ArmA Progress Updates

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Dynamic destruction is very complex problem.

1) very high CPU severity ( more CPU cells will be welcome as standard)

2) very coplicated production, take one month for 3-4 artists to prepare. Lot of problems with special lods like shadow, view, collision, fire geometry. Big trobles with section reductions throught resolution lods. (RTS games does not use any kind of lods and use very simple simulation). All buildings must have interiors.

3) very complicated implementation in multiplayer, due numeric stability - need to have same results of simulation for all clients and high load for network when is synchronization needed.

4) RT replanning strategic maps for AI

and many others

Ddynamic destruction is still " in research/development technology".

So you are saying that this might be added in a patch later on (after release)?

[ohara 0]

Research is not work for weeks or few months.

[Cannon Fodder 0]

No, he's saying that the technology to do it in a game of ArmA's size would need to be so advanced that it would require a supercomputer to handle it. He's essentially saying that not only do you have the mere calculation of the dynamic destruction, but the capability of AI to interpret it and the possibility in multiplayer for all players to see the same dynamic destruction.

For christ's sake, cut the guys some slack. No other game has got anywhere near what the BIS guys are producing, and you want a highly experimental and incredibly complicated dynamic destruction process that would most likely choke the life out of your computer? Be realistic!

While I agree the current model of destruction could use some tweaking to make the transition that little bit more visually appealling (perhaps slow down the building's descent and add more smoke to mask the transition?), it is more than adequate for our needs and not only that crucially does not destroy your computer. Just imagine setting off 10 satchels in a town with dynamic destruction! It would most likely set your computer on fire!

Guys, keep up the good work.

[txalin 2]

Research is not work for weeks or few months.

so can we suppose that you are working to give a better look to the "static" building destruction?

[lwlooz 0]

I need to work on my postings,they seem to come across not like I intended. Anyways,to add some constructive criticism to my last post.

Even tho the transition-effect looks very comical,that isn't my main beef with this, i.e the graphics. I understand that the destroyed models probably aren't hardcoded and thus it is not really a problem of BIS,but considering that almost noone made new buildings for OFP and these ones are most likely to be used in addon islands as well,here are my 2 suggestions:

A) Rubble left over is proportional to the size of the building

B) It takes a lot ,lot ,lot,lot more damage to bring houses down

When I saw the video I had this vision of a platoon of tanks levelling a city-block just to get a better LOS or even worse, to drive over the destroyed houses as well

[FCOPZ-illuminator 0]

A) Rubble left over is proportional to the size of the building

B) It takes a lot ,lot ,lot,lot more damage to bring houses down

I agree point A.

But i don't wanna shot an half hour into the building to bring them down...

[txalin 2]

I think that the way of improve de destruction system of Company of heroes could be a really good option for ArmA, several stages on the buildings, you can see it on this shot posted on the previous page:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums....ion.jpg

For me it's ok, i don't need/want something that need higher requirements if you can find an alternative, but valid, solution

For example, the havoc from dkmm has a very very nice script that replaces the "horrible" (sorry BIS ) destruction system with another model of colapsed heli, and to avoid that you can watch the model change they added an small explosion.

Here you have a shot:

For me this way is pefect for the buildings, serveral destruction models, and dust to change the model

[Scrub 0]

Oh come on. Yes, that sounds like a nice way to do it, but once you see the one of the middle destruction shots, you'll be saying "Hey, I didn't shoot it there, why is there a hole on the other side of the house?" Let BIS finish up in peace.

I'm sure any left over bandwith/cpu cycles you may have will be taken up by the community attempting to do this (and setting your computer on fire).

[Balschoiw 0]

Welcome to the forums ohara !

Quote[/b] ]1) very high CPU severity ( more CPU cells will be welcome as standard)

Do you think about implementing such if physics cards get more spread among users and the costs for such additional devices will go down ?

Right now physics card support imo would not work properly as the results produced by physics cards in relation to dynamic destruction would cause several problems when you play with guys who don´t have such hardware device installed.

Quote[/b] ]2) very coplicated production, take one month for 3-4 artists to prepare. Lot of problems with special lods like shadow, view, collision, fire geometry. Big trobles with section reductions throught resolution lods. (RTS games does not use any kind of lods and use very simple simulation). All buildings must have interiors.

As far as I understand the object itself has to be modelled very different than the houses in OFP as they need to consist of parts that can be adressed independant. In shooters like COD or such some house are destroyable to some extend. That means that certain parts of the houses collapse as a result of force applied to them. It´s no real collapse simulation but only a predefined pattern in case the house get´s shot at.

You´re talking about a much more complex system as if you are really thinking of a house that is made of numerous bricks and accurately simulated physics on every single part of the house.

This is infact a nice approach but I doubt that it will work in scenarios sized as big as Arma or follow-ups.

In a test-scenario this maybe will work, but taking into account that Arma will feature loads of buildings I can´t see how this could be implemented anytime soon. I´m talking of years here.

If you take into account the huge amount of data that has to be stored to keep the accurate position of every stone that has

dropped from the collapsed building you know that it´s a huge issue to embedd such in large scale maps like the one used with Arma.

I know that it´s only a half-hearted solution to embedd buildings like in other shooters that collapse in a predefined way and are not destroyable really dynamically, but for now I guess it would be a nice addition. In this context it would be nice if BIS could implement a feature that I already missed with OFP:

Allow missionmakers to change map-objects on the fly. Means: Missioneditors can read object ID´s from map and remove the objects on the fly or replace the objects they want with different ones. This would also make it more easy for BIS to replace an object (house) that has been destroyed with another object (rubble) This way AI inflictions would be hindered and the map itself would be a lot more flexible for mission-editors.

Just my 2 cents.

[txalin 2]

Oh come on. Yes, that sounds like a nice way to do it, but once you see the one of the middle destruction shots, you'll be saying "Hey, I didn't shoot it there, why is there a hole on the other side of the house?" Let BIS finish up in peace.

I'm sure any left over bandwith/cpu cycles you may have will be taken up by the community attempting to do this (and setting your computer on fire).

i was thinking on that like a provisional solution to avoid new delays, to give BIS time to improve the real dinamic one and release it in a patch

[GabKa73 0]

[...]

In a test-scenario this maybe will work, but taking into account that Arma will feature loads of buildings I can´t see how this could be implemented anytime soon. I´m talking of years here.

If you take into account the huge amount of data that has to be stored to keep the accurate position of every stone that has

dropped from the collapsed building you know that it´s a huge issue to embedd such in large scale maps like the one used with Arma.

[...]

And real dynamic destruction (brick for brick dynamically) is never going to work properly in multiplayer (imagine just 10 players and hundrets of different houses) when you have to sync all client side calculations. The whole dynamic destruction has to be calculated on the server and passed on to the clients. And now we're talking far into the future ...

[Maddmatt 1]

[...]

In a test-scenario this maybe will work, but taking into account that Arma will feature loads of buildings I can´t see how this could be implemented anytime soon. I´m talking of years here.

If you take into account the huge amount of data that has to be stored to keep the accurate position of every stone that has

dropped from the collapsed building you know that it´s a huge issue to embedd such in large scale maps like the one used with Arma.

[...]

And real dynamic destruction (brick for brick dynamically) is never going to work properly in multiplayer (imagine just 10 players and hundrets of different houses) when you have to sync all client side calculations. The whole dynamic destruction has to be calculated on the server and passed on to the clients. And now we're talking far into the future ...

Brick by brick isn't necessary, chunk by chunk would be more manageable. It's too late for ArmA, but I can't wait to see the kind of destruction Game 2 will have. Also the destruction can be calculated by the clients, and then synchronized with the server every so often.

[Sniperwolf572 758]

@ Bals:

Predefined destruction is already possible in ArmA, bridges are one of the examples. I belive that now you can assign .rtm animations to objects.

[walker 0]

Hi all

Do the math people!

The OFP engine's network code already deals with hundreds of bullets being fired. Add in the destruction on a per bullet bases with destructable scenenery and you have at least doubled the info the server has to pass.

Yes lots of it can be, should and is handled at the client but all has to be sychronised. And we all know what desynch is.

I have argued for some time about the need for network archetecture based on a distributed server model. In a way OFP all ready does the half the work load in distributing what it does to the clients but then there is the question of what needs an Ack and what can be assumed.

Consider a bullet is fired

client tells the server

Server tells other clients

Bullet hits building

a chunk is knocked off

visuals are altered

all clients need to see the same thing

Server AI has to see it

The server has to check all clients see the same thing. It is called Synchronisation.

And that is to simplyfy it.

what is Desynch

What happens when a client does not acknowledge (ack) the bullet was fired? packet lost in the internet or indeed client disconects. The server must send the packet again. Does it send to all? Does it keep sending it till it gets an ack? ever seen player x has not replied for 30 seconds? Ever noticed the desynch?

And that is just a simple case.

And Loose you use Network services in your missions and you know the complicated code it needs and have worked on implimenting it in your missions with BN880.

Reorganising network archetecture is long term work as the developer said and to some extent must await improved computer technology.

Untill then we have to accept a little smoke and mirrors corner cutting to get something in game that looks whole lot better than house crumple and results in improved game play.

Destuctable buildings is complicated.

The animations are tweakable and can be patched as can replacement rubble models but as the man said the models are more complicated than we see them; they have to include LODs that describe how the AI understands them which is with code not eyes, They have to include other LODs such as how they affect light or object movement and bullets. It is not just eyecanydy it has to work and have a physical effect on the world.

I would rather we did not wait for those improvements though. We can get them in a patch and live with what we have.

Full blown destructable buildings brick by brick is probably game 2 though.

Kind Regards walker

[Eda Mrcoch 0]

There's been a new preview from Invex (in Czech).

http://pc.hrej.cz/clanky/preview/armed-assault-dojmy-z-invexu-2006/

Apart from the old news, they dissect the shadows system: different shadow techniques for trees, moving objects and such and ambient shadows that can be dynamically affected by, for example... The flashlight! Also there gonna be a knife ingame. Acording to them, Invex version was quite unstable. That's about all.

(it seems to me, that we who are going to get it in November will be in similar situation like when OFp 1.00 was released and we were "gammatesting" it for US 1.20 release )

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Hi all

Do the math people!

The OFP engine's network code already deals with hundreds of bullets being fired. Add in the destruction on a per bullet bases with destructable scenenery and you have at least doubled the info the server has to pass.

Yes lots of it can be, should and is handled at the client but all has to be sychronised. And we all know what desynch is.

I have argued for some time about the need for network archetecture based on a distributed server model. In a way OFP all ready does the half the work load in distributing what it does to the clients but then there is the question of what needs an Ack and what can be assumed.

Consider a bullet is fired

client tells the server

Server tells other clients

Bullet hits building

a chunk is knocked off

visuals are altered

all clients need to see the same thing

Server AI has to see it

The server has to check all clients see the same thing. It is called Synchronisation.

And that is to simplyfy it.

what is Desynch

What happens when a client does not acknowledge (ack) the bullet was fired? packet lost in the internet or indeed client disconects. The server must send the packet again. Does it send to all? Does it keep sending it till it gets an ack? ever seen player x has not replied for 30 seconds? Ever noticed the desynch?

And that is just a simple case.

And Loose you use Network services in your missions and you know the complicated code it needs and have worked on implimenting it in your missions with BN880.

Reorganising network archetecture is long term work as the developer said and to some extent must await improved computer technology.

Untill then we have to accept a little smoke and mirrors corner cutting to get something in game that looks whole lot better than house crumple and results in improved game play.

Destuctable buildings is complicated.

The animations are tweakable and can be patched as can replacement rubble models but as the man said the models are more complicated than we see them; they have to include LODs that describe how the AI understands them which is with code not eyes, They have to include other LODs such as how they affect light or object movement and bullets. It is not just eyecanydy it has to work and have a physical effect on the world.

I would rather we did not wait for those improvements though. We can get them in a patch and live with what we have.

Full blown destructable buildings brick by brick is probably game 2 though.

Kind Regards walker

The clients already know what bullets hit where, no reason to send it one more time. I don't see why this would require more network bandwith?

We are talking about atleast some animation of some kind when the house falls apart, and some kind of rubble when the building have collapsed (well, atleast more than just a building sinking to the ground).

To the one stating that the house should take alot more damage to bring down.... Well, 3 sabot rounds should be more than enough to take out most modern houses.

[Higurashi 0]

Does anybody care about AI? I just worry about that because all ArmA vids shows same AI enemy & friendly units - just run, "duck" and shootin'...

Yeah, it would be ok when "80's style mechanized frontal assault" - but MOUT will be available in ArmA right? I know that "Rescue Mr.Banane" vids were played by COOP. And there's no info about AI but the words like "AI has been improved"... man, HOW improved?

OH! PLEASE DON'T SAY "the OFP community will do that part with scripts, so we don't worry about AI"!!

I think the great feature that could change the whole Tactical FPS genre like "suppressive fire" and "supersonic bullet sounds" has been talked a lot in the community, but not declared by BIS...

[WhoCares 0]

@Espectro: A Sabot would do little damage to a house, just some nice small holes. You'd prefer to use some explosive ammunition instead (that's why we already have HEAT and Sabot rounds in original OFP)

Regarding the general discussion about dynamic destruction, just think about some 'nice' level bombing - even Game2 will not be able to recreate Dresden-like results. Even a single A10 dropping 6xMk82 on a village would make your PC die, today and tomorrow...

[walker 0]

Hi all

@ Espectro

This is highly simplified

In normal OFP server needs to be told bullet was fired as do all other clients, what moving objects could be between the bullet and building Server must mediate. All clients need to Ack they see the same thing (packets lost must be resent). Ever see those destroyed Reanimating trees and bulidings in OFP multiplayer? The damaged building cannot be moved through.

In ArmA bullet hits building. Building reaches destruction level. Server tells clients. Building destruction animation is run on all. Clients Ack building destroyed and building replaced with rubble. Additionaly the building can be moved through.

Now the big difference.

True destuctable buildings

Every chunk removed/moved needs an ack from each client to confirm all clients see the same thing.

The difference 1 chunk in ArmA or OFP the hole building goes through a change; in an engine with true MP capable destructable buildings how many chunks?

Consider how much damage from an explosion? How many chunks?

How big are your game engine atoms? That is what defines how many chunks per building. And each client has to see the same thing and confirm it has the same world view. Lets be conservative and say 10s of chunks atoms of legobricks about 1 metre square (roughed up for aesthetics).

You can do it all client side. But what hapens when the packet for one bullet that knocked out the chunk is not recieved by a particular clent. Hey no fair player X or the AI is cheating I was behind a wall!

Any game egine can do true looking destrucable buildings and terrain in single player. Doing it in MP is whole different kettle of fish.

Kind Regards Walker

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]And real dynamic destruction (brick for brick dynamically) is never going to work properly in multiplayer (imagine just 10 players and hundrets of different houses) when you have to sync all client side calculations. The whole dynamic destruction has to be calculated on the server and passed on to the clients. And now we're talking far into the future ...

Depends I guess. Playing some mindgames I could think of some coding system for serverside damage transmission. Means, not every single fragment´s pos or state has to be transferred from server to client, but the server sums up changes to an entity object and sends this summed up "code" to clients. An interpreter embedded in clients and server could handle the traffic that would be significant smaller than transmitting every single change on an object.

Quote[/b] ]@ Bals:

Predefined destruction is already possible in ArmA, bridges are one of the examples. I belive that now you can assign .rtm animations to objects.

I know, but for AI those objects are still solid. That´s why I asked for the dynamic object replacement/removal from map to exchange the object itself, not just it´s look

Quote[/b] ]The OFP engine's network code already deals with hundreds of bullets being fired. Add in the destruction on a per bullet bases with destructable scenenery and you have at least doubled the info the server has to pass.

Don´t understand your reasoning as Arma will already have bullet penetration for several materials, so it´s already embedded

[walker 0]

Hi all

@ Balschoiw the dammage has to be sychroinised accross the network all clients and server have to agree the the world view.

Kind Regards Walker

[Dudester 0]

Another month another screen shot and here was me thinking we might just of got the Demo this month... since the game is complete and released for some next month. Im sure then we will have our fair share of screen shots. Whats the deal over the demo and not releasing it. I have seen so many screen shots now, i feel i have had a walk through the entire game playing it frame by frame. Ok thats abit of an eggsageration but how many more screen shots am i of to see before its not. Do everyone a Favour and make them happy just release the demo.

[Sniperwolf572 758]

Another month another screen shot and here was me thinking we might just of got the Demo this month... since the game is complete and released for some next month. Im sure then we will have our fair share of screen shots. Whats the deal over the demo and not releasing it. I have seen so many screen shots now, i feel i have had a walk through the entire game playing it frame by frame. Ok thats abit of an eggsageration but how many more screen shots am i of to see before its not. Do everyone a Favour and make them happy just release the demo.

[sarcasm]Yeah, you just press the "Make demo" button in the editor, and viola, insta-community-satisfier.[/sarcasm]

[Dudester 0]

Another month another screen shot and here was me thinking we might just of got the Demo this month... since the game is complete and released for some next month. Im sure then we will have our fair share of screen shots. Whats the deal over the demo and not releasing it. I have seen so many screen shots now, i feel i have had a walk through the entire game playing it frame by frame. Ok thats abit of an eggsageration but how many more screen shots am i of to see before its not. Do everyone a Favour and make them happy just release the demo.

[sarcasm]Yeah, you just press the "Make demo" button in the editor, and viola, insta-community-satisfier.[/sarcasm]

Really, even easier then i thought then. Do you want me to list all the games that have had a demo a month before release. Tell you what go look on IGN. or go buy a Pc mag. Now wheres the magic in that.

[Placebo 29]

It has already been posted in a number of places that the demo will be worked on after the German/Czech/Russian/Slovakian/Polish versions have gone gold.