low fps / high end PC spec time scale?

[Chok3^]

right i know many people have this problem as do i when in single player the game is so smooth and lovely to play but with MP its just GG i cant evern kill a AI driver a truck without hitting a tree .


but we all know about this all i want to know is have the DEVS started to evern look at this? is there a time scale on when this is gunna to be fixed? because tbh i payed for Arma 3 to play MP not single player and its starting to get boring playing with AI

or is this just another bug thats gunna take months and months to fix evern know there is such a high number or people with problems?

i did do a little searching to see if they evern accept there is an issue but could not find one nor could a find a fix or a time scale for a fix any idea's?

[kurva anyátok 天島]

Arma 3 is interesting graphically, as it is CPU-intensive and GPU-intensive. After a while, it takes its toll on your system.

[Chok3^]

Ursprungligen skrivet av redivider:

so what part of the engine are you talking about? the engine is what allows gameplay to be made and it decides waht kind of content the game can have. Im trying to give back argumets because you started with planetside 2 and vehicles. Vehicles sound as content to me in some way. And as I am saying, those engines cannot run that big amounts of "stuff", but if you believe so, show me some examples please, there is no need to insult.

I just thought of another one - elder scrolls for example. Whats really wierd in that game is sure daggerfall has the map which is the size of England, but in those games they use tricks again. The world is not actually simulated, only the things 100m around you are. Otherwise everything is in "sleep mode". Ex: that blacksmith will only be doing 3 things in his life for ever and ever, that is: go bash that hammer at a sword, go to sleep at a specific time, go eat. I remember observing that in oblivion with fast travel.

When you came into a town, NPCS started doing their actions whatever they were at the specific time. So a guard always started near a gate and started patrolling around the town. As you fast-travel there, he would always "spawn" at the gate and start to patrol, always, he was scripted to do that. So in that regard, the game hasnt "advanced" since 199x aswell. Why? Because baldurs gate(old game based on DnD tabletop) had the same ♥♥♥♥. When you went to the tavern there would always be some guys in there chatting around, so its not actually as random and dynamic as you think. Its all tricks and magix :D. Like for example: You will never see the stormcloaks attack and take an imperial city or whatever in skyrim unless those things are scripted (like that oblivion gate opening in TES 5 in that town starting on K, i forgot the name, oh yeah Kvatch). So the game is not actually "using" the whole world and its not actually "alive" its just based on your doings, and how you manipulate it (complete a quest to save a magican for example, then he becomes available to give you some spells). Its just stagnat.

But in arma if you give AI orders in the editor to just move to a position they will engage enemies on the way. And you can put those "enemis" around wherever you want and give them waypoints aswell. And the GAME WONT GIVE A ♥♥♥♥ IF YOU ARE THERE OR NOT they will start fighting. And it will be just as "realtime" as anywhere else on the map. And that takes resources and thats why games like skyrim dont do that. TES actually never calculates/renders/simulates/wahtever events that are not happening in your vicinity. They think those are irrelevant things that dont add anything to the game, so they "optimize" it by taking them away. In my opinion it adds to the game.

But hey, skyrim is a typicall "god" game where you become an allmighty ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and can kill everything and the faith of the world is in your hands and whatever blah blah... Meh I dont even know what we are debating about here, but whatever floats your boat I guess, go play planetside 2 if you like it

btw u a ARMA 3 developer? no?


just wona know why u have ur face so far up there arse its unreal the game is badly made and tbh the fact that arma 3 didnt sort this fps lagg issuie befor releaseing Beta tells me one thing they just want there money!


i made this thread for people to reply to my Questrion if people know of any deevlopers reply and all u have done is troll everyone thats had a bad word to say about the subject


and tbh the simple fact that no DEVS reply or have evern made a deal about trying to deal with the mass numbers of people saying there is a problem just makes me think its not gunna get fixed


p.s dont give me this oh its a beta bla bla bla BS cos u please EXPLAIN one game that when was alptha to beta with such BAD playgame?


the hole point in a beta is to iron out bugs and test servers etc not to rewrite the game its just gunna be one of there 1/2 a game on release jobbys

[Zlokob]

you guys are loosing it. at the same time it is and it is not to blame it on alpha/beta state of game. i mean do you know any other game with huge maps and abilities so high. this game needs to be much optimized to run smooth, if it has cod size of maps and abilities it would run perfectly on most of pcs. and game is still in progress, so be patient. we will see what is to come. there is lots of complaints on performance, so i hope developers will listen and do at least a bit about it.

[redivider]

No sadly I am not a dev, also im not saing "this is beta OH MA GAWD!". What my point is that this "series" (from OFP to arma) has always been like that due to VBS. You realize arma is basically a more "mainstreamed" VBS right? And now tell me why the price tag on VBS is like 3 digit number while every other "popular" game is 2 digit...

What my point is, is that this game is DIFFERENT and you WONT be able to run it as easily as some other because it just isnt as similar as you might think.

You are right about the devs not wanting to reply, but we have had this kinds of problems since OFP days so im not sure why they dont want to fix their code to be honest. But IMO there is no reason to start from scrach due to all the time they have spent on this engine and it does what its supposed to do really, just that people dont get 60 fps and cry out loud. The point is that its meant to be like that to conserve longevity of the game. As time passes and you get better hardware, you ramp up the settings...

This is a sandbox that has so many things coded in that you cant even imagine, so i can see why performance is so mediocore.

Generally, games put as high GFX as possible to achieve with up-to-date hardware. BUT guess what, you could put almost CGI quality graphics that noone or almost noone would be able to run, and later on (10 years maybe) the majority of the people will be able to run it on much higher settings. This is kinda what arma is, atleast how I think of it (ofc it doesnt have near CGI quallity gfx but IMO its much better then bf3 which just has tons of filters, blur, bloom, glow, lens flare, blue-orange contrast and that stuff, and I actually have bf3 lol, it took me a while to see that, all those "optimizations"). If you actually go back and watch some cinematics in some games or something you will see that thats what games are today in REALTIME; check this out for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyS17KRo_aA

You see what my point is? Rendering that took some time for sure, nowadays I am pretty sure we can render things like that in REALTIME! How awsome eh? ;)

Anyways, they have done quite a bit already because arma3 runs better then A2 on my machine for some reason, lets just hope they keep optimizing the thing, so that people stop crying.

I have a feeling that performance wont improve much in the release version (because betas are mostly released versions with missing content and a few "irrelevant" features) but seems like they really have to do something about it.

You have to take everything with a pinch of salt tho as I am a fanboy I guess (been following BI since 2000). But I try my best to argument and give reasons why I think something is good or not good.

[redivider]

And I dont think they just want money with this product, they have VBS and they rent their movement tracking stuff etc.... The whole minecraft model means they want to get more people into the game, not money.

But at the end ofc they want money lol, nobody works for free, would you waste your time writing loads of lines of code, planning it all and then just release it as a torrent or something? Only if you want some new people to see your work, not to get money.

Also you should take this fact into consideration: What if it CANT BE fixed? what if you just need a badass pc to play such a huge game? People are saying OH MA GAWD FIX THIS GAME, MAKE MY PC PLAYS THIS PL0X, maybe there is nothing to fix? maybe...

[Eternalis]

You should talk with yourself, don't worry, that'll change nothing. It seems like you never read what other people say.
And btw, if we need GPU AND CPU from 2023 to run ARMA3, there is obvioulsly no problems with this engine. Thanks for the good laugh, please go ahed and answer me.

[redivider]

Well, im trying to get something together, so many people hating arma3

[Drefus]

Lots of posts on this issue

[white]

The issue is not optimzation or that the game has huge maps, no matter the size of the ingame map, the game does not scale with multicores at all, the game was made for dual core and havent changed. theres is 1 main thread and 1 main AI thread, the other threads arent even worht mentioning since they barely need a third core. turn off your excess cores and you will notice no performance drop. Not to mention the game being 32bits and streamign off your hard drive intead of using your RAM properly. This has nothing to do with optimization, people already complained about this for years on ArmA 2. This is a design choice made for the first ArmA and it won´t change in beta or after launch because to change this would be to break the game. This is exactly the sort of issue that shouldve been addressed in alpha or before but there were too many fanboys defending BIS while sure that they would "fix" this for them to take this seriously. wake up, they won´t, that´s the fault of everyone defending them believing they will eventually fix this, and why they are silent.

This is a rushed launch, it´s arma 2 with new dx support and some new content. Stop being in denial.

And for you to wake up, there are recommended settings to buy this game, and they are a clear lie to lure new buyers, unless this game was made solely for single player with a dozen AI.

[redivider]

Well, im just trying to help people, the game works fine for me and uses all 6 cores, tho 1 is like 60% others 30%, seems normal for games, crysis 2 was the same, so was every other game. Most games have that because of consoles, theyre all coded for 2 cores kinda...

Yes its arma 2 with new dx and content. Arma 2 was arma 1 with new gfx and content, arma1 was new OFP cold war crisis + resisitance... Its a game series, ofc their all similar, what did you expect?

The recommended settings are a lie tho :D agreed

Feeling like a "rushed" product? I dont think so. Its the first one in the series which actually has a feedback tracker, and was available before completion of development. Theyre trying something new. Theyre learning. Thats my opinion

[Addiction]

BattleGuns came out with a solution. Your welcome! http://www.battleguns.net/forum/m/7737561/viewthread/6153624-arma-3-cpu-optimization-low-fps-fix

[Ragequit Inc.]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Addiction:

BattleGuns came out with a solution. Your welcome! http://www.battleguns.net/forum/m/7737561/viewthread/6153624-arma-3-cpu-optimization-low-fps-fix

Everyone who has googled for "arma 3 fps tweak" or similar has found that. And it doesn't do ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

[Junkz]

stay away from mass co-op for now and play smaller co-op missions.

Personally i find the small co-op missions more fun than the mass co-op's

[jaikens19]

i have a gtx titan and i am havinbg some issues as well and i also have an i7 3770k so i think i should be good

[v4vDrJoker]

Biggest increase for me came from adjusting my draw frames ahead setting in the Nvidia control panel to 1.... just my 2cents. Worked wonders for me...