Lepardi

I guess some of you play at super high sensitivities then, not requiring any speed at all to move the mouse, therefore not experiencing any negative acceleration? It's really an issue if you play at low/medium sensitivities. If there are enemies coming on my flank and I want to get them, I have to really slowly move the sights to not have the negative accel messing it up and I'm dead before it's even half way there. Then if I try to quickly get my sights on the enemies it doesn't go where I want it to go. It slows down for no reason at all... and finally when I get my sights on the enemies it speeds up throwing my aim all over the place... why would anyone implement anything gameplay ruining like this in a game? It must be a bug. It needs a fix.

Eh? I don't see why would the negative accel only occur on my PC and not yours. Just try, open up the editor and spawn as a rifleman. Move your mouse really slowly as much as you can with your wrist, and then do the same but as fast as you can. You will definitely not turn the same distance, but like half of it. It feels horrible when trying to aim something. I have the float box turned off and Y sensitivity doubled so it's as fast as X sensitivity...

Please take a look on the negative mouse accel in ArmA, I made a thread about it below.

I think that's exactly your problem: those recent Nvidia drivers stink. look for this one 163.75_forceware_winxp_32bit_international_whql Just remove the current drivers, make sure to allso uninstall the physx crap if you installed that. After that, reboot and install the above driver. I'm sure that won't help. I had the same exact problem with those drivers when I had an 8800. Just get rid of the geforce and get an ati card which will work.

I had the same problem with an nvidia card. I had also ArmA crashing a lot with it. But then I upgraded to an ati card and both problems were gone. It is a problem with nvidia drivers or hardware, i dont know. Get a HD 4870 since they're cheap now, 1gb model for ~200€. It'll fix the problem.

It's not a cut down version, it's simply an old Audigy card renamed as X-Fi in hopes for better sales.

Its more about the comparison - you're stuck in a tiny playing area with a big fake skybox around you. It's a CQB game mostly, but there are huge maps as well in AA... so no that tiny area you are 'stuck' at.

That pine tree forest doesn't look that realistic. It's too scattered.

CoD 4 doesn't use Unreal Engine 3.0 There are also mountains you can drive to in AA.

It is relevant, since the game uses the same graphics engine in versions 1.0-2.3. Therefore, it looks exactly the same, so it doesn't matter if the pics are from 2003. That's exactly how it looks in 1.x, apart from the updated gear in the playermodel. And the quality in those pics you just posted is really poor and doesn't even have the graphics turned to maximum.

It was, in 2002. And I don't understand what are you talking about 2.5. I just said that AA version 2.4.0 introduced the new game-engine called Unreal Engine 2.5, and versions before that (1.0-2.3) had the Unreal Engine 2.0 as game-engine. And those pics I posted represent the same graphical quality as you can see in 1.x versions. It was ahead of it's time when being the first game on UE 2.0 engine in 2002.

1.0 really didn't look like in your picture. And I was talking about the UE 2.0 engine which was in AA in the versions 1.0-2.3. Version 2.4 introduced the UE 2.5 engine. Those graphics on my pictures you see right there are the same except for the playermodel on the bottom picture which was slightly updated around 2.0.

That is a really old alpha/beta pic. It didn't look like that. These show better how it looked at it's best on the old 2.0 engine:

The graphics were years ahead of it's time. AA1 uses the UE 2 engine, AA2 uses the UE 2.5 engine and AA 3 uses a completely new UE 3.0 engine.

Yup. I don't care if it's 6 months or a year later, just finish the game properly before release.

Consoles ruined this game as well.

It feels like a poor console-port. Another crappy game, why can't they make it properly?

This will pretty surely not be addressed in OFP2. Gameplay videos show the character movement is degraded to the usual arcade shooter style, like CoD 4.

What magazine, I would be interested to read it! And I thought the HD4870 was the fastest card in the market? You get it for around ~200€, while you can get the GTX280 for ~400€, and the difference is marginal. In some games like CoD 4 the HD 4870 is actually faster than GTX 280, but the 280 will be a bit faster in most. HD 4870X2 is the fastest card out there, but some games like ArmA lack a proper support for two core GPU's.

Get a basic version of the HD 4870 with 1GB mem, and OC it to "Golden Sample" level.

Do you have correct voltages on RAM? Have you tried downclocking the cpu?

With my last AMD setup it did the same, and it was the CPU clocks which were too high (stock clocks), even though the thermals were good. I had to underclock it to get it stable.

I don't understand why are they implementing stuff like this, it's only making it harder for the customers who legally buy the game and easier for those who don't... makes no sense.

No, Battlefield 2 has a crappy hitpoint system.

ArmA went backwards on almost everything but graphics. If it's continuing with the same tradition, OFP 2 will be a definite winner.