Will Arma 3 be better optimized

[Shatter3D_S0uL 1]

I am sure with our help,Arma 3 will run and perform just fine in a wide range of PCs,considering the upcoming Community Alpha of course.

[maddogx 13]

you cant bake a cake in 1 millisecond with 10000 cooks..

This is now one of my favorite quotes of all time.

[Timnos 1]

I am sure with our help,Arma 3 will run and perform just fine in a wide range of PCs,considering the upcoming Community Alpha of course.

Don't get too carried away, sure there will be improved performance but anyone serious about playing Arma3 will require PC's with specs at the very least equivalent to those used at E3 2012.

[froggyluv 2130]

... you cant bake a cake in 1 millisecond with 10000 cooks..

The single most astute point ever made on these forums.

Now, whaddabout 10,000 AI programmers...:chef:

[MavericK96 0]

The low gpu & cpu util seems to be mainly in multiplayer.

as for cpu utilisation there's also people with i7's complaining they see only about 35% cpu usage, which is 70% in reality because hyperthreading has no use.

Except I see utilization maxing out at about 50% and I have HT disabled. Soo...

And yeah, it is mostly in MP, so maybe it's an MP issue then? In any case it is something that should be looked at, that's all I'm saying. I really don't think anyone can make the argument that it's perfect or couldn't use more optimization.

Don't get too carried away, sure there will be improved performance but anyone serious about playing Arma3 will require PC's with specs at the very least equivalent to those used at E3 2012.

Which is a pretty high-end rig, actually. i7 2600K with a GTX 580 IIRC?

[rekrul 7]

A3 will NOT have a 64-bit binary. It has already been confirmed it will still be 32-bit LAA

Wow, really?! That sounds really ... well, retarded. Ah well, at least my expectations will be at rock bottom so I can't be disappointed when I buy it. ;)

[Leon86 13]

why does that sound retarded? they just made an estimation of gains/effort and concluded it wasn't worth it.

[antoineflemming 14]

Wow, really?! That sounds really ... well, retarded. Ah well, at least my expectations will be at rock bottom so I can't be disappointed when I buy it. ;)

"Wow, really?!" 32-bit instead of 64-bit is "rock bottom" for you? I mean, I'm all for a 64-bit game, but most games and applications are 32-bit anyway. And you consider the decision "retarded"? I'm sure there's a legitimate reason why ArmA3 will be 32-bit and not 64-bit.

[chiefslapahoe 1]

I'm just scared they're making it easy for everyone by making it "accessible"

[antoineflemming 14]

I'm just scared they're making it easy for everyone by making it "accessible"

They have said plenty of times that they aren't simplifying it.

[Pulverizer 1]

you cant bake a cake in 1 millisecond with 10000 cooks..

Obviously, but they could bake 10,000 cakes in 2 hours, or one monstrous cake. ARMA isn't probably programmed by one "cook".

[metalcraze 290]

why does that sound retarded? they just made an estimation of gains/effort and concluded it wasn't worth it.

Because 64 bit is two times more than 32 bit and that means ArmA3 will run two times faster with 64 bit exe hurr

[Timnos 1]

I'm just scared they're making it easy for everyone by making it "accessible"

Don't be afraid of the word "accessible", what the developers mean is that they are making the game more "useable". For example part of the campaign will be teaching new players how to use a rifle.

[dmarkwick 261]

Don't be afraid of the word "accessible", what the developers mean is that they are making the game more "useable". For example part of the campaign will be teaching new players how to use a rifle.

Also "accessible" would in our case include the general ingame user interface. Improving the command menu selection for example without actually losing the current method of number keys. To keep the piano players happy :)

---------- Post added at 11:58 ---------- Previous post was at 11:54 ----------

Because 64 bit is two times more than 32 bit and that means ArmA3 will run two times faster with 64 bit exe hurr

More like the accessing of more than 3.5gb of ram. A lot of people with 64-bit systems have upwards of 6gb nowadays. However, as mentioned, the developers have seen no real benefit at this stage.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Well there is a difference between accessibilty (= available to as many people as possible) and usability....

[Leon86 13]

Arma is not as accessible because of the way you give orders. you have to press lots of keys to give an order, pretty complicated.

in operation flashpoint cwc singleplayer campain you start as some lowlife grunt taking orders from the ai and slowly progress to group leader. In arma 2 you're pretty much thrown in the deep as some specops dude, if you're new to arma games you get the low fps, slow character and weapon movement and the command and control problem all at the same time, that's not very accesible. in arma 3 you're some kind of infiltrating supersoldier dude apparantly, not sure how they're gonna make that accessible.

The resistance campain was the best. always trying to keep your guys alive and looting all the good guns 'n ammo, ambushing stuff etc.

I think arma 3 will be more accesible because I think arma 3 will run better (compared to arma2 at launch) and the character will feel more responsive.

[Timnos 1]

Well there is a difference between accessibilty (= available to as many people as possible) and usability....

Technically your right and I can understand why that dreaded word invokes pure fear and panic on this forum, but ArmA3 will retain the core game mechanics and characteristics that we all love so there's no need for anyone to be alarmed.

[metalcraze 290]

if you're new to arma games you get the low fps

And if I'm old do I get the high fps

[LeeManatee 4]

@OP yeah.. most likely