Jump to content

Synopsis: BFC’s recent comments on the CMx2 engine [Long]


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks for the update!

Perfect timing, as I had been wondering about CMX2 as of late, and managed to check back in this forum for the latest news.

Although you've implied that the theater hasn't been selected yet, I don't see how you could go wrong with WW2...whether it be ETO, PTO, or Africa.

I'm so burned out on the recent trend of portraying contemporary conflicts in pc games. :rolleyes:

Keep up the good work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by WineCape:

</font>

  • For CMx2 the need for split squads is inherently reduced. First of all, Squads now behave as teams (2-3, depending) which removes the "leapfrog" problem associated with CMx1's solid Squads.URL]</font>

just saw all this, very informative. Now to leap to conclutions. The above quote would indicate a post-WW2 conflict. I believe the fire team concept was developed by the DOD(W really) because those post war psyc studies found that the majority of morale came from that 4-5 immediate comrades level.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fire team concept has its roots based on Marine actions during the 1920s and 30s. It was adopted by Marine Divisions in 1944 (I do know it was used in 1945 on Okinawa by the series G division) and has stayed with the Marines since.

Originally posted by Dillweed:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by WineCape:

</font>

  • For CMx2 the need for split squads is inherently reduced. First of all, Squads now behave as teams (2-3, depending) which removes the "leapfrog" problem associated with CMx1's solid Squads.URL]</font>

just saw all this, very informative. Now to leap to conclutions. The above quote would indicate a post-WW2 conflict. I believe the fire team concept was developed by the DOD(W really) because those post war psyc studies found that the majority of morale came from that 4-5 immediate comrades level. </font>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Polygons

…I’m hoping we may be able to spend around say, 2000-3000 on a soldier, 300-500 on his weapon and maybe 5000-8000 on a vehicle. I’m the 3D Modeller though and we always like to get as many pollies as we can, hehe...its not impossible that Charles could turn around and say okay, time to cut them back. Testing thus far look promising but time will tell.

Just to put those figures in perspective CMBO had about 150-350 pollies per vehicle and CMAK ended up with about 600-700 on new vehicles for that game. Each soldier in CMAK, as a guess, was probably about 120 each (these models were basically hardcoded so I cant say for sure).

Trees should be 3D now, with twigs, branches, roots and leaves all being modelled using various methods...again time will tell just what we can do here after more solid testing.

Im a bit late coming into this but in regards to your poly counts I find them to be excessively high. You already say your not trying to compete for detail against FPS models as you want to have more "1:1 realism factor for squads" instead of like CMx1 with 3 blocky toons, yet your numbers are higher than theirs and they have some of the best detailed models in games.

As an example RSE (Red Storm Entertainment, makers of Ghost Recon and the R6 series) character models are in the 1000-1200 poly range. The weapons come in at around 150-300 polys. I dont have the numbers on the vehicles handy but think they too are high with all the modelling I've done.

Get your models down into the FPS count like above and you'll actually be able to include more soldier models for your squads, making that 1:1 ratio more realistic if not pratical.

Take a closer look at CoD, GR, R6 etc. Quite amazing what 1000-1200 poly characters can do with textures.

Im sure most would agree the FPS models are far superior to what is currently in CM now, more than enough in detail for what would be needed, and yet approx. half of what you are proposing.

:confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Polys are mostly handled by the GPU, there is no harm in having high poly counts these days (it's been a long time since GR and R6) and, as you probably know, making a model with low polys can be more time consuming than making one with high polys (depending on the tools used and the type of model).

OTOH adding more units (CMx2 is already 1:1, so you can't add more soldiers per unit) requires more CPU time - and I assume that is at a premium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Added the 14-pointer "Big Question" and BFC's design philosophy on top of post #1 in this thread.

-------------------------

CMX2 progresses nicely. All my coding errors caused by drunkenness will of course be entirely your fault, so I hope you can live with yourself. -- Charles Moylan, 1 Oct05

[ October 12, 2005, 05:49 AM: Message edited by: WineCape ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...