Bee8190

Very much this - As much as I'd like to I can't justify spending another cent on what to me feels like grossly unfinished and to en extend broken game that has been officially released a year ago. Furthermore while more content is always welcome whether paid or from our modders, the official content aside of being pretty is not exactly rich in features and I personally do have issue with that. Just look at the hit point system that we chose to deal with by buying this game as of present - 2014 I'd very happy to throw my dosh on DLC as long as it's quality ( no, not pretty only ) content that is functioning well ( and no I don't mean just bug free ) than by all means, please charge me 20 quid for it

Agreed it is obnoxious ( 3.14159265359 ) Can you elaborate on that? Maybe you mean something else but there simply isn't a better example of utterly sad sound samples than the A 164 30mm. If the golden poo award was to be picked on the most atrocious sound samples in game this plane would win it 3 times right away

Either way what I'm reading in this thread is quite hilarious but sad at the same time @ Player base - BI we'd like more realism as that is why we play your games BI - Yea right but we don't really give a toss much and just want to keep on rolling with that sendbox thing or whatever we call it now

In relation to the above update I found that lowering inertia appears to have positive outcome although if just very subtle. Reducing the inertia further may produce even better results however there appears to be side effect to it too - the vehicle is sort of floating in a sense that weight transfer is not nearly immediate but appears to be delayed. ( as in - taking its time to take effect ) btw - curing the erratic steering wheel animation when turning left and right is appreciated One more thing - there might be something wrong with rear left wheel ( rear left as when in driver seat ) on said civilian offroad. From my observations the rear left wheel appear to have a brake applied for split moment when in stand still. The behaviour and what to observe is that the vehicle is being pushed slightly to the right side as if the wheel is trapped or damaged when reversing from stand still or again moving forward from stand still

BI is never going to implement w/ resting but I wonder what would a skilled modder pick from the most requested features list in resemblance of make war not peace contest :bounce3:

Haha keep it up ( wanted to do the same thing ) :pistols:

Now that would actually be quite neat as AFAIK, it should be easier to destroy the glass frame than the glass itself

haha I wouldn't even buy anything unless it's a BLACK edition or PRO :p

I don't think the devs are lazy, not at all. They'd probably not develop for long otherwise. BUT I'm damn sure they're advised not to spend too much time on details ( mechanics and features ) as long as it looks pretty, amIright BI management? IMO arma is treated as a side, secondary product ( and no I am not saying exclusively becasuse of dayz )

I hear you but I am talking about the poor handling, poor feedback of arma vehicles and how they handling are unfit for even arcade based games. Also pCARS have not even reach beta yet so I will save my judgement for later.

Are you talking about gatling bullet spread?

Because there are hardly any positives left to talk about. I already said the models and textures are nice but that alone doesn't make me enjoy them and just to clarify, I don't expect them to refine the physx to racing simulation levels but enlighten people who doesn't know better what physx is capable of in race sim games, opposed to saying they ''handle as they should'' and hence why I said that vehicles in arma are not even fit for arcade simulation. Furthermore it's outright naive to expect BI tweak the physx to the level that one would say ''it's little arcadey but believable and fun''. As for gears, they still fucked up ever since alpha

It would be lengthy post to list how those vehicle should drive and under what conditions but the fact that they lack any kind of feedback and drive rubbery still stands. The whole physx was just marketing and I don't see BI tweaking the physx much further if at all but if you're genuinely interested in what physx and driving model looks like ( feels like ) on simulation side I suggest you try out one of the known race sim titles like Project Cars or Asseto Corsa. Edit - as for the previously mentioned gears - let's avoid the terrible illusion that they are even anywhere near working properly :rolleyes:

Oh really do they now? It's not an opinion it IS a problem contrary to your wrong opinion. Vehicle handling and their behaviour are still even far behind what some people call arcadey. Obviously if you ever only played arma 2 and need for speed you wouldn't know any better as to base your comparison on. :rolleyes: You know just because they can move forward and backwards while making some noise doesn't mean that the implementation has been successful FPDR .

:rolleyes:

View distance is deemed to be mainly CPU dependent. I agree the 2500K is still pretty capable CPU but I'd be little more optimistic about the 5% performance gain. The maximum FPS would not change dramatically but I imagine it maintaining more stable FPS instead. Either way as I see it, the gain from better CPU would go further than GPU upgrade but whether it is worth upgrading or not for potentially 10-15% increase in performance ( we should maybe call it - smoothness ) will be up to you to decide.

I think the stealthy A10 looks somewhat reasonable. It's a popular plane and BI didn't want to take it too far and eventually screw up the plane so to speak. I quite like it and the nickname is funny - wipeout lol :) The opfor jet is quite nice as well, just little too low sitting? I can also appreciate the rocket overall detail although I've too noticed little inconsistency, especially the texture on the A10 which is not very detailed at all and seem rushed out like the warning signs, which are all blurry and the whole vehicle skin is much less resolution compare to other vehicles. But now, the sound/s bit Just to clarify though, I don't care for 100% accuracy of everything, not at all, and most of the time I'm happy to settle with authentic enough, as long as I can get immersed that is. Now I am not even sure anymore if its the in game audio engine or the sounds itself but has anyone actually heard the A10'a gatling cannon? As ridiculous as it may sound it's literally so bad that if it's not some sort of punishment by BI then I feel sorry for the audio engineer who thought it's even reasonable sounding. Thank you for the aircraft but it's shame that I have to disable those sounds while flying and firing as complete silence is better than listening to the A10 fire.

I am sure many appreciate the positive attitude but I can't agree with everything in this post. I think many realize the potential of the game too well and hence the disappointment. The game has indeed massive potential but BI seem to simply look away leaving the broken core of the game same as it were 13 years ago and now all of the player base slowly realize that this is very unlikely to change and lose the hope I don't think anyone is saying that BI doesn't try and that nobody appreciate their work but given the scale of the game and the amount of work that this game no doubt requires seem to be not quite enough.

I am no modder and have literally zero knowledge of the depths of the engine but I think we may be jumping to conclusions little too quick. Not sure how much different A3 is under the hood but as it is different modders may need more time to explore all of the new. BI is also changing the code pretty much daily which doesn't speed up things either, from what I read I think good addons take fair amount of time to deliver and perhaps the same modder is working both on MANW contest and another

I am little baffled by this discussion. Someone is happy with 30 fps and that's good for them, no need to shout it from the rooftops but why so strongly object when someone mentions they would welcome more? 120 Hz or more capable panels might be nothing but marketing for some but making it sound like it's some redundant technology aimed at younger audience is least to say ignorant. If that was the case we all would be stuck in grainy DVD times instead of blu ray and low resolution lossy Mp3 instead of 24 bit flac. Some people are spending serious money on their computers, just to find out it makes no difference whatsoever

I'd rather they fix 2 or 3 of the well known flaws or look at the long standing requests instead of fixing 10 no one really cares about

I never bothered with gaming headsets either as some of them coast as much as proper cans dedicated to serious music listening. Unfortunately I have to take a stab at vanilla sounds once again and say that rather expensive headphones or 5.1 & 2.1 set up's will be simply wasted on arma. Some sounds are high resolution and great but overall not really worth it, #AKG K550 should be plenty good

Vanilla effects, especially bullet & projectile impacts and explosions leave a lot to be desired. I've always admired ACE and how much more immersive it is. BlastC may not be spot on but better than the d*mn vanilla effects sigh

I don't mind the future settings all that much but I do kind of miss old trusty AK's and humvees. My problem is performance in MP, lack of ACE 3 and I can't get over the utterly pathetic sounds. I'm also unable to ignore the horrible, horrible vehicle physx ( I like hunter even though it's not fully there either ) and that's not to mention vehicle crosshairs are so off of where one is trying to shoot it's simply disgrace. So far sitting on some 80 hours played in A3 :P yup