Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

Maj. Gastovski

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    45

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by Maj. Gastovski

  5. Posted

    I'm okay with the layout change besides the fact that some usernames (mine included) are not properly resized to fit in the poster box... so now it just looks like my cat jumped on my keyboard during my account creation. That's got to change, or please allow me to edit my username at least.

  7. Posted

    Straight from the PC Gamer review:

    I’m mostly happy with the graphical performance I’ve been getting on the three configurations I’ve been playing Arma 3 on. The caveat being that my framerate varies based on where I am on the map, the number of objects and enemies, and if I’m playing online. On a Core-i7 X990 at 3.47 GHz and two AMD Radeon 5970s on Very High settings, I’ve gotten 17-25 FPS on one single-player mission and 40-50 on another. Multiplayer is where I found the least-consistent performance. On a Core-i7 870 and GTX 780, I can get 55 FPS in a tight, six-player scenario on Very High, but 20 in a large-format mission like Wasteland.

    Tinkering with Arma 3’s 25 configurable video settings allowed me to improve these numbers a little, but even dialing down the quality to standard or low on my rigs barely helped while playing large multiplayer missions. The scripting or complexity of some scenarios simply seems to bottleneck performance regardless of your settings. Some specific actions also consistently produced framerate dips for me, like turning 180 degrees with high draw distance, driving at high speed into a city, or right-clicking into gun optics for the first time in an area.

    I respect BIS for all they have done so far, and I see the potential in Arma 3 after it has marinated with the community for a while (I've always considered it an investment other than a release purchase) but this is an issue that needs to be addressed and prioritized.

  8. Posted

    Again, I really hope they just allow those who wish to tone it down to disable it some way via the video options. That way - you all can play the way you wish and not affect my experience that I paid for as rightfully as yourselves.

    By completely canning a feature due to a complaint thread, you only create yet another potential complaint thread (which I would have no problems writing out) from the opposite perspective of players who don't mind the feature at all and those who even wish to see it expanded.

  9. Posted · Edited by MysteriousStranger

    Its less of make it optional and more of return it to its optional status.

    If im not mistaken we had a more or less working system already with arma 2?

    Isnt all it needed was to take the weight into consideration and thats it?

    Whatever floats the boats of people displeased with it, as long as it isn't taken away from players who don't mind it at all. To make sure I wasn't going mad or completely blind I just ran a bit with a bunch more than what would constitute an average player's set up might be. There is a pulsating vignetting effect and the out of breath audio. The blur is subtle and pulsates, it will eventually become more frequent when the player is continually pushing himself further without taking a brief rest. Again, that is what I would expect to happen and what I would prefer.

    No, you're not mistaken because you're speaking your opinion and a perspective I respectfully don't agree with. I didn't enjoy Arma 2's system in this regard. It was far too lenient and players have obviously become accustomed to that. I'm not against whether folks here like it or not, I just don't want to see it removed or compromised - I think that is a fair and respectful way to put it. Perhaps some tweaks may be in order, this is beta after all. Tweaking features is better than out right removing them.

    What happens in real life is what should happen in the game. The more gear, the more weight, the less distance you can go and at lower speeds. One doesn't get blurry vision, you simply are forcibly reduced to a quick walk and then if you don't slow down from there you will be forced to stop altogether to catch your breath. It's highly reproducible; put on pants and a button down shirt, a backpack full of heavy items, grab a shovel out of the garage as your rifle and start running at top speed for as far as you can. First you will slow to a jog, then a walk and finally, if you keep going as fast as you have in the tank, you will have to stop and catch your breath. Your body will not allow you to run so fast and so far that get blurred vision or start wheezing like you have asthma. Still, other than the blurry vision and the wheezing I think the distance and pace is fair and it does reflect how much gear you have on. Just drop the wheezing and blurry and keep the heavy breathing.

    It is a game where you, the player, have control, the effect only occurs if you continue to push yourself in that manner. It isn't going to automatically stop for you, as you are in control the entire time. In reality, as you're trying to compare it to, people can easily push themselves to the point of passing out and that is what is trying to be simulated within the game. When you notice the vignetting starting to grow consistent before the blur takes effect - that is your sign, or "your body" giving you that preemptive sign to slow down a bit and take it easy.

    I honestly believe people are misinterpreting or misunderstanding the simulated effect here. Don't drop nothing, you want watered down immersion I would suggest BI makes it optional.

  10. Posted

    I'm not sure what everyone is seeing. When exhausted in-game I get some pulsating vignetting effect and certainly not enough to bother me - I rather like it and hope it doesn't go anywhere.

    If there is some blur, it must be rather subtle. I've been playing Insurgency type missions with friends and carrying an over abundance of gear and while I do tire out fast (as I expect and that's the way it should be), there is nothing that transpires that would be enough for me to complain about. My settings are all set pretty high as well, so surely I would see any drastic effect if it were happening.

    Whatever comes from this I prefer they make it optional, unless it seems to be a bug that might be potentially occurring with some that exacerbates the effects. Because I certainly wouldn't want to miss out on features simply because others on a forum are displeased with it.

  12. Posted

    If you're hoping for real PiP 3D scopes I can say that very likely won't happen because PiP takes so much resources. These are million times better than the old hole-in-the-box scopes and this is the least that community have wanted.
    They'll keep it as is, because the using PiP to render different parts of the scene at different zoom levels has proven to be too performance-hungry. They said long ago that PiP scopes weren't feasible for Arma 3, long before even the Alpha was out; which is why we ended up with the traditional blacked-out scope shrouds in the Alpha. Yet people keep harping on about it as though the idea has never occurred to BIS before.

    However, throughout the Alpha, feedback expressed by the community both here on the forums and the feedback tracker has suggested that we'd be happy with them doing scopes this new way instead of the black shroud, if they can't achieve the ideal of RO-style PiP scopes. The 'Design Mastery' M4 addon for Arma 2 that use this same method for 3D scopes have proven fairly popular because of this feature, and it's been a generally accepted method in other game titles such as BF3 and those soldier games that codemasters made (FPDR) - Reason enough for BIS to adopt this method instead of the black shroud.

    Personally I'm not a fan of it due to certain technical limitations: Like you can still see the front ironsight post through the optics if a weapon has fixed ironsights (IRL the sight post is far too close to the objective lens to be focussed, so it'd appear as a transparent smudge at most), and it'll be inconsistent with NV and TI scopes in the game because they will probably still use the black shroud method. However, I do think it was the smart thing for BIS to do given the feedback expressed during the Alpha.

    That's why I edited my post after reading on that particular part of the feature shortly after I posted it. I wasn't expecting nor mentioned PiP to be utilized for iron sights (the first guy that replied to me implied it). I could already imagine the ramifications on performance. Yet being that I'm not a game developer I perhaps entertained the potential of having something akin to it (like a placebo work-around) in some degree - hence the curiosity.

    What I expected though was at least some sort of filter to the peripheral sides, perhaps a subtle blur and/or saturated effect. That's what I meant about some further work since we've already accepted the benefits over the mild oddities. I like the 3D scope, it could be better but it's better than nothing. Though I'd like to see something applied to help balance it a bit to some degree, just my humble opinion.

  13. Posted · Edited by MysteriousStranger

    Has there been any clarification or mention on the 3D scopes they showed off on the live streams and latest Alpha build? The fact that the outside peripheral is zoomed-in along with the scopes themselves is a bit odd. Will it be fixed/adjusted?

    And yes, I'm aware of what was mentioned in the SITREP #00014...

    The Beta will enhance certain weapon optics with a much nicer-looking 3D version. We are aware of a few known issues with this technique, but feel the benefits outweigh these massively. Your reaction to seeing them proves this!

    I can't decipher if they are keeping it as is because of the outweighed benefit or moving forward to fixing it as development continues (which would I assume would be the case)?

  14. Posted

    I have asked for the same thing a couple of months back in May. Making it completely optional would be beneficial for players who can utilize these keys for other elements, actions and features (especially those who particularly play co-op/MP like myself). I messaged a few of BIS devs active here about this after I created a thread that didn't go nowhere, only DnA replied back (which I greatly appreciate).

    Hi there,

    Thanks for your message. Don't worry, many of us are actively and constantly scanning the forums, Feedback Tracker, social channels and lots of other places for feedback, suggestions and issues. It's simply too busy to reply to every one of them in detail. We've had this topic opened many times also internally; there may be technical limitations preventing it. Can't promise anything, but it's something we can at least look into.

    Cheers,

    Joris

    So I really hope this still holds true and they can consider this for Arma 3. A game of this nature needs to give complete control to the user in my opinion.

    No, they are bound to RADIO control. A subtle distinction, I know. I do agree that it would be nice to have total control over keybinds, however.

    I actually use the mouse scroll for those actions, so for others that desire to rebind those reserved numeral keys they can do the same, the functionality is still there by default. The Num Pad keys are binded to looking around you, I use ALT and mouse to do that (some utilize TrackIR), so anything reserved to the numeral keys I would love to move it to the Num Pad and free those up for my own personal customization.

  20. Posted

    I am not suggesting we remove the ability to remap controls. You would still be free to map controls however you please so you don't have to adhere to my idea.

    This just proves to me that you don't have the faintest idea of what my point was. Never did I mention nor express this supposed discontent with such a suggestion.

    In fact, if it were a radial menu it might even allow for more customization of the controls by allowing players to place custom commands on the radial.

    A radial system wouldn't be any more different in terms of response to actions in-game, unless you're incredibly slow on reaction time. Due to screen real estate and potential UI design it would more likely hinder if anything. You originally stated you just want an interaction key that was context sensitive, and there is one - the ENTER key. Furthermore, you can remap every key except those on the reserved list (which is my only gripe about controls). Basically, you can already achieve a comfortable system for your own personal in-game interaction. People are just simply pointing that out to you.

  21. Posted

    But how long have you been playing ArmA? You can certainly get used the the controls, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to improve them.

    It also doesn't mean we have to adhere to the personal preferences of others. You're driving down the middle of a two-way street.

    Yes yes yes, I know I can remap the controls. But the problem that the scroll menu was put in to fix doesn't go away. The scroll menu DID put a lot of controls at the players fingertips, albeit in a very clunky clumsy way. I am making a SUGGESTION as to how that system might be improved upon.

    Your capitalization of the word suggestion doesn't convince me of your genuinity. Reading your posts chronologically simply reveals that you had a potential moment within the game where you were only limited by your lack of knowledge of the game's customizable control options. You've been told that not only can you already achieve what you originally claimed about below...

    The interaction menu is incredibly clunky and clumsy. When interacting with a car for example, I should be able to simply hit interact to get in and interact to get out. Quick, efficient, intuitive. I don’t have to spend a second to think about it.

    ... but that you can also further reiterate your control scheme to match your personal preferences without having to use the scroll menu option at all. All these actions have an alternate context sensitive key dedicated to them which you can also remap. Don't open a SUGGESTION thread than brush off logical replies.

  24. Posted

    I had bought up something similar in a thread that was, unsurprisingly, buried but it briefly touched upon the old reserved controls for the commands (F set keys and number keys above QWERTY keys). While it's mostly untouched besides what was mentioned above, it's fine in single player campaign because I actually have been using Jojo's VAC profile (Thanks, Jojo). Yet I was proposing the option to allow us to, at the very least, remapped those reserved keys for more important immediate actions for online multiplayer/co-op. I think the old system is much too rigid and the limitations need to be open for rebinding for this new era of ArmA.

  25. Posted · Edited by MysteriousStranger

    20 pages, and still no BI post on the terrible optimization?

    Dwarden posted on page 18 of this very thread. You even mentioned it yourself in the same exact post in which you claim this thread had no developer replies.

    I'm sure it will see improvements, we all want better performance and I'm almost sure BIS are well aware of that.

×