FP : DR - News & Discussion

[Zipper5 74]

Walker is like a broken record, just keeps going ona bout no jets, no civs, micros battles (lol wut) and such.

No civilians is a very bad point, the island itself doesnt have many people and those few there got evacuated. Sounds more realistic than Arma 2. In Arma 2 civs just going about there daily business while tanks and jets blowing shiz up all around them.

No jets is the only valid point i've ever seen him make. Everything else is easily argued.

You and Ptolemaios are the ones sounding like broken records. :j:

[boomar. 10]

You and Ptolemaios are the ones sounding like broken records. :j:

We aint in Walkers league. He keeps going on about no jets, no civvies every damn 10 pages. Blah blah blah.

[nodunit 397]

Hmm...well there is one way we can find out for certain if civilians will stay in a warzone and go about their daily business, lets visit Iraq.

Granted alot of people will evacuate not everyone will as we have seen. But I'm easily willing to give up civilians for them to concentrate more on say..how weapon systems on vehicles work and such.

Edited May 10, 2009 by NodUnit

[boomar. 10]

Hmm...well there is one way we can find out for certain if civilians will stay in a warzone and go about their daily business, lets visit Iraq.

Granted alot of people will evacuate not everyone will as we have seen. But I'm easily willing to give up civilians for them to concentrate more on say..how weapon systems on vehicles work and such.

Yes there are places such as Iraq where civilians will stay. But just take a look currently at Swat valley in pakistan, all we hear about apart from how many militants get killed each day currently is thousands of people fleeing south to avoid the conflict.

There are many other cases of civilians fleeing the warzone.

So its entirely accurate with CM giving the scenario that all civies have left, especially since there are so few actually on the island.

[froggyluv 2130]

Why would anyone be excited about a feature that was in OFP1 being removed?

Even if you accept with tremendous glee CM's explanation of 'Well, they left...", wouldn't you at least want civilians available to you in the editor to add color to the mission making palette?

Some might be ok with these paper-thin explanations but I find it quite lame.

[nodunit 397]

Eh, I'm not excited at all but I'm not too upset either..provided they do enhance the systems.

Edited May 10, 2009 by NodUnit

[An-225 0]

OFP and ArmA were and are brilliant because of their ability to make ANY sort of scenario. You had freedom in the mission editor.

DR has taken away some items that gave you freedom - airplanes, civilians etc.

This has made it a more standardised experience, much like Conquest mode in BF2 or TDM in CoD 4. And there is nothing wrong with that. Apart from the fact that it is being marketed as OFP and that everything that has been said about it being open world warfare is a load of BS.

[boomar. 10]

But it is open world warfare, you get a massive island and free to do what you want with it. Look forward to making many things in mission editor.

[nodunit 397]

Apart from the fact that it is being marketed as OFP

Which I have resented from the very start to the point that people thought I simply hated CM.

It's not OFP, a sequel nor even a continuation that much is pretty much fact, just a marketing ploy.

But they still have a chance to salvage something of it.

While I'm not happy with no civilians I'm not going to gripe about it endlessly since they are of no importance, or simply do not fit into their campaign. And they never promised civilians or aircraft in the first place...instead I'll wait for the finished product, then thrash them if they do not deliver what they DID promise.

Edited May 10, 2009 by NodUnit

[Placebo 28]

Perhaps we can stick to discussing the topic without naming and shaming people whose opinions you find contrary to your own :)

[walker 0]

Hi all

The key problem for DR is the modified Dirt engine. The Physics uses up so much of the computers resources there is not even room for an editor. The internal editor was the thing that made BIS's OFP 1. Without it anything left is a poor echo.

But the damage done to the project by the modified Dirt engine physics is far worse in MP. It means that all destruction has to be non real physics. In other words the player exists in either of two bad choices:

a) a physics without effect on the virtual world, where the player is stuck in a land of ghost objects on client side that have to be culled from the virtual reality thus making it an arbitrary, unsustainable and transient world. Where a player Y says "Hey did you see that great explosion where X's vehicle exploded into bits" and player X says "Hey my tire got flat from that near by explosion I got out to fix it and WTF my Hummer disappeared?!!**##"

OR

b) Where as number of players increase in an MP game, a number of simultaneous explosions turn all the players experience into a frame per hour lag fest as the server struggles to synchronise the effects.

Worse still is the possibility of a half ass-ed combination of the two options above. Where AI kills other player supposedly behind object A then walks/Clips its way through the object and the player who is blazing away at it full auto from cover where upon as the player stares at it in disbelief and the player suddenly dies with a puzzled WTF?

With the choice of the modified Dirt engine I think that kind of experience will happen at as low as 16 players.

That is the kind of thing that results from failing to do the math.

Kind Regards walker

Edited May 10, 2009 by walker

[EricM 0]

The latest trailer with ingame footage looked alright (not super great and not on par with the target renders, but ok).

It seems it can provide some good fun on consoles, while certainly more shallow than Arma 2 on PC, but still more versatile than most of the rest of the crowd.

Edited May 10, 2009 by EricM

[echo1 0]

The Physics uses up so much of the computers resources there is not even room for an editor.

I disagree with that logic - for one, the physics engine isn't running when you make a map, and secondly - the map editor doesn't really use that much in the way of resources so even if there was a problem with the physics engine, I don't think the map editor would conflict with it.

[Litos 10]

Now I'm expecting DR to be announced "buggy" by nearly all reviewers, thus failing the game. Similar to what happened to stormrise, which was a pretty anticipated game, but at the end it was just not it.

[walker 0]

I disagree with that logic - for one, the physics engine isn't running when you make a map, and secondly - the map editor doesn't really use that much in the way of resources so even if there was a problem with the physics engine, I don't think the map editor would conflict with it.

Hi ch_123

I come to the conclusion that the modified Dirt Engine and its physics is what is causing CM its problems with the DR project for the following reasons.

1) The Math

When you start a project you Do the math! What will the systems you intend to use need in terms of resources? Every other developer looked at this problem, did the math and came to the conclusion that ragdoll or similar physics is a no go in an MP environment. It is a classic exponential load problem. As you add players, the number of calculations increase. When you start with a big number and physics is big numbers, you double the big number with two player, triple it with three, quadruple it with four etc. etc. That initial number has to be small! In fact it is worse than this as often with physics you are increasing by powers of that big number.

2) Feature loss

Well since the world is smaller than ArmA, there are less cities (one small village plus a farm apparently), less AI than BIS's OFP1, smaller MP games than BIS's OFP1, no aircraft, less quantity and complexity of vegetation, no wildlife and no internal editor etc. In fact it looks like a quantum leap back wards from the capabilities of BIS's OFP1; and they keep lowering the features. Therefor something is eating up resources.

3) Experience

At CoC we do big physics number problems in MP so this is something we know a little of. BN880 had to develop our own Network services to give us a way of compressing and optimising the information we sent across the net and we had to develop a totally new way of calculating the ballistics for UA to get round the exponential load problem past the 2000m range(it is one of those big number problems). Then we had to develop totally new ways of creating explosion effects so that it would work in MP, yet more big number problems.

That is why I insist you Do the Math!

If you have not done the math, you do not understand what it is we are talking about.

Kind regards walker

Edited May 10, 2009 by walker

[MehMan 0]

Your math is a bit wonky there. You still don't explain how physics are having an effect on an internal editor. They are two completely unrelated things and an internal editor doesn't take away preformance.

And oh noes, the woes of having an external editor! You're making it sound like it's a huge leap backwards, while it's probably going to be more enjoyable to use than the clonky internal OFP/ArmA editor. Considering that if you wanted to make a mission a bit more complex than with waypoints and you didn't know the commands by heart you spent either working in the not so great window mode or you kept alt tabbing. And I'm guessing that the external editor is going to work like with other games where you have a preview button and it just loads up on the fly. Maybe like Far Cry.

But seriously, tone down your bashing, wildlife isn't an important feature so stop mentioning it. Neither is an interal or external editor. If it has an editor is all that matters.

[ricbar89 0]

Walker

Where are you getting this one farm stuff from? Skira Island is 110 square miles with many different features including farms, villages, monasteries and a town. There's also a dormant volcano.

When you go on about civilians and wildlife you need to get it into your head the game isnt like ARMA in story, its not about some civil war somewhere, its a WW2 pacific island style battle, like Iwo Jima or Okinawa (on a smaller scale), civilians and wildlife played no roles in those battles, hence its irrelivant to the scenario, get it.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

Edited May 10, 2009 by ricbar89

[froggyluv 2130]

Walker

Skira Island is 110 square miles with many different features including farms, villages, monasteries and a town. There's also a dormant volcano.

When you go on about civilians and wildlife you need to get it into your head the game isnt like ARMA in story, its not about some civil war somewhere, its a WW2 pacific island style battle, like Iwo Jima or Okinawa (on a smaller scale), civilians and wildlife played no roles in those battles, hence its irrelivant to the scenario, get it.

.

Towns, villages and farms etc are really only features if their is some life to them, without them they serve merely as a backdrop. While I can understand that wildlife is nice but not essential, civilians play an extremely important role in almost all contemporary military conflicts. Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Georgia, all have strong civilian components in terms of both gathering intel, and restraint of fire and both of these only enhance tactical thinking and strategic gaming.

For instance, if I know the enemy has consolidated it's forces into a town and I have air strike/artillery capabilities, whats to stop me from mass bombing without restraint if their are no civilians to worry about? It are these very real-life intricacies that make modern mil-sim's more interesting and frankly, I hope all mil-sim's move in this direction.

Edited May 10, 2009 by froggyluv

[jtec 0]

I honestly think comparing Arma2 with OfpDr is pointless. Codemasters are making a slightly arcadish game using a engine not really designed from the ground up with a military game in mind. Meanwhile BIS have a engine that is a progressive evolution of a military sim that is still evolving after a decade of development.

I honestly think OFPDR will be a buzz to play even if it doesnt follow on from ofp, but at the same time we lose nothing as we will hopefully have a great true sequel named Arma2! Codemasters will sell loads of copies of OFPDR, not because of the name but more to do with it being different from alot of the current FPS out on consoles. Arma2 may sell even more, the only concerns i have at the moment (although easier with the console market) is the bugs that we seem to have to put up with for a number of months. I understand that due to the scale of Arma/Arma2 + the 1000's of different PC setups this is a huge problem, but if the console owners download a demo of Arma2 (if there still is a release on console) they will not be as forgiving as us PC owners.

[ricbar89 0]

Towns, villages and farms etc are really only features if their is some life to them, without them they serve merely as a backdrop. While I can understand that wildlife is nice but not essential, civilians play an extremely important role in almost all contemporary military conflicts. Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Georgia, all have strong civilian components in terms of both gathering intel, and restraint of fire and both of these only enhance tactical thinking and strategic gaming.

For instance, if I know the enemy has consolidated it's forces into a town and I have air strike/artillery capabilities, whats to stop me from mass bombing without restraint if their are no civilians to worry about? It are these very real-life intricacies that make modern mil-sim's more interesting and frankly, I hope all mil-sim's move in this direction.

It seems CM hasnt taken that route, they have gone with 2 superpowers fighting over a wilderness with no civilian involvment. Its just about the 2 army's facing off, nothing more.

[fumo 0]

Hi ch_123

I come to the conclusion that the modified Dirt Engine and its physics is what is causing CM its problems with the DR project for the following reasons.

1) The Math

When you start a project you Do the math! What will the systems you intend to use need in terms of resources? Every other developer looked at this problem, did the math and came to the conclusion that ragdoll or similar physics is a no go in an MP environment. It is a classic exponential load problem. As you add players, the number of calculations increase. When you start with a big number and physics is big numbers, you double the big number with two player, triple it with three, quadruple it with four etc. etc. That initial number has to be small! In fact it is worse than this as often with physics you are increasing by powers of that big number.

2) Feature loss

Well since the world is smaller than ArmA, there are less cities (one small village plus a farm apparently), less AI than BIS's OFP1, smaller MP games than BIS's OFP1, no aircraft, less quantity and complexity of vegetation, no wildlife and no internal editor etc. In fact it looks like a quantum leap back wards from the capabilities of BIS's OFP1; and they keep lowering the features. Therefor something is eating up resources.

3) Experience

At CoC we do big physics number problems in MP so this is something we know a little of. BN880 had to develop our own Network services to give us a way of compressing and optimising the information we sent across the net and we had to develop a totally new way of calculating the ballistics for UA to get round the exponential load problem past the 2000m range(it is one of those big number problems). Then we had to develop totally new ways of creating explosion effects so that it would work in MP, yet more big number problems.

That is why I insist you Do the Math!

If you have not done the math, you do not understand what it is we are talking about.

Kind regards walker

CM have a lot of coder that are payed to do the math, what have you? A hobby mathematician isn't realy thrustworthy, sorry. Still with your UA example you don't prove to be better than they.

But keep complaining and avoiding the sun ;)

middle-class regards Fumo

[walker 0]

Hi Fumo

Just do the Math.

Count how many calculations are involved.

Then multiply by number of players in MP.

Then compare to the capability of a standard game server.

I does not add up.

In fact as a result I think CM will have to put limits on how many tanks/vehicles can be in the simulation in MP. Either that or make it use ghost physics where the tank exploding does not affect the virtual world.

Kind Regards walker

Edited May 11, 2009 by walker

[echo1 0]

But what has that got to do with the editor?

[max power 21]

CM's word about the editor for consoles is that there isn't enough space on the disc.

[4 IN 1 0]

CM's word about the editor for consoles is that there isn't enough space on the disc.

Did he stated that it's the HD space or the DVD space? As BI managed to put a simple editor in the old xbox for ofp:e