Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Community Reputation

43 Excellent

About Deadfast

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Deadfast

    Arma 3 - Feedback Tracker

    Everything :P. It might have a snappy look but everything else about it is worse than Mantis. The worst offender is the "advanced" search. One would expect it to return some other information than the task title. One would also expect a way to sort the results (such as by date created). Heck, as far as I can tell there isn't a single table in this thing. How can you have an issue tracker without tables?
  2. Deadfast

    Arma 3 - Feedback Tracker

    The new bug tracker system is quite frankly terrible. Somehow Phabricator manages to be even worse than Mantis, a feat I thought impossible.
  3. Yes, in fact it did. I can guarantee you this is exactly how it worked in Arma 1 and 2. I am reasonably sure this is how it was in OFP too.
  4. Deadfast

    Problem with Dialogs

    Did you check that the control is found correctly? I suspect the findDisplay may be failing to find the display. It's best to use the display reference contained in onLoad's _this.
  5. I'd still do a sync every now and then, just to be safe.
  6. Deadfast

    Loop not working

    This seems like a very weird way to do a countdown BTW. Why not just count down seconds and then convert this number to minutes and seconds when you need to display it?
  7. Certainly, depends on how much data you are sending though. Once per second sounds definitely far too often. Does the countdown really need to be so accurate? Why not just have each client count down on its own, with occasional synchronization from the server?
  8. Might I suggest everyone calms down and stops throwing insults around? If you experience any performance issues please provide as much details as you can (i.e. your specs, your settings, in which situations, what was your FPS before, etc.) so that the developers can reproduce and fix the issue. If you do not experience any performance issues, that's great, just remember that just because it works for you, doesn't mean it will work the same for everybody else. Programming games for PC is hard, a solution that works perfectly for one range of graphics cards may not work so well for a different range.
  9. Deadfast


    I meant which data :).
  10. Deadfast


    Interesting, what exactly were you testing this with?
  11. Deadfast


    I find it difficult to believe since the handling of the code's return value will likely outweigh the benefit gained by not having the _forEachIndex variable. Besides, for a small array this is just premature optimization.
  12. Deadfast


    Why would you use count instead of forEach? { _x say3D "alarm"; } forEach [lp1, lp2, lp3, lp4, lp5, lp6];
  13. Deadfast

    Arma 3 being upgrade to 64 bit

    I never said your CPU needs replacing. Yes, I did say the source of the low FPS is the CPU, as in the game is CPU-bound. I then said that the game needs to be optimized to address this fact.
  14. Deadfast

    Arma 3 being upgrade to 64 bit

    Keep in mind that the application's bit-ness has nothing to do with threading at all. The one critical problem with a 32bit application is that it can only address (keep track of) up to 4GB of memory. Arma gets around this limitation by only loading the content it really needs into memory ("streaming"). This is of course bottlenecked by the speed at which data can be read from the hard drive, hence why SSD is recommended (it can load data much faster than a regular magnetic drive). Without an SSD you may notice the game briefly freezes every once in a while as you travel through the terrain since new assets are being loaded. A 64bit exe could pretty much do away with this problem as you could load assets from a wider radius around the camera. What a 64bit exe will not fix, however, is your average FPS. If you are standing still and yet your FPS is low then problem is elsewhere. If there aren't a lot of AI moving around then the graphics card is the problem. If you do have a lot of AI or stuff happening in general then the problem is the CPU, an area where Arma could certainly do with some optimization, both by using better parallelism and by making the code more efficient. Would it be possible to make Arma a 64bit application? Certainly, VBS has done it and it originates from the same engine. Would it help? Probably not much.