Infantry Height Variation

[CW001 10]

Hello,

An idea popped into my head and refused to leave, so, here it is:

Currently, all the infantry are the same height(to me at least). In my opinion, if there was some kind of height variation implemented, it would improve soldier individualisation and realism. I'm not meaning anything drastic, like midgets vs giants, but small variations.

Just a small idea, but I hope it's a good one.

[jasonnoguchi 11]

Its a good one and I have been thinking about that as well hehehe... guess its too much effort for too little benefit on the part of BIS but it will sure increase realism. Especially the NAPA units in uniform.... jebas, they look like a clone army! hahahaha

[An Fiach 10]

You realise it would require all new animations as well? Undersized/oversized avatars wouldn't fit right in vehicles and crew served weapons

[max power 21]

Without any regard for what's possible in the engine (because I don't know), you could procedurally scale the animation, I think, and scale the models. That way the artists wouldn't need to make a number of models and animations for every soldier class... but that would also scale their equipment, so the smaller soldiers would have smaller radios, etc.

I think that this suggestion is very unlikely to amount to anything.

[jasonnoguchi 11]

looking at secondlife, you would see that the same animations fit avatars of every size so I don't think its a technical challenge. As for fitting into vehicles and stuff, if the vehicles are scaled to real life and human dimensions don't exceed real life dimensions, there shouldn't be a real problem otherwise Ford and GM should be making same cars of all sizes to fit the vast variety of human shapes in the world today? don't think so , right? :)

[-SONAF-Rebel 10]

I`ve been thinking about this as well for a while.... I think its shame that every soldier looks like the same in terms of height and weight.

We should be able to create our own characters, which could be kinda cool. Of course few limitations would be necessary.

[CW001 10]

You realise it would require all new animations as well? Undersized/oversized avatars wouldn't fit right in vehicles and crew served weapons

Which is why I said small changes, nothing too drastic.

[max power 21]

I think even small changes would negatively effect the hand placement on weapons quite dramatically.

[jasonnoguchi 11]

@Maxpower, I really don't think that is a challenge either. Again, quoting secondlife where there are avatars of ALL shapes and sizes and somehow, weapon positioning looks ok because the player get to align and adjust the positioning ingame.... if this has been possible in secondlife for the past 5 years (or 6 years) I think its possible for BIS as well. :)

[SWT_Janowich 10]

You cannot compare this game to second life.

[jasonnoguchi 11]

I am just saying that the technology exist so its BIS's problem to solve if they want to.

[johncage 30]

no thanks. the differences would be absolutely negligible...unless you want to include midget soldiers ala modern warfare 2.

[max power 21]

@Maxpower, I really don't think that is a challenge either.

This is because you lack any understanding of what you are talking about. To appeal to some unknown technology 'out there' that would help BIS do this thing is at best premature. How much would this technology cost BIS? How much would training their staff on it cost? How many man hours would it then cost BIS to impliment? How many more man hours would it cost if the change wasn't smooth? How many more man hours after that for repacking and testing?

Sorry man, anything in business is challenging.

Edited December 19, 2009 by Max Power

[-SONAF-Rebel 10]

This is because you lack any understanding of what you are talking about. To appeal to some unknown technology 'out there' that would help BIS do this thing is at best premature. How much would this technology cost BIS? How much would training their staff on it cost? How many man hours would it then cost BIS to impliment? How many more man hours would it cost if the change wasn't smooth? How many more man hours after that for repacking and testing?

Sorry man, anything in business is challenging.

I am not saying that your point is not right, but you make me remember a little story regarding the Wright Brothers - who invented the aviation. In their time, the physicists were trying to explain in their books why aviation is impossible. Luckily the Wright brothers did not read those books.

Adding new ideas is the role of community. The technical part comes down to BIS. They will decide wether these idea`s are worth dealing with or not.

Edited December 19, 2009 by [SONAF]Rebel
mistyped

[max power 21]

Rebel;1519157']I am not saying that your point is not right' date=' but you make me remember a little story regarding the White Brothers - who invented the aviation. In their time, the physicists were trying to explain in their books why aviation is impossible. Luckily the White brothers did not read those books.

Adding new ideas is the role of community. The technical part comes down to BIS. They will decide wether these idea`s are worth dealing with or not.[/quote']

I think maybe you're attempting to talk about the Wright brothers.

We're not talking about some unknown physics or a new method of transportation, here. Resizing models is not teleportation. There are known and finite challenges, and known and very finite benefits to this. It seems like a man-hours intensive cost for a limited benefit. We're not pushing the boundaries of human knowledge. Your analogy is false.

Edited December 19, 2009 by Max Power

[sic-disaster 311]

I think it's a good idea.

Considering animations on crew-weapons: how well exactly are they done right now? :p

Hell, a boardgunner on a Blackhawk has its hands on his lap while the gun turns by itself!

Anyways, this suggestion immediately tingled my Rainbow Six memories! :)

The first game had soldiers of different height:

http://www.tangodown.nl/data/artikelen/klassiekers/r6/schipbestorming.jpg

[-SONAF-Rebel 10]

I think maybe you're attempting to talk about the Wright brothers.

We're not talking about some unknown physics or a new method of transportation, here. Resizing models is not teleportation. There are known and finite challenges, and known and very finite benefits to this. It seems like a man-hours intensive cost for a limited benefit. We're not pushing the boundaries of human knowledge. Your analogy is false.

Yep, it was the Wright brothers - do not understand why I typed White... It was not an analogy. Your words brought this up in my mind and I have just typed it.

I believe if the actual game system - or engine - is not supporting radical changes within it, its not good in its basics. I know that it is advantageous in some cases, like when you want to reduce the labor costs etc., but via this perspective we can not reach the ultimate goal.

[An Fiach 10]

I believe if people want a new game engine they should make a thread just for that or write one themselves.

[mr_centipede 31]

instead having variable heights, why cant we just have variable heads instead? easier I think. dont have to mess around with hand placement and all that... the hard part is, well I dont know one. Doesnt mean there arent any... just that I dont know any. There will always be a hard part somewhere

[LODU 19]

Try to resize the model skeleton arma 1, then make it a config with a different name, like "johndoeSkeleton", for example, and in O2, start an animation decompressed from "anims.pbo".

To complete the manipulation, you must also resize an avatar of a soldier with the same values in x, y, z.

[NeMeSiS 11]

I believe if people want a new game engine they should make a thread just for that

No they shouldnt.

[An Fiach 10]

No they shouldnt.

Fantastic point :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 09:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:20 AM ----------

Try to resize the model skeleton arma 1, then make it a config with a different name, like "johndoeSkeleton", for example, and in O2, start an animation decompressed from "anims.pbo".

To complete the manipulation, you must also resize an avatar of a soldier with the same values in x, y, z.

Even if that works they will not work correctly with vehicles and things like that due to proxy placements.

[SFJackBauer 10]

I think maybe you're attempting to talk about the Wright brothers.

We're not talking about some unknown physics or a new method of transportation, here. Resizing models is not teleportation. There are known and finite challenges, and known and very finite benefits to this. It seems like a man-hours intensive cost for a limited benefit. We're not pushing the boundaries of human knowledge. Your analogy is false.

And what gives you power to be a spokersperson of BIS or put down ideas of forum members?

The old tale says, if you dont have anything to add to the thread, then dont post.

I could use your argument and say "why they motion-captured human movement just for the sake of appearing real, all we need is a gun and bullets". Or "why they motion-captured some guy dancing and put into the game as a hidden animation"? Motion-capture equipment (which BIS own), and actors to perform cost money and time, doesn't? Its because its technology, and sometimes breakthrough in technology are made because investments in things seemingly futile and unnecessary.

What the OP is proposing may be low priority in the grand-scheme of things, but who decides is BI, not you or me. Inverse-kinematics has been out there for long time, if they want to incorporate into their engine is their decision.

Quote from wikipedia:

Inverse kinematics is a tool utilized frequently by 3D artists. It is often easier for an artist to express the desired spatial appearance rather than manipulate joint angles directly. For example, inverse kinematics allows an artist to move the hand of a 3D human model to a desired position and orientation and have an algorithm select the proper angles of the wrist, elbow, and shoulder joints.

For example, when one wants to reach for a door handle, their brain must make the necessary calculations to position his limbs and torso such that the hand locates near the door. The main objective is to move the hand but the many complex articulations of several joints must occur to get the hand to the desired location. Similarly with many technological applications, inverse kinematic mathematical calculations must be performed to articulate limbs in the correct ways to meet desired goals. One example where inverse kinematic calculations are often essential is robotics, where an operator wants to position a tool using a robot arm but certainly doesn't want to manipulate each robot joint individually. Other applications include computer animation where animators may want to operate a computer generated character, but find it impossibly difficult to animate individual joints. The solution is to model the virtual joints of the puppet and allow the animator to move the hands, feet and torso, and the computer automatically generates the required limb positions to accomplish this using inverse kinematics.

Key to the successful implementation of inverse kinematics is animation within constraints: computer characters' limbs must behave within reasonable anthropomorphic limits. Similarly, robotic devices have physical constraints such as the environment they operate in, the limitations of the articulations their joints are capable of, and the finite physical loads and speeds at which they are able to operate.

Edited December 20, 2009 by SFJackBauer

[dm 9]

Yay, lets all argue about something we have no idea about \o/

:j:

[ceeeb 147]

BI's VBS2 has a setHeight & setBMI command, so it would be possible within ArmA 2. Such options are a luxury, but would be nice :)