-=seany=-

Yeah, I'm sure they would carry over any new fixes into the engine for Arma3. Some stuff maybe not. For example, there where recent changes to Arma2's LOD swapping. Arma3 might use a totally different system for this, so in that case no, they wouldn't carry a fix like that over.

Yeah, we should be thanking DayZ for getting bugs that probably never would have been fixed being pushed to the for front. These fixes help every game mode. LMAO you don't have to download them you ungrateful git. Thanks for giving me a good laugh though.

Odd one that, I have used SLI for years with Arma and the only flashing I have ever seen is briefly before a mission loads, and that is rare. Maybe you could try updating/ reinstalling your Nvidia drivers? Your using the default setting for your Arma nvidia profile I guess?

Nice vid thanks, new lighting looks great. But :).... ....I think the vehicle shooting could be better. I expected to see the terrain around the vehicle (and the vehicle itself) light up with the flash from the muzzle, but I couldn't really see that. It would have been sweet to see the tracer rounds cast a light on the ground/grass as they whizzed down range too.

Welcome to Arma and the Forum. I would leave the res alone and 3d res, leave them at native settings. They make the game look pretty bad at less than 100% and native. Try turning Vsync off, for me this makes the game feel very "stuttery", even at FPS >30. Very High and High Post processing gives quite a hit to performance with little advantage/eye candy. just use Normal Keep shadows on at least High as Normal and lower causes them to be rendered by the CPU (*iIrc) In built Anti aliasing hits the GPU very hard. With a gtx 295 the difference between Low AA and Off is about 5 -10 fps. We used to be able to force 2x AA via the Nvidia Control Panel but that no longer works, a shame as 2x AA forced here was very nice. We have other methods of AA you could use instead of MSAA (in game AA setting). These are called FXAA and SMAA, you can read about the here : http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/arma2.cfg They have to be set in the Arma2.cfg file in your My Documents Arma2 folder. These will provide Anti-aliasing with virtually no performance loss. While you are in Arma2.cfg you could turn off ATOC by setting it to =0 (Note that this is only used when In game AA is set to On, so ignore if your going to use just FXAA or SMAA) For things like Objects detail and Terrain Detail, try to stick with Normal for the moment, until you get an idea of how much FPS each setting costs. At first it can feel like there is no much difference between Normal or High (in terms of perf) but when you start putting every thing to high you will get bad performance. Keep your view distance at around 2000 for now. Finally, remember that playing on some certain game types of online (large coop eg Domination) mission you will feel like your system is running way worse than it should (which it is), no matter what you change with the your own GFX settings. This is beacuse your own PC is affected by the CPU load on the server. In other words, if the server is getting bad performance you will too. -------------------- Other things to note: Operation Arrowheads' map Takistan runs way better than Chernarus. Buildings on both maps hit the CPU quite hard (Chernarus in particular). The reason I mention this is that if you are testing your FPS in the editor be sure to test in the middle of the biggest town as well as out in the greenery. The performance between both these area differs dramatically. This includes the rendering load on both the CPU and GPU. When you go near a big town your GPU is on holidays and your CPU is running a marathon. When you go out into the Forested, green areas it's nap time for the CPU and bench pressing for the GPU :D . This is useful to be aware of while trying to get your head around how to get this game running satisfactorily in all areas/your preferred pay style.

That's hardly surprising, Arma is different from anything thing they have played before. Mil sim is to BIS as Dayz is to MilSim fans. Believe it or not the original crew behind OFP (Marek Suma etc) only used military as a way to make the kind of game the have always wanted that no one else could or would make. eg a simulation of a massive out door area with realistic flora, fauna, day night cycles, weather etc. Basically a nature simulator. You can see they are achieving this goal very well with every version. The fact that new, completely unthought of game modes pop up using their core game must give them great satisfaction. It shows that they are on the right path with their vision. A realistic world/ sand box with a powerful editor that allows their customers to create what ever they like in a beautiful environment. They do have a dedicated mil sim fan base which they obviously feel they have some loyalty to and wont just dismiss them. But I would say that they are only too happy to embrace some other forms of play style, game type that can show off there superb engine. An ultra realistic military sim is not their ultimate goal.

No, never noticed that before :) I can see the "AN" at the end of "ChamAN", but that's it. heh heh :D

Interesting, looks very accurate.

Hi and welcome to the forum. Ambient occlusion does look good I agree. I believe it is some what already implemented into the Arma2OA engine via the High and Very High Post Processing options. Both of these enable SSAO (Screen Space Ambient Occlusion). There are other different types of AO, not sure what the advantages / disadvantages are though. SSAO seems popular. Is SSAO the same type as the version you can force in nvidia control panel, I don't know?

Try turning Vsync off.

http://www.arma2.com/beta-patch.php Thank you! ------------------------------------------------ For 92612, could this fix a possible problem that I have noticed for a while (Arma1) where some times various people in a multiplayer game could not see other players chat (not only Direct)? What is SelectPlayer, an editor command used in missions I guess? I never reported it because it was so damn hard to make a repro for it. One of the ways I spotted it was playing on line with 2 PCs right next to each other. Some times one PC could not see chat by other certain players on the same server. Hope it is the same, because it can cause a lot of confusion (and bad feeling) online.

In the history of games, mods always do make a surprising amount of revenue for the Developers. Like Counterstrike, Desert combat etc. I know of a racing sim where a whole swathe of people bought the game just to "cruise" and not race, much to the dismay of the established race community. But hey! what ever makes the devs more money can only be good. Well done BIS.

The New Island and the New Physics engine. Hard to choose actually :D

Agreed. I think Arma2 anims a pretty damn good. And Arma3s are obviously going to be better. Some need to have a little faith in BIS :)

Nice vid. So...are we going to be able to make armies of M60 toting Bikini girls? You know it makes sense BIS!! Weapons for Women! Equal rights!

Would it be possible to add the following functionality to Binoculars for Arma2-OA (&)or Arma3? Currently, when you switch to Binoculars you are immediately put into the Binoculars' optics view. If you suddenly need to look around your immediate vicinity when in this view (with TrackIR etc) you have to switch back to your primary weapon first. This very clunky and can be frustrating. I propose that when you switch to binoculars they behave like a normal weapon. Eg: 1.Switch to Binoculars 2.The Binocular is switched to, but remains "lowered". 3.Pressing the "optics" key brings up the Binoculars and gives you the Binocular view. 4.Pressing "optics" key again lowers the Binoculars and allows you to look around without having to change weapon. Just like any other gun. Some players might not like having to raise the Binocular after switching to it. So for the first initial switch to Binocular, you could have them come straight to the Binocular view, if the majority prefers this. Devheaven Feature request, if you want to add a vote or thought: https://dev-heaven.net/issues/30792

Indeed, that's why I suggested that it might be a better idea to have the binoculars come straight to the "optics" view when you use the binocular initially. If you wanted to, you could then "lower" it/switch away from optics view with the optics button. It's hard to tell which way would be better without testing both methods for real in game. I forgot about this. Been a while since I used this tool, I must have a look again at how it works. Maybe they could just apply its functionality to the Binos ty for the feedback

Congrats on making such a popular mission. I have yet to try it, I will soon. Sounds very interesting. There are over 1000 people playing Arma right now and approx 700 are playing this mission. Impressive stuff! I don't think I have ever seen so many people playing Arma. Thank you for the Mod

Thanks, I'll have another look. It is indeed a good mission.

I use Track IR and I find I need to have Vsync off or I get annoying "jittering" when panning my view. This is playing on server where my FPS are between 25-30. I would normally have VSYNC on if my FPS where higher as I find tearing quite distracting. I haven't really noticed if triple buffer with VSYNC makes any difference. I'd have to guess no.

I think that is a bad idea, the last thing you want is a bunch of elitists trying to get the game changed to how they think BIS "should have done it all along". You want a spread of different styles of gamers and different levels of interest for a balanced feedback. That's my thought on it anyway. I hope the point of the Alpha is to route out bad bugs across a wide range of hardware and get an idea of performance and also to give some feedback on newly implemented features. Hmm, I get the feeling some people are expecting it to be some vehicle for getting BIS to alter the game to there vision of what Arma should be. This will suck and cause lots of arguments, so I hope that is not the case. The Alpha will be great for eliminating those terrible bugs that dogged previous initial releases. People need to trust BIS with the game play aspect and not try to use this to change the fundamentals of the game.

Very interesting, thanks. I'll be sure to check and report on this.

I agree one of the biggest disappointments with Chernarus was the lack of enter-able buildings. Ironically, I also find (and have since the release) these buildings to be extremely hard on the CPU, even though they are just boxes with some textures on. I find the lack of enter-able buildings does quite a lot of damage to the atmosphere also. For some reason I also find that Chernarus does look really nice...but when I'm playing online it just never seems as pretty. Horrible LOD of bushes and trees and dead vehicles..I don't know what it is exactly, it just looks messy and lo res. When ever I play it online it just doesn't look that impressive at all. But if I load up the editor and just go for a "nature walk", looking at the graphics, it's gorgeous...very odd. Anyone else find this?

Video is very impressive. Night especially looks much better.