• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Arma 3 announced

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Markbnj said:
Wait, what's the deal here? I see an Arma III Alpha on Steam for $32.99. Then I read here about alpha invites. Confused is me. Are people paying $32.99 to test an alpha?
Click to expand...

You are preordering the game at a discount, and as a bonus you get to play with the Alpha and Beta.
 
Also turn off post processing to stop it looking cinematic and slow mo/ fuzzy weird while incurring performance hit.
 
Jacky60 said:
Also turn off post processing to stop it looking cinematic and slow mo/ fuzzy weird while incurring performance hit.
Click to expand...

Yup, post-processing still appears to do nothing other than make your screen blurry. Best to keep it turned off.

Midwayman said:
I've been waiting for this for a long time. Played BF2 hardcore, bf3 hardcore, realism mods etc and been frustrated with how twitch based they still are instead of rewarding good tactics. Never really could get into arma II with the ancient graphics though. Nice to finally see a modern update.
Click to expand...

In what universe does ARMA II have "ancient" graphics? 😵
 
Midwayman said:
Ancient is a bit of a hyperbole. Though it is way behind the curve compared to BF3, COD, etc.
Click to expand...

ARMA 2 is from 2009.
Same year as BF2 (actually BEFORE BF2)...so the comparsion should be:

ARMA2 <-> BF2
ARMA3 <-> BF3



No you migth wanna edit your post a bit 😉
 
I just bought it, even though I've never played ARMA 2. Oh well, all the videos looked awesome. My only question is, how hard is it to find people who also play this game on a large enough scale?
 
Lonbjerg said:
ARMA 2 is from 2009.
Same year as BF2 (actually BEFORE BF2)...so the comparsion should be:

ARMA2 <-> BF2
ARMA3 <-> BF3

No you migth wanna edit your post a bit 😉
Click to expand...

You might as well edit yours. Battlefield 2 came out in 2005. 2 years before ARMA:Armed Assault, and 4 years before ARMA2 .....
 
Last edited:
LessThanDan said:
No, people are paying $32.00 for alpha access, and beta access, and the full game (when it releases).

They're using a "Minecraft-style" business model. If you support the developers by pre-ordering the game early, you pay a discounted price as a reward (in this case, $32) and you get all future versions of the game, including the final release version.

Once the game leaves alpha and hits beta, the price will get higher (maybe $40), but it will still be discounted for people getting in early. Then, when the game is finalized, the price will finally go up to $50 or $60 MSRP or whatever.

From the store description:

The "Alpha invites", on the other hand, are free passes to the alpha that paid users can give out to their friends for free. It does not have the same benefits as actually paying for the game though; in this case, it doesn't include access to the full game. Just alpha.
Click to expand...

Ah ok, cool. Thanks for the explanation. I'm in for $33.
 
After turning everything down to High and turning off post-processing and ATOC, everything is looking really good. The vehicle models are exceptionally nice.

A lot of foliage pop-in but when you're standing still the graphics are pretty damn impressive, especially considering the scope of the maps.

2013030600006.jpg


2013030600007.jpg


2013030600001.jpg
 
Thinking of getting this. Seems like the Digital Deluxe Edition isn't really worth it.

Should i just get the base game?
 
Midwayman said:
Ancient is a bit of a hyperbole. Though it is way behind the curve compared to BF3, COD, etc.
Click to expand...

If you're the kind of person that gets hung up on graphics and eyecandy and benchmarking tests, you're probably not the type to enjoy the ArmA games anyway.

It's like getting uptight over the latest Paradox strategy game graphics. IF you really care that much, the game probably isn't for you anyway.
 
I think graphic quality is very important in a game like ArmA, whose intent is to make these situations feel as real as possible.

I personally feel like every aspect of game development is an art, from foley work and sound engineering, vegetation, character, and architecture modelling, etc....and especially movement mechanics. They all work together to bring you into the scene.

I hope what we see released from ArmA 3 at least looks something like all those videos we've seen. The alpha levels don't necessary look awful, but it looks like something the average modder could throw together in an SDK in about 20 minutes, and the lighting just seems a bit...dead.

I really like the game and all, I just hope the final version gets a little more attention in the environmental department.

What I REALLY like about the alpha is the gun-handling mechanics. Finally, a game makes it feel like you're aiming and shooting real weapon, and also the various movement speeds it allows you (sprint, jog, and walk).

I don't even like military games, but I'm excited about this one.
 
Looking good, how are the controls? I really wanted to enjoy ARMA 2 I just found the controls too frustrating and I arrived kind of late so there weren't may servers without either far too hardcore players or a few ass clowns that kind of ruined the experience.
Best time I ever had in a shooter was I played BF2 Project Reality in a squad with some Marines (5 or 6 of them). It was awesome and educational.
 
Stringjam said:
I think graphic quality is very important in a game like ArmA, whose intent is to make these situations feel as real as possible.

I personally feel like every aspect of game development is an art, from foley work and sound engineering, vegetation, character, and architecture modelling, etc....and especially movement mechanics. They all work together to bring you into the scene.

I hope what we see released from ArmA 3 at least looks something like all those videos we've seen. The alpha levels don't necessary look awful, but it looks like something the average modder could throw together in an SDK in about 20 minutes, and the lighting just seems a bit...dead.

I really like the game and all, I just hope the final version gets a little more attention in the environmental department.

What I REALLY like about the alpha is the gun-handling mechanics. Finally, a game makes it feel like you're aiming and shooting real weapon, and also the various movement speeds it allows you (sprint, jog, and walk).

I don't even like military games, but I'm excited about this one.
Click to expand...

ArmA II looks fine. In many ways, it's a lot like the Elder Scrolls games: Up close, texture for texture, they're nothing special. Its beauty lies in it's unrivaled scope. Period. It looks well enough, but when you factor in the utterly MASSIVE scale (that simply blows CoD or even BF out of the water), and the sheer amount of unscripted stuff that's going on, it works and looks very good.
DCFFE1B41D18B1E92B073A8F2557CE657BEBEDF3

AF1DB204B079107982CD43A0FE3C9DAFAAC80549

44E5E577D79576B6CC77E3FA4096482A1FFE1EC1

FD860AA40A22CD1CF50D594EE4754CCCCD2A2EAF

AF67A105705EB4197219B67CB7EF63E0F5A10F54


...that last shot is my favorite, because it gives a small sense of the scope. Myself, my friend's and my brother's squad are perched at the top of that hill, surveying the village below, as there's a platoon of t-55 tanks and a Hind helicopter somewhere in the area. Every move we make we have to plan. But as you can see, we can go literally anywhere, and approach our objective from anywhere, and the game still looks very good, despite its age.
 
Sulaco said:
ArmA II looks fine. In many ways, it's a lot like the Elder Scrolls games: Up close, texture for texture, they're nothing special. Its beauty lies in it's unrivaled scope. Period. It looks well enough, but when you factor in the utterly MASSIVE scale (that simply blows CoD or even BF out of the water), and the sheer amount of unscripted stuff that's going on, it works and looks very good.

...that last shot is my favorite, because it gives a small sense of the scope. Myself, my friend's and my brother's squad are perched at the top of that hill, surveying the village below, as there's a platoon of t-55 tanks and a Hind helicopter somewhere in the area. Every move we make we have to plan. But as you can see, we can go literally anywhere, and approach our objective from anywhere, and the game still looks very good, despite its age.
Click to expand...

ARMA3 is all about teamplay, tactics..and using your brain...perhaps why some people don't like it, because they think BF3-style is more "hawt"...it's not 😉
 
Fanatical Meat said:
Looking good, how are the controls? I really wanted to enjoy ARMA 2 I just found the controls too frustrating and I arrived kind of late so there weren't may servers without either far too hardcore players or a few ass clowns that kind of ruined the experience.
Best time I ever had in a shooter was I played BF2 Project Reality in a squad with some Marines (5 or 6 of them). It was awesome and educational.
Click to expand...

BF2 Project reality was brilliant-I remember having to kick cowards from my squad who refused to attack leaving me to assault enemy alone. With the success of DayZ I suspect Arma 3 will build a much bigger following. Controls are easier although coming from Arma2 I guess pretty much anything is more immediately user friendly. As for looks Arma 2 still requires top end hardware to make is shine and the scalability of the graphics engine means most people don't have a machine capapble of displaying it's full beauty (I can't max it by any means with my rig) but it still ooks great.
 
Last edited:
WiseUp216 said:
After turning everything down to High and turning off post-processing and ATOC, everything is looking really good. The vehicle models are exceptionally nice.

A lot of foliage pop-in but when you're standing still the graphics are pretty damn impressive, especially considering the scope of the maps.

2013030600006.jpg


2013030600007.jpg


2013030600001.jpg
Click to expand...

Lookin good man, glad the fix worked for ya!
 
but when you factor in the utterly MASSIVE scale (that simply blows CoD or even BF out of the water)
Click to expand...
This.

The first time you see like 20 ground troops, 3 helis, tanks and APCs all converge on a town in-sync it is a thing of beauty.

... also the seemingly endless amount of game styles due to the modding/scripting potential.
 
Dang, $33 ain't bad for alpha and beta access along with the full game. I bought ArmA II when it was on sale a while back but only played it for a short time. I might pick this up since I also recently got TrackIR.

EDIT: Ended up buying it. Hard to go wrong for $33; the more videos of ArmA III (and II) I watch on YouTube, the more I'm anxious to play!
 
Last edited:
Sulaco said:
If you're the kind of person that gets hung up on graphics and eyecandy and benchmarking tests, you're probably not the type to enjoy the ArmA games anyway.

It's like getting uptight over the latest Paradox strategy game graphics. IF you really care that much, the game probably isn't for you anyway.
Click to expand...

That's kind of presumptious. Graphics matter, as do a whole lot of other things. I ran across arma II probably in 2011, so it was several years old at that point and looking pretty dated. I kinda of bookmarked it to come back to when it had an update as I am interested in the concept.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top