Do things catch fire this time?

[punderland 0]

I wanna know do things catch fire this time? It is very important concept for a game of warfare. So will it emerge this time?

[mr.g-c 6]

Most likely not.

[HKFlash 9]

Most likely not.

Lol I could not be more direct!

[Steakslim 1]

Do you mean objects remaining on fire after being struck? Or are you refering to propogating fire? I doubt the game will have either aside from the occasional flaming wreakage. Structural fires in buildings and such would be a bit much for servers and the game's engine isn't that advanced graphically to support that, especially if you wanna dip into the realm of propogating fire which I think the only game to really do that with any success is FarCry2. I imagine if FC2 was coded more for PC rather than a consol port they could of done more with it.

[Kirq 0]

I would say that for 99.99% the answer is no

[paragraphic l 2]

Do you mean objects remaining on fire after being struck? Or are you refering to propogating fire? I doubt the game will have either aside from the occasional flaming wreakage. Structural fires in buildings and such would be a bit much for servers and the game's engine isn't that advanced graphically to support that, especially if you wanna dip into the realm of propogating fire which I think the only game to really do that with any success is FarCry2. I imagine if FC2 was coded more for PC rather than a consol port they could of done more with it.

It was done in SLX mod both for OFP and ArmA but it did cause some serious problems in an MP-environment AFAIK. So I guess it will not be done by BIS. Although it would be really cool in such a huge space as ArmA II gives us.

[I_Am_F3arl355 0]

I think fire's kinda pointless

[Steakslim 1]

I think fire's kinda pointless

Simulated fire can actually be very fun, but again, as long as it's done correctly (attempts to at least act and burn like a real fire, even if it isn't entirely accurate). People often get the idea of massive wildfires when thinking of fire in games. That doesn't always have to be the case, and unless the environment is expected to be severely dry, shouldn't be the case at all. It could be more contained fires like burning buildings and other structures. However again, proper implementation has always been an issue.

[Raphier 0]

I think fire's kinda pointless

Simulated fire can actually be very fun, but again, as long as it's done correctly (attempts to at least act and burn like a real fire, even if it isn't entirely accurate). People often get the idea of massive wildfires when thinking of fire in games. That doesn't always have to be the case, and unless the environment is expected to be severely dry, shouldn't be the case at all. It could be more contained fires like burning buildings and other structures. However again, proper implementation has always been an issue.

fire fetish that way ->

[cjph 0]

I agree - fire, or at least any kind of rising smoke trail can be helpful in locating a firefight in a hurry and add to the realism/sense of peril if you are fighting surrounded by burning vehicles.

Maybe this is more relevent in the suggestions area but drifting smoke and even dust would add further immersion - always seems the dust settles too quickly from building collapses, vehicle columns or rotor wing aircraft. I don't know the technical possibilities though compared to the blanket fog we have now (I have seen some mod or other list dust storm on the map but it did not look like any sand/dust storm I have experienced before).

cjph

[Steakslim 1]

I think fire's kinda pointless

Simulated fire can actually be very fun, but again, as long as it's done correctly (attempts to at least act and burn like a real fire, even if it isn't entirely accurate). People often get the idea of massive wildfires when thinking of fire in games. That doesn't always have to be the case, and unless the environment is expected to be severely dry, shouldn't be the case at all. It could be more contained fires like burning buildings and other structures. However again, proper implementation has always been an issue.

fire fetish that way ->

                                                                                                                          Better now?

[Blackbird1967 10]

oh well

[Mafia101 0]

I would say, let them use remaining time to make better weapon/vehicles optics and systems and other that kind of stuff not such a unimportant things like this one, in military simulator type game.

[PhilippRauch 0]

well, fire has always been a important weapon in any military... past or present ... be it greek fires, flamethrowers or mk77 ...

if there is going to be a 'resistance' addon later on it needs molotovs for sure... missed them in the ofp resistance ... its an important weapon for under/illequipped (para)militaries...

[-Total- 0]

In single player, I could support this.

In multiplayer, the replication load to each client would cause the server to lag severely.

[max power 21]

I would like a variation of this where if you 'destroy' a vehicle it doesn't really have a 'destroyed' animation state, but rather it may catch fire and then become burned depending on what it was hit by. I doesn't make much sense that you shoot a vehicle with a machinegun and then all of a sudden it poofs into a fully burned up vehicle even before the fire starts.

[PhilippRauch 0]

why should a fire particle lag a server? if so any explosion will lag the server ... i dont get it ... maybe you speak from bad experiences with some addon doing fires ... but why should a burning wreck wreck ;) the server/lag? ... i mean if you start to drop gazillion particles, sure it lags, doesnt matter if its rain,fog, explosion or fire that the particle represents ...

[-Total- 0]

the original suggestion was for fire to spread (grass, trees, buildings, cities)

That level of replication would cause lag.

[SWAT_BigBear 0]

I've always enjoyed the ECS effects,

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6xmTi2EueE&hl=es&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6xmTi2EueE&hl=es&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[PhilippRauch 0]

I wanna know do things catch fire this time? It is very important concept for a game of warfare. So will it emerge this time?

no the original question was this ... and the answer is yes, if destroyed they might catch fire, also depends on what kind of 'things' he is talking about... tanks and cars for example burn pretty nicely. I dont talk about wildfires and firestorms ...

[Raphier 0]

I've always enjoyed the ECS effects,

heheh, that waas quite funny. now if only there would be pain animation and gritty screaming.:rolleyes:

[leckig 0]

In single player, I could support this.

In multiplayer, the replication load to each client would cause the server to lag severely.

bollocks, check far cry 2, fire works great in multi and is often used for tactical purposes

[-Total- 0]

Does FC2's engine support the online numbers that ArmAII can support?

Is FC2's total map size equivalent?

Answer to both - no.

Remember that this engine is replicating every downed tree, every knocked over road sign, the angles they fell, etc etc already. Now add in burn damage models for grass, trees, buildings, etc cuz everyone would complain if they ccaught fire without burn models. Now start replicating every stage of those damage models for JIP players.

I'm all for more immersion think this would be a helluva addon, but not at the cost of server performance.

[Nicholas 5]

This is a definate N-O. It would be a HUGE leap for BI to even attempt to do this. It takes a lot of time and skill to code such a thing.

[volkov956 0]

Or a simple request would be just for a Flame Thrower?