ArmA 3 (armed assault 3) sucks .. how they manage it?

Everything about gaming, walkthroughs, discussions, news, reviews ..etc

ArmA 3 (armed assault 3) sucks .. how they manage it?

Postby Sethioz » Tue Sep 17, 2013 5:30 am

Well maybe not the gameplay, but im getting serious LAGGGG, from 10 - 30fps ....
if you're a noob, you would say "OMG BAD PC!!!" .. well no, this is why i said IF you're a NOOB. ArmA 3 uses only 30% of my CPU and 20-30% of my GPU .. no matter the settings.
I have 8-core FX8350 + GTX680, i can run Crysis 3 on maxed out and get 25fps min, turning off AA and Multisampling in Crysis 3 i get easy 80+ fps .. while leaving everything else on ultra high.

in ArmA 3 .. no matter what i do, it just LAGGSSSSS.

How do they manage to release such crap? don't they ever test? i mean .. WHAT THE FUCK they use to test it on? if game is unplayable even on a high-end gaming pc, then .. how the fuck they expect anyone to even play it ?
I had such high hopes for this game, but i cant play a game that lags like shit, all those features and gameplay means nothing if it is unplayable due the shitty lag.


and yes i have latest drivers, dx ..etc. there is nothing wrong with my PC, its the game that is unable to get higher FPS due the crap game engine they used, same issue exists in arma2, no matter the pc, it just wont run properly.
User avatar
Sethioz
Admin
Admin
 
Posts: 4754
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 5:11 pm
Location: unknown

Re: ArmA 3 (armed assault 3) sucks .. how they manage it?

Postby KEN » Tue Sep 17, 2013 10:12 am

Is it only in MP or also in SP?
I saw people on steam talk about the low fps issue too:

"i have 670 sli with a i7 3770k and i inly get 20fps with everything on ultra"
"i have a gtx 680 classified and find myself getting like 20 fps max in MP evern on low settings"
"On singleplayer I can run on ULTRA graphics in multiplayer on lowest settings I get 8 fps -,- I can't even play this game and I have no idea why. I have a GTX 650"

Seems to only happen on MP.
"i got 40-50fps with 5770 and i3 2100. on high.
i noticed a huge performance increse in game mode SA-MATRA wasteland. Dont know why but that version of wasteland runs best. So its definatley not peoples cpus. So whoever samatra is he needs to code the rest of the game."
User avatar
KEN
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 756
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 8:11 am

Re: ArmA 3 (armed assault 3) sucks .. how they manage it?

Postby Sethioz » Tue Sep 17, 2013 11:22 am

nah its everywhere, even in map editor, i only put few vehicles to test them out, as soon as i got near cities it lags down to like 20 and below. i was flying a heli, very low over ground and got like 10fps LOL.

clearly ArmA series is built on very crap engine. .. they need to learn from Just Cause devs, both JC games run fine and JC2 has quite amazing graphics, vehicles are not that good and neither are characters, but environment is quite nice. i'd rather have bit less visuals and high fps than other way around, but its not even about the graphics.

people are just too RETARDED nowdays to know wtf they talk about, lot of people are like .. pahpahpahbahblah you need GTX Titan 4-way SLI to run games on MAXXXX .. but those fucking morons don't understand that makes no difference, since games like ArmA 3 won't even use them. cmon seriously, 30% of my GPU ... it could easily run at 100fps with maxed out graphics if game engine would be optimized.

what i absolutely do not understand: how can game developers even release a game that is completely BROKEN and unplayable?
do they really expect someone to play a game on 10-20fps? its like if car factory would produce a car with 3 wheels (not the 3-wheelers, but a normal car where 1 wheel is missing) ... well car would be driveable, but it would be very dangerous and handles like shit. are they blind to what is going on or ... i just don't understand their logic / thinking.
User avatar
Sethioz
Admin
Admin
 
Posts: 4754
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 5:11 pm
Location: unknown

Re: ArmA 3 (armed assault 3) sucks .. how they manage it?

Postby Sethioz » Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:54 pm

well i did some research and checked the resource usage again, seem like arma3 is able to use only 1 cpu core ...
WHAT ?!!!???!!! :O :O

are you fucking kidding me ?! 2013 year game and has no multi-core support? what were they thinking? have they gone completely NUTZ? this is same issue with arma2 / dayz.
there are some people saying (liars) that it uses all cores, but i think they're just too noob to know what they talk about.
there are also some other people who say .. blah blah blah .. copy -cpucount=8 .. blah balh .. some more blah .. and then launch options and then some blahhing and some more blah blah .. and then it runs on 8 cores...

unfortunetely it makes no sense, so i can't test what they mean. idiots can't just write a fucking step-by-step ... but this is probably because it never worked for them and they just talk some shit they over heard and trying to play smart.

i think they are talking about COMMAND LINE PARAMETERS, but making a shortcut with that cpu count thingy did not work either, still using 1 core.

seriously ... 2013 year game has no multi-core support ... HAHAHAHAHHA, what a joke. that's why it lags so bad.
User avatar
Sethioz
Admin
Admin
 
Posts: 4754
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 5:11 pm
Location: unknown


Return to Gaming - Discussions / Walkthroughs / News / Reviews

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests