Arma 2 Vs 3

• Arma 2 Vs 3

I3-3225 2 / 4 3.30 GHz 3.0 MB i3-3220T 2 / 4 2.80 GHz 3.0 MB Yeah you might get better performance if you push the bios settings higher, which most mobo would have. But if you use them at the default levels, you'll notice the speed drops in half sometimes. BF3 is nothing compared to ArmA 3. Only thing I think Arma 2 has over Arma 3 is a better damage model. Almost everything is going to kill you in one to two hits, Arma 3 gets ridiculous especially when using 5.56.

So the purpose of this thread first off is to key together to see which is better and which has better controls, between arma 2 and 3.Honestly to say this I love arma 3. When I first bought it I thought it was a waste of money until I discovered a lot of the unique fan made gamemodes like 'altis life', 'Invade and Annex, etc. I truly loved it after I discovered those certain things however I miss the whole arma 2 style of modern day US military equipment like C130's,AAV's, M1 Abrams, etc. Yes I know there's hundreds of mods to enhance your gameplay however all that gives you is a less community with those certain mods. I ask several friends if they want to mess around on a private server and just do random things. And my all time favorite mods are All in arma, USAF mod, KYO's chinook, and FZAAH64 mod.

Half of the mods I listed nobody really plays with a whole lot. Now with Arma 2 we can all hop on a private server and quickly start spawning in AH64's,Chinooks,ETC.However arma 2 has downsides too. Arma 2 does not have the greatest of all texturing. Yes I love the texturing still but that's on high settings. Now when I always play arma 3 with high settings it truly says 'wow ' and with arma 2 MAX settings I say 'sorta cool'. So I mean arma 2 has it's downsides and so does arma 3.

I mean im not a guy that likes future military equipment however I do still like half of Arma 3's equipment.Oh yes maps!Maps are a key thing to any game. Each map MUST have great locations like big compounds, city's etc. Nice coloring to it.Arma 2 has some AMAZING maps like takistan. Which however is my all time 2nd favorite map in gaming history! Truly over all I love all Arma's maps however arma 2 does not provide the best of map lighting, shadows, etc. And arma 3 doesn't provide that natural desert field feeling.

As I'm a big desert environment gaming shoot em up insurgents fan.Did I forget mods?Arma 2 mods are truly unique but don't have best graphics in my opinion. Arma 2 is amazing in mods due to the amount of different mods they have. In arma 3 yes they have better graphic mods however arma 3 has a medium amount of mods. (however it is still just new) Arma 3 has also the same exact mods every week.

Arma 2 Vs 3

It depends on who's doing this and what it features. Most mods I see lately are all the same just little difference. Like multiple C130 mods.

Or LOTS of FlightDeck crew members. No I will not point out people or anything but still. Arma 3 should have a better amount of great equipment in mod discussions like 'Sea Stallions' or 'B2 Bombers' etc.

I truly still love the whole arma 3 mod community just needs more different mods instead of multiple same mods with little differences.Another thing that I wanted to point out was Arma 2 and Arma 3 little features. It would be a amazing and mind blowing experience if they had more awesome features like arresting insurgents, DNA checks, Databases, TV missiles, option to change between single fired flares and multi fired flares, ability to carry things like cones or other little things. Just a large array of un added things.Please don't take this as some strike im going on lol. It is simply just a few things needed to say.However my main needed thing I would love is why cant there be any Modern Day vehicles in arma 3 as maybe a community #TBT-Arma 2 anniversary DLC or something very unique like that.Out of all said I personally like Arma 3 better.

As with enough knowledge to download mods you can simply join a team with lots of mods used to form a arma 2 equipment/map arma 3 settings game mode every night, etc.Now all said above. Which is your favorite????

Arma 2 or Arma 3?! Vote above and comment your opinions below! Sure, arma3 has brought many good features to the series like stances, weapon modification and the ablility to dive, the new lightning system is also awesome. But i also have to say that the bad performance(low frames), mp lag problems and the setting with this future weapon systems (with no correct radar system or a fire control system for tanks) isn't something that pushes me to play arma3.In arma2 i have the right setting (US vs RU), i have the weapon/s i love(M16, AK47, G36), i have some very good islands (i love chernarus) with good performance, i have many many vehicles and other toys to make war and the greatest thing, i got ACE. Also i have so many good missions for a2, made over the last years, that i really like to play a2 far more than a3.A good graphic is not enough, performance, setting, amount of content(in the original game) and a good mod(ace) is more important for me.so my winner is ArmA2regardsmoerderhoschi.

Modded Arma2, hands down the better game, for me anyway.Playing the other night, hadn't played for a while, 140ai approx and me, I was fighting with Opfor, it was damn near perfect, grenades, rocket launchers, tactical flanking, using buildings really well, smoke, surrender, long firefights, retreat, regroup etc, it was all in there. A great battle, took forever it seemed, only a little over a hour and a half maybe, but I loved it. Moving forward then getting ordered back, regrouping, finding other routes through and around town, I was just copying the ai, taking orders (well sort of).

Had a great time, just me and A2. Hadn't done it for a while, its some game when you think about it, well, some series really. Great to come back too every now and then.Not a proper mission just groups down in the editor and a single WP for each group, ie straight at the enemy with a town in the centre, just a minute or so to setup and away.Anyway I put A2. I don't play A3 now. Edited September 30, 2014 by ChrisB.

I would have to say Arma 3 over Arma 2.Infantry combat is mostly on a whole other level, the damage system is a bit lacking but Arma 3's multi stance solves a lot of the problems we had in A2 with windows being too high or too low, response is also much more fluid and we get added systems such as weight causing fatigue from the start rather than relying on a mod for it. There are just so many opportunities now for more varied forms of engagement, able to have good steady close quarters and to utilize various forms of cover in ways that were either a great hassle or just not possible in A2.Vehicle combat is so much better with the new armor penetration system and the addition of more system damage, it started in Arma 2 yes but its far more prominent in Arma 3 with your ammo type mattering more and the armor values playing a bigger role as opposed to the T-34 obliterating an M1A1 as we saw in Operation Arrowhead. Arma 2 with ACE and some other mods.Arma 3 had potential but it suffered from way too many wrong design decisions. Of course I understand that BI is a relatively small company, that it encountered some serious problems during Arma's development, that it has to consider DayZ/Altis-Life/Wasteland crowd to have more sales and so on but all of this does not change the fact that Arma 2 is way better than Arma 3, for now at least.And once again mod-developers is the ones who will come to the rescue of yet another Arma. I stopped playing. Call me strange but I own a trackir and there is no way I'm playing without it as I'm used to it since armed assault. The problem though is I'm used to 100% free floating box since OFP (2001) and the combo with trackir is bugged in A3, so it feel so wrong and strange for me I just dont like playing.

And as A3 is so much better I cant go back to A2.So I guess the upside is I have time for other things. Still read the forums as I follow the development and mods hoping to play some day when BIS has fixed that known bug. If I knew BIS will never fix that I could uninstall, stop reading and move on.Maybe I am strange but it annoys me so much I cant enjoy the game. I loved all the games in the series, since OFP. Arma 2 was(and still is) a great game. For me personally A3 is just an expansion for me. It adds the small things we didn't have like weapon accs, underwater operations, Gear menus, etc.

It's not perfect by far, but its good enough for me(Nice NVGs in your SIG btw;))- Post added at 16:20 - Previous post was at 16:16 -Hahaha. Yeah I liked arma 1. It was great for a brand new franchise however the graphics scared me a little but the performances were amazing and great FPS.

Simulation isn't the defining aspect of Arma. It's scale.The enormity of the map is the foundation for the experiences that distinguish Bohemia Interactive's flagship franchise. It's what makes radios, topographical maps, binoculars, and compasses practical equipment in an FPS. It's what allows for kilometer-long headshots and coordinated convoy raids. It's what makes using your eyes to spot hints of enemies-muzzle flashes, tracers, gunsmoke-as valuable as being a crack shot.The scale of dwarfs everything in the genre, including., a keyhole portion of which is seen in these screenshots, is a Mediterranean island-nation assembled from ruins, airports, coastal villages, solar power plants, military outposts, salt flats, and tank-friendly scrubland. It's a variegated backyard for you to play war in, but what's more significant is that Arma's landscape finally has the technology it deserves.

Fictional and adapted contemporary weapons, vehicles, and equipment make up Arma 3's armory.Arma 3 represents an aesthetic overhaul of the series. Unbelievable dynamic lighting, a volumetric cloud system, genuine vehicle physics, 3D weapon optics, ragdoll, noticeably improved weapon audio, and other grainy, eye-level details await scrutiny inside Arma 3's macro elegance. The best improvement is the merciful cutting of Arma 2's rigid, Tin-Man-without-oil combat animations, which makes infantry combat more responsive in your hands.A half-year in paid pre-release has given Arma 3 time to gestate, but the final build is far from being a comprehensive reinvention of the series, and some long-standing blemishes that arise from its nature as a gargantuan simulation linger.

Even on high-end hardware, my framerate dips under the spectacle of some multiplayer missions. Friendly AI units, though marginally better-behaved, still depend on the player to be their brains, an issue that's circumvented by playing Arma the way God intended it: cooperatively. A tank percusses the ground after firing. Operation cooperationWith voice-connected friends and a good user-created mission, Arma 3 is an unparalleled war story generator. On with a gang of Steam pals, I had to drive a clumsy, eight-wheeled transport called a across the map.

To protect this elephantine truck we had a IFV-6c Panther, an APC with a mounted grenade launcher and 12.7mm MG. Minutes after leaving base, our tanky bodyguard eats a land mine, ruining its left track. As we get out to survey the damage, rockets streak across the valley. Everyone's okay, but the Panther is immobilized.Dumping the APC is the only option. We clump into the fragile HEMTT, burning diesel to get off the exposed ridge. Green tracers track the truck, eventually pricking some of my tires. The wheels don't deflate enough to go flat, but the suspension slumps to the left.

For the rest of the mission I have to drive lopsided, constantly counter-steering just to keep the truck on the gravel road. But everyone works together to keep our war bus on track-my teammates give turn instructions, read the map, and scan the road for more mines.When we're free of immediate danger, we send someone back to base to retrieve an ATV so that we have a forward scouting element. At one point we position two machinegunners with nightvision scopes at the lip of a valley to provide cover as we drive the HEMTT down an exposed valley, then taxi them back to us on the ATV. The sequence of events, the chatter, the wounds and kills we rack up, all developed because we happened to run over a mine and our tires got shot up.Getting flexibleArma's capacity for stimulating camaraderie, atmosphere, and problem-solving, in other words, is fully intact. The feeling of ownership that arises over these moments between you and your squadmates sticks in your brain. Central to this fun is how malleable Arma continues to be for its community, which before launch day had published.

Assuming you have an internet connection, this well of content compensates for the absence of an official campaign at launch, which will integrate in three free monthly installments beginning in October.On the ground, a new stance adjustments system is the best thing that's ever happened to infantry combat in Arma. Holding the Ctrl key as a modifier while tapping W or S cycles between nine vertical stances, and you can also take a horizontal step in addition to using Q or E to lean. You feel articulate-making small body adjustments while behind cover initially feels like finger gymnastics, but the system makes more types of cover viable and more types of weapons viable in that cover. Coupled with the general smoothing of movement and the near elimination of Arma 2's uninterruptible, sluggish animations, running and gunning should finally feel comfortable to average FPS players.On the opposite end of your gun, though, AI remains a shortcoming. Arma 3's enemies share plenty of their ancestors' DNA, which means that they oscillate between being eagle-eyed snipers at one moment and static, dumb, 3D silhouettes evocative of a light gun arcade game another.

Their greatest flaw is that they lack personality, which mostly resigns them to being targets rather than soldiers. 3D weapon optics contribute a lot to Arma 3's infantry combat. Holographic, high-magnification, thermal, and other types of optics can be attached to almost every rifle along with other rail items like grenade launchers and flashlights.A few sparks of intelligence did impress me-after we killed the rest of his squadmates, I watched a rifleman flee for the first time in Arma, setting up a tense shot where I had a narrow few seconds to snipe him in the back before he disappeared behind trees. This is the sort of human behavior I'd love to see more of, stuff like blind-firing, limping, throwing smoke grenades for cover, claiming abandoned vehicles, or looting bodies for supplies-anything that would lessen the predictability.Friendly AI is even worse, unfortunately, because they're typically your responsibility. It's absurd that my squad's medic won't patch me up when I'm bleeding right next to him unless I order him to. Pathfinding isn't reliable, either: I spent five minutes repeating the “Move to” and “Get in vehicle” commands, trying to convince a freed hostage and my squadmate to cross the map so we could finish the mission. They wouldn't budge.

The crux of the issue is Arma's mile-long command menu, which scatters dozens of commands across all 10 numerical keys. Like the enemy AI, though, there are glimpses of authentic behavior. I felt like a proud parent when my AI fireteam, unprompted, broke formation and spread themselves behind cover during a raid on a cluttered factory. A night base raid. Arma 3's single-player missions are most enjoyable when you're not assigned the commander role. Breaking formationBohemia's graphical improvements are substantial enough to make Arma 3 one of the most visually impressive games on any platform.

Altis (and its little-brother island Stratis) are rendered with incredible clarity, illuminated by lighting that produces pink sunsets, blinding solar glare, and golden afternoons. I love the way the earth feels textured as you jog and crawl through it-gravel, sand, and grass all emit different sounds under your boots.I'm mostly happy with the graphical performance I've been getting on the three configurations I've been playing Arma 3 on. The caveat being that my framerate varies based on where I am on the map, the number of objects and enemies, and if I'm playing online.

On a Core-i7 X990 at 3.47 GHz and two AMD Radeon 5970s on Very High settings, I've gotten 17-25 FPS on one single-player mission and 40-50 on another. Multiplayer is where I found the least-consistent performance. On a Core-i7 870 and GTX 780, I can get 55 FPS in a tight, six-player scenario on Very High, but 20 in a large-format mission like.Tinkering with Arma 3's 25 configurable video settings allowed me to improve these numbers a little, but even dialing down the quality to standard or low on my rigs barely helped while playing large multiplayer missions. The scripting or complexity of some scenarios simply seems to bottleneck performance regardless of your settings. Some specific actions also consistently produced framerate dips for me, like turning 180 degrees with high draw distance, driving at high speed into a city, or right-clicking into gun optics for the first time in an area. Despite Arma 3's size visual and audial details like back-blasts and muzzle flashes feel handcrafted.If the downside of Arma's fidelity is its inconsistent graphical performance, its upside is that it reliably produces stories. Even its modular inventory system has produced little rituals for me in co-op, where I have everyone vocally recite the gear they're carrying to make sure we've got enough versatility.

Sometimes, like some sort of weird mom commander, I inspect their backpacks to see that they're storing enough C4 and medkits. In these moments, you realize that the majority of Arma's realism doesn't exist for the sake of realism.I'm annoyed that it's still much more of a burden to command teammates than it should be, on par with chaperoning a second-grade field trip. It's bothersome that enemy AI oscillates between being smart and dull. I wish 40- and 50-player missions chugged less. And it's mildly disappointing that Bohemia delayed the release of the game's campaign, presumably in order to get Arma 3 out ahead of Battlefield 4. For most of us, the self-authored war that awaits in co-op is worth tolerating all of this.