Dynamic destruction, who needs it anyway?

[MehMan 0]

I think the problem here lies not with the full dynamic destruction but rather animations and more variations in building destruction, which is possible in ArmA actually. It'd be nice to see more than one step in building destruction, not just the two states of either destroyed or not destroyed.

The dynamic part could be solved with anims, one or two, with particle effects and most people wouldn't notice anything different. Then the model would just switch to the damaged LOD. The MP load would be just a flag that would mark the state of the building, not sending position of each part.

A mix of the hole blasting and anims(like 75% damaged a part of the roof caves in, 50% damaged a part of the building collapses, 25% you've only got a wall or two left) could do wonders. Also several rubble models would be needed, with varying details, some with a wall still left, somewithout. I think it's lame that all buildings that collapse just leave this pile behind them that is of no use at all. I'd love to some more detail, variation and cover from this.

[mattxr 9]

Lets not throw the r-word around so casually - even doing something as simple as having a single brick wall that reacts appropriately to the full range of munitions, from handgun to grenade to tank shell to bomb, is far, far from trivial. Doing that to an entire building, let alone an entire city, is asking a hell of a lot. If you think a small independent developer even has a snowball's chance in hell of doing that kind of full-blown simulation-level dynamic destruction, or that it would work over multiplayer in the current day and age, you are simply mistaken and have expectations that cannot be met by reality.

Not entirely true

But its way unrealistic.. grenade takes out half the wall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M42YSqd-DlQ

[dslyecxi 23]

Not entirely true

Please explain to me which of the following is "not entirely true":

1. Doing full dynamic destruction is very difficult

2. It is even more difficult for a small independent dev team to accomplish #1

3. Having full dynamic destruction work over MP with ArmA-level playercounts is almost completely out of the question with modern bandwidth requirements

[max power 21]

That bad company video looks very much like the way ArmA 2 works in the demo vids. What I see is that you hit a wall with a grenade and predefined parts of it blow away with some impressive effects to hide the model swap.

Further to the geomod discussion, boolean operations are something that not even max, maya, or xsi can do 100 percent... and they certainly don't do it in 1 frame of a 60 fps realtime render. As far as I know, XSI is the best of all of them, but it still chokes on those kinds of ops, and the geo you're left with is, to understate, horrendous. You may not even attempt it in Maya.. more often than not, you just end up cutting the hole my hand anyways... which is pretty much what they are doing in the above video and in the ArmA 2 video. And then to re-uvmap the parts without seams and stretching? This kind of destruction without massive limitations is not something you are going to see in games for a long time yet.

[MehMan 0]

What has been shown in ArmA2 right now is pretty awsome, all that's need is the particle FXs and perhaps that little addition that I spoke about in my earlier post. It'd be more than sufficient and it would look okay. If not animated, then just a lot of smoke.

[SaBrE_UK 0]

I think that ArmA 2 could have more than adequate damage with the current system, if effects are added and a good amount of parts of the building destroyable. Perhaps if enough damage is done after all the destroyable "sections" are gone, the building will have a nice collapsing animation (maybe one of three for variety), to imply the foundations giving way. If this happened on all buildings, that would be great, but all this is already just speculation of possible ideas and probably far too much to code.

[MehMan 0]

Code wise it's small, taking ArmA itself for a base, I don't know how much the destroyable sections add.

[Balschoiw 0]

@Dslyecxi

Quote[/b] ]I haven't seen it in VBS2 yet. Saying that "it seems to work" is a bit misleading when there is no release of VBS2 currently available that supports such a feature.

Here you go:

Dynamic destruction in VBS 2 picture 1

Dynamic destruction in VBS 2 picture 2

Deformable terrain is also included, aswell as thermal imaging.

Read more about it here

The feature list is very impressive. A lot of things that have been asked for Arma and Arma 2 are implemented in VBS 2. I know there´s a huge difference price-wise, but wouldn´t it be nice to have at least some of that features embedded ?

[paragraphic l 2]

Both pictures don't look that impressive to me, and IIRC VBS2 is not made to be played on public servers, with experimental add-ons and scripting.

And even if the description would say it is dynamic, with the screenshots I don't see anything dynamic or what could not be achieved with a multiple-stages-destruction system. (Like we have in ArmA yet with more stages of destruction)

[dslyecxi 23]

@Dslyecxi

Quote[/b] ]I haven't seen it in VBS2 yet. Saying that "it seems to work" is a bit misleading when there is no release of VBS2 currently available that supports such a feature.

Here you go:

Dynamic destruction in VBS 2 picture 1

Dynamic destruction in VBS 2 picture 2

Deformable terrain is also included, aswell as thermal imaging.

You misunderstood me. My job is VBS2-related, I use it every day. The current released version of VBS2 is 1.18, with 1.19 as a work-in-progress. 1.19 is supposed to have such functionality on some buildings, but, again, as I said, I haven't seen it yet. I seriously doubt it will be as impressive as some seem to think. Those screens don't change my mind any, either - the terrain that they're showing is a tiny little map that's maybe 500m on a side, consisting of buildings tailor-made for that map. Seeing a building being destroyed in such a fashion in it doesn't really mean much to me.

In any case, VBS2-style destruction will likely be the same or even inferior to ArmA2-style destruction. I suppose time will have to show that to be true or not. I seriously doubt it will be any different from ArmA2 in the "dynamic" nature of it.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Seeing a building being destroyed in such a fashion in it doesn't really mean much to me.

For me it does as it shows that there are multi-segment buildings possible and done that support different hitzones and consist of different segments that can be removed dynamically.

In Arma today the house is there, or removed, nothing in between.

If you can´t see the gameplay improvements gained by such implementation of multi-segmented buildings, you obviously miss the point of a realistic tactical shooter.

The mapsize is irrelevant in that context btw as the segments obviously get removed once they are hit and therefore texture load will decrease with a slight increase in poly-load.

Of course the existing buildings have to be reworked to provide such system, but that´s one thing you can expect to be done by a company producing a game like Arma 2.

There seems to be a major change in ground deformation aswell, a feature that has been long asked for by the community. No more texture swap or overlay but deformable terrain that will create new tactical possibilities and of course improve gameplay.

If you don´t value such changes or features on a personal level is not of my interest. I guess it´s about time something like this gets implemented and the poll also indicates that very wish.

[dslyecxi 23]

The mapsize is irrelevant in that context btw as the segments obviously get removed once they are hit and therefore texture load will decrease with a slight increase in poly-load.

Of course the existing buildings have to be reworked to provide such system, but that´s one thing you can expect to be done by a company producing a game like Arma 2.

It's not irrelevant - the point is that this "dynamic destruction" currently (again, AFAIK) only takes place on a small map with special buildings. It may be on more buildings in the future, and they may do the same thing in ArmA2, but the point was that you cannot say that "VBS2 has " without clarifying to what extent they actually have said feature.

Quote[/b] ]There seems to be a major change in ground deformation aswell, a feature that has been long asked for by the community. No more texture swap or overlay but deformable terrain that will create new tactical possibilities and of course improve gameplay.

I have yet to see a screenshot or example of the "ground deformation" improvements. Anything said about the system's influence on gameplay right now is pure, unfounded speculation.

Quote[/b] ]If you don´t value such changes or features on a personal level is not of my interest. I guess it´s about time something like this gets implemented and the poll also indicates that very wish.

It has nothing to do with that, and much more to do with a reality check as to what VBS2 actually has, versus what you think it has or assume it's capable of.

[mrj-fin 0]

Its seems that the incoming VBS2 VTK will have DD and DT alongside of dozens other thing that people have dreamed in this forums on years the question is will any those features ever land to BIS released games.

[max power 21]

That vbs2 destruction doesn't look very dynamic to me. The building is still just vapourizing in predefined chunks. The website doesn't even call it dynamic. It just says that the buildings can be demolished 'in a realistic fashion', which means nothing.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Yar, it's all a bit hazy there. All it truly means in sooth is that you can blow a hole in a wall approximately where you want it to be and hopefully walk your TAG dudes in there. I doubt whether it's truly dynamic, for example, I expect to see some interesting bugs concerning gravity and defiance of physical laws (i.e. one sided houses still standing, floating chunks, etc).

[AWDrift 0]

Redfaction: guerrilla has some really amazing destruction going by a feature they had in a game informer mag. Not sure it's anywhere digitally, but it's something to look out for.

[-duke- 0]

Prolly a st00pid question but since I have no knowledge and experience no shame with asking st00pid questions I'll ask away.

Why doesn't BIS turn to the community to help in the development process so we can get as good a product as possible upon release? I've heard time and time again that you can only expect so much from a tiny developer (which is entirely true) and yet see community talent here on an unprecedented scale; why not pool your resources and make a killer game that no dev. anywhere can touch?

Not only will this help ArmA2 be all it can be, I'm sure it will help BIS stand out from the rest in releasing a product truly catered to the gamer.

Anyway this in my $.02 CDN and I think it's worth every penny.

No disrespect meant to anyone here btw, I just think it would make for an interesting product.

[max power 21]

Prolly a st00pid question but since I have no knowledge and experience no shame with asking st00pid questions I'll ask away.

Why doesn't BIS turn to the community to help in the development process so we can get as good a product as possible upon release? I've heard time and time again that you can only expect so much from a tiny developer (which is entirely true) and yet see community talent here on an unprecedented scale; why not pool your resources and make a killer game that no dev. anywhere can touch?

Not only will this help ArmA2 be all it can be, I'm sure it will help BIS stand out from the rest in releasing a product truly catered to the gamer.

Anyway this in my $.02 CDN and I think it's worth every penny.

No disrespect meant to anyone here btw, I just think it would make for an interesting product.

I have some questions.

What makes you think they don't listen to the community

Are you implying they hire all of us, that amateurs are better than their professionals, or that we should all work for them for free?

[-duke- 0]

Where in my reply did I even hint that they don't listen to the community?

I also never suggested that they "hire all of us" whomever us actually represents.

As for pay structure I really don't see anyone in the community making any money on the terrific mods that graced OFP and now ArmA as well as ArmA2 and beyond.

Lastly, I'll just ignore the amateurs over professionals comment because it's just plain silly. The so called amateurs have churned out some terrific content that has made ArmA a much better game than it was upon release and you prolly need look no further than your own .exe target line to confirm this response.

[Enixj7 0]

Dynamic destruction is a great addition to any game, especially a game that is supposed to be re-creating a war (of any scale) Not implementing when the ground is already available would be silly. It's also plain stupid not to have it when its direct competitor will.

[max power 21]

Where in my reply did I even hint that they don't listen to the community?

I also never suggested that they "hire all of us" whomever us actually represents.

As for pay structure I really don't see anyone in the community making any money on the terrific mods that graced OFP and now ArmA as well as ArmA2 and beyond.

Lastly, I'll just ignore the amateurs over professionals comment because it's just plain silly. The so called amateurs have churned out some terrific content that has made ArmA a much better game than it was upon release and you prolly need look no further than your own .exe target line to confirm this response.

Well then describe what you meant, because it is not clear.

The 'terrific mods' you're talking about happened well after ofp was introduced, and only when computers had evolved somewhat. Many of them had hiddeous performance issues that were masked somewhat by running ofp on a 2ghz machine in 2005, rather than a 600 mhz machine in 2001.

I don't really play with mods that replace anything in arma. The devs at BIS have certain design plans that they want to accomplish for arma 2, and have budgetted around that. If you're buying addons from the community, you're going outside of your plan and your budget. AND, if you're getting a screaming deal on addons, you're underpaying outside contractors to do work you have employees to do.. in essence, you're sending work outside of the company to avoid paying your employees... which is sort of crap.

At any rate, I don't think that the community is somehow going to hatch an elegant, lag-free, beautiful dynamic destruction simulation that BIS is going to step over their employee's families to get their hands on.

[-duke- 0]

Good Lord, if you can't understand my first post then I'm not even going to bother clarifying myself anymore just so you can multi-quote every sentence I post and pick it apart by reading between non existent lines.

I don't believe I stated anywhere about budgeting around community mods, that is your input. My suggestion is merely getting the community more involved earlier in the process instead of after release, it's simple really. If it's something that simply cannot be done then fine, it was an idea pure and simple. I don't believe anyone in the community is taking a penny for their work presently so I'm unsure where you came up with the idea that they would be paid as BIS employees either thus taking food from the table of actual employees?

What you have here is a community focused on making a good game even better by enhancing it in ways that the dev couldn't do for reasons known only to themselves. My suggestion was simply to embrace the talented within the community and involve them in the process prior to release.

I simply cannot explain it anymore simply, if you can't get it then my apologies, hopefully someone else will.

BTW I never said it was a good idea or a bad idea, simply an idea.

[max power 21]

Good Lord, if you can't understand my first post then I'm not even going to bother clarifying myself anymore just so you can multi-quote every sentence I post and pick it apart by reading between non existent lines.

I don't believe I stated anywhere about budgeting around community mods, that is your input. My suggestion is merely getting the community more involved earlier in the process instead of after release, it's simple really. If it's something that simply cannot be done then fine, it was an idea pure and simple. I don't believe anyone in the community is taking a penny for their work presently so I'm unsure where you came up with the idea that they would be paid as BIS employees either thus taking food from the table of actual employees?

What you have here is a community focused on making a good game even better by enhancing it in ways that the dev couldn't do for reasons known only to themselves. My suggestion was simply to embrace the talented within the community and involve them in the process prior to release.

I simply cannot explain it anymore simply, if you can't get it then my apologies, hopefully someone else will.

BTW I never said it was a good idea or a bad idea, simply an idea.

All you said was that BIS should get the community involved to make a better game. That means nothing. I assumed it to mean that BIS should get the community more involved than they already do, which is a great deal. If it's not that, then what is it? You first post is not clear at all, it is very vague. I am not stupid for not reading your mind.

[SaBrE_UK 0]

Duke, haven't you realised Plaintiff1 cannot be wrong yet? It's just impossible...

Aside from that Duke, you do have a good (and easily understandable) idea there but there are inherent problems with such a practice- like who owns the content and other legal matters. If it could work, then it'd be great, however.

[max power 21]

Duke, haven't you realised Plaintiff1 cannot be wrong yet? It's just impossible...

Aside from that Duke, you do have a good (and easily understandable) idea there but there are inherent problems with such a practice- like who owns the content and other legal matters. If it could work, then it'd be great, however.

'Get the community involved somehow' is not an idea. It's like saying 'go to alpha centari somehow'. How can I be right or wrong when I don't even know what he's talking about, and he refuses to elabourate? I think that's as far as he got in his thought. He thought it would be nice to end world hunger and then decided to post his idea for feedback.