RuecanOnRails

Steam default screenshot is F12 Open the screenshot manager (right click steam, screenshots) then select the "show on disk" button. Should bring you to the folder. You can also press the print screen key on your keyboard. I believe the print screen key saves to the root folder of arma 3 install which will be in steamapps common arma 3. There's also countless programs you can run that monitor your fps that usually have their own screenshot function. That should get you started, unless I misunderstood the question.

Alpha lite is very limited in terms of use. Playing user made content and mods is one of those limitations. You can use the editor and create some basic missions for yourself to play on, however I don't believe you can save them. The alpha lite version should be looked at as a proof of concept tech demo to motivate sales of the full alpha. Use the alpha lite to see how it runs on your system and run through the showcases then decide if it's worth the purchase.

The distance between the islands is only a short 40km away... if the scale is 2:3 it's 26.6km away in game. In the speed boat at 100kmh it will take about 17 minutes. Unless a massive naval section is added to the game, we don't need that much open water. It would become just a waste of space on our ssd's. empty terrain that people simply fly over. I'm not against the idea of having both islands put into a single map at their respective location, but I don't feel Arma currently has the features to make use of that open water. Please by all means show me I'm wrong If scuba is expanded, and a fully operational naval arsenal is added with in-depth combat, and a more detailed ocean floor/depth I'd be all for the additional open water. I'm all about meta gaming in the arma series but with that much excessive open water short of detailed diving and deep sea fishing what else could it be used for that the current map set up couldn't do? Reenacting the perfect storm?

Yes buying ANY of the alpha packages includes the alpha, beta, and full game on release. You are essentially Pre-purchasing the game and being given access to the development builds of the game until launch.

This has been discussed before. And geographically it wouldn't work. The distance between those islands is simply too far and would require an excessive amount of empty open water. The game is about realism, they're not going to put the two islands side by side to make the map larger. It also wouldn't work too well with the story IMO.

The main argument in here seems to lead back to dayz, as if that was the life of the game. Not only is dayz not available on arma 3, it's was a small blip in the history of Arma. Configuring the game to better benefit a mod is just pointless especially when it potentially hinders the primary game and style of play. Hard forcing gamma or any other settings in Arma is not the way to go.

Yes, many thanks. BI never ceases to amaze me. I'll most likely be picking up another copy of Arma 3 with it as well. It appears that the coupon was given out to only those who bought the supported edition on the first day of release during or around the downtime.

I still don't think there should be any type of FORCED setting. If someone chooses to play with "cheater vision" using high gamma then let them. If someone chooses to hinder their vision at night by dropping gamma to make it more intense let them do that. Just because one or another custom created mission\mod would benefit from having a locked gamma doesn't mean the entire game should suffer and include that. It's why I believe the client settings should be reported to the server where the admin could assess if the person is giving himself an unfair advantage. The arma series is designed around being able to play the way you want and have total freedom implementing locks would be taking a step in the wrong direction. Give the player the benefit of the doubt to play properly and the way he chooses. Allow the admins to monitor player settings the admin could then have his own set of rules. Locking down functionality a game with as much customization as this would be to me compared to EA's always on DRM. I'm all about balance, but balance does not need to come in the form of forced play style.

I use my gamma settings all the time. I do not leave them static (I don't abuse it to see in the dark, rather for the feel of a mission. Some missions feel much more intense if everything is darker and enemies disappear in shadows). I feel the ability to change gamma whenever is an important part of this game. Bringing the gamma down to make a more atmospheric feel, or bringing it up to brighten and even wash out colours should remain in control of the user. There should be no hard locks on gamma settings even in mission settings. Not every monitor is configured the same, nor do they output similar contrast telling people to use their monitor or windows settings is hassle and wouldn't bring anywhere near the results that people are looking for when it comes to colour correction. A deadzone I'd be iffy supporting, it could work but I think it would still be too limiting. What I'd like to see is the client side settings sent to the server at which point the admin could see what everyone has set for their gamma. If they see someone tanking their gamma for an unfair advantage a message could be sent to that player. Still allowing for full use of gamma settings but giving the admin the ability see if someone is abusing it and allow them to follow up with their own discretion.

If you post the issues you have with the game, people on the forums may be able to suggest ways to make it more to your liking through settings, configurations, and even mods. Also post your computer specs, cpu, gpu, ram, OS, hdd/ssd, also post what overclocks you have set. Not to nitpick or anything but "latest and greatest" might be a bit hopeful. Not saying it isn't good and more than capable, but sli 660ti is lacking compared to enthusiast grade hardware and rig set ups :)

Laptops don't play games all that well to begin with. Your laptop is not a gaming laptop either. Minimum: OS:Windows Vista SP2 or Windows 7 SP1 Processor:Intel Dual-Core 2.4 GHz or AMD Dual-Core Athlon 2.5 GHz Memory:2 GB RAM Graphics:NVIDIA GeForce 8800GT or AMD Radeon HD 3830 or Intel HD Graphics 4000 with 512 MB VRAM DirectX®:10 Hard Drive:10 GB HD space Sound:DirectX®-compatible As you can see with the minimum specs, you DO meet them but just barely in terms of graphics performance required (HD 4000) At this stage in early alpha development you might be able to get only 10-20 fps. Hopefully further along development you will be able to play with a higher fps but don't count on it too much as by the looks of things you just make the minimum. I'd recommend checking out some of the performance tweaks to try and get a couple extra fps out of the game, or at least it might help to make the fps more consistent and not fluctuate as much.

Is your graphics card overclocked? reduce the overclock a little and try again. You can also try to FULLY remove the graphics drivers and install the new latest drivers.

Minimum: OS:Windows Vista SP2 or Windows 7 SP1 Processor:Intel Dual-Core 2.4 GHz or AMD Dual-Core Athlon 2.5 GHz Memory:2 GB RAM Graphics:NVIDIA GeForce 8800GT or AMD Radeon HD 3830 or Intel HD Graphics 4000 with 512 MB VRAM DirectX®:10 Hard Drive:10 GB HD space Sound:DirectX®-compatible I don't believe your graphics card meets the minimum requirements to play the game which is causing it to crash when loading.

It's the picture in picture settings. "PIP" under the rendering section

The game does support multi gpu's as far as I know. I had no issues with crossfire running on my old 6950's. I use msi after burner for overclocking and monitoring usage. Since near launch of the alpha my second gpu had always been utilized by the game. There is currently no pre-defined profile from AMD, but using the default crossfire settings my set up worked. Try running with all default settings from AMD, not creating a profile. You could try to use the old arma2 profile from amd and see if you get any results.

monitor your FPS, it most likely feels more laggy because it is. The mirrors/camera's can take a decent size hit in FPS based on their quality setting. Try lowering the setting a by a notch or two until you feel comfortable with first person driving.

Running with a pistol should be faster than running with a two handed weapon. The inertia from having both arms able to move independant and freely, you are able to gain more speed with less energy. When you are both hands are holding something your arm movement is greatly limited requiring more energy to move the same distance at the same speed. It's less about the overall weight of carried items, but how much restriction there is with the weapon or object being carried.

The slower your character moves on foot, the larger the map feels. It also helps with getting closer to a 1:1 scale (which the map is not) I prefer the slower movement as other have stated our characters are not world class athletes, they are soldiers carrying a hundred pounds of gear. I can't wait for the infantry movement to become more realistic. no more running full speed up or down inclines, movement speed scaled to the map, total weight of equipment affect mobility, and different terrain can allow you to move faster or slower. None of that may ever happen but the nice thing with arma, there will be a mod for it.

I don't think they have any set deadlines. If the game requires more time in alpha, it should get more time in alpha. As much as I want to see a finished game, I do not want to see a game that is rushed suffers from game breaking glitches, bugs, and imbalance. I'll make an early prediction.. BF4 will suffer from all those. Not that you can compare a battlefield game to Arma. They are two completely different genres and different leagues. especially when it comes to fps comparison. Looking at the ground in arma 3 has the same complexity as any scene in BF3. And I agree with rehtus777, Stratis offers so much in terms of content that I feel I've barely scratched the surface people who are getting bored of it already need to expand their view of statis (looking at people who only play wasteland). Arma 3 in it's current state can easily offer me a few more hundred hours of gameplay.

I don't know how many sites I've locked myself out of by pressing next to quickly claiming I was just born. Simple solution, clear your browser cache. http://www.wikihow.com/Clear-Your-Browser's-Cache I always try to remain anonymous when browsing online.. it's great until I forget the name or age I entered when creating the account and can't recover. To help you in avoiding the governments ever watchful eye create yourself a fake persona for online use. http://www.fakenamegenerator.com/ Print it off and keep it next to your computer to be used when registering for anything.

Editor tutorials are all over the place, check http://www.armaholic.com/ I'm sure there's a lot there. You can learn from the arma 2 editor tutorials as well. besides a slightly different layout, they are pretty similar. I just searched on youtube, and found one user creating a bunch of simple tutorials to help teach people. http://www.youtube.com/user/Armaidiot As for more game modes, there aren't exactly official game modes. They are all user created missions. Once you get alright in the editor you can make your own missions and they might catch on with the community.

Don't worry guys, I did a quick search for you.. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?151512-PhysX-processer There's a thread from a week or so ago talking talking about physx and forcing it to gpu (doesn't actually work, as it's cpu only). Give it a quick read. Short story, The Physx is CPU only. There is no trickery or method to force it onto gpu. Nor would doing so give you any benefit to performance. I believe there's a list of all the ingame features and objects that use physx somewhere. The main features of physx are the vehicles, ragdoll, and a few objects that are able to move when hit. I could be wrong about that last one but I cant be bothered to look further into it.

The rangefinder is a separate object that takes up the position of the binoculars. you use it the same way you would use binoculars. Scrolling and having it tell you the range, is not part of the rangefinder. That is controlled via the difficulty of the game. To mark an enemy you must be a squad leader and tell one of your members to attack, as Pundra stated. You can select as many people in your squad or as few but right now as far as I know, it relies on heirachy chain of command. The squad leader can only create those markers using an unmodded and no scripts running. Most of the current scopes and weapons do not have zeroing capabilities, wait until more weapons are added to have the ability to zero with different scopes. The scopes that don't zero usually have mill dots to help in shooting at distance. I don't think soldier class limit what can be equipped, rather the starting equipment. You can always change what the player starts with using in the editor.

I vote to have this thread locked and buried. It's going no where. Every question, suggestion, and rant ends up right back where it starts with random discussions leaving the main topic. Just reading this thread leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Too many self absorbed people spouting on about how the game developers should cater to their needs and forget everything else. There are Currently 61 pages to this thread. Post only if you have read through them all and still feel the need to ask the same question again. BattleEye will be added to the game when it is ready. Release dates of said anti-hack/cheat are not stated and most likely not ever have a set date. One day with an update the game will suddenly have BattleEye enabled.

That issue is caused by forcing AA above 12x. (At least that's the only way I'm able to replicate it on my 6950 crossfire set up.) If you go into your CCC change AA to use application settings. Everything should work now. If you still get issues, try going through CCC and change everything to application settings. Also I wouldn't suggest using Driver Sweeper. Not with AMD's official uninstaller that works better. http://sites.amd.com/us/game/downloads/Pages/catalyst-uninstall-utility.aspx