ArmA II: Operation Arrowhead discussion thread

[Hunin 0]

With all due respect you seem to know nothing about the technology involved in gaming engines.

Cryengine 2 is the single most flexible and powerfull platform on the market right now.

Of course it is build for a different basic purpose then the ArmA engine, but in terms of capability CE2/3 can do every single thing we see in ArmA 2 and much more.

In fact you could even do a full blown flight sim in it - including dynamical fluid and blade calculations.

Think of Crysis ( the game ) what you want but what Crytek pulls off technologicaly is aweinspiring.

Edit

This is coming from someone who always had an instal of one of the OFP series instances on his harddrive since the OFP demo.

I simply adore what BI does and they ride without competition in my book.

Edited August 22, 2009 by Hunin

[The Afghan 10]

As realistic as they will make the game BIS will always be using a fictional conflict even if it reflects realistic conflicts.

Ok. So it's set in Takistan, where Obama bin Sadam is hiding after his escape from Bora Bora ;)

[W0lle 1047]

The Afghan

Yep maybe something like that, you never know. :)

Hunin

Might be that CE is a very capable one, but you don't switch game engines with 2 clicks on your mousebutton and pressing a bunch of keys.

Besides that, why they should abandon that engine they developed for more than 10 years and still doing. It's not that this engine is totally outdated. Would you throw some work of you away you spent 10 or 15 years of your life just because another company has something "better"? I doubt that.

You won't see CE used by BIS. :)

[Maddmatt 1]

It's an expansion, if you have the slightest clue on game development you should realise you can't switch engines for an expansion :eek:

Well technically you could, but then it would mean reworking everything and it may as will be a new game because the previous one will be dated by the time it's out...

Anyway this discussion isn't really worth having because nothing will come out if it.

Anyway, thanks for the translation Deadfast. That was interesting :)

[mattxr 9]

[Hedo 10]

in terms of capability CE2/3 can do every single thing we see in ArmA 2 and much more.

Do you really want to say that CE can handle 225km^2 of terrain AND

?

[4 IN 1 0]

The simple question to ask is that did any full scale island of 225km^2 with complete detail without choping into parts ever existed in CE2 and being tested with 100AIs (dont use 1700 gere as the AI kind of stop working with too many ai at once, same with other games) on it doing combating?

Edited August 22, 2009 by 4 IN 1

[-Paladin- 10]

it would be interesting what he sad at the time the background noise was to loud maybe a forum Gard(or how they are called) coud ask so the whole story can be understood.

[Hunin 0]

The Afghan

Yep maybe something like that, you never know. :)

Hunin

Might be that CE is a very capable one, but you don't switch game engines with 2 clicks on your mousebutton and pressing a bunch of keys.

Besides that, why they should abandon that engine they developed for more than 10 years and still doing. It's not that this engine is totally outdated. Would you throw some work of you away you spent 10 or 15 years of your life just because another company has something "better"? I doubt that.

You won't see CE used by BIS. :)

Yes I'm perfectly aware of that and I didn't want to imply that BI could license CE2 or would even want to in the first place.

It would take a substantial amount of time and money ( Crytek isn't exactly known for offering pricy solutions ;) ) to create all the assets and code in the CE2 enviourment.

I was merely commenting on the old technical myth that an engine for a seemingly "arcady" game is less complex per se then simulation equivalents.

ArmA II's technology does the job absolutely fine ( especialy the often critizised AI is a thing that is really impressive seeing the enviourment it functions in ).

The things you could call outdated in ArmAII are really minor to me as far as gameplay is concerned ( physics beeing the prominent example).

Things like terminal ballistics or more exactly penetration are more or less easily solvable by modding. The engine is capable of it, I don't exactly understand why BI opted against improving on that aspect.

@Hedo

Yes of course it can.

You're confusing assets and game design with engine capabilities.

Crysis the game and it's assets are build for a completely different enviourment then ArmA.

You could just aswell ask wether a 3 million poly scene with dynamic lighting ( including light and physics interactive particles ), POM and SSAO was ever rendered by your ArmAII.

Of course not, because it isn't build to do that.

It doesn't need to do that.

EDIT

Almost forgott,

thanks for translating Deadfast :).

Edited August 23, 2009 by Hunin

[Hedo 10]

Of course not, because it isn't build to do that.

It doesn't need to do that.

That's the point. CryEngine isn't build for a game like ArmA2.

And even if it could handle it, it would take insane amount of time to get all the features and functions to a new engine.

[Hunin 0]

That's the point. CryEngine isn't build for a game like ArmA2.

And even if it could handle it, it would take insane amount of time to get all the features and functions to a new engine.

I'm not quite sure you really read what I wrote but in short form anyway:

engine != assets.

[ohara 0]

First of all, we do games because we like to do them, in case we will buy some engine it mean we will just put content to technology that is not ours. But we like making technology. And just from my point of view, in that case, i will not be interested to make games this way any more and i belive it will be same for most of people in company.

[Yapab 10]

Stalker and ARMA2 seem to be in a similar position with both releasing expansions and using their own ingame engine.

Its funny that Cryengine has been brought to this discussion as there have been rumours about GSC using Cryengine for the next Stalker (not the expansion).

I guess there wont be any rumours with ARMA2 as ohara has closed the door on that one! I agree with what you said, its more enjoyable making your own engine than simply being a content monkey.

I do have to say the cryengine3 demonstartion I saw did look amazing and could suite a game like Stalker which is not as advanced as ARMA2 but still a lot more advanced than a corridor shooter.

Yapa

[sv5000 127]

You won't see CE used by BIS. :)

I hope not, I like my BI games as they are thanks.

I am really looking forward to this even more now.

[Yapab 10]

Just watched the interview with captions (thanks Deadfast) and have to say overall I'm happy with what he said.

But we are all different and have different tatest and likes... I actually loved the ARMA2's campaign which is focused on the Razor team. I have played about half of it with a friend in COOP and its been a pleasure.

I never liked flying the planes/helicopters or driving the tanks... so its a bit of bad news for me to hear that the new campaign will be expanded and make the player use planes/tanks etc.

I know a lot will like this but I have a feeling ARMA2 campaign will be my fav :)

Yapa

[Hunin 0]

First of all, we do games because we like to do them

and you're doing a great job with it. :bounce3: ( just repeating myself since you're in here ).

Now what about these KSK units that Wolle explicitly promised to the german community :p *********HE DID NOT, HE SAID EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE AND THIS IS A JOKE*********

@ Yapab

I thought that they had allready gone on record about Stalker 2?

Maybe just my imagination.

EDIT

fixed

Edited August 23, 2009 by Hunin

[The Masta 0]

Now what about these KSK units that Wolle explicitly promised to the german community :p

Where did he do that?

[Yapab 10]

@ Yapab

I thought that they had allready gone on record about Stalker 2?

Maybe just my imagination.

Have they? What did they say?

[Hunin 0]

Have they? What did they say?

I'm really not sure.

I just seem to remember seeing a vid on youtube with I think their CEO confirming it.

I think it was from a russian games con a couple of month back where they were presenting CoP.

Let's see wether I can dig it up.

[4 IN 1 0]

anyway, cryengine should stick with their customers, its a no no for me to use other engine for ARMA as i find no point for it

[koroush47 10]

anyway, cryengine should stick with their customers, its a no no for me to use other engine for ARMA as i find no point for it

A milsim game using the cryengine would actually be kinda cool.

[cole 0]

A milsim game using the cryengine would actually be kinda cool.

Personally, I'd rather see BI use their own engine, but a milsim based on cryengine might be interesting, if it would've been well made.

[koroush47 10]

Personally, I'd rather see BI use their own engine, but a milsim based on cryengine might be interesting, if it would've been well made.

Well I guess they won't be doing it because I'm looking at some of the screenshots... The game looks like it's halfway done already.

So far the screenshots are epic. I'm Loving them. They are making arma 2 look like crap

http://dslyecxi.com/screens/ArmA2/Arrowhead/

go BIS for making amazing games, Thank you. It will also cost less than arma 2 XD XD

(just make sure you get rid of the major bugs before you release... so it gets better ratings and less headache!)

[Stugwi 0]

Just recently got Arma2, longtime OpFlash fan & Arma.

Screens for this look great but then screens always look great. One thing i am concerened about is the clunky movement and actions when entering buildings/climbing ladders/stairs/doors ect. As Arrowhead seems to have built up populated landscapes i would question how well this is going to work. For me since the original game came out in 2001 this clunkyness has never been addresed and has never progressed for the better.

Compared to most other FPS, the FPS part of Arma2 needs improvement, don't get me wrong the game has so much more than any other FPS in terms of depth and complete involvement. Compare Arma2 to say Americas Army in the shortcomings mentioned then there is no comparison in terms of smooth close combat/opening doors/stairs/ladders ect.

Bohemia have done a bold great job in the OFP clan of games but if only these issues could be solved.

Cheers

[The Afghan 10]

Hey, nobody read today's announcements by W0lle?

"How large is Takistan? Can we count on arid surroundings to be more system friendly?

BIS: There are two maps of Takistan in Arrowhead, one presenting the countryside and mountains with villages and small urban areas and the second map of large urban area with the city of Zargabad.

Takistan is a 160 square km map of Central Asia modelled with extremely precision using real world data. Zargabad is a 70 square km map of extremely realistic environment including full areas of dense urban CQB conflicts."

w00t ... urban warfare with CQB! (please add knives BIS ... and roadside bombs like this one

) :bounce3:

"To what degree do original ArmA II and Operation Arrowhead interact? For example, can Operation Arrowhead units be used in ArmA II and can Modifications be loaded in Operation Arrowhead with copying them all to a new directory?

BIS: ArmA II content can be used in Operation Arrowhead with problems."

:confused:

"How can BIS work on two games at the same time?

BIS: There are a lot of people paid every month at BI, and they need to do something."

:D