Seems to be HDR related issues. Change it from Normal to Low, or vice versa, on notice game going from white to rather black and blue and vice versa.

Edit: Happens on AMD HD5870, 13.3 Beta 2's.

How this new model makes game unplayable for TrackIR users?

@Mitor, That this is feedback about current adaptation of 3D scopes in ArmA 3 and devs have taken notice about this. Will this happen? Who knows, but they know that people are talking about this.

Why in yours opinion ArmA "really needs this"? What this can possibly add to the game besides neat and very very performance demanding graphical trick?

If they were to add requested feature, from e.g. RO 2, they better add option to disable it fully. With ArmA 3's IQ and requirement to render area of screen twice it would absolutely murder performance of anything below hi-end GPU's.

I don't want absolute FPS hogging graphics features into game if I can't disable or push them to very low from options.

If Realistic == Difficult, for you, then yes. Going full auto and hitting targets up to 1 km is far far far away from realistic behavior of modern assault rifle and makes game very arcady, Call of ArmA. That range even with single fire is insane gamble to take.

There is reason why things like sniper rifles exist, yours assault rifle isn't that.

Having large amounts of muzzle climb is unrealistic solution to have recoil for weapons, especially when prone removes every bit of it from all rifles. Devs don't want people moving around upright and shooting? Then make move slightly in X and Y axis with every shot so you can't shoot it like railgun, need to adjust after every shot, but you can put couple fast ones into direction of hostile to suppress him while going for cover.

Now it's more like you put single round down to the e.g. 250 meters, start playing mini-game called "Pull the mouse and pray for best" while scrambling for cover because you can't suppress yours target properly.

@oldirty Then recoil system of ArmA 3 is even more and utterly fucked up by devs if it's possible to go full auto retard and actually land hits up to 600 - 1000 meters. I mean actually making certain hits, not some super random lucky 1 hit from 200 fired bullets.

Even 300 meters with full auto and landing certain hits should be very hard to pull of.

More I play this game, and hear comments like yours, more I feel that ArmA 3 is a lot Call of ArmA than mil-sim. Infantry weapons are so arcady modeled that it starts to be annoying, recoil modeling is just stupid in every way.

Funny thing is that if you actually have fired 5.56, 6.5 or 7.62 rifle you know that something like Battlefield has one thing right, no insane muzzle climb when firing single round at the time. Either soldiers in ArmA 3 don't have any upper body strength or no training because with that muzzle climb you know that person don't have a clue how to hold a rifle and fire it.

Even 7.62x39 chambered rifle don't have such laughable and arcady muzzle climb as ArmA 3 shows to us now. There is no learning curve to it or anything hard about ArmA 3's recoil model, you just compensate with mouse movement amount X depending on rifle. Model is simple "Click to fire and rifle X kicks yours muzzle up Y degrees" -model.

That model has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with realistic behavior of assault rifle, but feels more and less to be theirs arcady solution to prevent fast and accurate single shots up to 300 meters. Any trained person should know how to, and be able to, shoot multiple single shots with decent accuracy to that distance. ArmA 3, yeah good luck with that when rifle tells person where you shoot and not other way around.

@armapirx If you get used to eating shit it doesn't mean it's suddenly 200€ steak. It's still just shit.

You can learn to play with and around ArmA 3's arcade recoil sure, but at least for me it doesn't mean it's any good recoil solution.

Agreed. Recoil model in ArmA 3, all calibres, is just laughably arcade solution. Is it better than e.g. railguns in Bf 3? Yes. Is it realistic? Nope, not even in same ballpark.

If we really want to nitpick you don't carry rifle like that, on yours back, when in combat situation / environment. You never put it there like you are in some marching formation. No wonder it takes forever to put sidearm away and take rifle from back.

At least we were trained that rifle is always on yours back, or by yours side, with barrel line towards ground so you can easily and fastly get ready to fire, with or without putting sidearm away first.

@Killzone_Kid Yesterday. I play on stable build, maybe it has something to do with it?

And yeah, in realm of 3 to 5 seconds / grenade and I'm ok with it. Throwing hand grenade should be judgement call and not something that you spam for lulsies and for easy solution.

Even after adding animation for it grenade throwing is still way way too fast and spammy. Often I just take 20-30 grenades to backpack and when I spot enemies in e.g. fortified position I just spam 10 or so grenades at them in couple seconds.

Why? Effective as hell under new grenade throwing system.

There needs to be time taken to take out grenade from vest, pulling pin, throwing it and pulling another out. You can keep fast key [G default], but this way you don't spam 20 grenades to field in under 5 seconds.

@SuicideKing There has to be delay if we want to have mil-sim over CoD's grenadespamfests. I would personally take equitable grenades, with small delay between grenades to "simulate" time it takes to pull new from vest, with pin pull animation over this "Hit G to quick nade just like in CoD!" -model that they have currently.

Edit: It made me laugh when I realized, in Alpha, that you can throw grenades out like fucking full-auto grenade launcher. That spam...

@XxSheepDoggxX, "Easy to use" shouldn't stand for "You throw hand grenades like full auto grenade launcher (MLG 40mm)". They can keep whole "G for throw" concept if they add delay between push of button and throw itself.

For e.g. you press "G" and 2.5 seconds later grenade is thrown because soldier had to take it from hes vest, pull the pin and throw grenade. This way you have quick throw function, so to speak, but you can't CoD spam it anymore.

@tyl3r99 It's safe to say that this ticked won't suddenly change into "Solved" or anything like it. This is pretty much "Hey guys, you need optimize shit out of yours engine" -ticket and optimization of game can go on and on even after retail release.

I would expect improvements through patches, especially during beta when game is more and less feature complete / locked and can be optimized around that.

New problem has occurred since last patch to live version, I don't use dev builds. Problem is that while playing in MP, any mode or server, game suddenly drops to 0 FPS while CPU and GPU usage also drops to 0%. What usage is left is because of windows running at background. After about 5+ seconds game resumes to normal play like nothing has happened.

This is very annoying and rather serious bug. There is no specifics how to replicate this, just play in MP and it will happen at random.

I'm running i5 750 & HD5870.

i5 750 @ 3.8 GHz
8 GB DDR3
HD5870 1 GB
W7 64 -bit
Cat 13.3 Beta 2's as drivers.

Game uses CPU up to about 48% and GPU to about same percentage while playing in MP match. Settings seem to have next to no effect on usage percentages. That one optimization patch did increase in-game FPS, but usage of HW could be a lot better.

@Deli, Even when standing vertical recoil isn't that large as you would think. Most of the recoil pushes into yours shoulder when rifle is handled right and allows surprisingly fast rate of fire to short-ish distance while maintaining accuracy.

I hope that devs really think recoil modeling through and decrease vertical recoil by noticable amount. Current recoil modeling is aiming more to arcade than to the realism and we, who has experience with assault rifles etc., find it silly.

ArmA, game series that promote themselves as ultimate mil-sim, cuts surprising amount of corners and does stuff to be very arcady or just has straightforward mistakes. One mistake, along the recoil, is handgun handling and rifle carrying while on back.

@Huron, (0020239) aka that one above mine.

@Huron, how much time and adjustment between shots when crouched? In-game, not guerilla shooting middle of desert in real life :D

As a person with military training and 7.62 mm AR as service weapon, like mentioned above already, I find recoil modeling in ArmA 3 to be joke and far far from realistic. It's overkill and promotes use of prone when shooting at target that are further than 50 meters away. Sure soldiers favor prone often, smaller target and what not, but shooting when crouched should be more feasible option.

P.S. What you mean with M14? MXM or ERB? ERB is kinda joke-ish when it comes to accuracy, but MXM rocks. Recoil on both, for being 7.62 rifles, is huge joke and even half of current recoil would be overkill.

Funnily 3rd person shooting is A LOT easier than 1st person or while aiming down sights. Recoil doesn't make 3rd person aim jump that much, almost at all, and this allows fast double and triple taps to even greater distance. Especially with MXM 7.62.

I kinda get laugh from all these "It's fine as it's because it's realistic!" etc. comments. Why? As a person who has military training and used 7.62 RK62 (Finnish army's AR, based on AK47) as AR for whole service time I don't see anything "realistic" in ArmA 3's recoil model.

It's clear that devs want players to 1. Use prone / "sitting-prone" all the time so we can shoot fast and accurate shots to over 50 meters away 2. Constantly keep pulling mouse downwards so we don't aim at sky after 3 shots from 6.5 mm rifle becase of "realistic" recoil. Maybe recoil is borderline realistic, but that is thrown out of window when player character has zero intention of keeping weapon in level without A) Certain stance that removes recoil as a whole from the rifle B) Constant player input and mouse dragging.

If we want to talk about "realistic recoil" then there should be very little of muzzle climb even on 7.62 rifle when single firing and standing. It doesn't kick like mule and is easy to control. Full auto sure causes trouble handling wise, but at least we were trained that full auto isn't really option outside of suppression situations.

TL;DR: ArmA 3 dosen't have realistic recoil modeling because even 7.62 rifle dosen't kick like that when fired, while standing, if trained soldier is firing it. Is it better than e.g. Bf 3? Yes. Realistic? Hardly.

Here is small gallery to show off what vehicles have and have not proper bearings indicators and proper hull / turret / commander orientation indicators, http://imgur.com/a/3fvYV#0

This is something that needs to be fixed by devs as operating something like AMV-7 without indicators like e.g. Panther has is just pure pain and frustration.