Project Reality Forums

(: arma 2 has 64 players....

R.J.Travis wrote:(: arma 2 has 64 players....

Arma 2 can support infinite players...

Excavus wrote:Arma 2 can support infinite players...

and will probably crash above 30.

lucky14 wrote: Simply, the BF2 engine can't tell between a steam and a ocean, it's just water to it. You now on Qiunling (sp?) with the Britians and Chinese on the 4 km map (I could have the it wrong though.) North of that big lake is a steam. All the water-fall affects are complete fake!

Yes ... we tried to get a real river in there with real water ... but it kept short circuiting our computers ....

Regards the C4 engine and its capabilities for rendering water ... well it can, but it does it with textures, materials and shaders ... as does any engine. This does not make the water 'real'. However code that detects when the player is in a water 'area' which would probably have to be created with somekind of 'trigger' that encapsulates the water effect, can make the avatar 'float' or 'swim', or make him run out of breath, drown etc etc. None of this is in the C4 engine and has to be programmed in. At present if you dive into water you just go through the pretty visual effects and then keep on falling out of the bottom of the lake for eternity or until you exit the game loop.

So yes we will have water, and it will be 'real' in the sense that behaviour in it will 'represent' real life.

[R-DEV]Hitperson wrote:and will probably crash above 30.

I am sure if you can get 1500+ AI into a game you can probably manage at least 100 human players.. I have heard that they have gotten quite a few people in ARMA 1 servers but TBH I don't think ARMA 2 is right for the style of PR, too complicated and clunky.

Yeah ... but have you seen what the AI in arma behaves like ? May as well just dump in a bunch of statics .... and have some random kill function for players.

nick20404 wrote:

that vid is pretty awesome!

The iGi guys were saying it's fairly stable at 30 players (IE, human), but not higher really.

So many buttons to press.... ugh.... I played a week of Arma 2 demo, and now I'm pressing the numpad to look to the sides, and enter to get into a vehicle. And the AI is, yes, clumsy, and hard to control, but it can headshot anything out of nowhere


I'd like to see them go on with the C4 engine

Excavus wrote:Arma 2 can support infinite players...

[R-DEV]Hitperson wrote:and will probably crash above 30.

True, true...

Arma2 is really army strong, you can carry m4+ugl, m107, and a javelin with 1 rocket..and still jog and run happily...hooah.

There has been so much work and and effort and hours put in current PR that it doesnt even pay off to switch engines..maybe if a group of lunatics starts as a minimod ...But im staying with BF2..

Wait for ACE2 mod for ARMA2. It will bring back perspective and realism.

ChizNizzle wrote:True, true...

Arma2 is really army strong, you can carry m4+ugl, m107, and a javelin with 1 rocket..and still jog and run happily...hooah.

There has been so much work and and effort and hours put in current PR that it doesnt even pay off to switch engines..maybe if a group of lunatics starts as a minimod ...But im staying with BF2..

If you're under fire, trust me, you will f*cking run as fast as possible!

I'd rather worry about things like moving, shooting and leaning before i worry about rivers. Quinling is fine with the "fake" streams, anyhoo

I've not played ArmA 2 yet. That video is mighty impressive tho! With the BI Studios games I've come to wait for the patches and a few of the critical mods to come to fruition before making a judgment on the game. I wrote off ArmA 1, but then when a few patches and ACE came out, I tried it again and found it quite enjoyable.

We'll be shooting to have PR2 be a lil less convoluted than ArmA's control scheme, I guess you could describe it as "accessible". I am not clear what ArmA2 has done for multiplayer, but I never liked the online play much. Co-op was good, but online I found it lacking in teamwork and structure (at least in "pubbing" experiences).

egg

Well, we gotta remember that Arma also have a singleplayer side, and it would be hard to give that part any tactical depth without an advanced interface. That's why the controls feel more advanced. Things are always more simple in multiplayer from that perspective since you can give orders just by talking to your players. PR2 will (hopefully) not need any advanced in-game menys since it will all be human players with ears and eyes.

ARMA 2 has made the command and control interface much simpler to use which is good, but if you are used to OFP and ARMA 1 , then it really does become second nature quite fast to learn the number sequences for the radio commands.

Well, we gotta remember that Arma also have a singleplayer side, and it would be hard to give that part any tactical depth without an advanced interface. That's why the controls feel more advanced. Things are always more simple in multiplayer from that perspective since you can give orders just by talking to your players. PR2 will (hopefully) not need any advanced in-game menys since it will all be human players with ears and eyes.

ArmA2 bots aren't bad to tbh. I really enjoyed the high command tutorial watching like 50 dudes obey me!!!

I used voice commands in endwar It was a nice feature but I didn't use it much
but in pr you can talk to your squad so why do you need voice command to place a marker when you can just tell you squad to shoot there