nyran125

i think you are referring to the graphic issues most of us have come to accept. I accepted it ages ago ( i got the same thing in Crysis). + try lowering you settings. We all know that tomorrows technology we have to wait for to really nail this game on high graphic settings without issues. Todays hardware can still play it easily though if you just deal with it take the foot of the high graphic settings. The game still looks good. But i get the graphic pops adn textures aswell. It hasnt hindered the experience that much turning the game down on graphic settings, you get use to it.

I seem to playing a different but the same game to you guys. I have texture popping bla bla aswell in single player( i dont have any issues with the campaign at all though). But we all know that this game is a beast and you have to put graphics on medium and low and even the next years hardware or the year after is the only thing thats going to fix alot of this stuff up. Yeah it sux, but arma 2 isnt the only game to ever advance thier game way beyond all of our systems. Every 3 years a game comes out that kills everything and all hardware out there unless you have the top of the line system. Arma 2 like crysis before it , like Oblivian before that, like Morrowind before that. Like the first ghost recon before that. Is just the next advancement in technology as far as having MASS units on screen at once is concerned Rome total war was very difficult to run on high when it first came out with MASS units on screen). Thats the thing making the game have low fps in single player is all the units sitting on the map walking and flying around. Unfortunately arma 2 BIS have chosen to really go all out with the bell sand whistels that have made even the newest systems struggle. In a years time just like Crysis was, everyone will be saying its easy to run. Pc gaming has never been any different. I do agree though that companies that go all out like this and Crytec etc can learn a few things from Battlefield and Call of duty 4 mw. But then Battlefield 2 shipped with 4 maps on release and it took 6 months before any other maps came out and was buggy as for about a year. Then new hardware came out and everyone could play it easy like everything else. If you use the editor you will see that the game runs smooth as in the editor without all the units running around. And for people that have 3 year old hardware , are you really expecting a 2009 (we arent to far away from 2010,4 YEARS old hardware) game to run on 2006 hardware on high graphics? I have a 8800GTS 512mb, intel core 2 duo E6700 3ghz, 3 gb ram, adn xp. I run on average 35 fps - 50 fps on average, and in the editor up to 70 fps. This hardware i have is at least 3 and a half years old. I run game on medium to low on single player. and high on editor. And even with the game running reasonably well , i still understand that 3 year old hardware is going to be difficult to run this game. Its the nature of the beast of pc gaming. Why do you think this ISNT on consoles? and if it ever gets there think of how much they will have to leave out, and the crap watered down experience the console people will have to endure, a completely different version that theyll wonder what all the fuss is about from pc gamers. It doesnt matter WHAT upgrades or patches come out if you dont have the latest hardware to run it unfortunately. My advice also is if you can run this game ok on medium and its not too bad and playable is dont rush out and get todays latest stuff, WAIT for the series of video cards AFTER that come out AFTER nividia 200 series next year or whenever it happens. Because ill quote a pc gamer's golden rule "dont go for perfect, go for good enough" If a game doesnt run very well, dont get todays hardware, get tomorrows and if a game runs ok and you can live with it then keep with what youve got until that hardcore game actually arrives on PC and you are FORCED to upgrade..................................

its probably more realistic for enemies to be able to hear your gun fire from miles away. If you hear a loud bang or gun shot in the street especially in a massively rural area like the area BIS has designed you would hear it from miles away.

These issues are not bugs Jakerod, they are design decisions that dont allow you to just do missions anyway you like. If you go into an area in single player campaign where you are not supposed to or go down a path that your not supposed to or go a different way your not supposed to (By the way , i dont like this way of doing it , however this is how its been done), you will get shot by invisable snipers or AT guys. Its the way the game has been designed so you cant go whereever you want and its supposed to put up a n invisable barrier if your not focusing on the mission at hand, this is NOT a go wherever you want sandbox game that you think it is its WAY more lilinear than that in SOME missions. BUT you CAN design a mission, campaign yourself without any restrictions if you like, its not a bug. Dont confuse this as a bug.

um. Just a quick note, downloading from steam the updates is no different to any other way you get patches. If you have Steam installed it will update, easy as. Ive never had a problem using steam updating my games. I almost thank steam for getting updates for me easy. What are you guys moaning about? You dont like Steam doing things easy for you? are you crazy?

I havent had any of the bugs that most people have had in the single player mode. All my missions have often gone according to plan, but that getting shot from nowhere was irritating because of leaving a specific area. I felt more trapped like a rat and i thought the same thing as David Schofield, i thought the NAPA guys were killing me. Yet they were running aroung me and not shooting me, if i hadnt of checked the Forums and David Scholfields Analysis of the situation i may of given up and started all over again. I only knew that because of checking these forums. If i hadnt done so i would of thought that it was a bug in the game. But now i know its not. What a bizarre approach the developers used though? Multiplayer they should of just worked on one mode only and thats Warfare mode and co-op modes and really honed it to be the most awesome warfare experience ever. Does battlefield have deathamatch and team deathmatch? NO . Does counter strike worry about any other modes other than Bomb and hosties modes? NO. Call of duty 4 mulitplayer mode was only fun in one mode and that was team deathmatch but you KNEW what you were getting into and playing thats why you payed for it. Arma 2 needed one mode that it was hugely recognised for, WARFARE and Co-op modes. It didnt need anything else. I LOVE the editor mode, but you guys are right, the single player campaign has a very bizarre feeling to it and can almost be off putting as a single player experience even though i love it. The compass etc really opens the doors to some amazingly realistic approaches to battles and missions. But in its currant state it would of been better off as a linear campaign, istead of just having magic killers kill you if your not going the right way. IF you guys havent tried it, you really need to try the editor suite that is way less irritating than the campaign. You can just make your own missions and campaigns.

You really need to just follow your orders down to the fine print. Yes its a sandbox game but just do one thing then the next. If one mission fails , dont worry and just go to the next task. Real life, a small group of soldiers only get one mission at a time. go get that intel, or go kill that guy , or go rescue that dude. Its never missions all at once like this. Some missions take a bit of time after completion aswell so just relax. I also recommend driving around in the Armoured Transport vehicle to your missions and not using your helicopter (unfortunately). I didnt even find the girl in MAnhatton she was shot dead going to her boyfriends house along the route of Krasnostav :):):)) But hey, failure of missions happen in real life too:) Just because you fail this mission does not meen you cant continue without her, just go to next task. YOUR MAIN OBJECTIVE IS the hospital, do that the whole mission is over. Regardless of church guy or side missions. Secondly, Boomarang ONLY is there when you approach the enemy field hospital to kill or detain nikolai. They come to help with clearing the place up. They arrive in an APC that takes ages to get there, so be patient. But you can kill the nikolai guy and clean the whole place before they get there. However if you do, the Apc still drives around clearing the place up then EVENTUALLY you'll get a call from sgt.Whathisface and be told to go back to your F.O.B Manhatton base. Just relax after shooting him. while he wriggles on the ground. If you shoot him and the mission isnt ending it meens some bad guys are STILL alive , check the hospital tents, some guys hide under the bed bunks. The mission wont complete until area is secure. THIS GAME SO REMINDS ME OF GHOST RECON Original edition in 2002. Did Bohemia make the original Ghost recon? Its so alike. I can tbelieve what they have done to Ghost recon these days and Rainbow 6.

Push the F4 button which is your corpseman. Then direct your crosshairs over the guy that needs healing and push left mouse button (this is the easiest way to do it). OR push F4 or whatever the button for the medic is then push number 6 and push heal (whatever the unit that needs healing is) THERE IS WAY , it just takes time. A good way of learning is go into editor and build a small group of units , a medic, rifleman, machine gunner etc etc , build a few enemies over a hill or something a little way away and practise your commands in battle until you know where everything is in your command list. Plus its fun too.

ive never had the problem with my team not doing what i tell them, sometimes thats the thing . Remember to use the space bar, then the 7 key and ppush safe mode then do it again and push STAND UP then tell them to move next to you THEN REGROUP. Try that first. They should all stand up go into safe mode then move to the position you tell them then regroup, yes this isnt very approachable in the middle of a battle, howver ive never had them do anything worng yet in battle. I tel lthem to shoot whatever and they do so far. But if you cant get them to move, SPACE bar > then 7 button> safe mode, SPACE bar >7Button > stand up mode > then tell them to move next to you > THEN REGROUP.

all i can say is FOLLOW your arrows and markers. DOnt stray away from them.

This game's realistic approach has SO much potential to get millions more people wanting to play the game and obviously the draw card, realism and Massive maps and a huge fleshed out campaign, mixed with play by play tactics with your troops. Its an awesome game , more potential than any other war game out there. But there are some things that could be learned from games like call of duty 4 and battlefield or cs or even the original Ghost recon. Like maybe having 2 campaigns the full fleshed out one like the one we have(BUT WAY LESS BUGGY, beginner players WONT stick around long enough for it to be patched properly or run properly, thats a fact!!!, only the hardcore gamer's like ME will stick around that really enjoy all that this game has to offer, mainly the editor). But maybe have a smaller beginner's single campaign thats very linear on that utes island or a quarter of the main campaign area, that is a mini fleshed out version campaign for beginner players, but actually make it so it can be easily achieved before going out there in the big wide world of a Czech region and taking over the whole place. A mini campaign that you can do, would be good just before you go straight into the full campaign, just so beginner's get more of a feel for the, massive, very complex, full campaign. It definately needs more missions at the start where your getting told what to do by a major or liutenant. Some beginner players get thrown off at the complexity to quick. When i meen some, im talking about the rest of the millions of gamer's that Dont play or even will bother playing Arma 2 or even look at it. I also meen the ones that werent thinking of even playing arma 2 yet saw the graphics and realism gameplay on you tube and went"WOAH , IM SO GETTING THAT" only to find that its to complex for them straight away. This game would benefit from an arcade battlefield or Call of duty style mini campaign mode that comes with the Full campaign features mode like it already has. Just for noobs to teach them how to play it properly, Unless you dont want new players to play and enjoy your games? I doubt that very much. Another thing that is quite irritating about the training for a noob is the fact the guys down in the MOOT mission in the training camp, attack you before you even get the chance to learn the rocket buttons or anything, it kills the learning quite a bit, even though its meant to throw you into the think of it i think the campaign itself throws you into the think of it enough, some beginner players that have told me what they think of Arma 2's single player game find that too full on straight away, when they are just trying to learn buttons. NOT EVERYONE HAS PLAYED OPERATION FLASHPOINT. Alot of people that want to play Arma 2 just see it on you tube or read reader's reviews or whatever and love the CONCEPT of the game more than the game itself. I got over this fact very quickly and still continued to play the full game, but many will be waiting for operation flashpoint 2's easier approach. I love this game despite white textures on people or graphic artifacts or anything i still rather play this than any other war game like BF2. And as far as the training missions being mixed together. Its easier for a new player if they have a more do this , then do that approach to learning, rather than do whatever you want, which by the way in the real military in training you CANNOT DO WHATEVER YOU WANT, you do what your told in training, get up!!!! stand up!!!!! move over!!!! go do this !!!! even some messenger missions at the start could of been handy or an actual orientation like course where you tell your squadies where to move but complete small orientation missions just uising compass could of been AND handy for the full campaign. IF YOU WANT REALISM, THATS WHAT THEY DO, before going into battle is learn about thier compass and stuff. Theres no "SO what would you like to do now??", rubbish in the military in training. New players dont need options in training at the start and they dont need to be surprised by a bunch of insurgents while trying to learn how to shoot a weapon or rocket as in this case, they just need to learn buttons and concepts and get a feel for the type of game its trying to portray, do a small campaign , learn how to tell guys what to do, THEN off to the big spread big map. So maybe For future BIS games maybe? if you want new players to play your games and enjoy the complexities of the full campaign and its realistic approach to storylines or area assaults or takeover's, in a huge area like you have, make sure you actually have a full mini training campaign with quarter of the size of the map. HAve a decent, follow this , follow that training camp and an actual orientation course using compass(just an idea). then after thats completed then bANG ONTO THE REAL CAMPAIGN. The mini campaign could easily be tied into the main story for example. As far as mulitplayer is concerned, i think of Team deathmatch, call of duty 4 hands down. Bomb planting, i think of counter strike. Flag capturing, i think of BAttlefield series. Deathmatch, i think of Unreal tournament. Arma 2 i SHOULD be thinking of one mode only and thats probably warfare mode, a realistic town capturing type mode, i shouldnt be thinking of team deathmatch. Just a suggestion, focus on ONE multiplayer mode warfare and Co-op and just try and get those things perfect and forget deathmatch and crap. Oh yeah, P.s And release a much less buggy, glitchy single player experience so all can enjoy it the people with high end computers AND the mid range computer people aswell:):):):)

OK so what you really need is an arcade mode then. Where you can run,jump, sprint , topple fall in 1 movement like call of duty 4 (I find those games fun aswell:)). In real life by the way once you did that once or twice you would be exhausted, it would actually be a few minutes, MINUTES before you moved again, NOT SECONDS like you have described. BOXERS can only swing thier hands around for 3 minutes at a time before they are exhausted and they have to time thier fatigue thoughout that round so they dont get exhausted for the rest of the fight. Now imagine doing what boxers do , but jump around aswell with equipment on your back, well you can do all those things instantly , its called call of duty 4 and battlefield 2. If you did the things that your explaining you can do in real life run, jump, run, jump you would be too exhausted to make decisions that will likely kill you in a few minutes. In real life YES , soliders run :):):), but they ONLY run at short bursts for very short distances to get to certain destinations which are likely just to be cover. like go to that wall, plan next move, go to next wall plan next movement then GO :> THAT IS A SOLDIER's movement. Then stop, collect yourself, before moving again and ..........GO. What the original poster has stated is VERY Unrealistic. You are trained to be quick and to move when your told to move if your ordered, not to rush in and do stupid stuff. Do you seriously think in world war 2 guys were just running around? Attacks could take an entire day or 2 or a week to perform. Then once in the action the officers designed waypoints that had been laid out before battle and during by the officers if things got messy. They didnt just rush in , jump around do everything quick as and be home before breakfast it TOOK HOURS of quick decisions from the generals to pull an operation off. Oh yeah theres gun safety too, if you reload like an idiot you would probably accidently shoot yourself which actually happened because of FEAR from the battle and doing things without thought because of being scared or adrenalin.

yeah the moral of the story is if something isnt broke dont fix it. + if your games are running well now dont upgrade computer until absolutely neccessary. Next years cards will run Arma 2 awesome, even the 8800 series cards run this gam reasonably well. Yet this years cards run it like crap same old story with pc gaming.

Yeah i cant believe you got flamed dude,lol. Your not the only one not enjoying the crashes and glitchy experience , theres HEAPS of people not running the game properly, accept me. Im running the game fine, i love this game:):)

YAY i love this game too. :):)

games like this that test the hell out of all our hardware are always like this in the last few years. Oblivian had it, Grid had it. battlefield 2 had it (a little). Heaps of recent games of the last few years. Then hey presto 2 years later all those probs are gone from Oblivian, Grid, Battlefield 2, and heaps of others. next years hardware will get rid of it,lol. The old ghost recon and ofp and even counter strike source in same maps couldnt be played properly until a year or 2 later. Its the way of pc gaming. Its called STUPID Future proofing or whatever the hell that meens. Whatever they do to it to make it difficult for currant systems to get the most out of it. Call of duty 4 and games like left 4 dead dotn seem to bother future proofing they want everyone to be happy NOW so we all go out and buy Left 4 dead 2 and Call of duty 4 MW 2 knowing we are going to be able to run it properly. Its a good system that has made those companies VERY SUCCESSFUL. I would of prefered a slight decrease in lighting effects and a few less units on the field at once, (lets face it , the graphic textures in Arma 2 are no where near the detail of Crysis) to get a better out of the box experience.

If your going to get a new card you are always better off getting the high end of the range. 8800 GTS 512mb or higher or 9800gt or higher in the series , yeah dont buy mid range cards of any series of Ati or nividia. Your better getting a 8800gts 768 for half the price than a 260GT for example. Yeah 8800 ultra are 3 year old cards but will still run Arma 2 better than mid range brand new cards. If your going to get ahigh end card today than go the full hog and grab a 295gtx. OR wait till next years line up of Nividia or Ati cards next year's systems will run Arma 2 alot better anyway. Get a TOP high end older card or wait till next year.

man ive never experienced anything like that before. 8800GTS 512mb. Intel core 2 duo , windows xp. I Get a pretty consistant FPS , its consistantly 20-40 fps WAY Higher fps in the editor.

Yep agreed, recommended specs should be replaced on box to minimum and a NEW Spec recommendation called Future Specs and the year people will actually be able to run it.

crazy, im gettng 35-60 fps consistently without many problems :> with this rig 8800gts 512mb single card, Intel core 2 duo 2.66Ghz, 3gb ram. windows xp. NO issues here accept i have to run it on medium - high instead of all very high. MAybe ask the developers what kind of crazy computer specs did they make the game on? I have learnt one thing from experience of gaming on pc's , only upgrade if you need to, and secondly dont get the hardware on the year of the game release always upgrade full computer specs the year AFTER a heavy resourced game comes out. Sad but stupidly true. This isnt the only game that has had these problems. I remember when Oblivian came out and the card that was released at the time was the 1900xt Ati and it ran the game ok but pretty poorly, the 8800's however a year later kicked the crap out of the game and ran it smoothly. Same will happen for this game next year. However BIS is Destroying thier new customer base very quickly. I already know people that have upgraded to a 295gtx and dont ever want to touch arma 2 again. They are currantly waiting for Operation flashpoint dragon rising to come out to see if it will perform alot better. YEP BIS loses customers over this, its sad. But everyone here is correct you should easily be able to run this game with your specs without any issues. Personally i think BIS rushed it because of the operation flashpoint 2 release. Maybe it was a better idea to wait and release it after operation flashpoint dragon rising, because the people that arent happy with Arma 2 will return it and go play OFP Dragon rising without hesitation and forget Arma 2 exists as a bad experience for them. BIS wont lose me theres already a ton of content that allows me to enjoy the game even without the single player experience , bu tmost people that arent like me just wont want to play the game long enough for the other content to matter because of the bugs and thier computers not being able to run it. :(:(:(:(

that issue there, i use to get HEAPS, with certain games like Gothic 3, Crysis i got that issue aswell so it doesnt surprise me your getting these in ARMA 2, it doesnt do this with all games but theres a big solution for the future with Ati cards and its Catalyst. Thats a Catalyst problem, i guarentee if you install your display drivers for Ati, BUT DONT INSTALL THE CATALYST from Ati just the display driver, the main driver only ,those graphic problems will be gone. Getting rid of the Catalyst drivers to play certain games, got rid of those graphic split problems , Crysis included. Try it , it will work. I never got an ATI card ever again after that.

it has a very similar engine to crysis in some ways but different in others. In Crysis it took a split second when loading up for textures to come through and Arma 2 is no different. This game heavily relies on a very good high end Proccessor aswell.

sorry mate, those specs are 3 years old. I have a 8800 GTS 512mb card and i have to run game on medium settings. The reality is your hardware is 3 to 4 years old just like my specs and i have to upgrade my comp i wont be till next year because my specs still run this game at 35 fps its not too bad. Just think of what the developers specs would be making this game.

I love that light darkening night vision feature. How can you NOT like that??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! or when you mov ethe light darkens for a second.