Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
S3V3N

are the previews for 0.59 taken with the new render engine?

Recommended Posts

I've just been going over the latest W.I.P. features videos and I've been wondering if they were taken in Enfusion/new renderer?

 

It might just be my gfx settings, but it looks to me like the material definition is a bit better than what I get. Metal looks like Metal, skin looks soft, partially translucent and overall the image colors look a bit better. However, I usually play with AO turned off (it doesn't really look good) and my settings may just be lower in general. It still looks like a slight graphical improvement to me, though the post process makes things look a bit fuzzy and blooming; which makes it hard to see things in detail. Also, we were told parity is the graphical goal, not improvement.  

 

Would be interesting to know if the new features come in pair with the new renderer. It's been talked about so much and with the issues with rendering and zombies, I don't really see how they would make a return without updating the rendering.

 

In case you don't know which videos I'm about, they're from the recent update, like this one:

 

http://www.dayztv.com/video/dayz-accelerated-skillset-growth-w-i-p-preview-dayz/ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enfusion, yes. - You are playing on Enfusion engine right now.

New renderer, i doubt it. - Internal testing/development is far from done, so i doubt they will show anything about that, as i understand theres nothing to show yet.

 

The lastest status report has a good amount of information about the renderer and how far along they are. You should read it :)

Edited by Byrgesen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

imo its highly likely that its being run in the videos

but that doesnt help us much, I cant really tell a distinctive difference as I play with -winxp and quite low settings post processing disabled anyway.

players stick out like mad, especially gorka jackets totally look out of place for me

Edited by jayfkay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enfusion, yes. - You are playing on Enfusion engine right now.

New renderer, i doubt it. - Internal testing/development is far from done, so i doubt they will show anything about that, as i understand theres nothing to show yet.

 

The lastest status report has a good amount of information about the renderer and how far along they are. You should read it :)

 

I did skim over some of the documents, but I found no info about what is being used internally. Could be the Devs are already using the renderer for internal purpose only. 

 

It's not like there is any big difference, I was just curious. It's tiny detail. Especially the reflection of the skybox on the knife made me think: "hmm, my Dayz don't do that!" On the other hand, I can't really compare my game looks to anyone elses. Quite possible, somewhere I turned off reflection, most likely in the HDRI settings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did skim over some of the documents, but I found no info about what is being used internally. Could be the Devs are already using the renderer for internal purpose only. 

 

It's not like there is any big difference, I was just curious. It's tiny detail. Especially the reflection of the skybox on the knife made me think: "hmm, my Dayz don't do that!" On the other hand, I can't really compare my game looks to anyone elses. Quite possible, somewhere I turned off reflection, most likely in the HDRI settings. 

 

The latest statur report, october 30th, has alot of info about the renderer :) This is what im basing my statement on, although i must admit its just speculation, in essence.

Read it here mate, if you havent!

 

As far as Enfusion goes, we have had it for a long time. Enfusion is, simplified, a engine-module-replacement "mission". They are changing bits and pieces on the engine, as they develop the gameplay. So they are developing the engine and the game, along side, and thats why it seems like development is slow at times. So much going on under the hood, we cant really see or feel yet.

 

As far as i know, they want to develop a robust engine, from which they can create future titles, but that might just be rumors.

Edited by Byrgesen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As far as i know, they want to develop a robust engine, from which they can create future titles, but that might just be rumors.

It would be wonder if they won't use Enfusion for other games. Not sure about Arma but at least many popular Arma RPG mods would likely fit this engine well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be wonder if they won't use Enfusion for other games. Not sure about Arma but at least many popular Arma RPG mods would likely fit this engine well.

 

As Byrgesen wrote, game engines are modular and bricks and pieces get updated and exchanged. For this you often have to license expensive third party plugins, such as Euphoria (crowd AI - e.g. GTA) or PhysX (Newtonian Physics simulation). Arma III uses PhysX and their vehicles feel a lot better than the Dayz ones ever will. So not every change is going to make sense. I think what game engines like Enfusion need is better hit detection and player position feedback. For me, it always felt detached in Arma games, like you are floating around or rolling across a large terrain. It's getting better, though.

 

Hopefully, some of the research done on this engine will help with future game development at Bohemia. It makes sense to have a versatile engine, because it needs to be customizable to fit a games needs. I don't think Arma games will ever need to spawn thousands of items/pickups or use a complicated algorythm like the CLE. But I do think this engine development could lead to further crossover, as with an engine like this pretty much every scale and type of game is achievable. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a space exploration game, like Star Citizen developed by Bohemia. Personally, I always wanted to see "Jurassic Park" made on that kind of a great engine.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

 

There game build is generally split into 2: Internal build and External build (I'm assuming it is splitted to far more but these are the main ones).

 

Internal build is the build that we don't get to see and is more advanced in technology but contains bugs that cannot make it to experimental builds.

 

External build is the build we get to see every exp update and eventually stable update.

 

The renderer, animation system and everything that is currently not implemented ingame - is in the internal build and is awaiting completion and testing.

 

You're currently playing with the ArmA renderer and half ArmA physics. By the time the enfusion engine is completely branched off ArmA - you'll be playing with 100% enfusion driven gameplay.

 

Hope that answered it properly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

 

There game build is generally split into 2: Internal build and External build (I'm assuming it is splitted to far more but these are the main ones).

 

Internal build is the build that we don't get to see and is more advanced in technology but contains bugs that cannot make it to experimental builds.

 

External build is the build we get to see every exp update and eventually stable update.

 

Alright, thanks a lot! Seems like they have worked an aweful lot in the background, since if that info is correct we are not even playing the real game, yet. However, with that little time to the Beta and all the other things still hanging in the lose (functionality not reliable) the devs must be pretty confident that the final transition to the engine will be a smooth one. Rarely, in a game development, you'd see entire games ported to another, better engine. Often that takes long and can completely ruin a project. In this case it seems like the engine is slowly ported over entire parts of an existing game that then have to be rewritten to work with each other accordingly. I don't even wanna know how confusing that gets ;)

 

Yet, with all said and done, it could still be the internal build, since these engines are bound to come together during the next few weeks. If we are indeed already shown stuff in the new renderer, I think there would be some word about that, though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to add - when the renderer comes out: MOD SUPPORT WILL BE RELEASED TOO!! YEAH!!

 

Now what you do need to take into account that the next update will "borrow" features that work properly from the internet build. So for example the internal build could have had grenade launcher attachments before .58 came out - but all we have currently (ext build) is models and some recipes for attaching them - but they aren't configured properly to work and therefore aren't "part" of the build.

Edited by StanleyWasHappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I wouldn't be surprised if we see a space exploration game, like Star Citizen developed by Bohemia.

 

they are already doing that... -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Byrgesen wrote, game engines are modular and bricks and pieces get updated and exchanged. For this you often have to license expensive third party plugins, such as Euphoria (crowd AI - e.g. GTA) or PhysX (Newtonian Physics simulation). Arma III uses PhysX and their vehicles feel a lot better than the Dayz ones ever will. So not every change is going to make sense. I think what game engines like Enfusion need is better hit detection and player position feedback. For me, it always felt detached in Arma games, like you are floating around or rolling across a large terrain. It's getting better, though.

 

Hopefully, some of the research done on this engine will help with future game development at Bohemia. It makes sense to have a versatile engine, because it needs to be customizable to fit a games needs. I don't think Arma games will ever need to spawn thousands of items/pickups or use a complicated algorythm like the CLE. But I do think this engine development could lead to further crossover, as with an engine like this pretty much every scale and type of game is achievable. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a space exploration game, like Star Citizen developed by Bohemia. Personally, I always wanted to see "Jurassic Park" made on that kind of a great engine.  

 

You are absolutely right and again i must point you in the direction of the status report, as it touches the very subject of player controls, hit detection and general interaction, in depth :)

As far as physx, DayZ does have that, but its not fully integrated/developed yet. as far as i remember, its called Bullet PhysX SDK (could remember wrong).

 

The Arma engine (Real Virtuality) is amazing and its also this engine, in a different fork, that is used for the most advanced virtual military simulater, in the world, called VBS. It can do alot of stuff, but the way it does this is also the core problem if the engine. You can do what ever you want, but the more you add the more the server/client performance suffers and the limit as to what you can do, at the same time, is actually quite limited.

Not saying you cant do alot of stuff, no doubt, but finding the balance in AI amount and orders, scripts to handle events, weather, triggers and the amount of players moving around and what they are doing and are able to do, at any given time, is EXTREMLY difficult!!

 

DayZ seems to take a different aproach, with alot more functions tied directly into the engine, so people might not have to write so many custom scripts and functions, simply adapt engine scripts to work the way you want. I for one cant wait to see how they are going to handle mods and what they can "hook" into in the engine.

It might be more restricted then Arma, because of the whole server/client architecture setup difference, but who knows!

 

As far as i understood the render talk in the latest status report, they have it well underway in internal testing. They are using it right now and making it work. But they dont want to push it to experimental, until they have a significant performance increase, when comparing renderers, so people will see and feel the shift.

I bet you, if they switched it now, you would most likely not be able to tell the difference, perhaps we would get even worse framerate, because it isnt optimized or "finalized" yet. Cant tell you for sure :)

You really need to take 15 mins and read that status report mate hehe, this one is very good and packed with information about lots of the things you speak of here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You really need to take 15 mins and read that status report mate hehe, this one is very good and packed with information about lots of the things you speak of here.

Ok cool, haven't read the latest one, just the charts from the PAX presentation. There is probably some interesting info in there, if it deals with player controls and hit detection. The main problem I see with Arma Real Virtuality is that it is a very complex engine for such few people to work on. I mean, look at Unity. Their business model was always to sell a framework of an engine (or give it away for %/profits) and to let the aftermarket deal with creating the tools. Some of the best addons for Unity are made by a single person or a small group, e.g. the node-based-materials Unity doesn't have by default. With DayZ they have to develop a whole suite of engine tools that better not be based too heavily on the old modding tools, because they are really ancient in form and function by now. It would be awesome if the engine could see similar developments like Unity, making it a truly modern game engine, which entails ease of use to me. It's already painful enough to model, texture and animate objects, I don't need to be fighting with a proprietary toolset that no other engine uses.

 

Unreal and Unity are really similarly easy to use and what works in one engine works in the other, too; if it has been integrated, at least. I hope something similar will happen with DayZ, so modding will be less of a pain and attract more modders from other engines. I'm sure Bohemia is gonna expand and use this engine in the future, but I question how far its modding capabilities will go. Without source code access we'll be pretty limited to what the devs hardcode into the engine, as opposed to running yet another script for (insert "random activity"). I hope they will follow the Unreal and Unity model and release for free and public after a while, just so that other people can get their hands on the engine, in depth. We'll yet have to see how this whole Steam Workshop idea works with the game. In the end, Bohemia will probably want to hang on to their engine exclusively, since it is a bit different from the competition.    

Edited by S3V3N

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Personally, I always wanted to see "Jurassic Park" made on that kind of a great engine.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Cool, I am not alone ^^ It's a start.  

 

What fascinates me about dinos in this engine is that they could actually behave like Dinosaurs (Hunter/Prey). Their behavior patterns could become part of the player's game, e.g. by luring a prey towards a herd of predators you can pass through their area; or you could hide along Brontosaurs to evade bigger predators. ARK dinosaurs have the hunter/prey mechanics, but they don't really wander or actually feed on plants. It would be much more interesting to see this on a large scale world with adequate dino behavior. 

 

You could also have different "Biomes" on different islands, parts of the park infrastructure and other parts that are just jungle; so vehicles would be quite important. It's a pity Trespasser is still the best dinosaur survival game out there, but it does a lot of things (looting/survival) that could be done better and with more freedom in the DayZ engine. Give it a different name and this might even become a huge franchise. Plus you could leave out the annoying kids from every Jurassic Park storyline ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arma III uses PhysX and their vehicles feel a lot better than the Dayz ones ever will. So not every change is going to make sense. I think what game engines like Enfusion need is better hit detection and player position feedback. For me, it always felt detached in Arma games, like you are floating around or rolling across a large terrain. It's getting better, though.

I wouldn't be sure about that PhysX part. Brian posted couple clips of vehicle driving and it looked that the car acted more like a car than any Arma 3 one. You can actually do donuts/drift :D There's also some problem with clutch/transmission with PhysX and I guess we won't see that because there are also manual gears coming. PhysX looks nice but it doesn't always act right. They might get better physics in their engine by making their own. 3rd party stuff usually cause a lot of problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be sure about that PhysX part. Brian posted couple clips of vehicle driving and it looked that the car acted more like a car than any Arma 3 one. You can actually do donuts/drift :D There's also some problem with clutch/transmission with PhysX and I guess we won't see that because there are also manual gears coming. PhysX looks nice but it doesn't always act right. They might get better physics in their engine by making their own. 3rd party stuff usually cause a lot of problems.

 

The thing about vehicles in engines is that they often feel "like" that engine. I mean, almost every game I played on Unreal Engine, I could always tell it was on Unreal Engine, because of how the vehicle felt. And the physics are great, they are just somewhat similar for all vehicles. On ARMA it always felt like driving on rails, but that was okay for me. The physics now feel like the compromise between PhysX and old Arma simulation, so the Donuts in the video actually looked a bit out of place for me; like a mix of real physical behaviour and simulation. I'm curious how far they can get it right, and I'm looking forward to manual transmission, too.

 

I only played the ArmA III lite version a while ago and thought the physics were pretty good. At least when compared to ArmA II. At least the suspension seemed realistic and taking turns was a bit less "on rails". I guess the new system is gonna be better yet, but I'll just have to wait on what they release next. So far, vehicles have improved quite a bit, but it is really important we get to drive something else than a truck now :)

 

Anyone else feel like this year went past really quickly? I can't believe we are in Q4 for this development. Overall, I had a lot of enjoyment with the last build, but when you play it so much, you notice more and more small things that don't work yet and hopefully will be dealt with in the Beta. I think this game will not be feature complete before going into Beta. Didn't they even say so on their spreadsheets?  

Edited by S3V3N

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×