bad graphics performance - BiS confirm?

[7SD-Toker 10]

lot´s of people have been reporting problems with stuttering, flickering and bad performance in the game hence they have powerful hardware (above recommended). Problems seems to occour with both ATI and Nvidia GPU and regardless of Windows operating system.

The forums are now filled with workaround and optimization suggestions but as I see it there is no "magic cure". The game need to be fixed by some manhours over at BiS rendering in a patch.

I want to know if BiS has confirmed that they are aware of these problems and are working on getting them fixed? Anyone knows? I see the buglist that states confirmed AI/scripting problems but fixing those problems feels secondary to me and probably to the rest of the community that has these kind of "showstopper" problems.

The game should be playable with "default" settings, ingame and in video drivers just like most other games out there. Customers should not have to spend hours manually trying to fix stuff that should not be broken in the fist place..

Edited July 10, 2009 by 7SD-Toker

[Potatomasher 0]

I would like to know too, but i'd be surprised if we get any info until patch is released.

[7SD-Toker 10]

my nightmare scenario is that they relase a patch that "just" fixes AI/scripting problems and not gives the "broken graphics/performance" problems the attention it needs.

It feels so bad right now as i´m really psyked about the game and having bought it but not beeing able to play it due to the fact that the game is broken as it is. I guess i´ll just have to wait for a future patch..

[Fansadox 0]

TBH its hard to believe after all these posts by people with highend systems (inc me) that get poor performance and have random ctd's, lockups and BSOD's they wouldnt be working their asses off to provide some proper fixes.

Im pretty sure the next patch will fix alot of problems i only hope they will come with a 64bit solution.

[Snicker666 0]

Im experiencing perf. problems too. It's so slow it is unplayable. And I have over recommended system. But you say '"default" settings' And my default setting was a very low 3D res. I think I remember 800x640 or something. And that is unacceptable. I wont to have my monitors native resolution or everything looks screwed up. 1680x1050 witch the game also supports. I have never tried the low res. So Im not even sure that it runs smooth with that. But that is unacceptable anyway.

[von_paulus 0]

my nightmare scenario is that they relase a patch that "just" fixes AI/scripting problems and not gives the "broken graphics/performance" problems the attention it needs.

For people who are in doubt with what BIS patches do, should consider to look at this threads. They show how BIS work with their products in relate with optimization, bug fixes and improvements.

http://forums.bistudio.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34

http://forums.bistudio.com/forumdisplay.php?f=71

Be rested, things will be solved. :)

---------- Post added at 11:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:37 AM ----------

Im experiencing perf. problems too. It's so slow it is unplayable. And I have over recommended system. But you say '"default" settings' And my default setting was a very low 3D res. I think I remember 800x640 or something. And that is unacceptable. I wont to have my monitors native resolution or everything looks screwed up. 1680x1050 witch the game also supports. I have never tried the low res. So Im not even sure that it runs smooth with that. But that is unacceptable anyway.

Please look at this thread:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=73947

[bushlurker 45]

As Von Paulus said - and he's an old hand at BIS patches, same as me - BIS WILL fix everything! - nothing surer... but, in relative terms, they're a small company and it won't happen overnight...

To give you an idea, lets look more closely at VP's links he posted - the update path for Arma 1...

We'll skip OFP here - suffice to say patches were long between - but during these years BIS were busy with VBS1 - which paved the way for the Arma series...

Arma1

30th Nov 2006 - 1.01 released (a drag the release to beta stage patch - just like arma2 1,01)

20th Dec 2006 - 1.02 appears (fixed some of the more wild CTD's, etc - sound familiar?)

3rd April 2007 - beta 1.05 (4 months later, the first real bugfix and performance issues attempt)

11th June 2007 - 1.08 released (at this point Arma 1 could be called stable, or - in an ideal world - actually ready for release... though it took a 1.08 "hot"fix 2 months later in the August and the release of the Queens Gambit expansion pack with bundled 1.08 patch in October before technically you could actually go into a shop and buy a copy of Arma which would work <pretty much flawlessly> straight out of the box(es)...

So at this stage we had a pretty much working Arma 1 - approx 9 months after its release

About 6 months after that the "optimisation" patches kicked in - notably 1.12 (April 2008) and 1.14 (May 2008)... these patches were GREAT (I think they switched from shader model 2 to 3 amongst other things) and could truly be called "performance patches"...

So what do we see??

We see a company committed to patching, optimising and fixing exerything that gets reported

Things WILL get fixed...

However, you also have to be realistic about timescales... given past performance on Arma 1, we can expect a stabilisation patch 1.04 round about the 5 month mark (about October) which should stop most of the total gamebreakers, followed by reaching the 1.08 stage sometime around the 7-9 month mark (December or January 2010). At this stage Arma 2 will be "release ready"... (also at this stage we're likely to see some sort of "expansion pack" which includes the patch).

The "performance patches" should kick in around 17 months after original release (around October 2010)...

Now BIS may surprise us this time around... if they work TWICE as fast as they've done in the past, we could see stability by Christmas, be asked to shell out for an expansion pack around Easter, and see performance issues definitively addressed by this time next year!

B

Edited July 10, 2009 by Bushlurker

[Pyrodox 0]

I hope it comes sooner rather than later. This happened when ArmA was released, too.

And I'd like to see a 64-bit version of the app myself... I have 4GB of RAM and no matter what ArmA seems to only utilize 20%-25% of my available RAM at any given time, while frantically loading and swapping files off my HDD. I'd love the option to load all that stuff into memory and avoid the slowdown and bottleneck of pulling info off the HDD constantly.

[ICE-Raver 10]

I actually upgraded my pc yesterday with hopes of a better gaming experience with arma2.

Now instead of running like garbage 95% of the time it only runs like garbage 75% of the time on multiplayer games. Especially in cities and aircraft.

Game runs phenomenal now on single player though.

I turned everything down to normal. Turned shadows off, post processing off to get my fps up and I actually get up to 50 fps now sometimes down to about 25 worst case so it's not an fps issue anymore. Before I upgraded I got single digit fps in some situations so I thought it was all my rig. Now I can see that it is ARMA.

I'm beyond frustrated.

My pc specs in my sig.

Edited July 10, 2009 by ICE-Raver

[thr0tt 12]

20 months left before its playable, cool.

[Yapab 10]

Bushlurker, by that time the game will be dead and only a few select hardcore players will play it!

I think if you pay for a game it should come out 90% complete and stable... having to wait 17 months (over a year) before its fixed is an absolute insult and joke, doubt it would win BIS any repeat customers either.

Hope this is not the path they are taking, I've purchased this version but I would definitely not purchase 3 if it came out?

Yapa

[kklownboy 43]

@ Yapab-I bought three versions of the game, .DE, Steam, CDwow/505, and with the 2.5 patch they run fine on my H/W... hmmm

[Yapab 10]

Thats good news for you but I think you are the exception and minority here, at least going by the forums here and all over the world... performance is not good.

Take a look at this engine (it looks better and runs 10x faster than ARMA2):

http://194.71.11.69/pub/games/PC/guru3d/demos/ChromeEngineEnvMovie-[Guru3D].zip

Yapa

[Jackdaniels 10]

Well why didn't they just release the game when it was ready? There are people who get paid to test games and I am not one of those people. I expect to be able to play a game straight out of the box when I have paid for it.

I also think this troubleshooting forum should be closed down. Let’s face it, it's just full of fan boys ready to rip into people for saying they have a problem with the game. Don't think on the same lines as them and you are a whinger along with all the other playground names they choose to call you.

So people be warned, if you are not willing to wait months on end for the Bis patches, change your OS from Vista to Xp, or dabble changing this file and that file, be prepared to take the stick in this playground.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Jackdaniels

[Wynthorpe 10]

my nightmare scenario is that they relase a patch that "just" fixes AI/scripting problems and not gives the "broken graphics/performance" problems the attention it needs.

It feels so bad right now as i´m really psyked about the game and having bought it but not beeing able to play it due to the fact that the game is broken as it is. I guess i´ll just have to wait for a future patch..

Think your going a bit far there! The game is FAR from unplayable, people need to stop moaning and enjoy as it! Its a superb game as it is.

[Jackdaniels 10]

Think your going a bit far there! The game is FAR from unplayable, people need to stop moaning and enjoy as it! Its a superb game as it is.

So just because the game works on your computer it has got to work on everyones? If you care to look around the forums you would see that it doesn't run well on alot of computers out there!!

He also has a right to moan he paid for the game.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Jackdaniels

[thr0tt 12]

I also think this troubleshooting forum should be closed down. Let’s face it, it's just full of fan boys ready to rip into people for saying they have a problem with the game. Don't think on their lines and you are a whinger along with all the other playground names they choose to call you.

Think your going a bit far there! The game is FAR from unplayable, people need to stop moaning and enjoy as it! Its a superb game as it is.

...in the next message posted, lol. Point demonstrated gj.

Heres an idea, why not start another sub forum for those who have no issues and just want to tell others ? There is always 1 or 2 posts in a trouble seeking thread saying 'mine works fine' whereas you are looking for answers to issues not statements that it works for you.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Thr0tt

[guynumber7 0]

Im getting device freed and direct 3d errors through the roof now....when i try to change the resolution it just crashes.

[Andy09 10]

It's a sorta funny game as it has a mind of it's own. One day you will be cranking along with hardly any problems but the next day it will be errors & crashes.

Leave it alone for a day or two & it will probably run flawlessly. Day one was a complete bummer for me. I lost that lovin' feeling.. you know the one you get with great anticipation.

ARRRRRGGG!!

[Cpt.Goose 10]

BIS released a Beta, from the performance issues, to the game errors, script errors, campaign bugs, and lack of solid multiplayer code and interface.

This is nothing more then a Beta that we all paid for... I feel ripped off, don't get me wrong I love playing the game and I love testing beta's but there free... this was not and I get the same problems as a beta test minus the acceptance that I'm playing for free and shouldn't complain.

So you know what everyone can bit*$ and moan because we all paid for this and got a unfinished game that should have never been released with such game, campaign, multiplayer, and performance bugs.

I don't know who is responsible at BIS but they are an idiot for releasing this product at this premature stage. People won't forget the launch of ARMA 2 or the company behind it.

It's obvious the release to North America was delayed to the 20th in hopes to have a somewhat stable patch released by that time so they didn't have thousands more bitching about the same problems we all have. I hate to see what the patch size will be all said and done to play this game patched up and stable.

[bender316 10]

Are BIS that slow to fix there games ???? If so i'll just wait to see it on steam for 10 $ then buy it ( fixed i hope ) , or will the game be dead by then ????

[7SD-Toker 10]

Funny thing that that the forums and all the threads that reports problems always gets a "it works fine for me, stop complaining" post/reply. What´s really up with that?

It should be clear to everyone now that the game is released in a far from ready state. If you buy a product that is presented as a finished game, the game should be finished. Pretty clear I think. I did not pay for a beta product nor to be a beta tester. I payed for a working game. As a consumer I have, and should have the right to expect high standards and be able to complain if these "de facto" standards are not beeing met. As in this case.

My point is that BiS should admit that they have quality issues with their product and that they should communicate it open and clear to their customers whilst presenting a plan of action with an expected timeframe for the the completion of appropriate actions (the miracle patch wich takes the game from Beta to Alpha status ;) ). That would be a respectful gestrure to their customers. Sticking the head in the sand is not.

[droid002 0]

20 months left before its playable, cool.

LOL

It´s pretty funny that the most of us will accept this. The gaming industry should learn from bigger software companys and offer some BETA-testing on a larger scale.

Look at Microsoft, releasing their OS for us to download/test/discover bugs etc. And AFTER that release a proper product rather than the other way around. Yes I´m aware of bugs still exits and they release servicepacks but in a whole it´s more solid.

[derk yall 0]

Droid, there is a difference betwen Microsoft and BIS, microsoft can do almost anything they want, because the are the major OS seller on the market, I think that around 98 - 98% of PCs are with some microsoft OS.

And start comparing microsoft to BIS is unfair for BIS, they are a small team, thyere product's target base of people (maybe I use bad words, I mean tactical players) is small, they dont have so much money like blizzard to test ArmA II on every PC seting that could exist.

But, hoever, even if they are a small team they do a better work in supporting the community and fixing the games unlike the ehm "profesionals" or "big" companies. Many people dont know about this long-time support. This is why there are 200+ spams topic about the same things and after they got closed, usualy the OP get very angry for no reason. Maybe BIS isnt repliing to your forum topic about some bugs, but that doesnt mean thatthey arent looking into.

Yes, ArmA II have problems on my computer, I wasnt expecting that it would work fine on the day of release, but ArmA isnt a 2 or 3 day game, It's a game that you enjoy for years and with the support of BIS I know that it will be fixed sooner o later.

[droid002 0]

What I meant was The gaming industry should be more on their toes before they release a product.

I am aware that software is hard to make but still....I am a paying customer. Without customers no company.

I understand that there are quite alot of different computer configurations out there. But then I think its even more important to make a study of what types of hardware that floats around.