bensu

@gruso: Have a look at your /etc/openal/alsoft.conf. Search for the entry "frequency" and set it correctly (48000 I guess) and make sure it's not commented out. This fixed the problem with my external card.

I also have sound problems with my external card (Focusrite Saffire USB 6). However this seems to be not Arma related since I have the same problems in Cities: Skylines and some other games. Have a look at this: https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=44862 I couldn't try it myself yet, but maybe there is a solution. Edit: I see that the linked thread is already six years old, so I don't know if that is still helpful...

I actually meant some kind of preset so you can select the OS in the filter section, but typing linux in the search field does the job too.I posted the bug here: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=25544 Could someone else please test his controllers and give some feedback?

Is there currently any joystick support in the linux port? I have a Saitek Cyborg Evo and a Logitech Wingman Extreme. Both are running fine under linux, but none is not recognized in Arma 3

I'm sorry, I must have overlooked this. I tried this method now but unfortunately this is a little bugy. After I did the controller mapping in steam Arma 3 recognized the joystick (Saitek), but it only saw one direction of each axis. So i could map for example the action "turn left" to "Axis X-" while turning the stick to the left. But when I tried to map the action "trun right" to "Axis X+" while turning the stick to the right nothing happend. Now, after I rebooted the PC and started the game again all axes where suddenly recognized. I mapped everything, tried the settings but saw that I did a mistake in the mapping, went back to the settings menu and the odd behaviour started again... So, currently I cannot say when this happens and when not. But there is a second strange behaviour. When the axes are recognized correctly, pushing the stick forward is recognized as "Axis Y-". But when the odd behaviour occurs it is recognized as "Axix Y+". I uploaded a screenshot here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/yeo1bl07zn5hrxi/arma3_joystick.png?dl=0 the white mapping is the correct one which I did when all the axes where recognized correctly. Both times I pushed the stick forward. I will try my second stick now to see if this is related to the stick or a general problem. I will add a bug report then later. Btw, do you think it is possible to add Linux and MacOS to the OS's in the bug tracker? Thx, Ben

Try playing around with the sampling rate. I had the same problem, but max. was standard. After setting sampling to 150% I could set it to high

The SSD seems to have no big influence on the performance besides loading times... I copied the Linux version on a hard disk. Same settings, but set the textures on high to match the Windows settings. Result: Linux: 1. run: 30 fps 2. run: 29 fps 3. run: 29 fps So an average loss of 1 fps over the SSD, but this might also be due to the texture level

Ok, so as promised here is my first little comparison between the Linux and the Windows version. First my specs: CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 @ 3.2Ghz RAM: 8Gb DDR3 1333 GC: Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 OS: Windows 7 - 64Bit and Opensuse 13.2- 64bit (Linux) So, what I can say so far is that the Linux version runs really really well. I didn't expect this since the port uses a wrapper layer which usually takes some of the performance, and since my PC is, as you can see, not the newest I thought I would get some trouble. The port seems to be stable as I had no crash so far and it ran at the first try. A little problem seems to be the sound engine as gun fire sounds a little different on the Linux version than the Windows version, however this is no big thing. At the first run I noticed also some Frame drops when turning/firing etc, but this seems to be gone now. So, here some benchmarks: First the settings: (Same for both OS's, Windows settings in german) Linux: https://www.dropbox.com/s/uymrlpu4cdadd0m/arma_settings_linux_1.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/4nm8syw0q1nu5kg/arma_settings_linux_3.png?dl=0 Windows: https://www.dropbox.com/s/p1hq8jzgbz0t7xt/2015-09-01_00001.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/t5160xss4geim02/2015-09-01_00003.jpg?dl=0 This looks already not bad, does it? But it gets better! On Windows, when you are at the settings screen, the fps rise, but drop again when you return to the game. On Linux however the fps counter is more accurate! There is no change in the fps when you enter the settings menu. What you see is what you get! (Edit: Seems to depend on the situation. That is not always the case) So, now I ran Arma3Mark 0.51, Stratis version: And here it comes: Windows first run: 29 average fps second run: 28 average fps Linux first run: 30 average fps second run: 31 average fps Whoa, cool! It's even faster on Linux! Okay, i have to say that I cheated a little bit ;) The Linux version is installed on an SSD, the Winodws version on a standard 7200 hard disk. But anyway this is a fantasic result for a ported game which uses a wrapper(!). I have no idea how much the ssd has an influence on the result, but I must say I'm quite happy with it. The external Team did a really fantasic job! Well done! Edit: I see that i had the textures on high at Windows and standard on Linux, sorry. But I think that makes no big difference

First impression on linux: runs great, I'm very impressed! I will do some comparisons now with the windows version and report later

Well, I can confirm Dead3yez observation. I have a Phenom II X3 720 CPU which is a 3 core processor but actually it has 4 cores and one is just locked. However if you are lucky there is a possibility to unlock the fourth core. So I updated my BIOS and *tada* I had 4 cores But before I read Dead3yez post I was about overclocking my CPU and did several tests with my 3 cores. Now I did another one with the full 4 cores and as you can see I got a major speed supply. :) Between 2 and 3 cores however there is just a little difference... System: * Phenom II X3 720 (@4cores/3500Mhz Northbridge: 2400Mhz) * 4gb RAM (1600Mhz DDR3/9-9-9-24-2T) * Asrock Mainboard with AMD 770chipset * Nvidia GTX 275 * WinXP 32Bit * ArmA2 Beta Patch (can't remember which one ;) )

This is the idea: If you buy the game, you should get: * 1 full license for the game * several LAN-MP licenses, lets say 4 for example. Now when you install the game there should be 2 options: normal installation and MP-client installation. With the MP-client you should only be able to join a LAN multiplayer session and maybe you could add a singleplayer Demo mission or something. And why this?: Because it is nearly impossible to start just a quick MP session with your friends because most of them are just casual players and don't have ArmA (2) or they have never even heard of it. Even on bigger LAN-parties you can't find a lot of ArmA players and no one is going to buy the game just for a quick MP session. However if you have a look at which games are the most played on LANs you see: CoD series, Counterstrike (still... :rolleyes:), Vietcong (ok ok, some time ago :p), AoE2 and so on... --> games with no/little copyprotection or with a seperate MP-mode (CoD) Now all those games got very famous and I think one of the main reason is their good LAN support. (just have a look at the "new" CoD..., I really know a lot of people who got that crap...) So the result of such an mp client: * A lot (!!) more ArmA MP sessions on LAN-parties (-->good for the us players) * A lot of new customers for BIS. (People who played the game on LAN-parties) (--> good for BIS :p) okey, so what do you think?

Hm, you could say that the other way around too: Just because he is the only one complaining doesn't mean he's the only one feeling this way. ;) Personally I think the best voices had been in ofp. But those sounds belong to codemasters don't they? Do we only need one command for each action? Hm, I don't know... but I agree that voices need a major rework for OA

I didn't read the whole thread but I like the idea. I think its much more realistic than stick the map right to your face and you can't see anything else. I always feel unsafe when I use the map ingame because an enemy could pop up in that moment right in front of me. :p

Hm, yap, that could be a problem. On the other side VPN's are nothing new too. Yap, unfortunately I don't know how much additional work this would take. But couldn't you just compile the game with several options disabled? (in theory ;)) okey, I really don't know. I just learned a bit of Delphi and nothing more... ^^ Yap, that is true, statistics would be nice. And your friends really just play it in LAN? Okey, I have no real counterargument on that. I could just say that this is a minority but as you said, we have no statistics ;) And CoD was actually just an example for a game which had such an option and was sold well. I don't think that CoD gamers would play ArmA if that is what you mean. AoE2 for example had this too. All in all I still believe that the pros surpass the cons but yeah that's a subjective view :)

Oh, come on. Please read the thread and try to understand it. Of course everyone who wants to play it should buy it, that's no question! And of course 35€ is not too much. But a "free" MP-client would just be additional publicity for BIS and it would simplify ArmA sessions on LAN parties. Just have a look at CoD which has a similar solution: afaik it is the game series with the most sold copies worldwide! Someone who is really interested in the game will buy it and won't stick to the MP client. And those who are not interested are just not buying the game. Those are no loss for BIS since in any way those wouldn't buy it, whether they played the game for free at a LAN party or not.

Indeed there are less and more limited demos out there nowadays. But I have a different explanation for this: The bad quality of the games. A lot of bugs and no really innovation. They just don't want to screw their potential costumers :p. In German you could say its about "Die Katze im Sack kaufen" (Buying the cat in a bag) Sorry, but no you wouldn't get 3 games. Just because this MP-Client would need nearly all gamefiles doesn't mean you would get 3 full games. With the MP client you could do nothing else than join a LAN-Session. No SP missions, no editor, no online MP... And now if someone played the game at a lan party for free with this MP Client and he had a lot of fun, he would surely consider to buy the game or its successor --> new costumer for BIS. Without the client he wouldn't have played it --> No new costumer for BIS. In my eyes its clearly a win-win situation. More fun for the gamers at LAN parties & more(!) sales for BIS And I think its one of the reasons why those games mentioned above (CoD, CS...) got so famous. Hm, I believe this MP-Client with full LAN-play support is still redundant enough because at the end of the lan party there is absolutely no use of it anymore. :)

Okey, but the MP-licenses would actually not be free. They would still belong to the one who bought the game. And you have to think a little bit further. Of course everyone who wants to play the game should pay for it but you have to think about potential costumers not potential gamers. And with your argument no one would buy a full game because everyone could just play the demo. Someone who generally pays for games and is interested in a certain game because he played the demo or played the game at a lan party will buy the full game. And someone who is not interested will not buy the game. For BIS it makes no difference if the later played their free demo or played it at a lan party. It's no loss for them because in any way those wouldn't buy it. Hm, but I'm absolutely not talking about discspace...

Yap, why not? CoD does the same! And some time ago when the first multiplayer games were released a lot of them had similar solutions. 1 normal license and several MP licenses, this is nothing new... aha, I don't see that. why not? Ehm, I think there are more than just CS kids out there who have never ever heard of ArmA :rolleyes:

Nah, I really hope its gonna be opengl this time

+1 even in ofp it looked better because you had at least 3 different flashes for each weapon

Someone tried the demo with wine and posted the result on the winehq: http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=10054 But the graphics look pretty messed up...

Hoak is absolutely right. Even though an opengl renderer does not automatically mean that you have a multiple platform game, it is much easier to port the game to any other platform. And there is another advantage for the game itself if you support multiple platforms: A much cleaner code! which results in much less bugs. For example: *Code A works in 99% of the cases on platform A but it contains a bug. *Code A works in 0% of the cases on platform B. If you just use platform A it will be hard to detect the bug but with both platforms you may detect it directly.

Hm, I still don't have the game but maybe I will try the demo with wine tomorrow.

Hm, okey, it seems that wine supports SecuROM so there should be no need of a terrorist exe :rolleyes: http://www.winehq.org/myths#no_copy_protection #Myth11 That's what I thought too. So there should be no troubles with wine and FADE as long as SecuROM works...

Yeah, thanks for that "red card"... Nobody is trying to copy the game. hm, so you think fade would even be activated without a cracked exe under wine? How would you know that? Since ArmA1 never run under wine because of some troubles with the d3dx9_30.dll or d3dx9_31.dll... http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=7411