Gaizokubanou

Less demanding = Less stuff = Less depth Then it is no longer the ARMA game you know and love ;) For example, consoles use p2p connection instead of dedicated servers with admins so first you are limited to absurdly small number of players (like 24 max?). Then there is the draw distance limit on outdated GPUs on the consoles which effectively remove any sort of meaning interaction between small scale infantry combat and big stuff like air support. Imagine playing Arma with draw distance of about 400 and with 24 people max server! :(

Wrong. There are many graphic cards that can handle this game's visual processing demands. The problem is with cpu load.

Do not listen to this advice. ARMA2 is cpu intensive game, not gpu intensive. That means your framerate is much more likely to be limited by your processor instead of your graphic card. http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ARMAII_gpu_performance/ If you want to see it for yourself, simply run armory mode... and crank up your graphics setting higher. You will see that there is hardly any framerate issues at all as long as AIs are not present. However, if you run with lowest setting with tons of AI... you will see a huge dip in framerate.

Well I'm not posting much not because I somehow got around the issue... but because posting here will most likely do absolutely nothing.

Hey don't get people's hopes up... 160 drivers have problems of their own and for some people like me, it doesn't do anything for ARMA...

I got a reply from BI... and it tells me to redownload from sprocket. Funny thing is, I got the Atari version and downloaded my patch from fileplanet.

It's kinda hard to do with an open software. Let's not make such assumption on other's characters, because it's just flaming.

grr -maxmem=512 only delays the inevitable for me by like 10 minutes (used to crash every 5 minutes, now it takes 15... lawl). Â Is there any news on this problem? Â It's just very irritating that I can't even use a software that I paid for...

Games that cannot be played due to crashes/bugs should be complaint about. Granted, flaming is a different deal, but I don't think anyone here is flaming to warrant protecting BI from criticism that it could use.

The new drivers doesn't solve this problem. I think this is a problem with ARMA, not the nvidia drivers. Files sent.

I got Vista Ultimate 64bit version, E6600 EVGA 8800 GTX 4gigs of Kingston ram EVGA nForce 680i mobo Seagate 200gb harddrive X-fi Xtreme gamer Both vanilla USA retail version (which I think is 1.5) and 1.8 gives me this problem, making the game simply unplayable. And judging from the length of this thread... will this ever be solved? It's a damn shame that I paid $39.99 for nothing as of right now.

I am disappointed in single player section but because of that disappointment I am trying to get into the multiplayer aspect.

I agree with some fundamentals, such as game modes evolving and whatnot, but disagree on the appliances of such fundamentals. ArmA or other kinds of "sim" like methods are not the only way in which a FPS genres such as CTF can evolve their gameplay. Â Abstract is not acient form. Â As long as arcadish shooters such as Unreal series brings new kind of weapons, different map interactions and better map designs into the play, it would have done a ton to improve upon the gametype such as CTF. It is perfectly feasible to think of future games being played out in a "gamey" way while still being very advanced in gameplay.

Well Armed Assault: Combat Operations feels like a good release with lot of stuff ironed out so I don't understand this vent of frustration regarding the ealier released while this thread is about Combat Operations.

I read this on the main website. Does this mean that ballistics will be improved officially, or what we have now is the enhanced ballistics?

It looks like BestBuy won't even carry them... I guess I'll get my copy off online.

What I was attempting to refer to was a comparison between teams that use real life tactics in game compared to a team that allows everyone to run off and do their own thing. I was comparing a structured team to choas. The original thread my post was in asked if real life tactics work in game and my answer is, yes, they do. Then I compared them, poorly, to groups that have no structure and just run off shooting and looting with no teamwork. Oh of course, an organized group of people with average aim will win over unorganized group of slightly above average aim. I could argue against real life tactic by claiming that gamey clans would destroy realistic but chaotic behaviors, but that's just horrible for a comparison. What if one group organized around real life tactics and the other with more gamey tactics? Which would be more efficient? And man the thread merge was awkward (it sort of stole Dslyecxi's specific thread and turned it into a generalist one), but oh well I guess what's done is done.

I don't get all these hostilities toward Celery's points. Â I think his last post pretty much sums it up, that unless the topic specifies that this is about certain pvp game type, his opinions on CTF/TD/DM have a point here that those tactics don't work in certain game modes. Â You guys could have simply stated that it works in different scenarios rather than bashing CTF/TD/DM. I don't get it. Â Why doesn't CS qualify as "real" PvP? Â If one plays CS they don't qualify as humans or something? Edit: hmm maybe his first post crossed the line.