Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

chrisb

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    2385

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by chrisb

  1. Posted

    When I first got A3 (when first available), I didn't know if I would take to it or not (I didn't), I was, and still am, very into the previous titles. So I put it on my second system I had back then which was a Athlon IIx64 640 and it played very well indeed with upto around 200ai seen at any one time even in combat, although I tended to keep that at around 70'ish seen at any one time.

     

    AMD are very underated, better than Intel for multi tasks imo, plus smoother whilst recording.

     

    Old vids.. All Athlon IIx64 vids.

     

     

     

     

     

    I would be looking at that 3850x coupled with one of their cards when it has been out a while and when I want to move on from this 4790k setup. I like to go back and fourth from Intel to AMD.

    ___________________

     

    Edit: First vid I ever did of A3 with the Athlon. 😉

     

  3. Posted

    8 hours ago, Grumpy Old Man said:

     

    Well he already complained that a i7 8700 and a GTX 2080 ain't enough for this game:

     

    So either he doesn't even own any of the mentioned components and made it up, or he's already playing arma 4.

    I guess he actually owns an i7 3770k and a GTX 780 with slow as hell RAM (think ~1600MHz) or something along those lines, some fairy told me...

     

    Cheers

     

    I wonder how that fairy knows... I have an idea how. 😉

    • Like 1

  6. Posted

    1 hour ago, Groove_C said:

    Silky smooth experience while flying at ultra.
    Significantly reduced primary, secondary and tertiary RAM timings definitely help not only min FPS, but frametime.

    Me flying (takeoffs and landings) in the editor (Altis).

     

    Forgot to take out landing gear at the end of the video )))

     

    I get the same results, although I haven't touched my pc, just stock 4790k runs at 4.4 (with stock boost). Zooming in and out can give an advantage with fps, but flying straight forward gives good enough fps and performance.

    I would take a little time to set everything up in detail prior to playing, if I were to play A3 for any length of time. But A3 seems much more optimised than A2. Plus of course they give a number of things you can do in the settings that should be enough to give a reasonably good performance, on a medium to higher end gaming pc.

     

    Only problem I get is trying to run something with the game. Intel do not like too many tasks at the same time it seems to me. Prefers to do one thing at a time, does it fairly well, it has to be said, but still just the one task at a time. I get the same mini stutter as in the video above there. Doesn't do it if not recording, but soon as I hit the record, I get it. Can't say it annoys me because its just a recording and I don't put any time into setting those up properly. As long as its not there when playing, I'm o.k. I don't mind the odd thing here and there, just Arma. 😉

  7. Posted

    12 minutes ago, dalber24 said:

    Well here I have a version in htm, it is not the version that spoke in the previous post but I think it will serve, I'm sorry but the full version that I saved in pdf I have it in another computer in another room and I can not get to it , since I am in bed recovering from an operation, and in this pc I only remain this one that I leave here, this link will never be erased, it is permanent.


    https://www.mediafire.com/file/z661pydiox2zpjd/ACE2_Classlists.rar/file

     

    Hope you get better soon. 🙂

    • Thanks 1

  9. Posted

    Concerning yesterdays post:

     

    Very popular gameplay style with older groups. Looks fun and the in-play organisation looks good.

     

    I enjoyed the interview & indeed, watching one of their videos. 🙂

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  12. Posted

    4 hours ago, cb65 said:

     

    DayZ 1.0 is launching on Xbox One on March 27th!

     

    Gameplay Trailer

     

    Actually looks pretty good visually on console.

     

    Yeah it looks good doesn't it. They have upped the colour etc for sure (I tweak that for A2). Looks nice, view distance looks good.

     

    But I don't play zombie games anymore, last I played something similar, although not really zombie, but that was the first Resident Evil, I played on the original playstation in the 90's. Good game really.

    • Like 2

  15. Posted

    It didn't sell, that is for sure, but that in no way makes it a bad game, which it wasn't (editor wise) and had some members messed around with it here, they would know that.

     

    The gaming world has changed over the years since OFP & OFPElite was released, there is a high demand for deeper type 'war games' now, more than ever really. Also console players are looking for more depth and becoming far more sophisticated in their choices, mainly because the console player of yester-year, is still playing at 30+, so yes I think BI may look hard at the console and what is possible now, considering modern day console power, which is just going to get stronger.

     

    Some here played SL & ASL (with vasl) I think, prior to ofp (BI) ever being a thing. That was our 'go to' game from the mid 70's before coming over to this series. It took a few years to bring us over fully. Back then ofp was looked on, as many here look on consoles now, as a bit of a joke really, from a war-gamers view. But we soon learnt that ofp, or to be precise 'the editor', was more than that.

    A persistent fully militarised war gaming world can be made in there, with of course vasl bits added for us.

     

    But I have seen many changes in the gaming world and I can see BI thinking, maybe not doing, but certainly thinking, about console release. The result today in sales would be much better than in elites time, I'm pretty sure of that.

    All BI's campaigns would run on console, I fully believe that.

     

    It is only the Editor & content making that makes this a pc game.

     

    All previous games in this series (campaign wise) inc A3 I would think, would run on todays consoles imo.

     

    But we'll see, I see DayZ is coming to console/s. I can see BI looking at this series for them too, in the future. But let's wait and see.

     

    My argument has been from day one of getting ofp, they (BI), should release the editor as it's own thing 'stand alone' for pc and leave the campaigns to wherever, the campaigns are just campaign games. Could be played on anything really.

     

    It's the editor that is special in this series and the content making ability. Without those things, these games would not be played as much as they are today. Campaigns take gamers only so far, the editor takes 'gamers that hobby', much further and into decades.. As it has with me now, I'll be entering my third decade with this series in a little under two years, but that is with the editor not the campaigns, not played any of those. Which will be my 5th decade in war-gaming.

     

    I have a little interest now in keeping the series pc only, I would like to see it, but that is just the pc player snob in me. There is no real reason now for me to want pc exclusive other than that. But it isn't going to happen, eventually it will go console imo. Still remain pc, but over other platforms too, makes business sense.

     

    I'm just happy the editor is always there and can be used for many, many more years. Which I thank BI for. 😉

    • Like 1

  16. Posted

    22 hours ago, wsxcgy said:

    those of you in favor of arma on consoles dont seem to understand that it would be nearly impossible to achieve the level of depth and freedom that arma offers if it were ported to console. the controls are incredibly limited, the hardware is limited, and the software is limited. don't fool yourself into thinking that most people play arma for the SP scenarios and the campaign. SP content doesn't really sell shooters much any more, almost nobody cares about campaigns and stories any more. sure, there could be a rudimentary editor in place and maybe even a self-contained multiplayer scene a-la call of duty or something rather than the community-ran servers like we have now, but that would mean stripping away a lot of the things that actually appeal to its playerbase, while also most likely failing to appeal to the majority of the console playerbase. if you think that the gaming community at large has "matured" and is ready for "realistic" and "hardcore" gameplay, you are completely wrong. the majority of "gamers" are more inclined towards easy, fast-paced, immature gameplay, all polar opposites of what arma accomplishes. and as others have said, it would mean either BI develops one extremely dumbed down version and markets it for PC and console (which I might add would probably drive off its entire PC playerbase and make the game a failure on all platforms), or they develop two separate versions of the game which would be a huge strain on their team and be almost impossible to manage. even the big AAA developers struggle with those kinds of things. in the end, it wouldn't be arma, it wouldn't be fun, it wouldn't be successful, and it wouldn't be easy to develop.

     

    They have done it before, that is what many on here seem not, to realise.

     

    It wasn't a straight port, it was built for the xbox console (original console) and if you didn't play it, then you wouldn't realise just what amount of depth they achieved with the game & editor. At the time I think one of the heads at BI (aren't they brothers), thought it was better than the pc version, seem to remember that being on here, in my earlier life 😉

    I think he said that mainly, because of the acheivement they made getting more or less all of the pc version onto console with arguably better graphics. Indeed that was a great achievement in my view.

    I played both pc and console version of ofp, the difference was not that much, just unit numbers and mods & BI make the vanilla game, not mods. Controls were very intuitive arguably more so, than the pc version.

     

    As said, the only thing missing really was modding (there was some limited modding), missions were shared in some instances. Maps etc were all the same, same size, same vanilla units etc, everything 'more or less' exactly as the pc version. The main restriction was unit numbers, iirc 72. Aircraft, armour counted as 4. But for spec op type missions and or smaller skirmishes, it was a perfect platform and all that was put onto, what is now tiny, tech wise, original xbox. But I can see most here didn't play the version, as they are unaware just how good it was, or unaware of the version period. No it wasn't the pc version with the easier modding/scripting etc. But it was more than good enough for a console sim.

     

    The series has come on some way since then of course, but so have consoles, way further than the series has shifted. I'm a pc player through and through, but when I picked up this current xbox one x, it surprised me just how good they are now. Still wouldn't replace my pc and run the game style we play, but for the mainstream player that A3 attracted, it would be more than enough. I think that A3, although they won't port A3, but the style and type of play that is the most popular for A3, would suit a console. So A4 could be thought about for a console platform, can't see why not, like I said, they did it before and the only headaches they talked about on the forums back then was the limiting factor of the console (numbers, ai, view distance, mainly), that has changed drastically over the years.

     

    Arma has changed, the types of play have changed, ours hasn't, but most players that moved onto A3, now play styles that would easily suit a console. If your playing a fully militarised type wargame like we do, then no it wouldn't suit. But for your average player and lets be honest, A3 now is for the average player, I can't see why a console couldn't handle it.

     

    Yes, we all know we would like it to remain pc exclusive, but I look at it also from a business point of view, and for me, it makes really good sense to consider a console version for the next in the series. An exclusive console version, would be worth way more financially for BI than a pc release. Lets hope they don't look at it that way, but they may do so, who knows..

    They have developed a console version before.. 😉

     

     

    Some mods, I didn't use any mods, but there was a small mod scene back then for the xbox version. Not sure how they ran, but here are a few I found on YT:

     

  17. Posted

    17 minutes ago, PuFu said:

    I am talking about current console generation.

    No, i never had an xbox, had a PS2 at some point, now have a PS4. 
    No offense but you keep coming back to a game that was made in 2005-2006. The target and market has grossly changed this then. If every single game out there presents yourself with this aiming aids, pretty sure it's going to be a requirement. Again, i don't play any sort of FPS shooters on consoles because
    a. i cannot use thumbs to aim correctly. 
    b. all the games in that department that interest me are available on PC just as well. 

     

    The console controllers are superior over mouse and keyboards in certain areas, and decent in others. shooters are not meant to be played with thumbs btw

     

    each with its own i assume, but i though we were talking about vanilla arma, not modder arma

     

    I honestly don't think the AI in A3 is any worse than it is in A2

     

    Yeah, it is each to their own. I think A2OA vanilla ai were and still are better than A3 vanilla. But I don't play vanilla anything, it's all modded.

     

    Regards shooters, I don't play many console games ofp-elite being the last and RD2 being the current (big gap), I love pc.

    That said, thumbs are very useful with a controller.. 😕

     

    The thought BI couldn't put in control choices, if they did make a console version, is an interesting thought. I don't think they would produce a typical console game, OFPElite wasn't a typical game for its day.

     

    Plus I already said, consoles have come on a long way, that is the reason I think BI will consider a console version for A4. It may not get beyond a consideration, but it would be foolish to not look at the possibility. Also like I said, the styles of gaming that are popular in A3, are really console style. Not that those styles are good, but the player-base for those styles are big.

  18. Posted

    1 minute ago, PuFu said:

    on release, maybe, today, no way. I couldn't go back to A2 robotic movement no matter what (not that A3 is quite there yet, but miles better by comparison).

     

    Today with the right mods, A2OA + all the dlc's is way better than A3, for me at least. But you have to include ai in that. AI in A3 is terrible. That is why I won't play A3.

  20. Posted

    10 minutes ago, stburr91 said:

     

     

     

    I don't think a game with less features will be considered "better" by much of the current community. 

     

     

    I think A2 was better than A3 on the whole. Certainly at release.

    But I'm not a fan of A3 anyway, so I'm bias. 😉

  21. Posted

    6 minutes ago, PuFu said:

    There isn't a single title on consoles i have seen where there isn't some sort of assist.

     

     

    You didn't have the Elite version then..

     

    Regards mp, I think coop with friends against a very good ai is far superior, just in my view.

  22. Posted

    1 minute ago, stburr91 said:

     

     

    The consumer is their first concern.

     

    I already stated that the decision on the direction of A4 will be based on economics, because I fully understand that Bi isn't going to simply make a game to appease me personally.  

     

    The decision on whether or not A4 will have both a console, and PC version will all come down to whether or not BI thinks they can make enough additional money in the console market to justify the trade offs inherent with that decision.  

     

    As I already stated, it's a competitive market, and if they want me as a consumer (and I would bet much of the community thinks similarly) I fully expect A4 to have all the same features as A3, and additional new features.   

     

     

    I just want A4 to be better than A2OA + all the dlc's.. That may bring me away from A2 then. Although I think A4 will be more of the same, aimed at MP, with little in the way of good ai for the single player. (I don't play the campaigns)

     

    Plus most of the A3 game types that are really popular, are almost console styled.

  23. Posted

    2 minutes ago, PuFu said:

    you didn't read what i wrote. I personally 100% agree that they should make a move into the consoles with their flagship product. I doubt anyone would properly disagree, especially if such a move would not influence a possible PC release negatively (and btw, a more ergonomic and simplified control scheme for A3 main controls (infantry and shooting) would be a good thing in itself)

     

    what i don't agree with is this topic's pompous title "we need ArmA3 on consoles" - that is bullshit, you don't need a video game to begin with, you want A3 on consoles for whatever reason
    (and yes, i also own a PS4 pro, i have no shooters on minus some destiny thing i got for free via PS4 plus thing, most game i have on are 3rd person action/adventure ones, i have no "simulation" of any sort - the only ones worth playing are, maybe, some of the driving ones. I personally cannot aim much with a controller, and i hate with a passion the auto-aims and magnet types aim assists systems in game)

     

    The xbox version had lots of things you could alter, like disable auto-aim etc. The controller on the whole wasn't too bad, just took a short time to get used to it, coming from the pc version. Can't beat mouse & keyboard though.. 😉

     

    The only console I have running now, is the xbox one x, think that is what it is called. I bought it for Red Dead 2, hell of a good game. That sort of has a sandbox side, although certainly not on the level of this series.

     

    I have all my old consoles somewhere knocking around, I dare say the original xbox will have the OFPElite disc in it still. I bought the console to see what the ofp version would be like. Glad I did, it was good in the editor, restricted a little, but still very rewarding.

  24. Posted

    3 minutes ago, stburr91 said:

     

     

    I will go a step further. Not only do I expect A4 to have all the same features as A3, but I expect new features that makes A4 even better.

     

    If BI wants to keep me as a consumer, that's what they have t do. I fully expect companies in this competitive gaming market to progress, not regress.  

     

    I'm not so sure BI would consider your buying a product to be their first concern.

     

    You say regress, it wouldn't be a regression in 'business terms', quite the opposite and probably very lucrative for them in the console world.

     

    I wouldn't want to see it, but I look from two views; Gaming (I wouldn't want to see a console version)... From a business view however (I would be saying bring it on)..

  25. Posted

    10 minutes ago, PuFu said:

    i said this before - BI is a business, and it is obvious that they have understood the existing market opportunity for consoles. I am saying that ideally they would just need to make a single game and port it across (and that is obviously not possible), make something that works out of the box on consoles - they will sort of fuck over everyone on PC, or make 2 games, one being a variant of the first (that means a lot more dev time on it), which simplified control schemes, with some simplified mechanics and some features watered down or removed

     

    I'm not so sure your view works. They have done it before with OFPElite, so they would be foolish in my view not to think about it again. Mainly because the console gaming world has 'exploded' since Elite and the consoles are hugely different now than back then. Plus player numbers, especially for the gaming styles seen in A3 now, would be huge & indeed suit console players.

     

    They had mixed reviews with the original xbox elite version, but they have matured as a business. If it were me, I'd be thinking about a possible console release (again) for the series at some stage.

     

×