Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Reb1rth.

ARMA III.

Recommended Posts

so why do people think that looks good? looks like arna II

ARMA II still looks great anyway. :)

 

true enough :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any of that is in-game except the side-on double chopper shot... and even that doesn't look right.

I think he was kidding, well, I hope. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any of that is in-game except the side-on double chopper shot... and even that doesn't look right.

:( Yeah I think your right. The soldier movements are too fluid and real. Unless they hired those motion capture dudes from avatar for the whole game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

E3 brought walkthroughs of ARMA 3.

Part 1

 

Part 2

 

Part 3

 

Looks good but for newcomers they'll probably think this is some sort of crysis wannabe.

Edited by Mr.Twinkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

something about the fluidity of movement doesn't look right in the first video, like when I run in real life I don't shake my head around like its an earthquake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

something about the fluidity of movement doesn't look right in the first video, like when I run in real life I don't shake my head around like its an earthquake.

Most modern shooters have that now. Have a look at BF3's faultines or Homefront and you'll notice the rifles swinging a little and shaking as you move.

I don't think ARMA 3 will be bothered to make their gun holding really realistic cause they got bigger fish to fry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gun holding and running looks the same as ARMA II to me.

If I remember correctly the movement is based around the gun, unlike other games where the gun is pretty much connect to you head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Arma 2 you have a head on your shoulders, your body is actually to scale, bullets don't come out of the top of your skull like they do in cod/css etc.

 

Its kind of weird, I usually turn headbob off (yes, its a feature just like any other and it is completely removable) because it makes me feel sick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The graphics in the first video don't look nearly as good as the screenies at the beginning of the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny that you say that, because Arma 2 looks nearly as good as those screenies at the start of the thread, just the character models in the screenshots look better.

 

Animation/Ragdolls look better too.

 

In Arma 2 it was hard to tell if the enemy you were shooting at was hitting the deck or actually dying =/

Edited by NukeJockey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny that you say that, because Arma 2 looks nearly as good as those screenies at the start of the thread, just the character models in the screenshots look better.

They should just freakin optimize and tweak their engine instead of giving consumers a graphical hog based on an engine that is used to power super computers for the military's simulations.

 

Starcraft 2's engine is such a warm and cuddly engine that looks dang good detailed and yet its power consumption and requirements are so dear. Bless those Blizzard chaps.

Edited by Mr.Twinkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Its a shame, rather than going with a new engine, they just keep updating the original operation flashpoint engine.

 

The graphics are nothing to sneeze at after 3 generations of updates, but I still feel a new engine could make it look better without all the overheads, like the AI flogging the CPU so hard.

 

Posted Image

 

Posted Image

 

Posted Image

Edited by NukeJockey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Its a shame, rather than going with a new engine, they just keep updating the original operation flashpoint engine.

 

The graphics are nothing to sneeze at after 3 generations of updates, but I still feel a new engine could make it look better without all the overheads, like the AI flogging the CPU so hard.

 

Posted Image

 

Posted Image

 

Posted Image

Yeah CPU consumption is pretty alarming in the game.

Lovely comparison shots Nuke. :)

For some reason i find the soldier on the left in the last shot kinda funny with his face standing out from the rest.

Edited by Mr.Twinkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man the detail on the draw distance is jaw dropping in arma 2, can't wait to see what arma 3 is capable of. Those requirements released for ARMA 3 are minimum spec only, thats a 3ghz quad core and a 5770 or equivalent for minimum, I doubt anyone will be running it maxxed out any time soon.

 

Sometimes ARMA2 will run so god damn nice and look so pretty and other times it will just slow down to a crawl, I'm lucky enough to pull 60fps in most multiplayer modes and alot of singleplayer stuff, but there are still campaigns that flog it, like the PMC addon, I get between 25-40fps at the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interview popped up about the production of ARMA III.

 

The interview is a little over 15 minutes long and covers these questions:

 

How much will we notice it being 2025 on Lemnos? Is it just the military stuff or also Civ and misc stuff? Architecture and such.

Will BIS 'invent' some technology in the game or is it ALL based on existing tech?

Will it be better optimized than ARMA2? Or will we need a beast of a computer to make it look like the screens?

Are they going to bring over all of the features from ARMA2, new multiplayer modes?

Updated sound effects?

How do they feel about the the modifications made to ARMA 2 and did they feel compelled to bring any of those ideas to ARMA3?

Will there be a beta for players to test?

In some of the videos of test footage, will there be any vehicles for underwater action?

 

Edited by Mr.Twinkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the second part of the interview.

 

The interview is a little over 23 minutes long and covers these questions:

 

Is there only one map available on ArmA3 or will there be 2 like the previous games?

Can you confirm or reveal the exact factions in which will be available to play in ArmA3?

What are they calling the Kamokum? (The helicopter that looks like an Mi-28 with the rotors from a Ka-50)

Will the character animations be the same as ArmA2 or are there any plan's to update them?

Arma 2 and OA had limited (not fully functional) mod integration support; will Arma 3 see improvements in this area, and if so what particular improvements?

Do they plan on being able to take equipment off? because you cant be stealthy wearing flippers raiding the compound. We know about the weapon attachments.

 

Edited by Mr.Twinkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not overly excited about Arma 3, while Arma 2 was fun, the performance (network and computer) was just atrocious, really dampens the experience, that and they always lack polish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not overly excited about Arma 3, while Arma 2 was fun, the performance (network and computer) was just atrocious, really dampens the experience, that and they always lack polish.

Yeah me neither. Just thought I'll share it around in case anyone is.

 

I'll be sticking with ARMA 2 probably for 2 years after ARMA 3 is released. The mods will keep it fruity. Plus the system requirements will probably be an asshole of a hog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The textures in ARMA 2 are blistering bad. The mods made to replace/change the standard Bohemia Interactive objects had such significant difference in image quality. It's so darn noticeable.

Edited by Mr.Twinkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant summary of upcoming ARMA 3 features so far. Much less boring than the interviews i previously posted. :P

Edited by Mr.Twinkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The textures in ARMA 2 are blistering bad. The mods made to replace/change the standard Bohemia Interactive objects had such significant difference in image quality. It's so darn noticeable.

most games have there fair share of bad textures

arma 2 arrowhead (not the free version) is one of the few games that has very good ground textures

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The textures in ARMA 2 are blistering bad. The mods made to replace/change the standard Bohemia Interactive objects had such significant difference in image quality. It's so darn noticeable.

most games have there fair share of bad textures

arma 2 arrowhead (not the free version) is one of the few games that has very good ground textures

 

Yeah. Thank god for that. Simulations do need a nice geography presentation to be around in. Edited by Mr.Twinkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I found this.

GON:Can you tell us a bit more about what sort of system spec you're aiming for with ArmA III, and whether or not our readers should begin pricing some system upgrades?

Jay: Sure, at E3 we're releasing a newly revised set of minimum hardware specifications, but I’d be happy to share them with you now:

Minimum Specifications:

OS: Windows Vista SP2, Windows 7 SP1

CPU: Intel Dual-Core 2.4 GHz or AMD Dual-Core Athlon 2.5 GHz

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 8800GT or ATI Radeon HD 3830 or Intel HD Graphics 3000 with Shader Model 4 and 512 MB VRAM

RAM: 2 GB

HDD: 15 GB free space

DirectX®: 10

I think I expected more even for minimum specs...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×