New Demo Required

[ArMoGaDoN 0]

After the aggravation that was ArmA1, I decided not to just rush out and buy ArmA2 until the forum reactions had time to settle, and the first couple of patches had arrived and been absorbed. Based on the forums, I was braced for disappointment but ready to be pleasantly surprised when I downloaded the demo. The screenshots and videos from other folks looked promisingly detailed, and I did manage to tweak ArmA1 quite nicely, even early on after it's release.

I upgraded my rig to quad-core, and treated it to 4 gigs of RAM and XP64, the same twin RAID 10Ks, and a stable OC to 3.3 GHz. Still got the old 1950 Pro GPUs in crossfire tho, but then I was hoping to at least be able to get the program running at close-to ArmA1 graphic levels, seeing as the Arma2 engine is a development fork from that same engine. At this point I was considering upgrading the GPU(s) but wanted to see how the game would run on this setup before committing to further expense.

So: Demo installed.

First run: FPS jerks horribly, well under 5 fps, Everything very blurred, Trees look like candy floss, Mouse lag worse than awful, and the "shine" from the sky is so overpowered that the sky+clouds white-out and the shine bleeds into everything so far that it looks like the world is viewed through spectacles fresh from a sauna.

So: To the forums.

Tried everything on the optimisation threads, played with all the settings for hours on end.

World far less blurry but now cartoon-looking, the "sky-shine" bleeding over everything was still the same but actually looking far far worse without so much blur, Mouse lag slightly better without render-ahead but still horrible because the FPS remained about 10-15 FPS (which was an improvement but...) And No Matter what settings I tried, I could not succeed in seeing the trees as others have posted screens of, they remained as very coarse-grained candy-floss blobs on sticks.

Anyhow, then I tried the bootcamp. Hmm. Got to the rifle range, got told to shoot some pop-up targets by a guy with a horrible attitude. So: bring up the sights... pop pop pop pop...., you FAIL, said the man.

Ok, np, retry... pop ... you FAIL said the man. Ummmmm, on first shot? Hmm... retry ... pop ... you FAIL ...wtf?

Having spent not a few hours of frustration trying to tweak the game into something that was half-playable and with the question on my mind of whether to buy new GPU hardware for this game alone to improve things, the VERY FIRST experience I get when trying to play it is a crummy bug in the very first part of the bootcamp...

At this point my patience expired, and so did the nuts of the overly sarcastic and rude instructor.

So: Uninstall.

BI, please listen to the many requests on the forum to make the post-processing sky-shine, eye-blur and motion-blur OPTIONAL.

Fix the stupid bugs in the bootcamp at the very least!

And when that is done, re-build a NEW DEMO, that has better performance, can be tweaked into something useable, and has the scripts fixed. First impressions count for a lot and for the scripts to fall over in the very first part screamed FAIL louder than that rude git of an instructor ever could.

The demo as-is is a serious let-down, and no matter what improvements are made in the actual game, the demo will not reflect the improvements made. I know that I for one will not be buying more hardware, nor the game itself when that decision will be based on the demo that is available.

The LOD on trees were a major problem for me somehow (I even tried GPU tweaks on LOD from my side, to no avail).

Before anyone out there starts to flame this thread, or accuses me of being anti-A2, I would say

to them that I really REALLY wanted this to be tweakable, and worth investing more money in hardware for.

ArmA1 had problems, which were overcome. Hopefully ArmA2 will also prevail given time, and effort.

I will continue to "watch this space" in the hope of seeing a patch which works for people, and a demo that will make me want to buy the product it's supposed to be selling, not lead me to uninstall it in frustration.

ArMoGaDoN

[koroush47 10]

Alot of nubs on the steam forums have made rant threads on how bad the demo was and that they won't be buying the game.. .blah blah blah

I think i'd be a good idea to make the demo atleast up to date...

[p75 10]

Won't happen......and to be quite frank, your gpu is shit......and then you start bitching as a non costumer.....are you ok, son?

[cole 0]

A new demo could maybe come before/after release of Operation Arrowhead. But I seriously doubt there's going to be a demo patch, or a new demo of current ArmA 2.

[cjsoques 0]

Crossfire does NOT help ARMA at all, this is well known, you might as well have only one GPU

[Inkompetent 0]

I don't think BIS either considers it to have been enough improvements to the game engine to justify another demo.

Maybe there'll be a new one before Arrowhead, and if nothing else I think Arrowhead itself will either get its own demo, or an upgraded ArmA2 one to help promote its release.

[Jimmy the Saint 10]

Why don't you download the regular demo, run the benchmark scenario and have a look for yourself. In case you're not satisfied, tweak the config files. There is no real need for a demo update, because the original game performance is about the same as the demo performance.

To sum it up: My question would be, why should BIS put resources into a new or updated demo when there are almost no changes performance wise? To get a glimpse about what has changed so far, you can also read the forums I guess. :)

*something I forgot and must be thought of: the newest hardware and drivers aren't always the best ;)

Edited August 23, 2009 by Jimmy the Saint

[ArMoGaDoN 0]

As stated already, I know what the GPUs are capable of.

Unlike some, I had patience and when finally tweaked in Crossfire DID make a massive load of difference to ArmA1 on my rig, renamed to FEAR.exe and many tweaks, many of which I relayed on these forums at the time. ArmA1 FLIES on a good crossfire setup to the point I had to limit the FPS to 75 in the drivers WHEN flying low-level with good ViewDistance. That was originally with a core2 1.86 running @2.6+GHz and 2GB RAM, now it's even better.

I could run ArmA1 high-ish settings but medium textures (256Mb cards) no problems at all. Looked gorgeous. Ran smooth. Still does when I fire the game up. Why ArmA2 has so radically different performance and clarity when forked from the same engine I really fail to understand.

At no point did I request a new demo "right now" either, read and understand the OP before deciding to denigrate my opinions, huh? My point in summary was that the current state of the game coupled with the shoddy demo is causing harm to sales.

@P75 Since when does relaying an honest opinion based on experience count as bitching? This is a forum for relaying information, hopefully at times to be helpful to the BIS guys and others. As an OFP and ArmA fan, often accused of being a "fanboi" by some, I find your comments about "bitching as a non-customer" most unhelpful. I am a "potential customer", have loved BI products and was active in-game and on the forums for years, though it looks as if the community might have slipped somehow into confrontational mode... again...

I did not come back here to attack anything or anyone, nor do I appreciate being semi-flamed for bothering to relay my experiences now.

ArMoGaDoN out.

FYI, from Wikipedia entry on ArmA2:

System Requirements (Minimum / Recommended)

Microsoft Windows Operating System Windows XP or Windows Vista

CPU Dual Core (Intel Pentium 4 3.0 GHz, Intel Core 2.0 GHz, AMD Athlon 3200+ or faster Quad Core CPU or Dual Core CPU (Intel Core 2.8 GHz, AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400 + or faster)

Memory 1 GB RAM / 2 GB RAM

Hard Drive Space 10 GB

Graphics Hardware Nvidia Geforce 7800, ATI Radeon 1800 or faster (with Shader Model 3 and 256 MB VRAM) / Nvidia Geforce 8800GT, ATI Radeon 4850 or faster (with Shader Model 3 and 512 MB VRAM)

Network Internet or LAN connection required for multiplayer

I would say that two ATI 1950's in crossfire far outstrip the performance of the single 1800 mentioned in this minimum spec information.

Edited August 24, 2009 by ArMoGaDoN

[Jimmy the Saint 10]

I'm not sure, but I guess the 1950's from ATI were one of the first graphic cards generation which supported shader model 3?

If so, it could be the weak spot.

[fincuan 0]

I've got two X1950Pros in crossfire, and Arma2 runs above expectations on them really. I wasn't expecting much, but with mostly normal/low settings and post-processing effects switched off I can run it between 20-60 fps very comfortably, and it's stable as hell. I'd say it runs almost as well as Arma1, but looks better.

The keys for this were:

• -winxp to the commandline of Arma2-shortcut. In my tests this gave better results than renaming the .exe.
  
• -maxmem=2047 to the commandline of Arma2-shortcut. Stability increased dramatically.
  
• Texture memory to "low" in Arma2 settings as well as texture detail. The 256mb in these cards have just doesn't cut it for higher settings.
  

and the specs are:

C2D E6400 @ 2.8ghz

Two Radeon X1950Pro 256mb versions

4 gb ram

Win7 RC1 X64

Edited August 24, 2009 by Fincuan

[Yisc 0]

I would like to see a new Demo of Arma2.

Tried the current one on my highend system but only got 25 FPS and a lot of lag after playing around 30 minutes.

With these experiences I decided not to buy Arma2 so far but I would like to give it another try when an updated version of the demo is released.

[rowdied 44]

Crossfire does NOT help ARMA at all, this is well known, you might as well have only one GPU

News to me, I run it perfectly fine and I'm sure if you've read all the threads involving crossfire you would've seen people besides myself running the game in crossfire mode.

[jw custom 56]

News to me, I run it perfectly fine and I'm sure if you've read all the threads involving crossfire you would've seen people besides myself running the game in crossfire mode.

Nobody said it couldn't be run in crossfire mode but that it doesn't give more than running with one card!

[ArMoGaDoN 0]

Thanks for the info. guess I should retry a bit harder if you guys are now getting decent-ish frames on 1950s already.

FYI for anyone reading this thread after some of the comments...

Crossfire DID and STILL DOES make a considerable difference to the FPS in ArmA1, if I ever get this ArmA2 running expect details to follow...