New Beta Build 70644 up!

[SASrecon 0]

New Beta Build 70644 is up!

Click here to download

Changelog:

[70582] Improved: Increased dynamic cloud layer visibility.

[70493] Fixed: Shadow artifacts visible on some windows while moving.

[70439] Fixed: Transient z-fight-like shadows artifacts while zooming.

[70372] Fixed: AI vision was too good on moonless nights.

I'm very glad they've sorted the z-fighting :)

[AnimalMother92 10]

Yeah I just got the email for this, but the server still lists 70313 as the newest. Sounds like some nice fixes.

[SASrecon 0]

Yeah I just got the email for this, but the server still lists 70313 as the newest. Sounds like some nice fixes.

ha, didn't notice until just now :D

Probably still finalising uploads or something. Maybe it was taken down :confused:

[NoRailgunner 0]

Where is the beta build 70644??

Be careful - sometimes some little devils aka bugs can delay a release by surprise. ;)

[xeno 234]

644 was up for some time, at least that's what the 16 MB I have here on my hard drive tell me :p

Xeno

[TRexian 0]

[70372] Fixed: AI vision was too good on moonless nights.

This one made me giggle a bit. :) Seems to me like the AI can't see anything at night... so... "too good"?

Edit:

Yeah, still showing 313 as the most recent for me... not a big deal, though.

Edited May 19, 2010 by TRexian

[MavericK96 0]

Yeah I just got the email for this, but the server still lists 70313 as the newest. Sounds like some nice fixes.

How do you get email notifications of new betas?

Also, if the z-fighting is fixed, SWEET! Though it says it's regarding shadows, so it might not be entirely fixed.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Xeno - find the (new) bugs and tell us about :p:icon_twisted:

[AnimalMother92 10]

How do you get email notifications of new betas?

http://www.qbasix.com/ARMA2/

That's what I used, but the page isn't loading for me at the moment.

*edit*

70644 is back up!

Edited May 19, 2010 by AnimalMother92

[MavericK96 0]

Yep, it's up. Downloading now. :cool:

[Punisher5555 0]

Do we still need to use the -exthreads ?

[Scrub 0]

Wow, good elements of Polish. Sweet. Looks like BIS are dusting and sweeping the floors after remodeling the engine. Dl'ing now: )

[MavericK96 0]

Do we still need to use the -exthreads ?

I was just wondering the same thing actually.

[mr.g-c 6]

Just installed and started it and now with "Namalsk" map, i get a "wheater overcast" scripting error on start.

a bit from the RPT:

Exe version: 1.05.70644
Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWorlds/namalsk/Weather/Overcast/Weather1.height'.
Warning Message: '/' is not a value
Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWorlds/namalsk/Weather/Overcast/Weather1.size'.
Warning Message: '/' is not a value
Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWorlds/namalsk/Weather/Overcast/Weather2.height'.
Warning Message: '/' is not a value
Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWorlds/namalsk/Weather/Overcast/Weather2.size'.
Warning Message: '/' is not a value
Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWorlds/namalsk/Weather/Overcast/Weather3.height'.
Warning Message: '/' is not a value
Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWorlds/namalsk/Weather/Overcast/Weather3.size'.
Warning Message: '/' is not a value
Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWorlds/namalsk/Weather/Overcast/Weather4.height'.
Warning Message: '/' is not a value
Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWorlds/namalsk/Weather/Overcast/Weather4.size'.
Warning Message: '/' is not a value
Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWorlds/namalsk/Weather/Overcast/Weather5.height'.
Warning Message: '/' is not a value
Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWorlds/namalsk/Weather/Overcast/Weather5.size'.
Warning Message: '/' is not a value

[MavericK96 0]

Initial testing: Stutter seems a little worse in this release, but overall framerate is on par with 70313. Minimum FPS went down in this by about 2-5 FPS as you can see from the results from the _FPS_6 test below.

             Avg   Avg Low   High   Low
70313 exT=0    37        26     52    13
70313 exT=3    37        26     52    10

70644 exT=0    36        26     50     9
70644 exT=3    36        26     52     8

[otrebla_snake_ita 2]

Are you using -exThread parameter?

[Alex72 1]

So how does the Z-fighting look for you guys? Could be good to not only look at FPS but also test the changes they do show us in the changelog.

[MavericK96 0]

;1631421']Are you using -exThread parameter?

If you're referring to my post, yes. Check out the two different benches for 70644, one is exThreads=0 and one is exThreads=3 (I didn't test eXthreads=1 because it was by far the worst performance for me in 70313)

[maddogx 13]

After a quick test I can say that z-fighting in general does still exist. Apparently the patch changed some specific occurrance of z-fighting. Since it was related to shadows, I'm guessing it wasn't related to distant objects through scopes, as shadows aren't drawn that far.

[MavericK96 0]

Yeah, I think the self-shadowing on objects is what improved, as there used to be some z-fighting with those, and it seems better now. Distance object z-fighting seems about the same from what I can tell from flying around for a bit.

Also, stutter definitely seems worse in this version, but not terrible. Also, I haven't yet gotten the black screen "Receiving..." issue even with about 10 minutes of flying around Chernogorsk and surrounding cities. Obviously more test time is needed (online is where I get the problem the most and it affects gameplay the most, and I haven't tested it in MP yet) but if it was a trade-off to have a little more stutter versus no "Receiving..." screen, I'll take it. :cool:

[Alex72 1]

Scratch what i said. This is not about Z-fighting distance problem.

This is the problem with shadows being applied to objects while zooming. Walls, houses and other objects got Z-fighting-look a like when shadows set to HIGH or above. From my tests so far - it's fixed. :)

This was a really annoying bug and it seems to be fixed.

Edited May 19, 2010 by Alex72

[MavericK96 0]

Well, this is interesting. I just played online for probably about 20 minutes, flew a heli over to the coast north of Chernogorsk and went on foot for maybe 50 meters, and then the game crashed with this message:

In the .RPT file I get this repeated over and over (look familiar?):

Memory store: Failed mapping, already mapped 8988 KB, error 8
Virtual free 25456640 B, page free 4294967295 B, physical free 2680565760 B
Memory store: Failed mapping, already mapped 8992 KB, error 8
Virtual free 25456640 B, page free 4294967295 B, physical free 2680565760 B
Memory store: Failed mapping, already mapped 8996 KB, error 8
Virtual free 25456640 B, page free 4294967295 B, physical free 2680565760 B
Memory store: Failed mapping, already mapped 9000 KB, error 8
Virtual free 25456640 B, page free 4294967295 B, physical free 2680565760 B
File read error: addons\ca.pbo,ERROR_NOACCESS
Error 3e6 reading file 'addons\ca.pbo'
ErrorMessage: Invalid access to memory location.

This is with Video Memory on Default, exThreads=0.

[Alex72 1]

Been flying over things a lot and no crashes. You still running video memory with default? The setting that doesnt seem to work properly for many people.

Can anyone else test fire a lot of FFAR's or shoot a lot of MG HE rounds close to the ground while flying a harrier for example. I didnt notice any sound cut out in this beta. At least it hasnt cut out so far. It was present instantly before doing such things.

EDIT: Flying is very smooth until coming up over villages/cities where it feels performance is worse in this beta. But only when going over houses. Otherwise its the same - very smooth flying.

That can be a reason to the crashes Maverick if your memory isnt properly set through "default". More stress than usual over cities and not properly set the video memory setting. Just an idea.

Edited May 19, 2010 by Alex72

[jw custom 56]

Can anyone else test fire a lot of FFAR's or shoot a lot of MG HE rounds close to the ground while flying a harrier for example. I didnt notice any sound cut out in this beta. At least it hasnt cut out so far. It was present instantly before doing such things.

I can't remember having this issue with ArmA vanilla but many times with sound mods. Don't have time to test right now though.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Comparing test with patch 1.05.62017 and beta build 70644 I have to say that the average fps is +3 higher with 1.0562017 - on all three benchmark tests. The only bigger changes are with FPSm. But the fpsm even differ from 1-10fps if the mission is only repeated over again. :confused:

Imho flying over something doesnt show all whats needed ingame - better have a benchmark missions with some AIs moving around.

Perhaps its good to have a "AI stress-test" for better evaluation?

Going to try some missions to see how good or bad the new build feels.

Btw can we expect significant improvements for AI in this or next builds? :)