They build the network bubble they keep talking about and then it's basically releasable rocket said. All other really neat content that gets made is done by passion from the other team members while that network bubble is being made.
Because the engine they are using is terrible and outdated
[QUOTE=Ylsid;41938867]Because the engine they are using is terrible and outdated[/QUOTE]
Quite funny to say that because now they have their own and they keep shaping it to a structure that will give the best results. You never played with the new engine.
[QUOTE=Ylsid;41938867]Because the engine they are using is terrible and outdated[/QUOTE]
the ARMA 2 engine was extremely bad for running a game like DayZ on, yeah
which is why they're rebuilding parts of it to suit their needs
[QUOTE=Ylsid;41938867]Because the engine they are using is terrible and outdated[/QUOTE]
The engine isn't terrible or outdated; it just wasn't made for such an expansive mod with so many features and such.
We have to remember that the original purpose of Arma 2 was simply to be a dynamic military simulator. When you start adding new foreign mechanics into the works of course issues are going to stem from that. In that regard, I think the engine has its own charm that makes the game fun and appealing.
The good thing about DayZ that has a lot over other similar games is the fact that the Devs have worked with that specific engine for a good while now. They're not having to spend as much time learning the engine then make the changes they want. Instead, they're focusing on feature packing the game while addressing many of the current engine problems we've all complained about.
No ragdoll physics? Rocket says he won't add them because the engine doesn't support them. Irony.
[QUOTE=Conna;41941882]No ragdoll physics? Rocket says he won't add them because the engine doesn't support them. Irony.[/QUOTE]
his entire reasoning behind not using the arma 3 engine as a base is "its dx 11 features are too intense for some computers, won't run well"
hey shitlord, you know what else doesn't run well for anyone's computer? [I]the entirety of arma 2.[/I]
[QUOTE=Bredirish123;41940800]The engine isn't terrible or outdated; it just wasn't made for such an expansive mod with so many features and such.
We have to remember that the original purpose of Arma 2 was simply to be a dynamic military simulator. When you start adding new foreign mechanics into the works of course issues are going to stem from that. In that regard, I think the engine has its own charm that makes the game fun and appealing.
The good thing about DayZ that has a lot over other similar games is the fact that the Devs have worked with that specific engine for a good while now. They're not having to spend as much time learning the engine then make the changes they want. Instead, they're focusing on feature packing the game while addressing many of the current engine problems we've all complained about.[/QUOTE]
From what I've read they've been addressing some of the stability issues etc, but one of the biggest issues in most ARMA games has been server stability more than client stability; the VoIP is always semi-broken, servers that have a lot of players or have high uptime give clients extreme lag (not network lag, more like "my game is running at 15 fps" lag).
So yeah, I'm optimistic that DayZ standalone will turn out good, because they seem to really be taking their time, but its cautious optimism, because ARMA 2 seemed to have limitations that BI couldn't even fix with dozens and dozens of updates.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;41947785]his entire reasoning behind not using the arma 3 engine as a base is "its dx 11 features are too intense for some computers, won't run well"
hey shitlord, you know what else doesn't run well for anyone's computer? [I]the entirety of arma 2.[/I][/QUOTE]
Arma 2 runs fine, most people just never bothered to start the vanilla game besides DayZ and then cry about the game having bad FPS.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;41947785]his entire reasoning behind not using the arma 3 engine as a base is "its dx 11 features are too intense for some computers, won't run well"
hey shitlord, you know what else doesn't run well for anyone's computer? [I]the entirety of arma 2.[/I][/QUOTE]
His reasoning is that Arma 3 is a completely new engine which people worked years on. If they were going to use that engine they'd need another year of development time. Arma 2 was a familiar base they could work from right away.
[QUOTE=Conna;41941882]No ragdoll physics? Rocket says he won't add them because the engine doesn't support them. Irony.[/QUOTE]
Rocket also said the developers went through great pains to get the ragdolls working properly in the Arma 3 engine, networked and all. He's not saying ragdolls are impossible, but they're not a priority at this stage.
[QUOTE=Niklas;41953712]Arma 2 runs fine, most people just never bothered to start the vanilla game besides DayZ and then cry about the game having bad FPS.[/QUOTE]
i've played vanilla arma 2 for like, a billion years. i'm pretty sure i know if it runs like shit or not compared to A3.
i remember when he said he wanted to release standalone before 2013 :v:
dont really want to support dayz because for a long time bohemiea were breaking core arma 2 feature with the shitty dayz patches but you seriously think they would develop dayz on RV4? the beta is a fucking mess each release is more broken than the last they went so far as cutting out the campaing to get it out the door in september and its still going to be a buggy piece of crap for atleast 6 months after release
also why make dayz standalone alone on RV4 when they can port it once the engine is in a reasonable state spend ten minutes porting cherno+ and sell it to you again
Is this the same bubble thats going to prevent people from playing on servers not in their country/zone?
FFS thats stupid. One of the only good things about the fuckin ArmA 2 was its netcode or w/e, one of the few games I can play with mates overseas and not feel like I'm getting fucked over for having 250 ping.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;41954053]i've played vanilla arma 2 for like, a billion years. i'm pretty sure i know if it runs like shit or not compared to A3.[/QUOTE]
Actually you can fix the FPS with a few minor tweaks.
[QUOTE=DrDevil;41960174]Actually you can fix the FPS with a few minor tweaks.[/QUOTE]
No you cant ffs
EVERYONE uses those fixes
Explain why then people almost universally have been experiencing far better performance out of the box in ArmA 3, than with ArmA 2, despite A3 being vastly superior graphically.
A2 is poorly optimized ffs, theres no dancing around it.
[QUOTE=Satane;41960575]You can't really compare stratis to chernarus.[/QUOTE]
[t]http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/jk48qduHkLE/maxresdefault.jpg[/t]
allinarma is a thing
[QUOTE=Satane;41960617]does it run better in arma 3 ?[/QUOTE]
I had a 10 FPS increase in ArmA 3 Chernarus over ArmA 2 Chernarus, without mods.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
