Information from Digitex!

[colkurtz 0]

Ragdoll effects are cool but in the case of ARMA/ARMAII a waste of decent development time IMO.

I'd like to see the development targetted towards increasing the scope and depth  of infantry based warfare in the game introducing fireteam/ platoon structures, adding mortars and artillery into the combat.

The sound-engine needs an overhaul, let's have more realistic weapon and vehicle sound effects.

What i don't want is exactly the same choices we've had in arma and ofp in that arma2 must bring in something new to the table.

[The_Captain 0]

MP. Far Cry which is almost 3 years old had quite realistic Ragdoll that was synchronized very well in MP.

Far Cry/CryEngine 1's ragdoll effects were calculated clientside (I worked on an mp shooter licensing the far cry engine), as are most if not all MP games with ragdoll. Most games drop carried weapons at the spot of death and calculate ragdoll effects on the client. Bodies can end up in different positions on different clients, but as the weapons to pick up are all dropped in the same spot (which is synchronized), there is no need to interact with the bodies, and thus, clientside ragdolls are ok. Arma needs bodies to end up in exactly the same spots on server and client, because all clients need to interact with the bodies themselves. This makes clientside ragdolls undesirable, and serverside/synchronized fully physicallized ragdolls impractical (as the server has to send the bone position of the ragdoll, not just an animation state flag, to all clients).

One workaround could be a hybrid of animation/ragdoll, like Killzone 2, where the bodies play an animation but are physicallized during the animation (clientside) to behave slightly differently, even though they end up in the same end location (thus not causing transfer problems). This would need to be a local client effect, and only displayed on nearby characters to not have a noticable performance hit (rather like how animations for far off infantry are simplified).

[sv5000 127]

A) - reloading on the move = Oh yeah

B) - in regards to ragdoll, I would rather have a ( any ) proper armour pentration model...

[froggyluv 2130]

I think the craving for ragdoll might go down if we had more intense 'blown away' animations. The first time i got a shotgun in Doom and shot one of those demon critters at close range i thought "nice". Give me some hardcore gun damage (not necessarily death-porn) and i'd be happy.

[Jarvis 0]

Not impressed.

[stakex 0]

I think the craving for ragdoll might go down if we had more intense 'blown away' animations.

Thats my issue with the current system... In Flashpoint if you put a satchel under someone and set it off, they would go flying hundreds of feet into the air. And it would look really stupid becuase as they were flying away, they would play a death animation and then go totally stiff once that was done. Im not really sure how ArmA's death animations for such a situation is handled, but with the way the system is it can't be too good. Just like when you hit someone with a vehicle.... it looks absolutly terrible. There needs to be a better way to handle how the death animations are done.

Im not the biggest fan for Ragdoll... I think it would be cool, and add to the game. But if its not there oh well. There are so many other issues with the engine this is kinda minor. But when it comes to people syaing "Its not possible/practicle" thats a load of BS. There are workarounds and Im sure if time was spent on it, there could well be a ragdoll system added to ArmA2 that would work. Thats how game technology advances... not by saying "its not possible" but instead finding a way to make it possible.

[smellyjelly 0]

In my opinion ragdoll isn't really needed, although Arma could benefit from it.

I think the most realistic approach is adding more death animations when shot, and then using ragdoll for explosions, water, falling, or being it by a vehicle.

[MATRA 0]

Things are looking a lot better, the RPG elements and Dynamic Campaign are giving me high hopes.

For now the visual look like ArmA, but so did ArmA at the first alphas, when it look allot like Ofp Elite.

The only thing Im concern is: the sound. ArmA sound is amator and cheep.

[The_Captain 0]

I think the craving for ragdoll might go down if we had more intense 'blown away' animations.

People flying high into the air when hit by powerful weapons has bugged me since OFP, and I'm annoyed that we still see it in ArmA, and could possibly see it in ArmA2. BIS could simply delete/splash/hide bodies when they are hit with weapons that give them a high impulse (which usually have a big smoke cloud anyway), to prevent the "people flying high into air" effect. I've tried the same with a damaged eventhandler, velocity check and a 'blood chunks' particle effect and it satisfies me. (Though it's a bit odd to run over people and see them splash, but I digress...)

When it comes to bodies being destroyed (and rendered unsuitable for interaction or hidden in some way), any client side effects including ragdoll are fair game as far as I'm concerned.

[TrunkzJr 0]

Well at this current time, i'm not too impressed after seeing those vidoes, it just looks soooo much like ArmA1. I know, it's still VERY early but I dunno, just makes me worried.

[rundll.exe 12]

Omg, the rear view mirror in that car works!

dont get your hopes up. We have the same in arma already (on the hummvees i think) its just a trick with a transparant texture or something.

[SaBrE_UK 0]

Omg, the rear view mirror in that car works!

dont get your hopes up. We have the same in arma already (on the hummvees i think) its just a trick with a transparant texture or something.

Are you sure?

[paragraphic l 2]

It does look like working rear view mirrors to me, you see the bushes appear at the moment they should appear in the rear view mirror after passing them. But it's to small to really be able to see it

[DBO_ 0]

looks more like an ambient setobjecttexture , no real detail just some looky likey .

but along way to go who knows what will be there in the end.

[paragraphic l 2]

I hope this feature will be in anyway because it would give so much more situational awareness inside vehicles without going into 3D person mode, could have saved my life a couple of times allready!

[smellyjelly 0]

I agree, I hate how we can't look behind us when in a vehicle.

[Zander 0]

arma physics and sounds are like 4 years old

needs ragdoll and a better sound engine.

[Dynamax 0]

enough about the ragdoll, it has been discussed to death many times. it will not work will with ArmA much less with ArmA II.

both these games are far too big for ragdoll to be implimented properly and with good performance.

all we need is more death animations, and a means in which the game can pick the best animation to match the last action of the soldier (no more crouched dude standing up flailing his arms around and spinning befor dropping like some overly dramatic bad actor).

as for what they should do about players who are hit by explosions and large caliber projectiles, simple.. GIB.

not only would it look better than the "flying manikin" we have now. it would also mean alot less polygons on screen, and better performance. what to do about the gear from a gibbed player? remove it, if the player was ripped to bits, then you can be sure most of his gear went with him.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Quote[/b] ]both these games are far too big for ragdoll to be implimented properly and with good performance.

Anything is possible. It's just up to BIS to make it look and play good. They do hold the key to the engine.

[rundll.exe 12]

About the rear view mirror: I'm sure the engine isnt able to render 2 different viewpoints at the same time. And this would be quite a change for a minor (but interesting) feature.

Check the ArmA hummers, they did some trick with a moving texture. To me it looks like the same effect in the red car.

[jaffo 0]

Here's the second link:

<span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'>ArmA II Preview</span>

SNIP...

So basically just more eye candy slapped on the clunk-fest that is ArmA? Think I'll stick with Flashpoint and wait to see whether Codemasters can produce a worthy successor.

[stakex 0]

Quote[/b] ]both these games are far too big for ragdoll to be implimented properly and with good performance.

Anything is possible. It's just up to BIS to make it look and play good. They do hold the key to the engine.

Yup... nothing is "impossible".

Personally, I wish that BIS would have left the Island size and view distance smaller. If they had done that, things like ragdoll and dynamic destruction would likely be alot more feasable do to a lot less objects being drawn, and thus more free PC resource. And sure, its great to have massive islands, and be able to see for miles.... but come on, how many missions really require that view distance, or the full island? If ArmA2's islands were smaller then ArmA's and a bit bigger then say, Nagova... ArmA2's gameplay would be better.

Especially since the game is being developed with the 360 in mind... becuase Id bet anything features have been cut becuase BIS dosn't want to make two games, they want to make one they can easily port... remember how long it took them to port OFP? Im sure they don't want to go thru that again... so you better believe ArmA2 is being tailored to the 360 more so then the computer.

[Heatseeker 0]

arma physics and sounds are like 4 years old

needs ragdoll and a better sound engine.

The default sounds themselves could be better but i dont see any problem with the sound engine itself, i find it quite impressive and capable, definetly suitable.

I also dont see whats the point with ragdolls or what positive impact these would have on gameplay.

Quote[/b] ]Personally, I wish that BIS would have left the Island size and view distance smaller. If they had done that, things like ragdoll and dynamic destruction would likely be alot more feasable do to a lot less objects being drawn, and thus more free PC resource.

Thats the worst thing they could do, i'd rather fly over (and explore) a massive landscape, snipe or gun a MBT over 1KM distance than sit in a corner drooling over some stupid ragdoll.

With so much room for improving gameplay and simulation it would be very dumb if they prioritised and wasted CPU on uselss ragdoll candy.

[froggyluv 2130]

Well I guess this is a case of the grass is always greener...

I noticed some people complaining on the Crysis forum about the need for death animations as some were finding the ragdoll effect too over-the-top  

I guess perfection lies somewhere in between

[NoRailgunner 0]

All that ppl complaining about huge island and no ragdoll animation - change your point of view and take some tactic lessons. OFP/ArmA isn't corridor gameplay with tunnel vision.

If you only want shoot'n'scoot, run'n'gun and similar go getsome of countless unreal shooter elsewhere.