1.05. Be happy you have it.

[whisper 0]

And that proves... what, exactly? Apart from explaining how the engine works, ofc.

Other games can reuse video card memory. Arma don't. That's the reason why all the textures shown during a long mission have to be stored in video memory if you want to keep performance high the whole time. In a long mission there are multiple gigabytes of texture data on the screen if you are using high or very high texture settings.

If you don't understand this I can't help you.

What Maruk wrote :

Quote[/b] ]This indicates that your textures are probably no more fitting on the main memory of the graphics care and are stored in the main system memory which is way slower. After reset of graphical device (which you can achieve by alt tab or changing the in game settings) the textures get again to the main memory but after while this is again no longer sufficient.

And your conclusion after reading this is : "ArmA can't reuse Video Memory" ?

All I read in Maruk post is : "the amount of video memory needed to show all the scenery texture is too high for your Video Memory. Lower the amount of needed VRAM (ie lower texture quality) and ti'll be OK". Certainly not that VRAM is unusable after having been filled once.

[Possessed 0]

And that proves... what, exactly? Apart from explaining how the engine works, ofc.

Other games can reuse video card memory. Arma don't. That's the reason why all the textures shown during a long mission have to be stored in video memory if you want to keep performance high the whole time. In a long mission there are multiple gigabytes of texture data on the screen if you are using high or very high texture settings.

If you don't understand this I can't help you.

What Maruk wrote :

Quote[/b] ]This indicates that your textures are probably no more fitting on the main memory of the graphics care and are stored in the main system memory which is way slower. After reset of graphical device (which you can achieve by alt tab or changing the in game settings) the textures get again to the main memory but after while this is again no longer sufficient.

And your conclusion after reading this is : "ArmA can't reuse Video Memory" ?

All I read in Maruk post is : "the amount of video memory needed to show all the scenery texture is too high for your Video Memory. Lower the amount of needed VRAM (ie lower texture quality) and ti'll be OK". Certainly not that VRAM is unusable after having been filled once.

Then why it is not used? Instead of it ArmA starts to use system memory. Why it is so hard to understand it?

Your questions start to be comical. You just don't want to understand this simple thing or you just do not want to give up. One childish internet bullshit debate again.

[whisper 0]

And that proves... what, exactly? Apart from explaining how the engine works, ofc.

Other games can reuse video card memory. Arma don't. That's the reason why all the textures shown during a long mission have to be stored in video memory if you want to keep performance high the whole time. In a long mission there are multiple gigabytes of texture data on the screen if you are using high or very high texture settings.

If you don't understand this I can't help you.

What Maruk wrote :

Quote[/b] ]This indicates that your textures are probably no more fitting on the main memory of the graphics care and are stored in the main system memory which is way slower. After reset of graphical device (which you can achieve by alt tab or changing the in game settings) the textures get again to the main memory but after while this is again no longer sufficient.

And your conclusion after reading this is : "ArmA can't reuse Video Memory" ?

All I read in Maruk post is : "the amount of video memory needed to show all the scenery texture is too high for your Video Memory. Lower the amount of needed VRAM (ie lower texture quality) and ti'll be OK". Certainly not that VRAM is unusable after having been filled once.

Then why it is not used? Instead of it ArmA starts to use system memory. Why it is so hard to understand it?

Your questions start to be comical. You just don't want to understand this simple thing or you just do not want to give up. One childish internet bullshit debate again.

Because *gasp* the rest of the VRAM is ALSO in use (ie, on screen), don't you think?

And before you ask "why does the issue only appear after a while", and seeing you don't like the question/answer system , just remember the changeable view distance (ie potentially huge need for "static" VRAM, ie textures immediatly used) and the streaming engine.

It's not as simple as it seems, and certainly not a matter of "hey, game X or Y does it, why not ArmA?". Or, at least, it's not a certainty the issue lies there. It's not like me, you or any1 outside of BI had ever saw a line of ArmA code.

ArmA is not game X or Y, and, for exampe with the streaming engine, is not at all built in the same way.

[AzzurF 0]

@I&CLUE:

"@AzzurF: Do you really expect that I would pay for a patch? Or why you stress it is for free?"

?

I was just asking that what's the Problem.

Patches are coming and they do not cost us extra money, so it's not like we have lost something here.

And we have a nice game already.

And, if you were ready to wait 6 - 12 months to get your game to be a bit better, you still can wait.

You don't HAVE to play it now, angry and disappointed for whatever, try again next year.

Get the patches and imagine that you just bought the game.

The rest of us, more satisfied customers, keep playing it though.

[hbk 0]

Then why it is not used?

Because the video RAM is already full. If all the texture data needed to display the scene do not fill into the local video RAM, you can't display the scene correctly (i.e. texture errors) of fill the non local video RAM and take a performance hit.

It bogs me that ArmA needs that much space for its textures, but that's the way it is. Simple tests can prove that, and using some tools to monitor memory usage (like RivaTuner) corrobrates that. I find it hard to believe but that's the way the game is right now. I don't know if there's a way to improve that (i.e. lower video memory needed for ArmA's textures) as I am no BiS coder/graphist.

I can confirm that ArmA reuses video memory by playing a very long mission (~1 hour) with lots of "moving" and seeing textures loaded on the fly while there is no performance hit (except for the streaming needed).

It appears ArmA does have some difficulty handling "non local video ram" efficiently, but this doesn't change the fact that one way or another, the textures are just too big for your "local video ram". Lower your texture settings and the game shall play smooth, with little to no texture errors, while retaining pretty decent visual quality.

Ever seen a game where you can't push all the video sliders to the max without turning into a slideshow ? Now you have seen one. Of course, it IS disappointing. But hey, "disappointing" does not equal "unplayable" in my vocabulary.

[JimLad 0]

Ok explain to me how I get massive texture corruption with Textures set to Normal, on a 640MB 8800 then?  

Some people seem to think others are whining, but a lot of those same people are in denial about the major problems that some are having with ArmA.  Myself and others with cards that have 640-768MB video memory, experiencing massive texture problems and poor performance even having reduced the detail.  Don't think that these issues are simply because we are too ambitious with the settings  

[Bingo 0]

There is another spin to this debacle that I have just recently thought about, and by no means am I in any position to verify it...

Perhaps BIS *wanted* to wait. Perhaps, as they were signing publishers, those publishers gave them dates set in stone for release. Perhaps, they did all they could before they had to ship, or lose the publisher. Everything else gets sorted afterwards.

From what I've seen in the patches, the interactive bug-tracker with the feedback between the devs and the public, I think we've got ourselves a damn good deal and a little bit of patience never killed anybody.

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

@ AzzurF:

Quote[/b] ]And, if you were ready to wait 6 - 12 months to get your game to be a bit better, you still can wait.

You don't HAVE to play it now, angry and disappointed for whatever, try again next year.

Get the patches and imagine that you just bought the game.

It is hard to get it into your head. I try it in another way:

CASH ->>> BI

time delay: few days to deliver the box, for downloads: immediately

Customer<<<<-ArmA

What we have currently:

CASH ->>> BI

time delay: meanwhile more then 80 days.

Customer<<<<- non-working ArmA, hence partial delivery

If the supplier would gently ask me to postpone the final delivery or to give me a discount on a future product, I would not cry.

But if the supplier decides alone when and what he will deliver...strange.

The thing is with all the fanboys like you, that you grant this exception in business behavior only to the game industry or maybe only to BI.

I would like to see the reaction of guys like you if:

- you buy a train ticket for the complete town, you give the money and then you get handed out a ticket for next 3 stations? And the advise to come back in 3 weeks, then you MIGHT get the rest.

- you buy a car and you do not get the ordered interior and features, also no date when you will get it and that car stops itself randomly and they can not get it fixed over weeks

- you pay for a blo* jo*, and the lady stops JUST before you come, she turns and tells you that she MIGHT continue in a few weeks

Sure you will understand all that. Perfect Victim

[hbk 0]

Ok explain to me how I get massive texture corruption with Textures set to Normal, on a 640MB 8800 then?  

What resolution do you use ? It's pretty easy with all the buffers needed to hit a 100MB mark just for your "display".

Even at Low texture setting I get frequent streaming on a 256MB card. I wouldn't be surprised if the game needs 500MB+ for all it's textures especially when using long view distances (3000m+) and High object detail.

I am not saying this is normal, I am saying this is the way the game is in it's current state, and I don't know if this can be improved with patching (and not by tricking the user by lowering texture quality at the same setting).

Also, you have to understand that the 8800 is brand new and that it's drivers are obviously in an incomplete state. Don't blame BiS, blame nVidia for releasing a product with crappy drivers (or ATI for that matter, they're all the same).

Edit : As for your edit, I am not denying there are specific problems for some configs. I'm just trying to make my point clear about the fact that this game needs insane requirements to run on High or Very High settings.

[Chris Death 0]

@Possessed:

As i can see in your system specs you got that 8800 GPU,

which is 'the one' card having those issues where you need

to alt-tab twice to refresh the VRAM.

Maybe there are a few exceptions where other cards do have

the same issue but i can't remember having read about them.

Now did you ever consider that the source of the problem

comes from somewhere in the near of GF8800 and not from

BIS?

Now it's the question: should BIS wait releasing ArmA until

the 8800 series gets fixed to refresh the video memory or

shouldn't they?

Or should they spend another year just to find out at the end

it's the graphics card's fault and not theirs (not saying that

it's for sure GPU's fault here) and release the game one year

later with a non explainable delay.

The so called 'payed BETA testers' might be a rumor since

they usually don't get paid but benefit in other ways - earlier

releases for them or other goodies.

The only BETA tester that really can uncover all of them bugs

is (sad but true) nowadays the end user.

Nowhere in the world you'll get so many different system setups and experiences of gameplay together as with the mass of the end users.

I'm working as a system administrator for mainframe at a big

european bank and even there where it's about big money,

nothing gets released bugless nowadays - it's not possible

to make the perfect software for your customer until the customer have had his experiences or problems with it - even

if there are other customers who in theory would have the

exact same expectations and systems and reported the software being ok.

I've seen a lot of complaints about bugs in ArmA which later

were solved by new drivers or open GL or direct x version but

not the half of the ppl whining and screaming onto BIS had the balls to show their respect and apologies afterwards since

it's 'their right' to complain about not working software. ts ts ts

btw - ArmA doesn't need a 10gb GPU to run on high settings

since i got a 7950 GT KO 512mb and it's running fine from

1.00/01 (since 01 was released too soon for me to test 00

too long). No Alt-tab'bing necessary for me to clear VRAM

it just works like it should.

1.05 is not totally unplayable - hell it's even not near to

unplayable if ArmA is running on the right rig.

If the rig is not fine for ArmA but from specs it should be,

then there's still a big chance of rig's fault and not software's

since on some constellations it works fine.

~S~ CD

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

I mean I would never blaim BI for HW or driver bugs. I even try to nail down HW bug reports in the BTS like "my Gcard is somehow not working". We might leave some reports in if there is a generic problem with a certain product e.g. ArmA would not run on any G80 based card, and this just with the spin to ask BI gently if they could provide a workaround.

This is a generic problem where I do not have an exact solution for how to deal with all those "my one does not work at all" vs. "mine runs perfectly".

Only a few users are able/willing to deliver with a HW/system-bug report a complete HW+SW/driver description of their rig. Hence trouble shooting is in many cases just guessing and useless trying of different solutions.

It would be cool if someone could suggest a tool, that gathers the complete system HW+SW environment and the ArmA logs(I know they contain a lot of info, but not all that might be necessary) and stores it into a file ready to upload.

Even the laziest user could deliver good stuff for analysis and BI/we would be able to approach bugs in a statistical manner by reading the logs (which have all the same structure) into a database and run analysis on that.

Some effort initially, but I am sure it pays back on the long run.

[andersson 285]

I have a C2D E6600 and a GF8800GTS (+2 gig ram, raid, all the latest drivers and so on..). I can play arma with full settings, but I "only" have about 22FPS when there are multiple units fighting in wooded areas. I have turned down terrain and objects to normal, and shadow and AF to high. Now I can play with ~32FPS in forrest ranging up to ~80 in desert (1204x678). Nothing is overclocked.

I do not experience any texture bugs. I havent yet experienced any bigger bug playing the campaign.

I play 1.05....

Yes, I feel lucky to be able to play arma as it was ment to! But my point is, you cannot rule out dual cores or 8800s.

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

Umm, andersson you are a lucky one, you must have the golden setup. Is it also as good when you are on MP servers with lots of players? I had only those graphical issues when it became very busy or when I return to ArmA with ALT-TAB.

I ordered recently a rig for ArmA testing, that insane 4500€ thingy quadCPU; dual 8800GTX everywhere water pipes and so on.

I returned that one due to the advice of one friend since he told me that ArmA can not utilize more then 1 CPU and out of those 2 8800 cards in total only the 768MB of 1 card effectively. Hence I ordered with the same ASUS Stryker just your 6600 C2D CPU, only one 8800 GTX and 4GB RAM and I pray that this would be now the one for further testing. So 2600€ now. But still a lot of dust and I would not understand it if I can't play ArmA now on medium settings.

[badvok 0]

I to am lucky enough to own a E6600 processor and a 8800GTX + blah blah. To be honest it doesn't bother me to much that I'm only getting 20 or so fps as I've been brought up on budget graphics card/PC's. It's just a fact of life if you own a PC and get the latest hardware that there are various bugs. Normally i alway buy the cheaper tried and tested hardware (ie over 6 months old) which works well. New games always have some bugs, Dark Messiah of Might and Magic crashed many times but i don't mind this if i can play as soon as possible.

The bottom line for me is I'd rather play it now with bugs than in 2 years time. Apart from that, we can look forward to new patches with excitement, treat them like little Christmas presents.

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

Quote[/b] ]treat them like little Christmas presents

You mean not paying for presents as usual? And throwing into trash bin if I do not like it?

[badvok 0]

Quote[/b] ]treat them like little Christmas presents

You mean not paying for presents as usual? And throwing into trash bin if I do not like it?

No, more like when you install the patch and run the game for the first time it's like the moment when you open the present. If all goes well, that's the point where you like the present. If the patch doesn't do much then it's the same as getting a toy without batteries. The fact is because more patches will be available there's always going to be highs or maybe lows (ie disappointment).

I'm going out on a limb here but...

No patches = No Christmas

[froggyluv 2130]

Umm, andersson you are a lucky one, you must have the golden setup. Is it also as good when you are on MP servers with lots of players? I had only those graphical issues when it became very busy or when I return to ArmA with ALT-TAB.

I ordered recently a rig for ArmA testing, that insane 4500€ thingy quadCPU; dual 8800GTX everywhere water pipes and so on.

I returned that one due to the advice of one friend since he told me that ArmA can not utilize more then 1 CPU and out of those 2 8800 cards in total only the 768MB of 1 card effectively. Hence I ordered with the same ASUS Stryker just your 6600 C2D CPU, only one 8800 GTX and 4GB RAM and I pray that this would be now the one for further testing. So 2600€ now. But still a lot of dust and I would not understand it if I can't play ArmA now on medium settings.

You'll run it fine with that rig. I've probably dopped a good $2500 in total to get this game/upgrade/dsl and I'm very happy with it.I've got the ASUS Commando and like Stryker, it's an OC dream. Right now I'm getting 40-50fps in almost all situations with settings set to med/high;res:1440/900

Specs:Commando

          e6400 oc'ed 3.3

         7900 gs oc'ed 650/1.5

         2 gig teem xtreem ddr2 667 oc'ed of course

         ocz 700 PSU

I hope this makes your Arma more enjoyable as Im having a blast

[andersson 285]

Umm, andersson you are a lucky one, you must have the golden setup. Is it also as good when you are on MP servers with lots of players? I had only those graphical issues when it became very busy or when I return to ArmA with ALT-TAB.

I did spend over 2 months just reading about parts before buying anything, so I know the parts do work together.

I havent tried it in MP. But I have done alot of ALT-TAB without any problems.

Good luck with your next rig!

[4 IN 1 0]

*sh~*dont tell anybody that i have 8800 GPU and i can run the game pretty good. no just dont tell anybody!

[AzzurF 0]

@INNOCENT&CLUELESS:

It's hard to get in Your mind.

I've tried, but I just can't see what's buggin you So much.

"- you buy a train ticket for the complete town, you give the money and then you get handed out a ticket for next 3 stations? And the advise to come back in 3 weeks, then you MIGHT get the rest."

You have bought a train ticket to get place B.

You may not have the most comfortable train, but still you are moving and getting there.

Maybe the train has to stay on the stations a bit longer for the repairs occasionally, but you'll be moving most of the time.

I guess what you wanted, was to wait on a station for a new and polished Train of all Trains, fast and pretty.

Waiting and not knowing when the train might come, and when it finally comes, you may still not like the seats or the smell of it.

The train ticket cost is still the same, or maybe higher.

This is not too serious, you haven't been robbed or violated.

You are just wasting your time with that 'overreacting'.

PS. "Fanboy"?

If you like this game for some reason, you are a "fanboy"?

What are you then? A "hateguy"?

[Mogley 0]

Dear Bohemia Interactive Studios:

I think you have done a very good job in customer support for this game Armed Assault. I am an original OFP'er since the days of the demo for OFP. I bought the game as soon as it was released. I have been gaming on the PC since the day of duke nukem, wolfenstein 3d, chuck yeagers air combat, etc. I play all current games too such as the BF2 series, counter strike source, etc.

I must admit I have never played a game the gave me the feelings that the OFP series gave me. It has not been surpassed by any other game. When I tell other gamers about the OFP series my face lights up as I tell them about the best game ever made.

So now that you know that I love your game, I really see better customer support from BIS than any other game studio. The presence on the forums from BIS and the buglist and such just shows your dedication to your game. Please dont let the negative comments make you feel overwelmed. Many love this game and the ones who love it dont have the time to post about it because they are too busy playing.

The latest patch has addressed so many issues and when I first loaded the patch and started playing I was so pleased with BIS and what they have accomplished in so little time. The patch is excellent and soon the game will be ready for the US release. I cant wait for the next patches.

I am aware that some new bugs have been introduced with the new patch, but the same can be said for BF2 and other MAJOR popular games. Its the nature of the beast. But where BIS shines is that they listen to the community and work with them to improve the game.

Thanks BIS.

Now all bow down the the king of all military style games

BIS and the OFP and ArmA series!!

[Dwarden 1124]

as Czech user i'm very happy that we got already v1.05 (most of these who started with 1.04 or 1.02 can't imagine what was 1.00 about

patches resolved tons of issues ...

yet IMHO same number of issues needs to be fixed before i can say bugs are not limiting my gameplay ...

considering time for development and size of team we got ArmA in state as it is (worktimes, team sizes used for titles like Crysis or Stalker are x times bigger, same goes for budget)

not to mention size of game world results into huge complexity,

if You familiar with game projects You sure aware there are thousands to tens thousands bugs

even AFTER game going gold (let say with minimum (dozens) gamebreaking ones , usually on rare conditions)

now for bigger ttles add one or two more nulls to that number...

that's why it's nice to see that BIS continue to fix (instead of take money and run), improve and add ...

sure, noone will argue that BIS made some new mistakes or repeated some mistakes from OFP but noone is perfect ...

as it was said another milestone will be US release and i myself hope at that time ArmA will be stable brand in large areas FPS tactical gaming community ...

as user if You keep reporting BUGS via bug tracking system, posting "usable" wishes for game improvement on BIKI and discussing (not whining) on this forum

then You get even better improvements over future patches

[benreeper 0]

I'd like to ditto the first and last two posts and also state that if you are trying to play the game at it's maximum (or near maximum) settings and are complaining about framerates, then the game isn't your problem: you have other issues.

--Ben

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

@ Dwarden: Do you try to suggest that the customer has to bleed for the mistake of the developer that he approached a huge project with a to small team in a to ambitious time frame? I knew it, and I took it as an explanation, not as an excuse.

I would not call it money making if BI would have cut the project into smaller chunks and implemented the main features one by one so that always a stable version would be available and a demo version with the next feature set. They even could charge me an annual fee for continuously working on quality insurance and further development.

So if they would charge me 20€ a year they would have every 2 years that what they charged me now and maybe for another 5 years.

If many of us easily spend 700€ for a watercooled BlackPerl or 1400€ to have 2 in SLI we could JUST pay also this.

What still brings me to the top, I do not care about the money for the 3 licenses, is that they were not honest to me about the condition what they sold to me, those things I take very serious. And I am sure they were hiding it on purpose, even a totally disabled person could not overlook these many bugs in the early versions sold.

In my opinion BI burned within days a lot of reputation and trust with that odd move. If they couldn't get it ready in November, they would have survived also a start of the cash flow now or in a few month. We could then betatest the 1.0x for free but would buy it for shure.

@ benreeper: If I manage to assemble til next week my rig and I can not get 25 FPS on 5000m and medium settings, would I get your permission to say something?

[Luciano 0]

5000m? Remember that this game is far far far far advanced compare to any hardware available. So maybe you should try 2500m

5000m in 10 years, this game is far ahead of its time.