Jimmy the Saint

Thanks for the tip! :bounce3:

runs fine here

Why are you not trying to tune down the graphics until it will get playable? Just do a bit of tweaking. You making it too easy by saying - hey look here I have the best of the best, now come on game run like I want you to run! I have a good performance and my system is not anywhere near yours.

My conclusion by watching these formus is so far, that the game will probably run best on a WinXP system. But do not take my experience for granted.

you have to be more specific - but you can also look into the sticky thread.

Okay well, but I still have to ask what "3D_Performance=180000" in the config file stands for. It sounds very ambiguous to me.

Are you talking about the Delta Force games which used to have the Voxel-Engine from Novalogic?

I am sorry for being (too) sarcastic, this must be typical of me and was not meant to be personal to anybody. So let me try to be more clear for my point of view. - ArmAII is not the only game which obviously has its bugs and maybe even more serious problems, even with Vista, but still you can see people coming to these forums who seem to be so unforgivable to BIS by only blaming them that the game is not running like they wished it should be. So instead of thinking a bit ahead that there might be so many aspecs or reasons which come together in a computer system, those people use the predominantly way by coming here to blame the producers for all the problems the software causes first. Anyway - I see it like that - I have my computer system and will keep it as long until there might be some real innovation in sight with some potential of becoming a standard in the future. Until then, I'm not going to change any essential hardware or software like the operating system or by using beta drivers instead of offically released ones etc. All those things just clutters up the system just like all the threads in these forums until it will not operate anymore or becomes totally confusing. ;) The demo runs pretty okay (around 28FPS)with the following settings: viewdistance 3000, resolution 1536x1152 32bit textures normal, graphic memory normal, anisotrophic filter normal, anti-aliasing off, terrain detail normal, object quality high, shadow quality high, post-process effects low (prefered) My system: Intel Core2 Duo E6750 @ 2.66Ghz, 2 GB RAM, ATI HD3780 256MB, Win XP Service Pack 3, 6 ch soundcard *edit - what does "160000" stand for?

I agree, the COOP gameplay part can be alot of fun when you gather people around you, who are willing to play the game like it is intended to be - mainly a military infantry simulation (not a arcade/action fps game). *oh and for all it is worth - sometimes it may take time and patience to plan and arrive at the battlefield, but those moments before the battle begins until everybody is in position and ready to attack can be very much intense and cannot be compared to simplified fps-shooters.

I do not want to insult you, but I can remember all the bad press which OPF and ArmA recieved.

Just how long did it take to get DX9 running stable? I will not even think about DX11 yet.

You wrote that you are modding the game since OPF. So when I think of those people who have redone or imported missions and objects from OPF and ArmaI into this game, it should be nearly impossible to change anything crucial in the overall game-engine since it might make it impossible to make such mods which are depended on the essential game-engine. What I mean is, changing structures of the game could make it impossible to import old mods or game files - like missions or vehicles from OPF - into this game, like some people already have done.

This proofs once again my theory not to install Vista on my lovely XP computer. :dance1:

So there is a Black Hawk in this game? I thought it was last seen in ArmaI?

Snipers are not supposed to take out a whole group of enemy soldiers from a distance. They are mainly there to observe the area and keep the place safe or to inform his squad of the situation and or movements. I mean which sniper would give away their great spot just for shooting around? He might be dead in no time! The enemy is not dumb, or do you think those enemy soldiers are just out there picking flowers without any situational awareness?

But its a game - do you think it can handle so many different armour types which are out there? It's good enough when the game can simulate different "hit-zones" I guess. Even when the front of a T-72 will be measured with 10000 hit-points compared to the back of the tank, which might have 5000 points or the turret with 4000. It all comes down to the question of tweaking and balancing aswell as using game and hardware resources.

1. I do not really know, but as much as I have read, I think BIS is implenting somekind of system, which will "sink" the player who is prone at a distance into the terrain making him less visible to others. Maybe somebody can confirm this? 2. Are you sure BIS is using a hit-point system - I mean, who told you this? *edit: Soldiers for example have different "hit-zones". And I do have "proof" for myself (no video though) that hitting a BMP-2 directly with a SMAW destroys it while a indirect hit may just damage it. While the latter effect happens, you can see the crew ejecting the BMP-2.

Cannot wait to fly the Hokum!

I like to play with the M24 - it seems pretty accurate and its good for observing the terrain.

I have a ATI 3850 256MB GPU and sometimes there are little white squares of different size in or around a certain area visible. The graphic settings are put to standard, which means "the games do decide what is best for them". - No screenshots yet. *most of the times I do recognize the dots or squares on moving objects, like soldiers or vehicles.

should be possible by cycling through the available weapon-system. :)

Bingo!

read: ...it could be your fault... I'm not here to start a "war" either. Both "sides" may have their reasons to post their opinions. I take it like it is. Anyhow, this is my last statement to threads like this. - for now.

this should be normal, aircrafts should always be dragging a bit to the opposite direction while using the rudders *i was just reading over your post again - usually the aircraft is dragging back a little, but your description sounds a bit different. More like your joystick is not calibrated fully or it does not have a neutral deadzone in which movement should be impossible. Have you configurated a deadzone for your joystick? Try to make a bigger deadzone first and then lower it steadily until you notice the (wrong) effect. - Though I am not sure if there is wind integrated into the game which effects aircraft movement.

Trust me - thats not the only advertisement you are falling for. All you had to do in this case was to wait for the demo and see at least a bit of the game for yourself in the demo before buying it. As I've written before, gather informations around the i-net, magazines, tv, play the demo and if possible try to get a close look at the object of desire for yourself before making any decision. You are living in a modern globalized world with informations over informations, so it could be your fault aswell. Nobody is willing to hear or accept your opinion in this modern society. There's no time and or place for it. Anyway I see the whole situation like this: Imagine two classical soapboxes. On the left box you have those people who are angry about the game and the customer's service -who for sure can be angry, but should keep their manners and respects for the working game-producers and those people who enjoy the game. While on the right box you have those people who enjoy the game - but who are not doing themselfs any favour by throwing back the "evil-bone" to the people who are already angry, because by doing so, the whole situation is just heating-up more without any reason or sense. So why not leaving it as it is? Just respect each ones opinion? Tell your ideas, hope it might be heard, but do not force it. If your idea will not be heard, fine - why not move along, for something else?