtualization, in a attempt to make a 3D sound based on Xaudio2.

Not a "true" 5.1 as we have, for instance in Assetto Corsa, after FMOD implementation.

 

You do realize that a software implementation can be just as good? You just lack hardware acceleration so it comes at the cost of CPU usage (which in the case of ArmA3 is really bad, as i doubt its done on a seperate thread). But there is no real reason it has to sound worse.

 

I do truly miss the days of EAX and its list of features that we almost completely lost since then. Every time i start up Medieval2 (i went trough the hassle of getting EAX to work under windows 7) i remember how good some games used to sound. But all of this could be done through software, its just that no company seems to be bothered by it, as it is hard to sell good audio through cool looking screenshots, and too many people who play on laptops with their shitty speakers wont ever hear the difference anyway,

 

EDIT: Also, i am still not sure what 'true 5.1' is supposed to be.

[I give up 152]

Yes, with EAX was possible to create sound effects from multiple sources without losing the positional and directional awareness.

But that was with D3D Sound and as we know it has been replaced (with Windows 7) for XAudio2 (XBox sound Api) and that killed EAX.

Also with EAX (D3D) the sound card architecture or quality, because not all were able to reproduce or support all sources provided by EAX, was really important.

 

Not the case of XAudio2, where we have  basically the same sound quality no matter if we have a top notch sound card or integrated sound (ie realtek) and thats because this Api is made for consoles.

Still, without complex effects XAudio2 it can provide some "quality" sound with an acceptable awareness provided by sound sources in matters of directional/positional and also attenuation sound.

When we start to add effects at XAudio2, such reverberation (the one that we have in game now), there is not even a remote chance to make it work properly. Most of the effects will not work properly, some will work but with a dubious quality due to limited sound sources and the worse of it, we will lose directional/positional/attenuation awareness. 

 

If we really appreciate the powerful help that the sound can be (in matters of awareness) for a immersive gameplay, we just can't accept XAudio2, because it just cant provide it.

Which is my case, maybe because i've played America's Army 1/2 for almost 7 years (since 2003) as daily game and where we could tell every single enemy position and what weapon they were using, just by the sound (D3D+EAX). Despite some other unique things from this game, the sound was one of the best. 

With America's Army 3 the sound (XAudio2) was not the same, in fact it was very sinlilar to what we have here with ARMA 3 now in matters of effects, but there was no quality, no awareness, no immersion, just some random effects without a reliable sense. That's why the developers of the current version (Proving Grounds) have decided to implement Wwise engine in attempt to achieve the former sound quality provided by the versions 1/2 because they know that is not possible with XAudio2. Also I am a CS player and that maybe explain why sound in matters of awareness (more than effecs) is important to me.

 

But this is nothing new, that's why some game engines, Unity for instance, have already inbuilt FMOD. Maybe because this engine developers know that is not possible to have a decent sound with XAudio2 in matters of effects, surround and general quality.

 

But I guess at end is just a matter of personal preference, knowledge or what we can accept as standard.

[almanzo 144]

I've noticed one significant change with the new sounds:

I used to have my master sound slider allmost at the bottom before the patch, now I have to crank it way up for it to match Teamspeak. I change I actually welcome.

[I give up 152]

Why do not include a decent sound engine with the next expansion?

That would be like 1 cent more for everyone that is buying it.

Are you kidding me?

[connorwarman 60]

Interesting, I personally found the new sounds to be a major improvement over the old ones. 

[megagoth1702 251]

Jesus bratwurste. Your posts spread too much wrong information which is the most offending thing to me because people already barely understand how audio works. Please, research your topics, provide sources for your claims or STFU, seriously. Let me clean this up.
 

Yes, with EAX was possible to create sound effects from multiple sources without losing the positional and directional awareness.
But that was with D3D Sound and as we know it has been replaced (with Windows 7) for XAudio2 (XBox sound Api) and that killed EAX.
Also with EAX (D3D) the sound card architecture or quality, because not all were able to reproduce or support all sources provided by EAX, was really important.

Your first sentence makes no sense. Creating SFX from multiple sources? What does that mean? Positional & directional is the same thing mostly. The sound engine decides how much audio is sent to left/right speaker at what volume. EAX added things such as complex environmental simulations and high quality processing for each voice (lowering high frequencies to simulate attenuation of sound behind a wall for example) but positional audio was possible before. So dont be like "EAX = best positional audio ev00r" please.
 
Your second sentence: Saying that Xaudio2 "killed2" EAX is completely and utterly wrong. There were may more factors involved. One major factor was the complete re-write of the audio system for Windows from Vista upwards that resulted in great things such as:
-compatible hardware works out of the box, without having to install a driver from the manufacturer (plug n play is always awesome)
-much more stable, before this audio drivers were a major cause for Windows instability
-a volume slider for each application
and more but basically - it's the way of the future.
 
XAudio2 is NOT "the xbos sound API". XAudio was used for the Xbox 360, XAudio2 is an improvement over that. I won't go into details but again you provide false information.
 
Also CPUs became really really powerful over time. Back in the day of hardware audio cards the most common setups were single core CPUs, 3Ghz was TOP SHELF. That's nothing compared to today's quad core gaming setups running at 4GHz. You don't need dedicated audio hardware anymore to calculate effects, all you need now is a DAC (digital to analog converter), the rest really happens in the CPU these days. Look at recent Battlefield games. All CPU processed audio.
 
So. We don't need sound cards anymore (EAX was a big selling point for those gamer cards). CPUs are more powerful than ever and can do all the sound work. Software companies shifted towards CPU audio and do it very well (Battlefield games). No reason for EAX to stick around. Dedicated sound cards are only needed if you want good ADCs/DACs, a linear frequency response and high signal to noise ratio and other stuff.
 

Not the case of XAudio2, where we have  basically the same sound quality no matter if we have a top notch sound card or integrated sound (ie realtek) and thats because this Api is made for consoles.
Still, without complex effects XAudio2 it can provide some "quality" sound with an acceptable awareness provided by sound sources in matters of directional/positional and also attenuation sound.
When we start to add effects at XAudio2, such reverberation (the one that we have in game now), there is not even a remote chance to make it work properly. Most of the effects will not work properly, some will work but with a dubious quality due to limited sound sources and the worse of it, we will lose directional/positional/attenuation awareness.

Another useless block of wrong information. Yes, good sound effects done through XAudio2 will sound good on any sound card, you don't need to buy your SoundBlaster X-Fi anymore just to enjoy calculated environmental reverb. But the API was not made for consoles (only). A bit of google & wikpedia would help you figure that out yourself. It's a common thing for big companies these days to unify their production setups. DICE produces games with the Frostbite engine which run on PC, consoles, mobile devices at the same time. Do you have any idea how different these are at low level, what file formats they accept, what sample rates, bit rates etc. ? The same goes for FMOD, WWISE, XAudio 2. These make sure that the audio you want will run on all supported systems. This is a good thing.
 
"still without complex effects" - like what? You always throw around fancy words but never really explain in detail what you mean there. If you want to position a sound in a scene you must alter the frequency content of the sound using EQ (which is simple), play with the volume relative to volume of "close" sounds and if you're really fancy you can even do HRTF stuff which even for example calculates how many miliseconds later a sound arrives at the left ear compared to the right ear. You can do all these things using xaudio2 as your low level API. You can program your own effects in xaudio2, you can basically build your own FMOD/WWISE/audio middleware using XAudio2 as your low level API.
 
Read about it, please.
 
Reverbation in arma3? There is NO reverb in arma 3 at this time. Stop spreading misinformation.
 

If we really appreciate the powerful help that the sound can be (in matters of awareness) for a immersive gameplay, we just can't accept XAudio2, because it just cant provide it.

It can't? Prove it.
The current state of the audio is nowhere near final. I would not have released it like this but this was a complicated decision to make and I am glad I did not have to make it.
 

Which is my case, maybe because i've played America's Army 1/2 for almost 7 years (since 2003) as daily game and where we could tell every single enemy position and what weapon they were using, just by the sound (D3D+EAX). Despite some other unique things from this game, the sound was one of the best. 
With America's Army 3 the sound (XAudio2) was not the same, in fact it was very sinlilar to what we have here with ARMA 3 now in matters of effects, but there was no quality, no awareness, no immersion, just some random effects without a reliable sense. That's why the developers of the current version (Proving Grounds) have decided to implement Wwise engine in attempt to achieve the former sound quality provided by the versions 1/2 because they know that is not possible with XAudio2. Also I am a CS player and that maybe explain why sound in matters of awareness (more than effecs) is important to me.

What developers need to do is to learn how to program audio properly, which is a REALLY FRIGGIN complicated task, which is why they choose to use middleware like FMOD/WWISE. But do you know how much these cost per project? Look it up.
Bohemia has a way of building their own tools to stay clear of third party dependance. This is why they chose to develop their own audio engine/middleware. Some day we will even get an audio editor, I am sure of it but it will not be within the next years. Look how long it took to get a 3D mission editor.
I have not played americas army but I believe you if you say the audio was worse after their switch to XAudio2. But that's not the only reason. You say the sound was "random effects" which means its the audio CONTENT that was bad, not the underlying audio architecture. You need to always treat these two separately. Battlefield Hardline uses the same audio engine as Battlefield 4 yet I still feel like the sound in Battlefield 4 is superior due to better audio content. Do you like using sound mods? Do you feel like JSRS/DynaSound/Another Sound Mod is superior to what Bohemia is producing? Well, they all use the same underlying sound engine so you see these two are separate issues.
 
XAudio2 is just another API and they all do the same. If it sounds bad, they have not used it right and/or fed it the wrong sound content. Arma3 uses Nvidia Physx, does the game feel better now? In some cases, yes, in some cases absolutely no - the tank behaviour is horrible and driving does not feel realistic to me. So these "if you use brand X together with brand Y and if youre hire person Z all your problems will go away" statements are just wrong.

But this is nothing new, that's why some game engines, Unity for instance, have already inbuilt FMOD. Maybe because this engine developers know that is not possible to have a decent sound with XAudio2 in matters of effects, surround and general quality.
 
But I guess at end is just a matter of personal preference, knowledge or what we can accept as standard.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but Unity uses a stripped down version of FMOD, it's not the full one and there are licencing fees if you want to do big projects. I am not sure on that though. Anyway XAudio2, FMOD, WWISE, they all can do the same thing, although XAudio2 is the bare-bone low level stuff and you have to code your features yourself while the other products are more or less "editors for implementing audio".

 
You have people claiming that ProTools is the best DAW out there. Then you have Cubase people,REAPER people, Sequoia, Garage Band, Samplitude, Bitwig, Ableton you name it.
 
All DAWs are really the same, if you really want you can get the same result out of them sound wise. What they differ in is the workflow.
 
So for the love of god man, stop posting wrong information, research, have patience and if you really can't take it, go play a different game.
 
I am also pissed that arma 3 does not sound as I want it to sound and that the sound engine is broken partially, sounds are cutting out etc. This is unacceptable but I know that the audio team is working their ass off to improve these things. They work really, really, really, really, really hard. You have no idea how hard.
 
So yeah. Please. No more XAudio2 bashing unless you can BACK IT UP with data, facts and proper explanation.


EDIT:
 

Why do not include a decent sound engine with the next expansion?
That would be like 1 cent more for everyone that is buying it.
Are you kidding me?

Really bro?
 
ONE PROGRAMMER spends nearly a whole year to program an engine that is better than anything we had before for 15 years and it's BOHEMIAS ENGINE meaning NO royalty fees to FMOD/WWISE/whathaveyou, instant bug fixes etc. It's just good to have in-house tools. And you suggest they throw it all away and just "buy a new one"?
 
What a stupid statement. "Buy X and you will be happy".
 
Like 1 cent? Really? Here you go:
http://www.fmod.org/sales/
 
Please provide me a calculation proving that if for each unit of arma 3 apex expansion we would pay 1 cent for an audio middleware it would be enough. I doubt that. Remember, they have to pay for every project they make... So it's not worth it in the long run.

 

 

I don't think that every piece of information in this post is 100% on point, so please feel free to correct me (and provide sources/data so I can check facts). But still this is 200% better than the nonsense being spread by other people.

[Jackal326 1158]

*snip*

Megagoth once again you have provided an intelligent and conherant counter-argument in response to a nonsensical rambling, I thank you sir.

 

For those who felt megagoth's post was too long and didn't bother to read it, I have found an image that perfectly sums it up:

 

That is Bratwurst's argument in the Japanese plane on the right...

[laxemann 1673]

What mega said. Not liking the current sounds is one thing (I have my issues with them as well but imo they're the best in the ArmA series so far) but please stop throwing around with dangerous semi-knowledge. The current sound configuration is great and opens up many possibilities and let's not forget that it was mostly done by one person (which would be nor argument if it was bad - which it isn't).

[I give up 152]

@ megagoth1702

 

For obvious reasons I am not going to argue with you.

But since XAudio2 is great (with "special effects") why dont you make it even greater fixing this.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pJSloGkgyU

[en3x 209]

For obvious reasons I am not going to argue with you.

 

I'm unsure what are reasons? I would like to see conversation where people back their claims with evidence.I think megagoth did that, I would

expect to see the same from you.

[laxemann 1673]

@ megagoth1702

 

For obvious reasons I am not going to argue with you.

But since XAudio2 is great (with "special effects") why dont you make it even greater fixing this.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pJSloGkgyU

 

All you're doing is showcasing a sample which accidentally was missing a line in it's configuration. Did you even take a look at how the new sound configuration works?

Doesn't seem like it. So please stop dicking around and spreading wrong "knowledge".

 

Here is the interior tail for the SDAR

 

 

 

Here is the interior tail for the MX (rangeCurve is missing):

 

[I give up 152]

I'm unsure what are reasons? I would like to see conversation where people back their claims with evidence.I think megagoth did that, I would

expect to see the same from you.

No. Mainly for 2 reasons.

When some one claims that XAudio2 is better than everything else, obviously some other reasons (not sound related) are behind those statements and iI respect that.

When a sound developer claims that XAudio2 is better than everything else there is no point for arguments.

I could elaborate a long list about XAudio2 concept. comparisons, examples, limitations or why 128 sound sources (currently in game, as option) are just a placebo, but for obvious reasons I am not going to argue.

[megagoth1702 251]

When some one claims that XAudio2 is better than everything else[...]

When a sound developer claims that XAudio2 is better than everything else[...]

Please provide me with a quote writing something in the line of "XAudio2 is better than anything else". Jesus man.

I am not a sound developer, just a well informed individual open to discussion and learning new things, if they are backed up by data.

 

Also, thanks to Laxeman I don't have to show to you that it's not XAudio's fault the interior sound is played over too long distance, it's the developer's fault because they did not configure the sound right. Which again proves - it's the user's fault, not the software's.

 

What I do really agree on though is that the sounds cutting out/missing is a very serious issue and I would LOVE, really love and I mean it, if we could work together on putting together a scenario in the mission editor that troggers the issue every time so that the DEVs can debug the stuff.

 

What I can tell you though is that although our average PC is able to handle 2000 arma3 sounds without issues (Bohemia's audio guys did a test of that, around 2000 is what they tested), they had to put some strict limits on the maximum number of sounds being played because some people play arma on a toaster and they have to make sure the performance is good.

 

There is also a very smart algorithm in place to select what sounds to kill. But due to configuration issues (especially the volume multiplier for SoundSets being set incorrectly) we had guntails drowing out gunshots.

 

So please mate, help me so that I can help BIs so that they can help us all. :)

 

I could elaborate a long list about XAudio2 concept. comparisons, examples, limitations or why 128 sound sources (currently in game, as option) are just a placebo, but for obvious reasons I am not going to argue.

I dont see any reasons. I provided facts and links and everything. So can you.

Although your sentence does not really say anything, (you just claim that you can create some long list) I actually would actually like to read that list and check out the examples. But only if you do it properly, with good explanations, simple to understand examples and a conclusion. Do it man. :)

[NeMeSiS 11]

What I can tell you though is that although our average PC is able to handle 2000 arma3 sounds without issues (Bohemia's audio guys did a test of that, around 2000 is what they tested), they had to put some strict limits on the maximum number of sounds being played because some people play arma on a toaster and they have to make sure the performance is good.

I cant be bothered to check, but i think that sound just runs on the main thread which is already overloaded as shit in most cases, and thus the amount of sounds playing would directly impact performance if you are running with some AI and scripts to actually play that amount of sounds.

 

EDIT: Odd sentence, cant be bothered to fix

Edited March 9, 2016 by NeMeSiS

[megagoth1702 251]

I cant be bothered to check, but i think that sound just runs on the main thread which is already overloaded as shit in most cases, and thus the amount of sounds playing would directly impact performance if you are running with some AI and scripts to actually play that amount of sounds.

EDIT: Odd sentence, cant be bothered to fix

Nope. Since the new engine is "new", it is separate from the main game core and runs in its own thread. No problems there.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Nope. Since the new engine is "new", it is separate from the main game core and runs in its own thread. No problems there.

I did not know this, increase the maximum amount!  :)

[I give up 152]

Please provide me with a quote writing something in the line of "XAudio2 is better than anything else". Jesus man.

I am not a sound developer, just a well informed individual open to discussion and learning new things, if they are backed up by data.

 

Also, thanks to Laxeman I don't have to show to you that it's not XAudio's fault the interior sound is played over too long distance, it's the developer's fault because they did not configure the sound right. Which again proves - it's the user's fault, not the software's.

 

What I do really agree on though is that the sounds cutting out/missing is a very serious issue and I would LOVE, really love and I mean it, if we could work together on putting together a scenario in the mission editor that troggers the issue every time so that the DEVs can debug the stuff.

 

What I can tell you though is that although our average PC is able to handle 2000 arma3 sounds without issues (Bohemia's audio guys did a test of that, around 2000 is what they tested), they had to put some strict limits on the maximum number of sounds being played because some people play arma on a toaster and they have to make sure the performance is good.

 

There is also a very smart algorithm in place to select what sounds to kill. But due to configuration issues (especially the volume multiplier for SoundSets being set incorrectly) we had guntails drowing out gunshots.

 

So please mate, help me so that I can help BIs so that they can help us all. :)

 

I dont see any reasons. I provided facts and links and everything. So can you.

Although your sentence does not really say anything, (you just claim that you can create some long list) I actually would actually like to read that list and check out the examples. But only if you do it properly, with good explanations, simple to understand examples and a conclusion. Do it man. :)

Replicate it with XAudio2 .

Or even better, place it in ARMA 3 sound (with XAudio2)

 

[laxemann 1673]

Replicate it with XAudio2 .

Or even better, place it in ARMA 3 sound (with XAudio2)

 

 

This is exactly what the new sound config enables.