Patch 1.08

[JimLad 0]

I think they should concentrate only on getting the damn game to run properly, instead of adding new content

[Törni 0]

My wote goes to taking time and building finally a solid base structure that can support the rest of the game content without always new leaks appearing on somewhere as things get added.

EDIT: The more time is spend on this semi-functional "this version does this, but not that" (but the previous version perhaps had it) state the more confusion it causes.

[mrj-fin 0]

I expect BIS will still fix many bugs like AI routeseeking. After then should geta look to improve performance and the last important to me is give new features. Waiting for a tools.

[Tankbuster 1747]

Defo a 8800 fix.

+1

[CameronMcDonald 146]

+ 10^99

[andersson 285]

Ability to disable tracers, internals in armour..

[Tic-Tac 0]

My old comp with 6800gt, 1gb of ram and an old single core intel p4 are run arma at so-so performance with most settings on low and a couple on normal. Im just surprised at the amount of bugs that keep coming up even though there has been quite a few problems. What is it with new games that havent been tested properly like arma and medieval totalwar 2. On one of these patches I would expect them to have Dx10 and dual-core support put in. But BIS (or BIA i cant remember) are probably concentrating most of their work on VBS2 as that is probably what is getting them more money. I heard that the MoD has bought a license for VBS2 so maybe BIS are concentrating more on that at the moment.

[omadmartigano 0]

Bugfixes!!

[mchide 0]

Ability to disable tracers, internals in armour..

Im with you mate.

this should be fixed ASAP

[MehMan 0]

My old comp with 6800gt, 1gb of ram and an old single core intel p4 are run arma at so-so performance with most settings on low and a couple on normal. Im just surprised at the amount of bugs that keep coming up even though there has been quite a few problems. What is it with new games that havent been tested properly like arma and medieval totalwar 2. On one of these patches I would expect them to have Dx10 and dual-core support put in. But BIS (or BIA i cant remember) are probably concentrating most of their work on VBS2 as that is probably what is getting them more money. I heard that the MoD has bought a license for VBS2 so maybe BIS are concentrating more on that at the moment.

Are you aware that a implementing DX10 would require an entire engine change? It wouldn't be in a patch. Unless you want a 3 gig patch that won't work properly with older cards.

And it's BIA and they do not work on ArmA, only BIS does. BIA handles VBS, BIS handles ArmA.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Performance improvements and bugfixes would be fine!!

I prefer bugfixes little bit more - don't like "Armed bugs"

[1212PDMCDMPPM 200]

I would say:

- directX 10 support

- dynamic addon loading inside the game

- auto addon loading from server

1.

[4 IN 1 0]

I expect BIS will still fix many bugs like AI routeseeking. After then should geta look to improve performance and the last important to me is give new features. Waiting for a tools.

well they are better over patches as i saw them but not to a point to "fixed"

(i mean, damn, will this thing ever being fixed?)

[max power 21]

dx10, like dual core support, is never going to happen.

[4 IN 1 0]

My old comp with 6800gt, 1gb of ram and an old single core intel p4 are run arma at so-so performance with most settings on low and a couple on normal. Im just surprised at the amount of bugs that keep coming up even though there has been quite a few problems. What is it with new games that havent been tested properly like arma and medieval totalwar 2. On one of these patches I would expect them to have Dx10 and dual-core support put in. But BIS (or BIA i cant remember) are probably concentrating most of their work on VBS2 as that is probably what is getting them more money. I heard that the MoD has bought a license for VBS2 so maybe BIS are concentrating more on that at the moment.

Are you aware that a implementing DX10 would require an entire engine change? It wouldn't be in a patch. Unless you want a 3 gig patch that won't work properly with older cards.

And it's BIA and they do not work on ArmA, only BIS does. BIA handles VBS, BIS handles ArmA.

and that BIA have 10^99 developing power then their mother(which translate to 10^99 costly and 10^99 differents in their products, can you turn R6:RS into Gears of war? both uses unreal 3)

[max power 21]

Well, BIS developed the engine and BIA takes over from there. It's sort of like an OEM / VAR set up... like the VWAG and Audi. Can you turn a VW Golf into an audi TT?

[1212PDMCDMPPM 200]

dx10, like dual core support, is never going to happen.

Why are you saying that ? We'll see a lot of titles supporting both DX9 and 10 this year.

ArmA could be one of them.

1.

[4 IN 1 0]

dx10, like dual core support, is never going to happen.

Why are you saying that ? We'll see a lot of titles supporting both DX9 and 10 this year.

ArmA could be one of them.

1.

letme see, crysis is dx10 only, halo2 is vista(therefor dx10) only, any others?

edit:wait i make a mistake, how could you possibly put 2 different code into a single engine?

[max power 21]

dx10, like dual core support, is never going to happen.

Why are you saying that ? We'll see a lot of titles supporting both DX9 and 10 this year.

ArmA could be one of them.

Because I can't see the devs rewriting the entire engine from the ground up for either.

And if you though that this game had performance problems before, imagine it in dx10. Wooo.

[mikupoiss 0]

letme see, crysis is dx10 only, halo2 is vista(therefor dx10) only, any others?

Just where did you get the info that Crysis is DX10 exclusive?

[neutrix 0]

Crysis is DX10 and DX9, Halo 2 is DX9 only. The reason that they almost definitely won't switch to DX10 is the sheer difference between DX10 and DX9. I don't know here who has programmed using both but in my experience the gap is sizeable enough for them to have to rewrite their whole rendering system for support. That in my opinion would take far to much time...

[mcbean 0]

imo, first of all, performance improvements, because arma require too much performance!!! it's not that game that requires geforce 8800 gtx and still lags like hell

maybe i'm mistaken, but it should run at all settings set to very high, vd 5000m and at high resolution on 6800gt with 75 fps.

as far as i concern it's an optimisation issue, and it SHOULD be fixed first

[max power 21]

imo, first of all, performance improvements, because arma require too much performance!!! it's not that game that requires geforce 8800 gtx and still lags like hell

maybe i'm mistaken, but it should run at all settings set to very high, vd 5000m and at high resolution on 6800gt with 75 fps.

as far as i concern it's an optimisation issue, and it SHOULD be fixed first

You're clearly mistaken.

[maddogx 13]

maybe i'm mistaken, but it should run at all settings set to very high, vd 5000m and at high resolution on 6800gt with 75 fps.

Ridiculous. Show us just one engine that can do that.

[Balschoiw 0]

Wishes (not in general for 1.08 as I do want to see bugs fixed and performance tuning first)

1. Render to texture channel (for overlays, monitors, security cams, HUD´s, etc)

2. Internal BIS update for editor to unlock all buildings and objects ingame with proper naming.

3. Further improvement of AI pathfinding. (Still tanks sometimes are block stupid when driving in a town or village)

4. Scripting command to disable/reenable shouted AI voicemessages

5. Free optional visible cursor to target when in vehicles

6. No center-reset of mouseposition when driving, flying vehicles (this has been asked for numerous times now, it´s getting old, really) Currently it´s impulse steering, not consistent vector steering that would make steerring much more smoother and consistent.