ArmA II: Operation Arrowhead discussion thread

[archsceptic. 10]

There wont be any red trees, so there is a performance 'improvement' straight away. The LOD switching with the red trees is shocking on my rig - what is it with the red chuffing trees AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

My kingdom for a map with no red trees.

[Laqueesha 474]

1) Tree LODs. They change too often, too slowely and at the wrong times.

2) The bloody aircraft gunners. How hard can it be to fix their hands to the gun? There was an ArmA 1 mod of a UH-60 where they managed to fix it...

This ^ and more realistic radio voices.

[Guest]

There wont be any red trees, so there is a performance 'improvement' straight away. The LOD switching with the red trees is shocking on my rig - what is it with the red chuffing trees AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

My kingdom for a map with no red trees.

What if there are new red trees, that are green....

DUN DUN DUN!! NOOOOOO!!!

:D

[Laqueesha 474]

Red trees sound great, hopefully there will be a performance increase caused by it. Or maybe, a performance increased caused by the lack of trees in a desert and mountainous environment.

[Guest]

I think OA is a lie. I think the new game will be based on the whole planet earth, that's why there are no console ports :)

[PuFu 4600]

Yeah, Arma 2 is very choppy in cities for me. Desert/open areas are great, but when the textures start popping in I really struggle.

I am not sure if this is a BIS issue, or a "the graphics are epic, I need a better pc" issue. :D

We will see lol!

The real difference between A2 and other games, are the size and amount of textures used at any given time in a scene, and the poly count on those models (afaik, the highest number in any game released). Add the sheer size and you got your culprit. There is no comparison to be made with the other games out there.

By no means i say the game is properly optimized. I never said that. I do believe they should be spending more time optimizing the balance between the gfx effect and visual beauty that can be achieved and the performance. In games, you do need a properly fluid fps, which is more important than a higher peek FPS. They could cut some details that you won't really see under normal circumstances (vegetation and buildings are kicking the rigs asses in A2) for better optimization.

I cannot give my input on the code handling or performance and hogs of the engine, but i am sure it supports more than just some visual new layer and texture handling (the main difference between 1 and 2).

For me, what OA should bring on the table:

1. more features (opposed to more gear). Both can be added by community later on, but the basics should be dealt by bis. In most cases the features released by community are work around the engine, rather than direct implementation (see point 3)

2. general optimization on performance, menus, MP lobby, etc

3. more commands to work with (scripting refs, including proper documentation for those).

[Guest]

Yeah definitely, I agree.

The main thing for me would be features, isntead of having to install a few mods, it would be great to have the really powerful stuff already in the game.

But looking back at Cold War Crisis, Arma, and all of their expansions, I really wouldn't be surprised if we saw alot of really great new features in OA. BIS always strive to improve, and they have never let me down.

:)

[PuFu 4600]

But looking back at Cold War Crisis, Arma, and all of their expansions, I really wouldn't be surprised if we saw alot of really great new features in OA. BIS always strive to improve, and they have never let me down. :)

Not here to argue over this, but all i can say is that, for some weird reason, the features from BIS are 90% cocked, and hardly ever seem finished in real sense. They are not 100% realistic (see the radar system suppose to be in OA), but neither arcadey. What is worth, some stuff is hardcoded, so there is no way to finish it.

Anyways, i learned not to get my hopes high, that is a general behaviour, not really related to OA.

[Guest]

Not here to argue over this, but all i can say is that, for some weird reason, the features from BIS are 90% cocked, and hardly ever seem finished in real sense. They are not 100% realistic (see the radar system suppose to be in OA), but neither arcadey. What is worth, some stuff is hardcoded, so there is no way to finish it.

Anyways, i learned not to get my hopes high, that is a general behaviour, not really related to OA.

That's fine mate, I understand what you are saying. :)

[EricM 0]

If only they could implement render to texture... this would open a world of applications for new systems and effects...

[p75 10]

If only they could implement render to texture... this would open a world of applications for new systems and effects...

I think we all second that!!!

But seeing the cockpit of the apache ah-64d in flight with the standard layout of fixed screens is an indication that render to texture won't be included. A damn shame if you ask me as it would allow for some real vehicle simulation instead of the arcadish one we got now. VBS 2 doesn't have it and unless someone in the military decides they need it, my guess is we won't be seeing it in A2:OA, a damn shame, but it is what it is.

I will say Bohemia does about 90% correct, but slacks the last 10%, which would pull the game above average.

Missing things are: realistic AI (the video interview is a perfect example), improved destruction/exploision effects, render to texture...

Instead they focus on the sound engine, which was not perfect in A2, but was more than doable and modable by the community.

Things like realistic AI, improved destruction/exploision effects and render to texture are more needed in my view. And it is a damn shame they put their limited means into the sounds engine and not more critical aspects of the game. The mod community had already improved the sounds to a higher level...Besides that, they didn't really rewrite the sound engine, they probably just took the one from VBS 2, which 100x better than the one in A2.

Seems Bohemia is just not learning from the feedback they get. I expect a mediocre game from OA after the novelty wears off with the same errors and irritations as before.

It seems that the last 10% to make the game perfect is what is lacking in Bohemia's toolkit. It is grand in its setting, but lacks the details that make a product excellent. Truely a shame...!

Edited February 18, 2010 by p75

[NoRailgunner 0]

If only BIS would make a serious quality control before releasing a game...

To play down bugs and issues or suggesting to use mod x or addon z isn't the solution. But as long as developers can count on such loyality there are fine.

[mattxr 9]

Pointing out bugs, glitches and other issues is not bashing ArmA 2. ^

People report bugs and issues in the hopes that they will be fixed, resulting in a better gameplay experience for everybody.

In fact, witholding knowledge is detrimental to the game as the issue will not be fixed due to ignorance of the subject matter.

Well do that inside the troubleshooting thread as your just trolling around the place doing it theads of discussion so get a grip :)

[Guest]

Wow, no offense to anybody personally, but lay off the whole: "BIS need to do this, BIS need to do that" idea.

None of you even have a clue how, why, or when they work, so what right do you have to tell them how to do things? No offense, honsetly, but all you do is criticize and moan. If it's THAT bad, why do you love it so much?

You know full well how much effort and time BIS put into this game, you find me one developer who works on their game 7 days a week. I mean it, 7 days a week, in -20 conditions, in 8 inches of snow...

BIS work harder than most of the people on these forums, to tell them they slack is completely out of order.

imo.

Edited February 18, 2010 by Guest
Spelling :)

[TimRiceSE 10]

Wow, no offense to anybody personally, but lay off the whole: "BIS need to do this, BIS need to do that" idea.

None of you even have a clue how, why, or when they work, so what right do you have to tell them how to do things? No offense, honsetly, but all you do is criticize and moan. If it's THAT bad, why do you love it so much?

You know full well how much effort and time BIS put into this game, you find me one developer who works on there game 7 days a week. I mean it, 7 days a week, in -20 conditions, in 8 inches of snow...

BIS work harder than most of the people on these forums, to tell them they slack is completely out of order.

imo.

agreed.

Its actually quite sickening to read some peoples posts. I come here to see if theres any updates and all I find is unreasonable and unrealistic demands mixed in with exaggerated complaints and people already pre-judging how its going to be. Is this really how ungrateful and ignorant people are these days? If I was a BIS employee reading some things that people post here I'd probably be seriously demotivated if THIS is who I'm making games for.

I dunno what most people paid, but ArmA2 - even brand new - cost a lot less than most other games, games where the only real experience was nothing short of a robbery-turned-rape. We get EXTREMELY much more than we deserve and pay for here.

[PuFu 4600]

I think we all second that!!!

Back for some more render to texture discussion, are you not?

But seeing the cockpit of the apache ah-64d in flight with the standard layout of fixed screens is an indication that render to texture won't be included. A damn shame if you ask me as it would allow for some real vehicle simulation instead of the arcadish one we got now. VBS 2 doesn't have it and unless someone in the military decides they need it, my guess is we won't be seeing it in A2:OA, a damn shame, but it is what it is.

Could that mean that a proper implementation is not possible in the current engine? I would think about it

Missing things are: realistic AI (the video interview is a perfect example), improved destruction/exploision effects, render to texture...

i would look over how a game engine is working (any engine really), then come back with more suggestions.

Yes, agreed that a proper destruction (haven't seen any game with it) and render to textures would open new world. But what would be the expense?

Instead they focus on the sound engine, which was not perfect in A2, but was more than doable and modable by the community.

There is a big freaking difference between sound engine and sound files.

Not sure if you have noticed the issues with A2 sounds, especially when more sounds are played that channels available, as well as sounds loosing their positions in 3d space, etc etc

I do belive that sounds do give immersion to a game, and it is a big part of what a game looks like in terms of finite state.

Things like realistic AI, improved destruction/exploision effects and render to texture are more needed in my view. And it is a damn shame they put their limited means into the sounds engine and not more critical aspects of the game. The mod community had already improved the sounds to a higher level...Besides that, they didn't really rewrite the sound engine, they probably just took the one from VBS 2, which 100x better than the one in A2.

needed for some = wanted by some.

about porting sound engine, i would stop making assumptions without knowing facts.

Seems Bohemia is just not learning from the feedback they get. I expect a mediocre game from OA after the novelty wears off with the same errors and irritations as before.

Again, showing a certain feature of a game, in a development stage is not necessary means other stuff such as AI has been looked over.

I'd have some patience. Remember, there is little info about a released date besides 2010. There is plenty of time for BIS to adjust, work on a lot of other things.

A2 screens, trailers and facts has been shown 8 months before release. When that starts happening, you have an estimation of a release date. Till then...

It seems that the last 10% to make the game perfect is what is lacking in Bohemia's toolkit. It is grand in its setting, but lacks the details that make a product excellent. Truely a shame...!

That is something i agree with. It is called: POLISHING the product

[dm 9]

Besides that, they didn't really rewrite the sound engine, they probably just took the one from VBS 2, which 100x better than the one in A2.

Hahahahaha. Serious?

You know the sound engine in VBS2 is the ArmA1 sound engine, right?

You have this "because its VBS2 its omg amazingly better than any of the ArmA products" point of view, and it really is wonderfully mis-informed... :j:

[Guest]

@p75,

Again, a case of "probably" and "they do this" and "they do that".

Its bang out of order!

No offence mate, but you need to think about what you are saying.

[Maio 293]

BIS puts a lot of effort in making their games , more then a lot of other dev's .

I believe they try their best to fix issues that we point out , but let's remember BIS has limited resources .

OA is an EXPANSION , not a " new game " but yet they decided to make 2 new maps , a campaign that takes place on one of the new maps , add new content , new features , a new sound engine and possible graphical improvements ( it was said in the QA thread or in some in interview ) and all that at a mid ranged price ... come on guys .

[Guest]

BIS puts a lot of effort in making their games , more then a lot of other dev's .

I believe they try their best to fix issues that we point out , but let's remember BIS has limited resources .

OA is an EXPANSION , not a " new game " but yet they decided to make 2 new maps , a campaign that takes place on one of the new maps , add new content , new features , a new sound engine and possible graphical improvements ( it was said in the QA thread or in some in interview ) and all that at a mid ranged price ... come on guys .

This.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Its done when its done - lets see how many time and manpower BIS invests in fixing and improving their games. Guess those fanboy or childish protections are doing more harm than good. Nobody wants that BIS is going the EA/Ubisoft way.... ;)

[Windexglow 10]

I hope they center more on polish than improving the engine.

As for p75; Good job, you know a few graphics terms. Hopefully you know that those terms aren't holy grails that solve everything.

[SteveJA 12]

heya may be just a noob question but i shoud imagin that the expansion would come with a number of fixes???

ie ai reacting to enemy in buildings etc

[Maio 293]

Guess those fanboy or childish protections are doing more harm than good. Nobody wants that BIS is going the EA/Ubisoft way.... ;)

The so called "fanboy and childish protections" are good for BIS :) , when the majority of your customer base consists of people who want more then a standard FPS with some sugar on top , thus a taste for complexity , it's good to receive a positive vibe from then .

That way BIS knows that they are on the right track and continue to stick to it . BIS did not reach the destination with their product just yet , but they are making good progress .

Edited February 18, 2010 by Maio

[Panda_pl 0]

Back for some more render to texture discussion, are you not?

Could that mean that a proper implementation is not possible in the current engine? I would think about it

Just two points:

- Arma or UT3 - both use the same libraries.

- in any game you can swap/change/modify image in memory - you just need an interface command

- both of above were proven true in practice by "extended Dll" for Arma1.

You have to realize in case of graphics there is nothing new under the sun. All game use the same libraries and there are really no limitations to what programmer can put in engine since graphics are separate from mechanics of the game.

Perhaps there is a performance consideration and perhaps BIS thinks it's an eye candy only and unnecessary, or perhaps they will include it at some point.