Demo today....WOOT

[Greyhound 0]

you have to tell me which distance between you and your enemy, if it is within 500m~600m its still realistic enought, anything above 700m would need luck even for AIs

BTW humvee itself is quite a large target even some 500 meters away, and there is no protection at all when you're manning the gun

If you know the starting position of BLUFORCE in the coop demo version(on top on a hill) i parked the humvee.

All the way across straight you see some flats behind some higher grounds.

The AI tracers while they firering come through bushes downhill behind that higher grounds infront of these flats.

I say its pretty screwed up auto aiming with their AK's without a scope.

When i'am at the BLUFORCE starting position i cant even see them with my SCOPE.

[ebns72 0]

I actually don't mind the new AI at all, because as a player I can pick off enemy AI with one shot, and thus they should be able to do the same. I am really glad there is no more OFP "hide in the bush and kill 3 enemy squads without them even noticing you) anymore.

[S.O.S 0]

FUCK http://armed-assault.net/ ALLWAYS CORRUPTED FILES

[Stealth3 0]

I'm assuming none of you have the retail version? AI can be quite stupid, I can assure you.

[Greyhound 0]

I am still curious if we ever gonna see a good massive wargame in the future.

With air/land/sea warfare together on huge and i mean huge maps/lands to fight your battle on with more then 200 players on each side.

yes you can do that, someone already did that in CZ verson 1.00(air not cause bis is still tweaking the control) only problem is that he is using a C2D class CPU

I am just saying that AA may be realistic gameplay compared to any other shooters but it certainly stops there.

AA

- outdated in grafics, character physics

- large boring enviourments

[Sennacherib 0]

yeah, i played all the night, and finally i think that Arma is really boring, if you don't like the simulations. for those who like that, this game is perfect. ofp was funnier, Arma is just too serious for me and need a too much expensive pc to work fine. thx for the demo as i said, but i won't buy the game. i will keep my old ofp.

[meyamoti 0]

I'm assuming none of you have the retail version? AI can be quite stupid, I can assure you.

So can people but even worse...

And Greyound,remember,graphics take more space then gameplay,the more graphics you have,the more gameplay you have,I doubt AA will become something like Halo3 or Crysis by default,and in all honesty,thats alright.

Still waitin for the download..got to 51 minutes and my internet conked out,now I'm just 2 hours away..yaaay..

[4 IN 1 0]

I'm assuming none of you have the retail version?  AI can be quite stupid, I can assure you.

if you really really want to compare AI to human then i have no words on that, atless it is better then OFP then i am a happy man

massive battle, now put it into a more practical way, i could made a 60 AI VS 60 AI with tanks, soft vehicals APCs and even some civil with simple implaced waypoint and triggers to take a town, and the outcome isnt bad at all(and it runs quite smooth with my crap PC), so i think thats is up to mission makers

btw remember to set object detail to very high even with crap PC so that the game render as much objects as well as enemy as possible within view distance

[Hornet85 0]

Im just geting

Quote[/b] ]Failed to read the shader cache file. Missing or broken shdc file?

Any one know wtf im doing wrong?

[Soldierg36 0]

new mirror

http://arma-fr.e-mengine.com/demo....547.zip

armedassault.fr mirror

[jerebaldo1 0]

I pine for the patch that adds some optimizations to the game. It is quite rough in its current state, and will be received by critics at least better than Soldner did. I mention this because the game feels more like Soldner, especially with the seemingly quirky scope aiming and the absent sounds. Things that explode actually do so, unlike the RPG which seems to swoosh into nonexistence when it hits.

So far vehicle handling seems alright, although anything is better than Soldner's. The graphics have awesome potential, and I like the new voices. The command interface is better, which is good, as well as the ability to better coordinate actions with squad mates....however nothing beats the BF2 command rose.

I do not like at all how the ai seems able to see through grass and trees....even if it's processor intensive I'd like the ai to take it into account. If the ai does already than do forgive me.

Anyway, I'm sure this game will grow into a masterpiece :-) given time.

[450R 1]

I can barely play the demo on my 9700 Pro, but unlike others I realize how outdated my hardware is and I won't blame the game for it.

So here's two quickies:

1) Recoil is WEIRD. Seems to just come on after you fire your shot, then it returns you to your original aim point. Feels more like an artificial afterthought rather than an integral part of the weapon's characteristics. Raven Shield's recoil system was much better than this. May or may not be related to low FPS, someone else can confirm/deny.

2) Get rid of the grass. Nuff said.

[kestrel7e7 0]

I pine for the patch that adds some optimizations to the game. It is quite rough in its current state, and will be received by critics at least better than Soldner did. I mention this because the game feels more like Soldner, especially with the seemingly quirky scope aiming and the absent sounds. Things that explode actually do so, unlike the RPG which seems to swoosh into nonexistence when it hits.  

     So far vehicle handling seems alright, although anything is better than Soldner's. The graphics have awesome potential, and I like the new voices. The command interface is better, which is good, as well as the ability to better coordinate actions with squad mates....however nothing beats the BF2 command rose.

     I do not like at all how the ai seems able to see through grass and trees....even if it's processor intensive I'd like the ai to take it into account. If the ai does already than do forgive me.

     Anyway, I'm sure this game will grow into a masterpiece :-) given time.

Quote[/b] ]however nothing beats the BF2 command rose.

I find the BF2 command rose simplistic and clumsy. The comm. interface in Wolfenstein:Enemy Territory is much better, using a classic numeric menu interface which is filled with several layers of options. Before you know it you can quickly pump out comments and responses to fast hectic battle in real time. Unlike the BF2 command rose (which seems like it was made for consoles) it doesn't obstruct your vision, nor does it hijack the mouse.

[Blackbuck 9]

This is how my demo went.

[img/]http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y111/CanadianTerror/Misc/armademo.jpg[/img]

your card does not support dx 9 sorry

i got that error and my card has DX9

[franze 196]

i got that error and my card has DX9

Which card is it?

Remember, it's not whether you have DX9 or not, it's whether your card supports it.

[sektor 2]

To all the wankers and crybabies who where in diapers when OFP 1.0 was out, the fact is that OFP was as unpolished as ArmA now, maybe even worse. Planes sucked, AI sucked, no pistols, phisics sucked, and it took a official expansion and reaching patch 1.96 trough few years to make it more and more enjoyable. But people loved it because from the beguining it had the feeling of freedom and possibilities, which resulted in 12 GB of addons on my HD. New game looks great and has the same feeling OFP once had, and i can't play OFP Rez 1.96 WGL anymore when i can play ArmA. Find me a shooting game you will play more than 6 months before you replace it with some new version, but not before you buy new grafic card.

If BIS provides the same support for ArmA like for OFP, the patches and tools, it's going to be good old times all over again

A bit off toppic, though.

[max power 21]

I've been playing the demo for a bit now and I must say that I can't really understand what most people are talking about. On this rig (not my primary, it's having mobo problems), the fps is between... 9 and 30 depending on the mission, with everything turned to low. The player does not move like he's drunk, driving is not hard, flying is not impossible (however it is very challenging with low FPS at low speed! on my nforce onboard sound, the sounds are not buggy no matter whether I have all the options on, off, or a combintion of the two. All in all, this demo seems like a great game that my rig isn't really capable of handling to its full extent, and that's really it.

For the curious, this rig is:

AMD 2500+ barton o/c to 2.2 ghz

nforce 2 chipset

ati x800 pro vivo firmware hack AGP 8x 256 vram

1.5 gigs ram

[Placebo 29]

<s>20</s> <s>21</s> 22 Mirrors added to the first post.

[SHWiiNG 0]

Ah, i cant see a thing, everythings too bright and everything is blurry. all my settings are high and Gamma correction etc are low

ill send a screenshot here

[meyamoti 0]

Strange,I was testing it just now and NEVER got that problem,I did find something odd about the shadows though..in normal I believe,I was inside of a building with a few stairways to the rooftop and an elevator beside it,the farther you look down,the grayer/whiter the screen became,personally I think its neat but I know many who would disagree..oh and driving is indeed not difficult,player does,as stated before,NOT move around like they are drunk. And piloting a helicopter isn't really that hard..I used a mouse and I found that if I barely moved it then I wouldn't have any trouble,when I rolled the Mi-17 (UH-60 can't do it so I figure they accidently skipped something) I noticed that I came down way too fast to do anything about it,natural. I then pulled the OFP hover idea of pulling the mosue back quickly,that is possibly the worse mistake you can make,its best to be gentle and barely move the mouse if you use it for piloting. It seems helicopters can also do forward loops,did it with the blackhawk but I wouldn't really recommend it to beginners.

And heres the image,first I chalked it up to being a video card issue but I saw a video that had a similar effect,only the infantry were in an APC,the view goes normal when the view is normal but the farther I look down,the more the gray/white spreads. http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/8470/imggh6.jpg

[kestrel7e7 0]

To all the wankers and crybabies who where in diapers when OFP 1.0 was out, the fact is that OFP was as unpolished as ArmA now, maybe even worse. Planes sucked, AI sucked, no pistols, phisics sucked, and it took a official expansion and reaching patch 1.96 trough few years to make it more and more enjoyable. But people loved it because from the beguining it had the feeling of freedom and possibilities, which resulted in 12 GB of addons on my HD. New game looks great and has the same feeling OFP once had, and i can't play OFP Rez 1.96 WGL anymore when i can play ArmA. Find me a shooting game you will play more than 6 months before you replace it with some new version, but not before you buy new grafic card.

If BIS provides the same support for ArmA like for OFP, the patches and tools, it's going to be good old times all over again

A bit off toppic, though.

The original OFP demo mission was awesome when it was first released and ran reasonably on an average computer. Fundamentally the core of OFP hasn't changed much since then, the patches have added assets and fixed bugs but the feel of the game remains the same. Don't expect ArmA to change much with patches.

[ziiip 1]

I really like the game, but I am most disappointed with the performance!! I have 1 GB DDR1 400 Mhz, 7600 GT and Intel Pentium D 920 (2.8 Ghz) and the game still very slow. 13 FPS is average on maximum, and of course bringing down the IQ to very low barely helps...

[baddo 0]

Dear All,

I tried the demo on this kind of system:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">Athlon 1.4 GHz

768 RAM

Geforce 6600 GT 128 MB VRAM

4xAGP bottleneck

WinXP Home with latest updates from Microsoft

DirectX9.0c "some edition"

This system does not fullfill the minimum requirements set by BIS, so low framerate and graphic errors mentioned below are not complaints, just observations what happens on a system like this.

Lets see what happened...

When trying to start the demo for the first time I got an error that file d3dx9_30.dll is missing. OK so there is a need to update DirectX then! No problem I can do that by downloading the latest DirectX runtime from Microsoft Downloads website (no need to go to a 3rd-party website to fix this, better download straight from MS). I think the readme of the demo has an error, or at least very misleading text when it says:

Quote[/b] ]DirectX 9.0c August 2006 edition (included with demo)

included with demo well for me the installer did not install or upgrade DirectX so clearly the readme was trying to fool me into thinking something which was not true, or did not work like intended. Maybe the installer sees that some version of DirectX 9 is installed so there is no need to install a new one, even if the installed version is not recent-enough. Only BIS knows.

OK now I got DirectX upgraded and yes the demo started quite nicely. Loading times were not too long. At this time the demo had 800x600 resolution, which it had determined to be good for my system. I switched it to 1024x768 though, to see an improvement. Then off to start a mission! Well I chose the coop mission and looked around at the start and everything looked just fine, except the frame rate was way too low to do anything close to playing. So back to 800x600, then! Well... what happened next was some very fancy graphics effects: all the buildings in the view crumpled into weird shape and some even lost textures completely (turned white). Well doesn't look good at all at this point... then I switched back to 1024x768 resolution and expected a change to even worse but no, it mostly stayed the same this time, all the buildings were crumpled and some of them were completely white. Also the ground looked like it was on the lowest level-of-detail it can go down to. At this point I was thinking, this system is just way too bad to be able to run the ArmA demo.

After a thinking and drinking break I restarted the demo. Now it was right from the start in 800x600 resolution and you know what? Things started to look just okay in the mission! It could even be played! Now things started to get warm... okay the visual quality is not good because the settings have been tuned down but hey it can be played! I had two pretty long-lasting sessions in the coop mission and I didn't run into any weird errors or problems with the gameplay (other than trying to keep my character alive). When a BRDM starts moving the framerate drops quite significantly (can't give values, didn't measure) but when the vehicles do not move then the framerate is acceptable, when it is known in advance that this computer is not anywhere near of being actually capable of running the demo with decent framerates. It is not possible for me to judge the quality of the gameplay or the visual quality with this computer, but I can say the demo is giving me a good feeling of what ArmA can be on a better system.

Thanks for the demo, BIS. I'll look forward playing the full version sometime next year with a much better computer.

Cheers,

Baddo.

P.S. I played on my own, locked server. No other players in the sessions.

[Blackbuck 9]

i got that error and my card has DX9

Which card is it?

Remember, it's not whether you have DX9 or not, it's whether your card supports it.

ive gathered why it wont work... my card is a 9250 whereas arma needs 9500...

[CsonkaPityu 0]

I really like the game, but I am most disappointed with the performance!! I have 1 GB DDR1 400 Mhz, 7600 GT and Intel Pentium D 920 (2.8 Ghz) and the game still very slow. 13 FPS is average on maximum, and of course bringing down the IQ to very low barely helps...

Must be something with your comp, i have the full game and when i max the graphics out my computer start crying... when everything is on low it runs like a charm (butt ugly but runs).