Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

NeMeSiS

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    6797

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Posts posted by NeMeSiS

  3. Posted

    Not always... not always... :j:

    Now that is the kind of story we want to hear. ;)

    So yeah, BIS nailed it with ArmA 2. Either it was simply too much for them to replicate that level, or they've left us all very much spoilt...

    It seems like BI had more ambition with ArmA2. With ArmA3 they seemed to go the 'less but polished' route, and apparently women didn't fit into that vision. I think it is a shame, immersion took a big hit. (Not just from a lack of women)

  4. Posted

    I thought it was pretty nice if you ever need to waste 30 minutes or so. Only thing i dont like is the limited inventory space combined with the 'losing my clothing because of a zombie and all my items disappearing', which keeps me from playing again for now.

    The advice is to gather a flashlight, wood and matches in the first 10 minutes? Can't, dont even have the pocket space. :D

  5. Posted

    I'll agree with you when people start sneaking out of the US, instead of sneaking in.

    Maybe not the best standard of measuring greatness, it just means that people in Mexico would rather live in the US than Guatemala. :p

    Anyway, this topic seems to me made purely for bothering Americans and their perceived greatness, which is kinda stupid. We also don't really need much discussions about it, in most statistical rankings the US does roughly (above) average compared to other first world countries.

  7. Posted

    Love it, save system and all.

    Taking it out will ruin the game and allow people to charge through it with no need to plan.

    This. It wouldnt be nearly as scary if you could save and load at any time. Consequences are fun. That said: I do play on easy, because i have other things to do besides trying a level 300 times. :p

    Anyway, the game looks quite alright, but i really miss some anti-aliasing. Without the jaggies this game would look absolutely stunning. I tried to get some downsampling to work, but failed.

  8. Posted

    You maybe wonder why the missions are campaign at first but the reason is when you fly from Startis to land Altis, the game need to change mission in the middle. So this is only singleplayer thing now and this doesn't "really" combine those maps. This is likely a thing if you want to go on the moon etc. planets also. But the game doesn't need to load any mission when you fly high and observe the earth and space.

    It's a cool singleplayer mode and it's awesome to see land over the view distance when you go enough high. Need to explore some space later :D

    That explains SO MUCH. I though he was the first to use some kind of new coding magic since OFP was released. :)

    Still cool though.

  12. Posted

    Here on my GTX-570 it has good framerates, but stutters every ~2 seconds. Which is not a problem for me, as it is no shooter. I was simply too lazy to optimize it for my rig. Maybe loading of textures... but OTOH it's on a well working SSD.

    I ran it on a very old (163GB) HD and had no such stutter (SSD too full, other HD just died), maybe a lack of VRAM.

  13. Posted · Edited by NeMeSiS

    I liked and would definitely play more games like this, though not for 20€.

    At times i got a bit annoyed because the directions were either to vague, or completely non-existent. At one point i had been aimlessly walking around for an hour or so and decided to google a walkthough, because i could not find

    the cave entrance to the mine

    . I had been stumbling around it multiple times, but just didn't see it.

    EDIT: Also: Best window-textures ever.

  14. Posted · Edited by NeMeSiS

    That game is nothing like Fallout. It's a postapocalyptic shooter, heavy on atmosphere, shooting and story. How could you actually expect something like Fallout 3?

    Last Light is kinda weird though, the first one has better story, atmosphere and gunplay IMO. Something just felt off about the second one. I still like both and they achieve what they are trying to be: Linear, story driven FPS.

    Anyway: Fallout3. I loved Fallout2 but i get the feeling that Bethesda just didn't grasp the atmosphere of the previous games. The design is very kiddy, the combat is boring and i just didnt get into it at all. It also suffers from a bad case of 'frosting shader' making the graphics look shitty. Though i guess i am the only one who feels this way.

  15. Posted

    I think I read fabrizio_t tried to exchange FSMs but still found that "something else" lurks down deep in the "engine" and overpowers the AIs mind in other directions.

    Would love if that was not the case, as FSMs can be edited and managed, but it may not be so simple

    That is correct. But they do govern a level of behaviour concerning the whole 'bounding overwatch' and stuff. If you let 2 squads run in combat mode, and you disableAI "FSM" one of the groups you will see a big difference in speed. Unfortunately no FSM at all makes them a bit too stupid for any purpose, maybe even 'run for your life'.

  16. Posted · Edited by NeMeSiS

    "Defend" could send AI in nearest buildings too.

    Well, ive been working on that myself, but getting it to work well enough consistently enough in any generic situation proved rather difficult, while something like 'Dont engage, use static guns' is usually generic enough to be implemented safely.

    Problems i ran into: Figuring out good buildings, especially before enemies are detected, calculating which buildingPos's make sense to use*, deciding when to enter or leave a building, ...

    *Once i had this brilliant idea of lineIntersects from nearby buildingPos's to every known enemy and figuring out the best postions from that. Occasionally it worked brilliantly with units shooting from balconies all by themselves, but more often it took the AI too long and whatever they did would just be a pointless detour. Also, lineIntersects supposedly isnt very FPS friendly.

    @Variable, i tried to keep the suggestions as down to earth as possible. The defend behaviour is something i already use and is easy to do. The convoy one needs some engine changes, as 2 different behaviours in a group/vehicle are not currently possible, but switching AI driver pathfinding behaviour for a single predefined condition shouldnt be all that hard. ProfTournesols suggestion for a simplified combat FSM during assault behaviour seems very elegant.

  17. Posted

    There's so much potential laying there, just need to allow the player bypass the AI automatic "danger behavior", and the mission makers will bring the game to a whole new level.

    Ive been thinking about this a bit, and what i would like to see is a second set of behaviour modes with modes like

    - Defend (DisableAI TARGET/AUTOTARGET, and automatically enter nearby turrets)

    - Convoy (AI drivers in careless mode, gunners in combat mode, currently impossible)

    - Assault/charge (No such behaviour ingame, but a 'fucking hurry up mode while still able to shoot' is desperately needed)

    - Default (Allround behaviour we have now)

    - More ideas welcome

    This would be seperate from the normal behaviour modes (safe, combat, ...) and you would be able to set these behaviours from the mission editor, as well as the command menu.

    Determining when what behavior is desired is pretty much impossible, there are just too many variables. But making it easy to set the desired behaviour for a commander/mission editor would go a long way.

  21. Posted · Edited by NeMeSiS

    Yeh this is for individual units, im not sure how the squad level works. I only worked on the single unit types at first.

    Theres more info here about it https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/FSM

    I would like to expand on this a bit:

    There are several 'layers' to the AI:

    The bottom layer is hardcoded, and contains the low-level stuff like making AI play animations when moving, line-of-sight calculations, low-level behaviour, and pathfinding (calculating the actual path the AI takes). AFAIK the decions AI leaders make are also here.

    On top of that there are FSMs: These mostly govern behaviour, stuff like bounding overwatch during combat mode, engaging targets, etc. These can be changed, but i dont know to what extent the default ones can be accessed in ArmA3. I am not aware of any addons touching these, but i have been somewhat absent lately. I have tried this in the past (ArmA1 mostly, bit in ArmA2, IIRC it was introduced in ArmA1) but i found it very difficult to get a measurable improvement, and i assume most modders had the same experience. (A lot of people are much more talented than i am, so without any mods changing this for the better i am going to assume that it is impossible to do without getting paid to do it 40 hours a week)

    And on top of that there is another layer: Orders, like forced behaviour modes, waypoints(not the same as pathfinding, this decides where the AI should go, not how they move there) or targets given by the mission editors or scripts. Most AI addons exist in this space, and basically pile the desired behaviour on top of what is already there, and can clearly get some good results.

    Besides that there are a whole lot of configuration settings that govern things like spotting ability, engagement ranges and formation distances that influence AI behaviour. A lot of good AI addons also change these.

  22. Posted

    Is there an option to turn fatigue OFF?? in SP?
    In terms of turning fatigue off the only way I know is if you made the mission. In the Units Initialization, put: this enablefatigue false;

    Heres also a version that works in MP-mode, when respawning, suggested by Das Attorney. I tested it yesterday locally (LAN).

    http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?183162-Can-you-turn-off-fatigue

    You could also make an addon that initializes that command on every unit automatically, which should work fine for SP.

  23. Posted · Edited by NeMeSiS
    I give up on grammar and spelling

    Probably because they at this moment prefer to have better reviews than money, specially after the weird release of A3.

    +1

    The game is currently in much, much better shape than when it 'officially'* came out and would have been received a lot better than it was. So support is pretty decent, even though it takes like 2 years to receive just 1 of the 15 most requested features. :p

    *As in not-alpha/beta, though that really didnt help.

  24. Posted

    In a perfect world, wouldnt AI do this:

    Spawn in

    (20 seconds of lag, loading screen for a bit longer, whatever you need to do, and: )

    Ai know the closest cover to where they spawn, and when the wait somewhere for X seconds they should mentally find cover, so that can be stored and used when shot at or something,

    Sounds really weird I dont know if I explained it well, but that is how real soldiers think.

    When you go into somewhere you are thinking where cover is, where the enemy could come from etc etc

    Unfortunately you cant know beforehand where the best cover is until you are being engaged. Like when you put down a bunch of objects as cover and an AI group in combat mode (without revealing enemies to them), and they take cover on both sides of the objects since at that point there is no 'good' side yet, because there are no one to hide form yet.

  25. Posted

    You mean this
    ? Yeah, it can be done. You had there more 16k AIs on a HD4890 card. :j: AMD showed the demo 5 or 6 years ago. Also ArmA 3 cannot maintain 60fps on low setting or even 30 at times (and i5 2500k OC + 7950OC in 1050p is no weak rig).

    While i am greatly in favor of offloading pathfinding to the GPU, there is more to ArmA AI than just pathfinding and you should not expect results anywhere near a techdemo.

×