Midrange Textures need improvement

[Alabatross 1]

I don't want to hear tons of comments like "its because stratis is big" etc. Planetside/Just cause 2 (pc multiplayer mod not console) don't have this problem.

This is my only graphics complaint honestly. I could care less if anything else gets fixed but this is a big one for me. This low quality terrain just a few meters in front of you makes this game look like a PS2/early 2006 title. Its un-doing all the work you've done with HDR/SSAO/Depth. And what worries me is if it isn't fixable on this smaller island, then I don't think atlas will look too nice.

This is pretty much ultra (some things turned off like AO/AA for mp but nothing that would effect this)

[Fa11en 10]

Ya this is a serious issue in my opinion, its not that I expect it to look as good as it does up close I know this would cause serious performance issues on almost any PC. It just looks completely like garbage at this point and I have seen some mods that do a decent job at improving it but I would like to know if there are any official plans...for me it really ruins alot of the otherwise amazing scenes in ArmA3

[nmdanny 22]

I agree, it's the biggest graphical issue with the game, but I don't think that this issue will be fixed in A3.

[b00tsy 28]

I want performance and good game mechanics, engine, AI, etcetera, fuck graphics.

[dale0404 5]

I want performance and good game mechanics, engine, AI, etcetera, fuck graphics.

Actually a lot of people want this AND good graphics, in fact I would say the overwhelming majority wants this.

[Alabatross 1]

I want performance and good game mechanics, engine, AI, etcetera, fuck graphics.

I hate playing against computers in games and could care less about AI. I won't even touch single player when its released.

[wildone_106 10]

Go back to Operation Flashpoint 2000 nothing has changed much for you then

I want performance and good game mechanics, engine, AI, etcetera, fuck graphics.

[TSAndrey 1]

I agree. This looks bad. But then again, I would rather want more FPS.

[twistking 204]

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=4635

it could even improve fps, because while the performance impact should be rather small, you could reduce some terrain / clutter details and still end up with way better graphics than you have now.

Edited July 2, 2013 by twistking

[EDcase 87]

Yes, I'm amazed BIS hasn't improved this yet.

In the meantime use Bad Denson's texture mod.

It improves the ground textures a huge amount and doesn't seem to affect fps.

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=19524

Of course online servers need to have the key enabled so you can use it.

[wiresnsnakes 1]

Graphics besides, looking for enemys (enemys looking for you) becomes "Where is Wally" on extremely easy.

Instead of 1000 people you get a few trees, bushes and rocks. 90% of the rest is just one giant polygon, with a blurry texture.

Everything simply sticks out. Even with Bensons textures its not much harder, cause everything with a form sticks out, cause the flatness, even more i fits moving alaising and lightend. At least if the sun shines its easy. Missing shadows are a problem too. A shade of grey can make it hard to spot someone (even more if everything around is bright and colourfull).

The nearby enviroment suggarates, that you are hard to spot, but the opposite is the case.

I would like to see them cut everything which is pretty, till they got the resources environment is consistent.

I like everything else, but at one of the most elemental aspects they didnt archive much.

They could make the game much better, if that wouldnt be the case and an overall stealthelement could be archived, beside crawling kilometers glitched in endless blur.

[tremanarch 6]

not that other games do it better: http://imageshack.us/f/690/l9612x10mil.jpg/, http://imageshack.us/f/221/l9612x34milsbackvehicle.jpg/

they just hide it better: http://www.pcgames.de/screenshots/original/2011/09/battlefield_3_caspian_border_beta_high_027.jpg

landscape textures have characteristics.. not just a repeated tile

objects could be more transparent - not so much contrast: http://img.dayzdb.com/img/screenshots/full/223.png . people would scratch their heads if they knew how much of a difference this makes

just a quick edit of the dayz screenshot to match the BF3 transparency (only 5-10 % - it makes a big difference): http://abload.de/img/transparency70sor.png

transparency is the most basic trick to blend stuff into each other without great effort. and it works in my eyes.

and some dust clouds here and there, and cloud shadows do the rest or giving the static map some movement so soldiers wont stick out so much.

Edited July 2, 2013 by tremanarch

[twistking 204]

there is one thing we can do about the issue:

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=4635

vote it! just vote it!

i'm wondering, if it is a good or bad sign, that bis never officially commented on this!

if you read nordkindchens abstract, you understand that implementation should not be a very big deal. of course there could be engine limitations that nordkindchen simply did not think of.

let us hope for the best!

and vote! let us vote for the best!

[Sneakson 1]

I wouldn't complain about textures.

They have already confirmed we will have much better textures... currently we only have a Very High setting.

Crazy LOD flickering on Standard Object Detail and to some degree on other settings is a bigger problem.

There are many big graphics problems though.

[tremanarch 6]

heres another example I just took:

http://abload.de/img/arma32013-07-0321-16-0ysv9.jpg

I dont think its thaat bad - its situational, and weather / light dependant aswell.

can you spot the six close soldiers? 4 right 2 left - they dont stick out soo much.

at least one soldier is 300-400m to Mike.. cant spot him, but there came shots out of that direction.

maybe the landscape just needs some more small rocks / bushes / holes in the ground - so the obvious places to get cover arent soo obvious.

and just with a little noise here and there, and soft darkened landscape texture it looks more natural and noisy: http://abload.de/img/arma32-altered25ss41.jpg

just some subtle changes here and there, instead of one big boom that costs cpu and whatnot and introduces new problems..

Edited July 3, 2013 by tremanarch

[twistking 204]

yes, the darkening makes it better. still not what you would expect from a 2013 game.

vote! :)

[tremanarch 6]

the problem with all those feedbacks is that they have good - but maybe too complicated solutions - the engine needs to be rewritten. the minds of the devs must go deep into the source etc etc. when you have a Program, that grew for 10 years and is that big like ArmA - and has maybe seen many devs over the xears everyone with his own little function etc and his "footprint" left and some personal comments in the code - the last thing you want to do is rewrite critical areas of the code under time pressure.

More easy and more direct and human ressource friendly would be a little sharpen noise and darken on the landscape - and voila. and later on for an addon - they can invest more time for a better complete solution. or just a noise / sharpen / darken postprocess overlay for the midrange from 100 - 500m with soft blending.

bis only has so many developers. for now a small quick solution is maybe enough to please the peoples a little bit.

Edited July 3, 2013 by tremanarch

[Fa11en 10]

Yes, I'm amazed BIS hasn't improved this yet.

In the meantime use Bad Denson's texture mod.

It improves the ground textures a huge amount and doesn't seem to affect fps.

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=19524

Of course online servers need to have the key enabled so you can use it.

That mod is excellent, BI should really take a page from that guy!

[tremanarch 6]

yeah but it still needs some more 3d objects in some areas. even with super textures etc - some hills are just only hills.

http://abload.de/img/arma3comp2bisn7.jpg

i was wondering why they didnt add more stuff like that: http://abload.de/img/unbenannty7se2.jpg

[Fa11en 10]

Well either way the mod creator has done a great job and hopefully it will only continue to improve this really is a serious issue although its purely cosmetic

[Alabatross 1]

Well either way the mod creator has done a great job and hopefully it will only continue to improve this really is a serious issue although its purely cosmetic

It plays a huge role in immersion. This is why I never played Arma II, it was just a super laggy ps2-looking title. And on that same graphics card I can run A3 fine

[Predator.v2 10]

Just use midtex. I hardly play the game without it anymore:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?150645-midrange-terrain-texture-replacement&highlight=midtex

Plus SweetFX:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/106806270/GBB%20Files/ARMA%20III%20Alpha%20-%20SweetFX.zip

This is how my game looks like:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/arma3%20midtex/midtex_final/orig_midtex_sharp2/1/orig.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/arma3%20midtex/midtex_final/orig_midtex_sharp2/1/sharp21.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/arma3%20midtex/midtex_final/orig_midtex_sharp2/2/orig%202.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/arma3%20midtex/midtex_final/orig_midtex_sharp2/2/sharp22.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/GBB%20Files/original.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/GBB%20Files/midtex_sharp_and_sweetFX.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/GBB%20Files/SweetFX/heli%20sweet.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/GBB%20Files/SweetFX/1%20on.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/GBB%20Files/SweetFX/3%20on.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/GBB%20Files/SweetFX/4%20on.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/106806270/GBB%20Files/SweetFX/5%20on.png

[Minoza 11]

I must have said this at least 10 times now but here we go again... while it looks great on grass populated areas, it still doesn't solve the main issue - same detail texture for every surface = not good.

[-Coulum- 35]

Well either way the mod creator has done a great job and hopefully it will only continue to improve this really is a serious issue although its purely cosmetic

No it isn't. It makes spotting far range units harder, thus having game-play benefits as well. Right now in arma it is arguably just as easy/easier to spot units far away rather than close up because of the poor textures, lack of camouflage and shadows at range.

I must have said this at least 10 times now but here we go again... while it looks great on grass populated areas, it still doesn't solve the main issue - same detail texture for every surface = not good.

Yes indeed, great mod, but we need Nord's idea to be implemented.

[wiresnsnakes 1]

I just really hope they fix it and implement whatever they did in VBS2 to create shadows at distance.

At bright sunlight as a sniper in Planetside 2 Im dead, if there isnt something behind me. If have something behind me and im in light im easy to spot. If there are other details that distract from my figure, im much harder to spot. In a highly shadowed area with a crisp texture behind me and the right camo im nearly invisible.

As i play nearly only as sniper (which I didnt do much in the past) I have spent much time for screening the environment fast in PS2 and if you put some thought on it, the factors of light/coloursatarion, sharp textures one the environment and the units, the right colours and objects/contrasts/details that distract you from units at higher ranges the differences become obivious. And they are HUGE!

The game greaty succeed in nearly all other cases, which is a huge success with all the content A3 provides. So it just is fruststrating i fails big time in providing the right conditions for fight at high ranges.

Who cares that vehicles and weapons arent used partly in todays military and unrealistic fatigue or flightphysics.

THIS issue is far more elemantal regarding realism for the backbone of the army, the soldiers.