pathetic_berserker

Now that's what I call a texture! Fantastic work teaCup.

Nope http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r9_290x_review_benchmarks,21.html Titan still on top for some games. And for some heat and power consumption are still important. I'd be truly stupid to buy a 290X, considering my machine gets between 2-10 hrs of use per day and I live in a hot country. And I'd still need two of them to beat the performance of my GTX690. The hidden cost of keeping my machine , and my self cool with 2 GPUs wanting to hit 95deg certainly out weighs a few extra (and redundant) frames. I understand why folks building today will swallow 290s whole. But seeing this really does make me feel even happier about purchasing my 690 a little over 12months ago, on the balance of power and heat vs comparable frames and what it $cost to beat it, the 690 is still a great card. Really the 290X card is typical of AMDs solution to everything, make an inefficient card and let the consumer deal with the rest. But I do like the crossfire solution, using the previously unused PCIE3 bandwidth and doing away with the bridge.

Not that I believe it. Just inb4 someone else starts making excuses for BIS. Resources Priorities PS. I dearly hope BIS answers your wish frag.

Yes, there is already a fish tank. Best solution is to pre-populate A2 style. With A2 furniture if need be. As long as the vast majority of furniture is placed along walls the Ai navigation issues should be minimal. And as part of the building fabric there's also no reason they cant be incorporated into the destruction function, time permitting. Unfortunately its something best done by BIS. The only other tool that might make it easier for mission makers would be for someone to come up with a furniture template that mission designers could copy/paste from. But it would be unreasonable for anyone to try and make for Altis short of having OCD and a comfy room with service.

Hmm I'd like to believe this and there may yet be time for it to happen but with the latest developments between Cryengine and Star Citizen I smell change in the wind. Star Citizen is dragging Cryengine back to PC with 64bit min, and an increased float point. And will combine 'tactical' FPS with ground vehicles and space combat and modding support. Now I agree it would be foolish to declare a single sci-fi game some sort of competition or replacement to a mil-sim style game like ArmA, but the biggest drawcard for the OFP engine has always been the size of the maps, the combination of different unit types and a feeling of being part of something big. If game devs happen to find an engine that allows them this sort of scope off the shelf then by comparison ArmAs scope doesn't look as big or as unique, and possibly not as attractive to PC gamers. Please don't take this as some sort of doomsday prophecy for ArmA, but I think froggyluv does have a point. Many of the core ArmA devs have hinted that they would like to move on, as everyone is want to do from time to time. If a trend takes off to develop 64bit min games that take advantage of PCs, it could easily deter the will to work further on OFPs 32bit engine. Still its going to take time. BIS certainly have enough time to milk A3 for a few years with DLC's, and the community might even survive another decade or more. But ArmA4? I don't know. Maybe they will play it smart and tick a few more things off the bucket list via DLC and patches till they make the idea of A4 redundant. Its becoming clear that a significant step up from the current would basically require a new engine from scratch. And BIS already have another proprietary engine in their stable under Carrier Command and TOM, so its clear they know they have to move with the times. Lets just hope there will always be someone out there doing a mil-sim game.

LOL. Depends on whether the campaign can start a 'feature' argument. Which we know it will. Then someone will mention resources, and some one else will say priorities and the thread will be complete. Honestly though the added features are pretty sweet. And its core scope well exceeds that of A2 I find the solid base that is A3 only adds to the fun of speculating about what might or could be done. .....Given the resources....runs and hides.

This kind of sums it up as far as I'm concerned. To those other arguments.. The eye-candy argument against furniture is just stupid. This is a current PC game and your implying eye candy isn't important? Performance, well they found some reasonable ways around it in A2. I've worked on ArmA structures before and don't believe a few sideboards, picture hangings or even the occasional chair and table would reduce the AI or collision performance in buildings, if it does it says more about the skill of the LOD maker than the game as a whole. And as far as general poly v system performance goes, I think BB made a good point re-shutters and poly expenditure. But by the same token I actually get good performance except in MP and there is still a lot of conjecture about how many players still misunderstand ArmAs settings, how they work, and what they should reasonably expect from such a scalable game. You cant max sliders on even moderately high end systems when the sliders go to past '10' and up to '12'. I think it all boils down to the 'Simulation Fever' thing. The lack of furniture acts like a smack in the face because the rest of the environment is done so well. Much like our bipods feel like the only thing on our guns that don't work, or the lack of civies and females makes you feel like your a test tube clone in a world of men. We have yet to see the campaign so its really too early to judge, but it seems BIS have been gradually losing their ability to understand that games require character. They have been too easily giving in to excuses to cut elements they don't regard as 'sim'. Pointing the fact out to BIS comes back with a 'well we would if we could' but no-one knows what they mean by 'could'. Of course there's a resources V priorities factor in there some where. But many of the priorities people scream about are not inter-dept' related. So at some point it has to be about the will of folks at BIS.

LOL that vid was Fuckin brilliant. Funny, and instructional. All noobs should be pointed towards it.

Was reading the comments at the end of this article posted in the media thread http://www.techspot.com/review/712-arma-3-benchmarks/ and found this interesting little morsel, note the penultimate sentence. TekGun is right. I am working on Arma 3 and I can confirm that all PhysX calculations in Arma 3 are done on CPU. We are working on PhysX acceleration for effects, but it is not in the game yet. Current particle effects don't use PhysX. http://www.techspot.com/news/54026-story-page-2.html

Just heard, some interesting stuff from Marek and positive to! Sums up what I love most about BIS. When I bought BF3 it felt like an expensive distraction. When I bought A3 it felt like an investment.

Yes having to being multi disciplined is the clincher, I like modelling, and I like texturing and I’m still really learning both. But I have issues with figuring out scripts and functionality, don’t know why but it’s one of those areas where even after a few successes I just don’t seem to feel any gain in knowledge or confidence. It really prevents me from wanting to do more. Yeah another, why the hell is that, moment. LOL They do seem to be making an effort towards improving this, but we’ll see. Till now it seems like I have spent more than half my time researching everything and trialling its implementation, instead of following a linear path to the goal. When you finally get to the end it’s of course very gratifying. But if like me, your time for it as a hobby is short you can’t realistically expect a timely turn around on a project, which is understandably off putting. Anyway as to the OP’s question I’ll not say I’ll never mod for A3, I would like to port my Mi-24A at the very least, but for now I’m taking a different approach. I’m going to focus on improving my modelling and texturing skills, and if I happen to create a suitable model to the quality I want then I’ll consider it.

Actually it was possible to attach satchels to the assault boats in the alpha, but it had to placed towards the front and be done from shore. I put up a ticket about the odd placement but havn't checked it since. The scuba show case wich sabotaged from below used a mission specific scripted solution.

Not worried at all. Sure there are still some things I'd dearly like to see improved, but the bug tracking and updates will go on as usual. And most of us are aware that if BIS doesn't fix it , it's because they aren't multi limbed Hindi gods.

Brilliant! Be interesting to see where you take it. Mondkalb did something similar years ago that I had hoped to see expanded upon, dont know if your familiar with it, http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?111219-MBG-Creationism .

326.19 gives me an extra handful of frames.

What can I say ......Gnawsome!

If LOD switcghing is horrible below high settings try reducing or increasing your view distance. I had noticed some time back that A3 uses some sort of rule set in prioritising and balancing your view settings. It can be difficult to grasp and you may need to throw some settings out to extremes to see the effect on others but it could be worth playing with.

Pfft, many games will bottleneck at the CPU if you turn vsync off and let the GPU run off anyway. It's like arguing about when the sky turns blue. Bottom line is it just does, and isnt particularly relevant to SLI per se because its both every where, and can be also difficult to define depending on the games capabilities, vs hardware, vs what the game is actually trying to render. So wormeaton kind of has a point. For me it will be relevant if I get an over all performance gain with v-sync on. Beyond that its just a benchmark of usless frames that only serve to generate heat and up my power bill. At any rate i havn't noticed any tell tales signs of restrictive bottle necking with A3 on my system so far (check spoiler). Now I want to go home and check it out.

Lol, well your right. And it was my opinion and pretty much what I said. And I admited after rereading the issue in more depth, interesting and e-sports do not go hand in hand.

I like the menu system. Hate roses in general, and they would be especialy shit considering how many action choices you could get. If your scared of slipping when you click your mouse hit 'enter' instead or get a better mouse. I found the logitech G700 to have a realy solid scroll click action, works a charm.

Well I read your reasons and thought it amounted to saying that it isn't suitable because it isn't enough like all the other available games. And that there was nothing that could be done about it, though some points clearly could be overcome through mission parameters and a matchmaking process. But I supose after adjustments it then comes down what Sneakson just said. I supose at the end of the day its success or failure comes down to the punters. And now I've re-read the situation I see a huge gulf in a simple tourney PvP system and one which introduces real money. I intially thought that would be nothing wrong with adding some variety to the e-sport lineup but now I look at it and see that a good e-sport game isn't necessarily a great game. If people cant understand or accept the limitations (or lack thereof) of the game being played ,as many ArmA players still cant, they wont be able to gamble with any comprehension of the risk and therefore beat, let alone determine the odds. Sure there would be a few about who understand ArmAs finer points but probably not enough to form sustainable e-sport setup.

Lot of nitpicking negatives here, as usual. Don't remember the name of the mission but I remember a fantastic one that I used to play during PvP nights in days gone by. It had some funky custom shaders laid over a round robin system that pitted one player vs another while those waiting watched on and placed bets on the outcomes. Successive wins netted in game money that winners could use to buy better guns. It may require some modding and some well constructed mission environments and rules but I think A3 is maybe an e-sport possibility.

Your probably right , but that only bolsters the claim that the ArmA franchise is being dumbed down. I dont see that the guns and vehicles add much variance in gameplay at all. At least not enough to take overiding preecedence over functioning females. Adapting to the small differences in weapons isn't rocket science, as long as they kill its all good. And weapons and vehicles is something BIS doesn't even have to do. As whatever BIS adds will be declared not good enough and replicated half a dozen times by the community. What I do see the various weapons adding is a level of imersion. Same as functioning females would. But what the toys cant add is a reason or story to all the killing and destruction. While having females means you can build up pictures of communities, and connections to family, and motivations etc,etc. As it stands the ArmA franchise has gone backwards each iteration on story telling since OFP and maybe now in danger of trying too hard to be a tweak on Battlefield numero infinitum, minus the bling and spectacle of a cut scene driven SP campaign. Not a game I personaly want to play. Also I dont buy the its too much work line that keeps springing up, sure its a lot of work and probably the most valid reason to not add females, but its certainly not so much work as to throw your hands it air as say it can't be done. Its not like BIS would be breaking new gaming world ground here. But like I've said before BIS are the only ones who know thier true resource levels so speculating on it is really at the fringes of the topic and adds very little. So sure add it later if they have to.

Go Dwarden! This has been commented on by others I have got to play this game. Its a vanilla must have in my view.

Not that your are actualy making it, but I dont entirely agree with the assumption that 'other parts of the game will suffer just to incorporate it'. At the end of the day adding females is something that only BIS can do, if they dont, I think the game as a platform will be poorer for the lost imersion and story/mission possibilities. Vehicles and weopons can be added at anytime by BIS or the community, there will be no shortage. But the question of resources as a whole is something only BIS can manage, in other words, what will be will be. Your right, but does that risk spawning new threads? Maybe better to have just the one to be ignored, or read at your own peril.