5LEvEN

I don't know if anyone knows when arma 3 is taking place, but the A-10C is supposed to be in service until at least 2028... The A-10C can carry a variety of munitions. For tank busting (depending on the tank) it has the GAU-8/A, CBU-97, CBU-105, AGM-65 (basically all variants of the agm-65), PGM's, and some other munitions. And for personal and lightly armored vehicles you have PGM's, Dumb bombs, rockets, and all of the mentioned. Sorry for not mentioning each munition in particular, but I would rather not go through the 20+ weapons at its disposal. So I have no idea why you guys are trying to figure out a replacement for the A-10C... BTW the A-10 in arma 2, is the A-10A, it's outdated....

Don't know if this has been stated. But sounds for crawling on different surfaces. I think right now there are only two sounds for this, one for off road, and one for on road. I would like to see a greater variety. Sounds for each surface in arma 3. Like for dirt, grass, leafs, sand, wet ground, cement, ect...

While if the technology being developed by euclideon is real, then arma 4 will be AMAZING to say the worst....

But that's how it is in real life. You don't just poof into the gunner seat, you have to climb into the gunner seat. It would take more time to enter the gunner seat, just as in real life. As of right now you could hide behind the humvee and wait tell the enemy is close enough, then just poof into the gunner seat and cut them down. With it being fully animated you could not do this. I would like to see animations for entering the gunner seat. The main reason is because of the added realism and immersion. ---------- Post added at 01:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:30 AM ---------- I would also like to see this...

Are those proper leaf sights, or arcade sights (Can't really tell from the pictures)? I am really hoping for proper leaf sights.... ;)

Is that done with an attachto command, or is it done more like Joint Operations? Because the attachto command works for vehicles, although is somewhat tedious to do, but it doesn't work for allowing me to walk around the platform whilst it is moving.

It is an amazing game. I really really hope the developers check it out, and learn from what they did with vehicles and the cargo bay....

Add an option to see detailed server information under multi-player. Like who's playing, any forced settings, time limits, ect...

In my opinion the goal of immersing the player in a game is to make the player feel like he/she is inside the game, apart of it basically. The head bob makes me feel like I am watching it, not apart of it. That is why it kills the immersion for me, and I prefer not to use it. I would enable motion blur if it wasn't tied to PP. I can run motion blur fine, its just the PP that kills my system. Also when my frames start to drop, the motion blur gets worse. Even if the drop is all cause of my **** CPU. This whole discussion started because of wanting to be able to force graphics to "balance" the game. But I do not see a need to. Also when players FPS starts to drop, then someone having a better system has an even greater advantage. For example I can compete on PvP, but if I enable PP (obviously motion blur is included in that setting) and my CPU begins to bottleneck (as it always does) then motion blur for me would be overkill and I would no longer be able to compete with others. If you left that option up to the players, then I would still be able to compete, and if someone thinks I have an advantage they could easily turn off their PP, so there is no longer an advantage. What we have currently is enough. Everything else should be up to the player. BTW my GPU actually handles arma fine at my settings even though it's low end. It's my CPU that bottlenecks. It doesn't matter if PP is done on the GPU, the moment my CPU bottlenecks, motion blur becomes unbearable.

Ugh... This is becoming very annoying now... I feel like a robot who only knows how to repeat him self.... -It is not biased if you can see how it is "supposed" to be. And it's actually fine on my computer all the way up until combat starts and the lag kicks in for me. -Head bob only makes a SMALL difference to motion blur... Do I really need to upload another video just to prove this stupid point? -I already stated that I USE CAPS JUST AS YOU WOULD USE italics. So I never yelled at anyone. -Of course you're going to see a lot of bobbing up and down on a head cam. Have you ever used one? Go ahead and just walk normally. Yeah, the camera still bobs a lot, but your vision looks level. It's not what the camera shows you, its what YOU see. -I am against this feature because it waste the developers time in my opinion. It waste time that should be used on increasing realism. I don't care if it takes only five minutes for them to do, it's still a waste of time. -I prefer realism. Realism being as close to reality. Your brain makes corrections for your head bobbing up and down. So you don't notice it. Even when just walking you head is bobbing, yet you don't notice it. -Oh and I have seen helmet cams on soldiers. Here's some proof for that (hope you enjoy them, I know I did :) ) ---------- Post added at 07:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:03 PM ---------- I would like the option under audio to turn down vehicle noises (mainly from helicopters). ---------- Post added at 07:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:06 PM ---------- Because I just hit capslock with my pinky. While ctrl+i requires me to hold ctrl with my pinky and hit the i with my middle finger. Then click out of the zone for italics. Also ctrl+i does not work for me... So to use italics I have to stop typing, click the button, start typing, stop typing, click out of the italics zone, and continue again. Or I just hit capslock keep typing and hit capslock again...

Please don't stereotype people... Although, IMO people in america that are ignorant are common, there is still a lot of people that are not... You're assuming the ENTIRE population is ignorant.

I use CAPITALS just as you would use italics. I honestly don't get why people have to think capitals are for shouting. Youtube for example has no italic capabilities (to my knowledge) so I use capitals instead. And it's also a lot easier to just FLIP ON THE CAPSLOCK AND TYPE STUFF, then it is to use the button, and type in between the symbols, or type the symbols. Hope that makes sense :) Also most on YouTube understand this, so I usually don't get the "why are you shouting at me" expression, and when I do I explain this. I have tried a lot of combinations for settings. Mainly for performance reasons. I have also tried them for immersion. Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to max out the game, but I just don't have the hardware nor do I have the money for the hardware. When I have low FPS I am all for performance, when I have spare FPS I start cranking up settings. And on some games (oblivion for example) I get graphical mods, and force AA, AF, and some other settings via the Nvidia control panel... Or a better example BF2, as some of the settings do effect your gameplay (like grass), but I still crank up the settings all the way because I can. How exactly does head bob effect my opinion of settings. That is really funny that you think that.... So let me get this straight... Because I prefer performance, and realism. My opinion of settings is delusional, and biased, whilst yours is not? rofl... I was talking about seeing defeat on the motion blur being almost non-existent while just running without movement of the head or weapon, and it's also basically the same with head bob at max. I do see what you are talking about with motion blur and low FPS BTW.

While I am sorry that there is no real way to determine exact numbers, thus it requires YOU to interpret the numbers. If you honestly think the difference is greater then 25% I would say you're blind or you are trolling. Actually you are the one being agitated. Hear to save you time I looked up the definition for you ag·i·tate verb /ˈajiËŒtÄt/  agitated, past participle; agitated, past tense; agitates, 3rd person singular present; agitating, present participle Make (someone) troubled or nervous - the thought of questioning Toby agitated him extremely Campaign to arouse public concern about an issue in the hope of prompting action - they agitated for a reversal of the decision Stir or disturb (something, esp. a liquid) briskly - agitate the water to disperse the oil I believe you are talking about the 2nd meaning. Which you are the one suggesting to be able to force settings, while I am saying LEAVE it alone. I get the feeling you are trying to troll, because before the upload of a video it was a discussion about settings. Now its you trying to say this and that because of my settings (which is what I HAVE TO RUN, so I can actually play the game, believe me if I had money, I would buy a new computer, and that computer would max out arma). And that I am delusional ROFL... Also that I am not having the same "challenge" as you. It's as if you saw defeat so you're trying to change the subject to something you can win at.... A disagreement is not trolling. -Just what I am thinking, do not want to argue about this- BTW I don't think you play at my FPS. Because I have 25 FPS without a lot of combat and without fraps, and at my settings. I have 28FPS as a MAX. You recorded with fraps just as smoothly as I run the game without fraps. You probably get to my FPS (without combat and without recording) when in heavy combat or recording, which during recording I have 9 FPS, and during heavy combat I can get down to less then that easy... -Just what I am thinking, do not want to argue about this-

While I don't know what tank you are gunning but, the Abrams has an excellent fire control system. As in it's vary accurate and calculates where to fire very fast. I would recommend you do some research on that.

Ugh, I don't get how it's that hard for you.... I said I DON"T have screen tearing so I don't need it. Which is funny you're telling me to go look it up, because I already answered that I DON"T need it, because I DON"T have screen tearing. Yes I understand I have a low end GPU, and I do WANT a better one for obvious reasons. shadows, AA, and PP are in my opinion EYE CANDY. And by small difference with very high PP and max head bob, I mean like literally a 10% difference. Which makes it still BARELY NOTICEABLE when moving without moving weapon or head. I run 6 days a week at an average of 8 miles a day. I don't run on the tread mill, I run on trails and roads. I know for a fact that I am able to focus on objects close and in the distance while running, and that my head doesn't bob like that. I also know people in the military who do not confirm what you're saying about head bob. TO be honest I get the feeling you are trying to troll....:j: ---------- Post added at 02:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:27 PM ---------- Yes. You fire a hell of a lot slower when you got low FPS. That you can trust me on... :)

I think cars will be much more modern in arma 3. The reason being the real island is not really a 3rd world country... As you can see in the pictures http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&biw=1920&bih=979&tbm=isch&q=limnos+greece&revid=1506892808&sa=X&ei=TfJJTq3ZJuzZiAKYz6ytBw&ved=0CDoQ1QIoAA

Is the A-10A capable of CCRP bombing? I never learned to use the A-10A, I just learned the A-10C... ---------- Post added at 04:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:24 AM ---------- I absolutely agree. Which is why I would LOVE arma 3 to have realistic vehicle simulation, not this current arcade crap :)

AA in some games does add an advantage. For example in DCS A-10C if I turn on AA the buildings don't flicker on the edges, and makes it easier to distinguish them. But in arma I have noticed no advantage. In some rare cases shadows do make a difference when spotting enemies. Out of all the games I have played (multi-player, single-player, and just screwing around in the editor) probably only 5% of the encounters with personal, shadows made a difference. In fact there are a few games that I have noticed actually need to have shadows disabled or enabled (other then performance reasons). When I enable shadows is to give me a slight warning. Because I can see the enemies shadow, but in arma its almost never needed. Maybe I am just different, but I have yet to find one game where shadows make a huge difference in spotting capabilities (other then seeing the enemies shadows). Yes I know what v-sync is. And I have never needed it enabled. I have yet to find one game that the screen "tears" on my system. I am a little interested in your system specs, because most people get better frames then me (most meaning around 99.9% of arma players)... If you actually get worse FPS then me, you are the first I have met.... :)

Low FPS is because of fraps. You have head bob on right? Cause you have just as much motion blur as I do. Also head bob is over kill... I know for a fact in real life my head doesn't bob up and down that much, and that my brain makes corrections to the image I see, so that even if it is, my vision is normal, and it is barely noticeable. So headbob is an immersion killer. AA is useless in my opinion, I don't give a **** if I see the jaggies. V-sync... LOL I get the feeling you don't even know what that is, so please go look it up, cause it doesn't make anything look better. Shadows are in the same vote for AA. Shadows do not give any type of disadvantage or advantage in a game like arma FYI. And yes it is a low end GPU. And as I stated before the low FPS is caused by fraps. I turned on head bob to max, guess what... SMALL difference. It is still in my book almost unnoticeable. So I am not going to waste time uploading a new video. We all have arma right? So go ahead and try it your self. Oh and what challenge? I would like to see you play arma @ 25FPS or 23FPS (with PP). Are you really going to say I have no challenge? Domi drops my frames down to around 15 FPS....

I call this almost non-existent.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1giB9-k9bBA It is almost non-existent without moving the mouse. Doesn't matter what direction you move in or how fast it will look like that. It doesn't become horribly noticeable until you move the mouse. Go ahead do your own test. I dare you to try and prove me wrong.

Here allow me to be more precise. I did do testing to refresh my memory before my last post... When walking, running, and sprinting motion blur is almost non-existent. When moving your view via head movements or weapon movements it becomes very noticeable. I do not move in a given direction without scanning my surroundings. My play style for arma is to move from cover to cover, and scan the environment. When moving without scanning the problem is non-existent. When aiming or looking the motion blur is over kill. When moving and aiming or looking the motion blur is even more so over kill. I have compared what I see in game to what I see in real life, and motion blur is over kill. I am not going to put my head in the dirt so I can play arma with motion blur. That's just stupid, since arma requires situation awareness. I dare you to do your own test, and do the comparisons. Motion blur in arma is just over kill.

I am constantly checking the edges of my screen for small things, especially when moving quickly. The blur gives me a headache over time basically because of the fact I have to take a blurred image and transfer it to something understandable. Yes I corrected it. But to say there is a small difference is really amusing to say the least. Numbers in bold = Total pixels divided by base pixels (480p) 720×480 = 345,600 1 1280×720 = 921,600 2.666666666666667 1440x900 = 1,296,000 3.75 1680x1200 = 2,016,000 5.833333333333333 1920x1080 = 2,073,600 6 2560x1600 = 4,096,000 11.85185185185185 5760x1080 = 6,220,800 18 7680x1600 = 12,288,000 35.55555555555556 I would like to think that having that many more pixels is an advantage. Not even two months ago I was on a resolution 1440x900 and now I am on a resolution of 1920x1080. I see a difference in my game play. I am now even better because I can spot and aim much more quickly. It is much more easier to aim at five pixels then it is to aim at one pixel for example... And IMHO the motion blur is really over kill. I can only replicate the blur in game turning at an average pace (the average pace being how fast I turn in real life) if I turn my head as fast as I can. And if I turn my head slowly in real life I get no blur, while in game I get some blur. So I actually see the blur as an immersion killer and over kill.

Motion blur and 3 monitors are 2 seperate things. Which is why I made that statement. 3 monitors is an advantage on its own, and motion blur, is a setting. Some see it as a disadvantage, and others may not see it having any disadvantage. Motion blur does not effect my ability to see enemies. The only thing it does is give me a headache after some time. I honestly don't see why anyone would want to force it in the first place. If you believe you are at a disadvantage becuase you have it on, then turn it off, you would gain performance and not have the disadvantage. :rolleyes: ---------- Post added at 10:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 PM ---------- Agreed....

Ah my mistake, I will correct that. I made that comment at at around 2 or 3 in the morning so...:) ---------- Post added at 09:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:09 PM ---------- Motion blur does not take away the advantage of 3 monitors. And I would rather just have it off. Everyone can turn it off, and it does cost some performance to turn it on.

Yes to adding the option to adjust graphical settings further... Now about the MP... No, servers should not force settings. There is A LOT of factors to consider if you're doing it to "balance" the game. The player should be able to decide what he/she wants, this would allow the player to have the best possible experince on his/her computer. Everyone has the same options, you're not forced to have shadows on, nor should you be forced to have certain settings. You guys are complaining about a player having an unfair advantage because of his/her graphical settings, when you can turn yours down to. Some of you who invest in your gaming rigs have HUGE advantages in both hardware and settings. For example, track IR, more then one screen, higher resolutions, better speakers, better mouse, better keyboard, better internet, and better joysticks. So if you want a truly "fair" MP experince, you would have to have a LAN party, where everything is exactly the same. Also lets not forget that you can have an advantage with options turned up... Bottom line... Do not force settings. ---------- Post added at 08:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:24 AM ---------- You are correct in the parameters given by you. But you are failing to understand this... 3 monitors at 1080p = 5760 x 1080. Now that is one hell of a difference from my 1920 x 1080 monitor. Also you can have 3 monitors each at 2560 x 1600, and a total resolution of 7680 x 1600... Also here is the pixel difference between set ups 1680x1200 = 2,016,000 1920x1080 = 2,073,600 2560x1600 = 4,096,000 5760x1080 = 6,220,800 7680x1600 = 12,288,000