christianmo

I don't think buying a new video card and doing SLI do much difference, due to the fact that its most likely your CPU that is the limiting factor. Overclocking the cpu is most likely the most cost efficient and effective way to increase your fps in your case. Get a solid CPU cooler. Consider a closed circuit water cooler like the corsair h100i, its effective, easy and won't cost you are fortune in money and time. As for the overclocking part there is plenty of guides on the internet for any given processor.

A lot of people has a misconception that stereo headphones are not capable of true 3D audio positioning. If you don't believe me put on a pair of decent stereo headphones and watch .The way audio is done in games is briefly explained by this article: 3D game audio uses Head Related Transfer Function (HRTF) algorithms to fake the effects of the pinnae, the head and various listening environments, so that injecting the sound straight into the ear canal can produce the impression of real 3D audio sources. The same process is still necessary when using 5.1/7.1 headphones. This is all theoretical though. If you have the possibility of borrowing a pair of surround sound headphones you could do a blind test to see which works the best for you.

I think you are entirely right on said point. But at the same time i think Zeus will make a great debugging tool for the AI. During the livestream it was very easy to spot the situations where the AI was weak and how they should have acted instead. Of course being aware of the problem is one thing, fixing it is the hard part :(

32 pages are by no means an indication of how many people would like to see females in arma. I mean half who have posted in this thread are arguing against females to some degree. If female soldiers/civs to "properly" implement in the game, there would already be mods that did so. Female civs would be nice, as it would open up for deeper story telling. But i don't by any means see it as necessary, especially if it means taking already sparse resources from other areas of the game. If you want to convince BI and the rest of the community, produce some solid arguments that convince us so.

Can we please stop making threads that goes along the lines of: "LOOK HOW BAD THIS IS!! BI sucks". No dev is going to read past the first page, with a title like this. I can tell that people care about the game, otherwise they would not be posting on these forums. It is just that they expect to get the attention of the dev's by berating their flight model and game. Its like a child acting up, and expecting their mother to apologize and ask whats wrong :mad: It is totally fair to say that planes should not behave as OP posted in the vid. And saying that Arma is not a flight sim wont change that.

This is how a female in arma 3 looks like with only the face replaced. http://s7.directupload.net/images/130903/8cyfty2e.jpg (683 kB) You would need to replace the body and a couple of faces for each faction. Record a entirely speechbank set for each faction featuring women, including pain and fatigue sounds. On top of that male animations might look kinda wierd on a woman, women do walk and move differently than men. Yeah i guess you are right, BI is just lazy :confused:

I am really stoked on the idea of a OPFOR carrier. I realize it would take a lot of time and energy to make. But if you decide to do so, the Kiev-class carrier would be a obvious choice. Having Cold War era carriers and planes would be epic and allow for some epic scenarios :cool:. Good luck with the project.

The solution to the ROF problems is not simply making them fire faster. The performance impact of a 2000-4000 RPM gun firing is quite big. What BI have already done is adding splash damage to the mini-gun to compensate for the missing fired rounds, its not a perfect solution but it is pretty good. For the AA a similar system cold be introduced.

Turn down particle effect settings

I would recommend everyone who is posting about moving in cargo to read this thread if you have not already done so: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?170227-AttachToWithMovement-Walkable-Vehicle-Interriors-and-Exterirors Chortles statement is correct in regards to the helicopter being the only vehicle that will stick to moving geometry by default. This can only be "fixed" by BI as it is hardcoded in the engine. But that does not necessarily mean that its not scriptable. In the linked thread there is proof of concept of such a script that attaches a soldier to a vehicle whilst at the same time allowing for movement. So far it has been demonstrated working on a ship and on top of a HMETT, with only a couple of minor issues. In regards to moving in cargo of a moving plane there unfortunately is a big issue. If a soldier goes above 100m above ground level he goes into a freefall animation.

It is nice to fast progress is being made. So far the map is looking amazing :) . I am really looking forward to see how the sanity system will work and how a low sanity will impact the player. I think it would be really cool if sanity influenced the nature of creatures that spawn around you. With a low sanity you might begin to see supernatural beings to emphasis that the player is becoming insane. The presence of some of these creatures should drain away sanity, forcing the player to run or link up with other players to regain sanity. Beyond that i really hope sound will play a big role in the sanity system. Hearing footsteps and other noises behind and around you will really build up tension if its done right. I am really looking forward to seeing how this mod will develop, especially the horror element. Also, does the text say "rape" at 8:12 in the vid?

I found a answer on the steam forums. Apparently they are fin stabilized and guided by GPS , meaning they will be more accurate over long distances. According to the poster its it has about 10 m spread compared to a unguided at 25 m, when the shell is fired 5 km away. http://steamcommunity.com/app/107410/discussions/2/864980734640404000/

I am by no means an experts on the game engine. Its most likely not a engine limitation in the sense that its not do able. Look at the light tower for example, it cast light far longer than vehicles or flashlights. I really think its down to performance. It would be reasonable to assume that the bigger the area you illuminate the more processing power would be required.

As far as i remember this was in the Beta, but it was deactivated for some reason. I believe it had something to do with BI not being satisfied with collisions of the doors in different states. For example you could not throw grenades into the Mohawk when the door was open.

I think a China inspired map would be great. The terrain could vary from dense jungle and mountainous areas to cultivated farmlands with rice fields and alike. In addition to that a conflict between NATO and China/ an east Asian alliance would fit the future theme of Arma 3 well and allow for a interesting new faction.

ACE has not been released yet. Hard to say about MP. A optimization patch has been released, but again a large part of the bad FPS in mp is due to the way some gamemodes are coded. I would install the game and try out the gamemodes you usually play, and let yourself be the judge :) .

4 GB of RAM is way too little. Arma 3 is a 32-bit application so it can theoretically support up to 4 GB ram under ideal circumstances. In your situation RAM avalible to ARMA 3 is much lower, because of your OS and other programs using RAM as-well. My advice would be to upgrade to 16 GB of ram, as it is relatively cheap. Alternatively you could install 32 GB ram, and run Arma 3 on a RAM disk. I am not sure if the preformance gains are significant over a SSD. Also you might consider overclocking your CPU. ---------- Post added at 19:59 ---------- Previous post was at 19:55 ---------- That only true under the assumption that he is using a 32-bit OS. A 32-bit application on a 64-bit OS can use up to 4 GB.

Your framerate seem abysmally low considering your setup. MAX 50% GPU usage might not be unexpected, in A3 its usually the CPU that bottlenecks the system, thus limiting the FPS. Seems like you have already tried the obvious solutions, like turning down graphics settings. Try lowering view distance to around 2000 m or so. Besides that reset 3D options in CCC to default. Try closing all software applications, anti virus an alike. Also try clearing some space on the ssd

Look at this benchmark chart: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/ I would look under best value and find a card fitting of your budget. From what i have heard AMD cards tend to be cheaper compared to Nvidia cards, on the other hand they are hot and noisy, especially the old ones. Remember to check if the card is compatible with your motherboard.

PhysX would only benefit those with nvidia cards. On said cards effect calculations are made on the GPU thereby taking a load of the CPU. On non nvidia cards PhysX calculations are done by the CPU, like it already done in A3. For vehicle physics PhysX is great, since the calculations wont burden the CPU more than the alternative. But using PhysX for effects and destruction is not an option for a lot of people, who does not have a nvidia card. What other games are doing is making physX effects that can be toggled on or off, depending on your the manufacturer off your GPU. But as you can imagine the PhysX effects take time to make for developers. Lets stop speculating about the future of Blastcore until we get a statement from OpticalSnare and be grateful for the wonderful mod he gave us ;).

Yeah sounds like the CPU is bogging down your system. This is to be expected under most circumstances in A3 since its very CPU heavy. How much does the fps drop? You could try to overclock your processor, the more space CPU power you have the better A3 will handle firefights. Besides that you might want to tweak your graphics settings. Lower settings that take up CPU power, mainly view distance. Also changing shadow quality higher changes shadow rendering method from stencil shadows(CPU) to shadow maps(GPU).

To sum it up GTA V was limited by hardware, while Arma 3 is limited by the amount of programmers not the hardware :( . Preformance wise DaRKL3AD3R sugesstion of switching from stencil shadows to shadow maps seems resonable, because it will take the load from the CPU and transfer it to the more powerfull GPU. Secondly it is already implemented, just not used for all objects. I think what GTA V is doing is giving priority to important objects like large buildings so that they are rendered at large distances. The amount of shadows is relatively small and the quality is limited. But that doesent really matter when you are far away. At the moment it seems A3 is only drawing shadows in relation to the shadow draw distance option. It would help a great deal if object shadows was prioritized based on their importance in the landscape and their distance to the player :D .

I really would not be worried. Its most likely a false positive from anti virus. The mirror is not what determines if you get a virus or not, the file you download is. Personally if would get it from armaholic: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=23868 :)

Dropbox links are dead. The ones on armaholic works though. Seeing as the file is pretty big, you might consider making torrent download an option. I have found it faster and more reliable when downloading large mods like forgotten hope 2 for bf2. Anyways thanks for a great mod :) .

I pretty much agree with smurf on all counts. I never got into vanilla arma 2 MP, mainly because of the clunky squad system. PR:A2 solution is simple and works and is intuitive, allowing new players to get a taste of how playing arma should feel. To our luck we have tactical battefield and PR:A3 is in the makings. But you can't help but think a lot of potential new players give up on MP before the really have tried it.