xmongx

Shinobi, he (like me) initially misread your post thinking you had an 8500GT which is shit. The gpu you have, whilst not being an especially amazing card, is a LOT better than an 8500GT (a tad better/similar performance to a 9800GTX) and should be fine for normal settings in arma 2. as for a 2.00ghz dual core? thats IS poor, but should be adequate to run the game.

No. As far as i can remember, paperboy ran at 12.5 fps on the spectrum.

No its not that, theres a bug on some 7 series cards, before you even move the screen pulses, mostly on the right hand side, theres a thread about it in troubleshooting.

He's rendering a lot more stuff, on top of the hdr/bloom peeking through the foileage, in that second picture.

sorry

I understand, Thankyou for the reply.

the mod states its for 1.01final did you try it with that?

What do you currently have your video memory option set to, try setting it @ normal and see if the problem persists. Also, at the minute, you should be running 182.08 or 182.50 for arma2.

http://linda.bistudio.com/

It would seem to me like you are under more load when looking at the bush which is perfectly understandable due to the intracacies involved with modelling semi realistic vegetation. also in what version of reality is a variance of 15 fps resulting in a low of 45-50FPS bad?

Thanks so much for all your obvious hard work on this mod. Im so happy to have access to your hard work in the editor. One small thing thing i have to ask. What are your minimum reccomended specs for the campaign?. Im on the verge of building an new machine for arma2 and sadly, due to my childrens need for food, i need to do it as cheaply as possible. Id like to be able to play the first mission at an acceptable frame rate (20+), as from what i can see through the 1-3 fps i get currently, it looks and sounds like just what i have been longing for. What would the mission author reccomend?

In my opinion the AI needs all the help it can get, sometimes the rate at which ai acquire your position is a bit harsh but I prefer getting shot unreasonably than running around like john rambo shooting 100's of 'baddies' with my 'boomstick'. The AI in arma2 seems to be less accurate and they seem to use suppression more, as a result firefights tend to last longer which is a good thing. Its quite rare that i am shot in arma or arma2 without knowing i made a stupid mistake a few seconds earlier.

many many thanks for this, the game was unplayable for me in first person due to my GPU introducing an odd pulsing effect, now works fine!

Yeah, fantastic news, works a treat. I didnt particularily dislike motion blur, it would have been nice to have but this makes tha game playable for me. god bless kegetys

why not? digital download is easy as pie (for most).

Whats the likelyhood of this being fixed? Im toying with the idea of building a new system but I am a very cheap man, i know i could augment my current system to run arma pretty well at low-mid detail for little cost but it would mean using my 7950GT as the GPU. Im a little hesitant to build now with new tech in the early adopter stage, as i only want to use the machine to play arma2. It would be better for me to wait a year or so. This issue seems to be a hardware problem, im not confident it can be fixed by BIS, a little signal to whether its being looked at or whether motion blur, which is the cause of the problem, will become an option would be very helpfull to me. Thanks if you oblige and eternal grumpiness if not.

Of course reducing viewdistance will increase FPS, its simple logic. When a mission is being played there is a whole lot more than the general area being processed, your fps will be lower than when spawning yourself in the same spot in the editor. When you pause the game in a mission, ai and scripts stop so your frame rate will shoot up as you are under less load. If you play the same mission again but reduce viewdistance your fps will increase but not because the ai is not in view, that has nothing to do with it as it is still being processed. You are freeing up the CPU as you are no longer rendering as much scenery, the gain is being used to process the AI, the surplus is your FPS increase.

Me too as untill i upgrade i have a 7950GT. I have seen this behaviour before when trying to add motion blur to fallout 3 via the enbseries.dll, exactly the same behaviour. Pulsing that affects the full screen but oddly seems more prevelant on the right. I think this is a problem with the 7 series hardware, the chap with the 8800 is most likely not getting this exact behaviour but rather suffering the blur that kicks in at low fps. It will be unplayable in first person, the fact that it is not there in third person or when you hit escape and open gfx options means it may be fixable but its probable that the only solution would be offering the option to disable motion blur and maybe depth of field.

I am genuinely surprised it released in this state, ARMA 1 i could understand but this time round i cant comprehend it. Its a real shame. I feel dissapointed, but for BIS rather than myself. I think i will love this game with time because BIS and/or the community will likely fix it up but i was expecting a more polished game from what id seen so far. To me it looked like BIS were concentraing on making the game more accessible via the campaign, i mean in reality how many serious arma fans would want to play as team R4z0r!!!11! ?, but it was a chance to bring arma back towards the more financially viable end of mainstream gaming. I fear from the feedback ive seen so far that this isnt going to happen, the serious players will stick it out because they know what rewards they can reap, new players just wont bother. However, im basing these comments on hearsay, I myself wont be playing it anytime soon, in order to do that i will need a new PC, im not going to invest in that untill i am sure arma 2 will be worth the investment over arma1.

But if the off map space is randomly generated how can be sure you dont place the unit in a pond or on top of a house? Dont get me wrong, the idea is brilliant, i was very excited when i heard it would be included, I had visions of rolling hills with forsets and towns scattered around along with a basic road system. But i think in reality i let my imagination run away with itself. I cant imagine how it would be possible to stage a meaningfull mission in an unknown space, but i really do hope someone better than myself can.

Brilliant. Just the sort of well balanced, thought out answer i was looking for, i can go to sleep happy now. Thanks.

How is it possible, via the mission editor, to place units on a procedurally generated space? At a guess i would say "not very". And in that case i would suggest that, albeit a step up form an invisible wall and fairly impressive, its a little bit pointless?

What do you chaps think about this for arma 2?: Athlon X2 7850 Black Edition Crucial 4GB (2x2GB KIT) 800MHz DDR2 PC2-6400 XFX ATI Radeon HD 4850 650Mhz 512MB DDR3 PCI-E 2.0 Dual DVI XXX Edition Card Gigabyte AM2+ AMD770 DDR2 ATX Audio Lan Im trying to build a cheap but capable enough system for arma2, i cant justify spending a lot as arma2 is the only thing i will use on it. Im particularily interested in what you think of that processor.

Ive looked into the ready boost drive before when trying to fix lod switching, having tried it i found it had nothing more than a placebo effect. The way it works is to cache commonly used files to the mem stick, the only real benefit it has is that commonly used programs start faster. (i dont really understand why as a mem stick should be s.l.o.w, something to deo with sequential read/writes) Try it with a mem stick with an led that signifies activity, you'll notice that there is activity when arma starts (it seems to load arma.exe form the memstick) but once you are ingame you'll see there is no activity at all. no luck with fanspeed? did you already do the old delete gpu drivers/use driver cleaner/re-install latest gpu drivers trick?

Is it just me that can see the obvious solution here? Keep terrain detail and shading detail at medium and you should be good. Its not an engine issue, many people run vith very high settings. to be honest it sounds like your graphics card is knackered. Do you have a spare you could swap out and replicate a similar issue with? A machine hardlock is not a good sign but you can be sure that it is not arma itself that is causing the issue, otherwise this board would be spammed with similar threads. I'd be looking towards either a GPU issue or a heat issue, i used to have a fairly similar problem with an old card...turns out the fan wasnt even spinning, liuckily i found out before i broke it and replaced with a zalman...served me well for a while.