What if CryEngine was used as Arma 3 future engine?

[Jockson 10]

wow. I think you have one major case of nostalgia :eek:

You think? :D Nah, I've actually stopped playing ARMA and I'm back to OFP so I am very well aware how repetitive the radio voices are/were. I wasn't actually suggesting to do it THE OFP way, just to keep it more simple because the whole idea of recording each and every word separately and by different actors too simply doesn't seem to be working with the current system. The OFP example I gave is robotic for sure. ARMA's: "ENEMY. man. 500 meters. TO OUR.... front" takes it to another level. They might as well have used Microsoft Sam to do the voices, perhaps it would have made moments such as "taking fire" and "we lost 6" sound more emotional instead of said in a casual matter ;)

[Millenium7 0]

You think? :D Nah, I've actually stopped playing ARMA and I'm back to OFP so I am very well aware how repetitive the radio voices are/were. I wasn't actually suggesting to do it THE OFP way, just to keep it more simple because the whole idea of recording each and every word separately and by different actors too simply doesn't seem to be working with the current system. The OFP example I gave is robotic for sure. ARMA's: "ENEMY. man. 500 meters. TO OUR.... front" takes it to another level. They might as well have used Microsoft Sam to do the voices, perhaps it would have made moments such as "taking fire" and "we lost 6" sound more emotional instead of said in a casual matter ;)

I agree on that, they shouldn't have recorded word by word and had it played in sequence, it just doesn't work. It would be far better even if they just recorded "move over there" with some emotion. And then showed the "6 move to building 12 o'clock 100 metres" in the radio text only. Makes for far less clutter and better sound, also meaning more time to record multiple versions for whisper/normal/shouting

[Peonza 10]

My opinion :

Good physics should be priority !

Bodies rolling down stairs,

50 cal bullets cutting little trees and wooden fences,

buildings made of material , where physics affect each piece of it (like those huts in Crysis)

I think you got idea :)

[millerhighlife 1]

one word outerra, plus a bunch more

molnibalage wrote:

"Is it capable to handle aerodynamic forces or ballistic modelling for bullets, artillery shells or unguided rockects? What about radar (this is one of the hardest), RWR, ground clutter, IR signiture AI eyball, ect. modeling for a hardcore sim? If currently it does not do you have ideas or plans to ensure this?"

Developer: "Well, currently we are focusing on the terrain rendering and connected things, which are important for the engine's usability in various target apps, but we are also integrating other functionality along the way - mostly for demonstrative purposes at the moment.

At the time we do not have resources to implement all the functionality that a hardcore simulator will require, so we are including stuff that helps to show what is possible. At the same time it must not be overly taxing our resources, as we have to implement core rendering features first. Specific functionality will be developed on demand for our customers, but we are selecting our customers so that their demands are not unrealistic smile

Many of the features you mention can be also developed in coordination with them - we would be providing the low level functionality that will make it easier, while they would be implementing the high level part. As an example, damage modeling would consist of collision feedback functions that we can provide more effectively, but the actual damage response will be handled in the game code.

BTW we did test some ballistic modeling already, and AFAIK JSBSim includes flight dynamics models for rockets as well."

Saw this while reading the forums, he also mentions the trees:

"Most of you can get over the fact that the trees are simple at the moment, that there are just a few terrain materials etc etc, because you can extrapolate and imagine what could become of it."

IMHO I'm very impressed with outeraa and maybe one day we will have another military sim to work with because we know BI will not switch engines. I'm just waiting on the rest of my computer parts to get here and will be playing O.A with you guys, But I must say I'm eager to play the outeraa demo.

check it http://outerra.com/wgallery.html

[noubernou 77]

Yea there is a lot of promise in an engine like Outerra, but I really think it is beyond the scope of something like ArmA...

That being said, it is not beyond the scope of something like VBS2... and we know one feeds the other.

I don't see BIS purchasing that engine though.

I been probing them about some specific features on their forums and it seems like they have lot of potentials planned for. Whoever picks it up, it should be exciting.

[JakeWed 10]

I would just like a couple of key things personaly:

1, Make the game less jerky (more Fluid Movement)

2, Add Mirrors (Simulator? You cant even see out your rear View mirror!)

3, Add some form of Physics (Eg: Cars Ramming into each other and getting stuck)

4, Voice Acting:

For Voice Acting it shouldn't be single words, but Parts of Sentences, Instead of "Enemy-Man-Behind-That-Bush" it should be "Enemy man-Behind-That Bush" still allowing for the Modular Speech but making it roll better

[lao fei mao 21]

a better physics system,please!

[nodunit 397]

...http://outerra.com/wgallery.html

The funny thing is from that height the pilots would be non the wiser if the tree's were 2D, I think 3d tree's are great but only close up, from distance you could fake the lighting and such easily with the 2d planes thus free'ing up a TON of resources. Looking at the terrian I think one thing.. "vehicle sim.." with that varied and beautiful terrain it could easily fit both ground and air, problem is that is the ENGINE itself not so much th engine used in a game, two completely different things sadly.

sunset transition is beautiful..the funny thing is render to texture aka mirrors is possible but only in VBS2, however Thermal was originally in VBS2 as well so perhaps at some point years ahead we may see this feature..it certainly would be nice to have as it could be used for so much more than just mirrors.

Edited December 20, 2010 by NodUnit

[sqb-sma 66]

I would say, "better physx, better netcode, better particle fx (they have remained almost unchanged from OFP...)"

but... looks like BIS have a competitor, who is using cryengine :p ;)

[jonneymendoza 10]

now where talking

[Herbal Influence 10]

I would say, "better physx, better netcode, better particle fx (they have remained almost unchanged from OFP...)"

but... looks like BIS have a competitor, who is using cryengine :p ;)

Yeah, too bad it's less a competitor in Gaming but in making good films about how it COULD look like. The demo doesn't show how it would work on nowadays PCs DURING a game. It's a kind of an advertising film.

Discussion is here !

[jonneymendoza 10]

still looks good

[Haystack15 10]

To be honest,

I Will not want the Engine to change at all. Why? Because BIS has been working on the current one their using for 10 years. Why Throw 10 years of their lives away when you can just keep adding improvements.

That will be like Microsoft Throwing out windows and Saying Fu%^ it, We will make something new. And the problem with that is nothing will be compatible with that new OS.

The Plus side of staying with their current engine is that they know it like a mother knows here children. Working on a new one will be stepping into unfamiliar territory.

[jonneymendoza 10]

To be honest,

I Will not want the Engine to change at all. Why? Because BIS has been working on the current one their using for 10 years. Why Throw 10 years of their lives away when you can just keep adding improvements.

That will be like Microsoft Throwing out windows and Saying Fu%^ it, We will make something new. And the problem with that is nothing will be compatible with that new OS.

The Plus side of staying with their current engine is that they know it like a mother knows here children. Working on a new one will be stepping into unfamiliar territory.

windows xp, windows vista, windows 7 and now windows 8.

[PuFu 4600]

windows xp, windows vista, windows 7 and now windows 8.

It is still the same stuff more or less: directX, .NET and so forth. Even though changes have been made, stuff works more or less.

Same goes for BIS games

[metalcraze 290]

The current engine is fine. Why do you think that 300 AIs, each calculated independently, that lag here won't lag harder on a new one?

[noubernou 77]

The current engine is fine. Why do you think that 300 AIs, each calculated independently, that lag here won't lag harder on a new one?

Uhhh obviously you've never dated a hot but very stupid girl. Its all about looks man, everything else can be ignored! :D

:p

Seriously though, I do not think most people are able to grasp the amount of stuff that happens in the background in these games. I mean things like ballistics are barely even simulated on platforms like the CryEngine, where as every round out the barrel on every gun fired is simulated in the RV engines (and thats just a tiny tiny portion of the background heavy that goes on).

[Haystack15 10]

Uhhh obviously you've never dated a hot but very stupid girl. Its all about looks man, everything else can be ignored! :D

:p

Seriously though, I do not think most people are able to grasp the amount of stuff that happens in the background in these games. I mean things like ballistics are barely even simulated on platforms like the CryEngine, where as every round out the barrel on every gun fired is simulated in the RV engines (and thats just a tiny tiny portion of the background heavy that goes on).

Right, Most of the people that are requesting an engine change keep saying something like CryEngine or Outerra. When they don't even simulate the basic thing the Real Virtuality Engine has.

My guessing is because they want some good looking physics. Once again that's something that can be added over time like everything else.

I mean for those of you who don't see anything this engine brought. Go look at some videos of Operation Flashpoint (Not Dragons Rising) and then look at ARMA II. Big Changes there right?

Or better yet Look at this PDF Here. A good reminder.

[twisted 128]

The engine is impressive

for me its LOD which currently I think is just bugged so hopefully we can get clean LOD stages that arent so noticable like they're right now.

graphically the main thing I would like to see is the lighting engine be revamp and make it as a lighting graphics option so you dont further kill performance for people with older set ups.

I would like to see more light sources, dynamic shadows, farther shadow draw distances, less blocky,pixelated shadow maps especially on People, but yeah things like flashlights/headlights casting shadows would be significant.

after lighting engine I would say overall Terrain mesh detail, nothing more awesome then having a huge mountain range in the background with high res textures and high poly counts,

then after that particle effects improvements, debris from blowing up vehicles rather them just turning into black carcus's, overall better looking fire effects and smoke effects on the big bombs.

non skippy animations this is prevelant mainly online, im not going to expect euphoria type animation in Arma 3 but if its alittle better than arma 2 and no skips ill be perfectly fine.

add more graphics options to arma 3 BIS to help people out from the beggining

easiest thing to please people right here.

Grass/ground cover draw distance setting or config

Shadow map detail

reflections on or off

seperate post process effects settings like motion blur, HDR, bloom, SSAO

well said.

add- outerra looks pretty damn impressive as well.

Edited January 14, 2011 by twisted

[Flash Thunder 10]

Like others have already mention people jump to say cryengine would make a better arma 3 then Rv engine because they simply dont know what they're talking about.

RV engine can have physics like Cryengine aswell, same for all those fancy shaders they use and the nice character animations (BIS own their own Motion capture studio FFS) :)

Im having a dream.....

I see the key improvements for Real Virtuality 4.0

Key Improvements:

* 20km + Viewdistance capability along with Dynamic Viewdistance (already available in VBS 2)

* Physics simulation overhaul

* Support for DX 11 and Open GL

* Character animation pipeline improvements, including actions for underwater movement.

* Complex facial animation pipeline

* Complex Simulation of muscles and limbs

* Support for 100's of light sources that cast dynamic shadows (dont even know if this is possible within an arma 3 timeline)

Talk about the awesomeness Then, BIS would be leaving all the other engines in the dust.

[Soetdjuret 10]

What graphics overhaul does this game need? Maybe nightime lighting and a few tweaks... Other than that I think this is the best looking game around.....

I can say with some confidence that they look far far better than any iteration of cryengine.

"Best looking engine around" and "Far better than any iteration of cryengine" No offence but what a load of BS... Check this out before you make your judgment please:

http://h-4.abload.de/img/big_01pqnd.jpg

http://h-4.abload.de/img/djungle1xotk.jpg

http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/142/1/8/Crysis___Game_Environment___01_by_MadMaximus83.jpg

http://h-4.abload.de/img/daisieszqtx.jpg

http://h-2.abload.de/img/1kykz.jpg

All pictures rendered in realtime using Cryengine2... It's far superior to the Real Virtuality 3 engine. Here's more amazing pics in my gallery: http://nvnews.net/vbulletin/member.php?u=98711

Edited January 18, 2011 by Soetdjuret

[Soetdjuret 10]

http://img5.abload.de/img/tank2pvhx.jpg

http://img5.abload.de/img/crabs5m7y.jpg

Edited January 18, 2011 by Zipper5
Images > 100kb

[Flash Thunder 10]

^

Instant Ban!

My friend unless you resize those GIGANTIC Images.

[Soetdjuret 10]

Uh, gigantic? The only gigantic is the daisies one which is slightly bigger than a 24 inch res. The rest of the pics are between 22" and 24" res, which I wouldn't consider too big. Also, there's only 5 pics so why the crying? Btw, if those pics were resized it wouldn't be as easy to appreciate the details and awesome graphics lol.

[noubernou 77]

Uh, gigantic? The only gigantic is the daisies one which is slightly bigger than a 24 inch res. The rest of the pics are between 22" and 24" res, which I wouldn't consider too big. Also, there's only 5 pics so why the crying?

Meant file size, there is a 100kb limit on the size of images here (for some reason its still 100Kb... :p)