To the people who are playing ArmA, how is it?

[Cannon Fodder 0]

Jarf, you have a very similar setup to mine (see sig). I hope ArmA will run acceptably with a great degree of eye candy on my system. Hitman Blood Money ran excellently on my system at 1600x1200x32 with 4xAA and 16xAF (High Quality mode), although I don't expect we'll be in anywhere near the same league of demand.

My system's managed to cope admirably with the latest releases (it chewed up Oblivion, including with LOD and texture mods, and gave GRAW a run for its money) so I'm hoping to do well with ArmA. Suffice to say, OFP runs like a greased racing snake, so fingers crossed.

EDIT: I am expecting, like OFP, for the CPU to be the biggest determining factor. What surprises me most about this community is the hardware people use. It's somewhat similar to the GR community - there are people still plodding along with 2003's hardware. The strange thing is that people are worrying whether or not they'll get good frame rates on hardware considerably out of date, when you wouldn't normally expect any other recently released game to do so. The best indicator of how ArmA will run is to look at the level of demand most modern releases place on your system. ArmA uses many of the rendering techniques (although on a much larger scale) now commonplace in present day development. The most important thing to remember is that ArmA is a modern game with modern requirements. You can be rest assured that the developers will have looked at what they believe to be the current climate of demand and based the updates to their engine on that. That said, BIS have always been careful to include no upper limit on their engine's capability (c.f. view distance and terrain detail in OFP), so it's more a case of where to set the minimum rather than arbitrarily limiting the system's capability.

ArmA looks satisfyingly scalable, although to be honest if you're running anything less than a 3GHz (or equivalent) CPU and less than 1GB of RAM, you're going to suffer. A decent graphics card will apparently only get you so far.

[dmitri 0]

Well im sad that this game needs so much hardware to play , very sad.

This game will cost me 1000 euros .

Shame.. I guess if you need to spend that much, no game you've run in the last 2 years has played smoothly.

[AgentKGB 0]

Well im sad that this game needs so much hardware to play , very sad.

This game will cost me 1000 euros .

Shame.. I guess if you need to spend that much, no game you've run in the last 2 years has played smoothly.

Don't agree. If you aren't the player, who always tries the newest games, don't need the most recent hw stuff. I used to play with ofp, il2, lockon with A64 3200+ 1G GF6800/128MB and tried some new like graw, cod2 etc. They run smoothly on this config, although I know, this is not the most recent config. Now I've upgraded to X2 4400+ but Arma can't be played smoothly with the 128MB GF6800. The minimum is X800XT with this card I can play on 1024x768 and low/medium settings smoothly ~25-40fps average. For me that means to play Arma in med/high settings smoothly, you must have one of the most modern configs (will not go on intel/amd ati/nvidia story) everyone knows what recent means... So I'm a bit dissapointed on the hw needs, but the game is awesome. I think gpu with 128M no matter what type it is not enough. So let's start to save some bucks soldiers I can only hope, that bis realizes this, and there will be some post optimized patches

[undead6001 0]

If someone could look at my specs for a second and tell me how I'll probably be able to run it, I'd appreciate it.

I've got:

Intel Pentium 4 2,8GHz

512MB ram

Geforce 6600GT

My goal is: fps - 30+; graphics - 1024x768@medium settings

Do I need a better computer?

I guess I'll settle with 800x600@medium, but not low settings (the screens showing low settings are awful)...

That's why I wish they'd release a demo before the actual release. I just can't get myself to order a non-English version if I don't know if I'll even be able to run it. I ain't getting a new computer anytime soon (I upgraded my computer because of OFP back then, btw).

Thanks.

ps. And a reasonable view distance...say 1500

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Do I need a better computer?

Definately.

[dm 9]

The only drawback is that your going to spend twice the amount of money on the Duo...for a good gaming chipset that is.

Not really, the E6400 is only ~Å20 more expensive than the X2 4200+. And when you consider the immense over clocking capabilities of the Conroe, then that Å20 extra is 100% worth it.

I can only hope, that bis realizes this, and there will be some post optimized patches

ArmA is already INCREDIBLY optimised, you have to realise that the average polycount for stuff is in the high 1000's (I THINK the average soldier count is around 6-7000 polys) and no matter the optimisations, its going to need SOME decent hardware to run it.

We [bAS] had the same thing when we released Tonal, everyone expected to be able to play it on high view distances with max details on PC's which were already 2-4 years old, 3 years ago. You just cant expect to be able to use todays technology on yesterdays computers.

[sickboy 13]

We [bAS] had the same thing when we released Tonal, everyone expected to be able to play it on high view distances with max details on PC's which were already 2-4 years old, 3 years ago. You just cant expect to be able to use todays technology on yesterdays computers.

Amen to that!

Especially the game 2 game comparisons won't help anyone...

What ... Quake 4 and Doom 3 run amazing on ur computer?? Well they display only a few square meters at a time compared to 1200m viewdistance in ArmA etc Anyway... nobody should expect it to run on high-very high with a 2-3 year old pc, depending ofcoarse on what they bought back then, but still

[Adam192 0]

Quote[/b] ]ArmA Seems to love more cpu speed over a better graphics card

Damn

My CPU is definitely the weakest part of my computer.

P4 3.00 GHz

2 GB DDr2 SD RAM

Evga 7900 GT 256mb clocked @ 650/1720

[Heatseeker 0]

Here's a simple curiosity, in OPF the beautyfull faces of our favorite developers were all included in the game .

Is this the case with Arma?

[undead6001 0]

Quote[/b] ]Do I need a better computer?

Definately.

Gee, thanks...um, why? I don't want to run it on high settings. ArmA is *that* demanding?

[AgentKGB 0]

ArmA is already INCREDIBLY optimised, you have to realise that the average polycount for stuff is in the high 1000's (I THINK the average soldier count is around 6-7000 polys) and no matter the optimisations, its going to need SOME decent hardware to run it.

I strongly agree with you, I can see the changes between ofp and arma modells My thoughts about arma are absolutely positive, I'll play it "no matter" what it costs.

You just cant expect to be able to use todays technology on yesterdays computers.

That's why I wrote down my dissapointments about the hw stuff. I understand, that a new game needs a new rig. But there are big differences between the "todays technology" hw's. There are 2 categories, mid and high-end stuff. Like X1950/1650 GF7900/7600 these are all recent aren't? These are valid for cpus mobos and all hw's. You can't just say, buy a recent config... Sleep some nights, and your 7900 will be in the "yesterdays category" I saw arma running on core2@3.2 w 7900GTX.

You cannot play in high/1600x1200. Thats what I'm talking about.

[Hustler_Baby 0]

Why not start a topic called "Computer specs required for ArmA".

This thread was supposed to be for the players who already have the game to post in and now it has become a PC spec fest!

[aus_twisted 0]

You cant even play OFP smoothly on the highest settings with current hardware, there's just far to much to render. To many people are used to FPS games like Doom 3, Quake 4 and Half Life 2 etc where there's barely anything to render behind each scene except for some low poly models and a backdrop, not to mention OFP and ArmA has far more players and AI units possible then any other FPS.

[Daniel 0]

@Hustler_Baby

True, but until someone does, knowing what you need to buy for ArmA is a hell of a lot more useful than torturing yourself by reading how much others are enjoying it.  

[AgentKGB 0]

Hustler_Baby: search & find

But anyway, you're right, i'll stop bullshitting about hw. Only 2 things.

1. I have Arma, playing with it.

2. See optimal system spec on the backside.

Thats all.

Of course I love the game after a very long awaiting... It's just incredible!

I can see the more powerful engine, it won't loose smoothness with 5x more units deployed, with increasing the view distance etc. unlike in ofp, fantastic modells, textures and so on. The reason I posted here is to see others have the same problems/expectations as mine who HAVE Arma.

[znashin 0]

What's this all about? Who gives a rat's fat arse about if there's a co-op campaign in or not? Everyone knows that it's the community that's responsible for the high-quality missions, especially in MP. It's not like it's addons which needs to be downloaded and installed seperately. When was the last time you lads ever played a BIS mission in OFP MP for any other reason than to kill time?

Id've liked to have been able to play community campaigns co-op. Doubt this will be possible if BIS campaign isn't co-op.

[sickboy 13]

Id've liked to have been able to play community campaigns co-op. Doubt this will be possible if BIS campaign isn't co-op.

This will ofcoarse be possible, this was even possible in OFP already, especially because of the SOW multiplayer engine/saving... But of coarse, ppl will first need to make use of such things and put effort in it to work something like that out

I think with ArmA there is a big chance that proper multiplayer campaigns will be made, or even the original campaign sort off converted...

yeah, but you wont be able to see the french briefing I guess. And hwo does this affect the modders? would it still be possible to use a replacement sound pack or something like llaumax, skypacks, dxdll....hmmmm. I wonder...

I think that replacement soundpacks etc shouldn't be a problem if they are loaded in mod/addon folders. As long as the default BIS files aren't modified... atleast ... a guess.

Good stuff sickboy, many are reading this thread and you really are helping the community IMO.

Thanks! I wish I could've done more when OFP got released, but I was 3 years late lol Anyway... the more ppl get the game, the more advertisement there is done, even more ppl will get the game, and as the saying says: "The More, The Merrier" ... I don't mind to put a little effort here and there

[Heatseeker 0]

What's this all about? Who gives a rat's fat arse about if there's a co-op campaign in or not? Everyone knows that it's the community that's responsible for the high-quality missions, especially in MP.

MP coop campaign != user made MP missions, if you dont care about having a quality coop campaign for MP then just... dont.

Campaigns are rare, good campaigns with good storyline, voice acting, etc are even more rare. You disregard the capacity and skill of professional developers.

This is a great idea for the Arma expantion .

[sickboy 13]

MP coop campaign != user made MP missions, if you dont care about having a quality coop campaign for MP then just... dont.

Campaigns are rare, good campaigns with good storyline, voice acting, etc are even more rare. You disregard the capacity and skill of professional developers.

This is a great idea for the Arma expantion .

As groups of mods make Single Player Campaigns, this is just aswell possible as Multi Player Campaigns, the quality is of coarse dependent on the group's dedication, size, time, and their plans. The question was not about quality, but about possibility, and I say it is possible

[Hammer Schultz 0]

Sorry for being repetetive but I have to ask again, could someone playing the game please tell me if the game supports 16:9 resolutions (instead of the usual 16:10 resolutions used in wide-screen TFTs) and if yes, which ones?

I'm planning to play this on Sony W2000 40" LCD so I gotta know.

[sasyboy 0]

Sorry lads a bit off topic re grass talked about a few posts ago.

I was talking to a freind and he suggested making the AI crouch if they are in grass before firing. Sounds like a simple enough fix and I think it would make things a little better. Still need to work on the AIs view of people hiding in grass but I bet that's easy enough to fix. I'm sure it will all be good in a few patches.

[KingC 0]

Sorry for being repetetive but I have to ask again, could someone playing the game please tell me if the game supports 16:9 resolutions (instead of the usual 16:10 resolutions used in wide-screen TFTs) and if yes, which ones?

I'm planning to play this on Sony W2000 40" LCD so I gotta know.

If you look at this screenshot you'll notice that the option of 16:9 aspect ratio is in there

http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/9631/arma2006111320373292kopyl9.jpg

[maxqubit 1]

Quote[/b] ]Do I need a better computer?

Definately.

Well i'm 'investing' 100$ for an AGP 7600 gfx card 'update' and that will be it. My 2.8GHz P4 and 1GB RAM should do the rest on a 1024x768 res with medium details and a low-medium viewdistance.

If not, well i'm NOT going to shell out 1000$ for a new rig. Perhaps in the future. Better still, I have a 360 (only 400$ or less), perhaps there will be a 'port'.

[sickboy 13]

Well i'm 'investing' 100$ for an AGP 7600 gfx card 'update' and that will be it. My 2.8GHz P4 and 1GB RAM should do the rest on a 1024x768 res with medium details and a low-medium viewdistance.

I think it will do perfectly for your mentioned graphics settings, altough I might recommend you to try to get an ATI X1950Pro which are also quite cheap but they are very high quality, speed and have a better SM3 than Nvidia 7 series But it might be a bit more expensive than what you had in mind though.

[maxqubit 1]

Thx sickboy!