Bohemia Interactive's future ARMA 3!

[maddogx 13]

I remember having played that, for one day or so .. until it became very obvious that everybody but me was playing on lowest details so they could rightaway pwn anyone whos (supossedly) hiding in shadows or grass :rolleyes: .. *bing* uninstalled.

Yup, that was the really sad part about FEAR multiplayer, rampant cheating aside. Shadows and particle effects off was pretty much a requirement for competitive MP. A clanmate of mine even insisted on playing with 640x480 res, because that apparently made enemies appear bigger. It was pretty ridiculous.

Ontopic: Not seeing how more public players could breath life into a situation where every newcomer gets the advice to join a closed group because public play is total rubbish :confused:

Perhaps the soon-to-be-unveiled BIS project is a piece of this puzzle. Like containing new MP missions that focus on teamplay, or something.

I dunno, this is all just speculation at the moment anyway.

[MulleDK19 21]

I remember when FEAR required a powerful machine.

I did a benchmark on my dads GeForce 470 GTX, and I got averagely 800 fps, lol.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Maybe BIS CEO and devs are already using/playing with something like:

GmqJr2ijKIo

and just waiting that consumer can afford/buy it :D

Imagine CTI with it or just making pewpew...

[Ish 11]

Outerra. Nuff said!

[PuFu 4600]

would some MOD drop that BANHammer on Outerra's virtual acolytes please?

[celery 8]

would some MOD drop that BANHammer on Outerra's virtual acolytes please?

They might not have full knowledge of Outerra's capabilities, but neither do you.

[dm 9]

Outerra is nothing more than a fancy techdemo at the moment.

We havent seen mass AI (or AI at all), mass physics, long range ballistics (or any ballistics for that matter). We havent seen whether or not things are simulated on the opposite side of the map to your current location. Etc etc...

ALL it is at the moment is a fancy long-range graphics engine. Theres nothing to make it usefull as a game engine. And once they start adding that, we'll see how well that scale holds up...

Until then, its all just PR fluff.

[PuFu 4600]

They might not have full knowledge of Outerra's capabilities, but neither do you.

I never said i am aware of what it is really capable of, BUT

1. i don't go round the forums posting "outerra" every nth word

2. i understand that it having BIS change their game(s) engine to another one (no matter what that is) and dump 10 years of RV developments in NOT gonna happen - both from a tech and financial perspective

3. Outerra is NOT in a finished state, so even suggesting it as an actual game engine TODAY sounds weird.

That doesn't mean i don't find it impressive, or look forward to the first playable tech demo to get my hands on

All in all, what is your point here?

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Point is, Outerra is used as an example of what the community expects in the future projects: Bullet physics for ground interactions, revamped animations.

You'd rather people use this,

DCzDKj3hjOE

to express the concept? "The world will change" is not my quote, and there's a lot of meaning put into it, if you get your head around a single thing, which would change the ArmAverse, forever.

[celery 8]

All in all, what is your point here?

This is a thread for expressing suggestions and wishes for Arma 3. Asking mods to ban people who in your opinion have a stupid suggestion isn't proper behavior.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Until then, its all just PR fluff.

http://www.theprodukkt.com/kkrieger#20

Got MeGAHurTz?

5R1MrkTra2g

Edited May 9, 2011 by Iroquois Pliskin

[PuFu 4600]

Let's get this straight: I have no issue with expressing a concept by using another WIP game engine as reference, BUT there is a difference between what this community expects/desire from BIS to REALIZE with their future products, and actually suggesting that they should just switch their engine.

More on the subject, we all want more from our games, but yet we also want to be able to play with 60FPS on a 400$ rig if possible. Hell, i am all for OpenCl/GL instead forcing game developers to use limited API present in M$ DX..Will it happen? Doubtfully.

[dm 9]

Point is, Outerra is used as an example of what the community expects in the future projects: Bullet physics for ground interactions, revamped animations.

Not that outerra has either of those... :j:

http://www.theprodukkt.com/kkrieger#20

Got MeGAHurTz?

I fail to see what your point is here?

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Not that outerra has either of those... :j:

Don't shy away from facts,

izyZ1kKQzbE

47paAW7ljRc

Concept of physics is alien to you?

Animations: it's so simple, you define the laws, you embody objects with values governed by said laws, and let the World reign.

[PuFu 4600]

indeed Outerra integrates Bullet Physics as well as JSBSim libraries.

More HERE

still, Iroquois, do you actually think that BIS will ever drop RV in favor of say, Outerra? (even if BIS and Outerra devs are familiar to each other)

[Defunkt 431]

Asking mods to ban people who in your opinion have a stupid suggestion isn't proper behavior.

I'm all for a stupidity instaban rule (God, please), this place would be much more pleasant to visit and converse in.

[dm 9]

Don't shy away from facts,

Concept of physics is alien to you?

OOOOOOH. You mean the bullet physics engine, and not "bullet physics". Right, yes, Outerra has physics, that I will agree with.

Animations: it's so simple, you define the laws, you embody objects with values governed by said laws, and let the World reign.

Uhh, the RV engine already has all of that. I assumed you meant character animations (since thats what people btich about the most) and outerra does not have human entities yet...

Talk about changing the goalposts (of already vague comments) :j:

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

still, Iroquois, do you actually think that BIS will ever drop RV in favor of say, Outerra? (even if BIS and Outerra devs are familiar to each other)

I'd say that there's a higher chance of a partnership between the two, and I would be willing to bet there's an ongoing development in the the topic of Bullet physics engine implementation. ;)

Most likely scenario - RV3 is coming late 2011 or 2012.

---------- Post added at 01:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:29 PM ----------

Uhh, the RV engine already has all of that. I assumed you meant character animations (since thats what people btich about the most)

Deaths are not animated?

[MulleDK19 21]

I can't say I'm impressed with Outerra.

[trips 10]

I see a lot of talk about physics but is there any netcode out there that would allow it? The current netcode struggles keeping track of units as it is...

On top of that I don't really see what significant impact it would have on gameplay.

[MulleDK19 21]

I see a lot of talk about physics but is there any netcode out there that would allow it? The current netcode struggles keeping track of units as it is...

On top of that I don't really see what significant impact it would have on gameplay.

A lot of games incorporate physics in multiplayer.

There are several ways it could be implemented in a game like ARMA.

One way, could be to replicate everything. Which unless you'd have a thousand physical objects at once, would be plausible.

For ragdolls, you could do either no replication at all (Clients will calculate on there own, with the disadvantage of dead bodies not being the same players for all players), simple replication (Only key body parts, like pelvis and head would be replicated (or maybe just the pelvis), so just the upper body would be at the same place for all players, while legs and arms would be measured by the clients), or a full replication (The entire ragdoll is calculated by the server, and replicated to clients).

Real world physics would greatly improve the gameplay, especially driving. Also it's much cooler to actually see enemies fall differently every time, rather than the same old animations over and over again.

Wouldn't it be cool, driving a truck, notice an RPG flying towards you, then jump out the truck, hit the ground, and roll off, while the truck continues, then blows up?

nom nom.

[PuFu 4600]

I see a lot of talk about physics but is there any netcode out there that would allow it? The current netcode struggles keeping track of units as it is...

On top of that I don't really see what significant impact it would have on gameplay.

While everyone agrees that the netcode would support some improvements, half of the issue with MP lag is server related (or the fact that there are few admins actually tweaking their servers, but rather opt for the default configs)

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

As MulleDK19 said, server would only need to keep track of the position of the torso, when events happen beyond the fog of war, the clients do the rendering when they come in view of the objects.

Driving, for one, would be improved; don't you love 120 km/h downhill turbo, flying BMPs?

[dm 9]

Deaths are not animated?

Uhh, yeah they are?

They're not ragdoll, but they are animated, if thats what you're getting at.

But again, outerra doesnt even have people yet, so dont go singing its praises when they dont exist...

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Uhh, yeah they are?

They're not ragdoll, but they are animated, if thats what you're getting at.

Then how does this fit in with "Uhh, the RV engine already has all of that." in reply to this: "Animations: it's so simple, you define the laws, you embody objects with values governed by said laws, and let the World reign."

But again, outerra doesnt even have people yet, so dont go singing its praises when they dont exist...

Irrelevant.

P.S. If only BF 3 was not limited by consolitis...