Armed Assault FAQ

[NeMeSiS 11]

Did ArmA 'll use the Ragdoll technologie and the havoc physic for the environements(props) and bodys ?

No, and it probably wont  

EDIT: A question that has been asnwered but i cant remember it:

Will ArmA make use of Dual core/64bit processors?

(I cant remember excaclt but i thought it did make use of dual core and not 64bit, but it might be the other way around)

[deanosbeano 0]

suma once said this, only thing i seen about 64 bit.

A few though on 64-b version of ArmA:

As many posters here already said, 64b native application is not necessarily better than a 32b one, and that is because 64 bit datatypes are not really usefull for general computing. While 16b precision is too low, 32b is already fine for most purposes (both integer and floating point). There are few cases where you might want to use 64b, like for high-precision timing or when addressing huge data sets in the memory (over 2 GB).

On the other hand, 64b platform does not automatically mean all your data will be 64b. By default only pointers are 64b, integers stay 32b unless you explicitely ask for "long long" ones. This means the data do not usually grow 2x. They will grow somewhat because of larger pointers, but pointers usually do not present most of your data.

Whether there is any real benefit in recompiling the ArmA for 64 platforms is yet to be seen. Besides of increased address size, those platforms usualy offer more registers, which can be quite beneficial for some computations. On the other hand, because of larger pointers, the memory footprint will somewhat grow. If the application is not really using 64b address space, it may even perform better in 32b version.

The answer to the original question "will there be 64b version of ArmA" is therefore this:

While this is still open, it is not very likely, as it currently does not seem 64b native version of the game would perform significantly better.

As evidenced even by the posters trying to defend 64b architecture, you get many performance benefits even when running current 32b applications on current 64b CPUs. Those benefits will certainly be there even if there is no native 64b version.

You may find some more reading on the Internet. Check links below or google for "64 bit real advantages" or similar words.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=76

Quote[/b] ]From my testing on both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Shadow Ops: Red Mercury, the claims made by both AMD and Atari regarding the enhancements to the AMD64 version come into question. What the 64-bit version does offer the gamer is an increased amount of visuals ... These did not show up in our 32-bit game testing and thus the 64-bit version of the game does have a bit of an advantage in this way. ...

However, the visual quality of the game I did not find to be any better on the 64-bit version of the game compared to the 32-bit. ...

These additional items that were added into the 64-bit game are mostly "fluff" -- they add a little bit more realism to the game -- but I see no reason why the same items could not have been added to the 32-bit version as well. There is certainly no technical reason for them to be omited. And while that "fluff" is by no means a bad thing, I would guess that it was added into the 64-bit only version either due to marketing desires from either Atari or AMD or purely for development time considerations.

http://arstechnica.com/cpu/03q1/x86-64/x86-64-2.html

Quote[/b] ]The take-home point here is that only applications that require and use 64-bit integers will see a performance increase on 64-bit hardware that is due solely to a 64-bit processor's wider registers and increased dynamic range. So there's no magical performance boost inherent in the move from 32 bits to 64 bits, as people are often led to think by journalists who write things like, "64-bit computers can processes twice as much data per clock cycle as their 32-bit counterparts."

http://compreviews.about.com/cs/cpus/a/aapr64bit.htm

Quote[/b] ]Much of the tasks that the average consumer does on the computer are more than adequately covered by the existing 32-bit architecture. Eventually, users will get to the point where the switch to 64-bit computing will make sense, but currently it does not. How many consumers out there will likely even have 4 gigabytes of memory in a computer system even in the next two years?

[NeMeSiS 11]

*too much to quote*

Well, read some stuff about it, but i thought some time ago someone from BIS said that ArmA would benefit from a dual core processor, but it might as well have been said that ArmA will be available in 64b, better performance or not  

And as im getting a dualcore i would like to know if its really going to matter for ArmA

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Edit: nevermind, my browser fucked up :/

[anders^on 0]

Well, read some stuff about it, but i thought some time ago someone from BIS said that ArmA would benefit from a dual core processor ..

BIS said that, indeed, but corrected themselves days later by saying that Arma will run nice and smoothly on a 64bit but won't be optimized for it.

[t80 0]

The dynamic weather...

is it possible to have no clouds at all, clear day?

[NeMeSiS 11]

Well, read some stuff about it, but i thought some time ago someone from BIS said that ArmA would benefit from a dual core processor ..

BIS said that, indeed, but corrected themselves days later by saying that Arma will run nice and smoothly on a 64bit but won't be optimized for it.

Thanks

Do you also know if ArmA supports dual-core processors or will it just use 1?

[Lou Montana 101]

I heard it would be, but excuse me for that stupid answer, I surf on so many pages that I don't remember where I saw that, or someone saying that... let's ask PLACEBO to answer all of our questions MuHahAhA

Em... sorry, it was a nervous crisis I had to blow. Thanks for your attention.

Anyway I read that 64-bits would work but not optimized, and Dual-Core would be supported.

[MeltdownSoldier 0]

Did the seagull 'll be present in ArmA when we die in multiplayer ?

[tonik_tzw 0]

I'd like to find out more about recommended server specs as I have read in some of the interviews that MP will only be limited by the specification and bandwidth available to a server.

I've seen that minimum spec is 2Ghz CPU, 256 RAM and 64 MB Video for clients but what sort of MP capability would this provide? I think in the current trend of hardware development, it would be beneficial if we could find out exactly if support for Dual Core / Dual CPU servers is available and the expected bandwidth overheads for a number of players so that clans can plan their server support for game release.

Also with JIP, will the joining players have a choice of the slot that they will fill on entering the game (ie: replace a bot), or is it likely that they will start from a set point in the game (ie: blue/red base).

Loadouts. In some missions, it is always the section commanders responsibility to issue weapons and equipment when weapon change is available. Is there the option for a player to kit up themselves and save a template for favourite loadouts for MP games? Hopefully this wouldnt lead to BF2'esque games where everyone decides to go sniper for one map!!

[CsonkaPityu 0]

Minimum specs are minimal. Servers need more then the bare minimum and i cannot find any confirmation of dualcore or 64bit processors being supported. I think i remember dual core being supported, but i know that the game won't be optimized for 64bit. I'll try to dig the info out.

How players can join probably depends on the mission the server is running.

The weapon loadout screen seemed to be the same, atleast according to Magnum from simHQ. So it hasn't changed yet.

[Lou Montana 101]

Q: will be Squad.xml and custom faces on the game ?

I would say "yes" cause Placebo once said that every cool feature would remain on the game, reworked.

A nice new

[rundll.exe 12]

Better make it more general then.

Q: Will all the good features from OFP be in ArmA?

A: Yes

[MeltdownSoldier 0]

Q: Will all the good features from OFP be in ArmA?

A: Yes

Its wrong !

They suppress le possibility to crawl faster, they suppress the total freelook to the dirigeable look(less réalistic, like BF2 with the possibility to look on you W/L, wow impressive), they add flat and little maps, they kept the same physic motor and the engine is not more optimisated than Ofp.

So i stop here, the list is too long. I think ArmA 'll be for a large audience, so, it 'll loose all that make Ofp a great game. What a pity...

What about the seagull ?

[NeMeSiS 11]

Q: Will all the good features from OFP be in ArmA?

A: Yes

Its wrong !

They suppress le possibility to crawl faster, they suppress the total freelook to the dirigeable look(less réalistic, like BF2 with the possibility to look on you W/L, wow impressive), they add flat and little maps, they kept the same physic motor and the engine is not more optimisated than Ofp.

So i stop here, the list is too long. I think ArmA 'll be for a large audience, so, it 'll loose all that make Ofp a great game. What a pity...

Actually the game is still in progress, for instance

Quote[/b] ]They suppress le possibility to crawl faster,

is because they didnt finish the anims yet,

Quote[/b] ]they suppress the total freelook to the dirigeable look(less réalistic, like BF2 with the possibility to look on you W/L, wow impressive),

Is supposed to be an option, and the option is probably there to make TrackIR more usable

Quote[/b] ]they add flat and little maps,

The standard map is 2 times bigger then the maps from OFP, and the mapsize is now only limited by the size of our HDs (+current island is far from fnished, and its far for flat, rewatch the E3 demo)

Quote[/b] ]they kept the same physic motor

Its being updated, thats why those 'physics videos' gave such weird results (vehicles stopping in midair etc)

Quote[/b] ]the engine is not more optimisated than Ofp.

Its based on OFPE which is an optimized version of OFP, but they added alot of stuff so theyll need to optimize that as well. Optimization is the last step and they wont start on it until everything else is done (otherwise it would be pointless)

Quote[/b] ]So i stop here, the list is too long.

Bring it on!

Seriously, you guys are giving me a hard time not to flame everyone. Cant you people think?

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Quote[/b] ]+current island is far from fnished, and its far for flat, rewatch the E3 demo)

That is probably false. The guy in the armedassault.wmv [15:54] video says that 'The island is already ready". (@ ~10:42).

[NeMeSiS 11]

Quote[/b] ]+current island is far from fnished, and its far for flat, rewatch the E3 demo)

That is probably false. The guy in the armedassault.wmv [15:54] video says that 'The island is already ready". (@ ~10:42).

Well ok, its not 'far from finished', its just not finished yet...

For instance, look here.

Noticed anything? Thats right, no roads/stuff yet, just a very basic city layout with some buildings

EDIT2: Just watched the vid;

Aaaaah, the IDEA games guy

EDIT: Altough i love the fact that BIS (allows) the release of BETA pics i dont think its a good idea, other developers dont do it and they usually dont get people thinking that what they see/hear/read is what theyll play  

[t80 0]

Quote[/b] ]Quote

they add flat and little maps,

The standard map is 2 times bigger then the maps from OFP, and the mapsize is now only limited by the size of our HDs

HD´s ? u sure? that would be REALLY nice, = REALISTIC Arty shooting distance would be possible with the right addons, so if u have like 100 G for this, how big could you do the land mass? think off crusader, paladin, pion. and missiles Tomahawk ect.

[GBee 0]

Quote[/b] ]the mapsize is now only limited by the size of our HDs

HD´s ? u sure? that would be REALLY nice

Well that's what we understand is meant by the new Streaming Terrain which, it is believed, only loads the parts of the map needed* at that moment into memory instead of the whole map, as in OFP.

* By needed we have to assume around the human and non-human players and also around projectiles. Thus lots of AI or hundreds of Artillery shells would place a strain on the HDD (loading the terrain along their course) and also utilise more memory.

Edit: Typo

[NeMeSiS 11]

Quote[/b] ]Quote  

they add flat and little maps,  

The standard map is 2 times bigger then the maps from OFP, and the mapsize is now only limited by the size of our HDs

HD´s ? u sure? that would be REALLY nice, = REALISTIC Arty shooting distance would be possible with the right addons, so if u have like 100 G for this, how big could you do the land mass? think off crusader, paladin, pion. and missiles Tomahawk ect.    

Well, in theory yes, as ArmA loads only an area x meter around you, and keeps loading and unloading whil you move. OFP loaded the whole island at the same time.

But we might run into other problems then a lack of island-editor time and our HDs

[t80 0]

Quote[/b] ]But we might run into other problems then a lack of island-editor time and our HDs

You mean loading time before the game start? ? ?

or slow speed HD?

Quote[/b] ]Well, in theory yes, as ArmA loads only an area x meter around you, and keeps loading and unloading whil you move. OFP loaded the whole island at the same time.

So in theory it would be possible if you have a huge HD, to have a map size of a country, there will be more use off spy planes o other info, like first u have to find the enemy, logistic and sutch thing will be more interesting, 30-50 unit´s on eatch side on a huge dessert map size of iraq.. but the last vid´s show that lot of units where possible to.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Quote[/b] ]But we might run into other problems then a lack of island-editor time and our HDs  

You mean loading time before the game start? ? ?

or slow speed HD?

So in theory it would be possible if you have a huge HD, to have a map size of a country, there will be more use off spy planes o other info, like first u have to find the enemy, logistic and sutch thing will be more interesting, 30-50 unit´s on eatch side on a huge dessert map size of iraq..  but the last vid´s show that lot of units where possible to.

We dont know yet as we dont have the game in our hands, but in theory it should be possible (now is theory not always the real world )

[AngusSingle 0]

Does anybody know if you can be standing free inside a moving vehicle?. Such as being able to walk around the cabin of a passenger airliner while your at 30000ft doing 900kph?

[martinovic 0]

Does anybody know if you can be standing free inside a moving vehicle?. Such as being able to walk around the cabin of a passenger airliner while your at 30000ft doing 900kph?

You won't be able to do that.

[telejunky 0]

I thought they improved the 'collision request'. So that the Player should be able to walk inside vehicles like chinook or going on real aircraft carriers or land on its. Wasn´t there a kind of those answer?