Island Lemnos

[sparks50 0]

When BI gives you Lemnos

make lemonade:)

Sorry.

Looks like the best BI island yet! I hope what they said about all houses being enterable is true.

Edited June 11, 2011 by sparks50

[OChristie 0]

When BI gives you Lemnos

make lemonade:)

Sorry.

Looks like the best BI island yet! I hope what they said about all houses being enterable is true.

;) Made me choke on my birdseye roast dinner and my cup of tea :) its around 40km2 According to my own version im going to through together :)

[MoS 0]

Chernarus wasn't enjoyable? Why? Because it didn't allow 10km view on a mid-range?

I have a mid-range and I think chernarus was perfectly playable at ~3km, as an mp host no less, and it was unrivaled in terms of gameplay -- thanks greatly to forests breaking up visibility, provide cover from air, forcing firefights closer. AI navigates forests better than urban areas. And tall grass also gives AI some much needed advantage.. Not to mention beautiful. and much more. Chernarus is BIS' finest work so far in my opinion.

Takistan has its merits, but the far too many and much too tall, dull and empty mountains and far too small and narrow greenzones did it few favours.

I'm sure lemnos will be cool even if it doesn't have forested areas, but I for one would like to see some.

Of course Chernarus is BIS finest "island" yet made, but only from a graphical point of view. I bought a new PC specifically for ArmA II just before release.

The recommended (not the minimum specs) were:

- Quad Core CPU or Dual Core CPU (Intel Core 2.8 GHz, AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400 + or faster)

- Memory 2 GB RAM

- Graphics hardware Nvidia Geforce 8800GT, ATI Radeon 4850 or faster (with Shader Model 3 and 512 MB VRAM)

My PC has a 3.0 Ghz quad, 4GB DDR2+ RAM and a Nvidia GTX260 with 896MB.

And I tell you I can´t play in those dense forrests without heavy frame rate drop! I´m not satisfied with playing max 20 fps. Now add godmode AI who sees you through bushes + grass and voila you get your own unplayable forrest experience.

I tried to overcome this problem with lowering my medium settings to low but you´ll always spot enemies after they spotted you (thanks to disabled AA and 3d resolution of 100%, btw don´t even bother going lower than that cause you´ll see through the eyes of an 80 year old).

For a PC that is above the recommended specs it is just not acceptable to have such a hard time in forrests, but as I said before, the same thing happened on Sahrani and many complaint about this.

I played ArmA I again yesterday with max settings and it was a joy walking through the forrest. I don´t know why BIS kept insisting on raising the poly models for the trees in ArmA II. The tree model from ArmA I are just as beautiful...

[maturin 12]

Now add godmode AI who sees you through bushes + grass and voila you get your own unplayable forrest experience.

Incorrect.

And Chernarus is one of the best videogame worlds ever created, in my opinion. War takes place in far more picturesque places, as we should all know, given the Harvest Red parallels to Georgia.

I have a computer that is right at the minimum specs line, and somehow Chernarus runs much better than Takistan. Forests are not noticeably worse than towns or undergrowth areas. I just don't want BIS drawing the wrong conclusions about their work based on isolated consumer feedback.

[Derbysieger 11]

Of course Chernarus is BIS finest "island" yet made, but only from a graphical point of view. I bought a new PC specifically for ArmA II just before release.

The recommended (not the minimum specs) were:

My PC has a 3.0 Ghz quad, 4GB DDR2+ RAM and a Nvidia GTX260 with 896MB.

And I tell you I can´t play in those dense forrests without heavy frame rate drop! I´m not satisfied with playing max 20 fps. Now add godmode AI who sees you through bushes + grass and voila you get your own unplayable forrest experience.

I tried to overcome this problem with lowering my medium settings to low but you´ll always spot enemies after they spotted you (thanks to disabled AA and 3d resolution of 100%, btw don´t even bother going lower than that cause you´ll see through the eyes of an 80 year old).

For a PC that is above the recommended specs it is just not acceptable to have such a hard time in forrests, but as I said before, the same thing happened on Sahrani and many complaint about this.

I played ArmA I again yesterday with max settings and it was a joy walking through the forrest. I don´t know why BIS kept insisting on raising the poly models for the trees in ArmA II. The tree model from ArmA I are just as beautiful...

Did you ever consider OC'ing your CPU to 3,8-4GHz?

My i7 @ 2,67GHz, VD 5000m in Chernogorsk: ~17-25fps, ~20-25fps in dense forests

i7 @ 3,99GHz, VD 5000m in Chernogorsk: 30-40fps, 35++fps in dense forests

as you can see it makes a huge difference.

[Avgeris 64]

The problem was the trees.

Processor:

Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9400 @ 2.66GHz (4 CPUs), ~2.7GHz

Memory: DDR3 4096MB RAM

Video Card:

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285

I have huge Problems with FPS, in Sahrani I don't the game runs smooth with the CAA1, in like 70~+ FPS

Chernarus was also not PvP frienldy as it had vast forests surrounding big forest areas that made the game very camping friendly and limited the map making capabilities. Takistan was full of canyons that made it also camping friendly.

Sahrani was great from every aspect, it was great, great and great. Canyons, forests, mountains, small cities and all the other stuff that made the game friendly for PvP missions and also looking good.

Sahrani FTW!