Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by funkee

  1. "ArmA2 / OA (low) performance issues" thread approaches to 100 pages... that says much. The truth is that the Virtual Reality engine is obsolete, uneffective (even on modern machines) and cant handle such amount of data. Whats the point of puting advanced (still dumb tho) AI and thousands km of terrain, if the framerate is unacceptable and whole fun from the game goes away?

    IMO if BI still thinks about ArmA series, they should buy or lease a new engine, because this one is dead. Othervise they gonna close another studios or make arcade platformers for children.

  2. Fully agree with OP. Movement (apart from performance) is the thing that i dont like the most in ArmA series. It feels kinda delayed and unsmooth. Another disadvantage is that you cant see your weapon when moving without aiming (the weapon just disappears in a strange way). Of coz you can see it pressing alt key and looking into the bottom, but thats not the same feeling.

    The reason MW2 has so many servers and ArmA doesn't is because ArmA isn't a mainstream game.

    You are wrong. I think that's just because of strange movement and poor performance. Some animations (especially bullet hit and falling down) also come off from many other games (like BF:BC2 or CoD:MW2).

  3. There are still tons of issues with it and the community supporting it are very pissed off that DICE seem to have dropped support and moved on to Medal of Honor. Oh, and MW2 isn't polished. Not. At. All.

    MW2 not polished? LoL :eek: I've been playing this game for a year and couldnt find 1 single bug!

    Re Bad Company 2 - they just released client patch R8 and R12 server which is amazing. I wish ArmA2 to have so little "issues" as BC2 have, dont even mention the performance.

    In fact, Marek said in a recent Czech interview that each of their games make millions of Euros after they're released. Add that to how much money BIA make. :rolleyes:

    LOL :D

    You are obviously a BI troll. Do they pay you for writing such a bullshit?

  4. Falcon4, DCS... So they have infantry, ground vehicles ... you can play with? Hm ok.

    Sure, they have :)

    Falcon4, DCS... Neither of those games are infantry simulators. Arma 2 is an infantry simulator.

    You know well that ArmA is not only ifantry "simulator" with it's tens of vehs and aircraft.

    Btw, from the look of it, it looks like BI has got at least a little the message, as performance is one of the key point they talk about with OA, so it must have been one of their main concern

    I hope so. Now i end discuss with you guys since it's pointless and criticism is obviously not welcome here (I got punished reciving infraction for posting my honest opinion).

    A propos DCS terrain and engine "as much horrible as ArmA2":



    Compare with this:



  5. I think it's time for you to quit the trolling thanks, we get it, you have issues with the game and like posting negative comments about the game, about us, over and over, well I think it's time to stop, if you have nothing constructive to add to discussions, don't post, it's that simple.

    No problem bro, I can understand you're king of the fanboys and your duty is to cut all negative comments. Keep up the good job! :thumb:

    Constructive ways are to pinpoint the problem and present it with clear repro steps. Its all explained how to do it in my sig.

    Ok so lets pinpoint and reproduce a poor Virtual Reality performance and 40 fps on GTX 480 / Radeon 5870: http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=16997&page=16. Isn't that what these forums are for? But this one will be easy, just run the game on any modern PC. :)

    When in the vast period of time between OFP's release and now, did BIS' games stop being realistic? (...) What the f*ck? Suddenly you don't think the game is realistic?.

    Sorry I don't and never didnt :) The game where you lock on target pressing 1 button, and then killing it with 1 cllick I cant call realistic. Want realism? Check out DCS: Blackshark, Falcon4 or similar, you will find a difference between FPS and SIM.

  6. *the game (...) is the only credible simulative FPS on the market. i have no doubts about these consideration

    Try Bad Company 2. I know it's maybe not so "simulative", but I doubt if we can talk about simulation or realism at all in any of these 2 games.

    guys we are just trying to focalize the game problems to allow depelovers to create a better game.and the point of the discussion is "why is this game is not more popular?"

    Exactly, and it's main problems are: bad performance, dumb AI, and poor sounds imho, esp. sounds of weapons (again, try to compare them to BC2, it's uncomparable).

    Whining is better than to report constructive ways on how BIS can fix things?

    So how do you imagine that "constructive ways"? Can you even distinguish whining from criticism? What would be a better way to help devs, than mention game problems? Do you expect us to instruct BI how to fix things? LOL!

    Btw: most of you guys are just a kiddy arma fanboys that can only butter devs up, 0 constructive thoughts that'd make the next BI games better. I wish you have fun playing OA with all the same issues. :thumb:

  7. And now we wait for the counterargument saying how much more advanced the Arma 2 AI is in open environment than a corridor shooter AI. And that the quirky behavior is only realistic because the AI soldiers are stressed out by the combat environment.

    LOL. And because its not scripted, unlike in other FPS games :D

  8. when did performance and graphics matter more than gameplay?

    No performance - no gameplay. Sorry.

    ...the engine aint very optimized as said tho they have done well seeing what the game has archived.

    I realy hate the AI warping tho thats a real crappy problem when I am trying to snipe at long range via me scope.

    It's not unoptimised (i think it is), it just sux all the way :) And dumb, robotic AI is another issue. Apart from the poor performance, I think the game also loses much due to bad netcode and lack of the weapon view while running (you can see it only pressing alt key and moving yor mouse down).

    The CPU isn't the only potential bottleneck. The motherboard itself can also be a problem if your CPU<>GPU bandwidth is being limited. If upgrading from 8800GTS to GTX260 didn't increase your performance, something is definitely wrong with your machine...

    Something is definitely wrong with this game, and plz dont teach me what may be a bottleneck in my machine as I'm computer engineer. I've been testing new GPU on a few games (incl. BC2, MW2, GTAIV, DCS:Blackshark), and ArmA2 was the ONLY game with no FPS gain (tested on win7, vista and XP).

    I wonder how Operation Arrowhead will perform on that "new generation engine", but I dont expect a lot.

  9. It doesnt really matter how old the base is as long as you are able to update it ;)

    You're right, but if I change my graphics card from 8800 GTS to GTX 260, and I get 0 - max 1 fps gain (I got 4GHz CPU so it's not a bottleneck), I can say only one thing about this engine: horrible. ArmA will never be a great game witch such poor performance even on modern hardware.


    40 fps on GTX 480 and Radeon 5870 OC'd? LOL! Now tell me that's due to large areas and because this is a sim (with one-click locking on target). :)

  10. ODEN;1610396']Hmmm I have a well running fairly modern engine with good performance thanks to developers caring and listening of their community.

    You sure you run ArmA2?

    So what are you doing in this thread and why do you post OT? The question is "why is this game not more popular"' date=' not "how well the game runs on your machine".

    PS. Modern engine from 2001? ;) (updated, but still the same)

    All drama aside, the engine could be way more polished. This is a fact. It's only the difference between studios with 150 staff and studios with 30

    Thats it. They were very ambitious, but that was to excessive challenge to small BI team.