Hi, i think that first of all... we should agree on what we understand as "optimization", and then begin to argue; optimization could mean run 500.000 more polygons at the same speed and drawing distance that you've your ArmA2:CO configured at, that's in fact an optimization, but... we'll take it in that way...?!.
I think that the ArmA3 gonna be more optimized than the ArmA2 or the OA, but see and feel the optimization... gonna depend on our machines more than on the engine, that sure that gonna need a good CPU to run clean without jumps it's a matter of money.
If you've your View Distance set at 3000, you don't gonna see anything beyond that; if something happens beyond that distance... it'll happen on the memory, but you wont see it or the effect of those events until that you're at 3.000m from those units or events. Remember, the tracers effect... is just viewable until 600m from the shooter, unlike IRL were it can be seen by killometers... someones will call that fact "an optimization..." i call it robbery. Let's C ya
Well, if we wish to define optimisation I think we'll get as many different definitions as posters for the record, mine would be: the maximising of both CPU and GPU usage. I rarely see my CPU usage go above 25%, so I should like to see more work offloaded to separate threads where possible.