This game runs terrible on a high end.

[WolfPax]

Multiplayer part of arma 3 is full of fps drops. Seems like the engine isnt great.
this game can't handle large scale modes despite having them anyways?

performance is #1 for me, and this game
Performs BAD on my High End PC

SPECS: 4080, i9-13900K. SSD, 5200 MHZ DDR5 total on 4 sicks

its hard to enjoy the experience
this game offers when you have to experience it in a poor manner.

i already jumped through numerous hoops and guides anymore to get it to run good but to no avail. I tried everything short of sticking the entire game in a giant ramdisk.

ive told some arma 3 players and they did confirm its an engine issue.

A shame my expectations got crushed, was hoping for good.
i hate bashing this game because it could be my favorite of all time.

[TacticalMetalhead]

You can blame performance on the server owners / mission makers. They are the #1 cause of good or bad performance. Your rig and settings play a big part of course, and there are plenty of things you can do to increase FPS. But overall, its the server owner / mission maker who influences FPS the most.

[WolfPax]

Originally posted by TacticalMetalhead:

You can blame performance on the server owners / mission makers. They are the #1 cause of good or bad performance. Your rig and settings play a big part of course, and there are plenty of things you can do to increase FPS. But overall, its the server owner / mission maker who influences FPS the most.

i tried so many servers, the performance is practically the same.
im not one to bare 30 fps gameplay,

this game has such good potiential for me, but i personally don't wanna bare through bad performance

[Koko]

Originally posted by TacticalMetalhead:

You can blame performance on the server owners / mission makers. They are the #1 cause of good or bad performance. Your rig and settings play a big part of course, and there are plenty of things you can do to increase FPS. But overall, its the server owner / mission maker who influences FPS the most.

Yeah a lot of that can come from excessive AI and a metric ♥♥♥♥ load of scripts. There are so many ways to mitigate it but a lot of mission makers & zeuses tend to be a bit overzealous even for those solutions. You can easily get really cool scenarios at 70+ fps (crazy numbers I know), but people want as much ♥♥♥♥ happening as possible even if it runs like dog water.

[BloodyMystik™]

Originally posted by WolfPaxHD:

Originally posted by TacticalMetalhead:

You can blame performance on the server owners / mission makers. They are the #1 cause of good or bad performance. Your rig and settings play a big part of course, and there are plenty of things you can do to increase FPS. But overall, its the server owner / mission maker who influences FPS the most.

i tried so many servers, the performance is practically the same.
im not one to bare 30 fps gameplay,

this game has such good potiential for me, but i personally don't wanna bare through bad performance

Constant 30 FPS not bad for Arma
join our community our frame are pretty good during events.
Like he said rig plays a big part of it. https://discord.gg/7KyhTYtSE6
Give us a try before throwing the towel.

[WolfPax]

Originally posted by BloodyMystik™:

Originally posted by WolfPaxHD:

i tried so many servers, the performance is practically the same.
im not one to bare 30 fps gameplay,

this game has such good potiential for me, but i personally don't wanna bare through bad performance

Constant 30 FPS not bad for Arma
join our community our frame are pretty good during events.
Like he said rig plays a big part of it. https://discord.gg/7KyhTYtSE6
Give us a try before throwing the towel.

30 fps is bad in 2024, i want a 60 and above since its also a standard for high motion content (aka videogames)

also i mentioned im on a pretty expensive rig.
im running a 4080 gpu and a I9 CPU. if the game is struggling on those specs
then im throwing the towel nonetheless

i brought a PC to move on from the 30 fps console era..

[|H|H| Fr3ddi3]

No one says we are happy with the performance of the game or all the bugs either, we just put up with the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and enjoy the experience regardless. You don't ... well within your right ... no one needs to hear about it though, it is never going to change either so put up with it and play on or don't and go do something else.

[WolfPax]

Originally posted by |H|H| Fr3ddi3:

No one says we are happy with the performance of the game or all the bugs either, we just put up with the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and enjoy the experience regardless. You don't ... well within your right ... no one needs to hear about it though, it is never going to change either so put up with it and play on or don't and go do something else.

theres a forum for a reason, ill post if i feel like it i couldn't care less if they don't wanna hear about it. im not catering to their feelings.

if they wanna stick up mediocrity, then their well within their right to easily ignore my post.

[stburr91]

Originally posted by WolfPaxHD:

30 fps is bad in 2024, i want a 60 and above....

Then you didn't do your research, so this is on you, not the game.

[|H|H| Fr3ddi3]

Originally posted by WolfPaxHD:

Originally posted by |H|H| Fr3ddi3:

No one says we are happy with the performance of the game or all the bugs either, we just put up with the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and enjoy the experience regardless. You don't ... well within your right ... no one needs to hear about it though, it is never going to change either so put up with it and play on or don't and go do something else.

theres a forum for a reason, ill post if i feel like it i couldn't care less if they don't wanna hear about it. im not catering to their feelings.

if they wanna stick up mediocrity, then their well within their right to easily ignore my post.

I'm saying it because life is short and it's a total waste of time cause it's literally never gonna change, it's man shouts at cloud, but you do you.

[WolfPax]

Originally posted by stburr91:

Originally posted by WolfPaxHD:

30 fps is bad in 2024, i want a 60 and above....

Then you didn't do your research, so this is on you, not the game.

I Like how you cherry pick that one statement out my whole post just to fit your narrative. It was exactly detailing how the games at fault

tvs are 60 hz minimium and 60 fps is the new minimium standard

None of the game reviews detailed bad performance because they are old and the new ones are literally hidden by steam.

So yes i did do research its called reading reviews and using google. Most of these were bias accounts anyway from diehard fans

When i buy a game i expect it to run good especially on a high end computer.

[WolfPax]

Originally posted by |H|H| Fr3ddi3:

Originally posted by WolfPaxHD:

theres a forum for a reason, ill post if i feel like it i couldn't care less if they don't wanna hear about it. im not catering to their feelings.

if they wanna stick up mediocrity, then their well within their right to easily ignore my post.

I'm saying it because life is short and it's a total waste of time cause it's literally never gonna change, it's man shouts at cloud, but you do you.

Life may be short, but it's certainly not meant for cowardly surrender to the mediorce status quo, sure it wont change for arma 3
(despite soon to get a creator DLC). But it can for other games.

You can still indeed strive for change in any other place, waste of time or not.

[|H|H| Fr3ddi3]

Originally posted by WolfPaxHD:

Originally posted by |H|H| Fr3ddi3:

I'm saying it because life is short and it's a total waste of time cause it's literally never gonna change, it's man shouts at cloud, but you do you.

Life may be short, but it's certainly not meant for cowardly surrender to the mediorce status quo, sure it wont change for arma 3
(despite soon to get a creator DLC). But it can for other games.

You can still indeed strive for change in any other place, waste of time or not.

You wanna elicit change? go to ARMA reforger and demand it for ARMA 4 instead, far more worthy of your time since it might actually make a difference. But what ever, you do you i'm out.

[stburr91]

Originally posted by |H|H| Fr3ddi3:

Originally posted by WolfPaxHD:

Life may be short, but it's certainly not meant for cowardly surrender to the mediorce status quo, sure it wont change for arma 3
(despite soon to get a creator DLC). But it can for other games.

You can still indeed strive for change in any other place, waste of time or not.

You wanna elicit change? go to ARMA reforger and demand it for ARMA 4 instead, far more worthy of your time since it might actually make a difference. But what ever, you do you i'm out.

Again, you clearly didn't do any research on the Arma series.

If you understood what Arma is, you would understand the absurdity of demanding an Arma game get a minimum of 60 fps.

Clearly the Arma series is not for you, don't "waste" your money on any future Arma games.

[WolfPax]

Originally posted by stburr91:

Originally posted by |H|H| Fr3ddi3:

You wanna elicit change? go to ARMA reforger and demand it for ARMA 4 instead, far more worthy of your time since it might actually make a difference. But what ever, you do you i'm out.

Again, you clearly didn't do any research on the Arma series.

If you understood what Arma is, you would understand the absurdity of demanding an Arma game get a minimum of 60 fps.

Clearly the Arma series is not for you, don't "waste" your money on any future Arma games.

Arma is renowned for its realism and simulation aspects, but that doesn't mean players should just accept subpar performance as some kind of badge of honor. Demanding a minimum of 60 fps isn't absurd; it's a basic expectation in this day and age, especially considering the hardware capabilities and the standard set by other games in the market.
Smooth gameplay isn't some far-fetched dream, its not a elitist luxury. either

consumers have every right to voice their opinions and expectations, just because someone doesn't share your exact opinion on a game doesn't mean they haven't done their research. People have different preferences, expectations, and standards. shocking i know.

demanding better optimization and performance doesn't equate to not understanding the essence of the game. It's called progress, something the Arma series could certainly benefit from.

It's not too much to ask for a game to run smoothly, especially when it's not some indie title cooked up in a garage but a product of a reputed franchise, seriously what where they thinking making the engine single cored, such a dumb company.

TLDR: Before patronizing someone about understanding a game series, consider valid reasons behind performance demands. Expecting smooth gameplay isn't absurd—it's reasonable. Blindly accepting mediocrity isn't commendable. Demand improvement, not complacency. If you can't grasp that, maybe PC Gaming isn't for you either, don't bother wasting money on new parts :)

[stburr91]

Originally posted by WolfPaxHD:

Originally posted by stburr91:

Again, you clearly didn't do any research on the Arma series.

If you understood what Arma is, you would understand the absurdity of demanding an Arma game get a minimum of 60 fps.

Clearly the Arma series is not for you, don't "waste" your money on any future Arma games.

Arma is renowned for its realism and simulation aspects, but that doesn't mean players should just accept subpar performance as some kind of badge of honor. Demanding a minimum of 60 fps isn't absurd; it's a basic expectation in this day and age, especially considering the hardware capabilities and the standard set by other games in the market.
Smooth gameplay isn't some far-fetched dream, its not a elitist luxury. either

consumers have every right to voice their opinions and expectations, just because someone doesn't share your exact opinion on a game doesn't mean they haven't done their research. People have different preferences, expectations, and standards. shocking i know.

demanding better optimization and performance doesn't equate to not understanding the essence of the game. It's called progress, something the Arma series could certainly benefit from.

It's not too much to ask for a game to run smoothly, especially when it's not some indie title cooked up in a garage but a product of a reputed franchise, seriously what where they thinking making the engine single cored, such a dumb company.

TLDR: Before patronizing someone about understanding a game series, consider valid reasons behind performance demands. Expecting smooth gameplay isn't absurd—it's reasonable. Blindly accepting mediocrity isn't commendable. Demand improvement, not complacency. If you can't grasp that, maybe PC Gaming isn't for you either, don't bother wasting money on new parts :)

You seem to fail to understand what it takes for games to get a minimum of 60 fps. It requires a very rigid set of guardrails, and everything the game does has to fit within those guardrails. If you put such guardrails on an Arma game, it will fail to be an Arma game.

Heck, reforger isn't popular with most Arma players because it's so limited in what it can do, that it isn't viewed as a true Arma game. Reforger can't maintain 60 fps, and oftentimes doesn't even get 60 fps.

What Arma players demand is that the game do all the things players expect an Arma game to do, and then just hope that the fps is playable.