Stripped down, OFP-like graphics, anyone?

[ebud 18]

I think to try this out you could create one small "blank" normal map and a small "blank" shadow map and use it to replace all of the *_nohq and *_as files in one of the pbos and see how it works. May just be the same as putting shadows to very low and whatever texture setting applies to normal map detail.

Also if you wanted to get really lores you could create a batch process in Photoshop to open all the textures from a pbo and scale them down by 1/2 or so, that way even the *_co textures get scaled back.

Then edit the islands so the grass is gone. More performance boost.

I would think if you replace all the shadow and normal maps and even the diffuse textures with a very lores copy you could gain quite a bit performance wise, but I honestly don't know.

Just a thought. It would look like crap though.

[Deadfast 43]

Hello everyone,

this topic just caught my attention as performance is something, that really bothers me.

The reason why I bought ArmA is realism and gameplay. Not graphic.

My PC is pretty old (AMD Athlon XP 2600+, GeForce FX 5700 128MB, 2x 512MB 400Mhz RAM, 120 GB HDD 7200 rpm).

Before someone starts telling me it's too big sh*t to run the game I'm going to link him to official system requirements.

Also I'm just a student so I don't have too much money to spend, so nothing like "go buy a new PC, it doesn't cost that much". Of course if you want to donate me some money for new rig, that can handle the game OK, you can send them right away .

To avoid any "put down details" there are my video settings:

And to show you what my problem is, this sometimes happens after 2 hours of playing:

and some benchmarks from forested area (Hd 21):

<span style='font-size:7pt;line-height:100%'>FPS:

10

10

10

10

10

10

9

10

10

11

9

9

8

9

8

6

10

9

9

8

9

8

9

8

10

7

8

11

8

8

5

6

6</span>

And of course I haven't bought ArmA to play OFP, so please no comments like "go play OFP then, fool".

If you find any way, how to increase performance (even if the game would look worse than OFP) I would be pretty happy. I finally want to play at minimal of 15 FPS .

[POPKA 0]

when you shoot does your Moniter flicker on and off? thats what happens when i do it, I have Arma on the same settings as you almost only with slightly higher visibility and I cat get anything higher than 15 in the FPS department. Which surprised me as I have an Radeon x600 and a 3ghz computer.

[fohtee 0]

Damn there's a lot of trolls here. What's so wrong with someone asking if there's ways to mod in lower graphical quality assets?

I really don't see what offended folks like nephilim enough for them to post amazingly useless suggestions. Buying a new PC, playing OFP or throwing out one's ArmA disc are all idiotic replies to a question no one asked.

Anyways, I too wish there was a way to get a little more performance out of the game with some modding. But it's unlikely to happen.

Quote[/b] ]

I think to try this out you could create one small "blank" normal map and a small "blank" shadow map and use it to replace all of the *_nohq and *_as files in one of the pbos and see how it works. May just be the same as putting shadows to very low and whatever texture setting applies to normal map detail.

Also if you wanted to get really lores you could create a batch process in Photoshop to open all the textures from a pbo and scale them down by 1/2 or so, that way even the *_co textures get scaled back.

Then edit the islands so the grass is gone. More performance boost.

I would think if you replace all the shadow and normal maps and even the diffuse textures with a very lores copy you could gain quite a bit performance wise, but I honestly don't know.

Just a thought. It would look like crap though.

I bet it would end up looking worse than OFP and run slower as well, unfortunately. Likely, the only performance gains I think we'll see will come from patches, I would think.

Not that any of this really matter too much to me, since ArmA runs swimmingly on my computer.

[KiwisDoFly 0]

Of course BIS had to improve the graphics a lot to make it sell, because world is full of people who judge the game mainly by screenshots (sad but true).

I'd like to comment on this because this isn't true in game development. Stuff like AI, gameplay balancing, engine development, game art, etc are not done by the same team within the company.

And there is no specific budget allocation either - the whole project is under one budget. So essentially, what I'm saying, is that if the game engine sucks and is unoptimized, or the gameplay is unbalanced - don't go blaming it on "mainstream" and accuse the devs of "selling out" and "appealing to the masses".

Blame the guy who didn't think something through, or didn't have enough skills to optimize the engine, etc.

Just thought I'd mention.

[Deadfast 43]

when you shoot does your Moniter flicker on and off? thats what happens when i do it, I have Arma on the same settings as you almost only with slightly higher visibility and I cat get anything higher than 15 in the FPS department. Which surprised me as I have an Radeon x600 and a 3ghz computer.

I'm affraid my PC is even worse than yours .

But no, I don't have any monitor flickering.

[vilas 473]

hahaha

super graphics - pulsing HDR like stroboscope lamp on disco

missing textures, LODs even on strong computers

i also waited for OFP 2 in sens - better AI, better destruction of buildings, more possibilities

i am satisfied with RTCW, MOHAA, is till play those games

OFP, now ARMA are the only games that can be so much user-editable and for me this is bigest PLUS of it

also big area

but normalmapping, annoying HDR for me is useless

i want ability to jump, i want better behaving AI, i want vehicles with good destruction structure (shooting even 10 bullets in doors cannot destroy car, cause doors has no fuel, engine and etc. ), AI soldiers with realistic damage structure (2 shots in leg cannot kill, vest must work, helmet must work)

instead of this i get OFP with better graphics, Sahrani is looking nice and beauty but after bombing house there is small heap of rubble (too small for big house)

ARMA in comparision to OFP for me it is like Polish word "wodotryski"

"wodotryski" means - you have car that smokes a lot, sometimes stops because of damaged gear box, air conditioning is not

working but one man gave this car very good Hi-Fi and new metallic paint and says "look how good car it is"

this graphical advantages like HDR are only making me angry, on Youtube you can see some movies of how HDR works on some PC :/

annoying, pulsing althought precision set to 16

hell with graphical advance if AI fires from RPG to another man, if 2 shots in arm or leg kill, if shot from pistol in the vest kills soldier, if AT mine on road cannot be destroyed by RPG or PipeBomb

i placed soldier, i shot in his direction (i was on his back in wood , hidden in bush) and i was killed, because he exactly know where i am, how the hell he knows so good where i was ?

no disorientation, god-knowledge

graphic is not all

if you love graphic - play oblivion, stalker, max payne

i want realistic battlefield simulator

and please tell me what is advanced if game is not dualcore compatible/benefiting ?

i changed PC specially for ARMA in December 2006, and now my ARMA goes almost like on my 2-3 years old PC which i gave to the friend , because for ARMA my AMD 3800 X2 is equal my old 2 Ghz PIV ?

[ColonelSandersLite 0]

Just a couple of thoughts on vilas's post here:

I agree completely with vilas about the HDR. I would actually *REALLY* like to be able to remove it completely. I like HDR, just not the way arma implements it. It's crap.

The ability to scale small obstacles would be damn nice.

A more well rounded damage system for vehicles and structures would be nice too.

For the AI's abilities, I found it took a considerable amount of tweaking to get them behaving fairly realisticly. Try these settings in your armaprofile file:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">

skillFriendly=0.650000;

skillEnemy=0.650000;

precisionFriendly=0.750000;

precisionEnemy=0.750000;

IMHO, they seem to be a good balance between close range fights, and long range fights. They still aim a little too quickly for my tastes, but it plays well overall.

I don't necessarily view kills in the game as true kills. For example, if you take a few 5.56 in the leg, you're likely to be rolling around on the ground screaming, desperatly trying to reattach your leg, or what have you. You know, effectively out of the action. Even if you would get home to tell about it IRL, you aren't going to do any fighting anytime soon.

Also, when your body armor takes a hit, it may save your life, but expect it to hurt. A lot. If you strap a pillow to your chest and let me swing a baseball bat at you, you won't be getting up anytime soon .

[privateguba 0]

Just a thought from someone who has 0 knowledge about programing or just OFP/Arma mission, mod making etc.

I`ve also thought about this performance optimizing `downgrade` of the graphics. I think that the answer could be in the Islands, not the units. It seems that the new streaming engine makes smaller islands pointless, but it also seems that Sara-Lite runs better.

Maybe, just maybe, a conversion of the original OFP islands or addon islands (no extra stuff, maybe just a sprinkling of grass) would run better, given the same hardware, on AA than on OFP`s engine. They would look much better, just given Arma`s engine enhacements, vegetation, etc. I think with even a little bit more detail `sprinkling` than original they could run much better than Sahrani, with a guesstimation/hope/prayer of the FPS in the 100s even on the heaviest spots. Because the scenery density is smaller than Sahr.

This could be the answer for heavily populated islands, a `square` format (Nogova style) 12,8x12,8km island has enough space and beauty for most tastes, the big dinamic mission/campaigns could be done, etc.    

Just dreaming      

[vilas 473]

ColonelSandersLite i have friends in Police, if you have good vest makarow bullet won't kill you, if you get shot from 50 meters by makarow, in few seconds you can back to action of course with some problems

in this game 1 shot from pistol in chest (vest) kill man, nonsense

of course wounded soldiers actions should be added

'in arma you shoot man in leg, he is not roling of pain, he shoots you back, he directly shoot at you, you are dead

he is not traumafeeling, he is not disorientated, schocked

i say what i said before on other topics

in my country on ARMA box there is written "most realistic battlefield symulating system" not "just another stupid game with super effects"

i don't play other games, i use this one because i can improve and make addons

i played SOF2 for few weeks, it was funny , i like RTCW for atmoshere, but i sue OFP, ARMA as software to establish my own "wars" and i like more realism instead of graphical "wodotryski"

[ebud 18]

Vilas your "woe is me" attitude and constant thread hijacking to complain endlessly is getting old and quite frankly a bit boring.

It was old after the first week you got ARMA.

I respect your work and your generosity in making addons, but ffs enough is enough.

I'd rather discuss the topic at hand, possibly stripping down ARMA to get better performance.

I agree with a previous post about the island and plants being the culprit. It really might be worth taking a look at making a mod folder for lores arma addons, then scale the island textures and plant textures back to see if it helps. It would HAVE to have a positive effect on FPS.

[vilas 473]

Quote[/b] ]somewhat better AI, and of course better scripting engine (not that any of them was too bad) - but i never cared for better graphics

said author

he also said that he thinks about better performance of game

i am talking about the same

all graphic "wodotryski" makes only engine heavy, for unknown reason even on stron PC people have problems

for me i am not hijacking topic

i tell about the same

if game was without annoying HDR maybe it will have better performance

maybe some effects make missing textures and etc.

there are some movies on youtube, many people suffering from HDR

people wanted better OFP and awaited for better game, not for pulsing screen and cartoon models caused by graphical engine

in OFP i never ever had any graphical problems since begining

in ARMA sometimes screen is darkening, pulsing (if white object is near, or if black object is near)

maybe this what author of topic says will help to get better gameplay and more joy

of course new SLA helmets are super

but gennerally performance is not good

FPS is not so important as things like good light (not pulsing HDR) like textures that are not missing

i can have 20,30 FPS, okay, but i want textures that are not disappearing and darkening/brightning if i turn head for few degrees

programist must say what is most important for engine (because we have no technical knowledge)

we as users only can say what we want

and i agree with autor of topic - i want better, stable graphic performance

[ArmaVidz 0]

Just buy a 7600GT and turn all the graphics to low, whalla, cheap fix to get OFP graphics

[ebud 18]

Vilas your comments have nothing to do with stripping out or modifying content to make ARMA run better. All your doing is saying the same crap day after day after day after day. Your venting in many many threads does nothing to further the topic and are a soapbox for you to sit there and bitch and moan, nothing more. We all know your pain and frustration, we've known about it for months as we see it here over and over and over and over and over. Complain in your own thread or in the many other complaint threads but give us all a damn break and quit turning every thread into your own personal pity party.

[CanadianTerror 0]

Good lord Ebud its like your possessed by the devil.

[ebud 18]

Sorry, I didn't intend to go offtopic. As much as I enjoy seeing Vilas's work progress and appreciate his enthusiasm in creating content to share, I couldn't stand to read another long winded tirade of his. My apologies to 5133p39 for getting the discussion offtrack and to Vilas for flamebaiting, but it was a long time coming and not unwarranted.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

Like many others, I find that the trees and vegetation are

big fps-killers (this is really the only Arma "misfeature" that

seriously affects the performance of ArmA for me). I'd be

interested in the possibility of replacing (at least some of)

the ArmA trees with OFP trees. I'd even be happy enough to

replace them by hand in maps if it meant that I could actually

pan my binoculars across a tree without the usual tedious

detriment to the fps.

Ok, flame away.

[max power 21]

To be perfectly honest (this isn't a reply directly to you, Col. Faulkner), Dx9 is a much more efficient API than Dx8. Dropping all of your graphics settings, especially shaders and post processing will return you to a more OFP-like state. You can't get rid of PP or HDR completely, though, because of the way the engine works. There don't seem to be many more cloudlets or other things going on in ArmA than there were in OFP, and the things that seem to have a large performance cost are things you have no control over (like the number of textures being shown at the same time, the demands of the way the islands are built semi-procedurally, dx9 effects, etc). Simply lowering the number of polies per character won't have much effect.

In this regard, I recommend trying out the new patch. It offers further optimization.

[TheReddog 0]

I would be interested in a mod that stripped down the bushes.

It is nothing short of infuriating to have the game running beautifully smooth on your E6600, 2GB RAM, 8800GTS system only to have it run into a 7 fps wall as you look at a bush.

[funnyguy1 0]

I believe that the eye candy is one of the ArmA's biggest features now... (out of the box, as the modding hasn't even started yet).

If I understand correctly, I agree with some people here, and I would rather BIS relased an upgraded Elite with totally reworked AI. Instead, they relased ArmA, and I don't want to discuss here whether it's a good or bad decision.

Now, I dreamed many times about just a plain expansion pack for ofp in terms of gfx, but either with a really decent campaign, or just like in my pre-ArmA speculations concerning the content of what later turned out to be ArmA - update focused on all of the features and new stuff conected with the AI and realism.

If we manage to strip down ArmA a bit, forcing it to work fluently on our comps, we won't make it more interesting at the same time. In fact, It'll be quite the opposite, as the lack of some features is compensated by the eye-candy, which as I mentioned, is one of the biggest features of ArmA now. (compared to modded ofp)

This will only, make the game more pc-friendly, but won't bring anything new. It's like asking yourself "do I really want to disable the grass in ArmA, or play with the grass only few meters around me", because it'll still be the same game. Therefore, if the performance is the only argument in favor of stripping ArmA down, it IS a matter of heavily modded ofp vs. poor looking ArmA.

However, I'm in the part of the community that want's the game to be more fluent on my pc even at cost of the dragonflies flying on the battlefield...

[Maddmatt 1]

I would be interested in a mod that stripped down the bushes.

It is nothing short of infuriating to have the game running beautifully smooth on your E6600, 2GB RAM, 8800GTS system only to have it run into a 7 fps wall as you look at a bush.

Been said loads of times, turning down shading detail to normal or even low will drop the detail on bushes. If that is enough to make the game playable on my 7800GT, then it's sure as hell good enough for your 8800 to run ArmA perfectly

@funnyguy1: Removing dragonflies is not going to help your FPS at all.

Why can't you people just turn down graphics options instead of trying to reduce the detail for everyone? Not everyone wants to have this game look like crap to get better FPS, so if you want that then drop the graphics settings.

[funnyguy1 0]

I don't want to reduce nobody's gfx settings. lol.

I've just said I have crappy rig, just like some other players, that's all, so I do what I can to keep decent fps count (and that includes reducing my gfx settings), but that wasn't the point of my post. Neither I want you to pity me, nor should you.

I just stated that I would prefer to have some other aspects of the game upgraded, as significantly as the gfx, EVEN if it would cost the gfx upgrade itself. Btw, that's what I meant in the last sentence of my previous post.

[mattxr 9]

IF you are now playing 1.08 and after 2 hours of playing and your gfx goes like that press Shift & - then type FLUSH.

[rcspikee 0]

dont take this the rong way but u can build a system to run armed assault for less than £350 with no monitor / keybord / mouse. upgrade or play ofp! the time you transfer all of ofp models an textures an degrade all the rest your left with:

Very S**T arma mod that less than 1% of all Real arma fans are gonna bother with if Any

or

A ofp mod for arma it will look the same as ofp but with a Lot more lag, Wats the F****N point!!!!

Sry makes me laugh!!!

[Deadfast 43]

Maddmat:

I'm affraid that won't work.

There's nothing I can put down/disable anymore. And the game still runs like crap.

Rcspikee:

Ha, ha, ha.

Easy to laugh with system like yours. I'm just a student, I don't have money to buy a new PC and upgrade is useless with my current hardware.

Noone is forcing you to use mod like that. If you're not interested than don't reply to this thread.

And as I've already said. I haven't bought ArmA to play OFP. I've bought it 'cos official requirements said I can run the game (even if that means on minimal settings) and apparently I can't (10 FPS doesn't mean running the game IMO).

Anyway, I think that we might be possible to do something with performance, when there will be a way to edit the original ODOL coded object - we could try to replace bushes and trees with less-detailed ones.