Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Posts posted by SPC.Spets

  1. Testing 50 vs 50

    first with an AMD Phenom II 920 3.2Ghz / 4GB ram 1066mhz, and then with a new PC I got, same mission, similar settings (changed a little bit), Intel i5 3570k / 4GB Ram 1600mhz

    Overall 2200 - 2400

    Objects 1200 - 1500

    Shadows 50-80

    Texture: High

    Objects : standard

    Terrain: Std - High

    Cloud: Disabled

    Shadows: Std

    Particles: Std

    HDR: Std

    Aniso: Std

    PiP: std

    Dynamic Light: High

    AA: disable


    PostP: Low

    Old PC

    New PC

  2. As i was studying physics & computer science at university and as my favorite ones was astro physics, I approove both AA2 and AA3A vids. Heck, i loved whole 5 days "camping" in observatory, but night - that's were I spent hours watching the sky!

    Well done.

    But, If my memory doesn't fail me, wasn't there a mission in OFP cwc or red hammer campaigns where you had to escape by such navigation?

    I dont remember that mission, but I read or saw something about it. and of course I didn't discovered it by myself, I just did the video :)

  3. I got some very low FPS at night 15-25 but I didn't noticed it too much when I was flying around and firing at cars with explosions and smoke. Weird because in MP I have almost the same fps, maybe a little bit less, but its impossible to move or aim.

    Im not a graphichardwarewhore I dont care about antialiasing, whatever, so I dont upgrade my pc every year, only when I have a game that I really like to play and at least at 40-60 fps, lets say, playable, enough for me. So im thinking to get a new pc very soon

    PC specs

    AMD Phenom II 920 @ 3.2GHz

    Win 7 64 - 4GB ram

    GTX 460 1GB

    Game Settings Customs High/Standard (Need more tweaks)

    Visual Distance 2200

    1600x900 - avg 40 fps in SP/Editor (when Im not recording with Fraps)

  4. 20 pages, and still no BI post on the terrible optimization? I want to enjoy the game so much, but this is just almost completely ruining it for me. What's making it worse is that there hasn't been a single post, or response anywhere from anyone who works at BI to say that they are looking into it.

    One of the devs said that FPS should improve on dedicated servers. I played on Matt Lightfoot's extremely overpowered dedicated server last night, and still got shit frame rates. There is more to the terrible multiplayer optimization than just 'dedicated servers'.

    You are a complete idiot, and have clearly only been her to complain and complain and cry and cry as if it gonna help to something. Im sure they are working on it right now. And btw, I played COD4 at 40 fps and at 120+ fps in a new computer, and didn't even notice the difference, I dont pay attention to that when Im playing the game, it doesn't even help me to get k/d from 40-1 100-20 at 40 fps to 300-1 1000-20 at 120+ fps so why even bother.... whatever don't even answer me, I know what you gonna say, kind of typical Internet character...

  5. I'm sorry but this a fallacy. I can expect this engine to do so as CryEngine can do so and it -is- your competition. Complex games are already in th works or out in beta as we speak that calculate unbelievable amounts of algorithms while pushing cpu's well in excess of 75% usage, closer to 90%. It can be done, and the fact arma cannot is one of the most defining reasons it's not taken off. a dual core i3 can run this game virtually the same speed clock for clock, this was certainly true of Arma 2. This is unacceptable, period, CryEngine can get into so much detail as water currents across rivers spanning island sizes much larger than Stratis, so stop pulling our legs.

    I'm not stupid, and neither are the people who wish to play your game. Get it in gear, make this game playable for everyone and reward those who bought serious machines to play this. The fact my older machine is not effected in FPS make or otherwise (Aside 3D res, not enough VRAM) yet NEITHER my GPU -or- cpu is pushed much past 30-50% and I lag either way is -NOT ACCEPTABLE, PERIOD- Get it together, so that we can make this one of the largest games on PC, and show people what a -real- PC game is.

    P.S.: Love Arma, love B.I. And will continue to support you, bought the digital collector's pack, will buy all DLC and expansions as I did before. But it's hard to get my friends to play because they got 3-7 thousand dollar custom built rigs that can't play the game any better then vastly inferior machines, all of which lag. It's a major put off, and to anyone who says you don't need the high FPS because of the pace of the game, this is a HORRIBLE and SERIOUSLY incorrect mindset, smoothness is smoothness, if you move at all, if anything moves, you want it to be smooth, people can and do see higher FPS, the eye can be trained like any other part of your body, stop with the fud.

    no, you CAN'T! can you jump 300 mts high if you train hard?

    is not the eye, is the brain that "compute" that

    30 is the max, you will not notice the difference between 40-60 or 200 fps unless you move your mouse like an epileptic, so you will may notice some ghost images at 30-40 perhaps

  6. COD style... no good. And dont get me wrong, I played COD for many years

    we have problems throwing grenades by mistake in Arma2, imagine now... and it is in the most common used key in arma2.... looks more like a big trolling :s

    I prefer the old method, select the grenade and then use the mouse click. The aiming at least seems to be much better