Character Ragdoll and more

[Tomek666PL 0]

Ragdoll is a fantastic thing. Try America`s Army. U know where the shot was coming from if u look at the body. Very helpful.

[-Grenadier- 0]

I'm not a big fan of ragdolls. The plus side is that bodies don't clip through walls or float in the air off of ledges. The bad side is that it eats up resources and looks very fake. I say keep the death animations until ragdoll matures.

[max power 21]

Actually, some ragdolls look eerily real. Seeing people die or fall inconscious in videos looks fairly close to what you see on ragdoll.

[Balschoiw 0]

Ragdoll as it is today is clinical and unrealistic.

People just don´t drop like marionettes when they are shot dead.

If you want to have it accurately simulated you need to calculate limb damage and give the unit a certain time to die that is afflicted by the accurate damage done to body. I don´t know of any Ragdoll system that would calculate such in an appropriate and accurate manner while being resource saving. As the number of units on a map will be increased in ArAs the ressources for death ragdoll only imo would be demanding and limiting other aspects of the game.

Ragdoll is eyecandy. I prefer a more speedy ArAs to eyecandy.

Seing ragdoll ingame makes about 0.2 percent of the overall impression of a game for me. I don´t spend time watching people die. They get shot, they die. End of story. I simply don´t care if they wind on the ground, screaming and slowly ragdoll to death. That´s not what I´m waiting for when I think of ArAs. If there should be Ragdoll in upcoming BIS games, ok, but I don´t think Ragdoll adds to playability or the general quality of a game.

It just makes it more likely to be put on the Index in some countries, including germany where I live.

It´s not that ragdoll is evil, but I can live without it anytime.

[Spy17 1]

Without ragdoll there are the following problems:

-Dead soldiers overlapping each other

-Clipping problems with obstacles (especially CQB)

-Dead soldiers hovering over the ground (stairways, uneven ground)

-unappropriated death animation "in flight" (for example after explosion or collision)

Only in these specific situations ragdoll can be a real "immersion saver". It would save computer power when only used in these situations.

For me ragdoll is not so much about the death sequences. I also think  death animations can be done nicely by animations.

[Batukhan 0]

Ragdoll as it is today is clinical and unrealistic.

People just don´t drop like marionettes when they are shot dead.

If you want to have it accurately simulated you need to calculate limb damage and give the unit a certain time to die that is afflicted by the accurate damage done to body. I don´t know of any Ragdoll system that would calculate such in an appropriate and accurate manner while being resource saving. As the number of units on a map will be increased in ArAs the ressources for death ragdoll only imo would be demanding and limiting other aspects of the game.

Ragdoll is eyecandy. I prefer a more speedy ArAs to eyecandy.

Seing ragdoll ingame makes about 0.2 percent of the overall impression of a game for me. I don´t spend time watching people die. They get shot, they die. End of story. I simply don´t care if they wind on the ground, screaming and slowly ragdoll to death. That´s not what I´m waiting for when I think of ArAs. If there should be Ragdoll in upcoming BIS games, ok, but I don´t think Ragdoll adds to playability or the general quality of a game.

It just makes it more likely to be put on the Index in some countries, including germany where I live.

It´s not that ragdoll is evil, but I can live without it anytime.

Are you serious? Ragdoll is NOT realistic and every 2nd soldier dying THE EXACT SAME WAY is? It's like they've practiced it in boot camp.

Also, eye-candy is very important. If you say that you don't care how the people die, you might as well just remove the enemy object from the game once their health reaches zero. Like Space Invaders!

edit: One more thing. I think that you're only going to see 2, maybe 3 ragdolls at a time - it shouldn't be such A DRAMATIC HIT ON PERFORMANCE. Once they've fallen down, they don't need to be calculated anymore. And i have total confidence in BIS in making the game scalable enough, so that even carpet-bombing a platoon won't be a problem to the computers. They'll just switch to a lower level of ragdoll detail, once the numbers get too high.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Are you serious? Ragdoll is NOT realistic and every 2nd soldier dying THE EXACT SAME WAY is?

1st of all there are a lot more death animations in OFP than 2.

And yes, Ragdoll is not realistic as it is presented today. It´s just like pressing the power-off button. That is not what I call realistic. In fact it sometimes looks incredibly stupid and anything but real.

I don´t know if Ragdoll is the solution but I prefer well done animations to stupid looking ragdoll effects.

Quote[/b] ]Also, eye-candy is very important.

For me gameplay is important. Eye candy is nice but I prefer to play in vast open areas with no boundaries at all. Eye candy is THE reason for corridor shooters being corridor shooters.

Less eye-candy made OFP that big and huge as it is. I guess noone would accept that ArAs is turned into a corridor shooter just because system ressources have to be used for eye-candy.

No sir, thank you.

Quote[/b] ]If you say that you don't care how the people die, you might as well just remove the enemy object from the game once their health reaches zero. Like Space Invaders!

1+1 = 3

Quote[/b] ]I think that you're only going to see 2, maybe 3 ragdolls at a time - it shouldn't be such A DRAMATIC HIT ON PERFORMANCE.

Situations where more than 2 or 3 units are engaged simultaniously are in fact very common with current OFP gaming. Attack tropps disembarking from a truck, concentrate squad fire on an enemy camp, let a machinegun rip through an infantry formation, throw a nade....These situations are in fact the main part of OFP. Not vice versa.

Especially when playing online the realtime data of ragdoll calcs have to be sent from server to client to display the same kind of ragdoll on the clients. We know that bandwidth is a limited factor for a lot of OFP online gamers. To increase the traffic for eye-candy and waste ressources on something that doesn´t have a direct influence on the gaming is not appreciated.

Quote[/b] ]They'll just switch to a lower level of ragdoll detail, once the numbers get too high.

How should that work if Ragdoll is calculated in real time ?

What´s the result ? Something that looks worse than death animations ? No thank you.

[Cpt Viper 0]

You know, if the Rag Doll physics are implemented well, I think it should look quite good and realistic.

But, you've also got Rag Doll physics where bodies go flying in the air after you shot them .. No, bad thing.

With a Shotgun .. Perhaps. But with a pistol ? I didn't think so.

And also like mentioned before, there is the lag issue.

If you really want to see what Rag Doll physics are, check this link:

http://www.planetdan.net/pics/misc/georgerag.swf

(You'll need Flash)

- Viper

[Batukhan 0]

Quote[/b] ]To increase the traffic for eye-candy and waste ressources on something that doesn´t have a direct influence on the gaming is not appreciated.

Yeah, sorry, i did forgot to mention the multiplayer. It would be better to use animations there.

But for the rest of your arguments, we'll just wait until ArAs is out, with it's ragdoll physics, and i'm sure there are modders who can turn them into animations just for you

Ok that was a bit harsh ...

[Sniperwolf572 758]

...But, you've also got Rag Doll physics where bodies go flying in the air after you shot them .. No, bad thing.

With a Shotgun .. Perhaps....

No, thats an urban myth inspired by modern movies and games with overkill shotguns.

[ade_mcc 0]

I actually am more than happy with the current death animations. If anything, having groups depending on standing/prone/running etc with say 5 death animations in each category and having a randomness thrown in should be much more resource (and mp) friendly on the system than one dodgy implimented rag-doll effect (I consider all attemts so far at rag-doll to be dodgy btw).

As someone wiser said before, I shoot them, they drop, I move onto the next one.

[lendrom 0]

The reason i'd like to see ragdoll is that after some time of playing OFP you get used to how dead bodies look like that you can very quickly tell which soldiers are threat for you and which are not. Think about it? From how long distances you can in one moment tell if an enemy is dead? The answer is: from too far

Ragdoll gives more randomness and in other games that use it I was sometimes very surprised and confused by the way dead soldiers layed. So my point is not exactly to have ragdoll anims of death but much more animations of dead bodies.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]But for the rest of your arguments, we'll just wait until ArAs is out, with it's ragdoll physics

I´m afraid you will not see ragdoll in ArAs. None of the screenshots or ingame movies show ragdoll at any point. Neither do the press releases mention it. So how does it come that you think it´s in ?

[max power 21]

Balschoiw,

Your arguments, for the most part, are logical but they are a little over-stated. Also, I don't think it's necessary to be rude. These people who disagree with you are doing exactly what you are, overstating their arguments.

I would like you to qualify your statement that ragdolls are clinical and unrealistic. You say this dispite the fact that you say that you've never actually really studied as to whether or not it's realistic.

I'm telling you, that in the case that someone loses conciousness, ragdolls can be very convincing. If a human being is shot in the head or stunned, they go limp. This is simply how it is. By the same token, death animations aren't realistic because people don't just die instantaneously from shots to the body or extremities. You could amputate someone's leg, and the result would be death by bloodloss some time later. You could shoot someone in the legs all day long, as they blink in and out of conciousness, and the result would be the same. The argument that death animations are MORE realistic is asinine.

The only real argument outside of personal preference is what kind of performance trade-off would be likely. I don't think you or I could adequately answer this question.

So, it boils down to what most suits your preconceived idea of how things should look. This is purely a preference for things that co-habitate well with your world view. I don't believe that your opinion is greater than anyone elses in this regard.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Balschoiw,

Your arguments, for the most part, are logical but they are a little over-stated. Also, I don't think it's necessary to be rude. These people who disagree with you are doing exactly what you are, overstating their arguments.

I would like you to qualify your statement that ragdolls are clinical and unrealistic. You say this dispite the fact that you say that you've never actually really studied as to whether or not it's realistic.

I'm telling you, that in the case that someone loses conciousness, ragdolls can be very convincing. If a human being is shot in the head or stunned, they go limp. This is simply how it is. By the same token, death animations aren't realistic because people don't just die instantaneously from shots to the body or extremities. You could amputate someone's leg, and the result would be death by bloodloss some time later. You could shoot someone in the legs all day long, as they blink in and out of conciousness, and the result would be the same. The argument that death animations are MORE realistic is asinine.

The only real argument outside of personal preference is what kind of performance trade-off would be likely. I don't think you or I could adequately answer this question.

So, it boils down to what most suits your preconceived idea of how things should look. This is purely a preference for things that co-habitate well with your world view. I don't believe that your opinion is greater than anyone elses in this regard.

Huh ? What have you been drinking ?

Where have I been rude ?

I´m just posting my opinion and undermine that with a logical approach to the issue. Those headshots you talk about are really rare IRL. I have had the chance to study some of those situations in real life.

People who lose a limb don´t fall unconscious when under adrenaline. In fact they tend to walk on upright with missing arms, or even carry their own limbs around for a while.

It´s not like they all faint immedeately because they got hit in one of their bodyparts. That is unrealistic.

Quote[/b] ]So, it boils down to what most suits your preconceived idea of how things should look.

In your opinion maybe.

I deliberately tried to picture what is wrong with currently used ragdoll systems and you better pack your personal rantings back to your backpack as I have not been offensive to anyone here. If you want to draw that picture you´ll be having a hard time.

Quote[/b] ] I don't believe that your opinion is greater than anyone elses in this regard.

Oh my god...

Have I said so ?

You´re really funny, not.

If you got nothing else to contribute than this, why do you contribute at all ?

This is a forum thread about ArAs/general/Ragdoll. If I have to ask for your permission to post in here, give me a sign. If not, just back off.

[max power 21]

That 1 + 1 = 3 crack was pretty rude, and most of this reply is very rude. I can't wait for your next installment.

Quote[/b] ]

I´m just posting my opinion and undermine that with a logical approach to the issue. Those headshots you talk about are really rare IRL. I have had the chance to study some of those situations in real life.

Quote[/b] ]

In Iraq, 48 percent of wounded GIs were hit in the legs and 28 percent in the arms, while spine injuries afflicted 7 percent, abdomen and pelvis wounds 9.5 percent, and face and eye injuries 9 percent, she said. These wounds, although more numerous than penetrating head wounds, usually were not fatal.

Head wounds, in contrast, were suffered by 21 percent of those injured in battle but resulted in 31 percent of combat deaths.

The other main cause of combat death was injury to the torso from bullets or shrapnel that penetrated between the ceramic plates or other gaps in the body armor. About 25 percent of GIs who died in combat suffered torso wounds so extreme they could not be saved, Lawrence said. She presented her data at a recent conference of the American College of Emergency Physicians

http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/wood102803.html.

Quote[/b] ]

To identify cases of TBI, doctors at Walter Reed screened every arriving servicemember wounded in an explosion, along with those hurt in Iraq or Afghanistan in a vehicle accident or fall, or by a gunshot wound to the face, neck or head. They found TBI in about 60% of the cases. The largest group was 21-year-olds.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-03-03-brain-trauma-lede_x.htm

You might imagine that among those who suffered a traumatic brain injury, a high percentage of them were rendered unconcious by the wounding mechanism, especially in the case of shockwaves from explosions.

Quote[/b] ]

An explosion can cause the brain to move violently inside the skull. The shock wave from the blast can also damage brain tissue, Lux says. "The good news is that those people would have been dead" in earlier wars, says Deborah Warden, national director of the Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center. "But now they're alive. And we need to help them."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-03-03-brain-trauma-lede_x.htm

Quote[/b] ]

In your opinion maybe.

I deliberately tried to picture what is wrong with currently used ragdoll systems and you better pack your personal rantings back to your backpack as I have not been offensive to anyone here. If you want to draw that picture you´ll be having a hard time.

Thought experiments were okay for Einstien, but I can imagine a lot of things that have no connection to reality. The only way to learn about these things is to study them.

Oh yeah, and stop being abusive, please.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]That 1 + 1 = 3 crack was pretty rude, and most of this reply is very rude. I can't wait for your next installment.

Hold your breath...

Quote[/b] ]Thought experiments were okay for Einstien, but I can imagine a lot of things that have no connection to reality. The only way to learn about these things is to study them.

Yes, do so please. You may find out that there are other parties than the US that don´t wear full scale body-armor...

Anyway, I don´t care what you´re trying to make up here. The relevance to the ragdoll issue is about 0.

If you don´t like my opinion just don´t read it and stop trying to put things on me.

Oh and btw, I am a bit confused now. A few pages back you said:

Quote[/b] ]And I don't really want to turn this into a medical/ballistic thread (I've had those on other forums), but getting hit in the legs with a 7.62 soviet isn't that bad. An uncomplicated leg wound from an ak-47 would be similar in severity to a similar wound by a 9mm parabellum round. It's the 5.56 wounds that are nasty, but nothing that would physiologically take you right out. Most wounded behaviour is psychological. If a 7.62 round makes an 8mm hole in your tissues, and misses your CNS, the result is a less then 1% destruction of total body mass. The reaction to such a wound is usually a latent psychological script (such as, 'I fall down now' or a decision on the wounded soldier's part (in uncomplicated cases).

but now you go like

Quote[/b] ] You could shoot someone in the legs all day long, as they blink in and out of conciousness, and the result would be the same.

Better get your own facts straight before hampering on someone else.

[Batukhan 0]

Ok, lets just say that "we're all correct in some way" and stop arguing?

BTW, Balschoiw, have you seen the ragdolls in Half Life 2? They're a great improvement comparing the earlier ragdolls.

[Spoock 3]

If I must waiting for ArmA very long time, so I want ragdoll and other physical effects and walking in vehicles and planes or helicopters

[Metal Heart 0]

Then it would only take even longer than the very long time. What would you come up by then? Map the size of earth and models of every weapon, vehicle and soldier that ever existed? No problem, it will just take a little longer again.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

spoock, maybe you should take up a hobby like model building or stamp collecting or whatever people do, it will pass the time and more importantly keep you off the forums longer...  

[max power 21]

Oh and btw, I am a bit confused now. A few pages back you said:

Quote[/b] ]And I don't really want to turn this into a medical/ballistic thread (I've had those on other forums), but getting hit in the legs with a 7.62 soviet isn't that bad. An uncomplicated leg wound from an ak-47 would be similar in severity to a similar wound by a 9mm parabellum round. It's the 5.56 wounds that are nasty, but nothing that would physiologically take you right out. Most wounded behaviour is psychological. If a 7.62 round makes an 8mm hole in your tissues, and misses your CNS, the result is a less then 1% destruction of total body mass. The reaction to such a wound is usually a latent psychological script (such as, 'I fall down now' or a decision on the wounded soldier's part (in uncomplicated cases).

but now you go like

Quote[/b] ] You could shoot someone in the legs all day long, as they blink in and out of conciousness, and the result would be the same.

Better get your own facts straight before hampering on someone else.

How are those things mutually exclusive?

In both I say that uncomplicated leg wounds are not severe.

In neither do I say that *a* leg wound would result in an immediate loss of consciousness.

Moreover, I do not say that ragdolls should be present 100% for all deaths. If you'd care to read back again, I believe I made a post about animation blending. You might want to read that.

I agree you are confused, but I don't think that that is my fault.

[Balschoiw 0]

Whatever plaintiff1.

I already wasted enough time on something that is not worth it.

Just live with it that there are different opinions on a subject.

I guess I made my point clear; at least some seem to understand and agree. If you are not amongst them I don´t care.

This is not for you plaintiff1, just skip it:

A Ragdoll system that comes anywhere close to reality needs to have much more than current ragdoll systems. If the actual reaction of a body to various ammo should be accurately simulated the engine needs to determine which projectile hits the body at which speed and the body parts affected would need some kind of hit zones to make the body react to the hit in an appropriate way. For example bullet velocity and angle to the body would cause a 1:1 reaction on the body itself, depending where the shot goes. Partially disabled limbs or shock effects on the body depending on which body part is hit need to be in. The neural dammage done to the body needs to be simulated aswell to make it look real and have a proper ragdoll behaviour after the hit. Else the ragdoll effects will look unrealistic and after a short while I can imagine people posting about the surreality of ragdoll effects in this forums. It´s not that ragdoll effects are a real progress today. They are a substitute in most cases, but not the ultimate solution. And yes, I still think that the amount of data traffic that has to be created to transfer the realtime calcs from server to clients indeed will not be smaller than the current data traffic that is cause by death animations. A lot more data has to be transported and handled by CPU and the multiplayer gaming will be stressed by something that is still what it is: Eyecandy.

[benreeper 0]

I see Half-Life2 everday and so far every game implementation of Ragdoll is not convincing and is just a game gimmick. I would rather BIS better OFP than spend time trying to INVENT something else.

If anyone remembers Battlezone. Well we hoped BZ2 would be BZ but better but they tried to make it into a game that the "eye candy" crowd would like and it turned into a disaster.

--Ben

[Placebo 29]

Balschoiw & plaintiff1 quit it please or you'll both be PR'd.