Graphics

[jamieb 10]

Hey guys,

Basically, my computer is utter **** - have to run ArmA2 on the lowest graphics to run it smoothly. However; on ArmA3 Alpha Lite, I am very much laggy, so slow etc and that's on what "lowest" graphics are. Will these graphics be bumped down when actual game is released (considering it is lowest) or is that finalized? Want to know if I'm gunna have to buy a better computer just to run it.. :P

[-FHA-Dynamo 0]

why would BIS lower the graphics of ARMA3 lower than ARMA2? if your computer is "utter ****" as you put it, why would any developer bother with you?

it's 2013, if you can't even run ArmA2 half way decent, you need to upgrade or give up on PC gaming and buy a console.

[Colossus 2]

Well, if you run ArmA 2 on low then you shouldn't expect ArmA 3 to run any better. ArmA 2 uses DirectX 9, whiles ArmA 3 uses DirectX 10/11. You can guess from here what the means for graphical improvements. It's a few. :)

All in all, with better graphics comes the need for a better computer.

If I may ask, what computer specs do you have?

[MavericK96 0]

Dynamo;2398905']why would BIS lower the graphics of ARMA3 lower than ARMA2? if your computer is "utter ****" as you put it' date=' why would any developer bother with you?

it's 2013, if you can't even run ArmA2 half way decent, you need to upgrade or give up on PC gaming and buy a console.[/quote']

Harsh but true. Not sure why you would expect ArmA 3 to run better than ArmA 2 (the same, maybe, after a LOT of optimization, but probably not better).

[OneZeoN 10]

Dynamo;2398905']why would BIS lower the graphics of ARMA3 lower than ARMA2? if your computer is "utter ****" as you put it' date=' why would any developer bother with you?

it's 2013, if you can't even run ArmA2 half way decent, you need to upgrade or give up on PC gaming and buy a console.[/quote']

lol true this!

[kremator 1064]

Hey guys,

Basically, my computer is utter **** - have to run ArmA2 on the lowest graphics to run it smoothly. However; on ArmA3 Alpha Lite, I am very much laggy, so slow etc and that's on what "lowest" graphics are. Will these graphics be bumped down when actual game is released (considering it is lowest) or is that finalized? Want to know if I'm gunna have to buy a better computer just to run it.. :P

Yes you will have to buy a better PC to run it.

[WalkerDown 1]

Hey guys,

Basically, my computer is utter **** - have to run ArmA2 on the lowest graphics to run it smoothly. However; on ArmA3 Alpha Lite, I am very much laggy, so slow etc and that's on what "lowest" graphics are. Will these graphics be bumped down when actual game is released (considering it is lowest) or is that finalized? Want to know if I'm gunna have to buy a better computer just to run it.. :P

Unfortunately they used the same old engine but with a pimped gfx, if that was bad some years ago, today it is even more evident: the engine doesn't scale good on the modern (with modern I mean from the latest 4 years to today) CPUs. Your PC may not be enough for a modern game, you didn't posted the specs.

[CHICKEN 10]

so would that mean that I could run it if I could run arma 2 on normal/high settings?

[WalkerDown 1]

so would that mean that I could run it if I could run arma 2 on normal/high settings?

You could run it.. why not? Do you mean if you'll have the same FPS? Probably not.. I've like 80fps in arma2 with mid-high settings (two gtx570SLI / i7 950 3.6ghz) @1600p ... while I have around 35fps (average with peaks of 55fps and low of 20fps). I do not consider any fps to be "playable" at 25-30 fps, not one where being capable to aim properly and follow the target is so important, but this is my opinion. :)