sapped

Agreed, always find this to be a big limitation for mission making since OFP, surprised BIS still didn't change it all these years, really like to see this feature in the next game

ArmA 2's executable is already 64-bit, it's the game engine which can't handle more than 2047mb of RAM for some other reason

Yes, this makes so much sense...

Hear that guys? You all need a SSD or RamDisk in order to run ArmA smoothly, so please stop complaining when ur game is running like a slideshow. It's because u haven't bought a SSD!!! It's now absolutely essential for running ArmA!!!!!!!! The Devs aren't gonna answer any more of ur questions about performance and optimisations since the solution is clearly presented to you!!! There's no need for any of those any longer!!!

I seriously don't get this kind of threads, how the hell can ArmA 3 run better when ArmA 2 can not??

Don't worry guys, u don't stand a chance of running this game smoothly on release.

It sounds like YOU are the one living in the dream world, not everyone have the money to buy new rigs every 3 years, we may have a bad time with loans, study, taking care of family etc. We simply cannot afford to upgrade so often, especially in this economy. You might have an uber Alienware with 10 core 5.0ghz CPU and 4GB GPU, but it doesn't mean the rest of us does as well, you really shouldn't be so selfish and only think for yourself. Afterall ArmA is about the community, enjoy playing the game by urself online at launch. If BIS can't see the reason in this, then they are gonna lose a lot of their dedicated crowds. Many of whom who have followed since OFP, we don't play arma for its uber graphics, we play it for its GAMEPLAY.

Fully agree with the OP, concentrating on graphics instead of gameplay is NEVER a good way to go for BIS, especially when the ArmA series have ALWAYS been about its realistic combats. No one is gonna buy the game on release when they realise that they will need a rig 3-5 years in the future to fully enjoy all it has to offer. And also the amount of bugs at launch is just unacceptable, people are just going to wait when it's patched to an acceptable level to play. We will be forced to buy the game only when it's like $15 on steam, we don't want to do this, we WANT to support BIS for making this incredible game, but BIS really left us with no choice but to wait, until it is finally playable at an acceptable framerate for the general public. ArmA 3 will pretty much be an elitist's only game at launch, for someone with NASA supercomputers. Hell, people are still experiencing performance issue with ArmA 2 now...

haha steam fanboys ain't getting any love

FUCK steam and its fanboys

what is the best FXAA value?? as in the value that give the greatest amount of jaggie reduction??

what is the best FXAA value?? as in the value that give the greatest amount of jaggie reduction??

did u even read what I wrote, most of the graphical changes are hardly even noticeable like grasses, can u seriously notice the texture drops?? yet the performance gain is huge. at least read the post next time before u post some sarcasm

I think for patch 1.60, it is best to introduce Lite textures for the following files. plants_e.pbo rocks_e.pbo signs_e.pbo sounds_e.pbo This will improve the game performance dramatically, as much lower memories are needed to load this file, this in turn will increase FPS for those struggling with the game, even if you got a uber rig, u can still be benefited by a more smoother experience. Just try switching those corresponding files with ArmA 2 and ArmA 2 Free, you will notice an immediate performance increase, yet the graphics still look as good as before, as those files you switched are used extensively for the gameworld, yet people never tend to take notice of them, so why have the quality of them so high?? If you agree with this, please vote for the issue here http://dev-heaven.net/issues/26807

come on, doesn't anyone want increased performance??

yeah, but the important thing is that most server will reject this as they require signature check like you have mentioned, alot of people play ArmA for the multiplayer, as it contains the kind of realistic military experience unlike anything on the market, so something like this will HAVE to come from the devs officially. lowering texture resolution ingame doesn't offer much in terms of performance, everything still looks nearly identical as before. and not even close to the amount of FPS gain by using lower quality plants/rocks etc. which people hardly cares about or even notices. so having the devs to set up the lite quality files and make them acceptable for signature checks is the only way to do this. btw, thx for the suggestion u gave me about this awesome tweak before!!

and arma 2 already have the large address aware flag checked

no need, just increase the pitch of ur character and it works perfect, I was actually really surprised when I first heard a girly voice shouting "enemy, man, at 50 metres"

hey just a quick question about amd overdrive, is it like gamebooster in which u can turn autoclock on and off at will? like only increase the frequency in intensive gaming, cos the thing is I'm perfectly fine with the cpu while online surfing, watching movies etc. but I only need the increased speed in certain unoptimized games like arma2 and total war series. so is it possible for me to turn it on only when playing those games?? or does change in cpu speed need a reboot to take effect??

shut ur damn mouth Cripsis, no one like the sexist comment u made, why do u even bother posting here, its u against the whole thread, no one give a damn about what u wrote cos all of them are so retarted, so just shoo, piss off

stop bitching, I ran all my games on 1280x800 and I'm not even complaining :D hey for overclocking the cpu, is it better to do it in BIOS or through overdrive?? u need to change alot of settings like ram speed if doing it in bios right?? also how far can I get if using the little fan that came with the cpu (its called stock cooler right?? I'm not sure), whats the expected peak that I can overclock to while also having stability, thx!!

hey guys, I'm having some serious performance issues with athlon II X4 640 cpu, how much performance can I get if I overclock it to say @3.6ghz from @3.0ghz??

that's what I did with arma 2, yet it still doesn't run that great. but I'm still enjoying the shit out of it, if anything im prepared to wait longer for arma 3, not everyone is gonna upgrade once every 3 yrs to play an arma game.

yeah, the rule of thumb is to never buy new BIS titles at launch (Expansion and DLC excluded), always wait 1-3 years and then buy it with the addition of hardware upgrade, hopefully by then the game will be more optimized and less buggy and u can fully appreciate the amazing work that BIS has done.