nyran125
-
Content Count
146 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Posts posted by nyran125
-
-
the transport and Artillary, that was for BEFORE the manhatton mission, it has NOTHING to do with the Manhatton mission at all. The best way to do Manhatton, is grab yourself an APC and drive to your destinations, do all of your missions that you can.
Dont think about it for too long, just get on with it, i dont think its a bug, The developers just forgot to tell you that you cant use them in the Manhatton mission,lol. I passed Manhatton my first time through. You have to DRIVE to your destinations and this is really important for Arma 2 single player mode, do each mission ONE at a TIME, do not stray away from the missions, if you fail a mission, dont worry about it, get onto the next one. Also, dont leave the area your supposed to be in, because you get shot by invisible snipers. This game represents a sandbox mode but it isnt really a sandbox game, you cant do whatever you like. In real life military , you cant do whatever you like either. Stick to the plans.
At the very end also, USE the transport helicopter to escape the FOB after its under attack, dont try and DRIVE to electrozovadosk. Another thing, IF you get shot by invisible enemies its NOT a bug, it meens you are not going the right way or trying to do something that isnt part of the mission.
Another thing if one thing is available in one mission, does NOT meen its availabl ein the next. Just because transport and artillary was available in the mission before Manhatton, because it was, doesnt meen its available for Manhatton, thats why the option isnt there anymore, its not supposed to be used. They should of made the Artillary ICON probably disappear in the Manhatton aswell because its ineffective and it causes confusion amongst MOST players. However transport DOES become available after you complete ALL manhatton missions, to escape the area.
-
well, lets look at real war shall we?
Bastogne :> did you see the Americans retreating? they were lying in icy trenches that were getting blown up to hell, most died, the only reason they lived was reinforcements, NOT RETREATING, retreating wasnt an option, if there wasnt any reinforcments they would of died, simple as that, they WOULD OF NOT HAVE lived through that last few days, but they still sat there as ordered to even though they knew they would most likely die. The Generals just kept sending them supplies while the men just died. What little supplies they had. That fight took days and days, would you really want Arma 2 missions to take days and days in real life time? your kidding yourself if you did.
Omoha Beach :> Americans RUNNING at machine guns that killed 1000's of them, alot of Americans DIED, like lemmings, exactly how you described as an issue with Arma 2 's Ai. If you survived it , you were lucky. The objective was to take the beach NOT retreat from it, besides where would you retreat to , once you were on the beach???????
Normandy :> getting dropped behind enemy lines WHILE enemy was shooting them in the sky, heaps died just jumping out of the plane, LIKE LEMMINGS. what retreat? Their job was to get behind enemy lines, alive or dead.
Oh yeah dont get me started on crazy kamikaze American Vietnam missions that they did. Where they would lliterally die by the 10's of hundreds just on one mission, because they were to deep in the forests to go anywhere. Some guys would just sit in thier bunkers for days trying to hold out until help arrived. AGAIN not much retreating going on. Especially if there's nowhere to go. Oh yeah not to mention the great American killing each other accidently with thier own airstrikes. In real life your own Ai can be crap too,lol. JKS :)
It really depends on the mission and what it is. If your mission is go and attack that village then thats your mission, retreating isnt really an option,ITS your job and yeah you'll probably die in real life too, unless you have reinforcements your waiting for to take your place. All depends on your numbers and how the mission is set out. if you have 100 guys and they have 20 then 80% of you will probably live, the other 20% will most likely be dead or wounded. If its 50/50, the guys attacking are probably more likely to die in enemy territory, because the locals know the area better.
Try this in the editor, set your waypoints up to COMBAT,Limited movement, and sentry, Set up LOADS of waypoints every few metres or so and get them to wait there for 600 seconds (thats 10 minutes BTW) for the very last waypoint of your Ai move waypoint OR set the waypoints up so the Ai only moves if certain targets are dead or detroyed ! (alive Tank1). You will find the Ai moving VERy VERy VERY slow. Try that in the editor... That doesnt meen your guys wont die but it will, or SHOULD stop them moving and doing dumb stuff until the coast is clear.
-
wait till the next Generation of cards after the nividia 200 series. Whats the point in upgrading to something that Arma 2 has already made practically obsolete,lol. If you can run every other game well ACCEPT Arma 2 then just hold up a bit. Try turning AA off and post processing on low aswell. It doesnt look that bad with AA off and runs a hell of alot better. try also turning vidcard memory on to normal also. You get used to it. Im not having that many crashes to desktop anymore, but then again im mainly only using the editor mode which runs a million times better than the single player or multiplayer modes, because theres less stuff going on.
HOWEVER, i also tried a mission with 380 troops and 38 tanks on screen at once ,lol. That mission had nothing to do with the mission i actually created which was a spec op mission destroy key targets while a war was going on. And no crashes i played it for like 6 hours. If i had my AA on , and vid card memory on high and everything on high it would of crashed in a second.
Try turning stuff down a bit. And turn that damn AA off , which is a GPU card KILLER.
If turning all that stuff down or off doesnt work then i would seriously consider building a brand new rig in a year or so's time. Processor, gpu, ram upgrade ,the lot, BUT NOT yet. wait till next generation of GPU's are out.
My specs are average at the moment and im not having that many problems.
WindowsXP 32bit
8800 GTS 512mb
19" moniter
Intel core 2 Duo E6700 2.66Ghz clocked to 3Ghz
3 Gb's Ram DDR2.
And an ASUS Deluze motherboard.
3 years ago this was the state of the art but its oldish now and im not having many issues with this game accept all the normal stuff other people are having ,like artifacts on windows, texture popping or building textures appearing after a few seconds etc. But alot of us have that. Im running game on average on 20-50 FPS. If you have a better system than mine and your having problems, upgrading your GPU to a 200 series card will probably not fix it. Im hearing way more issues with the 200 series cards than im hearing with 8800 or 9800 seris of nividia cards.
Im running my game on
Visibility =3000
Quality preference =high
Resolution =1280X1024
EVERYTHING on normal including Video memory, only options that are different to normal are these :>
Antistopic Filtering =HIGH
Anti aliasing =OFF
Post processing =LOW
interface size =normal
the game runs fine without to many issues. The gam estill looks awesome with these settings, you just get use to it. After awhile you dont really remember that it looked any better,lol and you can actually enjoy the game :):):):)
-
nope. I wont even bother with AA till the next generation of cards come out after the crap 200 series which barely runs anything that much better than a 8800 Ultra or a 9800 high end card.
-
i suggest you go to editor aswell, to just free roam, for practise. No enemies around.
You can easily create a free roaming commander mode.
Just go to editor create yourself as an officer or a commander(make sure when you pick what unit , you are a high ranked luitenenant or something and ALL other units, troops or groups under you control are lower rank than YOU).
Then :> go to groups and select a few tank groups and infantry groups. Then go to modules and grab a high command module-commander. and sync the module WITH youself. Then push preview. Once in the preview in-game you just push Ctrl+space bar to bring up your commander options. Then play around with the F1,F2 keys etc till you hearts content. I would also recommend doing this even if you just want to learn basic A1 troop directing aswell. Its fun and your can learn heaps just by telling your troops what to do in an open , no enemy environment.
-
OK, poeple this is NOT the only game that does this for ATI Cards. Try this. Uninstall JUST your catalyst drivers, NOT display drivers. It will go away. Or uninstall all of your ATI drivers then re-install JUST the display drivers without the catalyst ATI drivers. Hey presto ITS gone. WHY because ATI has some serious driver issues with certain games. Another thing try OMEGA ati drivers instead, those catalyst ones are a real pain. Same with Crysis did this for me with the 1900xt cards. Someone said get rid of the catalyst suite and it was gone.
-
first of all that nividia 260 is a low end new series card, remember nividia 8600's? it was better to get a 8800 high end verson card for a bit extra money, those 8600 cards were a really bad , you would probably get better performance out of a high end 8800gts card than a low end new 200 series card.
-
:):):):)
I accidently saw this song. If people have already heard it months ago, i never did. So there are probably people like me, that never heard this before.
-
::):):):):)
lol sorry if this is old, but i only just found this song.
-
i wouldnt call domination and Evo mode fun at all. Not with 255km's of land to cover, theres nothing fun about running 200 km's to get to an objective. I have yet to have a fun experience in Arma 2 multiplayer on the big large scale maps, unless its small user made co-op missions. you have to rely on the team in small missions(user made or default) and it seems to be way more fun than Warfare mode with 30 players over 255km 's of land. screw that, thats boring as hell, unless you had 200 people playing warfare Mode with loads of squads to choose from. you should have to pick a squad immediately when entering a server to create a team situation straight away fo rth eplayer. Not an individual situation.
PLUS if a team member kills you they should be punished and killed on the spot adn not allowed to join for 2 minutes.
In order to create the atmosphere of a real war battalian situation you need a game mode that FORCES you to have to play it like that. They should re-design a territory mode or Area of operation mode. That incorporates Warfare mode AND Sector control at the same time with smaller areas of Operation. 255 km's of land for multiplayer is just Tooooo big.
Instead of having capture the flag, maybe the leader of your group has to be present and you MUST build a camp and a series of buildings at that sector to capture the sector. Once built, another team can only take it if they blow the camp up and make a new one.
Again not ALL of us have the time to sit down and LEARN a complicated Multiplayer game. I dont think Warfare mode is hugely complicated but for a new person like me , id rather just have a capture sector mode , have some guidelines and be FORCED to work as a team in a smaller Area than 255km's of land. Again this game like Call of duty 4 MW tries to outdo itself with heaps and heaps of modes. not just focus on one specific mode. Does BF2 have deathmatch? no. Does counter strike need a capture the flag mode? no. So why cant Arma 2 be solely recognised for one Awesome type of game mode only and nothing else for multiplayer. Co-op , capture the sector and Warfare modes. Screw domination, its boring as hell. The editor and the smaller user maps are the only thing that makes me want to play this game in multiplayer. The large scale Warfare is just too far flng for me with only 30 people in the server.
Id prefer smaller Warfare sections of the map. say at 20-30 km lots or territories. And within THOSE territories are sectors that need to be takin. Like capture the sector mode. Which personally should be the mode to go to for a noob.
LoL by the way there are heaps of poor people in America. Not by choice, but by birth. Silly post. Seriously. What a bad discussion. Half of America is 3rd world. Look at Florida, like theres a section in little haiti called PORK and BEANS (thats the nickname of it, because thats what they live on and someone dies and gets shot there everyday, by anotehr poor uneducated person. You dont have to travel to a different country to experience 3rd world) and parts of Detroit and MANY other states. Masses of poor people and abandoned buildings there. You cant blame the people that dont have a choice that are born in poverty in those places. Stop speaking about this stuff, unless you want to go and do something about it. Otherwise stop speaking about 3rd world countries when there is poverty on your door step probably not to far away from you. That youll never actually know is even there right around the corner from you, while you keep your EYES CLOSED and pretend you KNOW everything!!!!!!!!!
-
wizbomb dont overclock your computer if you dont know what your doing.
-
you have to play around with the settings a bit Aviator i went back to 3000 view distance and it stopped crashing maybe even a bit under i also tried turning Post process onto low that helped a bit. Some settings crashed my desktop if they were low and other graphic settings crashed my desktop if they were high,lol. Seriously, if this game didnt have the editor mode i would never have bought it. But that editor mode SEEMS to be completely Bugfree. Its almost like they made this game JUST for the editor to run well for everybody. I love the Editor mode but without it , this game wouldnt be worth its weight in Bronze let alone GOLD. But they have the editor so im content.
-
Get rid of Vista for gaming. fullstop :):). wow DX10, DAMN dx9 people are missing some slight visuals, what a shame. Id rather my games run better than have to go out an buy 6gb 's of ram just to play my games properly , screw that. Why bother?
-
i did this test years ago,lol. When Crysis came out. And the intel core 2 version of the E6700 2.66Ghz ran better than the quad core version of the same clock speeds. All i can say is if people are going to upgrade FFS do yourself a favour, dont listen to your friends (that includes intel websites, nividia websites, dont listen to them) and do your research on Frames per second at all the sites first (like anandtech or Toms hardware or SOMEWHERE that does honest benchmarking, or MOSTLY honest benchmarking) and get an informed decision on your upgrade , not just the graphic cards, check the processor fps benchmarks also seperately. Just because youve listened to Intel sell a load of rubbish to you about the fastest quad core bla bla and Microsoft about thier new friggin Oporatin system. Doesnt exactly meen its going to run your games WAY faster than the intel core 2 duo version with same clock speeds JUSt because its the latest thing out, i still dont know why ANYBODY went to Vista if they are a gamer, it makes no sense, DX10 was a waste of performance, money and trouble.
Secondly when doing an FPS test , at least stess your system out by going to editor mode and running 200 guys on screen at once. At least that way people can actually get a realistic view on things as opposed to runnign around on the editor by yourself, that tells you nothing. Everyone is getting good fps on editor mode with just a few units on screen at a time. Its when the units increase to 20-50 or 200 more units is when everything gets more difficult.
Just do your research before upgrading and only upgrade by Frame per second benchmarks for gaming. My computer runs all my games mostly fast on my Intel core 2 duo 2.66 Ghz. (Arma 2 is an exception obviously, ill be upgrading in about 2 years time judging by this game), more than the quad version. I want my games to run fast NOT anything else. For example, If your about to buy a card DONT buy a card if its benchmarked at only 10 or 15 FPS higher than the card you already have running the same games, whats the point? your not getting anything that different out of it. JUst do your research THEN upgrade.
Otherwise yoru going to upgrade your computer thinking you have the best stuff, play that special game you have just upgraded for and be dissapointed time and time again.
Remember this when pc gaming, "the grass is not always greener on the other side". Companies just want to make it look greener but underneath the green pastures could be rotting wood and quicksand. Do your research first ON the game you want to play and whats running it well and whats not. IF system benchmarks for the specs you want, runs MOST games really good then go for it. If a system is benchmarked at only running one game well and the rest bad , dont touch it.
Lol thats what ive learnt over the years anyway. :):):). My system runs all my games reasonably well, but it is getting on to 3 years old now. I dont particular like spending LOADS of money on things that i THOUGHT was going to play all my games really well based on friends computersor based on the latest stuff. Ive already made thos mistakes, thinking i had the latest hardware then BANG lates game comes out in a month's time and i cant run it. I now wait for the game to come out FIRST then upgrade a year or 2 later. (processor's, video cards etc). Research has defintaley paid off for my gaming. That includes not switching from XP to vista. XP ran all my games better than vista so i stayed with XP and am glad i did.
-
wow you must really be able to see far in real life man. Because if i even look km down the road i can barely make out a bus coming down the road from far away. You can only really see the glint of it far away until it comes closer. Why do you need it to be further, 10'000 is HEAPS, man. If your on top of a hill in arma 2 you can see miles anyway.
-
there isnt that many vietnam games really. BF Vietnam is probably the most fun, probably my favourite too. Vietcong, but thats about it. My favourite would have to be BF vietnam.
-
At the moment DONT go and buy a nividia 200 series of cards, expensive and already obsolete, they are not really capabable of running this game properly on very high or even high with high fps. You are better off running game on medium with a cheaper option the 9800 series of Nividia cards or even the 8800 ultraseries because the 295gtx2 is a waste of money and a very expensive option and is already obsolete, its not the upgrade that will run this game on high without issues. Only the cards coming out next year or the year after will be capable of running this game properly, its been future proofed to hell. So get a 8800 Ultra, they are cheap as by now and you will run this game on medium and save yourself a SHT load of money. Then in a year's time or 2 years time go get the latest graphic cards and processors and bs(save up for 2 years to get it) and you will run Arma 2 gloriously on very high without issues. Same BS as Crysis or Oblivian, when that came out. The cards at the time of release ran the game like sht then the 8800 series came out and everyone ran the game well, same ol' pc gaming crap. Lets face it even the guys with nividia 295's arent running this game without fps drops. BIG fps drops. Unless they are using editor, thats different, but then even the 8800 ultra series of graphic cards run editor on 50- 80 fps. Its just single player and multiplayer on high graphic settings everyone is having probs with.
It also depends on how much you are willing to spend. My specs run this game on medium, fine without that many issues, my specs are out of date yet a cheap option. (wasnt cheap 3 years ago though ,lol) :):). Or you can go spend THOUSANDS of dollars on latest processor, latest motherboard, latest everything. BUt you WILL be dissapointed if you get a 200 series card if you want to run this arma 2 on maximum graphic settings in single player and multiplayer as far as Frame per seconds are concerned. Id get a cheaper high end card, i meen and 8800 ultra card or the highest 9800 card, but upgrade all your other specs, ram, processor, etc. And wait to get a better graphic card in a year or 2 when they bring them out.
I run a 8800 GTS 512mb
Intel core 2 duo clocked to 3.0ghz
3 gb ram (this game only uses 2 anyway)
windows xp 32bit
Get a good mother board too, something thats tried , tested and can handle everything you put on it without issues.
Research at TOM's hardware or Anandtech before thinking about upgrading is my advice. Get Frames per second reports on certain high end games on the type of computer you are about to buy so you KNOW what your getting. And you wont be dissapointed in the performance if youve researched it first. Theres no point in going to get nividia 295gtx card if all the reports are saying that the fps is only5-20 FPS difference to the card you already have on the same resolution.
with my specs Arma runs flawlessly, to reasonably good on normal vid memory, everything medium EVERYTHING, Anti aliasing OFF, with high textures distance set to 3200.
25-40 fps single player consistent, no massive fps drops.
40-60 fps in editor depending on how many troops i place in it, starts running slow at about 5-10 fps after 320 units on screen at once shooting each other. The editor also runs BETTER at night time interestingly enough, than day time.
So yeah my specs 3 years old and im not upgrading until next year or year after ,AFTER or until the 200 series of nividia cards are completely dead because they havent been that impressive at all. All my games including Crysis run awesome on medium to high, Arma 2 is the ONLY game thats testing my hardware.
-
yeah everyone should just hold up and wait for next year's hardware to come along. I feel sorry for people that have upgraded to a nividia GTX295's just to play this game when even the 9800's or the 8800' series of cards are capable of running this game fine on medium without many issues. This game is just future proofed(TOO Future proofed, for my liking) to hell and requires next years or the year after that hardware ro run on high graphics properly.
-
can someone tell me how a kid that is under 18 can even afford a computer that can even run arma 2?. Parents shouldnt be buying their kid a computer capable of running this game,lol. YOu get WAY to much money for your age:). the average age of gamer's is between 20 and 30 these days. Most people under that age cant really afford the specs. $2000 - $4000 is the type of computer required to run this game. IF your under 18 and you have that kind of money, that's crazy. Just to blow on a computer.
-
But then we could all be wrong, OPeration Flashpoint 2 dragon rising might be the best game ever made, who knows. :).
I just cant see it being better than Arma 2. I look at GRID (good bye TOCA sims), i look at DIRT(Good bye Colin MCrae games :(), I look at DIRT 2 it has a playboy girl on the cover. LOL. And then i go, ok, so if all these other games are catered to just action only and smoke effects(which is DIRT to a tea) then how could Operation Flashpoint 2 dragon rising possably be better coming from Codemasters judging by thier recent line up and where they are heading in the gaming market. Look at FUEL, and fuel is a very boring game, yet the area and playing field is humongous and the graphics are still pretty awesome but the gameplay is drab and lacks any substance with a massive environment. There's no authenticity there at all. So im really interested to see where Operation flashpoint 2 is heading.
So you are right, dont judge a book by its cover, but im seeing a lot of the same cover's from Codemasters. And the written material inside the books they have been writing lately in the last few years have been matching thier crap glossy covers.
I have a feeling that Arma 2 is going to kill it, NOT in sales, but in gameplay. I just wish Bohemia would REDO their damn 10 year old game engine and make it run better on a wide range of TODAY's hardware not tomorrow's.
-
To this day i will never understand why all of you went out and bought vista. Bored? You have too much money? You like giving major corporations money for no reason whatsoever? lol . Seriously. DX10 in theory just to good in theory for you rather than actual reality? can you honestly tell me that Vista was worth all the bullshit for the last few years of waiting for it to be only slightly decent, to find out that it wasnt even worth it at all?
You would of been better off just staying with xp and enjoying good performance in your games. You also would of saved thousands on Ram that isnt needed, and upgrades that were completely pointless.
NOW the next real generation of games are slowly trickling out. 4 years after Vista was even released. So it wasnt worth it all that frustration of trying to get your hardware to work on a new OS when you could of just stuck with the one that actually worked and waited for Windows 7 and realised that Vista was not progress, it was a backwards OS.
I hope windows 7 is actually going to be progress this time around, not just a theory and a marketing project.
-
dude turn your post proccessing down to low or OFF. It fixes most of that stuff:):)
I love the light dipping like that, just turn some of that light stuff down.
-
yep, good ol Bohemia. I wont even bother playing Multiplayer in this game. MAtter of fact the only reason im still playing it is the mission editor. Codemasters Ooperation flashpoint 2 will probably get my multiplayer juices flowing, not this. Try the editor man its fun as for hours. You can make missions just as complex as Bohemias but without the crashes , YAY. :):):)
-
Also go into editor mode , create a single unit. and push Preview and see if, without ANYTHING going on around you but your guy standing there, you still have the same problem OR if the mouse moves alot smoother, I BET YOU IT DOES. If you do still have the same problem it meens you and the rest of us have computers that cant handle everything thats going on , CPU and graphic card related and try turning your video settings down to normal to increase Frame rates. Alot of the time its purely frame rate problems with mouse movement. If FPS is to low it would definately cause mouse lagg. Dont worry YOU are not the only one having this problem with Arma 1or 2. We all need better CPU's and graphics cards for this game OR Bohemia Interactive are crazy and are HUGE risk takers and need a much more optimised approach to thier game engine for thier games. I vote on better game engine than there 10 year old engine, like a completely new game engine. Same game but a new and improved "I can run on anything" game type engine would be nice so peopel can RUN the damn thing properly with todays hardware.
Let's talk about VRAM, 8GB RAM & Video Memory.
in ARMA 2 & OA - TROUBLESHOOTING
Posted
can someone tell me why the hell, you even NEED 8 GB's ram? What crazy game specs says you need 8GB's ram, in the first place?.
Has vista got you so bad, that you needed to OVER compensate for every bit of hardware? get rid of about 4 GB ram, you might actually be able to run stuff properly.
Secondly what are you trying to do with 8 GB ram, future proof your computer for the next 6 years? I can guarentee in the next 6 years it will be up to 4GB ram for games most probably, but not 8. Madness. people , madness. No wonder you people are having problems. Are You trying to outgun the game designers?. Or do you want to just spend loads of money pointlessly to just have the LATEST of everything?
Vista prooved that having the latest stuff with the awful resource hog of DX10 isnt better at all, having what WORKS is the most important for gaming. Ive heard so many issues with 8gb ram for gaming ,its insane. Get rid of some of it then. and Get rid of Vista, the thing that made you have to overcompensate your pc specs in the first place. Arma 2 and all other games run great for me with alot less ram than what you guys have.
Tip on upgrading, wait till the game comes out BEFORE upgrading your pc so you know what your in for, then wait for a YEAR, then upgrade. Youll have way less headaches.