Sorely Unimpressed with Arma 3's Graphics as they exist in the Alpha.

[Stlkrash1 1]

Check you settings on your monitor also. Mine got weirded out and had to readjust thm

[specta3 1]

I think the graphics are very good and even better when you consider its in alpha .The lighting and weather effects are very good and the water and diving looks great .

Now they could add some more eye candy but not many people would have a PC that could handle that. As for trees yes the don't look great but compared to Arma 2 they are fantastic I can zoom now and trees dont appear and then disappear .

A massive wide open sim like this, it looks great I don't know what some people expect. Seems to be a common trend these days people complain about every new release and have unrealistic expectation.Making sweeping statements like they have professional knowledge of the subject matter when 99 times out of a 100 they know nothing about what's involved in the process. My burger never looks as good as it does in the adds , That lady I met looked nothing like her picture online ,That beach looked much better in the travel brochure etc etc :)

[Alabatross 1]

This is still an Alpha man. This is like complaining about what color your car is before you get buy it. From my time spent playing the Alpha it seems to me that the terrain is still not finished. If the game was in Beta, I could see where you have a point, but at this stage in the build it is alright IMO.

Alpha is 99% gameplay. You really have to complain for them to update any graphics. The graphics are usually final other than performance tweeks

So those of you saying "relax its still an alpha" are going to ruin it for all of us, because im pretty sure these graphics are final and if we don't complain nothing will be changed.

[specta3 1]

Alpha is 99% gameplay. You really have to complain for them to update any graphics. The graphics are usually final other than performance tweeks

So those of you saying "relax its still an alpha" are going to ruin it for all of us, because im pretty sure these graphics are final and if we don't complain nothing will be changed.

Can you please give me some examples of some military sims that look as good as arma does ? I don't quite know what your expecting but you have some thing in mind are else you would not complain. So if you can post some pictures in the thread of the other sims that have as much detail as arma 3 does I love to see it ?

[Alabatross 1]

I don't really have an issue with how it looks, but it could look better (like in the screenshots BIS posted)

My only issue is medium distance terrain quality

[BlackLord 0]

I'm glad the graphics look nothing like those first promo screenshots, which had this weird, blurry, green filter effect.

The reason why ArmA3 looks great is because the lighting and effects actually look natural. The sun doesn't light up the whole sky, like it's a perpetually exploding a-bomb, surfaces do not radiate with eye scorching bloom and objects just 20 meters from you aren't clouded in DOF mist.

The middle distance terrain textures, vegetation and shadows could be better indeed, otherwise the game looks absolutely splendid. Just look at the ArmA3 photography thread, the majority of screenshots that weren't butchered in photoshop look so good, sometimes it's hard to believe they aren't real photographs.

---------- Post added at 15:08 ---------- Previous post was at 15:02 ----------

So the question is, were those official screenshots edited with Photoshop (adding the blur like above for example). At least I believe the A3 screens never had the "IN-GAME" tag added to them, compared to some previous Arma 2 "IN-GAME" screenshots which to my eye basically resembles the in-game quality as experienced by the user.

You seriously think that blur and the green filter is realistic? Go outside sometimes, or maybe you are a dichromat.

[ScratcH1 10]

The only thing different in the "brownish" looking image compared to the alpha is that the soldiers appear to much smoother...

[Smurf 12]

That first screen is more A2 than A3.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

I still don't know what the OP and others are talking about - A3 looks better in game to me than any of the E3 screens:

Here is the original BIS concept screen on Armaholic:

http://www.armaholic.com/datas/users/arma3_e3_release_49_4.jpg

Recreated in game with similar weather and terrain at the Kamino Lighthouse:

http://25.media.tumblr.com/4f0176ea547a9731201b6a8a32b39c67/tumblr_mky2jsxXtB1sneir7o1_1280.jpg

2nd one looks better to me, the 1st one still has the A2 brown desert filter over it, also probably doesn't have the final lighting engine?

Edited April 8, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[froggyluv 2130]

I still don't know what the OP and others are talking about - A3 looks better in game to me than any of the E3 screens:

Agree 100% -game looks better on my end than those company photos. She's a looker.

[ak1287 1]

I think the main crux of the argument against the A3 graphics as they stand is that they don't look like A2.

Which is a ridiculous argument, because A2 had that butt-ugly color filter. Just like the photo the OP showed us.

[D34 2]

Generally the alpha looks really good, especially compared to arma 2. Lighting made a very positive impression on me, trees look way more dimensional thanks to it and depth is shown well. During morning/eveninng I thought some vistas are backdrops because no way the landscape could look so good, had to stop shooting to admire it :D

Large rock formations could be more detailed though, there's a lot of them and they lack finer details: overall shapes in coastal cliffs etc. are good but even the medium level of detail is missing. It's probably huge render hit to get more out of them but I wish they were improved, the natural overall shapes and distribution is again really really good and helps a lot.

Ambient light could also need improvements, all goes flat when you remove the sun or dynamic light sources, although it's still better than arma 2. I'm not a fan of adding a ton of post-process bloom, blur and monochrome overlays, so some of the early screenshots are also inferior to alpha.

By the way, I don't really buy this "BI has built higher LOD assets and better lighting engine just for screenshots but won't release these to the game" -type of thing, sounds like terrible time-management ;) Probably they've just spent time looking for some scenes and angles and lightings that show the best the game can do - maybe some minor color-corrections (not talking about PP, that's ingame!) and tweaks.

[hudson78 1]

Alpha is 99% gameplay. You really have to complain for them to update any graphics. The graphics are usually final other than performance tweeks

So those of you saying "relax its still an alpha" are going to ruin it for all of us, because im pretty sure these graphics are final and if we don't complain nothing will be changed.

Can you please give me some examples of some military sims that look as good as arma does ? I don't quite know what your expecting but you have some thing in mind are else you would not complain. So if you can post some pictures in the thread of the other sims that have as much detail as arma 3 does I love to see it ?

I don't really have an issue with how it looks, but it could look better (like in the screenshots BIS posted)

My only issue is medium distance terrain quality

You still didn't anwser Specta's question. It is a good question and I pose it to anyone here saying that Arma 3 doesn't look as good as it should. Give an example of a milsim that is as expansive as Arma 3 and looks as good or better than Arma 3. I haven't seen one yet. I am not sure what some here are expecting but the graphics in this game are really good. In a lot of games you either get substance or pretty shinny things to look at. BIS has done a good job of giving players both.

[ProfTournesol 956]

I must say that the lighting is vastly improved, which adds to the visual quality (even if i would appreciate some sun blinding, though not as overdone as in A2).

[ziiip 1]

While I partially agree with OP, and I am not good in PS at all and I had only 3 minutes for this:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxjqGzmtx1GBX0VpaWhWX21PWVU/edit?usp=sharing

You dont need photoshop, you can change the color scheme with scipting commands. There are even a few effect modules shipped with the game.

Normal: http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/2570/17881570.png

Movie day effect: http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/9356/70020013.png

Sepia effect: http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/8159/20458694.png

But there are infinite amount of color alteration choices with a few scipting commands.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Don't agree with the OP, game looks great as far as I'm concerned, if he cant even recognise the tress he may have to fix his settings. Or maybe its the new drugs I'm not getting.

[seamusgod 1]

it's very hit and miss, visual wise. just the nature of the engine.

[zoog 18]

You seriously think that blur and the green filter is realistic? Go outside sometimes, or maybe you are a dichromat.

No, where did I say such a thing? :rolleyes:

[R4IDER 10]

I am currently running the Landtex mod to make the textures look better, I really shouldn't need a mod to do this. Like with most things that come out of E3 recenty it looks like we have been served yet another misleading set of screenshots.

I would also like to see better models also, being able to see the threading on clothing like battlefield 3 would be an improvement.

[Llano 11]

Whaat. I think the trees looks amazing on the photos.

[simjedi 10]

Those trees exist for me....:rolleyes:

[Smurf 12]

Those trees exist for me....:rolleyes:

http://i.imgur.com/fqeCXqgl.jpg

Up close they indeed look very nice. But from afar... (random pic)

http://imageshack.us/a/img89/2139/arma32013031823205008.jpg

[tremanarch 6]

Up close they indeed look very nice. But from afar... (random pic)

http://imageshack.us/a/img89/2139/arma32013031823205008.jpg

not with a slight different colour on the trees

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/4934308/Arma%203/Bushes_mod_before_2.jpg

after:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/4934308/Arma%203/Bushes_mod_after_2.jpg

[comc 1]

not with a slight different colour on the trees

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/4934308/Arma%203/Bushes_mod_before_2.jpg

after:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/4934308/Arma%203/Bushes_mod_after_2.jpg

Looks good!

I think the two biggest issues I see here for the original pre-alpha picture are:

1. The amount of buildings in the distance: the largest town we have right now is of course Agios Efstratios, which is not very large. The town shown in the distance is certainly larger.

2. The trees are very well blended into the ground, which the lack thereof is possibly the biggest factor behind the poor visual fidelity right now, behind the midrange texture issue. As posted before, trees in the alpha tend to look completely unshaded and much lighter than the background. Also, I don't know much about the pine trees, but unless they were modeling a specific, odd looking tree native to the island, the needles don't branch out in the weird circular fashion they do now. It makes them look "billowy", especially at medium range.

However, I do have to say that I'm very impressed by the vegetation at close range, especially grass coverage.

[SmallBlackSheep 0]

Myke;2367678']Maybe i'm getting old but i don't see much difference: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/9367994/arma3_2013_04_08_10_14_31_082.png(2972kb)

:EDITH:

AMD Phenom II X4 965 @3.4GHz' date=' AMD Radeon HD5870[/quote']

how did u get so much contrast myke?