nimrod123
-
Content Count
272 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
-
Medals
-
Posts posted by nimrod123
-
-
this is till going?
i though BIS was taking the position of all assets must be made for this game, so we don't end up with really old models this time around. and considering how much they scraped in the interlude period they had when RL + community response to certain units lead to a focus change, its understandable why their is some much copy paste.
personally i think they should have moved the release back to Q1 2014, if not Q2
-
The problem is that at least some of us used these promises to make the decision and bought the game.Would you like to buy a house? Here are some pictures and blueprints. Wouldn't it be wonderful to own a house by the beach?
Those pictures were only placeholders. There is only half finished house, you have to finish it yourself. Oh, the beach you say? I never promised it, and I didn't mention this house is even remotely close to a beach.
exactly why they should never show unfinished assets, better to lose some sales due to people seeing to little, then to build a platform that you can be attacked from.
they should also not listen to the community when it goes ape shit over "to futuristic" assests, as that means all that work is lost. its their game that they funded, and are only now selling
-
The developers have not confirmed this yet, so it could be just another discontinued vehicle for the game. We do not know wether dyslexi made this with current info or with new information. Making a reskinned future C-130 would just be plain lazy for them. The A-400M is the C-130's successor. And is a very logical choice for a transport aircraft in Arma 3. It appears like dyslexi used the AllInArma mod to take those photos. Because hopefully we would see the A-400m for NATO and mabey the C130 as a plane for the AAF because they wouldn't have the money to buy a better transport aircraft.---------- Post added at 02:29 ---------- Previous post was at 02:19 ----------
It is the Arma 2 C-130 and unless AAF is getting a transport aircraft then it's a placeholder.
i doubt its a arma 2 model.
unlike the other games they have redone all the models ingame from scratch (part of the reason ARMA 2 launched with more) i doubt this one will be. i would guess its either a holdover from 2010/11 where they where using old assests, or its a new model
-
Only ignorant fan boys can ignore the fact, that weapon recoil is nearly zero on rifles (I'm not even speaking about 45 acp smgs lol).I remember a recoil back to Alpha (they were feeding veterans) and present recoil.
It's clearly, katipo666 was right... "Probably because thats one part of the market they hope to entice?"
They want a market of cod kids spraying auto fire, end of story.
It's like your favourite metal band started to sing about ponies with Justin Bieber.
the 45 ACP should have shit all recoil, its got a crazy recoil damping system. i also seem to rember a massive hate rush from alot of arma vetrans about how all the guns kicked more then in arma 2.
so clearly they can't please everyone, and i think they should make the game they want, and don't tell the community what they have until its 100% done, so no sneak peeks, no hints, no promises, since the community goes mental when the timeline slips and something has to be cut
-
it's equally wrong to presume that the qa process was working perfectly and doesn't/shouldn't need improvement, aka the infallible overlord fallacyno but people are saying it completly failed.
thats so far from the truth its not even funny. look at HOI3 from PDS, or gettysburg armored warfare, for a massive dayone fail.
what arma 3 is, is a project managment fail (and a minor one at that). noone seems to have stood up and said that either they push the date back, or they cut even more content
-
For me, this whole thing is only a sign that, despite what BI claims, ArmA III is still in late Alpha. Placeholders all over the place, no campaign, limited assets... In proper terminology, that's still Alpha stage, Beta being a feature-complete, untested version and Release being a 90% bug free, feature-complete version. That said, ArmA III seems to be using a MMO-style update/expansion system, with patches being used to balance and expand the game "on the fly". Perhaps that's the future of gaming, the old terminology would mean nothing in that case.I think that those lousy placeholders will soon be replaced with proper models, including females with proper, full support (the new ArmA III loadout system should make that much easier once the models are done) and more diverse, non-stereotypical ethnicities. The current civilians look like something that'd work for a mission designer who needs to set the scripts up, not actual gameplay. I can see why BI prioritized tactical simulation over "feelies" like that, but as a result, AIII is about as atmospheric as the latest VBS. While it's fine for a training tool, in an immersive game like AIII, it needs to be fixed.
its late beta. its is feature complete, not content complete.
alpha is where features change, beta is where placeholders exist.
personally i want to be able to shoot women *sarc* (lets see how that goes down), and i await the white knighters that say thats sexist or something
-
I have yet to see evidence of either of those things (educated OR constructive).All there is are a lot of assumptions, then when people who are educated post, they are simply ignored or shouted down with the typical "oh but this should be easy!" response.
seriously, don't try and explain these 4 things;
QA
project managment
coding
asset creation
to the general community, as 90% think they are instant magic, and the dev team was to lazy to read the spell correctly
-
Looking at Page 254 of the Tactical Guide Dslyecxi has written for arma 3, we can expect a "C-192 Samson Cargo Plane" (future C-130).that name has also been found in the localisations
-
My FPS have being all over the place in DEV build the last week from 60 - 9 on Altis with this 1.0 seem to get 43 fps max in MP no matter what setting's i use can anyone hit 60 in MP.main branch is closer to the dev build from ~12 days ago, then last night from the looks of it
-
dev branch and 1.00 are the same during release
-
read the newest change log.
basicly all content is in, dev brach probally goes back about 2 weeks on alot of content, then goes far foreward to what current, plus some inhouse stuff.
their should also be a main brach patch on day one of all the fixes from between going gold and launch (if they follow standard QA procudure.)
then dev brach is the staging ground for beta patches
-
You really should not be reaching 90C with your graphics card, you might wanna check that out before it melts.---------- Post added at 17:58 ---------- Previous post was at 17:55 ----------
Could this be because the game only uses about 60% of your CPU? This is completely the games fault as is it not well optimised. Nobody should be having to overclock their CPU because the game can't even use it properly.
someone has no idea how programing for CPU works, nice to know
-
Well, isn't that also completely configurable in the keybindings? yeah, it is, because that's what I'm doing. I only drive and fly using my keyboard, I have free look as default on (meaning I automatically use my mouse to look left and right without pressing alt).yes it is, and their is also a option in settings that start you in free look in any vechile
-
And now imagine if BIS rolls out something on a friday that does work, but breaks mods like ACRE. Wouldn´t it be nice if you could simply roll back to the previous dev version?your using a BETA build, not a QA'ed build, use at your own risk is on the tin, so no bitching about compatibility is allowed
-
Some nice maneuverability of the PAK-FA. at one minute it´s flying sideways. Looks like it´s breaking physics.its very comparable to the F22. the pak, less stealthy, has better sensors, slightly slower, longer range, more weapon hard points.
and both are better then the F35 in every single way
-
Don't those keyboards have programable macros? If you have spare keys in your ARMA profile: 9-9-1 to select red team, 9-9-2 to select green, etc.or shift + f1 for red, green is f2 etc
-
i run a modifed version of dysliexs. i turned off the lean axis and made the dead zone fairly large and the ratio of real to ingame quite flat
-
Before it's too late, please transition the Grass Cutter function from the Helper objects to a module. Some people can't handle the map with grass on, and it's not always available to turn grass off. This would help solve that problem without spamming a game map with large garish yellow circles.already to late for launch, try for a patch
-
already in.
all selected units become a group when you press ctrl + F#, and are selected when you press shift + F#.
its normally covered in one of the command tutorials once they are in
-
I was having bad frame rates, turns out V-Sync locks FPS to 30. Turning off vsync = 60-62fps on Ultra settings with Altis. Where do I fix the V-Sync rate?My Arma3.cfg is set to 'refresh=60;', yet it's locking to 30fps like a jebby little munge.
Also just remembered I had CrossFire switched off (Splinter Cell: Blacklist does not like CrossFire at all), and still managed 60fps on Altis for the most part (obviously lots of buildings drops it to around 45fps untill I reduce FXAA - was running 4x FXAA + SweetFX sharpening and colour enhancement). Weird how that works for me but not for other people.
i5 2500k @ 4.2GHz
16GB RAM
2x AMD HD7870 2GB in CrossFire
v shync requires you to always be over a limit, otherwise it drops you down to a lower limit.
i have found crossfire counters poping when you look around quickly, and that about it, it maybe due to having more Vram
-
will this have been the last update for dev branch until the final release??why would it be, we are no longer getting the stuff that would make the release build (unless it was held back for reasons, see altis) everything new is more then likely day one patch stuff, since the release build was golded about a week ago
-
They stopped F-22 so i don´t think there will be any problems with stopping a fiasco.that lacked the political backing the F35 has, the F35 is to much of a cash cow for all the people seeing kickbacks to let it go quitely
-
Who´s going to buy it? :)Many of the countries that first decided to buy seems to backtrack.
Then you have the various factions of the US Military who probably won´t buy as many as they first said.
and?
who cares if it makes money, the contractor has lobbyists, and the pentagon is controlled by the government at the end of the day, this wouldn't be the first program they demand to be kept going for some reason.
normally they quote jobs as being very important
most of the nations looking at buying it, arn't actually suited to its role. most would be better off buying russian or euro multi roles instead of the f35. this was actually highligted by the austrilians recently, due to the problem that the F35 is realitively short ranged. they suggested buying the licence to make su35's for about a third of the price, so you get good coverage, longer range, and a generally better plane
-
Uhm no, as a combat Wings ( they have been send to Irak already ).In fact even the F35 project may be cancelled.
it won't be canceled, to many senior politicans pay for their holidays with the bribes... i meant the "lobbying" that goes with the project
General Discussion (dev branch)
in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
Posted
so are you lot running a internal SVN system? if so please tell me you have 2 versions, where one is a untouchable stable backup (i've seen what happens when you lack that)