Is Arma III gonna shape up?

[NeuroFunker]

well, with ffur85 or 2007 + dxdll, flashpoint looks still way better.

http://youtu.be/i90afxVObO4 RV4 engine?

*dream on* i hope it looks like it in arma 4*dream off*

[CyclonicTuna]

perhaps you are the one who needs to try something else to compare this nightmare to?

Happy News.. Finally some Arma competition is out there you may want to have a serious look..

as for my preferences I have changed over & finally can say arma 2 series is henceforth deleted & banned from my computer.

DCS: Combined Arms Preview

DCS combined arms is a beta for an RTS. It simulates war on a massive scale with hundreds of vehicles envolved based on a flight sim engine. You'll be spending most of your time in the map commanding blocks around (in singleplayer that is). Like metalcraze said, there are about as much polygons in a DCS tree as there are in a finger of a soldier in Arma II, and an entire mountain range in DCS has the same pixelcount as a single rock in Arma. You just can't compare the two that easily. Arma is an all out warfare simulation with the focus on infrantry, DCS is an all out warfare sim with focus on commanding around hundreds of vehicles.

I'm not slashing on DCS in any manner, as a matter of fact I can't wait to play it myself. But if you think DCS is a replacement, or a competitor for Arma II. You're gonna be very disappointed.

[NouberNou]

DCS CA seems to be what Steel Beasts is to tanks. You can do a lot of strategic level play, on huge areas, and one part of the system is simulated extremely accurately (Tanks in SB, A-10/Blackshark in DCS) but the rest is sort of left up to a more generic simulation when playing as those units.

Arma is to infantry as DCS is to aircraft, as SB is to tanks. They all serve their niche, and do it well, and its pointless to compare them all.

The real money maker would be a consumer level implementation of HLA so all these awesome sims can talk to each other and exist in the same game world!

[Qazdar]

CRYSIS is a like a blonde ... beautiful but stupid !

And,besides ,as stated above CRYTEK never keeps promises with their engines ... it's always half of what's being shown on trailers !

[maturin]

DCS CA seems to be what Steel Beasts is to tanks. You can do a lot of strategic level play, on huge areas, and one part of the system is simulated extremely accurately (Tanks in SB, A-10/Blackshark in DCS) but the rest is sort of left up to a more generic simulation when playing as those units.

Arma is to infantry as DCS is to aircraft, as SB is to tanks. They all serve their niche, and do it well, and its pointless to compare them all.

The real money maker would be a consumer level implementation of HLA so all these awesome sims can talk to each other and exist in the same game world!

But honestly, tanks in DCS are more realistic than tanks in vanilla ArmA.

[the_antipop]

I know BIS is trying their absolute best on ArmA 3. But my only hope is that they really look into not only DX11 features, but also DX10 features. Remembering ArmA 2, thus RV3, was only DX9. DX10 brought in loads of new graphical upgrades as well. I just hope BIS aren't just doing a half hearted job at 'trying' to get these graphics features working. ArmA is really a platform rather than a game. I'd much rather see much nicer graphics engine, thus platform, then a amazing campaign that took up all the time of the developers. That's just me. But I hope that BIS get some DX10 and 11 features in there. It can be done, it takes time, but I really do hope they do it. I'm almost certain Tessellation on Vehicles, Player models and even objects wouldn't impact too much performance. Improved Shader models could also be achieved. These sort of upgrades can make the engine go from a 6 or 7/10 to a 8-9/10.

[BasileyOne]

I know BIS is trying their absolute best on ArmA 3. But my only hope is that they really look into not only DX11 features, but also DX10 features. Remembering ArmA 2, thus RV3, was only DX9. DX10 brought in loads of new graphical upgrades as well. I just hope BIS aren't just doing a half hearted job at 'trying' to get these graphics features working. ArmA is really a platform rather than a game. I'd much rather see much nicer graphics engine, thus platform, then a amazing campaign that took up all the time of the developers. That's just me. But I hope that BIS get some DX10 and 11 features in there. It can be done, it takes time, but I really do hope they do it. I'm almost certain Tessellation on Vehicles, Player models and even objects wouldn't impact too much performance. Improved Shader models could also be achieved. These sort of upgrades can make the engine go from a 6 or 7/10 to a 8-9/10.

DX10 will matter not, period.
only DX11.x!! only VICTORY !!!
/me waves flag of "immense scalabilty/persistency of dataflow, cortesty of SM5.x/DirectCompute"
basically, there is no other ways to utilise more that 3 cores for GFX, w/o DX11.
unless BIS will turn to OpenGL 4.3 and etc, of course.
as sideway there is possible DirectCompute/OpenCL workarounds, which both working on older drivers and [surprise, surprise!!]older OS'es, but sadly, thats unlikely to happen, cuz major BIS sponsor[iNtel]reliance on Microsoft pressured-decisions. bright side - they are even MORE scalable than both Sli/CFx and basically already become part/mainstay of majority of HPC stacks.


p.s.
next time you asks about something like "please not leave DirectX7 support in Arma4", think how its would [eventually]looks like in result.
both overall, for majority of installbase and against majority of gamers.
and no, 95% of gamers, run x64-bit Vista/Win7 presently. those who won't will matter not and die SOOON !![Evil laugh] starting from XBOX360 owners, obviously.

[DM]

cuz major BIS sponsor[iNtel]

Umm.... WHAT....

[ProfTournesol]

DX10 will matter not, period.
only DX11.x!! only VICTORY !!!
/me waves flag of "immense scalabilty/persistency of dataflow, cortesty of SM5.x/DirectCompute"
basically, there is no other ways to utilise more that 3 cores for GFX, w/o DX11.
unless BIS will turn to OpenGL 4.3 and etc, of course.
as sideway there is possible DirectCompute/OpenCL workarounds, which both working on older drivers and [surprise, surprise!!]older OS'es, but sadly, thats unlikely to happen, cuz major BIS sponsor[iNtel]reliance on Microsoft pressured-decisions. bright side - they are even MORE scalable than both Sli/CFx and basically already become part of majority of HPC stacks.


p.s.
next time you asks about something like "please not leave DirectX7 support in Arma4", think how its would [eventually]looks like in result.
both overall, for majority of installbase and against majority of gamers.
and no, 95% of gamers, run x64-bit Vista/Win7 presently. those who won't will matter not and die SOOON !![Evil laugh] starting from XBOX360 owners, obviously.

Could someone translate this please ?

[BasileyOne]

Could someone translate this please ?

"someone" can, for sure.
here a few handy hyperlinks to assist:
http://translate.google.com/
http://www.translate.ru/