Masterfragg

I'm actually going to do some tests myself, I'm going to see if there is truth behind the Arma2 engine being nothing more than OFP's engine modded. If this is true it would explain the CPU thread bottleneck. I have claimed that BIS have reused the same engine as per their original plan but now I'm going to get some evidence :P be back in 10 minutes. Operation Flashpoint: Resistence Tested on CO2: Battlefields (SPMISSION) CPU Thread = 7 Average Armed Assault (1) Tested on Sanitizing Operation (SPMISSION) CPU Thread = 15 Average Arma 2 Tested on Trial by Fire (SPMISSION) CPU Thread = 22 Average Now I'll test another game, Just for shits and giggles lets go with the recently released Operation Flashpoint Dragon Rising (Only other large scale game I can think of) Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising Tested in Campaign Mission CPU Thread = Average 40 Now I know it's a comparison that no one likes but this is purely from a technical view so don't panic. To me it seems as if Dual Core support was added to the OFP engine with some Shader upgrades and that was it, in Arma2 I don't know if they have attempted to add Quad Core support or what. But currently the CPU Thread count is really low if they double the threads they may improve performance on machines like mine. Which honestly is the ONLY thing keeping me from playing the game, I'd love BIS again if they fixed it but for some reason I have this horrible doubt in my gut that tells me they won't :(

Herbal you seem to be slightly mis-informed with computer jargon lol CPU Channels = CPU Threads Relook at perfmon and check out how many "Threads" are there, or google perfmon how to and you should come up with some decent infolinks on perfmon.

Hi Herbal In another thread you asked how I checked how many CPU threads were being used during Arma 2 gameplay? Well heres the how to dude. On XP goto Start/Run and type "perfmon" without the qoutes Expand the "CPU" section and all the information is right there. Hope that was the information you were after dude. On my AMD Athlon 64 x4 Phenom II 940BlackEdition I have 21 to 22 threads max (Which anyone will tell you is god awful for any game)# Although any help you can give on getting Arma2 to run better (without making it look like arse) would be awesome, to be honest the only reason I get so damn arsey in these forums is at my end at least it feels like BIS just coughed up a beta although judging by the amount of people that are running the game there has to be a fix :)

lol thats rich like anyone listens to fanboys anyway. I'm a critical bastard when it comes to games and proud...If a game has issues I don't hide behind fanboy googles I stand up and say "The company fucked up big time" I couldn't give two fucks if your computer runs it....No one does....No one believes it either. Unless you overclock an i7 or do something amazing with the game it doesn't run great does it? And rather than be proud of being a fanboy I'd seriously look into your motives for being such a fanboy. I mean...What have BIS done recently? Released Arma 1 in a fucked beta stage and release Arma 2 on an engine that can't totally handle it...WOW...GREAT COMPANY!!! Fucking EA may be twats but at least they release half playable games lmao Oh and as for that screen shot how about doing some screen shots of the FPS counter of fraps? That doesn't even really matter my point is that lets face it...Arma 2 running on 1/500 computers isn't fucking good is it? I'm still waiting for BIS to sort shit out then I'll rebuy the game...Returned mine as a faulty product as it was nothing more than a faulty product and all the mods and community driven fixes don't make up for BIS being a bunch of lazy gits does it? They need to either develope a new engine or move on to greener pastures like...working in their local bar or cafe! They can't stay on a modded 2001 engine for ever....The engine just ain't as scalable as the classic QIII engine. ---------- Post added at 08:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:04 PM ---------- Actually I ain't CPU limited and telling me what my CPU is doing is a bit silly considering that I'M the sod using my computer and monitoring it. Also no it wasn't the Manhattan mission it's every fucking mission. I've even stated else where that OC'ing the CPU doesn't help and I actually underclocked my graphics card and it didn't change a damn thing in the FPS department. I'm sorry I refuse to accept that theres something wrong with my rig, runs everything else perfectly yet this game (Which isn't a big improvement over Arma 1 (Which is why I still play Arma 1 with ACE mod which has pretty much all the features of Arma 2 lol) Meh...We should agree to disagree though

Personally, I say you're totally going down the wrong path here mate. It is poorly optimized I can prove it! I get 27fps all the time....40% usage on CPU (Cores 1 and 2 mostly) If I put my resolution at 1920x1080 with everything on medium/high I get 27fps... If it lower the resolution to 640x480 with fillrate at 320x240 I get....27fps with everything on low. I know it ain't my computer I researched all the parts myself I built it myself and I've been building the damn things since I was a lil' lad of 14 so....I've had a lot of years! This is a cock-poorly optimized game and another issue is that it's using the same engine as ARMA...Arma uses a heavy modded version of the OFP ENGINE. Remember? Arma was ment to be nothing more than an "Engine Update" to allow players to run "OFP" on a updated engine that would support todays hardware. I was watching Arma for years...I remember it well....This game is fucked....THE END Also check out perfmon, this game uses around 21 to 22 CPU threads...Thats poor...very very poor it's bottlenecking itself via lack of open lines to the cpu. Also it doesn't seem to use the pagefile...I've watched HDD access and well....Theres nothing being written to the pagefile at all. Also x3 I don't know if you've noticed but this game doesn't take full advantage of system ram. How the hell can you say to these people that it's "Not poorly optimized"?? Sorry but I'm actually quite angry that BIS fanboys are still defending them! If you stood up with everyone else and said F YOU BIS SORT THIS FUCKING THING OUT NOW....They'd have to wouldn't they?! Christ....GOD hates fanboys lol

You know, it still bugs me that players say this game is "PC Resouce hungry" or a "PC Resource Eater"...Doesn't a game need to USE resources to be one of them!? It's been awhile since my last post I've been playing other games such as Batman: Arkham Asylum (Reccomendation to all gamers this is my only 10/10 game this year lol) But apart from that I've been waiting on another Arma II patch. It sadly seems that this game is doomed for me as even with the new patch they haven't bothered optimizing FUCK all. 27FPS no matter what. Message to BIS, DO NOT RELEASE YOUR EXPANSION PACK!!! Start on a new engine we all know you can do it! Yes it could take a year or two but using a modified OFP engine thats almost what...10 years old? is stupidity in it's greatest form! I mean does everyone remember what Arma 1 was ment to be? a remake of sorts for OFP updating the engine etc...Updating the engine not a new engine...updating. Thats all Arma II is...You can only update engines graphical richness before you have to optimize it and lets face it they haven't done so. Come on BIS...Make a new game one that isn't "Epic Fail" worthy. Of course I could be wrong and this could be the legendary "Game 2" engine...But if this is "Game 2's" engine then fuck me BIS are screwed lol

Interesting idea, it's a pity that none of the problems are GPU related, it's a multicore optimization fuck up. Check out perfmon, it only has 20-or so threads open to the cpu and only uses about 40% of each core due to cockpoor optimization. Arma 1 has the same problem but requires less CPU so you don't notice it as much. Truth is BIS have not done anything to the engine other than overload it. Hell...Firefox has more open threads than this game... I think it's just time to accept that BIS have fucked it up...Wait until the next game when they pull their fingers out eh? **EDIT** Ok that was a bit harsh from me I'm sorry. The main thing to watch for is a patch that sorts out game engine problems we need a better designed .exe and they need to do it now. Basically the problem as I see it is they don't have the GPU doing enough, if they could optimize the game to use the full CPU & also forward something to the GPU that'd take the load off the CPU. But truth be told if they sorted CPU optimization this game would run perfect for everyone...I have not a single doubt about that. Example: I have a feeling that the Grass/Vegitation uses CPU also the geometry uses CPU as well (As it should) well if they can't open the amount of threads the game uses why not pass textures/grass and partial geometric calcs such as buildings to the GPU?

On a random note, not being happy with Arma 2's performance has brought be back into the scene enough to start playing Arma 1 again in Private Matching

Course not lol but I don't think you sensed the sarcastic nature of #2 :P I should stop the use of sarcasm online it's impossible to sense in test lol

Hi, I've deleted my thread as I was stupid enough to not use the search function! I am in fact an idiot! Could a mod delete this thread from the actual forum please?

Sorry everybody! I totally noobed out and forgot to search that topic :D Forgive moi please and uh...yeah..

You are very correct Gunslinger the CPU is a very complex chip. But lets not pretend that this is a CPU bottle neck this is strictly a game engine issue and we in the Armaholic Optimization thread have more than enough evidence to back this up now including RAM optimization problems, CPU optimization problems with CPU thread problems and a major issue of lack of page file support within the engine. So even though you are 100% right about the CPU, lets not put that in the way of blasting BIS until they fix it :P Although I do urge people NOT to overclock their hardware for this game, your efforts would be better suited to sitting here and either 1) Trying to find some other solution (even though that is hugely unlikely) 2) Just keep posting and complaining until BIS stop working on the stand alone expansion to Arma 2 and get their act together! Lets not hide from the fact that BIS have still to give a statement on these problems. Hell, no one on the BIS development staff have even confirmed these issues have they? How about giving the developers system specs to us? and what settings they run at? that'd open some options to us! And considering it's US that are determined to fix this game and not them I think we deserve it. In fact...I'm starting a thread now!

Thanks for clearing that up for me mate lol I didn't want to have to start editing posts and what not...Although maybe I should make that clear hehe I have just created a thread requesting the developers to inform us of their system specs, this may point us in the right direction. Seeing what hardware the game was created on may shed some light on this sordid affair. If you could look it up and post on there and just leave a message to say that you agree (if you agree) i'd be grateful...Maybe we can finally squeeze some information out of these gits! lol http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1418059#post1418059

Hi Potatomasher Yes Arma1 does load all data from the HDD and nothing from the pagefile but it is not nearly as much as Arma2 loads. Thats why Arma1 gives such better fps, although both games run on a pretty much exact engine (graphically minus the new HDR effects and motion blur...I'm a fan of neither sadly) Arma2 just trys to force feed everything to be read from hdd. Also the HDD noise that you hear mainly where moving is due to the Arma2 engine loading a terrain grid, as you move it's ripping more data from the hdd and loading dynamically. ---------- Post added at 06:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:36 PM ---------- Thanks Ginger, I'm unsure if the engine can now be edited to use the Pagefile and/or ram more. As with BIS we could be waiting until Arma3 before they'll give a statement on this matter, either that or they'll suddenly fix it although I'm unsure as Arma1 has the same issue. Heres a tip for everyone just to triple check it. Remove your pagefile completely and see if it makes any difference to the game. If it doesn't you are now allowed to throw shoes and gloves at the BIS staff! :p ---------- Post added at 06:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:40 PM ---------- You are not the only one mate, but an official statement on this issue from BIS I would say is unlikely. Or they would say something along the lines of ****THIS IS A MOCK BIS REPLY NOT REAL**** "We have many satisfied customers and are sorry that there are a "Few" that can't enjoy the game due to hardware limitations, sadly not all hardware configurations are able to play this game but only 1% of the units sold have experienced issues" I'm not putting words in their mouth or anything but this is starting to feel very Electronic Arts and thats their default response :P Just kiddin' lol BIS won't give an official statement though hopefully they'll start beta testing on a closed team (Btw BIS if you want a good beta tester just message me I'll send you my CV and I'll work a 2 week free trial! :cool: and!!! I'll even stop bitching! because if I miss a bug I'll hit myself in the bawls!)

Does anyone know of a way to increase a .exe's thread count? how hard would it be to use a bit-hack to mod the code as it excutes to increase a thread count? I used to do resource hacking for educational purposes but that was a very long time ago and I can't remember sweet FA lol I don't want to reverse engineer anything as thats tipically against the EULA but modding the code as it excutes on my computer isn't as the program will be excuting original code until it hits a filter. It's a long shot but I'm currently looking it all up

This is a possible factor which I have experienced before, however... It doesn't really chance much for me. Personally I'm sticking with just wait for the next patch to see if BIS fix the problem. If they don't fix it within 2/3 more patches then just take it as a DOA game and move on to something else until they redesign. I say this as Arma 1 has the same thread count etc as Arma 2 which says engine limitation although maybe we can find a way around that. I have found that I don't lose any performance by setting the affinity to 3 cores rather than 4 but anything below 3 cores and the game becomes a mess so it's more than likely a CPU problem for most of us. What I would suggest is NOT overclocking the CPU just for performance in this game that could lead to hardware failure if you do not know what you are doing. Another thing I'd like is information from BIS on their systems which it is unlikely that we would get that. I mean some information from BIS on their system setup and performance (exact FPS on X SP mission would be perfect) so we know if it's our computers or their programming. I don't expect this from BIS but it would save on people upgrading just for this game. I'll see about sending BIS an email asking them nicely for it as it would be a nice sign of faith and trust...Again don't expect it. What I would like to see from everyone on here is performance on underclocked graphics card, because I think I mentioned this but the other night I actually seriously underclocked my graphic card and I mean a MAJOR underclock and I didn't receive any performance hit...And to make sure it had infact underclocked I tested Fallout 3 and it was unplayable. Odd little tidbit of info there but hey might help someone! If you guys wanna try underclocking just to see it might help shed some much needed light on this dark cave of a situation.

Dude it is the game not the computer lol Right about now I'm ready to hang up my gloves and just declare Arma2 DOA. As for Ethne saying "If OFP2 keeps the Dullards away from this" I stopped reading that as he put him self on a mighty high horse. Right so players that enjoy Arma 2 are better than normal gamers? get over yourself boy...I enjoy the BF series, I enjoy the Resi series, I like COD I like OFP and Arma 1. Just because us gamers enjoy other games doesn't make us any less intelligent or any less of a gamer does it? Realism isn't everything and this game has proven being realistic doesn't make the game good or in this case playable. Fuck me this game is FAR from realistic!!! People POP INTO CARS!!! Hands don't move on steering wheels!!! It may be cosmetic to some but think about it! Arms and hands that move on a wheel can make the difference between a 9mm hitting you in the chest or deflecting! Or your lining up a shot as someone is getting into a jeep or something and as you take the shot...they disappear and are suddenly Harry f-ing Pottered into the damn jeep! (You watch as the players on arma 2 servers suddenly hit rock bottom on that bombshell :P) But it's FUN! thats why you play it! RIGHT!? I hate retarded people that bash players of other games! Or consoles for that matter whats wrong with console games? and don't give me that crap about keyboard+mouse=>controller because on a console everyone is on a damn controller so it doesn't matter. Consoles gamers are no less gamers than us after all I went from PC gaming to console gaming and back! it's just all about where the games are and PC gaming is a very dying breed as piracy raped it to death. You+highhorse=epicfail....Also you say out of the box it worked pretty well for you? LOOK AT YOUR COMPUTER. Some of us can't spend that much on computers and that spec computer is certainly not on the Recommended system requirements are they? So saying you get 50/60 and you've seen 120fps is completely bloody terrible considering your rig. Although it is true what you say about FRAPS people do tend to watch that a little too much but I don't. I just can't play games that run jerky...Well I can I just point blank refuse to...After all if a game doesn't run at around a steady 40fps on all the lowest settings then it's just a really badly made game... ---------- Post added at 01:36 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:32 AM ---------- Yes sadly it is a problem with the engine by the looks of it. And to be honest I wouldn't be so annoying with my comments if BIS stopped releasing the "How to use WSAD for dummies" and "What is a mission editor...For dummies" until they fixed the game and the announcement of the standalone EXP is just salt into the wound. I mean I wouldn't have any problems at all I'd get on with not playing the game if BIS just turned round and said "YES! we have located the problem! it's our CODE!! Sorry guys! we'll give you a rebuilt engine in a year or so until then we are sorry" That would make me very happy as we'd have an ETA on a damn fix! I don't mind companys making hugeeeeee errors releasing a game before it's ready if they only be honest and feed us real information rather than tidbits of bullshit masked in purfume! At least they released 1.03 to stop nades knocking down houses on impact (didn't even know that bug exsisted) and no...that isn't me being sarcastic I'm actually serious... And yes I guess Ethn was right when he said games just arn't released in the states they should be most of the time. But at least most are playable. I mean come on...You guys see the machine in my sig...There is no reason that it shouldn't run properly (Albeit AMD are the weak link nowdays) It's actually the same with console games as well now...I own all 3 current gen consoles and I cannot explain how many patches every single game I have has to download when I install new hdd's or whatnot it's ....Sick...to say the least. But background devs like BIS really need to keep things going, at this rate they are hugely isolating the player base due to technical...Hitches...We'll call them hitches.... But hey lets drop this subject I'm actually going to work on seeing what I can find out...Rather than moaning my arse off...which doesn't solve anything. I am sorry guys I just...get really frustrated you know? Sorry BIS and you guys.

Although I will admit ethne is very right about Codemasters being dishonest with using the name Operation: Flashpoint, they are trying to piggyback on BIS's titles success. Although another point is OFP2 will be directed at more mainstream, it'll be more universal not just for tactical phreaks (I'm one of them lol) so even though you'll need a good tactical mind you'll also be able to learn on the fly. Where'as with OFP1 and the Arma series if you don't go into that game with a good knowledge on tactics (multiplayer mainly) your gonna die quickly, it's not really hugely noobie friendly. Also the AI lets Arma down to no end (Arma 1 that is can't comment on Arma 2 although it does look better) in Arma 1 the AI was god awful to be blunt. Also the campaign had enough scripting errors that it SHOULD have been canned and released as a pure Multiplayer game. I should look at Arma 2 the same but I refuse to believe that the people that made the game can't make a campaign that works FOR that game when so many users of the community have made pure masterpieces in the form of SP missions, Coop missions, MFCTI was a classic from OFP in fact come on...Entire campaigns! Although I guess thats what BIS are really about, the community and thats one thing I do have to hand to them up until Arma 2 they were all about the community even if releasing the mod tools was a bit late for Arma 1. But all good things must come to an end. On thread topic. I ran a test. Arma 1 (CTI@DVD) Server 3 players in coop 2 on lan 1 through netcon Perfmon reported Arma.exe using 21 threads. Pretty much the same as arma2 (19 to 21 threads) Considering Firefox uses 32+ on my machine this could be an indication of BIS recycling too much code from previous releases. Which they are guilty as hell of. They need to redesign alot of stuff in the .exe build and pretty much most of the core engine if I'm not mistaken (Amature programmer) This could mean it won't get fixed, although I could be well off the mark Also Ethn You say "It's much easier to get such a limited game right so it's not going to be a major accomplishment if it ships in a better state than A2 did." It isn't an "Accomplishment" releasing a game in a working state its a damn requirement. Whats the point of releasing a game in a non-playable-for-most state? I could release my OWN damn game that does that...Anyone could... Any gamer knows that games must be scalable, they must be usable for the majority of the fanbase and you can't expect players to stand by a company if they release utter trash...Thats why I don't like EA damnit! Cryostasis is a prime example of this. I've seen reports that GTX295's can't run this game properly due to an overuse in "Frost-like" shaders. Basically it's an overload they could have optimized it much better by reducing the shaders slightly and just performed a bit of polishing on the game to make it look just as good minus the heavy load. But they didn't and my comp has issues with it (25/40/50 ish FPS) and that is fuckawful as it's an INDOOR game! I know Crysis is a bad comparison but hear me out. Crysis is the bitch of games, no one has managed playing at very high @ 1920x1080@60fps (eurogamer.net done a segment on it I believe) I run Crysis better than I run Arma2 and I'm sorry Arma2 can't use advanced AI as an excuse as it only uses 40% of the cpu and 530mb of my ram. Even the hellspawn that is PC GTAIV runs better fully maxed out...I had to test it when I got my new CPU... There is NEVER an excuse for releasing a game in a "Not-so-great-state" just because it has ambition and has scale. If your going to say "oh it's ok for them to release total crap because it's big" then I could introduce you to a whole load of not-so-great-but-it's-big games! (Sorry if I come across as a complete turd but like most of you I've been playing games for over 15 years now...Just seems that I've become more of a critic than most which is a curse)

Your ASSUMING it's an "Arcade game" actually, and I wasn't comparing the games, I was simply saying it looks good and it'll problably be released in a working fucking order. No offence intended but try READING posts before you reply. But no matter how you look at it comparing the games is VERY VERY valid! Much like comparing GTA IV with Saints Row 2 is valid! What they are saying OFP2 (or OBG "Operation Bastardized Game") is ment to offer it is very valid to compare. Also I say you are ASSUMING it's and arcade game because unless you've actually bloody played the finished version you have no right to judgment on what genre the game comes under (in your views) unless you managed to get a leaked version in which case you are breaking laws :P Thats like me saying GTA V will be a first person bloody shooter ain't it? That'd be an invalid point because I haven't bloody seen or played it As for it being easier to release a smaller scale game again invalid point, you don't know the scale and you haven't played the damn game. Also it's called Beta Testing and QA something you BIS should learn about! it's all about release quality not "Oh lets release it in fucked up beyond life itself form and hope for the bloody best" ain't it? I admit I'm directly attacking BIS, but I'm the first to admit my hypocrasy as I love the games (when they bloody work) but I can't help it. BIS may make great games (eventually) but the company are a bunch of cowboys...Although the end result does become greatness, shouldn't we expect greatness on release rather than a S.T.A.L.K.E.R.-esque game that needs to be patched up to be playable? Still back on what I was saying, I refuse to accept your comments on OFPDR being "Arcadey" like BF2 because you have not played or experienced it. But more to the bloody point WHO CARES!!! As long as it works and the game is FUN! I remember the days when I was all about realistic games, then I grew up! Realism is great! when it's fun! Fun should be paramount above every other aspect! OFP was I still play that today...Armed Assault 1 was when they finally fixed it (campaign still doesn't work properly for many) and Arma 2 is (at the moment) a fucking disaster! Thats just my views on the way things are though.

Hahahahaha I've just seen the announcement about the "Standalone Expansion Pack" being made. Screw BIS. You bring out useless videos before essential patches, you are now working on another money maker which you'll fix the bugs along the way or maybe at least a few of them. But instead of that maybe you should of been focusing on a playable FIRST edition of Arma 2. Fucking awful...You know PC gaming is going downhill when a backwater developer starts acting all Electronic Arts on our arses... ---------- Post added at 06:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:50 PM ---------- Dude BIS don't even know what 3D_performance does...They apparently don't know what "Performance" MEANS! But no sorry on a more helpful note OFP had something like that I think it's something to do with object and geometric detail but I can't be 100%

I don't think it's a problem we can sort ourselves mate, I think it's just playing the waiting game. Although interesting thing here. Last night I had Arma 2 open and perfmon told me it had 19 threads open. Firefox was using more threads at 32 lol I also had another interesting experience, I underclocked my graphics card to seriously slow speeds and it didn't slow down fps at all....Strange stuff...Dunno whats with that.

Faster/Newer or better setup of Hard Drives can increase raw framerates in games with piss poor pathetic optimization. As the game is constantly loading information from the ram but only uses a stupidly small bit of the ram in Arma2's case it'll be constantly ripping files from the HDD's (Pagefile most probably) that could explain why placing the pagefile on a seperate HDD has increased performance for some? Basically it's a matter of fast access I guess. Either way if I am wrong it doesn't change the fact that it did in fact increase my performance slightly lol. And interesting case, through my time fucking about with arma2 not once have I had lag loading textures or anything and that was Pre-RAID0 (s) I'm seriously considering reverse engineering the game a bit and seeing if I can stop the problem lol It has to be an .exe(cutable) problem. Still only ever see 23 threads or in that area which limits CPU usage. The biggest question is this, is this problem hard coded into the engine? if so can BIS fix it? if not...Will Arma 2 ever be playable?! I'm going to test Arma 1 in a sec see how many threads and how much ram that can use, if it's any improvement I guess I could learn to mod again and just chuck Arma 2's contents into Arma 1 and play the campaign through that. Ok maybe it won't have the advanced AI but it'll have more than 27fps won't it? If thats even possible and if modding Arma 1 with Arma 2's contents that'd mean I have to buy the cocking game again and I really don't want to do that until BIS fix it. *Walks out of room holding head screaming into hands* ---------- Post added at 02:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:39 AM ---------- Got another problem here! This game, I've been watching via Perfmon how many Hard Faults per second the Arma2.exe issues. It's a big fat 0 for me. That means the game does NOT issue any calls to the page file as far as I am aware hard faults = request pagefile (google it) That could be another issue considering this game uses F all ram. Also highest I've seen threads is still 23 but it was actually only using 19 on Trial by Fire. Another interesting fact. My HDD was being accessed way to much we are talking it had more HDD usage than anything I've witnessed on this computer since installing RAID0 also another useless fact. I opened 200 different firefoxes and uh...still got 27/29 fps! Doesn't matter how much CPU firefox takes up as Arma2 only uses 40% I can open anything (except crysis I guess but I'm actually going to test that theory!)

Hi guys. I'm starting to think that this could be a major, MAJOR issue with this game. I'm starting to think that this isn't a patchable problem lol Judging from the comments I have read all over this forum... I'm starting to think graphics acceleration on this game is fucked up as well as the CPU Thread problem, the ram allocation problem and the Hyperthreading problem. I mean I understand that BIS is a small company but are you seriously telling me they couldn't afford an i7 CPU to test on?! Bullshit... At the current time my CPU stands at 40% usage in game I'm not going to bother with Screenshots because there are enough all over this forum already. My ram usage continues to be only in the mid 500mb's at ALL times and I'm unsure of my GPU usage I currently don't have the stuff installed to check that (I'll get GPU-Z later) ... ... ... On a harsh note, Operation Flashpoint 2 looks very good to me at the moment lol at least it'll be playable...I mean it's running on an X360 so it'll run fine for us. The time I spend playing OFP2 will give BIS time to get there sorry act together and it'll teach em to employ beta testers. I don't mean to be an arsehole but after the Armed Assault 1 fiasco I thought they'd of learnt a lesson, I mean as you may have read in the other thread I took my copy back as faulty. I hate to say it as I am a huge fan of OFP1 and Arma1 (now it bloody works) but quite frankly the developer disappoints me and I feel they take the community for granted lol Don't get me wrong I tend to love their games but they are the Electronic Arts of the backwater developers. Rush release a game to compete with another companys game (ofp2 of course) and think "To hell with beta testing we'll do it on the public"... Sorry I know it's all harsh stuff but...Even US THE COMMUNITY would make great beta testers IF WE DIDN'T HAVE TO BUY THE GAME TO HELP BETA TEST just ask 100 of us to help in a closed bloody beta! Don't get me wrong OFP2 won't be anything near what Arma2 could be, but sadly it might never BE what it could have BEEN and thats the problem right there really.

OK guys! Yesterday I fixed a few 500GB SATAII HDD's together in a RAID 0 Stripe config. Gotta say it didn't improve FPS in all cases but in some cases I'm seeing more effects than a CPU upgrade and ram upgrade combined showed. Considering I was using one of these 500gb's as my primary HDD and the other was in my other halfs computer (which I originally stole this HDD from...hey look I bought the damn computer she can live with a spare 80gb damnit lol) there has been more improvement than any other effect. Rather than a constant 27fps in Trial by fire mission I get 27 to 32 FPS which is a huge change! Question to start asking now is... As this game only uses 530mb of my ram wouldn't performance increase with better utilization of my ram?? IS the HDD really accessed this much? and if so...Why is that? Some people have commented that having the games files mod foldered and on a seperate HDD helps...Well this is a call to BIS... Work on ram optimization now... Right now the meat of the post. If anyone has a SSD (Solid State Drive) HDD can they test on that then possibly a SATA II 3gb/s drive? and maybe some others? Also could I see some posts with ram usage whilst the game is running? Thanks guys...The plot thickens!

heh... Mate came round today with his copy of Arma 2 to test the new patch on my computer. I returned my copy of Arma 2 to the shop as faulty as you may have read eariler in this topic. The reasons were for the game barely bloody working and running like a rabid one legged dog. Right my thoughts on this new patch. Very good! they have done some interesting things with the AI and fixed many bugs I had not had the chance to encounter due to technical difficulties. But the important part that we should all be asking. Whats the performance like? Guess...! Eariler in my posts you may have read that no matter my settings I was getting a constant 27 FPS in "Trial by Fire" Single Player Mission. Well I'm getting 27 sometimes 28fps which...Is not really an improvement but it does feel a tiny bit smoother which made the game feel much better. However, CPU usage is still at 40% for cores 1/3 and 50ish% for 4th Ram usage is 530mb which is a pathetic amount considering I have 4gb...Bloody games should USE this memory as much as possible shouldn't it? Still I can't complain I can't make games myself, sadly it just means that I'll have to avoid Arma 2 for the longterm which I hate that because I love the game. I'll keep my eyes on the forum and I'll stay hopefully that one day in the future BIS will employ some of the community members as an actual beta tester team rather than test the 1.00 game on the public. I hope that with their next game (if there is a next game) they'll do that or something simular because there is such a following with their games it seems a pity that the community has to put up with sub-par releases, and I do understand that it is a small company but back in the days of bedroom programming in the ages of the Commodore and the Amstrad CPC 464 (Tape loading computers) you rarely came across a game with major problems. Bar "Seymour goes to Hollywood" which couldn't be completed due to a bug and "Predator" (game of the movie) which took 30 minutes to load and on death required you to RELOAD for 30 minutes lol In the Sega days you wouldn't expect this. In the Doom days it wasn't as bad as this. In the Playstation One (PSX) days you wouldn't of accepted this. In todays day I refuse to accept this. On that note I take my leave for now. I by no means say that BIS are the worst because they are far from it, I'm just more critical about games I love! There are a ton of developers out there that are far worse such as Konami (Their support for PC games is legendary for being piss poor) and Square Soft (All Final Fantasy games to be released have been screwed up) and Blizzard....Activision or Blizzavision as I like to call them are just....awful! So I ain't picking on BIS by any means. Now thats clear! Adios gamers! I'm going to play OFP for a bit on a MFCTI! Maybe a little Arma 1 with all it's 13 players (about 2 nights ago there was 13 players lol) Thanks for all the help guys! I'll always be grateful to the community!