Graphics engine improvement

[desertjedi 3]

these trees hardly affect framerates.

Not according to the tests in this thread:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=78423&page=3

They seem have to have a MAJOR impact on frame rates. I'm sure a lot of it depends on the devs' implementation.

Check out that whole thread...it really brings together all the problems with Arma 2's vegetation.

[Flash Thunder 10]

@DesertJedi: With modern GPU's (8000 series, HD2000 series), these trees hardly affect framerates.

It's the terrain, loading (bandwidth and buffersize) and probably AI which is killing performance.

And perhaps outdated APIs and render paths like D3D9 which have to be emulated.

Dead wrong....

Read post above My FPS can get sliced in HALF if looking at several of these trees at a close LOD. BTW: 3D Resolution only set to 80% I have an ATi 3650 512MB and normal settings, 45FPS to 20 and below, these trees need some shaving.

[cadet_94 10]

i like the graphics on arma 2 i think there as good as they get

[Rapier 10]

Real clouds or close to it. that gives shadows on the ground an move etc. you know what clouds do.

You nailed it with the clouds. I was just thinking what issue I wanted to bring up. The clouds are terrible. It's like OFP all over again. They need to make realistic puffy clouds, not only storm clouds which is like flying through a thick haze.

[eirulan 10]

I suggest to improve the interface for "Warfare" & "High Command" game type. :)

An example: it is used actually in a war game "WW II:General Commander". I like the concept.

It could be useful for the warfare high-command in ArmA II. Link:

http://www.stragames.com/gc/

Edited September 24, 2009 by eirulan

[Arma-2-Guru 55]

I don't see much need for graphics improvement, only animation in my opinion, better graphics inside vehicles would be a nice addition though.

[hotel 10]

There is apsolutly no need for such detailed (quality not quantity) vegetation, eg. trees. Bushes and grass are o.k., most of trees look quite dicent from distance but in a closer look with all those million of leaf poligons are needlles. GPU is wasted in any combat or non-combat situation when actualy no one realy care about it and yet still rendered.

Im sorry but I dont like playing a game that looks ugly ;)

[Rapier 10]

It's not the detail that kills the frame rate, its how much they are optimized and the efficiency of the game engine loading textures coming into visual sight and unloading those that are not visible.

[desertjedi 3]

Im sorry but I dont like playing a game that looks ugly

Well the devs blew that chance - the vegetation is a mess in this game. Or should I say, all the vegetation in this game is a mess EXCEPT for the single LOD resolution you see when standing right near something. Some of the leafy trees look like a 3-year old was smearing water colors around.

And I think this situation is made worse by the fact that the variety of terrain is much less than it was in Arma 1. Forests, anyone?

[Flash Thunder 10]

Well the devs blew that chance - the vegetation is a mess in this game. Or should I say, all the vegetation in this game is a mess EXCEPT for the single LOD resolution you see when standing right near something. Some of the leafy trees look like a 3-year old was smearing water colors around.

And I think this situation is made worse by the fact that the variety of terrain is much less than it was in Arma 1. Forests, anyone?

The game would run alot smoother if on an island like Sahrani. :)

I think it would've been better if BIS stayed to the Desert setting, Trees that are destructible use up alot of resources :mad:

[sk3pt 0]

Some of the leafy trees look like a 3-year old was smearing water colors around.

Set 'texture detail' to a higher setting.

[Flash Thunder 10]

Set 'texture detail' to a higher setting.

He's talking about at far distances...

It only looks half decent at 5 feet away, other than that :mad:

I have mods and settings on high don't see a differance and I could care less for the trees anyways not like I hide in them...

[sk3pt 0]

Texture detail - normal

Texture detail - very high: (a tiny improvement)

Objects detail - very high:

I agree, the LOD switch for these trees are a little too close now. I think they changed it in one of the first patches to gain some performance.

[maturin 12]

What IS the story with performance in this game? Today I discovered that I can run Chernarus in the editor with 10 km view distance (on slightly >minimum req laptop) and a good frame rate, but fps can chug at 2000 m with a few dozen guys on the map. Is it all about the CPU for processing the AI, and any competent video card will do?

[ActionMan 10]

in any event, it was obvious BIS was unable to understand and implement VS and PS

Every game uses shaders these days -- they are the 'default' method of rendering in modern graphics APIs...

Technically, it is possible to make a D3D9 game that doesn't use shaders (i.e. you can use the fixed-function pipeline instead) -- but your graphics drivers emulate the FFP in a shader program! so even in that rare case you're still (indirectly) using shaders.

[desertjedi 3]

Sk3pt, regarding your pics...is it just me or does the artwork in general (regardless of the actual image "quality") in this game look like crap?

I look at Arma and then I look at this game and feel...WTH?

[mils 10]

I dont think pixel and vertex shading is something that automaticly makes games unrealistic. My question is, how will vertex and pixel shading work in a large scale game like ofp2?

i was gonna write something about Bf1942´s water but i realized that was H/TL witch resistance allready has?

lads, pixel and vertex shaders should already be in the game mate, I'd suggest that a lot of effects they are doing are through shaders.

They are just a gpu optimised way to do tasks which before were difficult and required specific code per vid card type.

If they are not using shaders atm I'd be pretty surprised indeed.

[harT 10]

Slightly off topic but I wish AA2 would have some of the atmosphere shown in that video, not to mention:

physics

animations

sounds

destroyable buildings

AND YES! I know that BFBC2 is an arcade shooter and a "tube run" so no flaming on me!

There´s no way future arma2 patches will include any "physics" or faster netcode...those shitty bugs and crappy animation will be there as long as BIS holds on that shitty game-engine.

Wake up BIS...you were lucky that OFP2 failed to deliver, so you still hold the crown..,.but just barely.

AA2 is a lost cause, no need to patch it anymore...dump all this shit and give us ARMA3 with new 3d-engine with all the major aspects community has cried for years...time for sucking the old OFP-ARMA engine-titty is over!

[Flash Thunder 10]

Slightly off topic but I wish AA2 would have some of the atmosphere shown in that video, not to mention:

physics

animations

sounds

destroyable buildings

AND YES! I know that BFBC2 is an arcade shooter and a "tube run" so no flaming on me!

There´s no way future arma2 patches will include any "physics" or faster netcode...those shitty bugs and crappy animation will be there as long as BIS holds on that shitty game-engine.

Wake up BIS...you were lucky that OFP2 failed to deliver, so you still hold the crown..,.but just barely.

AA2 is a lost cause, no need to patch it anymore...dump all this shit and give us ARMA3 with new 3d-engine with all the major aspects community has cried for years...time for sucking the old OFP-ARMA engine-titty is over!

I dont think Frostbite 2.0 is as open and mod friendly than RV3.

You honestly think BIS is just going to drop Arma II and the expansion just to license this engine and make Arma 3???? Wouldn't that give them a bad reputation for dropping a game so early in your books?

Oh wait do you even have the game?

[harT 10]

I dont think Frostbite 2.0 is as open and mod friendly than RV3.

You honestly think BIS is just going to drop Arma II and the expansion just to license this engine and make Arma 3???? Wouldn't that give them a bad reputation for dropping a game so early in your books?

Oh wait do you even have the game?

Yes I do, i bet my left nut for it :D

[Pyronick 21]

Physics and sound improvements can be done homemade or through licencing middleware such as FMOD or Havok. You don't need Frostbite 2.0 for that as it's featureset is far too limited for a game such as ArmA.

Animations are made using BIS' motion capture studios, it won't get better than that. ;)

Destroyable building are in the game, but I think you are referring to the dynamic destruction in Bad Company.

That stuff such be processed by a physics engine, which might be improved in the next "iteration" of the ArmA series.

[Flash Thunder 10]

Physics and sound improvements can be done homemade or through licencing middleware such as FMOD or Havok. You don't need Frostbite 2.0 for that as it's featureset is far too limited for a game such as ArmA.

Destroyable building are in the game, but I think you are referring to the dynamic destruction in Bad Company.

That stuff such be processed by a physics engine, which might be improved in the next "iteration" of the ArmA series.

Agreed.

Actual dynamic physics, soft body physics

Simulation of particle dust, volumetric lighting, enhanced lighting engine

More bump maps and those fancy textures that look like they're actually 3D, more and lots of them, and more indepth texture work on objects and stuff

Realistic Lip-Synch, Animations for everything!

Improved Special effects, smoke, fire, destruction, muzzle flashes, explosions.

Improved sound effects for explosions and weapons.

Edited June 23, 2010 by Flash Thunder

[Wolfish King 0]

They should re-write their whole engine. A new one. I have the feeling this is just OFP but then they just added some "open-source free to download on the internet lighting system". I love how the campfires look when it's night... it's just a DOOM engine light placed on it or something.

But I love this game.

[JuggernautOfWar 1]

They should re-write their whole engine. A new one. I have the feeling this is just OFP but then they just added some "open-source free to download on the internet lighting system". I love how the campfires look when it's night... it's just a DOOM engine light placed on it or something.

But I love this game.

Doom engine? The light does effect the 3d environment. Doom was two-dimensional so I don't think they had any lighting effects buddy.

[Pyronick 21]

Dynamic destruction eats up alot of CPU, it would make more sense if BIS added realtime dynamic desturction into Arma 3 with RV4 engine or whatever engine they choose to use. :)

No need to run this on the CPU. It can be offloaded in the near future using OpenCL or Direct Compute.

Actual dynamic physics, soft body physics

I have been craving for this since Operation Flashpoint.

Simulation of particle dust, volumetric lighting, enhanced lighting engine

Particle dust is already in the game, it's affected by helicopters only AFAIK.

More bump maps and those fancy textures that look like they're actually 3D, more and lots of them, and more indepth texture work on objects and stuff

No need for that with DirectX 11 tessellation, which is real 3D instead of parallax effects.

Realistic Lip-Synch, Animations for everything!

There should be some sort of Facial Action Coding System like in the Source engine.

This means that every important usable muscle group in the face is simulated, and as you can see in Half-Life 2 and Crysis it looks very realistic.

I think that using tessellation instead of parallax mapping and normal mapping could reserve enough power to handle physics and even 3D audio processing on the GPU.

With the huge bandwidth growth of everything going fiber optics, LTE and what not I think networked physics could actually work in maybe a year.