Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

12 Good

About Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

    Constructive Criticism, Rants And Locking Threads

    i agree 100%. (WARNING: a bit offtopic, but fits to the case of OP) not only when it comes to arma / BI criticism, but when you go to the offtopic section and post your own political views which are the opposite of our media´s or criticism western leaders & media, they also lock your topic or delete your posts fully or even ban you. one guy got banned by maddox because of this and there was really no reason, maddox used as excuse for his ban that the guy was "trolling". (NOW BACK ONTOPIC) some moderators (not all) needs to be removed and/or replaced. i said some because there are good moderators here. some moderators cant stand criticism nor cant some members here (aka fanboys).
  2. Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

    Saudi Arabia General

    German news wrote: LOOOOL! he was the one who helped together with EU, NATO, USA, Qatar, Turkey and other gulf states to create several terror groups like al-qaeda, IS, FSA, NTC rebels, Al-Nusra, taliban etc and helped them with weapons and money to destabilize several countries, including anti-imperialist countries like syria (not counting libya anymore since they success overthrow gaddafi and placed a puppet regime there). king abdullah was one of the biggest terrorist.
  3. Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

    DirecxtX 12 for ArmA 3?

    yeah. DX12, lets take the 12 and split it = 1 & 2. 1+2 = 3 !! OMG HALF-LIFE 3 CONFIRMED!!
  4. Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

    DirecxtX 12 for ArmA 3?

    why is everyone talking about arma 4 ? did bohemia interactive mentioned arma 4 somewhere ? no. did bohemia interactive announced arma 4 ? no. bohemia interactive said that they will work on arma 3 for the next 4-5 years, so dont expect a new arma for a long time, its to early to talk about arma 4 (when it is even called arma 4,, when a new arma arrive, we dont even know how they name it).
  5. Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

    Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

    thank you guys, will install arma 3 again when the expansion has been released, hope we get (more) improvements.
  6. Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

    Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

    have you noticed any FPS improvement with this in SP with AI ? (SP editor without any AI, just placing player isnt a good way to test if FPS increased)
  7. Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

    Zombie Panic Source

    yeah i agree, for some odd reasons it says coop. anyway, if you want to play against AI/NPC zombies, i recommend you the game "no more room in hell", it can be downloaded in steam for free and it works in multiplayer aswell as lan.
  8. Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

    Development Blog & Reveals

    from ArmA 3 scanning the horizon - platform updates section: good one! these problems are there now for over 10 years in various games, now in the scanning the horizon, i read in the "new terrain" section this: how can a new terrain -which can be made later + community done already new terrains- be your main priority then?! i mean wtf ? sorry but thats laughable. another thing is: the all new features you promise, thats all nice and good, including the new terrain, but whats the point of having all these stuff, when i can use them only when im alone in the editor + maybe some AI, to stay on good FPS and whats the point of adding FPS eating features on a game (we saw it with AFM), which already runs like crap ? xD i mean the features are all nice but the the performance should be priority number one, especially multi-threading, THEN it would make sense to add new features which eats FPS when the game uses the hardware properly, the FPS cost of these features wouldnt be really noticed on todays machines. sorry but i can not take this seriously nor can i trust you devs, i believe that you will continue making small optimizations (which are barely noticed by most players) but at the multi-threading part, i dont trust you there and i bet that you will abadone it. but at least you admit that the game has multi-threading problems. now fanboys can not deny it anymore like they did before.
  9. Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

    Why I will never buy any of your games ever again.

    shut the fuck up and stick your head out of bohemias ass, then you will see the world look quite different
  10. did i said that BI should make arma on cryengine ? i only proved thats possible to have large terrains in cryengine, not more not less. and about what engine arma should run: it should run with its current engine but proper multi-core/multi-threading and 64bit support should be added (in short: BI shouldnt switch directly to a new engine, but fixing the current engine, like i wrote few pages before), no matter if 64bit only helps at fkin loading or increase the FPS in fkin fraction of %, we are in 2015.
  11. oh god you are fucking stupid and didnt read my post before. it took me 2 seconds to confirm what i thought, that you didnt done your research nor didnt read my post before. to the first point: this is what i talked about, you have to contact crytek and then they may give you (if you prove them you are working on this and this and has the teampower etc) the source code for the terrains and then you have to code your terrain system into cryengine for your game. and if CE1 or CE2, what does it matter ? its possible to code large terrains in every version of cryengine. oh and every company / team who use cryengine for theyr games, customize the engine to make it fit to theyr game so @the end, it is a custom version. to the second point: yeah. thats for the standard user, for those who use the free ce3 sdk or the newer version which can downloaded via steam but it costs $10 per month. (the free sdk is unsupported now, they wont working on it anymore, if you want the updated and supported cryengine 3 you need to get it from steam for $10 per month). but still if you use the updated and supported version, you can NOT have huge terrain sizes in standard, you still has to contact crytek and prove them you are working on a game which use cryengine and you made progress etc etc etc... and making huge terrains works different than in arma, you cant simply have ONE 40960 x 40960 meter in cryengine, this is not how it works in cryengine, here is a example of one method how it works in cryengine: there are some projects out which are working with terrain streaming, just do research yourself. with this: you knocked out yourself, first saying that large terrain isnt possible, but then quoting a project which confirm what i wrote: that you have to code it into the cryengine to have large terrain available. and for your last question: i dont know what you mean, i didnt talked about any project specific in my previous posts and it doesnt really matter if these projects are going to be released or not. fact is that its possible to have large terrain in cryengine (and for you: doesnt matter what version since different projects are working on different cryengine versions) and that these projects showed us that is possible to have large terrains (again for you: large terrains works different in CE than in arma) i hope this time you understand.
  12. you are the best example of the lazy guys im talking about. here it didnt took me 2 seconds: http://www.cryengine.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=314&t=74175 https://www.google.de/?gws_rd=ssl#q=cryengine+3+MMO+terrain+streaming https://www.google.de/?gws_rd=ssl#q=cryengine+3+large+terrains now, look around. and about the environment: arma 3 environment looks Ok and im fine with arma 3 environment, but still, there are better looking out there. ---------- Post added at 18:05 ---------- Previous post was at 18:03 ---------- i love how every game from bohemia (not only arma, but dayz, take on helicopters etc etc) has bad performance, yet some fanboys blame players for it.
  13. if BI want to stay with the current engine - ok if BI will not add 64bit & proper multi-threading / multi-core (i hope all here knows that the game runs mostly on one core, uses only a small % of the other cores) support - ok but they should write then on the boxes that this game is a very limited sandbox game where you cant have huge battles/wars with good FPS, where you can only have small spec ops/SWAT/Counter strike like battles. about big maps: ok, you can have big maps, but there are other engines out where you can have big maps. cryengine allows you huge terrains in arma level, but not everyone has the access for this. you must contact crytek and provide them your work and inform them about your company (if you have one) and inform them about your project etc to get access to the terrain code. but not everyone knows this because of lazyness to research, this is why i read bullshit from some people here saying that cryengine doesnt allow huge terrains. there are some games WIP with cryengine which has terrain streaming (and which works better than the arma terrain system). anyway, arma terrains can be big, but also cause problems, begining with performance, one word: kavala (and no i dont talk about place yourself alone at kavala and you have good FPS). the engine is in many aspects more limited than we can imagine, from performance/CPU/GPU usage, to terrain, to modeling (in modeling there are many limitations too) and and and... you can do alot in arma, but the few things of the alot runs smooth, so this makes not only the game limited, but the playing too. the only game i know that can be A BIT compared is: garrys mod, why ? because its a sandbox too where you can spawn objects, units etc like in arma. it can also run custom mods, scripts, maps etc like in arma. heck you can even have helicopters and jets there and tanks and military stuff like in arma. but maps are different sizes, there are small maps and some big (not big as arma but still bigger than the usual source maps) yet the source engine is in many aspects more advanced: - 64bit support - proper multi core and multi threading - better ragdolls/physics system - proper bulletholes, sprites, effects - and many more things. there are even life mods running on servers and zombie mods like in arma 3. there isnt a game out which has the same scale of arma 3, but the closest which comes to arma series is garrys mod. i personally prefer garrys mod over arma. in garrys mod, i can do more than in arma, because i can play in garrys mod proper wars/battles with thanks, jets etc which arma 3 cant handle. in garrys mod i can have maps with skyscrapers where arma 3 has problems in terms of performance aswell in terms of model limits. in garrys mod, i can play all the life, zombie and many more mods too. in garrys mod, i can play awesome addons too and in garrys mod, i can play everything with proper multi core, multi threading and 64bit support, with good ragdolls and physics which i cant in arma 3. there is a motto: more is less, less is more. for arma 3 i say: more is less, why ? because arma 3 gives you so much but its very limited which makes you less usage of it. less AI, less FPS, less huge battles etc etc for garrys mod, i say: less is more, why ? because you cant have some things from arma in garrys mod like for example big maps, but you can have proper battles/wars, be it with military, with aliens, or zombies, you have proper 64bit, multi core and multi threading support, good physics, good FPS, proper city maps which can be huge. so guys, i say more is less and less is more :) btw, you can have campaigns and missions in garrys mod, but the creating is far different than in arma series.
  14. Arma3goodCPUlowFPS

    the mapframe

    ok thanks!