Espectro (DayZ)

That's a whole other discussion, mate. Infact, there have never been a truely Communism anywhere in the history of mankind. Anyway.... Have anyone thought about China is simply flexing its muscle to show North Korea its capabilities due to the tension around that area? It seems logical to me, that China would show North Korea that they are very near them, and they better watch themselves as China could create quite a problem for N. Korea.

LoL, I bet you glued ya own PC together

Update: The video is now available on Metacafe for you to stream. It will not be uploaded to youtube, as they only allo up tp 10 minutes movies, and I do not have the time to split up the movie. The software is better on metacafe anyway. http://www.metacafe.com/watch/397974/armed_assault_using_trackir/

I pass at all points... My framerate isn't the best, still though... But I think that's a Vista+Drivers problem (can't use both graphic cards in SLI mode)

Aint reality good enough for ya ?

move.sqs <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">? !(local Suche):exit ~3 _movepos=[gl_1,gl_2,gl_3,gl_4,gl_5,gl_6,gl_7,gl_8,gl_9,gl_10] call RandomSelect _unit1 = _this select 0 _unit1 setpos getpos _movepos ~2 ({_x setpos getpos _movepos} forEach units _unit1) exit randomselect.sqf: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">_This Select (Floor (random (Count _This))) rands.sqs: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">RandomSelect = Compile preprocessFile "randomselect.sqf" init.sqs of the Mission: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">[] exec "rands.sqs" AllPlayers = list playersearch On the map i have a Logic with the Name Suche Hmm.... I really don't know why it doesn't work sometimes and sometimes it works very well? B.t.w. I use PRiME's Revive in this mission too. Can this be the Problem? Well just 1 more question: ArmA is using "JIP" i have a Lokal Dedicated Server but no one is joining... Â Â so maybee someone can answere me. What will happend with the RandomSelect Script if im in the Mission and a new player join my mission? Will randomselect teleport him to me? Or will he just stay at the starting point? How does it works? I actually have no idea, but I will try anyway It appeers that your move.sqs only moves the leader: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">_unit1 = _this select 0 _unit1 setpos getpos _movepos[/QUOTE] Since you called your move.sqs with [this] exec "move.sqs" In the init field of the leader, The _unit variable will always only be the leader, no? Is it possible to use: _unit1= _this select [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10] ??

what are you smoking? even aside from the occasional graphical glitches with HDR in ArmA HDR implementation is PATHETIC. Its better than nothing but its like getting a steering wheel and a tyre instead of the whole car. Your not really blinded by lights you can still see soldiers/planes/birds/etc, the effect doesn't last very long, the effect isn't strong enough, it can adjust textures to the point of making them look retarded but haze, blur and glare are weak. Light adjustment is too aggressive your screen shouldn't go from bright to dark just looking around, it should be a gradual process. Forests for example they should appear dark from the outside and it will take you a minute or so after walking in to adjust and we should be seeing haze like this http://www.rosengren.net/photo/washington/large/Img0013c.jpg through the trees I don't experience those problems at all - butI do agree that forests should appeer darker when you first get in. The sun does indeed blind me to an extend it hurts myeyes when looking at the screen ina dark room. Also, I cannot see enemy or anything else when looking upon the sun. I don't get those weird light-on, light-off thingy I have seen a video about.

Oh yeah, you just put yourself down, but some enemy groups down... fly in and bomb them. Â To give most towns in a little mechanized infantry squad would probably take you an hour if it took you a half hour to figure out what you were doing. Â You could make it so that you are unchallenged, or make it so that there are AAA sites around to keep you busy... Â you could probably even put some groups of ai civies in there if you wanted to take the time to do that. Â That said, most aircraft missions in ofp weren't 'take off, fly 10 feet, kill everything, go home'. Â The Limited size of the islands meant that you weren't flying for that long, but you were able to see quite a lot of the islands between waypoints. This is offtopic but have you guys noticed that when flying the harrier, AA sites never engage you? Neither Shilkas or AA soldiers.

Thanks mate. Don't worry Fubarno, I can tellyour not having a goat me. The reason why I had the editor in it was, that the three things I wanted to test (plane, chopper and infantry) are three different scenarious which I wanted to let people see... But I can see it isn't as perfectly as I imagined . I will see whatI can do today. Cheers

Went to have a looksee but your download is very slowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww, you need to edit out the crap at the begining no-one needs to know what you have done in the editor that was 38 sec's of wasted time and space, you should keep the video to the facts of your review and I would think that if you did a bit of editing you could easily get your video below the 100mb for youtube. Once you have a better source I'll take a looksee again and hopefully get to see it all this time. Okay, mate...I'lldo it tomorrow when I get home.I'm at my gf place atm...

I have written a small review of trackIR use in ArmA. It also includes a 150mb 27 min. long video demonstrating it in the Harrier, Littlebird and in CQB as infantry. Enjoy: http://www.armedassault.eu/readarticle.php?article_id=14

Very nice mate... And nice to see another Dane around here

Its imature, disrespectfull and non productive to portray Arma has a completely flawed game or to rate it 4/10 based on what he posted. Its imature to diss the game by posting lies (about the graphics). Its imature to class Arma has something that should have been an OPF expantion released 4 years ago (please...). There are many engine improvements to be found, there is much potential in Arma and BIS is known for supporting their products the best they can. I might have gone a little far with my previous post but im tired of the constant bitching going on, if people wish to be taken seriously they should post seriously and in a constructive way. If someone feels like Arma is not up to par with the other great 2007 PC games out there ( ) then dont buy it and gtfo! . It is very easy to respond with anger like that, but the trueth is, he is right about most of what he is posting. Although I do not agree with him, he isn't lying. The game really does look crap on some computers (even on some high-end machines) because of some hardware dificulties (bugs). If you guys really get this upset about a post like this, either don't open threads called "I won't be buying ArmA" or simply GTFO

Could you please add a server-browser for it? So we dont have to add all the servers ourselves, thanks.

A quote from a great man. He is wrong, though. We heard of ArmA in May 2005, and it's first release date was Q4 2005. How I know this? Cause I started my website in August 2005 - which would be kinda weird if the game development started months after... Why, oh WHY are you saying this again? If you actually read the quote, you'd see that I do infact state that ArmA was announced in May 2005... How does that POSSIBLY conflict with your info? Take like 2 mins to actually read the quote, then have a poke around the screenshots on your site. You'll see that I'm correct... Sorry, my fault mate. Although I still cannot see why you can say the game development first started in 2006. That the screenshots are alot nicer is very clear, but that is IMHO part of the development of a game. The game has been under development far longer than what we assume, just look at those littlebirds and rotor wash... I have seen them somewhere before - and of all people, you should as well. That and the fact that it is simply a build on an earlier engine.

Nope, its how these latest noob wave storms like to do it. Constructive criticism was always apretiated, posting imature bs shouldnt be. If someone comes here showing disapointment for a number of features that are not present (some for justified reasons they fail to understand) they should still be welcome to do so, i do so too. But what most do in the process is more like this: "There are no *insert something here* in Arma, what was BIS doing all these years? The graphics are very old and look like a game from 4 years ago, Arma is just OPF, it should have been an expantion, i give it 4/10 and im not buying it!" And the most annoying bs: Â "For a 2007 game Arma is not good!" Wich is far from being true! Arma gives you alot more than most other games out there, if you fail to see that you never really explored OPF and didnt keep up with Arma's development. And what are these little bitchers accomplishing other than creating a bad and even false reputation around the game? Turning people away by posting infantile bs? Not something i apretiate reading since i expect BIS to support the game for a long time (like they did with OPF:R). So basically what im saying here is... Â If you dislike the game enough to post lies and bs about it be nice and GTFO. Thank you . You are very correct - but I do not think that the poster of this thread was imature on any points. Maybe you can clarify that, Heatseeker, cause I feel you are the immature one.

Not good enough, you will find yourself being shot at and wont see the grass but wont see the shooter(s) either, that would be like being atacked by a cloaked predator, its also likely to be abused in MP and people will come here complaining they are being shot at by invisible a.i. soldiers . The best solution i can see is making the grass short enough so that it doesnt obstruct the players LOS. The way its done in the demo is a step in the wright direction imo. More simple, fair and reliable imo . Maybe make them partly invisible, and combine it with grass laying down close to players when prone?

Oh man... I wish I had the time, will and energy to fall down on your level, but I don't - so I won't reply to you two... Who btw. is very offtopic. I feel sorry for you, though. A person with so many oppinions, but clearly have never seen anything outside the US for yourself. I do hope you are joking, though - which I think you are. Anyway, if you are so overpaid, intelligent and flexible... Why don't you go download the game off the Internet instead of buying it in the stores? Is that too hard?

That would look really weird, having a 2D texture floating across ground. I still think the best to do, is to make models be more and more transparent (in the height of the grass) the longer they are away from the player.

Well, you have some very valid points, although I see all of them (except one) as minor glitches that doesn't ruin the gameplay nor the athmosphear for me. The AI is a dissapointment indeed... I cannot find ANY improvement at all, by looking at it compared to Flashpoint. The Flashpoint AI was very impressive back in 2001, but the lack of 'humanness' is shining through very clear with these modern graphics. I am just thankful BI made it so we can edit the AI and make it work like it is supposed to. I like the graphics in this game, but as you say yourself - graphics isn't everything. I would disagree about the collision detection, though. While it certainly can be improved (fence/tree falling over, as you stated) it is ALOT better than in OFP where you could get stuck in around every corner of the buildings etc. The collision detection offered in ArmA gives us the oppertunity to do CQB which puts an entire new aspect of gameplay compared to OFP. The 'model/texture-change' of the jeep being shot upon is, indeed, pretty sad. I even liked the OFP one more than that, since now it simply looks sort of magical?! But it doesn't remove any of he athmosphear of the game to me. I really enjoy the game, and play it alot MP coop using TS. There are alot of things that needs to be tweaked, but I havent lost faith. Here are a few I can mention of the back of my head (all in MP): 'minimap' (ESC) shouldnt center on your position. Voice should work and should not crash server. Spawning near water shouldnt make clients crash. Fix the AI and make it look like actual soldiers. Fix the grass to work at longer distances, such as how Delta Force did it - by putting an alpha channel just above ground making units more and more invisible over distance if there is grass. VTOL should be implemented. It is pretty bizar that they added the Harrier but forgot to enable the number one feature that it is known for.

A quote from a great man. He is wrong, though. We heard of ArmA in May 2005, and it's first release date was Q4 2005. How I know this? Cause I started my website in August 2005 - which would be kinda weird if the game development started months after...

Dream on, mate. The US army have showed it's weakness fighting militia forces. I fear that it is useless against a 'real enemy'. Especially your 'air superiocity' as China is capable of destroying or deactivate any satelites it wishes, and their Anti-Air capability is alot stronger than what the US have encountered so far. As for your 'theory' of state-piracy of software. You are wrong - China doesn't support piracy neither officialy or unofficialy - infact, China have executed numerious people for selling pirate software, media etc. The piracy comes primarily from other Asian countries, but not from China. Also, if China felt like it, it could destroy the world economy and paralyse the US industry by making a boycut.

I doubt BI means this, though - and are probably just saying it to incriese sale etc. I don't think BI know what they or their publishers have to do to get real persistant worlds. Their own 24/7 online servers with an EXTREMELY stable server .exe. We are very far from that now. We need servers and game optimised so that it's possible to have servers with more than 50 people at once without server fps goes rotbottom on even the highest highend machine. Maybe in a few years... Or does BI got something up in their sleves that is so different from what we have already seen infrastucture-wise of the server .exe and client?

What? Why in the world would this affect texture settings?

Yea, it should be changed. We trained throwing two live grenades in my service before finding shelter... So I assume it was meant for active service as well