Ragdoll

[-Snafu- 78]

I rather other things were implemented or fixed, before adding needless eye candy.

Lets be honest, once you've all ooo'ed and aaah'd over the first 10 or so ragdoll kills, and maybe the following few funny ragdoll moments/poses where you amaze us all by your maturity and stack dead bodies so they appear to be fornicating with each other, then it'll lose its novelty and become a waste of much needed CPU.

Quoted for emphasis.

[milobr 0]

Lets be honest, once you've all ooo'ed and aaah'd over the first 10 or so ragdoll kills, and maybe the following few funny ragdoll moments/poses where you amaze us all by your maturity and stack dead bodies so they appear to be fornicating with each other

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

I just laughed so hard at this.

Is it necessary to rewrite the whole engine and/or maybe models in order to apply ragdolls?

Again that game, Mount & Blade, I don't know what's it engine, but the game didn't have ragdolls and they were applied very quickly. If it takes a lot of work then it won't be worthy.. but if it's easy I see not reason why it shouldn't be in the game.

[max power 21]

nowdays ragdolls wont have the problem as BF 2 had. a great example is CoD4 MW, the ragdoll is beatyfull in it, and it doesnt make funny or ugly positions in it. all looks quite good.

ORLY. I've seen some pretty ridiculous stretching and hanging, and I don't even play it. I was watchign someone else play it.

Look at Kane&lynch or The Darkness. Both have very good ragdolls.

likely they are a good effects because they have a detailed model mathematical model. Likely, one that would be suitable for arma 2 would not be very detailed.

[dm 9]

nowdays ragdolls wont have the problem as BF 2 had. a great example is CoD4 MW, the ragdoll is beatyfull in it, and it doesnt make funny or ugly positions in it. all looks quite good.

ORLY. I've seen some pretty ridiculous stretching and hanging, and I don't even play it. I was watchign someone else play it.

+1000

I rather other things were implemented or fixed, before adding needless eye candy.

Lets be honest, once you've all ooo'ed and aaah'd over the first 10 or so ragdoll kills, and maybe the following few funny ragdoll moments/poses where you amaze us all by your maturity and stack dead bodies so they appear to be fornicating with each other, then it'll lose its novelty and become a waste of much needed CPU. At any rate, on average you're engaging soldiers at far greater distance that in any linear corridor bore fest FPS, so the lovely bendy people won't actualy serve any visual purpose, unlike the up close and personal nature of most FPS.

You're right that any FPS worth its salt has rag dolls... but not many FPS can boast the insane free space that ArmA 2 can, if not none at all. I can happily 'sacrifice' goofy ragdoll for that any day. As long as everything works as it should, and they add a few gucci genuinely useful extras in (such as shooting from vehicles, slinging cargo etc) then its perfect.

Although, on the contrary, some sort of compromise that prevents the utterly annoying 'stuck in mid action' death, or the anims defy clipping issues and you lose bodies into houses/stairs/trees, but doesn't drain a cpu, would be nice.

+1000000

This is that god damn trigger finger issue all over again...

[AWDrift 0]

nowdays ragdolls wont have the problem as BF 2 had. a great example is CoD4 MW, the ragdoll is beatyfull in it, and it doesnt make funny or ugly positions in it. all looks quite good.

ORLY. I've seen some pretty ridiculous stretching and hanging, and I don't even play it. I was watchign someone else play it.

Look at Kane&lynch or The Darkness. Both have very good ragdolls.

likely they are a good effects because they have a detailed model mathematical model. Likely, one that would be suitable for arma 2 would not be very detailed.

Then look at Rainbow Six 3. There is a mod that let's you change the ragdolls from falling in weird positions like a pile of poo to being realistic and that came out in 04. I don't think getting the ragdolls to look good is an issue. Besides I don't hear people on forums for the other games that have them yelling "They look ugly, we want death animations!".

[stakex 0]

The debate about ragdoll not being "realistic" is kinda pointless if you think about it. OFP/ArmA's death animations are FAR from realistic at times, so it dosn't really matter if they are replaced by a better looking system that might not be totally realistic. ArmA2 is going to be a game afterall, and useing the argument that "ragdolls not realistic" is not a very valid argument in this case.

Either way, ArmA2 needs SOMETHING done with death animations. Now Im not saying ragdoll is the awnser, and Im not saying its not either. Ragdoll has been done very well in many games in the last couple years and would go very well with ArmA2. Not really a full blown ragdoll system such as Far Cry, but a restricted ragdoll that allows for bodies to move on their own, but more realisticly like COD4 (which after 30 hours of playing I have seen only a handful of odd ragdoll reactions). It would probly take a lot of work, especially the MP aspect. But a revamped animation system might work just as well if done right.

It dosn't really matter what the devs do in the end... I would love ragdoll and think the game would in fact be much more realistic if it was done right. But we have had the OFP/ArmA system for so long, its not really a huge deal if its not changed too much (tho it might hurt with selling the game to new players).

[max power 21]

nowdays ragdolls wont have the problem as BF 2 had. a great example is CoD4 MW, the ragdoll is beatyfull in it, and it doesnt make funny or ugly positions in it. all looks quite good.

ORLY. I've seen some pretty ridiculous stretching and hanging, and I don't even play it. I was watchign someone else play it.

Look at Kane&lynch or The Darkness. Both have very good ragdolls.

likely they are a good effects because they have a detailed model mathematical model. Likely, one that would be suitable for arma 2 would not be very detailed.

Then look at Rainbow Six 3. There is a mod that let's you change the ragdolls from falling in weird positions like a pile of poo to being realistic and that came out in 04. I don't think getting the ragdolls to look good is an issue. Besides I don't hear people on forums for the other games that have them yelling "They look ugly, we want death animations!".

it is precisely the issue. This is straight from the mouth of the devs. They said that when they were developing game 2 that they considered Ragdoll and did some R&D, but no suitable solution provided adequate performance.

[AWDrift 0]

nowdays ragdolls wont have the problem as BF 2 had. a great example is CoD4 MW, the ragdoll is beatyfull in it, and it doesnt make funny or ugly positions in it. all looks quite good.

ORLY. I've seen some pretty ridiculous stretching and hanging, and I don't even play it. I was watchign someone else play it.

Look at Kane&lynch or The Darkness. Both have very good ragdolls.

likely they are a good effects because they have a detailed model mathematical model. Likely, one that would be suitable for arma 2 would not be very detailed.

Then look at Rainbow Six 3. There is a mod that let's you change the ragdolls from falling in weird positions like a pile of poo to being realistic and that came out in 04. I don't think getting the ragdolls to look good is an issue. Besides I don't hear people on forums for the other games that have them yelling "They look ugly, we want death animations!".

it is precisely the issue. This is straight from the mouth of the devs. They said that when they were developing game 2 that they considered Ragdoll and did some R&D, but no suitable solution provided adequate performance.

Link?

[shinRaiden 0]

nowdays ragdolls wont have the problem as BF 2 had. a great example is CoD4 MW, the ragdoll is beatyfull in it, and it doesnt make funny or ugly positions in it. all looks quite good.

ORLY. I've seen some pretty ridiculous stretching and hanging, and I don't even play it. I was watchign someone else play it.

+1000

I rather other things were implemented or fixed, before adding needless eye candy.

Lets be honest, once you've all ooo'ed and aaah'd over the first 10 or so ragdoll kills, and maybe the following few funny ragdoll moments/poses where you amaze us all by your maturity and stack dead bodies so they appear to be fornicating with each other, then it'll lose its novelty and become a waste of much needed CPU. At any rate, on average you're engaging soldiers at far greater distance that in any linear corridor bore fest FPS, so the lovely bendy people won't actualy serve any visual purpose, unlike the up close and personal nature of most FPS.

You're right that any FPS worth its salt has rag dolls... but not many FPS can boast the insane free space that ArmA 2 can, if not none at all. I can happily 'sacrifice' goofy ragdoll for that any day. As long as everything works as it should, and they add a few gucci genuinely useful extras in (such as shooting from vehicles, slinging cargo etc) then its perfect.

Although, on the contrary, some sort of compromise that prevents the utterly annoying 'stuck in mid action' death, or the anims defy clipping issues and you lose bodies into houses/stairs/trees, but doesn't drain a cpu, would be nice.

+1000000

This is that god damn trigger finger issue all over again...

Seconded.

No ragdoll, and no bunny-hopping, for very good reason. If you want that sort of crap, un-install any BIS products you have and go back to TF2.

[rainbow 0]

So here we go to the another discussion about jump. I think that jump is not necessary for ArmA but here suppose to be any "possibility" to go "through" the wall or the trench.

[model 101 0]

Quite useless feature that takes more time to develop then focusing on the real aspects.

I vote: No to ragdoll

[walker 0]

Hi all

IMHO Ragdoll is a waste of CPU and programming time that: 1) Is just Eye Candy and adds zero to game play.

2) In most implimentations the physics is hollywood not realism

3) Lags MP. (if it can be enacted in it at all)

4) Is a waste of BIS programming time. (which is a finite resource)

Kind Regards walker

[max power 21]

nowdays ragdolls wont have the problem as BF 2 had. a great example is CoD4 MW, the ragdoll is beatyfull in it, and it doesnt make funny or ugly positions in it. all looks quite good.

ORLY. I've seen some pretty ridiculous stretching and hanging, and I don't even play it. I was watchign someone else play it.

Look at Kane&lynch or The Darkness. Both have very good ragdolls.

likely they are a good effects because they have a detailed model mathematical model. Likely, one that would be suitable for arma 2 would not be very detailed.

Then look at Rainbow Six 3. There is a mod that let's you change the ragdolls from falling in weird positions like a pile of poo to being realistic and that came out in 04. I don't think getting the ragdolls to look good is an issue. Besides I don't hear people on forums for the other games that have them yelling "They look ugly, we want death animations!".

it is precisely the issue. This is straight from the mouth of the devs. They said that when they were developing game 2 that they considered Ragdoll and did some R&D, but no suitable solution provided adequate performance.

Link?

It was in some interview around the release of arma. It's a matter of public record. If you wish to verify my claims, you can spend the time to find it. I don't know where it is anymore and I'm not going to go looking for it. Unfortunately, I don't have time.

[AWDrift 0]

What was the point of bringing it up then? I could just as easily say that BIS is putting in ragdoll and then tell you to find proof yourself.

[max power 21]

What was the point of bringing it up then? I could just as easily say that BIS is putting in ragdoll and then tell you to find proof yourself.

If you don't trust my information, it's your choice. It's old news. You may make one of several decisions now. You may trust me, not trust me and seek out the information, or not trust me and not seek out the information. It's all the same to me.

[AWDrift 0]

What was the point of bringing it up then? I could just as easily say that BIS is putting in ragdoll and then tell you to find proof yourself.

If you don't trust my information, it's your choice. It's old news. You may make one of several decisions now. You may trust me, not trust me and seek out the information, or not trust me and not seek out the information. It's all the same to me.

I know it's my choice. My point is it's pointless to make these claims when you have nothing at all to back them up.

[max power 21]

What was the point of bringing it up then? I could just as easily say that BIS is putting in ragdoll and then tell you to find proof yourself.

If you don't trust my information, it's your choice. It's old news. You may make one of several decisions now. You may trust me, not trust me and seek out the information, or not trust me and not seek out the information. It's all the same to me.

I know it's my choice. My point is it's pointless to make these claims when you have nothing at all to back them up.

Obviously, I feel differently. If you want to make a scientific inquest into this light conversation, then I'm afraid you have a bunch of work ahead of you. Since you have already chosen laziness in that you aren't willing to look it up yourself, I might just have to live with the fact that you don't believe me.

To my credit, I have my history of being correct, and my gigantic brain.

edit: here's a gift from me to you:

Placebo references the the post that I'm talking about. Now I'm correct AND generous.

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....ragdoll

[AWDrift 0]

This is a thread about ragdoll, not physics engines which is what those post deal with. Show me a specific quote from the devs, it isn't my responsibility to back up your claims.

[max power 21]

This is a thread about ragdoll, not physics engines which is what those post deal with. Show me a specific quote from the devs, it isn't my responsibility to back up your claims.

Well, Suma or Maruk went into it in more detail regarding the testing that placebo mentions. Ragdoll was mentioned. I can't do any better than that. You may continue to discuss this as if I had said nothing, if you wish. Considering that discussing ragdoll would be, presumably, to learn more about it and the implementation in arma, you think that it would be in your interest to research the topic. But apparently that also doesn't fit into your schedule either. I told you that the announcement is out there. you could probably find it if you look for an hour. It doesnt' seem that your interest is in learning more about this so I'm wondering what you're doing here talking about it at all. To rehash the same issues that have been covered over and over ten billion times before this topic, perhaps?

[AWDrift 0]

This is a thread about ragdoll, not physics engines which is what those post deal with. Show me a specific quote from the devs, it isn't my responsibility to back up your claims.

Well, Suma or Maruk went into it in more detail regarding the testing that placebo mentions. Ragdoll was mentioned. I can't do any better than that. You may continue to discuss this as if I had said nothing, if you wish. Considering that discussing ragdoll would be, presumably, to learn more about it and the implementation in arma, you think that it would be in your interest to research the topic. But apparently that also doesn't fit into your schedule either. I told you that the announcement is out there. you could probably find it if you look for an hour. It doesnt' seem that your interest is in learning more about this so I'm wondering what you're doing here talking about it at all. To rehash the same issues that have been covered over and over ten billion times before this topic, perhaps?

That has nothing to do with what I said. If you don't have proof then just say so and let it end there instead of posting this BS.

[Balschoiw 0]

I´m not opting for Ragdoll as it would consume too much CPU power for eyecandy only and it would be most likely cause problems in MP, but the death anims definately need an overhaul. There are simply too much situations where you shoot someone and he shoots up and dies in slow motion without any credible animation in between. Imo it looks a lot more surreal in Arma than it did in OFP as the anims do not blend into each other very well and sometimes the animations just do not fit into each other to make it look real or good.

[max power 21]

This is a thread about ragdoll, not physics engines which is what those post deal with. Show me a specific quote from the devs, it isn't my responsibility to back up your claims.

Well, Suma or Maruk went into it in more detail regarding the testing that placebo mentions. Ragdoll was mentioned. I can't do any better than that. You may continue to discuss this as if I had said nothing, if you wish. Considering that discussing ragdoll would be, presumably, to learn more about it and the implementation in arma, you think that it would be in your interest to research the topic. But apparently that also doesn't fit into your schedule either. I told you that the announcement is out there. you could probably find it if you look for an hour. It doesnt' seem that your interest is in learning more about this so I'm wondering what you're doing here talking about it at all. To rehash the same issues that have been covered over and over ten billion times before this topic, perhaps?

That has nothing to do with what I said. If you don't have proof then just say so and let it end there instead of posting this BS.

Let's put it this way. If I said that the feature set for arma 2 is closed now, and that this discussion is pointless, and you said prove it, and i said it's in the interview that Suma gave radio sahrani, would I then have to relisten to the whole thing and give you the exact second that he says that? Or could I just say that it's in the interview... because the answer is in the forums.

[AWDrift 0]

This is a thread about ragdoll, not physics engines which is what those post deal with. Show me a specific quote from the devs, it isn't my responsibility to back up your claims.

Well, Suma or Maruk went into it in more detail regarding the testing that placebo mentions. Ragdoll was mentioned. I can't do any better than that. You may continue to discuss this as if I had said nothing, if you wish. Considering that discussing ragdoll would be, presumably, to learn more about it and the implementation in arma, you think that it would be in your interest to research the topic. But apparently that also doesn't fit into your schedule either. I told you that the announcement is out there. you could probably find it if you look for an hour. It doesnt' seem that your interest is in learning more about this so I'm wondering what you're doing here talking about it at all. To rehash the same issues that have been covered over and over ten billion times before this topic, perhaps?

That has nothing to do with what I said. If you don't have proof then just say so and let it end there instead of posting this BS.

Let's put it this way. If I said that the feature set for arma 2 is closed now, and that this discussion is pointless, and you said prove it, and i said it's in the interview that Suma gave radio sahrani, would I then have to relisten to the whole thing and give you the exact second that he says that? Or could I just say that it's in the interview... because the answer is in the forums.

No, it's different because it would be looking in a very specific location. Searching the forum can mean looking through countless threads and post. Which I am not willing to do as the burden of proof is on the person who makes the claims in the first place.

Again if you can't back up your words just say so and let it end there.

[IronPyramid 0]

This is a thread about ragdoll, not physics engines which is what those post deal with. Show me a specific quote from the devs, it isn't my responsibility to back up your claims.

Well, Suma or Maruk went into it in more detail regarding the testing that placebo mentions. Ragdoll was mentioned. I can't do any better than that. You may continue to discuss this as if I had said nothing, if you wish. Considering that discussing ragdoll would be, presumably, to learn more about it and the implementation in arma, you think that it would be in your interest to research the topic. But apparently that also doesn't fit into your schedule either. I told you that the announcement is out there. you could probably find it if you look for an hour. It doesnt' seem that your interest is in learning more about this so I'm wondering what you're doing here talking about it at all. To rehash the same issues that have been covered over and over ten billion times before this topic, perhaps?

That has nothing to do with what I said. If you don't have proof then just say so and let it end there instead of posting this BS.

Let's put it this way. If I said that the feature set for arma 2 is closed now, and that this discussion is pointless, and you said prove it, and i said it's in the interview that Suma gave radio sahrani, would I then have to relisten to the whole thing and give you the exact second that he says that? Or could I just say that it's in the interview... because the answer is in the forums.

No, it's different because it would be looking in a very specific location. Searching the forum can mean looking through countless threads and post. Which I am not willing to do as the burden of proof is on the person who makes the claims in the first place.

Again if you can't back up your words just say so and let it end there.

Get a grip...

[Deadfast 43]

This is a thread about ragdoll, not physics engines which is what those post deal with. Show me a specific quote from the devs, it isn't my responsibility to back up your claims.

Well, Suma or Maruk went into it in more detail regarding the testing that placebo mentions. Ragdoll was mentioned. I can't do any better than that. You may continue to discuss this as if I had said nothing, if you wish. Considering that discussing ragdoll would be, presumably, to learn more about it and the implementation in arma, you think that it would be in your interest to research the topic. But apparently that also doesn't fit into your schedule either. I told you that the announcement is out there. you could probably find it if you look for an hour. It doesnt' seem that your interest is in learning more about this so I'm wondering what you're doing here talking about it at all. To rehash the same issues that have been covered over and over ten billion times before this topic, perhaps?

That has nothing to do with what I said. If you don't have proof then just say so and let it end there instead of posting this BS.

Let's put it this way. If I said that the feature set for arma 2 is closed now, and that this discussion is pointless, and you said prove it, and i said it's in the interview that Suma gave radio sahrani, would I then have to relisten to the whole thing and give you the exact second that he says that? Or could I just say that it's in the interview... because the answer is in the forums.

No, it's different because it would be looking in a very specific location. Searching the forum can mean looking through countless threads and post. Which I am not willing to do as the burden of proof is on the person who makes the claims in the first place.

Again if you can't back up your words just say so and let it end there.

If I say he's right will you take it as a proof and finally quit the flame ?

Back to topic:

Since I last posted in a ragdoll thread my opinion didn't change.

Ragdoll is useless eye candy and the effect would be minimal.

There's no need to waste CPU power, BIS' time and nerves for something you would barely notice. And if you would, it would be the bad side - ie. glitches.