DayZ moving to new engine - ENFUSION

[hombrecz 832]

I have to say, that Rocket did not formulate this well enough.

To say "we are getting new engine" while he ment reworked VR engine from Arma 2 (or TOS), had to lead to confusion and departure of many "hate trains".

 

On the other hand whoever was following development knew, that they changed VR engine a ton and mentioned this at zillion times. So knowing this, it was not that hard to understand, what he ment by changing engines.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Hombre

[instynct 99]

I have to say, that Rocket did not formulate this well enough.

To say "we are getting new engine" while he ment reworked VR engine from Arma 2 (or TOS), had to lead to confusion and departure of many "hate trains".

 

On the other hand whoever was following development knew, that they changed VR engine a ton and mentioned this at zillion times. So knowing this, it was not that hard to understand, what he ment by changing engines.

Just another case of rocket giving false information to try to hype people up backfiring.

[hombrecz 832]

Just another case of rocket giving false information to try to hype people up backfiring.

 

Well even when he was honest and said, that he wants to go independent by the end of this year, that backfired a lot as well.

Basicaly whatever he says will cause chaos amongst many players, often needlesly.

[ld-airgrafix 403]

If you buy a used car and change the tyres one day, next day interior, day after the body, followed by everything being replaced eventually with new parts, do you have a new car or is it still your old car. I can't understand what is so difficult to understand. It's a completely new engine replacing the old in stages.

[hefeweizen 254]

the point is they are going to make much needed changes, the arma engine is a horrible clunky platform riddled with 10 year old bugs and so many band aids that have been applied over the years that it must be a complete nightmare trying to work with. This is pretty much complete bullshit. Arma 3 is an amazing game, and it is built on the same engine. Rather recently, I might add.

 I just wish they'd realised what everyone else realised at the beginning. The only people who 'realised' this were idiots caught in the echo chamber of the internet mindlessly repeating nonsense that they heard other idiots say without actually understanding the subject matter at hand.

 

DayZ is too good a concept to waste on this engine, it deserves a chance to be the game we all imagined when SA was first announced instead of a prettier but buggier version of the mod.  ITS BEEN SIX DAMN MONTHS HOW DO YOU PEOPLE STILL NOT UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF AN ALPHA YET????

[Gruffallo 16]

If this puts us a step closer to dynamic beards then this is good news.

[scriptfactory 620]

 

 

the point is they are going to make much needed changes, the arma engine is a horrible clunky platform riddled with 10 year old bugs and so many band aids that have been applied over the years that it must be a complete nightmare trying to work with. This is pretty much complete bullshit. Arma 3 is an amazing game, and it is built on the same engine. Rather recently, I might add.

 I just wish they'd realised what everyone else realised at the beginning. The only people who 'realised' this were idiots caught in the echo chamber of the internet mindlessly repeating nonsense that they heard other idiots say without actually understanding the subject matter at hand.

 

DayZ is too good a concept to waste on this engine, it deserves a chance to be the game we all imagined when SA was first announced instead of a prettier but buggier version of the mod.  ITS BEEN SIX DAMN MONTHS HOW DO YOU PEOPLE STILL NOT UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF AN ALPHA YET????

 

 

1. Arma 3 is a lot of fun but mainly because of its modding support. Even though major advancements have been made the A3 engine itself is pretty shitty by modern standards. The bugs are incredible. Compared to any "modern" engine (e.g. Snowdrop/Frostbite 2/CE3/etc.) it is lacking in many areas.
2. Read the next point I make and think about your words.

3. DayZ is still in a pre-alpha state. In the typical development of a game you aren't changing rendering engines during an Alpha. Stop repeating what you have heard other idiots say about game development.

Edited June 12, 2014 by scriptfactory

[Daemonkid 493]

If this puts us a step closer to dynamic beards then this is good news.

Verily!

[kichilron 8550]

If your only contributions for this topic are going to be either of these

 

• Moneygrabbers
• Game will never be finished
• Alpha is an excuse
• They're just buying Lambo's trolololol

then please use the topic linked below instead of derailing this one.

 

http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/6794-i-give-up-this-game-is-bull-i-want-my-money-back/

[brumey 116]

 

 

 

1. Arma 3 is a lot of fun but mainly because of its modding support. Even though major advancements have been made the A3 engine itself is pretty shitty by modern standards. The bugs are incredible. Compared to any "modern" engine (e.g. Snowdrop/Frostbite 2/CE3/etc.)

 

 

 

can those cool "state fo the art" engines handle large scale maps with 100 People on them ?!?

Edited June 12, 2014 by brumey

[AlcApwn (DayZ) 28]

can those cool "state fo the art" engines handle large scale maps with 100 People on them ?!?

 

i guess they do a hell lot better than BI's bullshit. DayzMod couldnt even handle 1player in 1 fast vehicle properly.

 

creating stuff like that is not a trivial code-monkey job, unlike creating a simple HP/Blood/Food system.

[scriptfactory 620]

can those cool "state fo the art" engines handle large scale maps with 100 People on them ?!?

All modern game engines can support LIMITLESS streaming maps.

Can the DayZ servers support maps with 100 people on them? Hell, can most Arma 3 mods even do that? No.

[Mos1ey 6301]

All modern game engines can support LIMITLESS streaming maps.

Can the DayZ servers support maps with 100 people on them? Hell, can most Arma 3 mods even do that? No.

 

They had 100 slot servers running alright during the last experimental build and things should improve once we start using 64bit servers.

 

You can't blame the engine for Altis Life getting screwy with 100 players on the map, lol.

[scriptfactory 620]

They had 100 slot servers running alright during the last experimental build and things should improve once we start using 64bit servers.

 

In my experience, 100-slot servers have always been a lagfest. A really "not fun" experience.

 

64-bit servers will not improve server performance much but it will help with scalability.

 

You can't blame the engine for Altis Life getting screwy with 100 players on the map, lol.

Not just Altis Life. I have never played a single Arma 3 mod that works well with 100 players.

[Mos1ey 6301]

Not just Altis Life. I have never played a single Arma 3 mod that works well with 100 players.

 

Try Wastleland, it runs more or less as well as the single player campaigns with 100 players on the map. It's the dodgy scripting in things like Altis Life that cause the game to perform poorly, not the engine.

[brumey 116]

a3wasteland on altis is THE mod i Play on arma3! it handles lots of People!

 

and renders bullet Impacts on 2000 metres!

[kichilron 8550]

In my experience, 100-slot servers have always been a lagfest. A really "not fun" experience.

 

64-bit servers will not improve server performance much but it will help with scalability.

 

Not just Altis Life. I have never played a single Arma 3 mod that works well with 100 players.

 

 

Yeah, but yet again you're saying ARMA 3 Mods.

 

Just boot up a server with absolutely nothing on there but 100 player slots, no scripts executed, nothing. It will run as smooth as nothing you've ever seen before.

 

Truth is, that most mods for ARMA-games are poorly optimised and that's the reason why it's performing poor. I reckon most of them didn't ever do any performance-checks or optimisation whatsoever.

 

I just remember the hugely problematic Invade & Annex, which had a nice idea - but was essentially just about 100 scripts smacked together to run on a server and it enver went past 25 FPS. When we set out and created the same thing from scratch doing it properly we had something that was well-optimised and performed at abotu 50 FPS average on Altis - which is about the same as you'd get from the Campaign.

The sad truth is - none of the modmakers know much about performance-tweaking and usually just add everything they can without ever coming back, revisiting, optimising.

[ZomboWTF 527]

i hope the new engine will handle distance camouflage as well as arma does, few games have similar techniques

 

without any insight to the new engine, i hope they will be able to re-use a lot of the old stuff or we will wait another year to get to the state we are currently in

[ZomboWTF 527]

Yeah, but yet again you're saying ARMA 3 Mods.

 

Just boot up a server with absolutely nothing on there but 100 player slots, no scripts executed, nothing. It will run as smooth as nothing you've ever seen before.

 

Truth is, that most mods for ARMA-games are poorly optimised and that's the reason why it's performing poor. I reckon most of them didn't ever do any performance-checks or optimisation whatsoever.

 

I just remember the hugely problematic Invade & Annex, which had a nice idea - but was essentially just about 100 scripts smacked together to run on a server and it enver went past 25 FPS. When we set out and created the same thing from scratch doing it properly we had something that was well-optimised and performed at abotu 50 FPS average on Altis - which is about the same as you'd get from the Campaign.

The sad truth is - none of the modmakers know much about performance-tweaking and usually just add everything they can without ever coming back, revisiting, optimising.

 

yeah, i remember that one dayz mod where the zombies were kind of bugged but you could play with 70 people without any lag whatsoever, never heard of it again though...

[MLG420blazeit 62]

Maybe if the OP read Rocket's post, he would have noticed that DayZ is not moving to a new engine, simply put the engine is getting re-named due to the changes it's taken over the development period - clearly the devs no longer see this engine similar enough to the rest of the RV engines.

[Caboose187 (DayZ) 3036]

Maybe if the OP read Rocket's post, he would have noticed that DayZ is not moving to a new engine, simply put the engine is getting re-named due to the changes it's taken over the development period - clearly the devs no longer see this engine similar enough to the rest of the RV engines.

No, instead the OP had to make a "sky is falling" thread.  And it worked.  He baited in a lot of haters.

[kichilron 8550]

Oh, by the way - if anyone's not seen rocket talking about it about 3 weeks back already:

 

http://www.reddit.com/r/dayz/comments/25y1e5/i_just_received_some_incredibly_disppointing/chly4wq

[Mos1ey 6301]

No, instead the OP had to make a "sky is falling" thread.  And it worked.  He baited in a lot of haters.

In fairness Rocket's wording at E3 wasn't great.

[hefeweizen 254]

 

 

 

 

3. DayZ is still in a pre-alpha state. In the typical development of a game you aren't changing rendering engines during an Alpha. Stop repeating what you have heard other idiots say about game development.

 

Bullshit, its happens all the time. Off the top of my head, without any research Team Fortress 2 and Rust both come to mind. Its clear you don't know dick all about software development.

Hell, DayZ isn't even changing to completely new engine like Team Fortress 2 did, or Rust did, they're just crafting an new engine for their game by modifying an existing engine to suit their needs just like countless other titles have before. Half-Life 1 springs to mind as an example.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Hefeweizen

[Caboose187 (DayZ) 3036]

In fairness Rocket's wording at E3 wasn't great.

This is true but in all honesty, it wasn't really all that difficult to deduct a reasonable conclusion to what he was talking about as it has been talked about for months.