Bohemia Interactive's ambitions are always set too high.

[dav 22]

Neurofunker and Dwarden you could consider playing army of two or getting a room the game is awesome, just fix the drop in fps when you spray.

[jiltedjock 10]

Windies stop tossing 64bit and 4GB memory around ...

Arma2, OA, TKOH and Arma 3 are LAA aware (directly addressing 4GB on 64bit OS)

...

So there is no maxmem hardcoded limit of 2047MB before the filemapping API is used?

[fred41 42]

@jiltedjock, the filemapping API (section object) is always used for arma (as cache for data streaming).

The size of this section object, is currently calculated from your maxmem settings and around 1.6GB, if maxmem is set to default/limit (2047).

This is what BIS calls 'addressless' memory and is comparable slow when accessed, but much faster then file IO access.

The other, direct addessed and faster, part of memory, can be theoretical upto 4GB (on 64bit OS).

This amount of memory, used via direct addressing, depends of many parameters as:

- server/client

- map/mission

- number of players

- session runtime (perhaps small memory leaks in engine and/or mission)

- quality of custom memory allocator

- some internal soft limit parameters in engine (which are being currently reworked, i think)

Greets,

Fred41

[NeuroFunker 11]

Neurofunker and Dwarden you could consider playing army of two or getting a room the game is awesome, just fix the drop in fps when you spray.

so, we are not invited for a big one, along all of you, fixmoaners?

[henri 10]

I wonder what would happen on a much smaller map, lets say a valley with one town in it, enclosed by mountains

[pathetic_berserker 4]

-Sigh-

Cant believe this community still takes the bait.

Topic = Bohemia Interactive's ambitions are always set too high.

Started by a whinger who thinks spending £2000 on a system guarantees instant satisfaction.

He claims he's been into this stuff since OFP.

But as much as I don't want to get personal, I'm calling him out for a noob.

He doesn't seem to be aware of why a segment of the gaming industry started the 60fps min call in the first place.

And he didn't even post his settings

I think maybe its his expectations that are too high.

[roshnak 41]

fixmoaners?

Haha, what? That has to be the least insulting slur I've seen.

-Sigh-

Cant believe this community still takes the bait.

Topic = Bohemia Interactive's ambitions are always set too high.

Started by a whinger who thinks spending £2000 on a system guarantees instant satisfaction.

He claims he's been into this stuff since OFP.

But as much as I don't want to get personal, I'm calling him out for a noob.

He doesn't seem to be aware of why a segment of the gaming industry started the 60fps min call in the first place.

And he didn't even post his settings

I think maybe its his expectations that are too high.

First of all, he posted his specs in the fourth line of his post and it's fairly top of the line in most respects. I think his point was that if he can't run the game well at max or near max settings with that hardware, what kind of hardware would he need?

Second of all, yeah, calling him a noob is pretty much not helpful at all.

Lastly, perhaps you would like to enlighten us as to why you think a segment of the gaming industry targets 60 FPS as a benchmark for good performance?

[dm 9]

a segment of the gaming industry targets 60 FPS as a benchmark for good performance?

Because it was inherited from console-land?

The problem with this 60 fps "best performance benchmark" is that most games achieve it by stripping away the substance of the game.

Take GTA - outside of the player bubble nothing happens, non-player entities spawn in/out within ~100m of the player (ever done the "look down a street and there are 2 red cars 1 black car and a taxi, turn 360 degrees and by the time you're back there is now 2 taxis 1 blue car and no sign of the others?).

CoD/Battlefield/et al - has no AI in MP and only limited zombies in SP.

Etc etc.

In order to achieve the 60 fps "benchmark" BI would have to strip out so much of what makes Arma Arma that I'm pretty sure the same people complaining in this thread would be the same people who are up in arms about how they've dumbed down the game so much its no longer true to its fans/they are sellouts/etc etc...

[nomisum 129]

if they kept ai/gameplay and just improved graphics and physx 60 fps would be possible without a doubt. arma2 runs quite well on todays hardware and hi res textures are more a gpu thingy.

dont want to say they shouldve done it though. granted, 60fps would be better for oculus :P

Sent from mobile

[chrisb 196]

In order to achieve the 60 fps "benchmark" BI would have to strip out so much of what makes Arma Arma that I'm pretty sure the same people complaining in this thread would be the same people who are up in arms about how they've dumbed down the game so much its no longer true to its fans/they are sellouts/etc etc...

Two different things altogether, 60fps is not even a realistic aiming point in this game, never has been, above 30-35fps and its fine for most tactical players, not run and gun.

But the way the game has changed is a completely different subject, A3 has changed alot from the series in general, but that again, is down to the player and the way they play. The game has lodged itself inbetween two places, in my view it sits uncomfortably in an odd place, neither a true series follow on, or a step directly towards the BF type game (pull in the masses). Sort of try and keep all happy type of approach, which has run, as we can see from this forum, into some difficulty.

So two seperate things altogether, I would say.

[Polygon 11]

With the mood several members have set for this thread, it's getting nowhere.

I say people need to dintinguish technicalities from a vision of a game (+ its content). Is A3 vision and mission malicious to the vision of Arma franchise? Unlikely.

Then, there's PRIORITIES (and certain questions arise):

Visual / audio aspects (as stated, A3 vanilla is currently lacking: mid-range high-res terrain textures, realistic and detailed particles, elaborate sound engine with HQ templates, and more). How important are they to both BIS, Arma's community and potential customers (12-18 year olds mostly?)?

Take high-res terrain insets and river simulation, Physx building destruction (presented for VBS3). It's great and adds up to visual satisfaction - immersion, mostly.

Right now, I assume A3 performance isn't the top priority in development. TOP prio. was to deliver the actual game with enough content to shut the mouthy crowd for a while until more is delivered. See what happens, react, adapt, and win. :D

It's not that most game devs consider complete optimization (in marketing slang - 60+ FPS - a must) a top priority. No - it's functionality, content, and marketing. A3 handles these varyingly well, except multiple MP issues.

Again, A3 misdirection was simply a prioritization mistake, miscommunication with community / perhaps dev departments. I hold no right to speculate on this further since having no detective's degree. But mistakes happen all the time. And games industry probably blames a studio most harsh for any, especially if there's a loyal community, lots of people start to identify themselves with a game.

Having the best engine / platform doesn't guarantee a quality, entertaining and influential game. See Crytek's Crysis 3.

Ultimately, what would lead to the best Arma possible? Simply put - more people working on code: programmers, scripters, coders, you name it. Code is the king in sandbox. I'll stop being Cpt. Obvious here. :D

(don't forget how "much" programmers / engineers are paid in games industry...)

[dm 9]

potential customers (12-18 year olds mostly?)?

Given that the game is rated Mature/17+ I think this age range is a bit wrong...

[Varanon 892]

Why does everything have to degenerate into personal attacks? Just discuss like normal people.

The problem is that a lot of the stirring up is done by individuals. Once people would start to realize that asking for a fix, or criticizing Arma in a constructive way is not a personal attack, then the forum would be a much better place. But there ARE people that take every negative point as a personal attack.

You know what would help even more ? If people here showed just a little bit of respect for each other.... this includes not doing this:

fixmoaners?

Name calling... always a good idea to bring threads back on topic.

[windies 11]

Considering the source, I took Fixmoaner to be a badge of honor

[ProfTournesol 956]

Given that the game is rated Mature/17+ I think this age range is a bit wrong...

Considering this topic, i'm afraid "mature" is a bit overdone.

[bad benson 1733]

come on guys. what's with the generic "consoles and all the other stupid games"-talk again. you should stop to philosophize about this meta shit and look at the actual game. arma was never a stable platform. no. not even on small maps (lagabad? rings a bell?). sure one could get lost in the whole general comparison to totally different games but go out there and compare arma 3 MP with arma 2. arma 3 is simply broken in that regard. the difference between SP and MP is huge compared to arma 2. i actually went back to arma 2 yesterday to see if i was imagining this (and because i just wanted to play a bit without getting a headache from the stutter and unacceptable FPS) and if arma 2 was as bad but no. compared to arma 3 it's buttery smooth. and no i wasn't playing empty PvP maps. i was comparing Altis Life with Takistan Life. the most cluttered missions there are. arma 2 = totally fine. arma 3 = err what?.

so again. as long as the game doesn't pull off what it's supposed to (by it's own standards) people should stop even comparing it to anything at all. these threads always drift into meta areas when the sole reason they even exist is because the experience is simply frustrating right now.

no i'm no future setting hater or realism comparer when it comes to arma 2 vs arma 3. i simply want to play some MP. and after last night i have to say there is no sugar coating it. arma 3 does not work properly yet (i hope that will change).

and to avoid nonsense answers. i play arma 3 on ALL low in MP (if i can bare playing it at all) so don't give me that "arma 3 is so amazingly advanced compared to arma 2, of course it runs worse". my specs are recommended. so no it's NOT that.

AMD Phenom X4 965 3,4

4 GB ram

Geforce GTX 660

Arma 3 on SSD

...

[smokedog3para 365]

I know what you're saying BB last night I had the rare go on multi was getting 40 fps but the stutter freeze was too much after 30 mins 60 mins in i wanted to quit only had 6 people on the dedicated just not there yet think if it was better instead of the 665 hours i've clocked up would of been double that if it was more stable.

[marcai 1]

I'm not going to pretend I know anything about how to optimise games, the state of the engine, performance vs its rivals or anything like that as others seem to have done in this thread. Neither am I going to say that it's a lost cause. BIS seem a very 'human' dev team to me, and whilst I would love for them to pull stable 60fps for all out of their hat, I'm fully aware that it likely won't happen I'm sure they are too. I'm quite happy to patiently wait and see what they come up with. I personally have already got over 500 hours of playtime from Arma by messing around in single player, which is far more than I get from most titles. I'm just hoping that performance increases to the point that my friends can play with me, as three of them have stopped playing until they can get a stable 30fps at least.

As for the thread title? I would rather BIS aim high and fall short whilst trying than aim low and meet the low standards which they set out to achieve. So long as there's engine improvements, new features, new content, mods and the like, I'll be lurking on these threads daily to see what's going on. Whilst progress isn't stampeding ahead, we're still getting a daily dev branch with attempts to fix problems. I'm sure once the campaign is sorted there'll be a focus on further optimisations and new content, as there's been a lack of new stuff for a few months now. I'm sure there'll be something not too far around the corner.

Keep at it, you guys at Bohemia. It's unfortunate that anyone who says something positive is instantly labelled a fanboy, but I've spent more on a single night out at the weekend than I did on your game, and I've got about 10,000% more time out of it. It's not perfect, but that's value for money right there. I'm sure it's pretty crappy getting negative feedback on your forums and people who don't know what they're on about trying to teach you how to do your jobs. Some of them have valid points behind the fury-text, so I hope you're still listening and keep your links with the community as you have been; keep us in the loop and we'll post occasional useful input. The modders of the community definitely will. Really looking forward to seeing how far you can push everything this year! Roll on 2014 :)

[Alwarren 2767]

no i'm no future setting hater or realism comparer when it comes to arma 2 vs arma 3.

See, there's a problem right there. People assume that "not like" = "hate". I do not necessarily like the future setting, but that is a far cry (no pun intended) away from hating it. I say something bad about the game? I must be hating it. I say that I think something has not been handled correctly? I must be hating BIS. If I say "feature X in RV is problematic", it automatically means "I prefer CryEngine".

People should finally see the world at least in (more than 50) shades of grey. There is more than zero and one. But apparently, we're all in for the Bush Doctrine, "you are either with us, or against us".

[Matt International 10]

People should finally see the world at least in (more than 50) shades of grey.

I know this is completely off topic but I can't resist. Your reference reminded me of this...

I just had to share it.

[antoineflemming 14]

It's unfortunate that anyone who says something positive is instantly labelled a fanboy

It's unfortunate that anyone on this thread who has any criticism of BI, RV, or Arma 3 is instantly labeled a hater, a complainer, a "fixmoaner", or a whiner whose only argument is "omfg my process explorer don't report xyz GB of memory used by the game process, baaaad coding ...", by both some within the community as well as from the dev team. That is what is unfortunate here.

[katipo66 94]

Keep at it, you guys at Bohemia. It's unfortunate that anyone who says something positive is instantly labelled a fanboy, but I've spent more on a single night out at the weekend than I did on your game, and I've got about 10,000% more time out of it. It's not perfect, but that's value for money right there. I'm sure it's pretty crappy getting negative feedback on your forums and people who don't know what they're on about trying to teach you how to do your jobs. Some of them have valid points behind the fury-text, so I hope you're still listening and keep your links with the community as you have been; keep us in the loop and we'll post occasional useful input. The modders of the community definitely will. Really looking forward to seeing how far you can push everything this year! Roll on 2014 :)

Nice post man, agreed :)

[windies 11]

"Technocratic zealots; evangelicals of geekery. Characterized by irrational advocacy of a particular OS, console, company, or franchise.

Most commonly used to de-legitimize contrary opinions in gaming forums."

Sorry but if you fit the definition then you are what you are. Would you get offended if I call you A man if you're A man or A woman if you're A woman? It's simply a word linked to a definition and if you find insult in the word than you what you really find is insult in the definition. Maybe you need to take an introspective look at yourself to find out why it so aptly applies and why you are insulted in the first place.

[roshnak 41]

Because it was inherited from console-land?

No it wasn't. It's because 60 Hz is the maximum refresh rate of most monitors.

30 seconds with google brought me to this article that says that 60 FPS is a rare thing on consoles: http://www.giantbomb.com/60-fps-on-consoles/3015-3223/

The problem with this 60 fps "best performance benchmark" is that most games achieve it by stripping away the substance of the game.

I'm going to try to stay away from talking about games that aren't Arma in this post, so I'll just say I disagree with this statement.

Two different things altogether, 60fps is not even a realistic aiming point in this game, never has been, above 30-35fps and its fine for most tactical players, not run and gun.

It's true that framerate can be more or less noticeable based on the type of game, but Arma has the same first person screen rotation as more action oriented games, and that is when low framerate becomes most evident.

I wish people would stop talking about framerate like the effects it has on people is some universal thing. Different people are capable of perceiving more or less frames per second. Some people can't tell the difference between 30 and 100 FPS - I have no idea how - and others get physically ill when subjected to framerates less than 30. I, personally, am usually fine with around 45 - 50 FPS, but anything around 30 starts giving me a headache after a while.

So framerate affects people differently, but almost everyone can agree that 60 FPS looks smooth on modern LCD displays (not necessarily on CRTs), which is why most people use it as a benchmark for good performance. I understand that there is a lot of stuff going on in Arma, but players with reasonably powerful machines should be able to get 60 FPS on the lowest settings.

Here's a good article on framerate and the human eye: http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html (Some USAF pilots have been able to detect up to 220 FPS)

Here's a site with examples of motion at 15, 30, and 60 FPS: http://boallen.com/fps-compare.html

[Polygon 11]

On ~60 FPS standart for consoles, Metro series devs once stated that because of a console's technical restrictions, it's possible to optimize a title further than on PC and gain similar results on typically 2x weaker console HW. Demanding PC exclusive, again, are to blame here, sort of.

If BIS was ever serious about RV engine, they'd have an independent tech team assembled outside of game development studios just like other companies. However, Arma was never a large profit franchise as DayZ is currently standing out.

Isn't RV4 ~1m lines of code, most of its features undocumented and best known by lead engine programmer only (Suma?)?

Handling RV engine is probably like taming a wild animal. Proper documentation is crucial in this area.