Arma Particle FX Example

[sniper pilot 36]

Oh yeah, the smoke and particles... i dont care about it if it drops my frame rate to single digits .

Yeah you would...who couldnt? lol man i played OFP on 10fps and i felt like i was using an xbox controller trying to snipe.

[Heatseeker 0]

Oh yeah, the smoke and particles... i dont care about it if it drops my frame rate to single digits .

Yeah you would...who couldnt? lol man i played OFP on 10fps and i felt like i was using an xbox controller trying to snipe.

Hmm, i meant i dont really care much about the smoke/particle efects, Arma is bigger and likely to be demanding already, i dont want unplayable frame rates just because 5 tanks rolled thru a minefield .

BIS might make the graphics efects scalable i guess .

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Game2 might be in need of DX10, since it's a next generation game. ArmA will do fine without it

[Sarge6754 0]

Oops, I forgot to update the thread with the "paste links into browser bar" thing. But anyway, Arma looks INSANELY GOOD, especially in the new trailer. I still think it could use some more detailed smoke and fire though. Remember, scalable graphics worked for OFP and they'll still work for Arma. Btw, screw those Gamestar.de pricks...

Long live BIS

[Scrub 0]

Between some comments, and ShinRaidens (as usual) cut through the Gordian knot, I think IMHO Placebo's "ArmA will have what it will have" and a lock was correct

What purpose for progress does this thread have? or change will it make? Unless it's just another topic to idly discuss, I'm lost to it.

^That was a real question, BTW, I'd like to understand. ^

[aus_twisted 0]

Pretty pointless to make ArmA for DX10 when it wont be released till next year with Vista. I'd say BIS will code Game 2 for DX10 as thats still another few years away yet.

[Dwarden 1125]

ArmA needs dx10 features, NOW

Why?

To reitterate, why? I can think of some API reasons why Dx10 would clean up some hassles, but I suspect that's not why you put it in. You know why people play nethack? It's because of the uber-1337 gfx over a 80x25 tty console. Oh wait, maybe it has something to do with the depth of the content and the gameplay.

If you change the textures and the models for the cl_particles in OFP right now and spend enough time scripting some drop commands you can make your own insanely cool particle effects. OFP right now supports 4096px textures if you have an nvidia card, ATI hasn't seen fit to bother adding in support for textures above 2048px. So that's 1.22cm per pixel for ground textures. And so on and so on. If it's eye candy you want, you can have it right now in OFP.

Sure it will lag your brains out. But DxN+1 does not make things go faster. If there's any speed change, each successive generation will go slower due to the function call wrapping and virtualization that will come in Vista.

What Dx9 has for coolness has nothing to do with pretty pictures at all. It is strictly about how to make custom commands to the video card. The idea is rather than make an OFP script that loops to make a bazillion drop[] commands with each being a seperate arbitrary function call to the GPU using a full instance of a generic mesh and texture, instead that particle effect can be rewritten to be spawned inside the GPU, rather than sent to the GPU.

Dx10 is a totally different can of worms. Again it has nothing to do with pretty pictures, the improvements have to do with how the system talks to the hardware and your applications.

i don't get point about lame 2048x2048 textures

please just get some photorealistic texture addons for e.g. Oblivion (or any moddable game) and they will look FINE compared to 4096x4096 ...

and difference between 1k vs 2k texture can be minimalized by qualite job done by texturer (if bad job on that no wonder you see difference

claiming needs to use 4096x4096 textures is just another e-penis stuff ,

You need for that MINIMALLY 512MB VRAM card (sure 256MB runs too but You run out of free VRAM in zero time)

and oops what if You need VRAM for something else than just textures

plus ATI cards from X1300/1400/1600/1800/1900 series support 4096x4096 textures too ...

BTW. there is no DX10 card on market yet and doubt there will be any till this fall or next year ...

plus DX10 is VISTA only feature

so not only You need wait till 2007 for your nextgen game

You must buy new hiend videocard (expensive), new OS (expensive and buggy until SP2 or Sp3) plus upgrade rest of system (expensive again)

and now tell me how does this apply to ArmAs scheduled Q2-Q3 2006?

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

I actually think the smoke in OFP was better than the oil-smoke in that trailer

I do like the tank-on-fire effect, thoug

[funnyguy1 0]

There`s a nice smoke on the usarmy (Iaq) video from vbs...(an old video of usarmy module)...

It`s going quite high and dissapearing in the realistic way.

[24Gamer 0]

btw i wasnt expecting ArmA to display graphics anywhere near what is shown in crysis, but they can do better than what was in that trailer :P

[aus_twisted 0]

I actually think the smoke in OFP was better than the oil-smoke in that trailer

I do like the tank-on-fire effect, thoug

Video compression.

[24Gamer 0]

I actually think the smoke in OFP was better than the oil-smoke in that trailer

I do like the tank-on-fire effect, thoug

Video compression.

its not all down to compression, that effect is quite poor, but it is still WIP, cant be too critical of it until we see the final version.