Graphics engine improvement

[johncage 30]

the lack of details is due to atmospheric perspective.

despite lack of clutter, the grassy plain looks very realistic thanks to the shaders. i'm sure clutter will be introduced at some point in the future. and nice terrain detail at 1:40.

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

I'd like to see in the ArmA 2 engine some of the backlighting from distant explosions that you see in this Crysis mod:

bIdVk1JwYsQ

You know the scene in Saving Private Ryan where the squad is walking through a field and distant explosions are backlighting their silhouettes?

[purepassion 22]

I'd like to see in the ArmA 2 engine some of the backlighting from distant explosions that you see in this Crysis mod

FPDR

One major point that should be implemented into Arma 2 (OA) is render to texture.

Especially important for the Apache and so on.

(VBS2 has this feature so why not give it to Arma 2?)

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

Can you describe "render to texture" in layman's terms? And why is it important for the Apache?

[tpw 2314]

Can you describe "render to texture" in layman's terms? And why is it important for the Apache?

Render to texture means that 3d calculations can be output to a texture, which can then be used in-game. In the case of the Apache, it means that you could have instrument panels showing terrain view etc. It would also be excellent for proper reflections in vehicle mirrors, zoomed view in scopes on top of unzoomed view etc etc. Many people are agitating for it for these and other reasons, and we know it can be done because it's in VBS2.

[Methos 10]

I'd like to see in the ArmA 2 engine some of the backlighting from distant explosions that you see in this Crysis mod:

bIdVk1JwYsQ

You know the scene in Saving Private Ryan where the squad is walking through a field and distant explosions are backlighting their silhouettes?

I agree. It would look SO much cooler if we had effects like that in ARMA 2 or ARMA OA.

[purepassion 22]

Render to texture means that 3d calculations can be output to a texture, which can then be used in-game. In the case of the Apache, it means that you could have instrument panels showing terrain view etc. It would also be excellent for proper reflections in vehicle mirrors, zoomed view in scopes on top of unzoomed view etc etc.

Thats exactly the point. thanks for explaining it.

---------- Post added at 02:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:24 PM ----------

I agree. It would look SO much cooler if we had effects like that in ARMA 2 or ARMA OA.

Guys, when do you understand, that implementing Cryengine features is near to impossible..

Edited February 17, 2011 by PurePassion

[maddogx 13]

Guys, when do you understand, that implementing Cryengine features is near to impossible..

How so?

[johncage 30]

different engine.

[maddogx 13]

different engine.

So what? Loads of features have been added to RV over the years.

[coopr 10]

So what? Loads of features have been added to RV over the years.

agreed.. why wouldn't it be possible to add more effects to the rv engine?? Nothing is impossible.. but it would probably take some time to add these features.

But before of these graphical features i have to agree with purepassion.. where is our beloved render to texture? We really need this addition to the rv engine.. and it probably isn't going to be to hard to implement as they already done it into vsb2. Are there any big differences between vsb2 engine and arma2 in a coding/how thinks are implemented way?

[lozz08 10]

The BI team are more than capable of adding a bunch of features to the game; physics, graphics, AI, etc... There isn't much that they full stop could NOT do-

But obviously OA is capable of bringing i7's and gtx 580's to their knees already... It is nice to discuss all this stuff but it really is going to be after mainstream processors go 10+ core and we see applications that actually scale properly for them that we will get what we wish for.

[coopr 10]

The BI team are more than capable of adding a bunch of features to the game; physics, graphics, AI, etc... There isn't much that they full stop could NOT do-

But obviously OA is capable of bringing i7's and gtx 580's to their knees already... It is nice to discuss all this stuff but it really is going to be after mainstream processors go 10+ core and we see applications that actually scale properly for them that we will get what we wish for.

:confused: seriously that doesn't make sense at all.. we are talking about render to texture.

adding a few more features doesn't require a 10+ core.. if they are overrushed bad coded and implemented yes.. then they will. Besides they are still optimizing the game

[Zorg_DK 10]

i wonder if BIS is working on DX11 for the Arma2 engine?

[Zipper5 74]

I highly doubt it...

[-)rStrangelove 0]

i wonder if BIS is working on DX11 for the Arma2 engine?

Not even Crysis2 has Dx11, why should ArmA2?

[Pyronick 21]

)rStrangelove;1895724']Not even Crysis2 has Dx11' date=' why should ArmA2?[/quote']Please don't compare Crysis 2 with ArmA 2.

In any case, it would do good for both games. In ArmA 2 it is a potential LOD pop-up killer and could make terrain LOD more dynamic and less performance killing.

In Crysis 2 it could offload the details done by displacement mapping.

[Zorg_DK 10]

)rStrangelove;1895724']Not even Crysis2 has Dx11' date=' why should ArmA2?[/quote']

DX11 has some useful features that could make Arma2 look and perform better. Dx9 is about 9 years old, it would be nice to see some new gfx features/effects.

[Parrotnut 10]

DX11 has some useful features that could make Arma2 look and perform better. Dx9 is about 9 years old, it would be nice to see some new gfx features/effects.

Something like "multi-threaded rendering" seems nice :): http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=31520674&postcount=28

[maddogx 13]

Something like "multi-threaded rendering" seems nice :): http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=31520674&postcount=28

+1 informative. :)

If there ever is an Arma3, I hope it fully supports DX11.

[BasileyOne 10]

)rStrangelove;1895724']Not even Crysis2 has Dx11' date=' why should ArmA2?[/quote']

just because both parts of Crysis never near Arma2 in terms of GFX beauty and subsequently, required GFX power.

so, DirectX11 provide that way. by supporting multi-thread rendering.

DX11 has some useful features that could make Arma2 look and perform better. Dx9 is about 9 years old, it would be nice to see some new gfx features/effects.

DX9 was decent API for BIS/Idea needs.

but DX11 had other advantages.

for example, all Arma2-capable D11 GFX cards will support DX11.

while weak ones will not.

but thats can be questionable strategy :/

Edited April 13, 2011 by BasileyOne

[-)rStrangelove 0]

Uuuuh - so thats how it works?

You just 'enable' DX11 mode for a DX9 game like ArmA2 and hope it will magically become multi-threaded and show all kinds of new gfx fx while running with double fps all of a sudden?

For this to work you need to develop a game with these things already in mind. Read what DICE says about developing the BF3 engine.

Won't happen with ArmA2, thats for sure.

[edit]

BTW ... the fps problems most ppl have are not gfx power related. Drive around with a groundvehicle in the editor, then do the same in a mission and compare your fps. The AI is most culprit most of the time. AI and streaming island data. DX11 has a booster for this as well? ;)

Edited April 13, 2011 by ])rStrangelove

[maddogx 13]

)rStrangelove;1896975']Uuuuh - so thats how it works?

You just 'enable' DX11 mode for a DX9 game like ArmA2 and hope it will magically become multi-threaded and show all kinds of new gfx fx while running with double fps all of a sudden?

Why of course. It's just like the mythical 64-bit executable that people are always asking for. Rumor has it that it would quadruple our FPS!

Too bad BIS have been so cruelly withholding it from us.

[BasileyOne 10]

Why of course. It's just like the mythical 64-bit executable that people are always asking for. Rumor has it that it would quadruple our FPS!

Too bad BIS have been so cruelly withholding it from us.

sure, you can laugh. until you find yourself, playing Arma2, constantly failing due "out of memory" error, while you sitting on 16Gb equipped-PC, just because lack of 64-bit binaries for game. wonderful !! in 2011 year.

and yes, with some tricks[consult "software optimisation guide" for appropriate CPU gen's] you can speedup division and multiply operation 1.5x-4x times in 64-bit code.

in newer chips, which come out in mid-2011,

[tnx to (significantly)improved sheduler, 128-bit(DP!)FPU and moved "to silicon"(from microcode)stuff]

you can get even bigger boost[up to 10x times], .

Edited April 13, 2011 by BasileyOne

[maddogx 13]

sure, you can laugh. until you find yourself, playing Arma2, constantly failing due "out of memory" error, while you sitting on 16Gb equipped-PC, just because lack of 64-bit binaries for game. wonderful !! in 2011 year.

The "out of memory" errors are bugs. They don't happen because the game needs more than 2GB RAM, or a 64bit exe for that matter. Just look at Arma2s RAM usage and you will see it generally stays under 1.2GB.