Arma 3 VS Arma Reforger

[Ruieurope - Europa_Teles_BTR]

I think Reforger is better in all aspects but its missing alot in vanilla content and in mods.

What do you think?

[jbonesmd]

I have both and by far prefer A3 over Reforger just for the WS content alone. Yes, A3 is showing it's age but is far more expandable BECAUSE of the WS content. I have 3000+ hours on A3 and still play it. I assume you are aware that Reforger is just a platform/placeholder for what is supposed to eventually become A4 and may look much different once the final product emerges. That would be the best time to judge and compare the two.

[Shekelberg Goldmannstein]

reforger is fun for a moment on the multiplayer servers,but arma 3 has thousands of hours of content and will keep you entertained a lot longer, in terms of mechanics arma 3 has a lot more too,personally i'd definitely go with arma 3

[151]

Arma 3's game engine is too dated. The animation is poor and many basic functions like round in chambre and melee attacks are still lacking, because of the old game engine. And the game optimization has been bad since launch. I have updated my hardware for a few times already, yet the game still performs the same as it was a decade ago. Low FPS, lots of stutterings and lots of crashes. It's the workshop that's been keeping this game alive.

Reforger's engine is better. The animation is still clumsy but it's has already improved from Arma 3. Item and game world interaction feels more natural than that in Arma 3. But just as everyone says, it lacks content. No tank, no jets, no boats. All you get is one weapon per type and one set of uniform for each faction. The official server game mode is boring. Having only 2 platoons fighting on an entire island is absolutely a terrible idea.

I guess I'll just wait for Arma 4.

[jbonesmd]

Originally posted by 151:

Arma 3's game engine is too dated. The animation is poor and many basic functions like round in chambre and melee attacks are still lacking, because of the old game engine. And the game optimization has been bad since launch. I have updated my hardware for a few times already, yet the game still performs the same as it was a decade ago. Low FPS, lots of stutterings and lots of crashes. It's the workshop that's been keeping this game alive.

Reforger's engine is better. The animation is still clumsy but it's has already improved from Arma 3. Item and game world interaction feels more natural than that in Arma 3. But just as everyone says, it lacks content. No tank, no jets, no boats. All you get is one weapon per type and one set of uniform for each faction. The official server game mode is boring. Having only 2 platoons fighting on an entire island is absolutely a terrible idea.

I guess I'll just wait for Arma 4.

I tend to play SP most of the time in A3, and with my set up I can pull 75 fps with no problem ( I keep it capped at 75 and it usually stays pegged right there ) and it's ultra smooth on top of that. Glad to share my specs if anyone is curious to know.

[Shekelberg Goldmannstein]

Originally posted by jbonesmd:

Originally posted by 151:

Arma 3's game engine is too dated. The animation is poor and many basic functions like round in chambre and melee attacks are still lacking, because of the old game engine. And the game optimization has been bad since launch. I have updated my hardware for a few times already, yet the game still performs the same as it was a decade ago. Low FPS, lots of stutterings and lots of crashes. It's the workshop that's been keeping this game alive.

Reforger's engine is better. The animation is still clumsy but it's has already improved from Arma 3. Item and game world interaction feels more natural than that in Arma 3. But just as everyone says, it lacks content. No tank, no jets, no boats. All you get is one weapon per type and one set of uniform for each faction. The official server game mode is boring. Having only 2 platoons fighting on an entire island is absolutely a terrible idea.

I guess I'll just wait for Arma 4.

I tend to play SP most of the time in A3, and with my set up I can pull 75 fps with no problem ( I keep it capped at 75 and it usually stays pegged right there ) and it's ultra smooth on top of that. Glad to share my specs if anyone is curious to know.

nobody runs arma smoothly all the time,its not very taxing on your gpu but when it gets to big gunfights or god forbid vehicles and infantry engaging it has to calculate the physics for every shot,every piece of shrapnel that flies around,thats when it usually starts chugging along

most realistic shooters suffer from this problem though,squad and tarkov have this problem too,its not exclusive to arma. however arma is probably the worst offender due to the combined arms nature and realistic simulation of bullet/shrapnel physics

[stburr91]

Originally posted by Ruieurope - Europa_Teles_BTR:

I think Reforger is better in all aspects but its missing alot in vanilla content and in mods.

What do you think?

If you want to fanboy for reforger, take it over to the reforger forum.

Originally posted by 151:

I have updated my hardware for a few times already, yet the game still performs the same as it was a decade ago. Low FPS, lots of stutterings and lots of crashes. It's the workshop that's been keeping this game alive.

You should get a new PC.

I get about twice the fps that I was getting in A3 ten years ago. Also, you can count on one hand the number of times A3 crashed on me, and I've had the game since 2013, and have thousands of hours in it.

[151]

I have all my CPU, graphic card and RAM upgraded(gen12 i5, 4060, 16GB). And still, though it can reach up to 80+ FPS, there are sudden FPS drops. It's even worse to have frame drops than low FPS. I have over 3700 hours, and this issue simply is just annoying.

[aK]

not a fan of plastic graphics, arma 3 will live as long as plastic graphics aren't the norm.

[GigaByteWide]

From what I see in most forum discussions, we most likely won't get a very smooth frame rate with the way the old engine is for ARMA 3. No matter what PC specs someone may have, but that's just what I've seen others say in their opinions.

[HybridGrizzlyTrenchGun]

I prefer good ole Arma III. More content to play with, including mods.

[Jack]

Originally posted by 151:

Arma 3's game engine is too dated. The animation is poor and many basic functions like round in chambre and melee attacks are still lacking, because of the old game engine. And the game optimization has been bad since launch. I have updated my hardware for a few times already, yet the game still performs the same as it was a decade ago. Low FPS, lots of stutterings and lots of crashes. It's the workshop that's been keeping this game alive.

Reforger's engine is better. The animation is still clumsy but it's has already improved from Arma 3. Item and game world interaction feels more natural than that in Arma 3. But just as everyone says, it lacks content. No tank, no jets, no boats. All you get is one weapon per type and one set of uniform for each faction. The official server game mode is boring. Having only 2 platoons fighting on an entire island is absolutely a terrible idea.

I guess I'll just wait for Arma 4.

2027 is the announced date. so you've got a while.

[R3dAlert93]

Arma 3 better because you can play by yourself and I hope arma 4 has that aswell.

[CalicoJack]

Arma3 wins!

[[SGT]Vagrant]

Reforger is obviously the superior engine. It looks better, runs better, Arma 3's netcode was atrocious and its nice to be able to get into a game with 128 players and get FPS of 50+ at 4K.

That said, Arma 3 doesn't just have 13+ years of dev time invested into it, that is also 13+ years of collective man hours invested from the modding community and their developers as well, who have built Arma 3 up to what it is today. Which means, you can expect that we won't have any comparable flexibility for another 10+ years after the release of Reforger/ARMA4.

That gap feels very wide now. It will naturally improve over time, but until that time passes, its like watching water boil.

Right now I go back and forth between the frustration of Arma 3 just not performing the way I want a AAA milsim shooter to perform because of an outdated engine and old archaic systems, to similar frustrations for Reforger just not being feature complete. But I also understand that this is to be expected. I just hate that by the time that Arma 4 roles around and feels as complete as Arma 3 does, I'm going to be an old ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ dude, probably in my late 40s, early 50s. These wait times didn't seem to matter as a kid, but as life happens, and you become more exposed to how quickly things change as an adult, you realise that in 10 years.... life happens... and waiting up on video games you're excited about just doesn't have the same allure that it once had.

[Machiavelli]

not enough content. multiplayer-focused