ARMA 2: Operation Arrowhead & Reinforcements, version 1.59 - Patch released

[Coffeecat 10]

some people are too lazy to press escape:j:

[Thats_Life 2.0 10]

again if you have tree or grass texture issues then please try disable or fiddle with AToC setting

example and description of values on BIKI: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/arma2.cfg

Did you mean my post? Because I did all of that and it doesn't help. EVERY ATOC setting is the same result. So I guess you need a CIT :j:

That video was on ATOC setting 0... No difference between 0 and 7.

Edited April 4, 2011 by Thats_Life 2.0

[Dwarden 1125]

and my reply wasn't to your video ...

[Thats_Life 2.0 10]

and my reply wasn't to your video ...

Just waiting for 1.60 then... Hope that will fix it..

[artbava 10]

...Steam...still...omg...why?!...8(...

[Bon 12]

Using Steam.

Can't update using the downloadable .exe: It says, OA is either not installed or of an incorrect version. After that it tries to update PMC and BAF, where I get some more errors for some .pbo. I can update Steam A2 using the .exe, though.

There where several posts of other people who have/had exactly the same problem. But I tried everything, from re-downloading the patch from all available mirrors over trying the beta or most recent RC to completely re-installing A2 and OA... Nothing worked.

I am using Steam now for a long long time and am not completely new to ArmA either. So I wouldn't assume my problem is due to lack of experience with both these media. Anyway, one of my motivations for using Steam is not to concern about manual updates in the first place.

I am not able to play ArmA with my people on our own server for about a week now. That makes me sad, a bit angry and very disappointed. I mean, I paid money for this...

And all I get on information is Steam update is delayed without any ETA due to technical difficulties.

I don't know if its Bohemia's fault, if its Valve's fault, if it was the holy ghost, and I don't care. I also don't wont to blame anyone even if responsible. All I am asking for right now is some more information or at least a very rough estimation on how long it could take to help me being patient...

Thank you.

[LondonLad 13]

Using Steam.

<snip>.....I am using Steam now for a long long time and am not completely new to ArmA either. So I wouldn't assume my problem is due to lack of experience with both these media. Anyway, one of my motivations for using Steam is not to concern about manual updates in the first place.

I am not able to play ArmA with my people on our own server for about a week now. That makes me sad, a bit angry and very disappointed. I mean, I paid money for this...

And all I get on information is Steam update is delayed without any ETA due to technical difficulties.

I don't know if its Bohemia's fault, if its Valve's fault, if it was the holy ghost, and I don't care. I also don't wont to blame anyone even if responsible. All I am asking for right now is some more information or at least a very rough estimation on how long it could take to help me being patient...

Thank you.

Basically my feeling on the matter too!

[Dwarden 1125]

i can't give You ETA as this issue is completely out of my hands ...

VALVE was able replicate the problem this week and theirs development team is trying to resolve it ...

please understood that there is huge amount of users on STEAM and You can't risk blindly ...

[Atkins 10]

Using Steam.

Can't update using the downloadable .exe: It says, OA is either not installed or of an incorrect version.

I got this error when i was installing A2:CO from scratch to steam. I had to verify game files and launch both A2 and CO and then the patch didnt complain no more.

[mrcash2009 0]

@Dwarden

Before I do that I want to show you this video. ATOC = 0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cujmb2cu3x8

Is this normal? Otherwise I make a CIT for nothing ;)

On all the arma2 islands I have this problem. Esspecially on the leaf trees. The cristmas tree is more normal.

With OA the trees are looking better.

Is it something ingame? Because witch other patches I didn't have these problems.

And what's up with that flickering at the start from the first video?

Let me know if I still need to make a CIT.

Specs below..

Thats_Life 2.0

I watched your video only to wonder where a problem exists, everything I saw was, to me, normal ... ?? BTW that shadow flashing issue, I have the same thing and has been since 1.57 .. if you run the arma2 SP mission to attack the village (where you use high command) that exact spot you start from always has a shadow flicker for me, so its not latest patch related.

[MissionCreep 12]

I'm back to 1.57 on OA ... 1.59 seems to have slowed down performance noticeably on my already marginal machine, even after I played with AToC, Video settings etc. Not worth the time, if in fact performance could get back to where it used to be.

---------- Post added at 04:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:11 PM ----------

I watched your video only to wonder where a problem exists, everything I saw was, to me, normal ... ?? BTW that shadow flashing issue, I have the same thing and has been since 1.57 .. if you run the arma2 SP mission to attack the village (where you use high command) that exact spot you start from always has a shadow flicker for me, so its not latest patch related.

The problem is the trees look "glassy" like they are covered with a white, twinkly frost.

I updated 2 WinXP machines, one was a Sprocket OA, with an ATI Radeon 4650 the other DVD version of OA but with ATI Radeon HD 5570. The Sprocket/4650 install was fine, but the DVD/5570 version had the "frosty" trees. I turned AToC=6 and the main problem went away, but it looked better at AToC=0. Anyway, as I said above, my systems took a performance hit, so I went back to 1.57 (I skipped 1.58 due to not-so-great reports). Also, the patch put an AToC=7; in the OA .cfg of my DVD install, but no AToC in the Sprocket install.

Edited April 5, 2011 by MissionCreep

[fer 21]

p.s. it's sad that You even think it's our fault

With respect, Dwarden (and by extension anyone at BI reading this), is this really an appropriate way to respond to paying customers with a legitimate complaint? Fault is not the key concept here, accountability is - you're representing the vendor here, so you're accountable. At the very least, you could own the problem and treat your customers with a shade more respect. You're good people with a great product, but sometimes you're hard to love!

in relation to the other problem You trying understood i will just point here: http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Valve_Time

If this is a well-known and well-documented issue, one has to ask the obvious question: why wasn't it factored into your scheduling? I'm sorry, but citing the dependency on RFT doesn't entirely explain the issue. Assuming (in good faith) that you had adequate contingency in your plans for bugs, and fell victim to unforseen issues with the Steam build, were your options for mitigation really delay RFT (unacceptable to publishers) or abandon the Steam users to unknown delay and fragment the existing playerbase?

1.59 deadline was 31st because of the A2: RFT being 1.58 build thus the owners of OA/CO 1.57 would not be able play with RFT owners and vice versa ...

Again, I'm struggling with the logic of this decision (as I'm sure many others are): why choose to fracture the playerbase of Steam and non-Steam 1.57 users, when those two constituences surely dwarf the newly-minted 1.58 playerbase?

do You ever read the Notice: notes at download page?

How about losing the attitude, and maybe replacing the text that's there now with a more informative entry, reflecting the fact that this update is:

a) Principally making RFT align with the existing installed base

b) Not yet available on Steam

For community organisers that devote their free time to organising events and regular sessions, it's heartbreaking to experience this pain in relation to a product (and developer) that is by no means a newcomer.

There will always be people willing to go the extra mile and devote Linux-user levels of care and attention to the patching process, and I have no wish to criticise them (esp. as I was one of those people for the thick end of a decade). However, many in the Steam consituency choose that distributor precisely because of an unwillingness / inability to engage with complex patching processes. Each time the process of playing ArmA gets harder, the pool of potential players gets narrower. And so do your DLC repeat-revenue opportunities.

Personally, I'd like to see both trends reversed ;)

[Thats_Life 2.0 10]

I watched your video only to wonder where a problem exists, everything I saw was, to me, normal ... ?? BTW that shadow flashing issue, I have the same thing and has been since 1.57 .. if you run the arma2 SP mission to attack the village (where you use high command) that exact spot you start from always has a shadow flicker for me, so its not latest patch related.

Don't know how big your monitor is, but didn't you see those white pixels in the trees. For me this is new. And the leafs of the trees looks like they are floating in the air (1.00 etc.). Nasty textures. And the painted style trees at 1.40.

I'm sorry but the trees look way better in previous version numbers then in this version... And nothing with the setting helps.

[rundll.exe 12]

With respect, Dwarden (and by extension anyone at BI reading this), is this really an appropriate way to respond to paying customers with a legitimate complaint? Fault is not the key concept here, accountability is - you're representing the vendor here, so you're accountable. At the very least, you could own the problem and treat your customers with a shade more respect. You're good people with a great product, but sometimes you're hard to love!

Sadly, I have to agree 400% to this (and the rest of the post). It's even better not to post, than disrespecting someone for a (valid?) dumb question.

[Dwarden 1125]

@fev and rundll.exe

we factored that into the release of patch - that's why it's compatible with STEAM distribution

or do You suggest we wait indefinitely with releases (patches or else) because one distribution service has technical issues?

[LondonLad 13]

@fev and rundll.exe

we factored that into the release of patch - that's why it's compatible with STEAM distribution

or do You suggest we wait indefinitely with releases (patches or else) because one distribution service has technical issues?

I do!

As is evident here, you've alienated some of your userbase from being able to play online with users/servers that are able to successfully patch their system because they've chosen a different distribution service.

Edited April 5, 2011 by LondonLad

[fer 21]

or do You suggest we wait indefinitely with releases (patches or else) because one distribution service has technical issues?

I've acknowleded that you probably had no choice WRT to the release of RFT (because of commitments to publishers). However, I am certainly suggesting that you could have delayed the public release of the 1.59 patch until Steam was ready.

Those two releases (RFT and 1.59) are only coupled (timing wise) because you chose to make it so - if I understand your situation correctly, you could have:

• Released RFT (at 1.58)
  
• Made clear that it would become compatible with OA/A2 in a soon-to-be-released universal 1.59 patch
  
• Waited for Steam to be ready before releasing the 1.59 patch for all distribution platforms

Assuming that the playerbase of RFT (1.58) was (and probably still is) smaller than the combined playerbase of Steam 1.57 and non-Steam 1.57, such an approach would have inconvenienced a smaller number of players and communities.

Describing Steam as one distribution service sounds disingenuous unless - and I'm really happy to be proved wrong here, if you're able to share the figures - it transpires that Steam users constitute a really small proportion of the active playerbase.

[sickboy 13]

I think fair points being brought up yet it seems the fact that the official 1.59 patch seems to work just fine with Steam distribution is mostly ignored.

(Many positive reports from people I know. But perhaps I have missed negative ones..)

Though have to admit, seeing that the download page states it's not recommended to install on Steam, that might be a little confusing.

[ChiefBoatsRet 10]

The Community that I play with is still waiting to update as are many others because there is a huge Steam player base. New players that have already updated can not play on our servers. This is fracturing an already fairly fragile player base that tries to keep up with all the addons and such that it takes to play online in most of these communities.

[jaynus 10]

I think fair points being brought up yet it seems the fact that the official 1.59 patch seems to work just fine with Steam distribution is mostly ignored.

(Many positive reports from people I know. But perhaps I have missed negative ones..)

Though have to admit, seeing that the download page states it's not recommended to install on Steam, that might be a little confusing.

Confusing, and those of us that do manage larger steam player bases ( > 30 people on steam), we *do* see the random times where steam doesnt update the registry, runs a random file check when it shouldnt, etc.

Forcing a user to disable updating *all* their steam games, just for A2, is asking a bit much.

[zeep 3]

I downloaded the patch and ran it. I have Arma2, BA, PMC and OA all in Steam.

Now my Arma2 is version 1.08? The patcher didn't say anything about patching arma2 which i thought was strange to begin with.

I also got a error during the installation of the patch,

Cannot open file 'pmc\addons\roads_pcm.pbo'

Should i be worried?

[OMAC 254]

@fev and rundll.exe

we factored that into the release of patch - that's why it's compatible with STEAM distribution

or do You suggest we wait indefinitely with releases (patches or else) because one distribution service has technical issues?

For what it's worth, I agree with Dwarden here. To hell with Steam - release PC patches AS SOON AS POSSIBLE! PLEASE!!!!!!! We NEEEEED those patches!

Steam = STEAMING PILE of ____

[rangerpl 13]

Guys, give Dwarden a break, he's right about Valve. There's a similar company making niche games, Paradox Interactive, in Sweden (they made the Hearts of Iron series among other grand strategy games). They get screwed over by Valve all the time, this issue is not BIS-specific.

They don't complain as much because Paradox games are primarily Singleplayer, unlike ARMA.

It sucks, but what can you do?

Edited April 6, 2011 by RangerPL

[Wilson_B 10]

I am fairly disapointed with the AI driving in cities in this new 1.59 patch. At first it seemed like something was improved about the driving, like when AI encountered a hanger, they knew to do a hard left to avoid it...but this is about the only thing I noticed. In Zargabad, it is horrible ai navigation... Especially when you are trying to do a cutscene for a mission that depends on a vehicle navigating a few simple streets in a reasonable amount of time and not taking rediculous detours... I dunno, I've been a fan of the series since cold war crisis but my patience for this game is wearing quite thin...

[1in1class 0]

Have not like steam since it came to, it's got nothing but problems for number of things. ArmA 2/OA came out on disk too, why not just get the game on disk? Just cause there are issue with steam does not mean it's BI fault. If anything you steam people should know this! It came out on disk and should be patched in the way that it has been for years as it worked just fine for BI and it's community. If you got it on steam that's your choice in that matter, if anything goes sour on steam that's on steam's part. I could see this as an issue if BI was only an steam release, but it's "NOT"! Just cause its an issue on steam does not mean its got to effect the people who bought the DVD disk! In all ways BI should take it off steam, as an poll befor had already gave favor for people that would buy it on DVD disk then on steam.