Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

10 Good

About guiltyspark

  • Rank
  1. no because that is the point , the CPU is not used for those things anymore
  2. guiltyspark

    Next gen physx effects?

    Is there a possibility we could get some of these goodies somewhere down the line for explosions and such?
  3. Alot of the CPU tasks are ill-suited for the GPU in the game because that is how the engine is designed. Its designed to use the CPU because back in 2001 when this engine was created the CPU was a more powerful asset for game developers. The GPU and CPU Are hardware wise the same exact thing , they are both number crunching machines which game developers can allocate code to, they can perform THE EXACT SAME TASKS , if the engine is designed to do designate these tasks appropriately. The current engine we have now is from 2001 , there is no optimization or incremental improvements BIS can do that will fix this , they would have to rewrite the foundational parts of the games engine to "optimize" it and at that point it would be so much un-needed work that they should just make a new engine in its entirety. You are all being irrational children , you dont understand how game engines work or how computer hardware works. Arma needs a new engine badly , this isnt really an argument.
  4. No just think of the CPU and GPU as sort of like engines in a car. Originally when this engine (the arma engine) was designed , GPU's (video cards) were relatively low power and only added some performance to the games you played. hardware wise , A CPU and GPU can both perform the same type of tasks , but to perform those tasks they need to be designated in the software code. The engine for arma 3 was designed when GPU's were not powerful . So the code in the arma engine is designed for taking advantage of CPU's. Today we have GPU's that are so powerful its starting to get scary (nvidia titan). Where CPU development is becoming less of a priority in innovation. So the tech for GPU's is increasing at a faster rate than that of CPU's , so writing another engine that only took advantage of CPU power would be silly. and in the next 5 years GPU power will improve exponentially to where the question of "can arma handle these physics calculations AND ai calculations without taking an fps hit?" would be like asking if the sky is blue. ---------- Post added at 11:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:01 PM ---------- actually you do. If they made arma 4 with this same old ass engine with minor goodies added in it would be disgusting. the engine is supremely limiting and arma 3 will be stale in some aspects because of this. (other than the setting which is friggen aweful in itself.) ---------- Post added at 11:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:05 PM ---------- you dont seem to understand what an engine bottleneck is
  5. Thats the thing though , the performance of the arma games is not because they are particularly taxing its because they are using an engine that was designed back when CPU's were far more powerful and integral for computer games. Mix this with the fact that there is no 64 bit executable and you have an engine that is stuck in the past where you can only take advantage of half of your computer and ram. Today GPU's outperform CPUs for game calculations by a wide margin. To the point where if the engine was designed for this in mind we could have the scale of arma along with the nice things like destruction and fire propagation. Arma still only allows the use of the CPU in these tasks as the power of your GPU changes little in the matter of frames per second. the entire engine is a bottleneck
  6. I know its early to be talking about arma 4 since we are still in alpha for arma 3! But as we have all discovered the current engine while still capable of delievering an incredible military experience second to none. The engine IS showing its age. The most obvious problem with the engine is the ram bottlenecks and other CPU intensive tasks that dont need to be done on the CPU when we have computational monsters like nvidia titan. Gaming in the future will be less based on CPU And more based on GPU usage. I think Arma's next engine should be rewritten to take account for this fact. Here is a list of features that imo would benefit the arma community if bohemia were to make a completely new engine. Feel free to add your own and comment! - Shooting out of vehicle windows - AI being able to use buildings and cover appropriately , its great having all these nice enterable buildings but its pointless when the AI dont use them. - AI civilians having a daily routine/job that they follow to create a more "active" enviroment that doesnt have to be scripted over the course of 20 hours. - Electricity simulation , power lines , power stations. - Fire propagation through vegetation , forest fires , house fires. - A easy to use terrain and enviroment editor. - realistically done building destruction - weather simulation that effects vehicle traction and mobility (mud , slick roads , heavy snow) feel free to add ideas
  7. To be fair deadzone aiming is the only form of realistic aiming to be completely honest. I dont know what dyslexci was smoking but its not "some nostalgic" feature. It allows you to change your lanes of fire without moving your entire body like a break dancer to reveal your position. Its integral when you have very little cover and cant reveal your body.
  8. ya i messed with the controls thoroughly trying to get it "right" but its simply the code thats different. Its not the same thing as arma2 as far as mouse aiming is concerned
  9. Maybe its just me but when you turn on aiming deadzone all the way (the way its meant to be played) , it seems like they made a completely new control or mouse input system for the game. I dont like it. It seems like its really easy to say move the gun from side to side , but when you get to the side of the screen with your gun , it becomes IMPOSSIBLY hard to actually turn your character and i find myself actually running into my keyboard with my mouse. So you have all this really fast gun movement but when it hits the edge and you start to turn your character it becomes really clunky and is in no way as nice and fluid as the previous games. Why didnt they just use the mouse control parameters from arma 2 and OA? Why fix something that isnt broken? (inb4 ITS TEH ALPHA)
  10. guiltyspark

    Steamworks, add it in or not?

    i would be furious if there was no steam integration , especially the new mod support they have going in steam workshop. All i have to say is that if you own a gaming PC and dont use steam for all of your purchases you are just stubborn and whiney. Games have no resell value anymore regardless of what you buy , physical copy or not. Gamestop made this a fact in the gaming industry. pc games are worth less than dust to resell.
  11. guiltyspark

    i hope they make bigger airport's

    your opinion blows
  12. guiltyspark

    They better have female soldiers...

    no i meant women are a rare occurance in the US military in most positions. Not even just that , but the way they are integrated into the system is wrong. right now some estimates say for every 10 men there is a women serving. the problem is they are thrown into a unit alone to fend for themselves , and anybody who has served can tell you a marines favorite hobby other than killing is beating off multiple times a day. IF women were integraded into close groups of 3 or 4 , it would make it safer for them in general , not only because groups would deter things like rape , but 4 women reporting the same sexual offense is ALOT more credible than 1 lone woman saying she was raped (which is often written off here in the states as a cop out for a "slutty girl"). Also there is the fact that women are there for emotional support for each other , guys are there for emotional support when there is pussy on the table. its a sad fact of life. Either take women out of the military completely , or integrate them so they can feel safe and not alone in their gender. ---------- Post added at 08:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:57 PM ---------- people are no different today , especially women
  13. guiltyspark

    They better have female soldiers...

    honestly it wouldnt happen if they were not such a rare occurance in the military
  14. guiltyspark

    They better have female soldiers...

    I think females should be incorperated into pilot and driver roles for aircraft and land vehicles (both offensive and transport) The IDF has tons of women in their military and there is no reason to keep them out of the picture. There are tons of female ah1 and ah64 pilots and from what i understand they are growing in population for roles as jet fighters too. I see no reason not to include them , but i agree they should not be the ones on the frontlines with m4's with full tactical gear. ---------- Post added at 08:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:27 PM ---------- you are an idiot google lyudmila pavlichenko and stfu
  15. guiltyspark

    Ragdolls = In .... Realistic wounds ???

    its not concept art , its an in engine screenshot , meaning that ragdolls are in the engine its not an argument , at this point in time ragdolls are in the game