Alfie-UK-

Sounds like a driver issue, check your Catalyst drivers 'Direct3D Compatibility' settings and ensure 'support DXT texture formats' is not set to disabled. Failing that, try a different driver for your graphics card, if you already have the latest try rolling back to an earlier version of drivers, and try resetting all driver settings to default before gradually customising it to your required usage.

Using 505 UK retail, patched to v1.05, the UAZ usually crests the hill when I am laying the second charge (even though I sprinted to the waypoint as soon as I get out of the hummer). If I start to lay a third charge they are already in firing range and I start this mission without a weapon (except the 5 charges). I've tried laying one charge (to ambush the UAZ) then hiding, but the UAZ and crew appears immune to the charge if it's laid at the waypoint marker, and if I lay it on the road where they turn they stop, decamp and come looking for me...although they never find me it means there is no time left to lay more charges before other vehicles turn up (the BMPs). I don't know how anyone has time to lay all 5 charges on or under the bridge, it's just so frustrating that this mission seems to have different timings on different PCs !!!

If any mistake was made it's in marketing ArmA as a kickass game and then delivering the demo, not to mention the various releases before that. I think the mistake for many users is assuming that ArmA = OFP2. I will admit that I had the same assumption, but I waited for the 505 release and v1.05 patch on the grounds that pretty much no software released nowadays is fit for purpose before a patch, or two, and by v1.05 we might have a playable SP campaign. Based on the fact that it took me 4 years of upgrades before I could run OFP on close to max settings, I expected ArmA to be a hog, I expected the first release to need much bug fixing, it is the BIS way. I did not expect ArmA to run above normal on my rig. What I did not expect was that after 4 months of certain versions being released that the SP campaign was still not completable, or that the v1.05 patch would introduce errors that did not exist in the v1.04 505 release. I hope, and can see through the bugtracker, that BIS are still trying hard to tidy things up, even more visibly than with OFP, and I guess that by the US release we'll have a pretty stable product, but; but, but, but, The early release must have hurt sales, the initial poor ratings can't help, and the UK release going straight to bargain bin prices is an indicator of how this may be received in the US. I still love and play OFP, even with Kegetys DXDLL it ain't that pretty, but at least AI knows to seek cover, doesn't shoot an AK as if they had a laser sight, takes cover appropriately, etc. Why are we still seeing in ArmA errors that were fixed in OFP ? ArmA may be aimed at MP rather than SP, but the SP campaign initially sold OFP, ArmA's SP campaign is short and in most cases not completable due to bugs. MP public servers are pretty much full of the usual FPS smacktards, and then there are fanboys that are worse than noobs 'I played OFP since 2001, I know it all and you will bend to my will', dear god. I still have hope for ArmA, I think like OFP it will take a while after the US release before all the idiots have left the scene and the die-hards make good mods and run friendly servers, even for 'n00bs' that have been playing OFP since 2001 but don't want to join a clan just to play co-op on a decent server.

I'm with monkeyboy on this issue. There is obviously still scope for optimisation of the ArmA engine (the view distance optimisation coming in the next patch for instance, in the 'increased view distance' thread), but there is also a large element of future-proofing in the same way as there was for OFP. Max settings are there for future systems, not todays cutting edge systems. I waited to buy ArmA until the 505 release and 1.05 patch assuming it might be mostly playable by then, but for now it's back on the shelf awaiting a few more bug fix patches. OFP: Resistance on the other hand plays with everything but terrain on max settings on my rig acceptably, 25-30 FPS on high-intensity, high-unit missions. If I turn a few things down a little bit I can even play with Keygetys DXDLL on and have a great looking game (post processing effects really change OFP). It's only in the last ~2 years that I've been able to run it at near max, hopefully ArmA will progress in the same way as OFP and we'll still be playing that in 5 years time. ArmA will run more than acceptably on normal settings for me, although texture caching is a bit slow, and I would never have expected to run it on high or max settings on this rig. The only reason I am not playing it now is the remaining bugs, particularly those rendering some campaign missions impossible, as I want to spend some time training in SP mode before moving to MP. I am slightly concerned that we may not get the continuing support over such a long time as we did for OFP, particularly with 'game 2' development underway, but I feel confident that BIS are continuing to identify/fix known bugs, particularly as they'll want a fairly clean release for the US version after the poor press so far.