Jump to content

Sixgears2

Member
  • Content Count

    34
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Sixgears2

  • Rank
    Private First Class

core_pfieldgroups_3

  • Interests
    Gaming, exercise, marksmanship, fishing
  • Occupation
    Nunya (business)

Contact Methods

  • Biography
    Hardcore gamer, political nerd, and history fanatic extraordinaire.
  1. Sixgears2

    Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

    Bummer, Medic. I've been away for a few months and I was hoping there would have been at least some improvement. No dice, it seems. I hopped on a while back after adding a second 7870 to my rig, but I saw no positive change. If anything, my performance actually got worse. I know Crossfire drivers can be slow to arrive and that CFX configs can be buggy, but it was still a little disheartening. To be honest, the performance issues have ruined my enjoyment of the game almost entirely. There's nothing I hate worse than spending more time watching and analyzing FPS monitors than actually playing the game (though watching my hardware run at 40% while performance tanks is a close second). As you said, the issues create a situation in which only very small, carefully scripted missions can be truly enjoyed. There are plenty of games out there that do small, carefully scripted missions better than ArmA. Hopefully it will get better. I'll keep checking back from time to time. Thanks for the update!
  2. @ruhtraeel I agree that the lighting is spectacular most of the time, but I'd sure like to see the night missions brighten up a little. They are currently so dark that I can't see anything with NVGs even if I crank the brightness all the way up. That's not exactly realistic since one's eyes adjust to low light after about 10 minutes provided there's at least a little moonlight. On an unrelated note and out of curiosity, has anyone else noticed the strange pop-in behavior of the short, scrubby vegetation towards the southern end of the island? It seems to be tied to specific missions (some display the behavior, some don't) and when it appears no combination of settings affects it. Is it related to the editor? Any suggestions on how to fix it would be lovely as I'd like to be able to play my buddy's missions without having to watch a seizure-inducing pop fest.
  3. @ DNK Thank you for actually acknowledging the issue and providing theories for why it exists. Interesting stuff. Clearly I'm no software engineer, but it sounds like you're definitely onto something. I'll try modifying the FOV. Hopefully it will alleviate at least some of the nonsensical frame drops. Glad to see you've reported your findings to BIS so they can (hopefully) get to the fixin'.
  4. @Myke If you can't even tell me why or how this game is different than others, then why should I agree to measure it by a different set of standards as you suggest? As far as it being an alpha, I'd like to point out that both alphas and betas are designed to allow players to find and report issues. I found and reported an issue. You then told me to bugger off because ArmA is just "different." Are you sure you understand how this works? @Zapat Fair question. My answer is that they run better despite also looking better and handling hardware-intensive situations. The followup question there is why. That's what I'm attempting to determine. @failberry You call me a full-on hypocrite, tell me I have a bad attitude, write numerous posts chiding me as if I'm some petulant idiot, and then try to come back as if you're some victim and I'm the big, bad wolf? No. You're delusional, and you'll get no more responses from me. For the record and as I've said before, I love ArmA 3. I don't take the time to create profiles and report issues for games I care nothing about. The fact that I love it is precisely why I'm so disappointed with the performance issues I'm having on what I know to be perfectly good hardware. I'm still going to play the hell out of the game, but I'd sure like to do so with a stable engine that doesn't drop my frames into the mid-thirties just because I look west towards the airfield or happen to encounter a three-house village. Graphics and performance are two sides of the same coin; that's why I brought this up here.
  5. I agree, OP. I'm interested in making missions, but my skills with the editor are sorely lacking at this point. $30 seems a little high, although I guess the alpha only costs about that and the combined cost would only equal the price of a new game. And I guess you would be paying to extend your enjoyment of the game... Ok, you talked me into it! :)
  6. @failberry I haven't insulted the devs in any way, shape, or form. I've simply brought up an issue that has been dismissed as "that's just ArmA," which I don't find to be a satisfactory answer. Pointing out problems and demanding real, verifiable reasons for them is part of the development process. My issue is with people outright attacking devs or calling something garbage or trash, neither of which I've done. You need to reread my posts to you and brush up on the meaning of the word "hypocrite." You are right that I have no idea what the engine is doing that's causing the issues, and the lack of actual answers here suggests that nobody else does either. I've read all about the engine here and elsewhere and nobody seems to know, including you. I'm not interested in the engine's functions; I'm interested in its underpinnings and how they translate into low hardware utilization. As you said yourself, ArmA 3 isn't doing anything spectacular visually, so why does it suffer such massive performance swings? Unless you have the answers--and I'm quite sure you don't--I don't think you and I have much to discuss. And to be told that I have a bad attitude by you of all people is hilarious. Go back and read your long, ranting diatribes earlier in the thread. After all that you want to hold yourself out as a beacon of civility and lecture me about the nature of hypocrisy? No thanks.
  7. Edit: apologies for the triple post, my phone had a seizure and multiposted .@Myke 1. Please enlighten me as to what ArmA 3 does that allows it to be measured by a different standard than any other for-profit game on the market. Or am I meant to simply write it a pass because it bears the name ArmA? Go on, tell me what spectacular thing ArmA is doing that makes it so much different than any other game on a technical level. Is it calculating the meaning of life? Simulating the every thought of each soldier? Pondering the nature of existence? Rendering objects down to a molecular level? If so, why does it only use 50% of my hardware? Why does hardware usage go up during empty missions and down during intense ones? I anxiously await your definitive answers. 2. Yes, I am comparing alpha gameplay to final code. If the engine is flawed there's little chance they'll fix it before release, and ArmA 2 had similar issues that weren't ever fixed. It therefore seems reasonable to me to assume these types of issues will carry over into the full release. Not that I doubt the reliability of blind faith, but would you kindly point me towards any post in which the issue is even acknowledged by a dev? For the love of Pete, read the full conversation. You'll have far fewer questions afterwards.
  8. I'm officially bored of you. And the fact that you are thread stalking me is rather childish. Again (and for the last time) my rig runs every single modern game I've played at a minimum of very high (usually ultra) at 50-60 FPS. ArmA is not doing anything that other games don't do, yet it can't seem to stop itself from dropping into the 30s every time I look at a hut. Until you can tell me why it is that a game like Battlefield 3, which has much, much more going on in a 64 player match and looks better than ArmA by a factor of ten, runs at 60 FPS on ultra with my "budget" hardware while ArmA struggles with 30-40 deep FPS swings depending on the direction I look with nothing going on at all, I'm going to keep believing you have no idea what you're on about. I'm glad you finally have a game that allows you to justify having spent $300 on a processor that's completely unnecessary in a gaming rig, but please stop acting as if a third-gen i7 is listed in ArmA's system requirements. It isn't. And as I've mentioned multiple times dozens of i7 users are reporting the same issues. This is the last response you'll get from me as I can't be bothered to argue the same points over and over and your inability to write properly makes my head hurt. Have a nice day.
  9. Sixgears2

    Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

    @Mobile_Medic Now I'm just confused. There's really no reason that I can think of for that kind of bizarre behavior, though I do have to admit that I'm intrigued by the streaming bottleneck hypothesis the other gentleman is proposing. Sadly, I'm simply not willing to dial back my settings--and thus my enjoyment since I am a self-proclaimed graphics whore--in order to force the engine to behave as it should in the first place. It's starting to sound like this problem is far too deep-seated to be fixed with simple patches. It may be time for BIS to build a new engine entirely. Bummer. I guess I'll just avoid cities and stick to lightly scripted missions for now. At least it runs properly that way. I like the game too much to walk away now even if my hope for a timely fix is fading quickly.
  10. @failberry Just for the record, "motif" and "motive" are entirely different words. I don't think it's possible to have an ulterior motif, but if I had to have one I'd probably go for paisley. In other news, I played more ArmA 3 tonight and it still looked fantastic right up until I ran into a clump of six buildings and watched my FPS plummet into the 30s for no discernible reason. Poor engine design is the biggest issue we're facing, not "puffy looking" trees or slightly blurry textures. I don't care how good the game looks if it can't actually use the hardware I'm providing for it to run properly.
  11. Sixgears2

    Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

    @Mobile_Medic That's extremely interesting. I don't have a background in programming, but it seems like you're onto something there. I wonder why the game would use less of your hardware in situations where it should clearly use more... I may not even be close here (remember: not a programmer), but what if BI has attempted to mitigate the level of stress placed on lower-end machines by somehow altering the code to "lock" usage at certain levels during intense sequences/heavy processing? That would explain the reports of low-end rigs running the game fine at 100% or close to it while the higher-end comps aren't able to utilize their full potential or architecture and therefore run worse. I sincerely hope I'm an idiot and completely wrong.
  12. Sixgears2

    Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

    Your issues are due to the fact that your computer was designed to control Mars rovers and calculate interstellar trajectories. NASA would like it back now. :D Seriously, though, that's a ridiculous rig. Almost so ridiculous I don't believe you. I will therefore require pictures to masterb... erm, use to verify the truthfulness of your claim. If what you say is true (still skeptical about the $5000 rig), then all of us mere mortal PC owners are doomed.
  13. @failberry I have multiple posts in other threads about my issues with the game, so I don't feel the need to make duplicative posts in this one. You can read them if you like. I felt like making a comment and I did so. I'll probably do it again sometime, and your approval or blessing will be the last thing I am concerned about. Better brace yourself now. :)
  14. Sixgears2

    Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

    My original post was in response to the post you're talking about, so clearly I read it. Time to work on that situational awareness of yours, friend. Funny that my CPU has no issues with a weak front-end in any other game on the market. I guess ArmA 3 must just be that much better looking. Wait, that's not true. Maybe it's got more going on. Nope, that's not the case either. There are dozens of games out there that look better and handle more than ArmA 3, and every single one works fine with AMD CPUs. That brings us back to the engine being the problem. The fact that ArmA 3 uses my hex core as a triple core (if that's true) just goes to show you that something isn't right, regardless of how much technical mumbo jumbo you throw out. And you still haven't explained why my CPU never goes over 35% load while my GPU hovers at 65%. And how about all those Intel CPU enthusiasts having nearly identical problems? You've yet to provide me with a compelling excuse for ArmA 3's issues. Instead, you've forced me to read a bunch of barely coherent and likely incorrect technical junk that doesn't manage to illuminate anything other than your raging bias towards Intel. If the issue was being reported only by AMD FX users maybe I'd believe you. However, it isn't and I therefore think you're full of it.
  15. Derail your thread? Please. Sharing an opinion about how others are expressing theirs is hardly off topic, especially since it was made in response to another post. It was only a one-off comment until you stared this bizarre flame war over it. If anyone derailed your thread it was you. Regardless, this isn't your thread; it's the community's. Once you click submit you no longer get to control where the discussion goes. I haven't violated any rules, and you have no right to tell me what I can or cannot remark upon even if you don't like what I have to say. This weird perception that I'm some kind of threat to you is... rather odd. As I've said before, my post was a general one and was in no way aimed at you or any other specific person. Hell, it wasn't even specifically aimed at the ArmA 3 forums. It was simply an observation I've made about many posts I've seen here and elsewhere on other game forums. You need to calm down and back off.
×