Latest ArmA2 & ArmA2:OA Press Coverage | NO discussion here!

[EricM 0]

What proof do you have that this is a skybox ?

This could very well be low rez geometry...

[Raphier 0]

What proof do you have that this is a skybox ?

This could very well be low rez geometry...

and it's kind of visible in here too:

well, for instance, it's 100x bigger than our flat geometry (the ground) it's sorta very large and it's visible in another screenshot.

[sk3pt 0]

Maybe those mountains are a part of that randomly generated landmass they were talking about ? (I hope so).

That's something I love about Arma, the fact that everything is "real".

I'm sure the game will be great anyway.

[Törni 0]

What difference does it make if it is outside the area of operations anyway? Would it be nice to know that it is a mesh not just a 2D texture?

[sk3pt 0]

That randomly generated stuff is not necessarily "outside the area of operations", it's just an infinite random landmass, infinite like the ocean.

[max power 21]

They used a technique like this in 'Shadow of the Colossus'. That game was many steps ahead of its competitors in terms of the appearance of its scale and what they were able to achieve on the ps2. They had what appeared to be very vast environments, pseudo HDR, self shadowing, etc. One of their tricks was to make very distant objects display on the skybox or some other polyplane, and then to become 3d when the player got closer, as the distance behind him receded into 2d.

This is just an extension of the concepts of LOD. I don't see what the hullabaloo about is all about. When a soldier model is in the distance it is a vaguely human shaped 50 polygon blob with pretty much flat shaded textures. Does this mean that it is less real that the full rendered version you see up close?

If it works, what is the problem? The screen shots look good enough- much better than having this distant grey void that gives birth to mountains for some reason.

[sk3pt 0]

The "problem" is unreachable mountains. As long as you can reach them I don't care how they do it, 2d or not.

[]

The screenshots look great, and both these faction updates are amazing.

[max power 21]

When I was reading the thread this morning it sounded like they were using the technology I was describing above. Reading it again, it doesn't seem like it.

I think probably you'll have to live with unreachable mountains.

[Praelium 0]

I don't know what the problem is with "unreachable mountains". It's just a sky box, and every game has them.

[max power 21]

The game also features an unreachable moon!

[Commando84 0]

The game also features an unreachable moon!

Quote of the year!!!  

yeah moon can't be reached in the game either, cheese every games has skyboxes, old ofp had them to but they had clouds and moon and sun.

edit* besides looking at the pic closer imo looks very good for a skybox really!

[Undeceived 392]

Please no unreachable mountains!!!

Just imagine you as a lonely man standing there with your hunting rifle in your hand, just you and the nature, watching this wonderful landscape with that fog in the wide valleys and those mountains behind it. Imagine that tension when you think about crossing that valley, maybe having the luck to spot a boar... Or having to face the bigfoot, the locals talked about in their stories.

Then looking up to see your main goal between the trees, which you never gave up... Those beautiful mountains in the distance...

But you will never start that fullfilling jorney. Because you are standing there and knowing that you'll never be able to reach and climb that beauty!

How frustrating this would be for a man who seeks the freedom...

Please not...

[telejunky 0]

A system like plaintiff1 mentioned would be great but i don't know how difficult it is to implement such skybox associated to the mountains... This would be very cool and definately "next generation" as game was called in the past Yep, it is some kind of new to me, but there is the thing about the realase and bugtesting... I think if they would implement such a feature, it will be included in a future patch. Now it is more important to fix those children illnesses like ArmA had!

[Lepardi 0]

It is getting really interesting. It might just be that OFP2 is released first. Some game retailers list the street date as 29.3.2009.

But there is very little info or screen shots of the new Flashpoint available. I do not trust pre-rendered animations as they have nothing to do with the game itself.

OFP2 is not getting released before the summer.

[sk3pt 0]

The game also features an unreachable moon!

It's not Master of Orion.

cheese every games has skyboxes, old ofp had them to but they had clouds and moon and sun.

No one said anything about removing the sky"box", but whether or not mountains should be included.

It would only be an issue when flying really, not so much while playing as infantry. So you don't care if you have these

magical unreachable mountains in front of you ? Not even Chuck Yeager's Air Combat had that.

Nothing in these screenshots convince me that they are in fact a part of the skybox. If they did include some sort of

randomly generated land beyond the map, it's kinda pointless anyway.

[Kristian 47]

Been reading this topic... I must say I got no problem wiht un-reachable mountains, as long there is good reason why I cant go any further in-game. I dont want no BF2 style: "get back or you will be shot! -bang you die suddenly" or OBlivion/Fallout 2: "sorry, you cant go this way any further"

Something like Random creating world would be nice. I dont want no-more islands too. in OFP it was fun, ArmA it was bit lame, but still cool. but no, I cant imagine chernarus as an island, its just the way it is, na'ah, no more islands. :P

The "unreachable" mountains are good/bad idea. as undeceived said, it would be frustrating when you cant reach something, that still exist. it would like looking deliceous glass of cola, but u just cant drink it. you just have to watch it. now that sounds stupid doesnt it?

But From thing to another; I think, that mountains SHOULD exist (but I dont care if they make it skybox mountains). As long as map has some limitations. This would be ideal:

Border system. Map has clear border lines, with border guards and stuff. if you pass the border you get shot, as you dont have permission to go over the border. if you fly over it, they fire you with Anti-Air guns, wich blow the F¤ out of you. if you eject in time to land, there would be soo many units after you, that you dont stand change surviving by fighting OR running away. For me that sounds reasonable. but it would be pissing if you accidently fly over border. you should get warning or something. and like 5-25 seconds time to get out of their airspace, before they fire missiles at you. I dunno, tell me what you think :P

[Raphier 0]

Been reading this topic... I must say I got no problem wiht un-reachable mountains, as long there is good reason why I cant go any further in-game. I dont want no BF2 style: "get back or you will be shot! -bang you die suddenly" or OBlivion/Fallout 2: "sorry, you cant go this way any further"

Something like Random creating world would be nice. I dont want no-more islands too. in OFP it was fun, ArmA it was bit lame, but still cool. but no, I cant imagine chernarus as an island, its just the way it is, na'ah, no more islands. :P

The "unreachable" mountains are good/bad idea. as undeceived said, it would be frustrating when you cant reach something, that still exist. it would like looking deliceous glass of cola, but u just cant drink it. you just have to watch it. now that sounds stupid doesnt it?  

But From thing to another; I think, that mountains SHOULD exist (but I dont care if they make it skybox mountains). As long as map has some limitations. This would be ideal:

Border system. Map has clear border lines, with border guards and stuff. if you pass the border you get shot, as you dont have permission to go over the border. if you fly over it, they fire you with Anti-Air guns, wich blow the F¤ out of you. if you eject in time to land, there would be soo many units after you, that you dont stand change surviving by fighting OR running away. For me that sounds reasonable. but it would be pissing if you accidently fly over border. you should get warning or something. and like 5-25 seconds time to get out of their airspace, before they fire missiles at you. I dunno, tell me what you think :P

So no more ranom flying or random walking around the whole map?

Ironically, you said, you disliked bf2 SYSTEM, then had an exact ame idea, now with more visuals.

[colt 0]

I have to say I dislike the inclusion of these mountains as part of the skybox.

One of OFP/Arma's charms was the 'if you can see it, you can go there'. This mountainous skybox breaks that ethos. I mean, what happens if we head in the direction of these mountains? Will we eventually reach an impenetrable forest? An invisible wall - *shudder* ?

At least with Island settings of the previous games you have the water acting as a natural border with nothing but infinite sea and air beyond it. For me this was much more palatable.

I'd definitely like an explanation on how the border between the playable land / sky mass and the mountainous skybox will be designated or handled.

[max power 21]

Large mountains can be larger than the entire area of the ArmA2 map.  Immense mountains in the distance are an important part of the geographical area that this game is set in.  Are you saying that if a game was set in Genoa, that you would insist on being able to go to the Alps, and perhaps to Switzerland? And once you get to the Swiss Alps, what then? Do we draw the arbitrary line right there or do we keep extending the map to more and more worthless, low fidelity territory?

[mr.g-c 6]

Quote[/b] ]One of OFP/Arma's charms was the 'if you can see it, you can go there'. This mountainous skybox breaks that ethos. I mean, what happens if we head in the direction of these mountains? Will we eventually reach an impenetrable forest? An invisible wall - *shudder* ?

Absolutely, another problem is, that they never change their size, so they look as big if im at the coast and watch in their direction, or if im 12km closer to them...

Thats like mid-90s 3D shooter lame stuff.....

I hope this was only temporary and in final Product or in patch this will be made like it should.

[sk3pt 0]

Are you saying that if a game was set in Genoa, that you would insist on being able to go to the Alps, and perhaps to Switzerland?

That depends on what game it is. If it's Counter Strike, then no.

That "infinate procedurally generated land" does not have to be "worthless, low fidelity territory" if it's done right, and it wouldn't even matter so much when flying, which would be the main reason to go that far in the first place.

Why all these far-fetched comparisons anyway, why not the other way around ? If I'm standing in Bagango, it's great that I'm able to walk to the other side of the town.

[max power 21]

Are you saying that if a game was set in Genoa, that you would insist on being able to go to the Alps, and perhaps to Switzerland?

That depends on what game it is. If it's Counter Strike, then no.

That "infinate procedurally generated land" does not have to be "worthless, low fidelity territory" if it's done right, and it wouldn't even matter so much when flying, which would be the main reason to go that far in the first place.

Why all these far-fetched comparisons anyway, why not the other way around ? If I'm standing in Bagango, it's great that I'm able to walk to the other side of the town.

Suddenly comparing one distant mountain range to another is far fetched!

The 'infinite procedural landscape' is just a tad less uselss than the infinite ocean surrounding Sahrani. It's useful to manoeuvre and that's all. There is no destination out there. There is no map of the area. It is worthless territory that you pass through if you're trying to avoid something.

Oh, and in case you're confused, we were talking about ArmA 2, not CS or Microsoft Flight Simulator. This case is not dependent on 'what we are talking about' because what we are talking about is known.

There is no two ways about this, either you see landscape in the distance on the sky box, or you see grey fog. If you would rather see grey fog, maybe a mod can come out to remove the mountains from the skybox to render the game playable for you.

[jakerod 254]

How do we know those are part of the skybox? Seeing as how I have yet to see the same two hills in any screenshots so far.

[sk3pt 0]

The 'infinite procedural landscape' is just a tad less uselss than the infinite ocean surrounding Sahrani.  It's useful to manoeuvre and that's all.  There is no destination out there.  There is no map of the area.  It is worthless territory that you pass through if you're trying to avoid something.

You would prefer an invisible wall BF2 style ? I'm appalled.

Quote[/b] ]

Oh, and in case you're confused, we were talking about ArmA 2, not CS or Microsoft Flight Simulator.  This case is not dependent on 'what we are talking about' because what we are talking about is known.

Somehow I felt there was room for misinterpretation, and I seized the opportunity.

Quote[/b] ]

There is no two ways about this, either you see landscape in the distance on the sky box, or you see grey fog.  If you would rather see grey fog, maybe a mod can come out to remove the mountains from the skybox to render the game playable for you.

Actually, I think the view distance in ArmA renders the skybox mountains obsolete given the randomly generated land. I don't think we can see that much further IRL standing on the ground. Never said it wouldn't be playable, I'm sure the game will be awesome regardless.

How do we know those are part of the skybox? Seeing as how I have yet to see the same two hills in any screenshots so far.

I'm wondering the same thing, is there any proof ?

I'm surprised people would support this in a large scale game like Arma.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

One of OFP/Arma's charms was the 'if you can see it, you can go there'. This mountainous skybox breaks that ethos. I mean, what happens if we head in the direction of these mountains? Will we eventually reach an impenetrable forest? An invisible wall - *shudder* ?

Really? Funny you say that because I had a difficult time trying to reach the moon in OFP despite being able to see it. Yea, BIS sure made a mistake not making it a reachable destination.

What you find you will always have in developing games is compromises. In such cases one must look at the pros and cons as well as consider the most practical solution in regard to your current situation. What BIS is doing with these mountains is no different than how they implimented the moon and the sun, the sky and the clouds.

Technically you could possibly reach outer space if you flew high enough, through all the clouds and the atmosphere, but consider what kind of resources would be required for BIS to impliment all of that. Now you may think that mountains are a more achievable destination than the moon, but the boundries still have to be drawn and in this situation BIS has taken a practical course of action.

Sure it wouldn't be impossible for BIS to impliment some of these other suggested solutions, but I'm sure they've chosen this solution because it was the most practical one according to what they believe is important in their game. Personally I'm pleased with BIS's course of action because this makes the game look more polished, and much of the problem with ArmA's appeal was the lack of such finishing touches.