DayZ moving to new engine - ENFUSION

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

Off the top of my head, Half-Life 1. Started with the Quake two engine, ended up with Gold Source.

Come on CHECK YOUR FACTS, they did not "change" to GoldSrc, they started with the quake engine and rebranded it GoldSrc after half life 1 was complete. This is not an engine swap, engines are evolving products.

 

This "engine A engine B" stupidity is popularized by modders who have to PICK an engine because most engines do not offer source code access without a hefty upfront payment (and no source engine mods don't have what you can call source code access)

Game developers don't have this limitation and their engine mutate and evolve based on what they add to it.

[solus84 19]

DayZ forever alpha.. Like I said 2-3 years at best for release. Im happy for a new engine, but this obvious decision should have been made in the first place.

[rezinsky 14]

I am excited to see this evolve, I was totally new to the Arma series after finding DayZ SA, so it is interesting to see the flexibility of this engine at work. Personally I say better they take all the time they need to make a superior piece of software, than appease us with updates. To all the anxious individuals who feel BI is lagging ass, I did too for a time but think about it. When you count the minutes and days the week never ends, so lets take a look at the bigger picture. 6 months in, major redevelopment of an entire architecture, changing studio location, expanding team out of country, training new in house teams, developing new projects, implementing new systems and tech from scratch, and oh ya all this while running plenty of servers for both testers and players alike with very little outage. It would appear that this team is kicking ass on many facets simultaneously. Besides now there is Arma 3 and well, DayZ SA? Whats that?

[Gdaddy22 299]

Yay and fuck at the same time - yay for new engine, fuck for 5x more waiting

[Kaboki 62]

All you guys that say BI engines are crap and all and compares them to arcadish FPS engines, wake up!! ARMA engines are simulators, where engines like Frostbite and others are arcade FPS engines. When doing simulation it takes alot more computer resources than these other non simulator engines and are much more harder to develop. Arma engines are unique and we don't have any good alterantives to them, if Dayz ever was built on some of these arcadish FPS engines it would be the day I stopped playing Dayz. I want realism and not an arcade game...

[gibonez 3633]

All you guys that say BI engines are crap and all and compares them to arcadish FPS engines, wake up!! ARMA engines are simulators, where engines like Frostbite and others are arcade FPS engines. When doing simulation it takes alot more computer resources than these other non simulator engines and are much more harder to develop. Arma engines are unique and we don't have any good alterantives to them, if Dayz ever was built on some of these arcadish FPS engines it would be the day I stopped playing Dayz. I want realism and not an arcade game...

 

Yup Frostbite and cryengine 3 all do not have the same scale or amount of ai that BI engines have.

 

I would love to see cry engine or frostbite render past a pathetic 800m.

 

I would like to see frostbite render a player out past 4000m.

[scriptfactory 620]

Yup Frostbite and cryengine 3 all do not have the same scale or amount of ai that BI engines have.

 

I would love to see cry engine or frostbite render past a pathetic 800m.

 

I would like to see frostbite render a player out past 4000m.

 

Why would you need to render any further than this?

[gibonez 3633]

Why would you need to render any further than this?

 

because the size of the map is substantially larger than Battlefield 3 maps.

 

Rendering players and objects at 5000m has amazing gameplay potential things such as scouting ahead play even more importance and it creates more immersion having objects not magically pop up at 1000m.

 

The Bf3 video was definetely set up too not to mention the player does not render and is merely shooting at glint.

Edited June 12, 2014 by gibonez

[byrgesen 1341]

Why would you need to render any further than this?

 

What Gibonez said and being able to see people at very long distances, opens up for higher value of high grounds, like green mountain for example.

If you could see players 5-10km away, it would be an great spot for a clan to hold up, or even use as a base.

If you can only see 500-1000m the importance of such a place drops rapidly, as well as the tactical advantage.

[Daemonkid 493]

Why would you need to render any further than this?

He's shooting at a scope glint. No player is rendered there. 

[scriptfactory 620]

because the size of the map is substantially larger than Battlefield 3 maps.

 

Rendering players and objects at 5000m has amazing gameplay potential things such as scouting ahead play even more importance and it creates more immersion having objects not magically pop up at 1000m.

 

The Bf3 video was definetely set up too not to mention the player does not render and is merely shooting at glint.

 

The map rendered is 32x32km. The playable area is, however, only 2x2km but this could definitely be increased.

In the video description it says it was setup because no one ever shoots from that distance.

 

 

What Gibonez said and being able to see people at very long distances, opens up for higher value of high grounds, like green mountain for example.

If you could see players 5-10km away, it would be an great spot for a clan to hold up, or even use as a base.

If you can only see 500-1000m the importance of such a place drops rapidly, as well as the tactical advantage.

 

AFAIK, DayZ is not rendering players at even 1km right now. With medium settings you can only see people at about 400m. I run almost everything on Ultra and I can't see players past 900m (perhaps due to the "network bubble").

BF4 already renders players at 2km with Ultra settings so it could definitely be used to power SA. The engine is in no way weaker than RV/Enfusion.

[gibonez 3633]

 

AFAIK, DayZ is not rendering players at even 1km right now. With medium settings you can only see people at about 400m. I run almost everything on Ultra and I can't see players past 900m (perhaps due to the "network bubble").

BF4 already renders players at 2km with Ultra settings so it could definitely be used to power SA. The engine is in no way weaker than RV/Enfusion.

 

Yea this is sad.

 

SA has severely nerfed player distances and not only that the quality of the rendered players seems to be substantially lower than it was in Arma 2.

 

Looking at a player rendered at 3000m in ACE mod or Arma 3 the player model looks substantially better than it does in stand alone.

[Kaboki 62]

The map rendered is 32x32km. The playable area is, however, only 2x2km but this could definitely be increased.

In the video description it says it was setup because no one ever shoots from that distance.

 

 

 

AFAIK, DayZ is not rendering players at even 1km right now. With medium settings you can only see people at about 400m. I run almost everything on Ultra and I can't see players past 900m (perhaps due to the "network bubble").

BF4 already renders players at 2km with Ultra settings so it could definitely be used to power SA. The engine is in no way weaker than RV/Enfusion.

 

Range is one thing, but the Arma engines simulates real physics better than any engine out there. There is so much more going on under the hood than in any other arcade engine out there. BF4 engine, works good for an arcade game, no way in hell that I want an engine like that for dayz.... I am a 'simmer' and fly alot of flightsimulators and heli sims, and Arma engines actually are pretty close to those sims with heli physics allthough it doesn't simulate 'vortex ringstate' and other advanced things but it does a fair job with the basics, now where arma shines is what it simulates when it comes to ground combat and weapon systems.

BF4 engine and other FPS engines does not simulate shit, they just look pretty....

Edited June 13, 2014 by Kaboki

[scriptfactory 620]

Range is one thing, but the Arma engines simulates real physics better than any engine out there. There is so much more going on under the hood than in any other arcade engine out there. BF4 engine, works good for an arcade game, no way in hell that I want an engine like that for dayz.... I am a 'simmer' and fly alot of flightsimulators and heli sims, and Arma engines actually are pretty close to those sims with heli physics allthough it doesn't simulate 'vortex ringstate' and other advanced things but it does a fair job with the basics, now where arma shines is what it simulates when it comes to ground combat and weapon systems.

BF4 engine and other FPS engines does not simulate shit, they just look pretty....

 

For a game like DayZ, do you see a completely accurate physics simulation improving the game more than draw distance, improved graphics and improved performance? Is there any reason why the weapon and vehicle simulation models couldn't be changed to be approximately as good as what is currently implemented in RV/Enfusion?

I would say that SA is currently lacking in the simulation department. It seems, at least, they are deviating from the extreme "realism" that the Arma series is shooting for.

[babypuncher71 22]

Yup Frostbite and cryengine 3 all do not have the same scale or amount of ai that BI engines have.

 

I would love to see cry engine or frostbite render past a pathetic 800m.

 

I would like to see frostbite render a player out past 4000m.

The biggest problem,with this is consoles...

It may not be on console yet but thats where the real money is to be made from gaming companys not the pc market..

Now if you look at the minimum specs for pc for bf4 you will see why,if you want things like this they have to open the game up to the console market and its coming..

Why do you think they now have so many people in the team or teams....

The cash van is at the console section..

[byrgesen 1341]

AFAIK, DayZ is not rendering players at even 1km right now. With medium settings you can only see people at about 400m. I run almost everything on Ultra and I can't see players past 900m (perhaps due to the "network bubble").

BF4 already renders players at 2km with Ultra settings so it could definitely be used to power SA. The engine is in no way weaker than RV/Enfusion.

 

Did i ever say that?

Im saying what benefits can come from this.

 

Look ar Arma III, you can render people and object at ridiculous distances, because you can change the settings your self.

The only reason you can do that in DayZ, is because its "locked" to the same distance for everyone, which is around 1600m.

 

EDIT:

gibonez beat me to it heh

Edited June 13, 2014 by Byrgesen

[AshleyP 121]

DayZ forever alpha.. Like I said 2-3 years at best for release. Im happy for a new engine, but this obvious decision should have been made in the first place.

 

My worry is that they'll fold some of the new updates into DayZ, tart it up a bit, and then release it in its current form as the finished product.

 

Then they'll work on an update with the new engine, which will be released as DayZ II, or DayZ: No More Space in Hell or something. For which you will have to pay another £19.99, because it's a whole new game!

[BadAsh (DayZ) 1513]

DayZ forever alpha.. Like I said 2-3 years at best for release. Im happy for a new engine, but this obvious decision should have been made in the first place.

 

 

Yay and fuck at the same time - yay for new engine, fuck for 5x more waiting

 

 

My worry is that they'll fold some of the new updates into DayZ, tart it up a bit, and then release it in its current form as the finished product.

 

Then they'll work on an update with the new engine, which will be released as DayZ II, or DayZ: No More Space in Hell or something. For which you will have to pay another £19.99, because it's a whole new game!

 

You guys should probably take the time to read more than the thread title next time you comment in threads.

[Cap'n (DayZ) 1827]

All right. Next person to ridicule the Real Virtuality engine is going to get a lengthy reply as to why it's still a good engine.

 

Still, they've just ripped so much out that it's barely the old engine. It's not a *new* engine, just a franken-engine. All these filthy casuals makes me nauseas.

 

But...still. ArmA engine is a good engine.

[Damnyourdeadman 1045]

Rocket announcing at E3 that the game is moving to a new engine,

when in reality he's talking about large modifications on the already existing

RV engine is a very cheap move in my book.Regardless of everyone's opinion the engine comes with various limitations.

For instance,i doubt it will be ever possible to jump and grab a tall fence and climp to the other side,

also i doubt the engine would allow a grabbing/takedown mechanic to make the zombies more ruthless.

Modifing the current engine is a common knowledge across the community,but with what he presented as "new" information in an official

and serious gaming hotspot convention is in fact a lie,so basically he decepted trolled the whole community.

Edited June 13, 2014 by Damnyourdeadman

[OrLoK 16185]

Hello there

 

Perhaps it was a Rocket faux pa to announce it as a "new" "engine" (it was him was it not?) but in many ways it is/will be.

 

Dont forget Dean isnt the most EA PR esque guy and I actually prefer that, its more like we are communicating with a real person rather than one who speaks in buzzwords.

 

The same with this forum, we run it very laxly and let a lot slip by that wouldnt be allowed on other forums. Again this is intentional. We  want to be close to our community not a faceless PR/Fanboi site.

 

Saying that, Dean knows his beanz, talking to him in skype, about the engine changes, is rather scary as he's uber technical and i often feel like a gibbering tangerine talking to Einstein when it comes to that area. (im the tangerine btw :) )

 

I think that folk will Micro judge him on his tweet as Haters just want *something* to grasp on to wail about.

 

The RV platform is great for Sim-ing, not perfect but great for what it does, with the upcoming changes its also going to be a great sim/gaming platform.

 

I do still find avatar control "clunky" and thats been my main gripe throughout the series, although with a beast machine its far less evident.

 

As to dean trolling or decieving the community, well no I dont think so.

 

I think that before we were going to just be using a fork of RV now we have much more opportunity to see fundamental core changes to the platform, perhaps more than the team initially hoped for.

 

i think the terms he use can be miscontsrued but are fundamentally correct.

 

If you see what I mean? :0

 

Rgds

 

LoK

[Damnyourdeadman 1045]

Well he still spoke of a new engine when in reality it's the same(moddified version).

That's not big news,the community was always aware of this information.

My problem is not whether DayZ moves to a new engine or not.But charachter profanity is something important,and his phrasing was clearly wrong,unintentional or not i really don't know.This is not something worth making an annoucment out of.

When someone just refers the word "clunky" the RV engine is the first

thing that comes to mind xD.

I just hope theese core engine changes are enough to fix that.

[kakysas666 191]

DayZ is moving to new engine - CONFUSION. Where the glitches and bugs overtaken Chernarus and a player must survive at all costs.

[gibonez 3633]

The cash van is at the console section..

 

Yet it is not.

 

for the past what 5 years pc generates more money than consoles by a huge amount ?

[Mark Darkers 151]

Well they did only acquire a new render engine to implement in the current engine, it has become a complete new engine by doing that, because update by update more and more core code of the original VR engine got re-written/placed. Now with the renderer being replaced it has become a complete game engine of its own.