Jump to content

Defunkt

Member
  • Content Count

    2558
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Posts posted by Defunkt


  1. I should have asked :(

    But I'll ask this now (not that I'll spend money on anything for over 6 months now...): Would going from an i5 3.4ghz to the best i7 out there have made much difference? ('much' being over 15% I guess)

    Single-threaded performance is what you're after, suggest you look at this chart to get an idea of what stock CPU upgrades could yield (~+12% depending on your current i5 model); http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

    Or overclock your current CPU if it's a K model.


  2. I humbly think it's too early to judge the Tanoa mid-distance textures.

    That's a valid, even sensible, point of view but given BIS' track record with this eternal complaint (namely it's one of the few things they've resolutely failed to even really acknowledge, let alone engage on since 2009) I'm not terribly inclined to just assume they're going to do anything different. Arma is a damned fine looking game apart from this glaring shortcoming.

    I'll confess I'm personally a bit more frustrated than usual about this issue because (until somebody who knows more about their terrain shader tells me it wouldn't work, and preferably why) I remain convinced they could quite easily make a significant improvement for existing and future terrains with next to no effort.


  3. Given Valve are unlikely to amend their EULA or provide adequate protection for content creators' IP I think BI should simply develop their own addon directory. They don't have to host the actual content, just devise an XML/JSON manifest format and allow addon makers to register a URL where their manifest of available mods can be retrieved (including text descriptions and images for browsing, right in the ArmA launcher). Side-stepping the Valve EULA would immediately make it possible for all of the most significant addons to participate and remove the largest driver that leads to people uploading content illegitimately. If it still proves necessary or desirable they're then in a position to add hash checks or approved bikeys to the registration system.


  4. Well, for what my opinion might be worth, I don't think watering down the default installation of OS' vision in order to accommodate people who lack the wit or will to move a pbo (or customise the content delivery system they've selected) is a reasonable expectation. I also think MrG's screenshots are an exercise in hyperbole, the difference between the effects isn't anything like that large.

    Maybe you could ask PWS to host it both ways? Assuming OS is okay with that.


  5. However this means we're unable to use other mods in conjunction with RHS, not even vanilla because for example, CSAT then take 4-7 bullets to kill with an RHS M4/M16.

    Nobody's going to take anything you say seriously if you don't test these claims before you make them (properly, Vanilla vs RHS-only).

    I just tried it; Vanilla: AAF Rifleman -vs- CSAT Rifleman then RHS: US Army Rifleman -vs- CSAT Rifleman, got the exact same result every time, 2 shots to the torso to kill (at 75-odd metres).


  6. Why don't you approach Toadie2K (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?172850-Toadie-s-SmallArms-and-Animations-for-Arma3), he's a professional animator and I believe recently released a model commissioned by a community member. Be aware though that AFAIK nobody can sell you works for your exclusive use if at any stage they've been created using BI tools (not sure if this would be necessary for animations or not) in which case I believe you'd need to make a donation and they'd need to be released publicly.


  7. I have the data for most of them, and I am gathering more data for the RHS team, I however did not get around to calculating them for ArmA III yet, they will be ready soon. 7.62x39, 5.45x39 will most likely be the very first Russian rounds to come out in my version 3 ballistics, plus 1 very special Russian caliber for a very special Russian rifle for the RHS team.

    Thanks, good to hear (and also that you're providing data to RHS). Still hopeful that at some point we might see your calculations in a JAM style addon backed by a GitHub repository config that all mods might reference (if they prefer not to have a dependency on JAM).


  8. If you activate the textures on the map in the editor its not that worse actually. I was surprised as first too but got used to it. But thats because I'm a ENB and SweetFX fanboy and really quick fall for that stuff :P

    *Sigh* Now that I've seen the difference with the default 'grey' lighting I don't think I will be able to live without this. Goodbye 2-3 FPS *sniff*.

×