wiresnsnakes

It seems Nordkindchens idea results in far to much work, to archive it any time soon, even I would be happy to see it happen. Overall Bensons approach makes the the distant environment much better, without much effort. Based on his results you could maybe optimise it a little. At least till BI find a better solution I would like if they use this solution. I played the campaign with the standard-textures and was again shocked (...cause I installed Bensons Textures only for Altis at the release of Arma 3).

Im dissapointed, cause the campaign felt like a low budget version (besides the good voiceacting) of popular arcade games like COD. So run and gun in rather short missions with a small scale and without much tactic (in the Crysis-Campaign i had much more of that for example). Gameplaywise I expected, that the campaign would use the potential of what makes Arma different to other games, so the scale, complexity and the fact its a (semi-) sim. Most times you just run/drive a few hundred meters and kill some smaller and one bigger group of enemys in close ranges, where your side and the enemys dont use much tactic (I just remember one order to flank the enemy and was disapointed that the enemys didnt suprised me in any way) and without doing much then shoot and any special events. The endmission felt rather shallow in comparsion to a mission i did, by just make a team and put multiple cas-teams in the big city on stratis, where in the campaignmission you shoot a few enemys and then get ordered to leave. The showcases showed more of the potential. Still, the appeal of the big environment is rather low in compasion to the fight ins the villages in arma3 and other games, cause the distant environment is so undetailed and its easy to see enemys even at high ranges and I know that the clutter, grass and shadows dont exist for people aiming at me. But you probably would need a 4 times higher resolution with ultra AA, FXAA and AF, besides shadows and grass till 2-3km. Overall I cant see anything that is A unique and B at the same time well executed in Arma 3, besides Infantry-movement/shootung in a sim-way. EDIT: Please implent something like Bensons Textures for Arma 3, at least till there is a better solution like Nordkindchens.

Where we are at it: I really would like a suit that gets blurry at high distances. If you cant make the distant environment detailed, make the 3d objects undetailed. The game would still look outdated through scopes in comparsion, but the harsh contrasts between environment and units would be gone. Gameplaywise that would be an emprovement at least. http://forums.bistudio.com/images/smilies/smile.png Otherwise the previous poster is right, there are several things that are pretty important to fix and many things requested are secondary or even irrelevant.

The idea is stupid. There is no grass at the distance. And because even highres-textures get blurry at flater angles at greater ranges, the most "effective" thing to do would be to use a blurry suit with no sharp edges, where the colours are a bit darker then usual, cause the lighning at higher distances doesnt effect the ground in the same way as the 3d-objects.

Its very pretty but still: at higher distances there is a high contrast of brightness from the ground and units, so the ground is dark and blurry the units are very bright, if not white (no i dont mean missing shadows). This make it impossible to remain unseen, if someone looks in your directions sees a ocean of dark green/brown and a bright few pixels on it (even if you dont move). Here is an EXTREME example: http://s1.directupload.net/images/130906/lq6ggy9v.png Here less far: http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/3353/t8wu7zy9_jpg.htm It seem to come from the sunlight (hdr) , if the sunlight is gone everything thing seem to be threaded the same lightningwise. EDIT: The same happens at night with light from the lighttower. Near you you can see that the model and grass is differently handled to the ground. Can and if: will there be something done about it?

Hello. Its generally often hard to move far distances and have cover. Cause the minimal detail at higher ranges and the lack of shadows a realistic amount of concealment isnt given. But besides that at higher ranges, textures become a blurry and -important!- dark mess. For some reason units are very bright. So you see people miles away. I tried dead nation and got a Deja Vu from Deus Ex, cause in some situations your vision is augemanted. http://s1.directupload.net/images/130906/lq6ggy9v.png I really dont fuckin know how to act stealthy under these conditions and feel kinda for the others (if they didnt see me allready, at leats). As you can see in the next picture, the ground mostly have brighter fragments and is overall brighter, still somehow even there the lightning seems different: http://s1.directupload.net/images/130906/2ahvntdt.jpg Next: At higher ranges units are often very bright from the sun-inflicting side and very dark, if not black, on the other, the ground is often somewhere more in the middle, I dont know if its primary cause the distance of the texture or the lightning or rather both: http://s14.directupload.net/images/130906/bltx9lh7.png# Here the effect is clearer in a rather extreme case and not so far away units: http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/3353/t8wu7zy9_jpg.htm The unit in the bright spot is easily seen, cause its half shadowed and half bright cause the sun, the others are overall bright but the ground dark, the bright parts of Bensons texture included. Couldnt it be easily fixed, that units at higher are threaded like the ground lightningwise? By take the influence of light away or some kinda shade at them? Thank you for your patience.

Maybe start with a place where you have most kinds of environment in a part, so some forest, a more hilly and a more lat part and a one or more city/s. Kinda hard to remember a specific region, if the island is so incredible big. http://forums.bistudio.com/images/smilies/wink.png

You are right seany, that you can make it better, but its just a bit. I tried Ultra-FXAA, but the effect is not significantly noticeable, same goes for everything else, btw some things are enomously hardware-hungry and it isnt about me but PVP and peoples different systems. The effect of low angles is just very big. On Altis You get many more "really" flat areas, then stratis, which is hilly like Planetside 2, where it isnt that recognizable (and you can respawn quickly and can compensate with cloak, at least as infiltrator). Overall, I tried Nordkindchens test-package and combined it with Bensons Sharp textures and on stratis there is a huge difference. Its just that the difference is relativly small, if you would compare it with reality or the case, if the detail would be the same to infinity, but (!) the problem here is, that everything that makes the distant environment pretty makes it sharp and clean and everything that isnt flat (there is just 2. no clutter and 2. no microterrain), so rocks tress and units stick out, cause there is a silouette on a flat texture (more or less detailed, so original/benson or nordkindchens texture). I would have nothing against a distortion-layer, that pixelaltes the environment a little and would simulate clutter and grass, which would be, like i mentioned, just unidentifiable pixels anyway, but it would look ugly. The other solution could be, to blur or make soldiers more transparent, so they would fit in the "flatness". Both of that should be possible, without to muc effort, in the near future. In combination with Nordkindchens solution the game would be pretty and you could have realistic options for concealment and could remove the horrible grasslayer, that is total unlogical, if you look from a little bit more above point. Ok, no, you cant use the (BIG! dont argue!) advantage of shadows over distances higher then 200m, "if" "everyone would use the highest shadow-settings if its about PVP, but maybe they could reach the shadow-distance from VBS2, or use shaders (btw the problem would be easy fixalbe if there wouldnt be a day night cycle...). Anyway: I just have expecations, that only are important for me and the few ones that care as much about that (i got many ideas from other people). I dont intend to missionate other people. But overall it should be possible, or could have been possible if the ressources would been used to solve all this. And at the moment I just constantly miss concealment for me (and I often cant see shit at the same time cause the freakin grass renders nera me) AND my enemys and the immersion cant build up. I dont bitch in arcadesgames with fast respawntimes and low detail at higher ranges, but Arma is allready time consuming and its just horrible to thin to be see so easily/see others so easily in this giant (beautiful) island of BI. So the realism of environment is most important and elemental for me, THEN all the small or bigger things others critize the game for. So long: Fuck it Chief, I dont go into war as long as im so easy to spot. Its a riddle for me that they dont care about that with the third or fourth incirnation of the franchise, cause it could be possible with low impact on hardware, while everything else is great. And fans sugarcoat that and talk big about "simulation" or "realism" or "cod-kiddys". No, there is no concealmant granted, or simulated. I think its a valid point to critize. Elsewise I would play the game I paid for and be happy. BTW: Benson and Nordkindchen still rock!

You dont need knowledge to see the differences in reality and in games and there ARE examples in other games that handle it better, at least for a few hundred meters. Then there are different approaches to simulate it with technical tricks, like many here already suggested, Nordkindchen approach for the midrangetextures, distortion effects for the environment or transparecy for units. Instead of shadows you can solve it with shaders. Overall you can decide which priorities you have. So you can limit the detail near the player, the overall viewdistance and much more to put it in the distant detail. There ARE solutions to simulate, if you dont have the amount of detail at higher ranges, to simulate the visibility of distant soldiers. About "challenges". How challenging is it too spot soldiers in this game? Is it a challenge that I cant use concealment which I could do in reality and which works better in some other games? Why has everything to be realistic, but not the environment? What is realistic that the concealment around me doenst influence the view of an far away enemy? Regarding other things the game is good or rather great and mostly realistic. But you cant sugarcoat this. BTW: I dont want to waste time to hate on a game, which I dont like. Its just this little thing that breaks it for me. I hugely enjoy fight in citys for example and every other situation you dont recognize this. And I dont have anything against dieing fast and take a punishment/aka respawn and long walk (playing dark souls demands it :) ), its just the wish to use concealment and dont be seen so easily, which is just a constant kinda rational thought in my head. And hell: I tried to ignore it and enjoy it overall.

Regarding realism: http://s1.directupload.net/images/130828/apirze88.jpg Heard of grass and concealment? It isnt futured in this game. See also: shadows and same influence from the sun for humans and the environment. At least not above 200m's.

http://s1.directupload.net/images/130828/apirze88.jpg FXAA Standard and 2x AA http://s7.directupload.net/images/130828/drtjj3yk.jpg FXAA off and 8xx As you can see, it sucks to be a soldier on Altis. To be honest: You see that especially FXAA increase the visibility. The environment textures have one colourtone and there is no fine structure as you would have in reality. But besides that there is just nothing that districts you. If you want to increase realistic camo you have to make the soldiers blurry or you have to distort/pixelate the environment. New textures will not really do the Job 1. The environment will still be flat with highres-textures. 2. the effect of textures is negated at flat angles. And at engagements the flatter angles are the usual case and are the ones that are important. 3. The lightning still handles the ground and units differently. Anyway, the thread is about the aesthatics texturewise, but the ones that are about the visibility of units above 100-200m are dead. Realism and gameplay doesnt seem to be important in this game. Beware of my paintskills! http://s1.directupload.net/images/130828/ptty7n2g.jpg Anyway: There is many tech that makes farer things sharp, at the same time there is nothing that adjust the soldier. I played around with paint and the only thing that works is to blur the soldier/making him more transparent like the environment is or spray pixels on the ground. I think its a generall a technical problem of the limited resolution and/or the fact that pictures on a display are 2D that makes a perfect solution difficult. I never had this problem in any other game, cause the effective range of weapons or viewdistance was lower. But still, I dont know why this wasnt solved in the last games or at least this game.

Hello. I just experienced rain in Arma and recognized, that infantry and more so vehicles still produce dustclouds. Besides realism/aesthetics, I experienced that the influence of the visibility from dustclouds is quite big, at least for bigger wheeled vehicles. Technical it shouldnt be too complicated to turn dust off for infantry and groundvehicles and maybe make the dust appear white for starting helicopters, right? The presence of dust should be still away, if the rain stops for quite some time too, depending on the time/amount of the rain. I think that would be a important aspect in regards of rain-feature. BTW: Was there something planed to make rain visually (and maybe audiowise) affecting the ground, so: wet? I heard about, that the rain-feature would be improved and would really like that.

Yeah, thank you very much Nordkindchen. Really hope this will not be seen as "not so important". I think it is if you being spotable in a second from a km and you rather play games with a lower scale and a bit less realism, where your harder to spot from far away, then the opposite. I often read Arma and actially believed it would be simply realistic, if people complain they got shot from a km away in this series. The real reason is often just the unrealistic low distant detail. A few hours drasticly showed me that. It should be possible to move in some areas without going prone to remain unseen from a few 100m. Thats why I hope Altis will have more micro-terrain. Stratis is hilly marcowise, so functional for vehicles, but micro-wise its flat and thats not functional for infantry. BTW: The lightning still needs work: http://s7.directupload.net/images/130819/7ejisuu9.jpg

I tested it (4GB RAM) no recognizable performanceimpact. But the resulsts are not much better then the original regarding concealment. I would seriously try to compensate for missing....god, verything is missing in the game detailwise...compensate with the texture how the place would look like with full detail. Bensons archived more in this regard (sharp2), so now i try combinate both. Edit: Looks much better with sharp2. Still the relevant factor is how the units look detailwise, so how strong the contrast is, plus the lightning. but anyway: without shadows and distant detail like and much more complex/more polys there will never be a significant amount of concealment.

AHHH! I cant wait to try it out! Far more then to see Altis. Quality over Quantity. ;)

@fragmachine So true! I dont like the game at the moment, cause the missing cover (flat landscape/no micro-terrain/not many objects) on one side and missing concealment at the other (no microterratin/textures/shadows/gass). Its just suicide, to move through the landscape and just ruin the infantry-gameplay for me. I love to get immersed in games and arma archives that by its aesthetics but the easy visibility at high ranges let me just think how stupid it is to move outside the citys/villages. Besides realism the game can set more potential free for stealth AND brings recon/intelligence on another level.

I would be happy to test, I got a Phenom X4 955 and a Radeon 4890 and 4GB RAM, so I can respond for people with a minimum-requirement-system. I dont think its too much, but I think there are 2 things to be aware of: 1. The picture isnt very sharp (i guess compression), would it be sharper you would see them tad better. 2. The sun is low and doesnt hit the place directly, which makes them naturally less visible, then with direct impact of sunlight, but still easier then in shadows (which I still painfully miss at higher distances :( ). Nordkindchen can correct if Im wrong. Edit: Not to mention, if the detail would be like in reality or at least the distant details in Arma would be as high at higher distances as near you would have a hard time to spot an enemy even if you know in which direction you have to look.

Thats great! Just: Im sure the soldiers arent hit by sunlight. Anyway I recognized something different in the game: the visibility is strongly connected (besides different threatment from sunlight and the colours) with the resolution - and of the colours, of coures - of the groundtexture and the the textures from the soldiers. From far away they just seem like a few coloured polygons without a texture. Anyway resolution, texturesettings,FXAA and AF can be used to make the normal view work like thermalvision. Its impossible to ensure a fair PVP-experience in this regards, without playing with (honest!) friends. :p Its pretty effective in Planetside 2 to do that, too, but it look really ugly and the viewdistance is very limited anyway/respawn-time fast.

Thats fantastic!!! That would really help much to reduze the only issue that makes it difficult for me to enjoy the infantry-aspect and the overall greatness of the game (concealment, not the look of the midrange). Hope they manage it (soon) after the release. Mein Held! :D I just hope they find a way to reduce the lightning differences between distant units and their sourounding, too. Should be possible, if they have the time for it. BTW: I dont find the effects on distant concrete etc. so dramatic, in relation to the use for camo with Bensons textures. @GingerMcAle These are a great results, even Bensons sharpest texture blur, when you look from a flat angle with the ingame AA. How hard is the impact on performace?

As the conceal is near zero and there is no potential for stealth, by flat microterrain, blurry textures, missing grass and clutter and no shadows at the distance, I recognized something even worse. Compare: http://s14.directupload.net/file/d/3353/ahbpx3hl_jpg.htm http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/3353/t8wu7zy9_jpg.htm http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/3353/b49jymfq_jpg.htm http://s7.directupload.net/file/d/3353/59jl5wgn_jpg.htm http://s7.directupload.net/file/d/3353/5dylc8n4_jpg.htm http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/3353/co2mcz5a_jpg.htm http://s7.directupload.net/file/d/3353/7ejisuu9_jpg.htm Besides the missing shadows, the lightning for units and the landscape is totally different and results in the highlighting of enemys and yourself. I use Bensons midrangetextures that are much darker but the effect is not much better with the regular textures. Will there something done about this or just be ignored like the horrible midrange-textures? Is the priority the pretty HDR-Lightning or the gameplay? How can this go hand in hand with the word milsim and quality? Why got this series a fanbase after nearly 3 releases and so few steps forward? Seriously?!

Yeah me too. I played "whole lot of stratis" (user-mission). After screwing with UAV people stopped to shoot, I couldnt command people in the APC anymore at one point, at the other I could but every command was repeated by some mysterious commander (Yellow coloured name) and if I send them in a vehicle they only got in as passengers. The UAV terminal seem to cause problems, after all I was trying to be in an APC as passenger, command it and use the UAV Terminal to control a stomper for maximal carnage. :) Edit: I dont know if this issues are connected with the custom mission. Edit 2: In this mission I ordered 5 (!) chopper-transports, all (!) decided to land next to an tree or building, just so close that their rotors broke, even there was a big flat area 20m away, where I ordered them, other times they tried to land on steap area and glided from side to side so the AI couldnt get in. Usually if the a helicopter lands its nearly impossible to wait that a full squad (often they just refuse or running circles around trees and buidlings gets in, sometimes I get in and he just flies away other times I wait till my squad is in and it flys away. The SP often is no fun cause the AI, the MP suffers generally cause the missing concealment (if players are experienced). Besides its time consuming its quite hard for me to get any joy out of the game. Even I just dont think about the ratio of fun and time I have with other games.

I didnt want to open another thread, so I just wanted to know if something can be done about this: http://abload.de/image.php?img=zzzooooluuh2.jpg Not only the shadowdraw distance is limited, but Units are literally "highlighted" in contrast to the environment (I read somewhere they are treaded differently lightningwise). If you are on a place the sun shines units look much brighter and the ground much darker from far, then from close, so the contrast between both is extreme at mid- to highrange. BTW: Could an developer say something about plans about the midrange? I use Bensons textures (now sharp 2, but sharp 1 is good also, strong trough scope is sadly often still to blurry). And really it profits hugely from it and make distant fights/spotting suck less much then regular (Still the highlightning, environmenflatness, missing clutter, grass and shadows make stealth nearly impossible besides "diving" through the grasslayer). I cant play the multiplayer without it anymore, where the consequences of being easy to spot are much higher and make it utterly frustrating, cause the missing eninge-capabilitys. That is something people usually dont except by a game that costs 40-50 Euros and is in competition with quality products, granted products with much less ambition.

For the future: How high is the chance for proper midrange textures - proper means, not look pretty but make the conditions realistic/as at close ranges for concealment - and a shadowdraw-distance for all relevant ranges (visibal enemys through the scope with the highest zoom) from BI or the community? I tried for months(!) to enjoy the game and everything in this game, besides the influences for gameplay from the visuals differences at the different ranges, made me bother. But I just cant deal with it that you are far easier to spot at high distances and can do shit to act stealthy, besides being sunken in the grass-layer. That there was no repsonse to Nordkinchen great idea and the implentation of shadows/a compensation for the relevant distances (i mean WTF? the soldiers even get highlighted by the sun!!!) was a clear indicator that there isnt the will or the skill to fix that early on. Would been nice to hear "Yeah, No, there will be nothing", so I could just accept the conditions and just delete the game. There argued by an other aspect, that they wouldnt do something, if not right. I think they never used the zoom/scope. I would be happy to return to the game if would be fixed, actually it could be one of my favs. Till then I just return to "cod-kid-arcade"-games with engines that can deliver functional conditions for their purpose.

I dont know how people can think of pvp, if at ranges above 200m the missing high-res-textures, shadows, grass and the brightning from units in opposite to the environment make it a suicide run with a "Im HERE! Shot me!"-sign or crawling in prone to be sunken out of the dimension. Would this be Tribes I wouldnt say anything, but not in a milsim in which I can get OHK'd thats pretty gameplay and immersion-breaking. They could remove scopes and any kind of zoom.