starstreams

I can wait. I just didn't know what the Dev Branch was. Or if BIS had addressed the issue in a final patch, but from from you said, it sounds like they're unofficial, unreleased fixes. Thanks for the Info RobertH

Hello I have a corrupt texture showing up on the Buzzard Jet (screenshot). Corrupted data on mipmap level 0 in file a3 which has a few tickets open, one here It was mentioned at the link above that the issue was fixed, or not able to be reproduced in the last dev version. My question: Are the fixes in the dev-branch only test beta updates that have not been released via steam? I'm just asking because I have steam configured to keep ArmA3 updated but I'm still seeing the issue on that plane. Could it be that the fix has not been released as an official patch, or my game was not updated properly? Thank you

The point you're missing, and its the same thing I keep saying again, and again, but people don't seem to get it: We don't want to rely on a service to access our games. We don't want to deal with activation servers since it's been proven time and time again that it doesn't work for hackers. It's the innocent who actually paid for the product that gets inconvenienced. I can't believe people don't get it. Firstly, let me ask you a few things: Steam is a distribution service, and it's also an activation service ..right? (there are two things it handles) Didn't we have these things before? We had activation, and we had bis providing updates via their host. So what is steam needed for? Don't give me this BS just about BIS not being able to find a host to host their game image and any updates. And don't tell me there are no other activation services out there that wouldn't require you to install some TOS application like steam which is more then just an application, it's a contract among other things only the future could prove. Is steam going to fix all the past issues with missing mod files in custom mod content? No, it's still going to be an issue. The only reason steam is being used is because someone worked out a deal with them at the end users convince. Wake up people, get out of bed already. I feel sorry for this new generation. "Those Who Forget History Are Doomed to Repeat It"

I'm haring Adobe is going the same route with their software now, but even worse, you'll pay by month. I hope the games don't get that way. Come on man, you've mentioned how easy it is to update via steam multiple times, and I've said I agree there. But what's the point? It's not like you're updating your copy every hour, maybe once a month. So it takes what, a few more minuets to download a patch yourself? I'm not against steam for the way it functions and agree that it can help elevate some hassles. But it can complicate the activation process down the road for the honest consumers when the hackers always get the games either way. So whats the point in all this. And I'm just not buying this idea that we need some distribution service to download patches that should really be hosted at the developers site along with all the mirror links. Are people that lazy today that they need some 3rd party app to update their software. It's amazing we ever got this far. What are we a bunch of wimps today? No Brave New World - Iron Maiden Raise The Fist of The Metal Child - Savatage (it was called ROCK n RoLL at one time) -- We need more tanks with diesel power, not steam -- haha. J/K :p Pressing the disk is nothing, the advertizing and distribution is another story. Fine forget the box then. Then why not just distribute a digital download WITHOUT steam integrated, and host the darn thing on their servers. Easy I think I know what you're going to say, and the answer is in the paragraph below. Don't give me that BS. if they're servers were getting hit that hard, they must be selling a TON of these games. The world wide web is full of unlimited hosting for average users, are you going to tell me a company like BIS can't afford sufficient hosing to host one copy of their game including any updates? ...And like everyone is buying a copy of ArmA at the same time that the servers will get crumbled. Ya maybe for the first week everyone hits the servers, but that's where a company like BIS should make a deal with a hosting company to get the extra bandwidth that week at a good cost, I'm sure plenty of hosting company's would be happy to host a successful title like this. If BIS needs extra money, they should charge for their updates, I think that's fair as the amount of work involved in producing updates is more reason to charge the consumer then some ridiculous reason such as not enough bandwidth. My gosh, do I need to drive over there and show BIS how to do it. J/K And why do you think they have billions of dollars? Because they get people to sign their contracts. Adding Steam into the mix does not make the game better. All these fixes to the issues you're mentioning seem redundant. A smart company called Value has figured out how to provide better hosting and advertizing to game developers for a fee, and at the expense of integrating their marketing conglomerate junk into the game code making the consumer eat out of their plate. It's called a monopoly. Some of us dispute the decision more so because of core principles then the actual content being provided. Again, you can layout all the good things about steam, I wont disagree. Let me ask you something: If Valve/Steam decided to change their contact down the road and started charging you the consumer for maintenance fee, what are you going to do about it? What makes more sense to me is if BIS would: 1. Forget about steam. 2. Charge consumers for updates starting now. ( I have no problem with BIS charging for game updates because at least I know the money is going to them, and not Valve Also, fixing issues and producing updates is not easy, they should get paid for that. But if Valve decides to change the rules, they might start charging fees for things like bandwith.. ect and that money would go to them, and not BIS).

Well, it is speculation at this point. But speculation is often feed by some past experience. Google and Yahoo are perfect examples. Their messenger service use to be totally privet. Over the years they implemented all sorts of EULA/TOS rules giving them permission to use your information for marketing. Another reason I won't use services like Facebook. Next thing you know, your employer is in your business because you're life is all over the net. Well, an imbedded store is different than a service like Steam. You're not required to buy anything from an embedded store. Steam on the other hand is a requirement, and an agreement both ways. If you buy and use software, I can understand the reason for the end user to have some responsibility in some rearguards. Such as not reproducing the product. However, you the end user should not have to agree to give the manufacture certain permissions to use your information. The EULA can always chance, and if you don't agree with it, you also don't get your money back for the product you rightfully paid for. How is it that I had a two year contract with my ISP and now all the sudden they upped their prices because of upgrades I never asked for. It's a contact I signed and I can't do anything about it. Contracts shouldn't change, but they can, and do. Look, I'll be fair about this. Since steam can be turned off once the game is activated, I have nothing to complain about there. But I sure hope in the event ..that if steam ever dropped off the face of the earth for what ever reason: I just hope that they would release a patch for all the games that needed to be activated though their service. If they can promise that, then that's a big headache gone.

No, installing a retail CD from a box is easier. BIS has been around for over 10 year, they can't produce a box or a simple digital download without some 3rd party? You're missing the point. One digital download hosted off the BIS site, end of story. How do you keep slipping Steam into the picture as though it's a fix to a problem. The problem is that BIS is trying to target all these outfits. If they couldn't come up with the cost to host and image off their page after all this years, I don't know what to say other than it's sad. If there's something wrong with the game, you put patches out to address the issues. And if people can't figure out how to download an update and install it, they should pick another game to play, it's not for kids. hows that for a choice. So they're not out for the passion anymore, but the larger publishing it sounds like. This is how the beginning of the end starts when things go commercial. And that is what I mean when I say I've been around. I've seen this trend happen, so you can discredit, or post your LOL all you want. It doesn't change the facts. I'm not saying I've been around and know everything with that remark. Just what I've seen happen to great games when they starting getting larger. The game doesn't need a large publisher, because it's a great game. You're missing my point. If a music CD sucks, you don't look for a larger record company to push it. If it's good it will spread by word of mouth. ArmA is great and does not need to be pushed. It needs to be keep real and stand for the principles that made us follow it. No, they added more bullshit for me. Get steam out of the picture. Like many others have said, when you agree to an EULA for a service like this, the rules can change quick, and they always do. Another point you're missing is that, not everyone wants to install marketing junk on their system. It's a privacy concern for some. Well no disrespect, but that's a pretty foolish comeback since it's not really a choice, it's a pointless remark. So if that's the only choice, I've made mine, and so have the other 12 people in my clan. You're right, it's very simple. Save my money for something else.

Well, from my experience with steam in the past at least, you have to have it running while the game is running. Is this still the case? The problem I have is, I always like to manually backup my updates and add-ons. I don't like the idea of relaying on a service to provide these things. Because what often happens is, you're stuck using what they have at the time. However, I think I read that steam does allow you to run old updates in the event that your clan needed an older version for what ever reason. But when you rely on a service for these choices, you always have to wonder if they (Valve) will continue to provide these choices down the road into the future. I might want to play this game 6, 7 years from now and my video card might have issues with a new update. Can you guarantee me that steam will still have any update of choice available? When you backup your updates yourself (on your hard drive), this question is no longer a concern then. An example of what I'm talking about is this: My old car GPS allowed me to save updates on the hard drive. However, my new GPS uses a service like steam to update the unit. Well the company recently removed a feature I really liked and there's no option to roll back because the manufacture doesn't want you having that feature anymore because now they charge extra for it. I'm not saying BIS will do anything like that, but I don't like relaying on services to spoon feed me. Aside from all that, as long as you can turn off steam while you're playing the game, i don't have too much to complain about, but if you have to run that service while you're playing It's a disappointment. ArmA is a HUGE resource hog and we need every bit of resources. We don't need some mass marketing, mass consumption service running in the background. People wonder why the internet still runs on Linux and not windows. Because Linux doesn't run 50 million services like windows. Less is better. Less is faster. You're ability to activate your game requires steam to be working at that moment. Now you have to manage a second account and hope no one hacks that. Steam gets hacked all the time. I guess this is not such a big deal as they'll probably just give you a new activation code if you're account got hacked, but the resource consumption of steam is a concern for me.

So put the burden on the customers who supported them for over 10 years? That's the number one thing you don't do in business. And why are they selling all these versions in the first place? Well, I don't think there's anything cynical about them trying to make their work easier, and I can appreciate what you said with regard to managing a single pipe line. However, why are they even trying to develop all these pipelines in the first place? Why not just sell one digital download and release patches for that? Whether they use steam or not, they still have to develop for multiple platforms, Win7, Win8.. 32, 64.. ect. And with all this talk about making it easier for the less savy, I've always associated OFP/ARMA as having an older community. Who are they targeting now ..kids? That's another concern. Kids have different requirements (laws) and expectations. If BIS does really well $ with a younger age group will they still deliver the same level of quality if they're able to make a profit from less demanding expectations found in younger consumers? Well, I'm being pessimistic with that last remark. But I don't understand why they're not just developing one digital download and managing the downloads from their site. I've built enough web sites to understand that mirroring patches (more efficiently if it's an issue now) is not a big deal. I'm not saying steam is not easier, I'm sure it is. But there's always alternatives. Why did we need ArmA III so soon? Is the new trend to pump out new games every year like Microsoft does with their OS? So now what happens to ArmA II? Will it get left in the dust? What ever, same story falls on deaf ears.

The updates are automatic, ok and what was the issue with the old updates posted on the site? If you like Steam Thromp, you're right, there's not much I can say in your situation. However, I don't see what the issue is with downloading a simple update and applying it. I mean come on. If you're talking about Add-ons' how is steam going to help Clans coordinate their add-ons any different then the wonder tools already out there? I guess it could help if you're one of these people who have trouble copying files in windows. I'm not saying you are. I just don't see the Wow factor in their decision out weighing the negatives associated with steam. I don't know about you, but I sure don't like getting locked out of my game in places where I don't have an internet connection on them rare occasions when the net goes down and I have noting to do but play singer player. Why would you want some massive service running in the background while the game was running? More things to go wrong. Just think what happens when there's an technical issue with your steam software, or their verification servers malfunction, or someone hacks their system. You just paid for a game you can't play now. Now matter how you look at it, it all complicates the situation. Just read some of the posts out there about steam issues. Your success with steam does noting to rule out the unsuccessful experiences of others. Here I have an idea that will fix this debate: Say BIS sold a Steam version and a Non steam version as they've always done. Then guys like you could be happy using the steam version and guys like me can have it my way? But the developer decided to force everyone to use steam .. why? If I have to explain why, you haven't been around as long as I have. That's just my view, and you have yours.

I totally get that DM, and they sure as heck deserve it. They deserve every bit of it. But as I've said many times here. I would be more then happy to pay for each and every update patch from them at full price just as long as they continued to improve on what is there. There are so many issues I won't even get into with ArmA II, like medic trucks smashing into cars, and your own trucks running over your guys when there's nothing in the way of the road and plenty of space to go around. OFP had better tracking on roads.. What is BIS doing developing a new game when there's so much more to improve on the current master piece? Anyway Well I won't argue against anyone's point, everyone has their own feelings. And I know I come off as harsh, but the truth is, I have the deepest respect for the developers of BIS. No one else has ever come close to their art and realism IMO. However, something to think about: It's always been a challenge recruiting, getting new people to try this game. Once they do they usually all love it. However, when you're trying to convince someone to try something, it becomes much more difficult when they find out they have to create an account at some content service such as steam. Not to mention all the other hassles and time involved installing something new and learning it. Point is, the inclusion of steam makes the process more difficult. On the other hand, I guess BIS's success could go the other way because of steam's huge base of gamers .. to be fair. But then one has to ask, what is this project really about at this stage? Only time will tell. O how I miss Sudden Strike, ...if only the developers heeded the warnings of the people. Now it's just a memory.

-> This <- is the exact kind of BS I was talking about in my post Here. @ MaxPower. You just told use to move the discussion here in steam discussion, while another mod in another thread told us to move it to Off Topic. Which should it be? If you guys want to repress long time veterans who supported this development $$$ from the beginning, be my guest. They won't get a dime from me or my clan if this is the direction this project is headed. I've been playing this game since the start of OFP. I voiced my opinion because, like many others, I actually care about what happens to the ArmA project. Shame on me, shame on all of us. With regard to the need for having Steam for better update integration, that is absurd. The fact is, most serous ArmA clans, (the ones who perpetually $$$ support this development) handle "community" updates on their own. BIS is clearly targeting the masses for profit. I just hope it works to their advantage.

So what is this, now people are forced to agree not to voice their opinion on these boards with a new terms of service page that pop up with rules that you can't talk about things that are not inline with the corporate agendas? And then we're pushed off into no mans land in the OFF TOPIC section to voice our opinion about how we (the consumer) feels about BIS's choice to become steam exclusive? I've been supporting this developer for over 12 years. I play with a group of 12 guys online and not one of them is willing pay a dime for anything steam related. What happened? What happened is called: Corporate fascism. The other side of socialism and just as bad. Paying CEOs millions to run a company into the ground. What a shame. Forcing people to agree to not say certain things is not the the answer mods, and you know it. People will just blog, the internet is a large place. I wish you all at BIS the best!

Well said nettrucker The world is what it is. I just hope Rock and Roll never dies!

I had not posted in a long time, I'm guessing it's probably a new warrning popup page with amended rules over the last year or so. Anyway, the page had all these rules that imply that you can't talk about things that discredit the game in their own words. I'll have to login from another location IP and I'll snap a copy of the page. it's not coming up now that I've agreed. No big deal. I'm aware of that, and it's a great thing. My question is, In over 10 years of development,BIS can't make a similar system exclusive to their game so they don't have to rely on a 3d party app to do that? My greatest issue with Value is that you don't always have an internet connection, and then you're locked out of your game. Will they make a patch to fix this down the road when ArmA 15 comes out and no one is looking at ArmA III anymore? (except me) And all the other issues it introduced into the game. Why would anyone want something else running in the background eating up more memory and possibly causing other issues and memory conflicts. There's enough junk running in Windows, who needs one more thing. There's a million reasons why it's not a better option. Read all the blogs out there. That is just not true, in fact the opposite. Steams has been hacked so many times I've lost count. In fact it introduces more security holes. Great, I would say please don't develop v3. Why not improve on arma II with v3 enhancements enabled by a mode. and just charge for updates. And fix all the hundreds of AI issues that were never fixed. What are you getting in v3 that you couldn't have in ArmA-II?, v3 Programing enhancements could be implemented in ArmA II. But as far as new islands, that could be created by the community. BIS should be focusing on better tools and instructional manuals. There's plenty of talented people who get hung up on all the complexity's of learning the tools to develop content, it's ridiculous. One has to ask, where is the real focus from BIS's point of view. Fine, charge for these updates. I would be happy to pay. Not disrespect PurePassioni. Look anyone can argue against my views. However, 2 points. first, I'm a customer. And second, I've been alive for over 38 years and I've seen this same kind of thing happen over and over, and it's destroyed the quality and compassion of games every time. The success of a company is irrelevant to the quality of a game. It is what it is. I guess I shouldn't be so pessimistic. I just hope this is a temporary thing, and that it doesn't effect BIS in a bad way.

I've had no luck finding a way to save a co-op campaign mission when running a dedicated server on Linux, is this possible? The game runs great, but we wanted to shut the server down and be able to resume the game later.

Before we get too off topic again, what Avengerzx said in the quote above? "That is" the point. Who ever decided to change this made a bad decision. I've been flying these since OFP, and was always good at it, even while moving and alone. Does the new way make scene? Now all the sudden you add a pilot to the aircraft and you can lock, but you can't with out him now? So just because some dude is sitting in the front of the chopper You're now able to lock even though your guy is doing nothing? This sucks. I played a game of Be warfare (ARMA) the other night with some people and went up in a AH1 myself and saved my team's tail while flying into a hot zone at 200+ with hellfire. Those things lock you know. You can fly and fire them in the real world. Why should this game be any different? So you have some guy in the front now, who isn't even flying the chomper for you, and now all the sudden you can lock, but you can't without him? Make sense? Yes, that's great, lets make the game less fun. To make a point in regards to the illustrations. keep mind that no chopper is going to auto hover while firing on a Tunguska, or Shilka. They'd be a dead target. You could if there was one or two and you are fast on the Tab key. Auto hover works well if you wanted to let the AI take out some infantry on the ground with the gatling gun while you keep the chopper still, but not against the tanks mentioned above. You have to take them Tunguskas out quick, or your're dead.

I've been wondering about this This sucks. The AI is too stupid and takes too long to fire, so I like to do it myself. This would be practical in a perfect world, but since the AI can't get the job done, This sucks. The ArmA way worked.

Edit, please disregard my comment below, I had forgot to patch OA.

There seems to be an issue with 400 series nVidea cards and ArmA-II, AO ...where certain "ground" textures are not being rendered in detail, but rather showing up extremely blurry. I have been contacted by a few members already with this same issue, here and on other forums. The problem is, we don't know if this is hardware, or software driver, or even a technology conflict. I was hoping that members "specifically" using these new nVidea 400 series cards could post solutions here. The main nVidea thread is too generalized with too many card model variants. This is getting to be a very annoying issue. I've gone to other hardware forums to troubleshoot this, but it's useless because the issue only pertains to the Arma, AO, game. None of the other applications or games I've run have had any such issues with the 400 card. Please post any solutions or findings to this problem. Thanks

Ok, but so far everyone that responded said they have a fully working "470". Who has a 460 1GB Super Clocked? That's the card I was having an issue with? Leopardi, mentioned he is using a 460, and he also has the same problem. So who else here has a 460 and can confirm their card "is" working? It's clear that the 470 works well, so that might be the card I pick up when I go back.

-- In reference to the GTX 460 1024mb SC that I was using -- I keep Anisotropic Filtering on high in the game, but I even tried setting that to Very-High, Low, and back to High. As far as the nVidia profile, Vertical Sync is forced off. Anisotropic filtering is set to Application Controlled. Exactly, its like the street layer is not being rendered on time. Well, It's not worth me speculating. I need to go pick up another card and just experiment. Although I'm now wondering if I should wait it out and get a more powerful GTX-480. This is totally unrelated to the issue above, but the performance in the center town located in the Zargabad island was "a little better" on the 460, I still noticed some choppiness even with "only myself" placed on the map, No other AI. The location I'm referring to is the center of town, where you see the top of the mosque as shown here: http://www.arma2.com/images/stories/jac_faq/AI_q1.jpg .

Hello Bang Tail The card I'm using is a 460, but I guess it shouldn't matter. But either way, I tried all of what you said on the same day I bought the card. I set the textures to low, high, very high. Changed every setting you can think of to try to see if it was some kind of a reset issue. noting worked. I even deleted my cfg files. I don't use FSAA because my native screen rez is 2048 x 1152, but I even tried running that on, and then back off. On thing I've considered in regard to "software"/ drivers, or any software is this: There might be "nothing" wrong with the nVidia driver for example, but there could be something running on my computer that is conflicting with a memory address space that the nVidia driver uses. Something as simple as a windows update. Let me give an example. I had some random crashes that started happening the last month or so. The crash happened as soon as the desktop loaded, but not all the time. I tracked it back to Nod32's driver. when I removed Nod32 and updated the base program, the crashes went away. So in that example, Nod32 was conflicting with the normal function of the window operating system. So, maybe this issue has nothing to with the driver or card, but something else on my computer that is being intrusive and interfering with the nVidia driver's memory space. On the other hand, I'm still a little curious why there was a stack of returned 460 cards at the store. It might having nothing to do with this issue, but it makes me wonder if I just got a lemon from a bad line. I'm going to grab another one in the next few days. Especially for the fact that you guys are not having problems, I'm confident to try this again. And to be honest, I had no issues using the 460 with any of my other games or software. Unreal Tournament 3, 3dsMax 2011, all worked great with the 460

For those of you who are "not" having this issue, Are these overclocked retail cards you're using? Here are two examples, and whats odd is that when this happens not all the textures are effected, only certain ones. The textures will sharpen after a certain amount of time, but it's taking way too long. http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/blurry1.jpg http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/blurry2.jpg This is what the ground should look like: http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/arma2_lg/arma2_2010-05-09_17-42-27-56s.jpg The mipmap Quality setting is high but why should that matter, I never had to set that on my 260. Secondly, even if it was low what I mean by blurry is extreme! not just low. ..but really...really blurry. When I run up to the street, the textures seemed almost out of focus, and so were some of the dirt textures but not all the ground texture were blurry which is what doesn't make sense. And without exaggeration it literally took 10 to 15 seconds for the texture to sharpen when I stood over the surface and looked down at the ground. If this "was" a performance issue, looking down at only the ground would ease up on the GPU and the rest of the world would not need to be rendered for that moment. But it didn't matter, the textures still took 10 to 15 sec to render correctly. On a card that's more powerful than my older 260, there is clearly something going on. I put the 260 back in, and the problem is gone. Maybe it was the driver, I should have tried others. I'll probably get another one and see what happens. What else could it be. I just installed the latest driver and turned off vertical sync, and that was it. I didn't change anything that I hadn't before. What is odd though, is why there was a stack of returned EVGA GTX-460-1GB SC cards at Frys in Downers Grove IL. I seen about 5 boxes returned, but I just thought those people changed their mind. Maybe there was something wrong with that shipment. Honestly, I've never had issues with nVidea, and EVGA cards have always been great. So I'm not knocking the brand, but something is wrong. By the way, thanks for confirming you're cards are working. That narrows things down. ---- System Info ---- OS: Win XPpro-32-bit / spk3 CPU: Intel Core2 Duo E8400 3.0 GHz Mainboard: Gigabyte GA-EP45 UD3P rev 1.6 Intel Chipset drivers: v9.1.1.1025 Memory: 4 GB DDR2 Corsair XMS2 matched 4.4.4.12 cas (as set in BIOS) Sound: M-Audio Delta 66 Video Card: nVidia EVGA / GTX 460 1024 SC Driver v260.99-WHQL (returned and replaced with original GTX 260) Video Card: nVidia EVGA / GTX 260 Driver v196.21-WHQL C Drive: West 7200rpm 500gb 32mb cache

I'm not going to chance it, Edit: I returned the GTX 460-1024 SC, and waiting for something newer, or an update from someone in the community. I put the 260 back in. The 460 did feel a little quicker now that I've compared them. But I can't deal with this texture refresh issue. I have to actually stand over the ground an look at the surface for about 10 seconds before the textures begin to sharpen. Something is not right. It could be a driver issue, or maybe the fact that EVGA overclocked the card. They may have gotten more speed from the core, but may have also introduced other timing/bus refresh issues. I can't speculate that their engineers wouldn't have checked this, but maybe they can't, or have not on this particular game. I have no idea what could cause something like this. It almost seems like at times the card doesn't know what angle your viewing the surfaces and possibly can't determine Anisotropic filtering at certain moments. I just hope this isn't a technology conflict where something new has replaced something old, but not been tested on the ArmA engine. This is what the ground, and tree textures should look like "all the time". These were taken on my GTX-260: copy and paste links http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/2oa_lg/arma2oa_2010-08-15_14-21-18-81s.jpg http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/arma2_lg/arma2_2010-05-09_17-42-27-56s.jpg http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/arma2_lg/arma2_2010-05-09_18-19-19-12s.jpg http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/2oa_lg/arma2oa_2010-08-15_15-02-35-25s.jpg http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/2oa_lg/arma2oa_2010-08-15_15-00-29-64s.jpg http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/arma2-2010-10-26-15-55-33-06.jpg http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/arma2-2010-10-26-15-59-50-60.jpg http://www.pyramid-of-wisdom.com/arma2-2010-10-26-16-02-27-67.jpg

I havn't had the black screen thing, but when I was at the store yesterday, there was a stack of these things that were marked as reduced price because they had been open. I've seen this before with mother boards. I still bought it because I know that sometimes people will read something on the net and think they got something bad so everyone runs back and returns their stuff. Well I've got 30 days to use this, and it's got a life time warranty so it's not the end of the world if I did keep it. I don't know, if I can't get this texture issue sorted out in the next 10 days, I might return it and wait for the next line of cards. It's 200 bucks, and performance wise I didn't noticed any difference from my 260, but I know it's a faster card at the hardware level. It's just something is not right atm, I really hope it's a driver problem and not some flaw with the GDDR5. I read that one of the features of GDDR5 over 3, is that it can optimize it self to your specific system by finding the best timing internally. I thought maybe these blurry textures was a result of the GDDR5 being in the process of finding it's optimal settings. But I would think that would happen in a min or less.