Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by ric

  1. Please don't spread misinformation when you don't have any clue about our work (which you actually stated yourself).

    Enfusion is NOT an evolution of the RV engine, ALL the parts of the new, modular Enfusion engine are being written from scratch, with the intention to serve as a tech basis for ANY kind of game, therefore not serving only a specific purpose. DayZ is implementing the modules one by one as they become available, while working with some legacy modules from RV (which is why DayZ is subjectively taking such a long time to be developed, because it solves complex technical/compatibility issues).

    The one thing that you stated correctly is the fact that (with the exception of DayZ) we will use the Enfusion engine for our future projects.


    thank you for this information  it's very encouraging to hear that you are making a new engine :):)  I was working on a project that involved many large structures using in-game objects so there would no mod to download, however performance issues made me stop :(  there were to be several of these types of castles of different sizes and shapes over the map  but just one of them (like in the picture) crippled the server :(, I really hope there is an A4 in the furture using the new engine.





  2. When you understand algorithms and data structures, you'll appreciate how good the current engine actually is.


    do you think a 4 engine bomber fly's better on just 2 of the engines? maximum speed will be obtained when all 4 engines are working. Are you saying the RV engine use's Distributed algorithm


    I dont know of any game engine which is truly ? "mutlicored"... even engines such as crysis which work in the same was as the RV core 0 API and AI , Core 1 volumetric cloud, core 2 phyx and water simulation, core 3 audio...  what would rewriting a completely new engine solve if anything, it will just cause a massive head ache to the devs and to the community which will have to relearn everything from scratch more or less.  people say that arma is unoptimized but when you ask them whats wrong they give an uneducated answer to why "such as in <name of open world / Fps game here> i get 120 fps Ultra"


    first thing is, Arma has a view distance which is 6.6 times larger then the maps in games such as battlefailed 3.


    2nd every single Ai is being tracked in real time not only in the view distance of a player, this also applies somewhat to ever single object over 1 million around the island if you knock down a tree and come back to that tree in an hour it will still be knocked down. 


    3rd every single round is calculated even the ones that you do not see. they all change angles and velocitys during flight and can bounce off of objects or the ground.

    all in all, what im trying to say without typing a damn book is that Arma is a game which does things which has no comparison to be made in its class. (and before someone says something no Dcs, il-2, x planes ect is not in the same class)



    4th people play on cancerous gamemodes such as king of the hill, domination, life, day z and what ever is on the band wagon.... all these gamemodes are not well optimized, they are filled with tons of objects, tons of scripts and tons of ai... and to put more salt upon the wounds they are not even being run on good servers or they are running without a headless client server.  


    What a game engine is doing is irrelevant when you find out it is not effectively using all available resource (cores) .

    "Evolution according to Amdahl's law of the theoretical speedup in latency of the execution of a program in function of the number of processors executing it, for different values of p. The speedup is limited by the serial part of the program. For example, if 95% of the program can be parallelized, the theoretical maximum speedup using parallel computing would be 20 times."



    Thnx for the responses I got the answer I was looking for, no need for further discussion.

  3. there is no engine built from scratch, there is an update to the RV engine though, that, afaik, has nothing to do with A3 anyways



    thnx for the response, how does BI plan to bring out future games when they have  hit a wall or very soon will  with the current engine... :( you would figure that 3 years after the release of A3 and all the subsequent problems revolving around performance or lack there of that they have at least a road map for the replacement of the current engine...

  4. There was a small improvement from the Sandbridge 2600k to the Haswell processors but hardly enough to make it worthwhile. Skylake is another big increase in GPU performance and no movement in CPU performance from Intel so I would hazard a guess its not going to bring much improvement again unless something amazing happens that we haven't yet heard about.

    As to Zen based on the fact its a 12 cores (probably stretching that definition like the 8350 did with 8 cores) it may or may not help Arma 3. If they get single thread performance to be roughly the same as Intel's (unlikely considering the vast difference in resources of the two companies) then the extra cores will help the rendering process go a little faster and give the Zen an advantage. But just a 10% drop in single threaded performance will hand the advantage to the Intel CPU again.

    Fact is the game just isn't written with todays or future processors in mind, thus it doesn't care much about the architecture changes coming and the general trend towards more cores. Its extremely unlikely we'll see a big change to that basic fact in Arma 3's cycle, DX12 is only going to reduce the rendering time in the API which right now is pretty minimal but it wont fix the serial thread issue over the rest of the games processing. I know people want hope but its more honest to just accept the reality that it'll always perform this way and no magic CPU is coming to save the day. The only time to show any hope is once BI themselves freely admit that the client has severe performance problems due to its design and commit to fixing that, until they do that (they haven't done yet) we aren't going to see any improvement.



  5. I posted this in the wrong place originally

    I have picked up on an old project I was working on from over a year ago and was reminded that in one of the patches a problem for me cropped up when it came to placing platforms high in the sky (1600m) and having people spawn on those platforms, it worked fine until one patch made it so any soldier spawning on said platform (over 100m in the air) was stuck forever skydiving on the platform unable to stand.

    does anyone know of a way to correct this so I can spawn people on those platforms?


  6. I have picked up on an old project I was working on from over a year ago and was reminded that in one of the patches a problem for me cropped up when it came to placing platforms high in the sky (1600m) and having people spawn on those platforms, it worked fine until one patch made it so any soldier spawning on said platform (over 100m in the air) was stuck forever skydiving on the platform unable to stand.

    does anyone know of a way to correct this so I can spawn people on those platforms?


  7. they on occasions explained that the game is (effectively) single threadded, that the guy who made the engine left BI which left them in a position where they werent able to easily change core functions, that they didnt focus on MP (and MP gamemmodes) because it would require to fix the persitent core issues with the engine first. (e.g. a dev half-jokingly explained to me once that they wont focus on pvp until the game performs well with 100 players, it was a bit of a flimsy pretext to cover up the lack of progress imho but the statement has a certain explanatory value nonetheless)

    p.s. also there are rumours that they simply are not good at making proper MP gamemodes (lol @ the bot-taxi mission that came with heli DLC :P ) and left it to the community to come up with it, which wasnt completely unreasonable but unfortunately didnt turn out very well in the end (or did it?)

    I remember during the alpha I booted my PC to run only one core and then I started the Arma3 server and loaded a mission i had made and it loaded fine until the AI spawned then it crashed, at its heart Arma is an old engine that was not coded for multicore and until there is a fundamental rewrite nothing will change and they will continue to rob peter to pay Paul. :(

  8. I brought this up 2 years ago but it was dismissed as "middleware"...but unless BIS is writing a whole new engine from scratch perhaps it is time to rethink this course.

    Best of all, SequenceL is built upon open industry standards to work with your existing methodology, training, and tools. Industry standard parallelized C++ and OpenCL output leverages all these investments while providing an easy, low risk path to modernize portions of existing programs. This also makes it quick and easy to explore if your algorithms can benefit from (GP)GPU acceleration without learning special low-level GPU languages like CUDA or OpenCL.


  9. You should release it!! Looks pretty cool... are there any issues with moving over the blocks (players and/or AI)?

    its crapshoot with the AI sometimes they walk around an object sometimes they walk through...mostly when their in the air (upper level of castle) do they walk through objects or off ledges, real players have no problems really.

    Presently what you saw in the pics contains almost 13 thousand objects :eek: . I put 5v5 AI battle and my FPS tanked into the teens :( So I think it will only be useful for PvP.

  10. like i said, you can get intel cpu + mobo for 300usd, so won't go above what he wanted to spend

    buying amd cpu just for arma is really stupid at this point as the upgrade won't be worth the money at all. he might as well just stick with his current setup then

    true, but he was asking about AMD cpu and his last comment said $200 not $300 :) now if all i had was $200 to spend i would go this route



    but i think the OP needs to chime in and tell us exactly what he wants todo.

    I think I ll go with some ~200 $ amd cpu, and next upgrade will be better gpu - any comments ?