funnyguy1 0 Posted February 27, 2008 New Hope  I'd say Empire Strikes Back! Thx for the translation k@voven. Quote[/b] ] AI is reacting to each situation on their own. Sounds good, but lead to some funny situations in the first versions of the prequel, when your own men cleared a whole city without your support or needed patrols didn't make it to their designation. But BI worked hard on this part, promises Marek. I want an early version of the AI then. No, seriously, I'd like to have such smart AI even if it made the campaign unplayable... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kavoven 4 Posted February 27, 2008 Looks like 'Resistance' for me: The engine should be the same as in ArmA - with all consequences... The bots will walk more precisely, the graphics will be increased, textures better, some rifles, cars and tanks - and what? I bet no real AI combat improvements will be made (no cover, suppressing fire, smoke shields and maneuver elements, artillery support over radio, tanks that try to get the hull down and keep distance.... because of...) so the game will be quite the same as ArmA and from the AI capabilities OPF: Resistance. I believe the money is always in the first line made by regular customers and not with people who "wanna try this new game out" – they can do so without purchase it. For me as an old OPF fan it is not so important how perfect the graphics are (or how big and accurate the landscape masses look) - the real fascinating (or not) game play don't depend only on them. The real thing of OPF was the innovation, and I hope it won’t get lost. Sorry, but before flaming around you should have read the article. It obviously says there'll be taking cover and supressive fire. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr.g-c 6 Posted February 27, 2008 I bet no real AI combat improvements will be made (no cover, suppressing fire, smoke shields and maneuver elements, artillery support over radio, tanks that try to get the hull down and keep distance.... because of...) so the game will be quite the same as ArmA and from the AI capabilities OPF: Resistance. There was already a short video circulating way ago showing an early build with AI improved capabilities, and we did not stop with development at that time. The AI definitely will use cover and provide suppressive fire. We intend the new AI behavior to be one of the major new features this game will bring. (It is also one feature that uses heavily dual core - so that the AI can be much smarter and create more complex plans by having more CPU power available to it). Good to hear, although does that mean that if you have a quad-core the AI will act totally different than when having a dual or even a single-core? That would mean that a campaign and/or mission can be totally different on different systems.... Another thing is that they really could use some smoke-shileds when they are under fire and having over a certain amount of members in their squad. Also when tanks get attacked they could use a smoke-screen and disappear real quickly out of the danger zone (thats what happend in real-life). There are a few AI-mods which already incorporates this, and it adds A LOT of immersion and realism. I think you should really consider this, its done in a very short time but the overall benefit is tremendous. Regards, Christian Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
berghoff 11 Posted February 27, 2008 I bet no real AI combat improvements will be made (no cover, suppressing fire, smoke shields and maneuver elements, artillery support over radio, tanks that try to get the hull down and keep distance.... because of...) so the game will be quite the same as ArmA and from the AI capabilities OPF: Resistance. There was already a short video circulating way ago showing an early build with AI improved capabilities, and we did not stop with development at that time. The AI definitely will use cover and provide suppressive fire. We intend the new AI behavior to be one of the major new features this game will bring. (It is also one feature that uses heavily dual core - so that the AI can be much smarter and create more complex plans by having more CPU power available to it). Good to hear, although does that mean that if you have a quad-core the AI will act totally different than when having a dual or even a single-core? That would mean that a campaign and/or mission can be totally different on different systems.... I guess thats why DualCore is now minimum requirement for ArmA2. The destroyed building on page 5 looks awesome:) missed that the first time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kavoven 4 Posted February 27, 2008 Analysing this picture of the map of Chernogorsk, can we say that there will be a railway station? Wow... I didn't notice that, but when you look at the scans on page 7, you will see some tracks as well. Combined with the marks on the map we can expect a working (and engine supported ^^) train than Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
suma 8 Posted February 27, 2008 Good to hear, although does that mean that if you have a quad-core the AI will act totally different than when having a dual or even a single-core? That would mean that a campaign and/or mission can be totally different on different systems.... The minimum requirements is a dual core system. AI is one of the major reasons for this requirement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Undeceived 392 Posted February 27, 2008 Analysing this picture of the map of Chernogorsk, can we say that there will be a railway station? Wow... I didn't notice that, but when you look at the scans on page 7, you will see some tracks as well. Oh! Â Yes, now I see it. Well, Opteryx showed the "proof" of it in his last post, this vids I had forgotten totally! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kavoven 4 Posted February 27, 2008 Good to hear, although does that mean that if you have a quad-core the AI will act totally different than when having a dual or even a single-core? That would mean that a campaign and/or mission can be totally different on different systems.... The minimum requirements is a dual core system. AI is one of the major reasons for this requirement. Great to hear Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeZz_DK 1 Posted February 27, 2008 Wau!! the new screenshots looks cool and the new features sounds great!! cant wait till its going gold! I will buy a new system when it comes out.. its allready needed now but I think I can handle the pain of waiting, if I can get this baby up an running smooth from day one :-) Any chance for getting a spot in the beta test :P please BI please..!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kernriver 4 Posted February 27, 2008 I bet no real AI combat improvements will be made (no cover, suppressing fire, smoke shields and maneuver elements, artillery support over radio, tanks that try to get the hull down and keep distance.... because of...) so the game will be quite the same as ArmA and from the AI capabilities OPF: Resistance. There was already a short video circulating way ago showing an early build with AI improved capabilities, and we did not stop with development at that time. The AI definitely will use cover and provide suppressive fire. We intend the new AI behavior to be one of the major new features this game will bring. (It is also one feature that uses heavily dual core - so that the AI can be much smarter and create more complex plans by having more CPU power available to it). 1st: AI will provide suppressive fire, but will it be affected by it? May be a stupid question, but rather important IMO. 2nd: About dual-core CPUs benefiting AI behavior, does that mean single-core computers would be struggling running the game? And what about quad-cores? Just curious, for there's a thread about hardware requirements (I have dual-core comp, guess I will upgrade when the time comes) Anyway, thanks for the information, Suma. EDIT: I guess I was taking too much time writing my post EDIT2: However, mr.g-c's and my questions about quad-cores still stand...question about suppressive fire too... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
suma 8 Posted February 27, 2008 Sorry guys, I have some work to do. I cannot spend all my time here answering the questions about my answers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Undeceived 392 Posted February 27, 2008 Sorry guys, I have some work to do. Sounds great  Just kidding, see ya! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kernriver 4 Posted February 27, 2008 I'm satisfied with what I've heard already, go to work young man! Did I mention that I will buy this game as soon as it hits the shelves...I feel like repeating myself Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bella1 0 Posted February 27, 2008 is there anybody who have the vid from the magazine? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr.g-c 6 Posted February 27, 2008 EDIT2: However, mr.g-c's and my questions about quad-cores still stand...question about suppressive fire too... Well the supressive-fire questions is already answered. Its a great feature for very long-lasting fights.. I wonder if at the end all available cores will have 100% utilization, because that could mean quad-core = speed doubled or to use it for much higher range of sight. However i'm very interested how to scale a program over many cores. Quote[/b] ]is there anybody who have the vid from the magazine? Sorry i have bought it as a digital copy. No DVD included Regards, Christian Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kernriver 4 Posted February 27, 2008 wow im very very impressed by what i see,apart from the fact tht on 1 of the pics,the soldiers hand is still sticking through the m203 launcher,hope they will fix this so soldiers will hold rifles with grenade launchers properly,thts sumthing tht really annoys me in arma Almost forgot about this in all this excitement... Yes, Dan, you're right, that's the first thing I've noticed, but I guess (hope) it's just WIP. Although it doesn't bring any real impact on gameplay, i think it should be improved. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kernriver 4 Posted February 27, 2008 EDIT2: However, mr.g-c's and my questions about quad-cores still stand...question about suppressive fire too... Well the supressive-fire questions is already answered. Its a great feature for very long-lasting fights.. I wonder if at the end all available cores will have 100% utilization, because that could mean quad-core = speed doubled or to use it for much higher range of sight. However i'm very interested how to scale a program over many cores. I'm pleased to hear that about suppression, this way AI won't be Terminator-like creatures that just go forward and lurks for enemy to shoot them down, no matter how many bullets flies over their heads (exaggeration, I know)... As for multiple-core CPUs, i really don't know anything about the technology, let alone how to utilize it in a game, I hope BIS pulls it of... EDIT: Sorry for double post Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Colossus 2 Posted February 27, 2008 Sorry guys, I have some work to do. I cannot spend all my time here answering the questions about my answers. Â No problem, it's good that you and the rest of the team participate in these kinds of discussions. You grow respect out of that Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vilas 473 Posted February 27, 2008 i saw screens of Russians in camo and island... wooow, impressing, so no MODs will be needed as game will give all Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaKa 0 Posted February 27, 2008 This may be a stupid question, but here it goes: In ArmA sometimes the AI see and fire with an AK (or plain M16) from huge distances very accurately, (which made me sometimes mad) through bushes (under this I meant that they saw you through them) when lets say I snipe through them, or when I am using it to hide from the enemy after I get detected. In ArmA 2 will this be corrected (I know that the AI is improved, but this thing has been making me mad)? I mean that will I see in it (like in OPFlash) that when I am using a bush to hide, enemy troops go past me and try to look for me(until I get detected of course)? Please forgive my english knowledge, I am still a learner, and don't misunderstand this noob who wrote this , I am just curious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paragraphic l 2 Posted February 27, 2008 New thing to discuss What are the icons on the sides of this image? On the Left you see some type of hearthbeat and on the right a hand in the middle of that hearthline, what is that supposed too mean? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Undeceived 392 Posted February 27, 2008 will this be corrected Good question, but at the moment there is too less information avaiable about the AI to confirm this. But it is just one of many bugs from ArmA... But yes, I also hope that this will be gone in ArmA2! There is a mod for ArmA called "Vegetation Fix" which solves the problem of the AI being able to see through bushes. (btw: But of course, if you keep shooting from behind a bush, the enemy will shoot back into the bush, even without seeing you...) The mod is avaiable here or here. New thing to discuss What are the icons on the sides of this image? On the Left you see some type of hearthbeat and on the right a hand in the middle of that hearthline, what is that supposed too mean? Please no display of how many life-percent i still have or something like this... Â Hm... It really looks strange. No idea. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sennacherib 0 Posted February 28, 2008 Arma2 seems better (lighting, models ....) but the story always the same thing. Since 2001, the story is almost the same: communist vs USA the BIS engines are amazing, this is sad to have always the same story, then that these engines could support a lot of ideas. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thunderbird 0 Posted February 28, 2008 Implying US forces to nowadays games is a consequent commercial argument as most of gaming compagnies aim at reaching the US Market. Regards, TB Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Undeceived 392 Posted February 28, 2008 Arma2 seems better (lighting, models ....) but the story   always the same thing. Since 2001, the story is almost the same: communist vs USA  the BIS engines are amazing, this is sad to have always the same story, then that these engines could support a lot of ideas. Yes... But you know how it runs, don't you... Who said this some time ago (don't know the exact spelling anymore): --> "Why should we play with something that is less good, if we can play with the best?!" I think it was someone from Codemasters, when the question came up, why OFP2 also plays with US-Marines... Well, that is not my personal position , but this should be the answer of the question. But: Which fractions would you like to see then? IMO there will always be more people that would prefer to play with the US than with other suggestions, because for them it would be the "the lesser evil"... And, looking from another point of view, I agree with Thunderbird. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
