droezelke
-
Content Count
28 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Posts posted by droezelke
-
-
I share your concerns Marvin, I really do! In fact I've just about given up with Arma 2 all together and haven't bothered to download patch 1.03, and why should I? I've heard it all before how bugs will be patched and improvements made! well 8 years, 3 games and God now's how many patches BIS games still fail to deliver!Don't get me wrong, I have respect for BIS and what they have tried to achieve here, that's why I've stuck with their games for so long. But if the truth be known they lack the ability to deliver what us FPS sim fans crave for. I brought OFP, I brought Armed Assault, and I'm happy to say I didn't buy Arma 2 and never will! My nephew was one of those that rushed out on the hype to buy Arma 2 the day it was release here in the UK, after about a week of playing it he handed the game to me and said “Here, its crap!†No, its not crap, its just not what he wants in a FPS, but it is buggy as hell, seems 3 quarters finished (like Arma1) and runs like a 3 legged pig thats eaten to many fermented apples. And it still as the same old Ai problems inherited from OFP/Arma... I expected so much more, its just arma 1 with slightly better graphics and more toys to play with. Just because you can get killed by a single round doesn't make a game realistic! Plus, spending more time in the forums looking for solutions is not the ideal way to play a game! There were more active members in the trouble shooting part of the forums then there were players on servers within the first few weeks of release, that says it all!
Oh, by the way, I loved the sound in Arma2, whether they are authentic sounds or not, bullets cracking left and right of you and ricocheting in all directions in glorious 5.1 surround sound was very impressive. If only they could sort that damn Ai out! It really is pathetic!
Marvin, you wont get a lot of sympathy here, after-all, this is the Fanboys Forum, they live in denial!
My hope lies elsewhere! (October 9th)
Krutish
I agree with you and the posts above. I have not been a long time bisforums poster. But since I came here I have followed the various topics more than once every day. Say something negative about the game (about performance, bugs, etc), and you can be sure to be flamed at by fanboys who are just living in denial that Arma2 did not deliver quality. OPF and Arma 1 are games that I see as 'work in progress games' that should have lead to a great third game, but it's the same story as before. The game is unfinished in such a way that even after 3 patches you could already predict this game will never be the game it should have been. I, being a musician, compare it to a song I have written that doesn't seem to work, and I am trying to fix by adding layers and layers, changing arrangements and so on, only to realize it's not the arrangements, but the melody just isn't good enough.
If OPF: dragon rising turns out the better of the two, I don't think I will ever return to BIS products.
-
That's not what was said.Let's just say I anticipate threads titled "when can we expect 1.04?" very soon..........
I thought that was said by you actually. Something in the likes of 'could be in a week, could be less'. The words 'in a couple of days' was definitely used by somebody from the development team here on the forum.
Very soon it is. (that could mean anything, you tease :))
-
Our dear moderator will probably close this topic again (every topic about news on patches are being closed for god knows what reason).
Last week, there was said that the new patch would arrive in a couple of days. Up until today: no more news about a patch. How far are they in development and what time frame is there?
-
Looked at your link. There are 48 pages of many people posting their config files.
If you know the answer, can you please just write it here instead of posting a link where you have to go through 48 pages of different set-ups? Thank you.
Videomemory=?
nonlocalvideomemory=?
-
Are you one of them? Self-hate's not necessarily a bad thing....I find it hilarious (well, more like disturbing) that everyone wants a "finished product", but at the same time there are 20 billion feature requests. IMO many of the problems with ArmA 2 seem to be related to BIS trying to add too many features. While many of them work, quite a bit of them are buggy and could be much better. While features are always nice, I can't help but feel that the community kind of got what we deserved... :j:
I agree with you. The game is too complex (I don't mean difficult) to make it work as well as we would like it to work. I would have settled with a game with less features, but polished in every aspect there is in the game.
-
I am waiting for Win 7 to upgrade to 64 bit.It is available already as RC. You probably knew this, but I don't see why you shouldn't try it as it works great, except for Arma 2
-
There is one guy thats been a member here for many years, and he is a great addon maker. He complained A LOT that ArmA1 had all these horrible issues, yet recently updating his pc drivers and DX9 cured them all.His problems of CTD after 30 mins sound familiar?
http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1287599&postcount=396
Oooooowww, you have found the magical solution!!! How is it possible that nobody tried that before??? Never thought about drivers.
And because Bigbear has no problems (so he says), nobody has problems. Great thinking.
Man, I love the people defending the broken game, saying there is nothing wrong with it and that we are exceptions and it is due to our hardware. But never did they post a possible solution for any issues. I love these guys. They are a real asset to this TROUBLESHOOTING forum.
-
Place yourself in a BI dev shoes. You are making a game, then come the big bosses, they want money and they want it now. You release an unfinished product full of bugs and missing features, everybody panic and make bad critics. Now your job is to finish the game by making patches. You'd want to come here and face the angry customers to post your work's news? I wouldn't.I would out of respect for the people who payed for the game. There have been developpers in the past who have released official press statements to apologize for the product they have put on the market (see e.g. Area 51). There is no shame in that, and it would earn the respect of the community much more than not reacting at all.
About the patch: some optimisations? What the hell? If the game has a big problem it's the performance. The troubleshooting forum is almost all about performance issues. It should be the number 1 priority.
The state this game is in, it should never have been released. Everybody with a sane mind understands that. No excuses about the complexity of the game are valid. You either make a complex game and release it when it's ready (the catch phrase of our moderator about the patch 'when it's done' should have been the catch phrase for the final product) or you make a less complex game if you can't succeed to make it work.
-
RIP good reply, thanks.Yeah mixing up with some of the nvidia controls over and over i managed to get the blur going off with the cfg file and making it "admin" controlled with vista. Also running the program as admin and with desktop features, vista transparency, no doubt. Anyways... the game is running at around 50fps in general with the blur and bloom at off. Im off to buy a new 295gtx, sigh... theres another 500bucks :I
Thanks for the info peeps, and thanks for the informative replies... and no worries "RIP" fellas, good gaming to you.
If I were you, I wouldn't invest in a GTX295 today. Wait until october (maybe november), and buy a high-end dx11 card for the same price as you would pay for the GTX295 today. You're going to be sorry when you buy a 295 at 500 dollars when later this year the new graphics cards will be released which will outperform the GTX295 by great lengths.
-
Unless your cpu is overclocked it's the problem, see my sig for the kind of cpu speed that will give you smooth frames in Arma 2.I have the same cpu & the stock speed is shite for Arma 2 (less than 2.8ghz), if i overclock to what's below i get superb frames & fluid gameply in singleplayer & online, no it's not down to my Graphics card either.
Good luck.
Yep, CPU is overclocked to 3.4GHz.
-
8800GTS 320MB here and good performance.The campaign however is low in its parts, but thats because i lack both video power for the juicer parts with a lot of units etc and also ofcourse cpu power to have all those units and scripts running/thinking.
I dont think there is much difference between my card and the GTX apart from that the latter have more power. So its either the rest of the gear that is in bad shape, or the pc is not optimized or that you guys want more than your cards can handle.
Sure BIS needs to optimize here and there, and they will im sure, but to hear that some with almost the same cards as mine but with more power run ARMA2 real bad hints me that something else isnt working as it should. Be it overheating, chaotic file system, faulty hardware, viruses/malware/anti-virus hog or something else.
Hope everyone gets sorted in the end though no matter what the problem is. :)
Alex
If you have read my previous posts, where my specs are written down, you can see that it is not a hardware problem. It's a software problem. I have run the dx10 benchmark demo of Resident Evil 5 with everything maxed out in 1080p, and I have an average framerate of 114 fps. If there was something wrong with my hardware, it would show in other games as well. Overheating is absolutely no issue. The highest temperature I had on my GTX295 while playing Arma2 is 65°C. My quad core q9550 is only used for 40% of my capacity. It is so clear that Arma 2 does not use the resources a high-end PC has. There is a bottleneck in the game itself preventing it to use the resources.
It's like it was optimised to play on the Xbox360. In that way I believe that the game does not recognise other hardware as it should.
About faulty file systems, viruses and so on: I have the game installed on a new hard drive with a freshly installed OS.
The only thing that will help the performance issues are patches, more specifically resource patches.
-
Err there are countless threads that would disagree with you, this one for example: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=81063&highlight=disable+blur which was found with a simple search of "disable blur".Your complaint about the previous poster may have been valid, but that was completely negated by your response.
He is a poster like everyone else here.
You are doubting his experience issues with blur? Why would he lie about that?
I don't understand why a moderator has to make fun of people who experience troubles with a game they bought. Is that the new politics at BIS?
Ban me if you want if you don't like my answer. That will tell a lot more about you than about me.
-
I actually spotted something troubleshootable (maybe) in the last few posts.Droezelke : ignoring all the rant of this post and the others, I noticed that you said something about the fps issue affecting everyone who plays the game (may have been a misunderstanding on my part), just noting that I don't suffer from the issue and everyone I play with doesn't suffer from it so you should be able to find a way to fix it (theoretically) but if it's a hardware compatibility issue and changing drivers doesn't fix it then let's hope the patch does something for it.
First of all: I'm talking about the single player campaign. The online part runs smooth. About the hardware: Intel quad core q9550 @ 3.4GHz, 4 Gb DDR2, GTX295 graphics card. I can play every game (except Crysis) at + 60 fps, all maxed out at 1080p resolution. So I have enough hardware power. I tried to run the game on 3 OS: XP, Vista 32 bit, Win 7 64 bit. Only with XP and a lot of config tweaks and driver adjustment settings, I can play the game on normal settings with +30 fps. Tried many drivers.
If anyone says it's my hardware that causes the troubles, it's just ignorance on his part.
To make a comparison: when Vista was released, about everyone was having troubles with it. It had nothing to do with hardware, but software issues. Everyone knew this, and Vista was burnt to the ground by PC-gamers. Nobody said then: stop whining, this is normal. But for some strange reason, some people at the BIS forums are saying that this is normal for PC-games (and in this case for Arma 2).
Vista needed about a year of updates to run pretty much stable. Now Win 7 is coming ((which is just an updated Vista), and the release candidate is running very well. Microsoft learned from their mistakes, but Vista is a blemish on their part.
The first Arma was as bug ridden as Arma 2. As it's an update engine in Arma 2, so we as consumers should expect that the game runs stable if BIS learned from their mistakes. But again, they didn't. Arma 1 needed up until patch 1.14 to be stable (18 months). Will this be the same for Arma 2? Let's hope not.
Call it rubbish what I'm saying, I don't care. But I believe I'm not blinded because of being a fan of Arma.
-
Honestly, because every time a PC game comes out, every forum is filled with people complaining about how bugged, how broken or simply what a POS such-and-such a game is. We see this year after year after year.The rants might have some validity if the same phenomenon didn't occur in every forum for every new PC game. Because it does, you begin to understand that this is how PC games work and expending energy whining and complaining is a complete waste.
And I've been a software dev in one form or another for 22 years. So I'm sure we've both had some access and insight into the code behind Arma and have seen that it's orders of magnitude more complex than most any software developer will ever see in his/her career. And Arma 1/2 being a sim that tries to include so many aspects of military combat is far more complex than most FPSes.
Once you accept the fact that this is how PC games work, you can be at peace with it. Ranting accomplishes nothing.
Was that Arma or Arma 2? I ran Arma in Win 7 with 8GB of RAM and it ran flawlessly.
What is wrong with your perception? Arma 2 is the least optimised game I have ever played on PC (10 years of PC-gaming, always up-to-date with the latest hardware and software). You mentioning this is with every other PC-game is just plain stupidity. Most PC-games have bugs, because complex software can't be bug-free, but no other game has as many bugs as Arma 2. The framerate issues people are having are not normal and not only for people posting their issues on this forum, but for about everyone who has played this game.
BIS is lucky that in Europe there are no warranty laws for software (although, some European politicians want to create warranty laws for software, so maybe one day...). If there were warranty laws, BIS would have been bankrupt because of all the refunds people would ask for Arma 2.
-
I've tried all this tips and tricks but nothing helped for meTried...
-various drivers, from 185-190.
-some command line options (-winxp, -cpucount=8...)
-Different CFG Settings (FSAA, HDR Precision, Scene complexity)
-All grapics quality settings from low to high, visual range from low to high
-different nHancer Settings(VSync, FSAA Transparency, SLI compatibility ...)
-with and without SLI
-Hypertreading activated/disabled
and so on...
I cant get the fps over 20-30. Even SLI off/on give me only about 3 more fps. Post Processing off about 1-2. Object Details off 1-2, Landscape Detail 1, all the other settings change nearly nothing. If SLI is enabled it shows that both GPUs load is at about 30-50%.
Any ideas? :/
This is my rig:
Core i920 @ 3Ghz
6 GB DDR3 1600 Ram
Nvidia Geforce GTX 295
Asus Rampage 2 Extreme
SB X-Fi
2 HDDs in Raid 0
Vista 64
There is nothing wrong with your pc, it's the game that doesn't use your hardware as it should. There is NO solution at this moment. Some config tweaks can enhance your frame rate.
Try: 3Dperformance: 100000 in cfg file to start. Make sure that after you have changed your config, you make the cfg file read-only, otherwise it will be overwritten. Turn off headbobbing in you profile (again: read-only).
In your nVidia control panel:
Force Vsync off
set anisotropic filtering to 8
Ingame settings:
videomemory: high
AF: disabled
AA: disabled
shadows: high
post processing: disabled
everything else: normal
And play it under windows XP 32 bit with the latest driver from nvidia.
Vista 64 bit doesn't work well with this game.
Good luck.
-
Ok, just to be clear. OFP2 is NOT a competitor for A2. It's an arcade game.You can't lean for example. How can you have a realistic military sim with no leaning?
Codemasters is dishonestly using the OFP trademark to swindle people into believing that OFP2 is a continuation of OFP. That couldn't be further from the truth, as all the people that were involved in developing OFP are the same people that developed A2. The only thing that OFP and OFP2 have in common is the trademarked name.
Eth
Where did you get the information about OF2 being arcade? I've read a lot of good things on the game. It wil be a war simulation with no comprimises on difficulty. Leaning is very much possible in OF2 (where did you hear the opposite???). The only thing Codemasters compromised on is the menu interface, making it easier to use on console. And I think that is even a good thing as you can't claim that Arma2 has a logical and easy to use interface (too many buttons and clicks to do some simple actions).
It's pretty sure that OF2 will be polished and will run optimised (quality control at Microsoft before release), and you can't say that from Arma2. I strongly believe that the release of Arma2 on Xbox360 was cancelled just a couple of weeks before release date, because it didn't pass the quality control at Microsoft.
If it will be a good game, I don't know, but at least it will be playable. I'm putting Arma2 away until there will be patches released and I read good things about them. And I will buy OF2 to keep me busy in the mean time.
-
Alright cool. Also, I dont have a physx control panel like Dwarden talks about... What then? I went to Nvidia's website and looked up the Drivers for PhysX and went to install them but my PC said I have them installed and it asks to uninstall. I uninstalled and reinstalled.Any idea how to get that menu so I can complete this process fully?
If you have an nVidia card from 8000, 9000 or 200 series, then all you have to do is download the latest GRAPHICS driver from nVidia. The physX drivers are included in the video-driver, so you don't have to do anything.
In the control panel from nVidia you will see a tab where you can enable or disable physX. But it is enabled by default, so no worries there.
-
Not double, but greatly improved. With my current settings I'm getting around 40 in a typical single player mission (even "Battlegrounds" which is rather busy). Down in the mid 20's without SLI. The 190.38 drivers helped a lot for me.First: that is double :)
I have a GTX295 graphics card. The battleship menu screen gives me 130 fps. Ingame during campaign, it varries between 25-60 fps. I'm pretty sure my 2 gpu's are not used as in single gpu-mode I have the exact same frame rates. Hearing your story makes me believe that the game doesn't support sli for recent graphic cards (gtx200 series), but maybe for older cards it does. Or that there is a limitation in the game engine that limits the usage of all hardware resources. My grapics card only reaches 60°C during intense gameplay. That proves something.
The 190 driver does not change anything for me (not in xp, vista or win7).
I'm pretty sure that there is still a lot of optimisation to be done by BIS. The question is: will people be patient enough, knowing that Operation Flashpoint 2 is coming in september and will run well on PC and consoles as it uses an engine that has been optimised since it was used in Dirt (the race game)?
-
@niQ®Thanks again :)
Other that can confirm the new Beta drivers v.190.38 give some more fps boost :)
Not for me.
q9550 @ 3.4Ghz
4Gb DDR2 800
GTX295
But with adjustments in de config, player profile and control panel, I manage to play the game (campaign that is) between 25 (city levels)-50 fps. And that is playable without frustration.
But again, the beta driver does not increase performance on my PC. The beta-driver is mainly focussed on bug fixes and Cuda platform 2.3.
-
I have tried loads of tweaking and nothing works, all I get is a crappy 16 -25 FPS.I have the exact same rig as you. And at first I was having the same fps. But go and have a look at the sticky thread for nVidia card owners. Someone posted a nice config at one of the last pages that may help a lot (it did for me).
Disable multi-gpu in your control panel (makes the game more smooth as sli is not yet fully optimised). Make sure you force Vsync of in your control panel: the game has automatic Vsync built in and caps the framerate to 30 fps in the campaign and scenarios.
Just don't expect to be able to run this game on max settings, as it is virtualy impossible at the current state the game is in. Also expect frame drops from time to time, especially with a lot of AI units and in city environments. There is no magical solution for now. We can only hope that patches will improve performance and that new drivers from nVidia respond accordingly so we can use sli to the fullest.
-
Hi my pc E8500 @3.170 GTX260 897mbi have changed my native resolution from 1920x1080 to 1820x1080 from the control panel nvidia driver
AnisoFilter I turned the driver over 8x
3D_Performance=100000;
Resolution_Bpp=32;
Resolution_W=1820;
Resolution_H=1080;
refresh=60;
Render_W=1820;
Render_H=1080;
FSAA=0;
postFX=0;
HDRPrecision=8;
lastDeviceId="";
localVRAM=927358720;
nonlocalVRAM=527433727;
TexQuality=1;
TexMemory=2;
useWBuffer=0;
shadingQuality=10;
shadowQuality=3;
play fast in the woods and the City
you try :p by (sry for my english :o)
That actually works for me. In Chernogorsk city it's still a bit laggy sometimes, but a huge performance boost. And most of all: it looks great!
If you play in first person view: set headbobbing in your arma 2 profile to 0, which makes it even smoother.
Thanks a lot.
PS: it's not perfect, but this is the best performance config I have tried. Now just a performance patch (or two) and it might become very playable.
-
Processor: Intel® Core2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz8GB system RAM
OS: Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium Edition, 64-bit (Service Pack 1)
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT (x2)
Driver version: 186.18
Stream processors: 112
Core clock: 600 MHz
Shader clock 1500 MHz
Memory clock: 900 MHz (1800 MHz data rate)
Memory Interface: 256-bit
Total available graphics memory: 4092 MB
Dedicated video memory: 512 MB
System video memory: 0 MB
Shared system memory: 3580 MB
Video BIOS version: 62.92.24.00.70
IRQ: 16
Bus: PCI Express x16 Gen2
At first things had the blocky textures and i tried everything but none of it worked until the -winxp command. But when that fixed the visuals the performance got very choppy. I tried lowering everything but it showed no noticeable difference in performance. Any suggestions?
There have been posted so many suggestions, but there is not 1 that will help you increase the framerate like you want it. Believe me, I've tried them all (even on 3 OS: XP, Vista, Win7). There is only 1 suggestion: wait for decent patches in the next months or so.
And those who are posting things like: 'On my system, it runs great'. I don't believe it until you prove it with a screenshot with Fraps enabled in a city level and AI units visible. Otherwise: stop posting this crap in a troubleshooting forum.
-
As this is a sticky thread, I suppose a community leader is following this topic (Dwarden?). I have read a lot on this troubleshooting forum, and many people ask just 1 thing: some sort of answer from BIS of a community leader. Not a solution for the many problems, but an answer that BIS acknowledges the problems and is working on it. I don't understand that until this day, nobody from BIS has posted anything. This does not show any respect to all the consumers who have bought this game and we are the ones that make it possible that people at BIS still have a job and a company to work for.
So in behalf of everybody:
Please, post something, just to show BIS has respect for it's consumers.
Thank you.
-
Nobody knows ;o)
Path 1.03
in ARMA 2 & OA - TROUBLESHOOTING
Posted
I don't understand the cartoon being related to my post.
That being said. I also believe that most problems will be eventually cleared out (after a long series of patches and a lot of patience). My point was actually: BIS has had the opportunity to make 3 games, with all three being the same game basicly. If those were three different sorts of games, I could understand more that every game would have it's flaws. But Operation Flashpoint, Arma1 and Arma2 are the same in structure and gameplay. So they had 3 full blown tries to make THAT game work. But every time, they were flawed in a way that is unacceptable. To quote some people here on the forums: BIS has released 3 beta-games at full price. Only after a year and a half of patches, the games were what I would call: release-ready.
That is the reason why I said: if Operation Flashpoint: dragon rising (awfull title) turns out to be the game that tops Arma2, I will buy it and never look back at BIS. BIS has received 4 times the money for a full priced game (I bought Arma2 2 times, on steam and on disc) from me, and I think I have done my part as a consumer. Now was the time they should have done their part as developpers, but they didn't succeed again. To say it harsh: 3 strikes and you're out.