Fuse

Ah, I get what DM meant now. Thanks!

Still, my question stands: What makes it so hard? If I were a modder I probably wouldn't have had to ask the question.

Just because something isn't in Arma doesn't mean it shouldn't be. Why do you think people make mods for games? It adds a lot to the immersion, IMHO. Arma is so detailed, and is so immersive in 1st person, it just would be a nice bit of polish.

+1 vote for bottom center. Would be perfect. Feedback tracker, ho!

Multiplayer always has more lag than single player, because single player doesn't use an internet connection.

I know it's not a one day project, but what makes it so hard to add an animation for this? The animation is only a second or so long and only needs to be animated for 1st person. Seems like it would be one of the easier things to add.

Players can (and do) change their names at will. The name doesn't tell you anything. Besides, as has been stated in about 437 threads in the past 24 hours, the seagull thing is a bug not a hacker.

It pretty much depends on the game. Running PhysX on the CPU is slower than the GPU, but only marginally. Mostly you want to put PhysX on which ever processor the game doesn't use as much. Arma hits you CPU much harder than your GPU (and GPU load is easily reduced with settings changes), so it will benefit from offloading PhysX to the GPU assuming your GPU isn't being overworked on low settings already... When Bohemia lets us. At least this is how it has was explained to me long ago.

This is actually pretty common for games. There really aren't a lot of "next gen" engines in use right now.

Sorry, my point was that posting your actual specs would be a lot more helpful than your FPS in an aging cross-platform title running a different engine (that, frankly, was never as demanding as people seem to think). Can you expound on what you mean by "fine" in single-player? What kind of FPS are you getting, in what conditions, and at what settings?

If you're the kind of person who can sit down and spend an hour just looking at the controls for a new game then alpha will be a blast for you. If you need your hand held (not meant as an insult, some people are fine with jumping in head first and some aren't) then there is none of that yet. Alpha has everything you need to have fun in Arma, but you're going to have to teach your self most of it and fight some bugs to get to it occasionally. If you're not easily deterred then go ahead and hop right in, otherwise wait for beta or the finished product. Of course you can order now if you want to support BIS. The game's not going to get any cheaper and you don't have to participate in testing just because you pre-order. If you do order, remember that purchases through Bohemia give them a larger share than purchases through Valve. The game is a Steam exclusive so you'll get a Steam copy either way. You're not really buying the Alpha, you're preordering the game for when it releases and getting to test earlier builds as a bonus. You can see what each tier of preorder includes here (though I do wish BIS had labelled the first tier as something other than just "Alpha").

You paid $50, by choice, to pre-order a game that releases later this year. As a bonus you were given the privledge of helping test the alpha (and later beta) builds. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle#Alpha No one can help you with the info you've given us. Are there any errors in your Windows event viewer or something? What's your hardware? What drivers? What kind of MP server? (I see a lot of people posting they have issues without trying non-modded servers.) There are one or two variables that can matter when troubleshooting.

If I'm wrong someone let me know, but shortening them would go a long way towards improving their appearance and it seems like it would be relatively easy to do. I'm just wondering if there's any "legitimate" reason for BIS to leave them as is, so if they do I can decide if it's because they want to appeal to Average Joe (who has never seen a tracer out side of the FPSRussia YouTube channel) over realism. ;) Eh, at this point the original post is practically irrelevant. This has evolved in to a (mostly) constructive discussion of the current appearance of tracer rounds. Besides, you just repeated maturin but with far less detail and an shot at the OP tacked on.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=4143 This isn't a new game, this is alpha testing for a game that is coming out Q3 or Q4 of this year. I suggest you uninstall and wait until then.

I thought it was considered a joke because it was not only fake but aerodynamically incapable of sustained flight. Why wouldn't the Iranians just have something from Mikoyan, like the rumored LMFS? That or something Chinese.

Finally spent a bit of time on a server at night, and I have to agree. The current tracers were probably the worst part of the over-all visual effect in what was otherwise a beautiful firefight across a valley. I hope they're not what Bohemia intends for the final release.

Sounds exactly like the kind of issues one expects to see in earlier builds. Devs have a relatively limited set of hardware available to them. Is your performance the same on all MP servers, or just Wasteland? Keep in mind that your PC's FPS on BF3 is pretty much irrelevant when discussing Arma 3. They are very different games with very different hardware requirements.

You'd fall in if you tried to jump. At best you'd hit the opposite bank which would likely not support the impact, then you'd fall in.

Nail on the head. This is what I've tried to describe multiple times. People get so entrenched in their views their comprehension begins to suffer.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. If an enemy is far away that's what the zoom feature is. Using FoV for this purpose isn't what I would consider legitimate. If you need a more gradual zoom I hear TrackIR/Freetrack is good. (Building my own as soon as the LEDs arrive.)

Glad to hear it's not just the good servers. ;)

I can't tell which side of the argument you're trying to support. These pics are exactly the kind of "improved vault" many of us (anti-jumpers) are asking for.

Your best bet would be a faster CPU clock, but you'd have to basically side-grade your processor. Currently most games benefit more from a higher clock speed than more threads.

Isn't this exactly the kind of use we want to avoid? You're supposed to set your FoV to something appropriate for your monitor size and position so it feels "natural" and doesn't give you motion sickness. If you get in to a place where you have difficulty seeing then that's intended. Maybe they could lock it so it can't be adjusted during multiplayer sessions or something.

Not sure what your point about jumping in training is. I said, and I quote, "Yes, your character would be capable of jumping, but why do you need to?" How often did you find your self jumping while out on a mission? I know it happens, but I've never heard anyone specifically tell a story where they jumped so I have a hard time believing it happens often enough to be worth programming in to Arma. It's kind of like melee kills: I know they happen, but the only guy I know who has killed more than one man by hand was a tunnel rat in Vietnam, so I don't see it as an important feature in a milsim game.