ArmA 3 - Alpha release March 5th!!

Flogger23m said:
The game is set in the future. So, fictional weapons are in the game. Some real world, but with fictional modifications.

I would have preferred a contemporary setting or a 70-80s Cold War setting.
Click to expand...

How far in the future? Weapons aren't going to change/be replaced much unless they are new technology. So that's silly.
 
arr4ws said:
i got the alpha lite , and i have to say im impressed by it. I might have to grab the full alpha! flying the chopper is reaaaallly rewarding when you do it right.
Click to expand...

i'm a sucker for anything with Heli's. can't wait until they patch in attack heli's.
 
Spidey329 said:
How far in the future? Weapons aren't going to change/be replaced much unless they are new technology. So that's silly.
Click to expand...

2035? i think.

so 20+ years

i dont mind the weapons being future based aslong as they are presented realistically and have variety.

thats not to say i wouldnt mind more current weapons tho
 
It's been talked about by the devs, but most if not all of the technology and weapons in ArmA 3 are based on real-life prototypes or concepts that are only a few years from being a reality. It's not lasers and magical holograms and shit.
 
Tried the Alpha 3 Lite and I cannot get over the negative mouse acceleration. You can't do a 180 degree turn with a quick flick mouse movement.

Does the full alpha version act this way as well? I read a post that it does not, but I am not about to drop $30 to find out.
 
MavericK96 said:
It's been talked about by the devs, but most if not all of the technology and weapons in ArmA 3 are based on real-life prototypes or concepts that are only a few years from being a reality. It's not lasers and magical holograms and shit.
Click to expand...

Not exactly true. For example, one of the helicopters is clearly a kit-bash of various designs. The Mi-28 with cargo bay helicopter; if that still exists (from early screen shots over a year ago). Regardless of what it was, it was certainly not a functional prototype and was certainly not in development.

That being said, for the most part, it plays out (with the Alpha lite) similar to real world weapons/vehicles. Just boring to me, IMO. And not fitting for a simulator in my opinion. Tactics are often determined by individual weapon systems (for example, Germans in WWII based infantry around their MG-34/42s) so fictional equipment kills some of the realism.

Again its not horrible, but it just is not ideal to me.

I am more concerned about the following:

- No way to edit loadouts in the Mission Editor with a GUI. I thought that was a feature of ArmA 3.

- No easy quick to use measurement tool in the editor.

- Can't switch to a sidearm while moving. Automatically stops the player.

- Only one set of reload animations for all weapons.

- No topping off rounds in your firearms.

- Similar (and IMO) very clunky squad control menu.

- 3D mode is not in (or at least I can't find it).

- Grenade launcher selection key is still binded to the fire mode key.


A bunch of other complaints as well. Overall, there are still many improvements I really wanted to see in game that have not made it. Maybe some will by the release, but overall I am a bit disappointed so far.

They got movement, aiming and driving down but still have a way to go.
 
Again, it's Alpha, most of the features are not implemented yet. I mean, there's only like a dozen weapons or so and a handful of vehicles.

I'm guessing many if not all of those complaints will be addressed. Someone actually made a thread about the pistol swap thing and they're looking at fixing that. Not sure about the editor but it seems bare-bones to me next to ArmA 2's, so I'm guessing that's incomplete as well.

As for the futuristic/realism of the vehicles and stuff, I dunno, that's just what the developers said. Here's a thread (not devs but still) that shows some of the stuff:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?132745-Is-Arma-3-authentic
 
From what I can tell, setting Terrain Quality to High instead of Very High or Ultra gives a pretty good performance boost with very little visual difference (you can change it in the menu and see the change happen immediately, so you can tell what difference it makes). You could probably try bumping Object Quality down a notch from Ultra to Very High and not see much of a visual difference, either, though I didn't notice a massive performance boost from that so I left it at Ultra for now.

That, and I've got PIP disabled for now because it lags horribly in vehicles even at Low (which as far as I can tell just makes the view distance in the PIP less depending on the quality setting)

View distance set around 3500 with object VD around 2000. Most everything else at max settings.
 
MavericK96 said:
From what I can tell, setting Terrain Quality to High instead of Very High or Ultra gives a pretty good performance boost with very little visual difference (you can change it in the menu and see the change happen immediately, so you can tell what difference it makes). You could probably try bumping Object Quality down a notch from Ultra to Very High and not see much of a visual difference, either, though I didn't notice a massive performance boost from that so I left it at Ultra for now.

That, and I've got PIP disabled for now because it lags horribly in vehicles even at Low (which as far as I can tell just makes the view distance in the PIP less depending on the quality setting)

View distance set around 3500 with object VD around 2000. Most everything else at max settings.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I have to set it down to high though. Still, High looks rather good. Most of the graphical affects had little change on performance aside from terrian (amount of vegetation and grass).
 
Yeah that's what I said, set it to High. The only difference is a tiny amount of grass from what I can see.
 
gimp0 said:
Tried the Alpha 3 Lite and I cannot get over the negative mouse acceleration. You can't do a 180 degree turn with a quick flick mouse movement.

Does the full alpha version act this way as well? I read a post that it does not, but I am not about to drop $30 to find out.
Click to expand...

you never played a previous ARMA game did you? Its not supposed to be a twitch shooter, its a simulation.

But no, there is no issue with mouse movement in this version of ARMA and a lot of people on the forums are actually complaining that they made it too fast since they're used to (and prefer) the slower paced ARMA 1 feeling.

It feels just right for me, we finally have raw mouse input in this version so everything feels very predictable. There is an adjustable deadzone in the options and you want to make sure thats off.
 
wasteland is the best version of co-op. You're doing co-op missions with your buddies with the chance of someone else on an opposing faction trying to do the same mission at the same time and running into them, its great and requires a much higher skill level than running against the predictable aim bot AI.

If you haven't played ARMA 2 wasteland dont play the ARMA 3 version yet and expect to get a feel for it, the current version of wasteland in ARMA3 plays nothing like how it will play out once we get further into beta or release. There simply isnt enough base objects, stability or teamwork going on right now. There is no weapon or vehicle progression since only a few items are in, and the map we have kind of sucks compared to Chernarus.
 
VulcaN said:
you never played a previous ARMA game did you? Its not supposed to be a twitch shooter, its a simulation.

But no, there is no issue with mouse movement in this version of ARMA and a lot of people on the forums are actually complaining that they made it too fast since they're used to (and prefer) the slower paced ARMA 1 feeling.

It feels just right for me, we finally have raw mouse input in this version so everything feels very predictable. There is an adjustable deadzone in the options and you want to make sure thats off.
Click to expand...

Yes, make sure the aiming deadzone is turned off, its borked right now, it will give you negative mouse acceleration.
 
VulcaN said:
you never played a previous ARMA game did you? Its not supposed to be a twitch shooter, its a simulation.

But no, there is no issue with mouse movement in this version of ARMA and a lot of people on the forums are actually complaining that they made it too fast since they're used to (and prefer) the slower paced ARMA 1 feeling.

It feels just right for me, we finally have raw mouse input in this version so everything feels very predictable. There is an adjustable deadzone in the options and you want to make sure thats off.
Click to expand...

I understand it is a sim, but negative mouse acceleration is a different beast.

Played DayZ a little and just kind of dealt with the poor mouse performance. I am a low sensitivity player so I need to be able to move the mouse quickly across my mouse pad to do a 180 vs a steady paced movement that high sensitivity players can do.

Are you playing the lite version or the full paid alpha?

This is what I am referring to, but it happens in ARMA 3 Lite as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JX9dJB4eCM4
 
VulcaN said:
wasteland is the best version of co-op. You're doing co-op missions with your buddies with the chance of someone else on an opposing faction trying to do the same mission at the same time and running into them, its great and requires a much higher skill level than running against the predictable aim bot AI.

If you haven't played ARMA 2 wasteland dont play the ARMA 3 version yet and expect to get a feel for it, the current version of wasteland in ARMA3 plays nothing like how it will play out once we get further into beta or release. There simply isnt enough base objects, stability or teamwork going on right now. There is no weapon or vehicle progression since only a few items are in, and the map we have kind of sucks compared to Chernarus.
Click to expand...

The wastelands floating around are fluff.
Smatra's wasteland is on its way
 
gimp0 said:
I understand it is a sim, but negative mouse acceleration is a different beast.

Played DayZ a little and just kind of dealt with the poor mouse performance. I am a low sensitivity player so I need to be able to move the mouse quickly across my mouse pad to do a 180 vs a steady paced movement that high sensitivity players can do.

Are you playing the lite version or the full paid alpha?

This is what I am referring to, but it happens in ARMA 3 Lite as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JX9dJB4eCM4
Click to expand...

dyslexi says that they removed negative acceleration, he even posted a video as proof, maybe he's not using a truly low sensitivity after all :p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTSXRjvQiOg
 
I haven't noticed any weirdness in the mouse movement in ArmA 3. ArmA 2 definitely had some issues but I haven't seen that yet in A3.

Overall A3 control is WAY tighter and more responsive than A2.
 
Actually that video came out on the 21st on the ArmA 3 channel (I guess they are commissioning Dyslexci to make them exclusive for them for a number of days), but thanks for posting it!
 
What AMD drivers is everyone using? I am having troubles even loading into an MP game with CFX 6950s :/
 
Bumping this thread to redress some of my criticism regarding arma III, mainly the voice and radio chatter. Turns out it's much better than it's predecessors. :D

So my friend from the internetz borrowed me a copy of ArmA II, so I could get a better feel for the series. So right off the bat during the training course I notice the voice acting was a little off. There's a black instructor who sounds like some white kid from Nebraska, and all the speeches sounds very generic in general, like they are reading from a script quite obviously. During the chopper ride into the first mission it seems to get worse, much worse! Thinking ok, whatever, not that big a deal, this's a tac sim not a story driven fps.

Then the radio chatter starts in and now I'm really thinking wtf!!! It sounds like robots who got their programing all fouled up. I gotta turn the volume way down because it just feels really embarrassing and I don't want people to think I'm retarded should they hear me playing it lol.

How could the dev's release it like this? Did they run out of time or funding?...or just don't care?
 
horse said:
Bumping this thread to redress some of my criticism regarding arma III, mainly the voice and radio chatter. Turns out it's much better than it's predecessors. :D

So my friend from the internetz borrowed me a copy of ArmA II, so I could get a better feel for the series. So right off the bat during the training course I notice the voice acting was a little off. There's a black instructor who sounds like some white kid from Nebraska, and all the speeches sounds very generic in general, like they are reading from a script quite obviously. During the chopper ride into the first mission it seems to get worse, much worse! Thinking ok, whatever, not that big a deal, this's a tac sim not a story driven fps.

Then the radio chatter starts in and now I'm really thinking wtf!!! It sounds like robots who got their programing all fouled up. I gotta turn the volume way down because it just feels really embarrassing and I don't want people to think I'm retarded should they hear me playing it lol.

How could the dev's release it like this? Did they run out of time or funding?...or just don't care?
Click to expand...

OpFlashpoint (the original) had the same bad voice stuff. It is a detraction from the series, as it can be annoying.

Soldier .. five .. o'clock ..
Rifleman .. six .. o'clock

It is something that might be better off if outsourced to an audio studio that specializes in the stuff (Ie: GPS voices, etc.). The main issue I found with the earlier titles is spacing between the words (obviously patched from multiple sound files), and the lack of any human tone to the voice. It's a monotone like sound, lacking any urgency, stress, etc. Like an old school text-to-speech system.

BF3 did a decent job of it (besides the crappy comm-rose). Surprisingly .. but they also didn't drill down to the soldier type, which seems unnecessary (in a firefight, can you really tell one soldier from another? Besides a guy aiming an RPG ..).
 
My frame rates drop down when looking in certain areas (no other units on the map) - from 50 to 22 or so. Graphic options are mostly at high, with some turned to medium at 1920. I am running a GTX 670 PE and AMD 965.

I know this game is CPU based but the performance drop seems a bit much to me. It might just be the fact that the game is alpha, though if someone has a faster CPU and a similar GPU what kind of performance do you get? Do you see drops down to the 20s when looking in the distance?
 
Spidey329 said:
OpFlashpoint (the original) had the same bad voice stuff. It is a detraction from the series, as it can be annoying.
Click to expand...

Only purpose of the radio is to give straight to the point information. Play any other sim (for example even the latest dcs flight sim) and you will get the same type of robotic voices. You can complain about it but you're not always in a combat situation like in bf3 and voices that are constantly screaming in desperation for no reason would be far more annoying and out of place.
 
yourgrandma said:
Only purpose of the radio is to give straight to the point information. Play any other sim (for example even the latest dcs flight sim) and you will get the same type of robotic voices. You can complain about it but you're not always in a combat situation like in bf3 and voices that are constantly screaming in desperation for no reason would be far more annoying and out of place.
Click to expand...

It would seem that according to bf3, the radio is used to do two things...tell me what point is taken' and remind me that I'm getting fucked in the ass.
 
Droc said:
It would seem that according to bf3, the radio is used to do two things...tell me what point is taken' and remind me that I'm getting fucked in the ass.
Click to expand...

And announce to nearby enemies your getting fucked in the ass.
 
It doesn't run well pretty much regardless right now. Some major optimization issues where you will get low CPU and GPU usage and low framerates to go along with it.

ArmA 2 had (has) the same problem but it's not nearly as bad. The tracker with the issue has like 1500+ votes on it...hopefully they are working hard on it.
 
MavericK96 said:
It doesn't run well pretty much regardless right now. Some major optimization issues where you will get low CPU and GPU usage and low framerates to go along with it.

ArmA 2 had (has) the same problem but it's not nearly as bad. The tracker with the issue has like 1500+ votes on it...hopefully they are working hard on it.
Click to expand...

i think you are playing a diferent game mate because i have same cpu as you and this game runs brilliantly!

better then arma 2
 
Odd, runs way worse than ArmA 2 for me. *shrug* And that's even on way lower view distance (~2500 or so in ArmA 3 versus 3600 in ArmA 2).
 
yourgrandma said:
Only purpose of the radio is to give straight to the point information. Play any other sim (for example even the latest dcs flight sim) and you will get the same type of robotic voices. You can complain about it but you're not always in a combat situation like in bf3 and voices that are constantly screaming in desperation for no reason would be far more annoying and out of place.
Click to expand...

Well, yes. But that is where a good sound engineer comes in. You can take out the combat urgency and still have quality voices. The ones they use are robotic and detract from all situations. By no means am I saying to have screaming wounded soldiers every time.

If they wanted to nail the sim part of it, they'd add some logic as to if the person is/should be stressed. Record different types (night/stealth-whisper, calm, urgent, amped, wounded, underfire) of the same recordings and then the system would utilize the proper chain of recordings.

Ie: - someone who is underfire is using the stressed/urgent subset.
- someone who wwas underfire 5minutes ago uses the amped subset (adrenaline).

R6 (original) had a well thought stress calculation for a lot of things. Heck, some would just go berzerk.
 
I played 6 hours of arma3 online this week and I havent gone more then 20min without encountering hackers. Not just aimbotters, but rage hackers that make you go invisible, teleport you around and cover the screen with a banner.
 
MavericK96 said:
It doesn't run well pretty much regardless right now. Some major optimization issues where you will get low CPU and GPU usage and low framerates to go along with it.

ArmA 2 had (has) the same problem but it's not nearly as bad. The tracker with the issue has like 1500+ votes on it...hopefully they are working hard on it.
Click to expand...

Good. I hope it will get better as it nears release so it is playable on my AMD 965. Going to upgrade it soon, but I would like to play ArmA 3 on this CPU regardless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top