Frell

I only turned post processing on because it had no performance hit for me. For the past few days I've been turning it on and off in different situations and my fps stays the same. Post processing "very high" automatically enables AO even if it says disabled, so make sure you click disabled again and PP doesn't have any fps hit. I'm wondering if there is actually a lack of occlusion culling. Looking at the ground confirms frustrum culling is working, but theres no real way to prove occlusion culling is in.

That's a sign of a bad game engine. GPU's are built to speed up render calculations yet they decide to use the cpu? It's a slap in the face.

GTX 770 here 25 fps on lowest in cities. I wasn't surprised, the game uses one of the worst engines in the industry.

You shouldn't. Planetside 2 fixed this after launch because it was complained about alot. But this same problem is also in Arma 3 and it was never fixed from alpha to release. The town doesn't look good enough at all to warrant this kind of fps hit, it looks like playstation 1 in terms of quality yet it still takes away 40 frames?

The Arma engine is terrible and needs to be rewritten. Arma 3 went from alpha to release with no performance increase despite all the complaints. Don't be surprised if the fps you see now is the same as final build. Arma has a terrible history with performance.

Is rain in yet?

Your issue is you're playing a game that uses the Arma engine which is known for being terrible. I watched Arma 3 go from alpha to release with no performance fixes despite the complaints, don't be surprised if your fps now is final. But maybe the money coming in from DayZ will be able to fund rewrites where they're needed

The game needs a buddy system. I never actually start playing until my friend and I find eachother. We just talk over skype and meet up. If we're too far we kill ourselves, you mad? Am I breaking your immersion? Because its TOTALLY impossible I was with my friend when the infection broke out? Buddy system is entirely plausible.

Engine has always been garbage. You must be new to Arma titles

Scale makes no difference if you know how to properly manage memory and resources

Weighty != clunky Weighty is red orchestra, which has COMPLETELY SMOOTH camera movement also. No one is asking for it to made into a twitch shooter, they just want a smooth camera

Standalone's camera feels just like Arma 2's, unbelievably clunky. Why can't we have a camera as smooth as BF/COD/Rust/PS2/ARMA3/every other fps in the world? Mouse smoothing in the options makes it feel even worse. Going through houses is probably the most annoying thing in the world right now because of the camera and I seriously wonder why this game has to be the odd one out. Arma 3 has a smooth FPS camera so I know its possible, and standalone uses the same engine so why not port it over? Inb4 "its alpha stop complaining" which is completely false. We're supposed to complain so they acknowledge issues, we can't just guess everything will be fixed.

I wonder how soon theyll fix the acceleration

Yes which is why SA runs better than the mod (but still bad in terms of games in general) A2mod wasn't built to spawn and sync items all over a map like that

GTA 5 pc hasn't even been announced yet :P But the mistake you're making here is: if a player on the other side of the map loads an area it is not loaded for you also. It's occluded from your stream until you get close to them. You're basically playing single player until the server tells you another player is near you, and then you begin sharing data. 40 strategically placed players could slow you down a bit (But I highly doubt it as the sharing radius is as big as it needs to be) but next-gen should completely get rid of this (and this is no excuse on pc)

That was a hardware limit because the console it was released on was outdated but yes it was part of the reason Buuttttttt SA doesn't have vehicles and pedestrians populating the world so the argument holds no water.

Lololol Building render limits are based on how smart you handle LOD Arma 2 has some of the ugliest trees in the world and they look like toothpicks with green tape on them from 40 feet away

I know the acceleration toggle will be added soon, no worries But client optimization I'm wary of. Arma 3 went from alpha to release with barely any performance increase, even though there were many complaints. Yes, ON HARDWARE FROM 2007 .... ......... DayZ crawls around 30-50 fps on near lowest when you're in a small town with a GTX 770, that is SAD. Lets compare that to GTA 5 running on a toaster with tons of AI and vehicles in a packed city of LA and holding 30 fps with AO/accurate reflections and good post processing. And the ONLY reason GTA 5 is limited at 16 players is because of 1. The consoles were outdated, going over 16 wasn't really advised 2. It used a P2P networking solution to sync vehicles and AI which is limited by players upload rates in many situations. I may be wrong here but the small bugs I noticed seem to be related to p2p, as I've experienced the same when network debugging in the past.

Then it feels like your camera is pivoting on a cube in a gravel road

Model/animation LOD would undo almost all performance hits that come with this. You should watch planetside 2's "Operation: make faster game" documentary about all the optimizing they went through and now the game runs like a dream. Everyone assumed it was because the game was too big but that wasn't true at all.

Thats exactly the issue. None handle it the way DayZ does and that's why. DayZ is the odd one out, the map is so big that they can benefit from some smart instancing/occlusion that is seamless. That was aimed (no pun intended) at the guy who said the bullet physics are why the game is slow

Let's not forget the server limited client-side FPS thats plagued Arma for years, which I'll admit seems to have been dealt with decently in SA (or not, we'll find out when more zombies are added)

This is a terrible argument. Lets take all the bullets being shot in a game like Planetside 2 or BF4/3 and compare it to Dayz... where ammo and weapons are scarce and there are maybe only 7 shots an hour? lol. Performance arguments that DEFEND DayZ or any Arma2/3 title are insanely outdated and I can't believe you're buying into the talk about the game being too big or what not.

Well aside from my obviously sarcastic comment you still were pretty wrong Most engines could easily handle this, and many are. Maybe if chernarus was filled with traffic and lots of civilians you'd have an argument but it still wouldn't really hold. It's 2013 and a game of 'this' scale is kind of the norm now for any RPG. All I'm saying is don't let people make you believe that its the scale or anything. Arma has a very bad track record with engines and this is NO surprise. I'm hoping all the money coming in from DayZ will finally solve the performance issue because they'll be able to afford rewrites from the engine team. read above

I should hit you for saying something so wrong