syphon0202@gmail.com

If you don't know the name of the engine (hint, it's not arma engine), how can you make claims about its functionality? 1) The only thing Arma 2 models with concern to ballistics is travel time, bullet drop, and bullet start location (inside the gun, not the tip of the barrel). These things already exist in other engine as projectile physics, they are just usually not implemented for every weapon as those physics would be detrimental to the action-based multiplayer of games like Crysis 2 and UT. 2) You think Arma 2 has no sector loading? Really?... It just hides it from you. It does it far in advance so to the user it looks like no loading is ever done. Any engine can do this. If the full map was loaded all the time the game would have insane requirements, I'm sure none of our pc's would be able to play it. 3) Any engine can do this, that is all done by changing the users perspective, not a hard thing to do. 4) A- I don't think many people use TrackIR... B- All the data readin for TrackIR is done by the free TrackIR sdk, meaning every game can easily use it and tweak how the readin data (which is done automatically and is the same for every game) is changed into ingame data until it "feels" right. I've done TrackIR "support" for silly java games, just to see how easily it's done. 5) I'm guessing you have never even looked at a screenshot of the CryEngine or Unreal SDK, much less actually used them. Same goes for Real Virtuality and the Arma 2 editor. The CryEngine editor is so well made I would feel comfortable using it with a Xbox controller and mini-keyboard. Honestly though, if someone thinks the editor included with Crysis/Crysis 2 is too complicated, they really shouldn't even be designing a map, much less creating a full mod. The only real point that can be made against switching engines is the time required to recreate the whole map. Although editors such as the one for CryEngine would make this a less painful job, it would still be a lot of work. Real Virtuality just isn't a good engine, it feels and runs like it is still in early beta, yet it has been out for 3 years. If I can run Crysis 2 on high and have it look beautiful at 45 fps, if I can run Unreal Tournament 3 on highest and if it look astounding at 50 fps, why should I be running Arma 2 at low/medium settings with it looking like a blurry mess at 25-30fps? Why am I teleporting to and from ladders, dying from scraping against a ledge while sprinting, and just overall getting a completely different set of glitches every time I login if the game and engine are such a well made base for DayZ? Why does the speed of the server cause my game's fps to vary from 2 fps to 30 fps if the networking behind Arma 2 is so great? It would be a lot of work to switch over but, honestly, dealing with all the shit from Real Virtuality and Arma 2 is just not worth it when you look at how much better just about every engine out there could be. I love DayZ and have literally days of playtime in it, but that doesn't change the fact that I find myself fighting with the game itself just as often as I fight zombies and bandits.