maddogx

Just what I was thinking too.

Something similar happened a while ago for OFP. Perhaps they will do it again for ArmA sometime in the future.

A topic like this won't really attract the public, because it deals with a very technical aspect of the game. You're lucky it hasn't been totally spammed. My opinion: I think the fade in/out effect for grass at medium to long ranges is an excellent idea that shouldn't really be all that hard to implement (at least from what I know about 3D graphics). It shouldn't impact performance too much either. Maybe BIS will try it out. As for the blurred "muddy" textures at long range, I think that's a necessity to keep the performance stable.

My sentiments exactly.

I bought the German DVD version, and so did three mates of mine, so -83+4 = -79

Yeah, I kinda realized that after watching the video a few times.

Originally from London, England. Currently residing in Wolfsburg, Germany.

EDIT

It's amazing how real ArmA can look.

Shouldn't this topic be locked? Or are we really gonna discuss the release date of ArmA v107.00 (Build 323459)? Â

Just tried that three times. Could not reproduce the crash.

<span style='font-size:10pt;line-height:100%'>Beta 1.07.5154 feedback thread</span> Please gather all issues introduced in 1.07b in this thread. I will add them to the summary if I can reproduce them. The summary is at the bottom of this post. When you post here, please make sure you adhere to the following rules: <span style='font-size:10pt;line-height:100%'>Summary of issues in 1.07b:</span> Increased HDD activity causing slowdowns - Probably due to new terrain streaming algorithms - Especially apparent in forests and cities Graphical issues with nVidia 8800 cards - Shadows are not displayed on high settings - Mip map problems, missing textures (screenshot) - Objects are often displayed at lowest LOD without textures - Certain images (markers, buttons) are not loaded and simply displayed as blank boxes General graphics issues - Terrain is sometimes loaded too slow, causing parts to be "missing" occasionally - When a player is killed, the screen goes black immediately (intentional?) HMMWV get in/out issues - The get-in-out position for the gunner of the armed HMMWVs (TOW, M2 & MK19) is about 5m in the air. When a HMMWV gunner exits the vehicle he drops from this position, causing damage. - The different passenger entry positions for the HMMWV do not work. When getting in at the rear left, you will still appear at the front right passenger position if it is free. - When a passenger gets out from a HMMWV, he must wait approx. 20 seconds before he can get back in. (vehicle is temporarily locked) Harrier / Laser Guided Bomb issues - AI is unable to effectively deliver the laser guided bombs (flies in too low, too slow) G36 sights - The sights on the G36 are strange (screenshot) Missing weapons models - Certain 3rd party addons seem to be causing issues with existing weapon models (mainly rifles) not being displayed Joystick button issues - Several buttons are "double-mapped" on joysticks, causing control problems Environment - Street lights cannot be turned off through damage (was possible in OFP)

Confirmed the street lights issue and added it to the summary.

^^ Nice one. Exaggerated, but essentially correct.

We've just seen your 2 cents in another thread. Stop asking for VBS2 features. It ain't gonna happen. if its dont gonna happen, tell me please why we have the NV from VBS2 then? and were is this Stryker onboard driver LCD from? Also not everything i wrote is VBS2 only. i wroted some good and needet improvements. this is a suggestion and feedback thread. so i am right with this points. adding some features for better gameplay etc. thats what i explain with that post. By the way, the german modder team BW-Mod is making better units for there addon as BIS for Armed Assault. More details and features included. that is disapointing many german players. Even if your requests were legitimate, this thread is for 1.07b feedback only, and it is explicitly stated in the thread rules that you should not ask for new features that aren't already in 1.07b.

Would be nice to get an official statement on this. I know people will lynch me for this, but to stop people using fake IDs, there should be an online validation process for online play. Like what we have in BF2/2142. It's probably the only thing EA got right.

We've just seen your 2 cents in another thread. Stop asking for VBS2 features. It ain't gonna happen.

You just asked for ArmA to be magically transformed into VBS2. Somehow I don't think that's gonna fly.

Hey there, I've come up with a really weird but possibly quite cool idea. I don't know if anything along these lines already exists, but here goes anyway: The idea was sparked a few days ago when a guy from these forums contacted me about voice acting for one of his missions. I accepted and did a couple of voice overs, and it was actually quite fun. It got me thinking though, about how many times I've seen people desperately looking for voice actors or other mission making assistance, such as scripting or custom sounds, etc. Wouldn't it be cool if we had some kind of open collaboration site, where people could sign up and offer their skills to help other mission makers? Perhaps even with a rating system and stuff like that. So, for example, if someone is looking for some english speaking voice actors for his mission, he could register at the site and look for english voice actors. Or someone needs help with a respawn system so he looks up someone with multiplayer scripting skills. I don't know about you, but this could really improve the general quality of user made missions, if the participation level is high enough. I was thinking of just going ahead and creating the site, but since I have a few other projects at the moment, I thought I'd get some feedback on the idea before I waste too much time. So, does it rock or does it suck?

Use cakePHP instead. Convention over configuration  The idea is good, but honestly I doubt the acceptance (and discipline to keep the designers' profiles clean) would be great on a long time scale. Well, that remains to be seen doesn't it. Planning is already underway.

I can't wait for ACE! Is there an official website where we can find more info on it?

This definitely a great idea and something I would like to see in ArmA. It isn't quite as easily implemented as some might think though. The current selections are hard coded to different functions of the vehicle, for example if the tail rotor section takes damage the tail rotor will stop working, or if the fuel tank of a helicopter is damaged it will lose fuel. Defining a new damage section would also mean having to tell the engine what to do with it, otherwise it would just be another selection. Like I said, this is a really cool idea, but it requires a bit more work than just allowing new damage sections.

I think so too. Even though our plans might differ at some points: If we can get something going alltogether it would have many more chances than three different solo projects. I don't mind on making compromises, as long as the result is useful. Same here. I've sent you and CrashDome a PM.

@Crashdome & Hardrock: Since we all have similar projects in mind, it really would be ideal to get this going as a team. I'm a dev too (well, in training) and have a lot of PHP and MySQL experience, and as you are both devs too I'm sure we could get something going. Since we all have different timeframes in which we can start, it might be best to get together privately and see where we go from here.

Hey CrashDome! Your project sounds cool, but like you said, it's the total opposite approach to mine. I was thinking more along the lines of allowing people with projects to look for help themselves, rather than wait for people to come to them. Obviously, there should be some limitations and some customization possibilities, for example if someone doesn't have much time to help others, they could flag themselves as busy, or they could set up their options so that they can only take one job at a time. There are a lot of possibilities to make it more user friendly. I think both of our ideas should be very helpful to the community. Since the general feedback on the idea is positive, I guess it's a go-ahead. I have a long weekend coming up, so I should find the time to at least get it started (if I can get SWAF-ACF finished beforehand). Web-space is not a problem, just need to come up with a name and get the appropriate domain registered.