General Discussion (dev branch)

[R3vo 2652]

You forget that not every player wants to fiddle around with optional pbos and other settings. So the only way to make this work, is to find a good base settings that most player can live with and make the rest tweakable as much as possible.

So please try again, what is it exactly that you don't like? The contrast, the colours etc?

[ruPal 143]

You forget that not every player wants to fiddle around with optional pbos and other settings. So the only way to make this work, is to find a good base settings that most player can live with and make the rest tweakable as much as possible.

So please try again, what is it exactly that you don't like? The contrast, the colours etc?

False. It is possible to add presets as stated above, for example:

Preset 1 - Old settings (1.56)

Preset 2 - New settings (dev branch settings)

Preset 3 - ...

Preset 4 - ...

...

Preset N - ...

That make things easier for novice players. Add advanced options like Greenfist ReColor mod for advanced players.

Everyone will be happy.

 

[R3vo 2652]

Yes, that's a good idea and we already have something like that in the video options. It only shows custom & default for now, but I think other presets could be added. However, I don't know how much of the PP effecs is hard coded.

[Varanon 892]

I've also tried the new dev version and I'm a bit dissapointed about the color space and the shadow intensity :(

If u have a closer look at the following screens, you will see what I mean (the fist pic shows the dev version) ...

 

While I think the color space is quite realistic, I agree that the shadow intensity is lacking. Shadows should be much more pronounced. It looks like the ambient light value is way too high

[domokun 515]

I'd like to add that anyone claiming performance issues (be they increases or decreases) try avoiding subjective terms like "more sluggish" or "performance is absolute trash now".

Post instead objective descriptions like "1.56 @ XX fps vs 1.59.135439 @ YY fps".

Ideally with comparative and reproducible scenarios.

Also, let's remember that this is the Dev branch so expect stuff to be far from perfect.

This appears to be the first iteration.

So let's hope that our feedback goes to improving the second version!

[Roach_ 52]

For me it's like this, main menu with an empty world (there's only water), everything on low/disabled except for ultra textures:

 

1.56 = 89 fps.

 

1.59.135439 = 81 fps.

[I give up 152]

Hello, fellow internauts.

Obviously water reflections will have some impact on performance, when we set to awesome. Still if a 10 year old graphics card can afford it, I believe there is no issue here.

The terrain is acting  a bit weird, in some islands like Bozcaada or Chernarus, for instance, Is just too bright. In vanilla is ok.

Now, think a bit forward, Tanoa expansion will be based in a tropical environment, can you imagine how it will look based on recent graphic improvements? 

I can, In fact I have contacted my lawyer to deal with divorce stuff, because I will marry my screen when that happens.

[pd3 25]

For me it's like this, main menu with an empty world (there's only water), everything on low/disabled except for ultra textures:

 

1.56 = 89 fps.

 

1.59.135439 = 81 fps.

We don't have access to the 1.56 build now do we? I tried the other night and I believe it is only 1.54, pre eden update. Had I known that an update was coming so soon and that it would completely decimate my performance I would have made a more thorough documentation of my performance with 1.56, I simply wasn't expecting this.

Secondly, it does not appear at least in my case to be as clear-cut an issue such as frame rate. In fact when I've checked there does not superficially appear to be a difference when talking about simple numbers.

However actual performance has gotten considerably worse, it is a stutter and the appearance of constant loading of resources that seems to be the issue.

It would be an extremely sleazy argument to make in saying: "well if the actual fps values haven't changed there's nothing wrong". 

Such a claim would be absolute B.S, post 1.58, the game is now not playable for me due to the frequent resource loading interruptions.

The fact remains the game ran as perfectly as I could expect such a game would with my hardware with the 1.56 build, so whatever has changed and contributed to the stuttering is the culprit. All I can do is relay what is happening on my end and unfortunately it isn't as simple as a disparity in a specific set of values unless you know of some monitoring software that offers more insight than fps numbers, perhaps then I could offer better information.

 

[Roach_ 52]

We don't have access to the 1.56 build now do we?

 

Isn't 1.56 just Stable branch?

[das attorney 857]

New visuals seem really good on my PC.  Good work on fixing the underwater vision bug as well.

 

LODs seem much less twitchy as well.  Only early impressions but it's looking promising.

 

[ceeeb 147]

For me it's like this, main menu with an empty world (there's only water), everything on low/disabled except for ultra textures:

 

1.56 = 89 fps.

 

1.59.135439 = 81 fps.

 

The empty world main menu performance does seem to vary, but it's not reflective of actual game performance.

 

Empty world main menu:

1.56 Stable - 203 FPS

1.59.135439 - 143 FPS

 

Simple above water scene over Agia Marina:

1.56 Stable - 87 FPS

1.59.135439 - 87 FPS

 

Simple underwater scene near Agia Marina:

1.56 Stable - 101 FPS

1.59.135439 - 101 FPS

 

System Specifications :

Windows 7 64bit Professional

Intel I7-950 (overclocked @ 3.85GHz)

Asus P6X58D Premium

3x2048MB Mushkin Ridgeback 998826 (PC3-12800 6-8-6-24)

MSI Nvidia GeForce GTX970 4096Mb

Creative X-Fi XtremeGamer Fatality (PCI)

Samsung 500GB 850 EVO SSD

2xWestern Digital Caviar Black WD1002FAEX (Raid0)

 

The scenes above are achieved by loading a mission in Eden editor, then closing the editor so the game returns to the main menu, so the frozen eden mission continues the background. Changes to the UI of the menu could affect performance too (eg, having the Eden editor UI loaded roughly halves the frame rate of simple scenes for me).

 

EDIT: Updated FPS numbers with consistent background program load.

Edited April 10, 2016 by ceeeb

[Dwarden 1124]

when you talk performance it's best to realize that ...

 

1.56.stable

1.56.performance binaries (profiling branch), aka more optimized,fixed,tweaked, experimented ahead existing stable

1.57.DEV, now already obsolete

1.59 DEV, new DEV (aka what will be in =>1.60)

1.58.RC, still not stable (it's WIP)  ;), combines what's in PERF/PROF and DEV but nto all

 

the visual improvements are part of DEV branch not RC nor Stable nor performance ...

thus they WIP and subject to be improved, tweaked and bugs fixed

 

also DEV branch usually runs 'slightly' worse than stable because of additional debug , not cleaned logs , errors etc.

[tpw 2313]

Personally, I find the updated visuals to be a huge step in the right direction, at minimal perceived performance cost on my system (i5, 16GB RAM, GTX970, W64). The water effects alone are worth the price of admission - the reflections look stunning and drag the game into the 2010s visually. They work on CUPS maps too, anything using the sea shaders for water gets the dramatic increase in immersion (pun intended). I find the default contrast and saturation a bit overdone, but it's simple to adjust in the settings. It's just unfortunate that some people are getting a performance drop, hopefully this will be ironed out as the dev builds progress.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

I must be the only person here who hasn't experience any performance change? I can run the game with the exact same visual settings + the new ones and still runs perfectly fine. 

 

I honestly don't understand when people complain about shitty performance yet everyone usually has a different PC??? Not everyone is going to get the exact same results so to merit a 'this is a shit update' claim may only refer to you, but not others. 

[road runner 4344]

Parachute landings are less tolerant/forgiving now, with death or injury occurring with faster/harder landings, unless you actually flare the canopy like the real thing. 

[Deadfast 43]

Might I suggest everyone calms down and stops throwing insults around?

 

If you experience any performance issues please provide as much details as you can (i.e. your specs, your settings, in which situations, what was your FPS before, etc.) so that the developers can reproduce and fix the issue.

 

If you do not experience any performance issues, that's great, just remember that just because it works for you, doesn't mean it will work the same for everybody else. Programming games for PC is hard, a solution that works perfectly for one range of graphics cards may not work so well for a different range.

[metalcraze 290]

So anyone figured out which pbo stores the config for the new PP? I'd like to experiment with these improvements with other islands' configs as they don't inherit them automatically

[pd3 25]

when you talk performance it's best to realize that ...

 

1.56.stable

1.56.performance binaries (profiling branch), aka more optimized,fixed,tweaked, experimented ahead existing stable

1.57.DEV, now already obsolete

1.59 DEV, new DEV (aka what will be in =>1.60)

1.58.RC, still not stable (it's WIP)  ;), combines what's in PERF/PROF and DEV but nto all

 

the visual improvements are part of DEV branch not RC nor Stable nor performance ...

thus they WIP and subject to be improved, tweaked and bugs fixed

 

also DEV branch usually runs 'slightly' worse than stable because of additional debug , not cleaned logs , errors etc.

Was that most recent 1.56 update in the last week or so? I was away from my pc for close to a week and when I decided to fire it up for arma 3 this weekend there was an update and that's what prompted me to try out the dev branch as the most recent 1.56 update that was installed was not performing well for me, so I decided to check the dev branch to see if it was any better, much to my dismay.

What exactly was optimized in the most recent 1.56 update? because I noticed it chugs along more slowly although not to the extent that anything upcoming will.

 

[Greenfist 1863]

Was that most recent 1.56 update in the last week or so? I was away from my pc for close to a week and when I decided to fire it up for arma 3 this weekend there was an update and that's what prompted me to try out the dev branch as the most recent 1.56 update that was installed was not performing well for me, so I decided to check the dev branch to see if it was any better, much to my dismay.

What exactly was optimized in the most recent 1.56 update? because I noticed it chugs along more slowly although not to the extent that anything upcoming will.

1.56 was released two months ago, february 18.

You can read the changelog here: https://dev.arma3.com/post/spotrep-00052 (not much about optimizations though)

[Vasily.B 529]

I see big confusion with new colours, which look perfect to me (except shadow should be darker).
ITS UP TO YOU HOW THIS WILL LOOK LIKE, this is why you have 3 options : SATURATION, CONTRAST, BRIGHTNESS.
You can get "Real Light V6" effects without using addon, just use your imagination!
"OLD" settings from 1.56 was about :
Contrast 70 - 80
Brightness 100
Saturation 90 - 100

AND THATS ALL! You have normal lighting from older version....... But for me new is 100% better and more realistic.


As for performance loss/gain - no change for me.
i5 4x 3,5Ghz
2 GB GPU R9 270 AMD
7200 rpm HDD
8GB RAM

[metalcraze 290]

Also BIS definitely needs to disable (or at least lower the effect) of the PP when night comes to Stratis/Altis. Vanilla night lighting was almost perfect and with current PP night looks extremely unnatural with a very overdone contrast.

[Guest]

Feedback for devs :

--------

in AA&PP setting menu, it's impossible to set postprocess colour correction by ourself, by writing it in the integer field. The new value is written, but not applied.

--------

When going underwater (without diving goggles), with your head just under the water level (i.e. when you walk into water from a beach), there is a picture reflected on the surface which should not be here. It look like a loading crane.

http://image.noelsha...409182507-1.jpg

http://image.noelsha...409182510-1.jpg

Note that I'm looking at 2 different directions on these pictures.

It happen at different places on Altis and Stratis.

--------

New

Old

The shadows seems too light.

another POV : here

--------

Maybe linked to the previous one, the night is not as dark as before.

Once, BIS said that player like Arma's dark nights, but finally you made them less dark.

example : "night" showcase

--------

at sunset, (19:05~19:15), at sea level the sun disappear behind the sea, but when you're on a mountain it disappear behind the fog render distance.

Sea level

Above sea level

--------

It could be nice from other members to add their feedback at this list by copy&pasting it.

[R3vo 2652]

Can anyone confirm, that the brightness of the scene depends on the direction one is looking? It seems to very quickly change from bright, to the darkest night. That also seems to happen if one watches though a LR scope.

[inlesco 233]

Hello, fellow internauts.

Obviously water reflections will have some impact on performance, when we set to awesome. Still if a 10 year old graphics card can afford it, I believe there is no issue here.

The terrain is acting  a bit weird, in some islands like Bozcaada or Chernarus, for instance, Is just too bright. In vanilla is ok.

Now, think a bit forward, Tanoa expansion will be based in a tropical environment, can you imagine how it will look based on recent graphic improvements? 

I can, In fact I have contacted my lawyer to deal with divorce stuff, because I will marry my screen when that happens.

On that topic, I wish you one hell of a happy second marriage, good sir! May the Tanoa flourish with the most amazing visuals of Arma!

[Roach_ 52]

The empty world main menu performance does seem to vary, but it's not reflective of actual game performance.

 

I agree, but to be fair it has been pretty consistent in my case. On stable/before the visual update it was always 89 fps, now it's always 81 fps. Not bashing though, even though while in game the drop hurts more, I think this visual update is a huge improvement and, considering it has just been put in DEV branch, I'm confident these issues will be looked into. I can't judge the update yet as I understand I'm on development branch and not stable, some sort of fps drop or bug was to be expected.