SexParty

I love this idea. It's the best possible solution to buying a game and being involved in the Alpha and Beta I've seen to date. Honestly can't say enough good things about this lot and the way they think, honestly. Only buying Alpha because I'm not interested in the extra stuff and it's soo dam cheap.

Again for the hundredth time http://i.imgur.com/3fH2Q.jpg scopes showing your POV instead of black surroundings. It isn't the 90s anymore, graphics and technology are good now. Such an outdated feature.

Since no ones played it you can't comment about it being clunky. Not to mention it's alpha still or close to it so things are very 'subject to change'. I don't really have an opinion on the 3rd person view since I don't use it. The character just doesn't look 'relaxed' to me but since he's 'always' ready to react you could argue there's nothing wrong with that. This video shows it the best I think: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=16936 Very fluid and quick movements. Nothing is perfect but these improvements are what I wanted from ARMA3 and honestly will be the best part of ARMA3. Fluid movement/animations and great gun mechanics. It looks excellent so far and honestly can't understand how anyone wouldn't be super excited about this after watching that. Makes every game at E3 look sub-par, except for the size and scalability of Planetside 2 which is impressive. This will be a very popular game.

Surely the final game with the highest res textures, everything maxxed and AA on would require a GTX 680 to hit 60FPS average though yeah?

Love it. New animations look pretty good. Hopefully such improvements translate over to indoors and close quarters fire fights for fluid gameplay. Game is very exciting, keep up the good work!

It not being clunky and awkwards indoors.

Sorry guys but you have no idea what you're talking about. The offical battlefield forums are a wash with hatred, complaining and suggestions everyday to make the game slower, more rewarding, more skill based, larger scale and more importantly team play focused. On a daily basis they ask for everything that ARMA has just not of course to the extent of ARMA in some cases. But it's what people want. You can't tell me you know what they want because you aren't them. You can't speak for them and why would you, when they want games to better the same way you do. Team play focused. All the offical battlelog polls are even going against the creators opinions/predictions and in the gamers favor of what they want/what I'm talking about. Battlefield sucks not because it appeals to what it's fans want but because it's fan base has been too loyal to stop and boycott the dam thing ever since it's developers ruined it. But we will see what happens when Planetside 2 and ARMA3 release. I predict a lot of them will leave it for these games. Player stats have already been cut in half since janurary. As for the america's army comments I don't know how much expereince you had with it but it was in no way comparable to battlefield. It was a good middle ground between a casual arcade shooter and a milsim. Like ghost recon and raven shield. Had a lot of arcade elements but also had some good milsim like additions to it.

I agree with female pilots and crew members in games but not with female infantry.

No, you're still missing the point. If done right it can be made accessable and fluid enough to bring in those players. Most battlefield players hate battlefield, they only don't play ARMA because it's too clunky. Make ARMA a fluid streamlined expereince but retain the highly skill based learning curve and keep teamplay necessary to stand a chance against an enemy force and they will ditch battlefield in seconds to play this because it's all what they want. And in reality it's what ARMA fans should want to. A more fluid and realistic expereince indoors and out so the game can progress. Not fast paced bullshit like battlefield but fluid and realistic. I've said it before the game already has the expereince and the satisfaction when using team work and tactics to take down enemy forces and objectives, it just needs to be more accessable. And if done right it would be the number one selling PC FPS with no equal. But in all honesty I don't see it happening. It has the potential with MODs to maybe showcase this but who knows until Alpha. America's Army was slower than battlefield and other casual shooters but still more fast paced than milsims like ARMA and it is one of the top 5 most played online PC games of all time. So don't tell me gamers don't want a slower, higher skill and tactical shooter because they do, thats your proof. They just want it accessable and fun. Something that ARMA just lacks in a lot of the time due to the way the game is structured. I'm not saying lower the threshold but make it more accessable and improve the game so it's more fluid (gameplay, controlls, connectivity etc).

This is the whole problem with typical ARMA players you think you're soo much better than everyone else because you play a slow, complex and deep game. But you're not... It's a great game but a game with many flaws, like all of the big games at the moment. The OP doesn't want ARMA to become COD or battlefield and turn it's back on it's roots, he's simply stating the game has the experience to challenge the blockbuster games. And it does. But it can do it in it's own way, the ARMA way, which has gotten the game to this point. Doesn't need to compromise it's self and lower the threshold, it has the experience already. That's all. All the game needs is to improve gameplay; make it more fluid and make the expereince more accessable; more user friendly, still complex and deep and based on skill but more user friendly and it can take on the big blockbuster games even beat them. People don't want bullshit action and to die every 10 seconds. They don't. The backlash everytime a new COD or battlefield is released proves that. They want a deeper, more rewarding and challenging expereince, they just don't want it to become boring thats all. And ARMA can do that. Whether it wants to or not is up to BI and in part up to it's fans. Personally I don't think it would be a bad thing at all. People aren't as dumb as you think they are and are capable of learning curves and developing skill.

I don't agree. A studio focusing on laptop quality computers being able to play next gen FPS games is great but at no point will it ever be a focus. Games like ARMA 3 and other next gen titles should always be pushing as hard and far as they can go with graphics and physics to develop and advance video games. It's great it a studio supports the ability to play a game on weak hardware through optimisation but never should it be a focus and never should such customers be bale to play the game and remove visual elements from the game that will make it easier for them competativly against someone with max settings enabled. It should be the other way round. Instead the game should be optimisied well enough that poor computers within reason can still play the game just well enough. Honestly think BF3 and it's hardware requirements as badly optimised as the game is, is the way games should be. Pushing the envelope graphically. Because without all the HDR effects, totally messed up gamma and hue settings and horrible character models the game does look beautiful.

Thats pretty neat. Whole thing looks great except the werid head animation of the guy shooting who keeps looking around? Lol.

Ohhhhh thats too good. Lol.

GTX 680 is probably the better bet because it's more energy efficient than the GTX 580 so just wait as suggested. Get a $30-50 after market cooler which will help with OCing in a big way but I mean everything else you have should be totally fine for that resolution. PCI-e 3.0 won't be the new standard for a while so don't even worry about that.

Not talking about strafing in and out of doors or jumping etc. I encourage the idea that you commit to room clearing and make CQC more military and realistic. But with that comes the desire to move like a human and we are fluid and seamless. I don't get caught on doors and walls, I bounce off them, I don't get caught half way through animations etc. We're argueing the same thing you're just intent on defending ARMA being a sim and not becoming arcade like and everyone here wants the same thing. Only thing is everyone else sees room for improvement and mediums in which inspiration can be taken from and you simply outright seem to be defending ARMA. Thats fine but nobody wants what you fear ARMA could become. So don't worry about that. As for the battlefield, don't even bother it's exhuasting thinking about discussing this. The DEVs are out of touch with the community and the game does not reflect what the fans want. A great idea but already done by battlefield to an extent and madden in detail. Maddens ANT technology is excellent at that. Which is what I've been trying to get at, madden is not a military simulation or even an FPS but a lot as far as the mechanics of the game can be learnt from it at a coding level because it's got some of the most realistic human movement seen in any game. And things such as this are what ARMA needs.