Graphics engine improvement

[Alex72 1]

In Age of Conan it seems the parallax mapping (making textures look 3D) doesnt do much to the FPS actually. Some very small FPS hit and the PM was everywhere around the player. I think the difference with on and off was about 5FPS. But then that might have been in that game and it will be different in others. Just let you know what i found out about that game.

Alex

[dentist guba 0]

i think the main improvement needs to be with performance, i think ARMA looks fine but objects need to be loaded much better. BTW you can't have COD4 graphics while flying a supersonic jet 15 m above the ground with a view distance of 10000m.

[baddo 0]

The object loading should benefit from multi-threading (on multi-core processors).

A background thread would be loading (and unloading) resources while the main thread is using them.

I think there is some limit when this in fact does not bring a performance increase, but my guess is that in a game such as ArmA that limit is well exceeded and it would bring a performance increase.

[dentist guba 0]

The object loading should benefit from multi-threading (on multi-core processors).

A background thread would be loading (and unloading) resources while the main thread is using them.

I think there is some limit when this in fact does not bring a performance increase, but my guess is that in a game such as ArmA that limit is well exceeded and it would bring a performance increase.

i hope your right, this should help with the console version too as the 360 has multi core.

[D007 0]

Fact is and always has been that since armas release it has performed sub par at best.

The game is prone to daily crashing and has always run badly.

Don't get me wrong. I still think it's the best game out..

But this game makes meat of pc's.

We absolutely need a better engine.

A more optimized engine.

And developers who know when enough is enough.

Arma simply overextended it's capabilities and I hope arma 2 doesn't do the same thing.

No, it's not my system..lol..

It's just to good and it runs every other game I have at max max everything.. im talking 10-15x's AA and 1900x1200. etc etc etc..

5 grand and still arma crashes me from time to time.

getting a steady 60 fps in this game is near impossible and that should be standard.

I run a lot of other high end games at a hundred plus frames a second.

Multiplayer supreme commander at 1900x1200.. with 6 ai's and 2 people with double resources..

This being dual/quad core will help..

but clearly there was an issue with the engine..

textures not being rendered properly. slow load times.

crashes due to strange texture related errors.

again I say don't get me wrong.. love the game..

I just hope it runs better this time..

a lot better..lol..

[Maddmatt 1]

...The game is prone to daily crashing and has always run badly...

If the game crashes for you then something is wrong. Either a compatibility problem with something in your hardware or a problem on your side.

The game used to crash occasionally for me with old versions, especially back on 1.04 performance was sometimes bad. But the latest version is definitely stable here and performance is good.

My PC is definitely not "high end" these days. 7800GT 256MB, 2GB RAM, AMD 64 X2 3800.

Quote[/b] ]Arma simply overextended it's capabilities and I hope arma 2 doesn't do the same thing.

Well I do think you have a good point there. On release the game definitely was not optimised enough for all the high detail content (especially vegetation) it has. But the patches have at least helped with that.

[Commando84 0]

Btw i have a suggestion and that is that the damage models for vehicles should have more than 1-2, the damaged and the destroyed, imo would be very nice if there was 2-3 destroyed models the engine could randomly switch between or something.

[Stiletto 0]

...The game is prone to daily crashing and has always run badly...

If the game crashes for you then something is wrong. Either a compatibility problem with something in your hardware or a problem on your side.

The game used to crash occasionally for me with old versions, especially back on 1.04 performance was sometimes bad. But the latest version is definitely stable here and performance is good.

My PC is definitely not "high end" these days. 7800GT 256MB, 2GB RAM, AMD 64 X2 3800.

Quote[/b] ]Arma simply overextended it's capabilities and I hope arma 2 doesn't do the same thing.

Well I do think you have a good point there. On release the game definitely was not optimised enough for all the high detail content (especially vegetation) it has. But the patches have at least helped with that.

Most servers and games ive owned and run arent as buggy as this game tho. Ive had  "Day Of Defeat"  chuck full of skins and what not and didnt have a flutter of issue. The Game engine is poopy! love the game tho , but someone needs to crawl under the hood and do some major overhaul work.

[Stiletto 0]

Maybe adding Nvidias Physx might be a nice addition the graphical equation? !!

[Brendon 0]

Fact is and always has been that since armas release it has performed sub par at best.

The game is prone to daily crashing and has always run badly.

Don't get me wrong. I still think it's the best game out..

But this game makes meat of pc's.

We absolutely need a better engine.

A more optimized engine.

And developers who know when enough is enough.

Arma simply overextended it's capabilities and I hope arma 2 doesn't do the same thing.

No, it's not my system..lol..

It's just to good and it runs every other game I have at max max everything.. im talking 10-15x's AA and 1900x1200. etc etc etc..

5 grand and still arma crashes me from time to time.

getting a steady 60 fps in this game is near impossible and that should be standard.

I run a lot of other high end games at a hundred plus frames a second.

Multiplayer supreme commander at 1900x1200.. with 6 ai's and 2 people with double resources..

This being dual/quad core will help..

but clearly there was an issue with the engine..

textures not being rendered properly. slow load times.

crashes due to strange texture related errors.

again I say don't get me wrong.. love the game..

I just hope it runs better this time..

a lot better..lol..

Not once, even on the old patches have I ever crashed with ArmA.

[baddo 0]

Maybe adding Nvidias Physx might be a nice addition the graphical equation? !!

That's more a physical thing, you know.

There is another thread for discussing physics.

Of course it would affect the graphics, or "visuals", as well if you have better physics simulation. Maybe that was your point.

There is the forcefield in the PhysX. It is possible to create wind which affects the physical simulation with it. Or a vacuum cleaner... or a magnet. Etc. And there is the fluid simulation. And the physical particles which don't go through physical objects. And then there is the ragdoll.

What could be used of the PhysX features to improve the graphics. The physical particles would look more "right" than the current particles which go through objects. The ragdoll could help to solve the problem of soldiers hanging in the air after dying, at least. The forcefield would not be much useful if there isn't added a lot of dynamic actors (dynamic physical objects) to the game. It has to have something to throw around. It could blow like a wind to the trees and bushes (which would be physx physical objects, maybe cloth or soft bodies or a combination of them), that's what it could be used for.

Sure, it could improve the "graphics".

[ElMono 0]

I would like to see the so called "fog of war" (dust, smoke of a near grass field that turn on fire, dust arround a firing gun) and that fog of war moves along the battlefield according to wind direction and magnitude.

Cya.

[Boborish 1]

One question for BI: Do you plan to change / remove the track prints on surface that appear behind cars and tanks? Would be cool if it was removed completely for cars but left for tanks, with some small changes if possible - like it would check the surface, whether its grass or road - on grass it would leave a texture with some normal mapping to give it a 3d feeling, while on roads it wouldnt leave anything or just a print that wouldnt be very visible.

I know its just a small detail but I dont think it would be complicated, so why not? ^^

[Pauldarrington 9]

would be cool to have steerable parachutes as standard or just specops guys but also maybe being able to shoot your weapon while parachuting down... seen it many times before during coop & pvp games were the enemie make mince meat of guys paradropping in and not having a chance to defend themselfs

edit---ahh nuts wrong thread, sorry guys

[LJF 0]

I'd just like to see ALL effects (bump/normal/parralax etc) on ALL surfaces. It really annoys me in games when I see a beautiful model next to one that looks five years old.

The only other things I'd like to see is better shadows, maybe Crysis style? And more detailed terrain/more objects. The shadows use the old "square" or checkered approach, which looks strange, and the maps in ArmA were too flat and empty, I'm not talking about hills or mountains, but things like ditches and drains, furthermore, a lot of the buildings look like they were just plonked in, they stood out too much, but this isn't really a graphics issue I suppose, and it looks like BI has already fixed that

Mainly I just would like to see the shadows improved and the landscapes more detailed, it'd be cool to blur the line between "terrain" and "object".

[gL33k 0]

72 @ July 09 2008,01:17)]In Age of Conan it seems the parallax mapping (making textures look 3D) doesnt do much to the FPS actually. Some very small FPS hit and the PM was everywhere around the player. I think the difference with on and off was about 5FPS. But then that might have been in that game and it will be different in others. Just let you know what i found out about that game.

Alex

we need real parralax. stalker has. arma doesn't. it's bump.

[xnodunitx 0]

Arma2 has parallax mapping capability,seen on the ground in previous video's of rocky terrain.

[Commando84 0]

yeah its stated in the Pdf files released during this years games convention germany

[Potatoz 0]

One major thing they need to change in ArmA2 is the scale of the buildings. I mean, playing ArmA now I see a lot of the same old OFP buildings, which are much to small to fight effectively in. All the houses I see can fit maybe 2 people inside (exaggeration). Most buildings are just too small.

There needs to be buildings that we can fight in. As of right now we usually only fight out doors and around buildings. I think this has to do a lot with the animations of ArmA and how awkward they are.

With the way things stand now in ArmA (which they might be the same in ArmA 2) there's basically no hope for urban warfare and going through and clearing out buildings.

[wipman 1]

Hi, another graphic improvement will be to allow the combination

of various material properties in the O2, for example... combine the

Shine and Fully Lighted properties, this will be usefull for recreate

certain materials present in the real life, mandatory in the battle

field and will reduce too the number of work arrounds that the addon

makers have to do in order to make more realistic weapons or just

materials and objects in general. Let's C ya

[ubernoob 0]

I´d like if the 3rd person camera would have some bobbing and "jerkyness" like there´s a cameraman filming it document style.

(Grid Race driver has some nice camera bobbing)

The current camera is so "stiff" and fixed...if not possible, then maybe some smoothing when rotating the camera.

[Commando84 0]

I dunno, camera is a touchy subject, some people may actually get seasick if the camera wobbles to much

From what I heard game devs tell me.

[celery 8]

I´d like if the 3rd person camera would have some bobbing and "jerkyness" like there´s a cameraman filming it document style.

(Grid Race driver has some nice camera bobbing)

The current camera is so "stiff" and fixed...if not possible, then maybe some smoothing when rotating the camera.

Gimmicky cameras are just asking for trouble. Keeping it playable is much more important than looking nice in gameplay videos.

[ubernoob 0]

Option to choose different face models(shapes) so that your custom face.jpg fits better in it...just more editing capabilities in it, not a biggie.

Maybe also an option to add something extra to your face: (baclavas, bandanas, boonies, facecamos, scars, caps, tuques, helmets with logos/writings etc) something extra to make your appearance more unique.

...or maybe mustaches

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Heheh, I know I was hoping to stick those Cavalry style whiskers from the bloke in CoD4 on my ArmA dude for shits and giggles when it first came out.