Jump to content

Paco454

Member
  • Content Count

    98
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Everything posted by Paco454

  1. As mentioned in the 1.02 patch, joystickSensitivity[]={0.500000,0.500000,0.500000,0.500000,0.500000,0.500000,1.000000,1.000000,0.500000,0.500000 ,0.500000,0.5000 00,0.500000,0.500000,1.000000,1.000000}; version=1; I'm glad this has been added to address sensitivity issues, however, which one of these numbers, controls rudder, pitch, yaw ect..? Providing these settings is a good thing, a bad thing is not to explain what each number represents. With out this information, it's not helping to solve a sensitivity issue because I'm shooting blanks with out it. Could you please, in a manner which explains each number and what axis it controls, what each number represents. I would be greatful if you could take the time to sort this out. Please provide an example of an increased sensitivity settings as a template to use as guide. Many thanks in advance. PACO454
  2. Paco454

    Do You want PunkBuster in Armed Assault?

    I vote "NO" PACO
  3. Running Czech version 102, had to use up second license to install 102 patch, now with 105 it asks again for re-activation however there are no more License's. This is unacceptable. I have e-mailed softwrap, they have not responded. I'm sitting here, as a paying customer, with a non working version of the game that requires a new License for each patch. I demand a refund or a working copy of the game. This is unacceptable. Totoally unacceptable. PACO454
  4. ---------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Under these circumstances, I will never buy downloadable versions online again, ever!!! PACO454
  5. I should not have to use an activation License to update the game. BIS this is unacceptable. PACO454
  6. I shouldn't be having problems. "You have no right to demand anything." Put yourself in my shoes and then say that after you paid good money. PACO454
  7. Seems I ticked off a few moderaters with my intial post which got locked because of a poorly worded title (My mistake, I eat crow). I would like to make clear, I intended no insults of any kind and wish to keep on the subject at hand, which deals with joysticks and ArmA. So let's bury it get on with it. Condition: I have 3 Joysticks connected to my PC 1) Logitech Wingman FF 2) Logitech G25 FF Racing Wheel 3) Saitek X52 The game only supports one joystick in ID# position 1 There seems to be hierarchy as to which one actually uses ID#1 A small program called "JoyIDs" allows me to change the ID#'s however eventhough I can tell it to assign a stick to ID#1 the game will still use that stick who's hierarchy, for what ever reason, is higher than the others. The only way to force a stick to been seen by the game in ID#1 is to remove all sticks accept one joystick which is then defaulted into joystick ID#1. Question: Is it possible to make the game support and allow the use of more than one stick, so that I may use the X52 for flying and the G25 for driving? I have to disable the other two sticks in the device manager. I'm forced to use mouse and keyboard for driving and it's difficult. Can this be looked into to see if this important issue can coded into the game to allow joysticks ID#1 and ID#2 or even ID#3 to be used simultaneously, as with most, if not all major games made today have implemented? This is really good game with great support, worthy of this type of device support. I'm sure others would agree. Can this feature be implemented, given a fair amount of "BEGGING", time, support and coffee? Thankyou, "Begging on my hands and knee's" P.S. Please delete my previous thread and response to being locked. I'd do it myself but you've locked it. PACO454
  8. Paco454

    worst controls ever

    The more controls the better. A game with no options "is a game with no options". Remember you heard it first. Over and out! PACO454
  9. Paco454

    Controllers - Pedal/ Throttle

    Yes. They did say they will add support in a future patch. Hopefully, I won't see anymore gray hair by then. PACO454
  10. Paco454

    Crossfire performance

    Doesn't matter what res. The cards in SLI share and therefore increase FPS. RES depends on how much video ram there is. A single card with 256 meg of video ram in a non-SLI system compared to a 512 meg single non-SLI card will have higher frame rates at higher RES because it has more video memory to buffer the higher res. PACO454
  11. Install 100.65 nvidia drivers to match your OS 32bit or 64bit. Try starting the game at a lower res like 1680x1050. You can find it here: http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=1582 Info about the video driver, # WHQL Certified driver for GeForce 8800, GeForce 7 series, and GeForce 6 series GPUs # Beta driver for NVIDIA SLIâ„¢ support for GeForce 8800 GTX/GTS GPUs # This driver supports the following features: * Single GPU support o DirectX 9 support for GeForce 6/7/8 series GPUs o DirectX 10 support for GeForce 8800 GPUs o OpenGL support for GeForce 6/7/8 series GPUs * NVIDIA SLI support o DirectX 9 support for GeForce 8800 GPUs o OpenGL support for GeForce 8800 GPUs # DirectX 9 and OpenGL NVIDIA SLI support for GeForce 6 and 7 series GPUs and DirectX 10 NVIDIA SLI support for GeForce 8800 GPUs will be available in a future driver. PACO454
  12. Paco454

    Crossfire performance

    Yes, I meant to try the FEAR profile. PACO454
  13. Paco454

    Crossfire performance

    What he is saying is you should try renaming Arma.exe to fear.exe. I believe this works for crossfire too. Isnt it closer to 90%? Ya....LOL sorry my mistake. It's more like almost double the FPS!!!!!!!.. By the way my request to have ArmA added and optimized by nVidia has reached level 2 tech at nVidia. Should know something soon. PACO454
  14. Paco454

    Crossfire performance

    Try the FEAR.EXE profile. Some users running SLI nVidia are getting up to 49% FPS increases, and that includes me. I'm in the process right now of asking nVidia to make a custom profile, however their first response was simply to make one myself. DUH!! They now have been told about the 31 optimaztion flags which can only be seen in nHancer. I'm now waiting to see what info nVidia will respond with. I have asked where I can make the request to have the game optimized using the optimaztion flags and added to the profile list, instead of using the FEAR profile. PACO454
  15. Paco454

    SLI and Direct X and FPS

    Because Arma isnt such a "big game". Its not enough eyecandy value in Arma for Nvidia to prioritize it. I guess they dont see a non-mainstream game as worthy the effort in order to promote their videocards. Nvidia is doing the optimizations. Thanks for the response. I did try the FEAR profile and went from, on a test map, from 41 to 79 FPS. I'd say you hit the golden egg. I think the game is "BIG GAME" with good eye candy, too bad nVidia doesn't think so. I'll right them nevertheless, can't hurt. 41 to 79fps, that's BIG TIME. Thankyou for the heads up. PACO454
  16. Paco454

    SLI and Direct X and FPS

    Strange? Covers the same issues whether I replaced a few words or not. Makes no difference. I'd say your flame baiting, off topic and looking for a fight. PACO454
  17. Paco454

    SLI and Direct X and FPS

    No, the reason SLI doesnt kick up your fps more than that is because when you create a game-profile in the Nvidia CP it doesnt add any compatibility flags (optimizations). That can only be done directly in the profile with a tool such as nHancer. FEAR is running with alot of different optimizations in the driver that Arma also benefit from. Here is the meassured result for Arma on my machine. The card is a GF7950GX2 and the same settings are in use in all three tests. Single-card config: 30fps. SLI without optimizations: 40fps. SLI with FEAR's optimizations: 55fps. Here you can see that by enabling SLI gives you a slight FPS-improvement, but the real performance-boost comes from the compatibility flags in the driver. There are 31 of them and unfortunately there is no info about them except a very few have the names of some games in them. So I'm not about to start testing all kinds of combinations there to see if I can push the performance further. Most likely it is as fast as it can go (going from 30 to 55 is close to twice as fast). I stand corrected, however if the FEAR profile is so heavily optimized then why isn't there an ArmA profile there? Who does this optimization, nVidia or the game maker? PACO454
  18. Paco454

    SLI and Direct X and FPS

    Driver support is the key as I have tested this. Please use v93.71 as this set of drivers will keep and store profiles. Create a profile for ArmA Use SLI: (Alternate Frame rendering) Image settings set to: (high) In testing I would get in a certain scene, (yours may very dending on scene) 21 FPS without SLI and 29 FPS with. The reason SLI doesn't work in other sets of video drivers is because the drivers do not support saving working profiles. The above mentioned "fake" profiles also works but is really not the way to do it, but then again it is a means to an end. v93.71 deos work. The reason SLI doesn't kick the frame rates up much higher is because the game makes heavy use of vertex's which is also why the game game doesn't run very well to start with. The GeForce 7900 GTX, for example, has 24 pixel shaders and 8 vertex shaders, the reason being that modern games are biased more towards pixel work than vertex. However, there can be problems with this fixed approach. ArmA is a good example Consider a typical scene in Oblivion, such as a cave; the geometry required to create the cave is relatively simple, and there are only two or three character models for a couple of goblins, plus a few objects such as chests. To make these objects look good, the GPU has to calculate HDR lighting effects, reflections and so on, which require complex pixel shader calculations. Here, the 7900 GTX's balance of pixel shaders to vertex shaders makes sense. However, when you go outside in ArmA, the balance changes. With the draw distance on full, there's more terrain to generate, plus a huge amount of vegetation, all made up of vertices. The 7900 GTX's fixed and unbalanced hardware architecture means that it finds the outdoor scenes much harder. With a unified architecture like the 8800 GTX, there's no distinction between pixel and vertex pipelines. There are only stream processors, and each processor, Nvidia claims, 'is capable of being dynamically allocated to vertex, pixel, geometry, or physics operations'. The benefit is clear, since with a unified architecture, each part of the GPU can be kept busier for longer regardless of the type of scene being rendered. For example, instead of the vertex pipes lying largely idle when a 3D scene is geometrically simple, they can be reconfigured to work on whichever task the game throws at the GPU. The GPU's dispatch and control logic dynamically assigns work to the stream processors, and this occurs automatically so that game developers don't need to worry about it. To keep all the processors busy, the work needs to be split into small chunks. Nvidia calls this 'thread granularity' (a term borrowed from ATi), and states that the 8800 GTX has 32-pixel granularity, as opposed to 48 for ATi's X1900-series. Despite borrowing the term from ATi, Nvidia still has its own name for it, which is GigaThread. It's important to point out that each stream processor is a scalar processor, so it isn't equivalent to a single pixel shader, which operates on vector or scalar instructions (or a combination of both) although rarely with 100 per cent efficiency. Nvidia says that its 128 scalar processors can deliver up to double the performance of a GPU with 32 GeForce 7-series pixel processors, although this is, of course, a theoretical figure. The main reason for these changes is that the 8800 GTX is the first DirectX 10, Shader Model 4-compatible GPU. DX10 is a massive leap forward from DirectX 9c and has a unified instruction set, which offers game developers much greater flexibility and resources. DX10 also adds a new feature called geometry shaders, which is a powerful new method of quickly generating geometry, without burdening the CPU. Geometry shaders can be used for many purposes, from simply adding extra detail (fur, for example) to generating particle effects. So this means that even if you have an 8800 GTX it will be Directx 9 that will hold back the "thread granularity" and the new geometry shaders from making full use of this 8800 GTX card. Unless BIS recodes the game to take advantage of DX10 the problem with poor FPS on high end systems will never go away on the 7900 GTX's fixed and unbalanced hardware architecture. The 8800 GTX's un-used features means that it finds the outdoor scenes much harder to render also. PACO454
  19. This is by far the most important "read" for any gamer out there SINCE PC'S BEGAN. I'm "SHOCKED BEYOND BELIEF I MAY NEVER UPGRADE MY PC AGAIN AND MAY GIVE UP PC GAMING FOREVER" and I'm a hardcore gamer, You won't believe your eyes. The Content protection system from what I have read will suck the life out of your PC, disable it, cripple it and with tilt bits and the system checking each driver 30 times a second simply to protect content makes Vista an overweight steel safe and will drive prices for everything up. I'd go into more detail so you should take the time to read it. Link: http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html Moderators: I did type some of this post in capital letters only because this is the most serious event to grace my eyes "ever" and I'm totally "flattened" by what I have read. I had no idea Vista was going to be nothing more than a dedicated Content Protection OS system with no enhancements or improvements in performance for gamers whatsoever. It's nothing more than a "gigantic lock" with self destruct routines built in designed purely to cost you money when it dies, along with creating a closed monopoly for Microsoft effectively given Microsoft, as it stated in the article, "It's obvious why this type of business model makes the pain of pushing content protection onto consumers so worthwhile for Microsoft since it practically constitutes a license to print money." This isn't an new OS, with things we might expect like improvements and enhancements to make things better for users and hardware makers and gamers a like. It's an OS licenced to cripple itself and a money pit for hardware and software makers. This is the worst news I've ever had since I first powered on a PC on with DOS. PACO454
  20. Paco454

    official complaint to BIS

    I think a dedicated sticky, (with instructions and how to's) to the bug reporting wiki so forum users can see it might help getting people to use it more as they should. Also a list of known bugs reported so one can decide whether or not to post in wiki. PACO454
  21. Paco454

    official complaint to BIS

    Useless dribble and not to mention intentionally spamming the thread. Reported. PACO454
  22. Paco454

    official complaint to BIS

    I think you lose a bit of the gamer when you start making them. What "gamer" would put out a product for other gamers that isnt done and then ignore them for months? My last word ever on this is one that has been mentioned before and "probably" would have stopped most of the bitching if not all. ...an official word from BIS not defending the state of the game but just telling people what they were going to do to fix it up (make it stable and playable with no CTD). This may (or may not) get rid of the heresay and the guesswork. That way people could get back to bitching about a lack of units, why the army is half marine and uses half cold war equipment and has bad flight controls. I could not agree more, well put. PACO454
  23. Paco454

    official complaint to BIS

    Codemasters, remember DICE, he was the heart of that group, however big business took over, he left and went to EA. Codemaster wanted to change everything and wanted a big slice of the pie. BIS wasn't going to let the publisher rule the game as so many titles have been butchered to meet demands of the publisher. An example of one title which was almost totally rewritten to satisfiy the publisher was Flatout. Almost half of the features which were on the drawing board were cut. Publishing PC games today is big business in the US and publishers want the piece of the pie but they also want more, way more. Thats why BIS has always stated "we are gamers and we make games for gamers and not publishers." In my view, Codemasters was good when DICE was there, but now they just plain suck! PACO454
  24. Paco454

    official complaint to BIS

    -Bring back codemasters.?? Why, what good would that do? PACO454
  25. Paco454

    official complaint to BIS

    I can see that you're hot for me, Paco454, but ours is a love that can never be. LOL!!! Your edited post is well written, on topic and you make valid points and I'm glad you decided not to take anymore shots at me, eventhough you decided you and I will never make it together, LOL!! I think over-all the whole issue and problems with ArmA is a hot topic and lots of issues are misunderstood by those who might not know exactly whats going on or what took place, as I personally found it, but nevertheless, BIS through it's own design, be it unseen or unknown issues we were not aware of and the failure to comminucate with the community has left my questions for those, in the know concerned and those no so well informed also concerned, hench some complaints seem lop-sided, but the bottom line, there are big problems. Moreover, the points are being comminucated but because the community is made up of long time OFP fans and newbies, the issue, "BIS FOOLIES" as I fondly put it, will always be a point of contention even on a good day. Thanks for you post plaintiff1 PACO454
×