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

[Shashman 0]

Lol, seeing all these people listing what (to me) sound like really fast PCs as not being good enough for ArmA, and here I am on my 1.7Ghz, 1gig RAM, GeForce GO6200 laptop

[ziiip 1]

Lol, seeing all these people listing what (to me) sound like really fast PCs as not being good enough for ArmA, and here I am on my 1.7Ghz, 1gig RAM, GeForce GO6200 laptop

Well, you will be able to play it with everything on minimum. The same applies for my with my Celeron.

[Skunk Monkey 0]

Well, my experiance of ArmA is limited, I knew my PC would be slow, but I thought it would run it ....... no pixel shader 2.0

 

[sickboy 13]

Well, my experiance of ArmA is limited, I knew my PC would be slow, but I thought it would run it ....... no pixel shader 2.0

You could've read that everywhere m8 Bummer!

Btw get any Radeon 9xxx series or Geforce 5xxx or 6xxx series

altough I would recommend stay away from the '200 and '300 or '400 series and only go a bit higher than that

[Fox808 0]

Well, my experiance of ArmA is limited, I knew my PC would be slow, but I thought it would run it ....... no pixel shader 2.0

Time to invest into a new graphics card...

[klavan 0]

Seems like Arma is going to boost high-tech industry profits a lot.

I'm going to purchase a new PC for this game......Damn you BIS, you make me doing crazy things!

Klavan

[Skunk Monkey 0]

I wont be buying a new GFx card, no point, rest of the PC isnt up to it. I was thinking of a new machine next spring.

I wasnt expecting to be able to get ArmA, but then got offered a copy earlier in the week, so just said yes without proper research - if you skim-read the specs (2Mhz processor, 128mb graphics card 512Mb ram then I'm above min spec - would have done for a few months)

I've been offered use of a 5700 which has the shader 2.0 but will be next week before its in the post. New system next year. I know it will be slow but it will run it and I'll manage.

[RussianElite 0]

What settings you guys think I can Run with this rig:

AMD 2X 3800+

2 Gig ddr 800 RAM

XFX 7600GT 256mb..

atleast meduim high? hopefully

[zyklone 1]

Ok, so I got the game today.

So how is it?

Well, the game itself is great.

The environment is excellent and the immersion is very good.

You can now play with very high viewdistance and the engine handles it

very well.

However, it's also quite buggy. Especially the multiplayer part.

Odd things happen and things feel a bit 'strange' all the time.

The response time on weapons for example don't feel as good as in

Flashpoint.

Some multiplayer missions feel like they're not quite done and the same goes for parts of the UI.

There are many cases where you just die without having any idea what

happened. Understandable ofcourse, but you'd atleast expect to hear a

sound or see some sign of what happened.

Having multiple players in the same tank is still a pretty bad idea

as the network code seems to collapse completely, so you're better off

both driving and shooting yourself.

I do however really like the new ways helis handle, except perhaps for

the AH1 which seems to be way too sensitive. Now you 'fly' helis instead

of just drift a long like you did in OFP. The downside of this is ofcourse

that it's much easier to crash now.

Most of the annoyances feel like things which can be ironed out pretty

quickly, and hopefully that's what BI is doing now.

Overall I think this will become a worthy successor to OFP, hopefully it will be in time for the EU release.

[berghoff 11]

(2Mhz processor, 128mb graphics card 512Mb ram then I'm above min spec - would have done for a few months)

Well if you looked at the biki you see this. Far below minimun specs ;( I suggest the 7xxx or x18xx/x19xx series from what I've read.

Quote[/b] ]* Nvidia Geforce FX with 128 MB RAM & pixel shader 2.0, ATI Radeon 9500 with 128 MB of RAM

& pixel shader 2.0

[sickboy 13]

Having multiple players in the same tank is still a pretty bad idea

as the network code seems to collapse completely, so you're better off

both driving and shooting yourself.

Nice Share...

I actually do not agree on the network part completely though... Indeed there are some things that need fixing... But I have been driving in a tank for hours today in multiplayer, with players in commander/gunner, and this went flawless, aswell as I heard from other ppl.. So I would check server hardware (server fps) and bandwidth usage, desync etc. etc.

It might be just lags due to poor connection, etc. etc.

If someone runs a server from inside the game, then it might possibly be a server performance problem

[zyklone 1]

Having multiple players in the same tank is still a pretty bad idea

as the network code seems to collapse completely, so you're better off

both driving and shooting yourself.

Nice Share...

I actually do not agree on the network part completely though... Indeed there are some things that need fixing... But I have been driving in a tank for hours today in multiplayer, with players in commander/gunner, and this went flawless, aswell as I heard from other ppl.. So I would check server hardware (server fps) and bandwidth usage, desync etc. etc.

It might be just lags due to poor connection, etc. etc.

If someone runs a server from inside the game, then it might possibly be a server performance problem

Yeah, it probably works if everyone has excellent connections.

It did sortof did then in Flashpoint too.

It's certainly better than in flashpoint though, as we managed to get gunner and driver to work somewhat. But with a commander also things collapsed.

[sickboy 13]

Yeah, it probably works if everyone has excellent connections.

It did sortof did then in Flashpoint too.

It's certainly better than in flashpoint though, as we managed to get gunner and driver to work somewhat. But with a commander also things collapsed.

Got a point there.

I guess it will always remain a problem to control a vehicle with laggy players, but for me it is almost unusual to have players with lagging connections, guess we're lucky

Those soundbugs annoy me though But seeying the patches for flashpoint... I bet BIS will get that all under control A.S.A.P.

[Adam192 0]

What sort of connections do you guys have? Is the netcode decent?

I only have an average 1MB connection.

[Janecky 0]

It does not matter how much you down-bandwith is, the up-bandwith is the one that matters when hosting MP since the host has to upload lot of data during the game.

So if someone has like 8MB/30kb connection he's certainly not going to host very big sessions lag-free despite great download bandwith.

People who experience lag are usually:

A) Playing on a server with poor upload bandwith.

B) Have poor connection themselves.

C) Are playing with people with poor connections.

OFP and also ArmA are able to support very big games if servers have good bandwith up/down, with OFP I had no problems with 30+ player games on some servers even with over 150 AI troops running around at the same time. Now tell me which normal off-the-shelf game which is not "massively multiplayer" can boast similiar performance?

In a way ArmA and OFP shoot themselves in the leg as they feature capability to host games easily yourself while playing without having to set up a dedicated server hooked to good bandwith. Larger maps then may lag a lot while self-hosting and those morons then complain about poor netcode, which is just bullshit as their net connection is to blame.

In a way

[FCs 0]

my impressions:

i'm using a c2d 6400@3.4ghz, 2gb ram, geforce 7900gs@600/800 machine, and the game runs slow and unbalanced at 1280, post proc low, aa and aniso disabled, obj txt normal, any other very high. i have an average around 35fps normaly, but it can drop to 15fps in a second, specialy when aiming.

the ai is much cleverer then in ofp, but every single soldier is a master sharphooter, from 300meters it's not a problem for them to shoot you with just one try with an ak or machinegun.

the ai is still driving in ofp style, so y turns, heavy breakings and weird corrections are included.

i think the real performance killer is the hdr effect wich was nice in far cry, but here it's simly disturbing, and looks very cheap. human eyes don't work this way, it's slow and and has let's say five steps. you run on a street on a sunny day, and the lights are changing every second. it's simply disturbing and as i said, not very well implemented.

every building colapses like the world trade center, after a few shots it comes down in 90 degree to the ground, leaving some bricks. before that there is no visual sign of a hit.

on a marketplace i could not drive through some tents with a m1a1.

loosing all your teammembers can happen in a second, they just walk in a city and die.

you still can't change mags when moving or using your bino.

i think thats enough problems for now, i'm sure that many thing i mentioned can be solved, but the bis are correct, this is ofp 1.5, or rather ofp1.5beta, not a new game. it's good to see the improvement, but i'm a little disapointed from the bugs and problems that were there in the old ofp and in stead solving them in the devepment we face them again.

[Postal69 0]

I'm sure most of the issues will be address'ed in a patch.. I have a question can u disable the HDR? and if so doe's it dramatically reduce the look of the game?

[Shashman 0]

I really feel for you, Skunk Monkey *hug*

Terrible news

Well, FCs' report is rather discouraging

I also find it kind of odd that people are so accepting of these bugs and immediately saying things like "it's ok, they will fix this in a patch, hopefully", in this day and age

[Adam192 0]

I would assume HDR can be disabled, if not.. well.. that's just silly.

Disabling it will give a considerable performance boost.

Also, as per usual, besides the 8000 series of nVdia or the x1xxxx series of Radeon cards, AA could prbably not be enabled in tandem with AA.

I always take AA over HDR.

[llauma 0]

I really feel for you, Skunk Monkey *hug*

Terrible news  

Well, FCs' report is rather discouraging  

I also find it kind of odd that people are so accepting of these bugs and immediately saying things like "it's ok, they will fix this in a patch, hopefully", in this day and age  

BIS has said that you need a card that supports PS 2.0 so what did he expect?

About people accepting the bugs.. There are two ways to look at it. First one is that BIS has shown that they have a good support for their games. The second thing, which is my own theory is that those who has ArmA suffers from the beta tester syndrome. Say what? I'll explain...

As ArmA has reached such few players the ones who has it feel special and fortunate to get to play it before the others. This makes the situation similar to the beta testers. As they feel chosen they tend to have an overly positive view of the product. After all, by making the product seem good it makes their chosen position even more envious to the others. Hence I've come to the conclusion to never trust the judgment of a 'beta' tester. Okay it wasn't quite on topic but in a way looking positively at the product and future patches is just what I was talking about.

[Heatseeker 0]

Its a little disturbing to read that a more than adequate setup averages 35/15 fps with not so high settings .

A C2D 6400 stocks @ 2.13ghz, pushing it to 3.4ghz might be pushing too far, im no OC'er but i would try to run Arma with default CPU speed and see if it goes, i know people have posted better numbers, even with many units on the screen .

[Adam192 0]

Something is wrong with his system I assume.

Spyware, maybe.

Or maybe he cranked up the view distance.

He should be able to play adequtely.

[FCs 0]

i'm not new in overclocking after some top100 3dmark results with cascade cooling a few years ago, so be sure that my system works just fine..:) 3.4ghz is on air, but for benchmarking at 3.8ghz on air. 6300 points in 3dm06 with a voltmoded 7900gs, and all the other games i play running flawless shows me that problem is elsewhere.

the fps. i was talking about normal situations / view distance at 1200 / like walking in village together with my troop, some foes etc, in this case i have about 35 fps. it can go up to 70 if look at the ground, but when i'm in a forest it can go down to 15fps. as i see the video memory can play a big role, because with cards with 512mb the fps fluctuation is much smaller. buy the game and check for yourself. in a preview i've red somewhere that a x2 4400+ with 1gb ram and 6800gt could only reach a stable 25fps at 800*600 and low settings.

i could not find any option to turn the hdr off, even in the config files you can just adjust the hdr precision

[Shashman 0]

Could someone post a screenshot of ArmA running at 800x600 and low graphics settings? I'd like to see what I can expect it to look like on my system

[Adam192 0]

Quote[/b] ]

i could not find any option to turn the hdr off, even in the config files you can just adjust the hdr precision

Ack.

I really hope there is some way to disable HDR, as it is an unecessary performance loss for me, and I will take AA over HDR any day of the week.

Unless you can run AA + HDR in tandem.. even then I would disable HDR for some extra FPS.