RobertJ
-
Content Count
57 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Posts posted by RobertJ
-
-
Cherno ran fine for me, Zarga is a lag nightmare.
I suppose one good thing is Cherno was renowned for crashing PC's for no known reason whereas Zargy doesn't
-
Fox you got an ATI card?
-
friday night there's generally about 1700 players overall. However the community is very active, games like Modern Warfare 2 have hundreds of thousands of active players but they don't really do anything, just join - play game, leave. Not much point in playing with a human if you act like that.
-
Total removal of all display drivers then a reinstall of Catalyst 10.4 sorted the problem. ARMA 2 OA has to be renamed to ARMA2.exe for Crossfire to work but it fixes the LOD problems.
-
Do any BI people have any hints on what's gone on here? Playing around in editor I noticed that old A2 units sometimes still had their recoil on playermade shells (such as the HEAT warheads on some of the P85 T80's) so I'm gonna assume it's something to do with the way the new SABOT rounds are handled.
It's weird that the firing dust has gone though, any comment on a fix?
-
Well I just installed Catalsyt Control Centre 10.4 to no effect, the LOD trashing is still there.
Any ideas at all? Do I RMA my card, send it for repairs. It's really hindering play when the entire game goes to lowest LOD and looks worse the OFP =(
-
In Arrowhead they don't impact or act like the projectile/bullet they were in ARMA 2. They have an exploding decal when they hit a surface and don't seem to penetrate anything.
-
I have hyperthreading enable at the moment and I'm seeing some (gamebreaking) issues in Operation Arrowhead, textures trash, fps drops randomly and the game just plays A LOT worse than ARMA 2 did on lower settings. Not only that but the ARMA 2 maps like Utes play awful compared to how they used to.
Just a couple of pointers before people answer
-> Yes I've tried -winxp
-> Catalyst drivers 10.8
-> Graphics card temps fine (Checked)
-> CPU's set to 4 makes no difference
-> exthreads at default (whatever that value is, 7?)
-> maxmem tried to no effect
ARMA 2 worked fine with hyperthreading, and disabling it can be a bit of a pain.
images
-> Horrible LOD, tree is just a blob, ground is 2d (this is a good level of trashing for me, at worst the textures just totally go)
http://img84.imageshack.us/f/arma2oa2010083119232792.png/
-> Ground, Vegetation and Unit model are all trashed up
http://img529.imageshack.us/f/arma2oa2010083119272079.png/
-> bad ground
-
My best guess is that it is to do with the new APFSDS rounds the force has been massively reduced (seeing as they explode, rather than being a bullet with massive force/damage)
Personally I'd rather see the old APFSDS rounds back, with the ridiculous force, as they were far more realistic. You could penetrate through several cars, or shoot a tank through a small building. With the curret rounds the shell is stopped by any surface and it's not particularly realistic, sure with the old one if you shot a troop with it they flew off hundreds of metres into the sky but the same happens if you use RPG'S/GBU's/Satchels.
So yeah, bring back the old sabot round!
-
In ARMA 2 if you fired a tanks main gun with a SABOT round the tank would recoil a small amount if fired directly ahead, and a large amount if fired to the side. I liked it as it added some weight to the tanks firing, however in Operation Arrowhead the recoil is totally missing. There's something a bit disconcerning about seeing a huge cannon fire with absolutely no recoil effect whatsoever, the tank doesn't move an inch.
Here's an abrams firing with clear recoil, I'm assuming it's firing a high-ex shell as the recoil isn't massive and that's generally what I see them firing when testing, I could easily be wrong but I'd imagine a SABOT round would induce even more recoil due to the higher momentum of the projectile. Even then the tank rocks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-25BjbKm-8
In the T-90 it's even more clear even in frontal firing the tank has a large recoil.
Anyway if the recoil is just my client being bugged that's fine, but if it's a game change that I haven't seen in the patch notes I'd like to see it return. The recoil really gave you a feel of firing a 120-125mm tank cannon.
-
It also appears to be a random issue too, on empty Utes the FPS just randomly stuttered and then all the textures began to look crappy. I've no idea what this issue is.
-
Does anyone have any ideas, can anyone from BIS confirm if they are working on this or not?
I've had this since I combined OA with ARMA 2 and I don't play the games anymore because it just totally ruins the experience. The texture trashing completely ruins your FPS and makes the game look terrible, everything is just gelatinious blobs of colour. ARMA 2 ran fine, on top of that the graphics are just generally worse as well, compared to my old screenies.
Any ideas.
-
Well I noticed this, if I ran it on a single core the game would look like it used to on Arma 2, that is everything is the right detail and the LOD's loaded. However if I ran it on crossfire the LOD's refused to load, everything looked horrid and the graphics just seemed worse than they used to be, I have no idea what the issue is.
-
I have the same problem, I didn't have it in ARMA 2, but it suddenly started in OA.
Generally what happens is the ground texture goes horrible, like 1995 level graphics. Basically just one colour, then vehicles get the same treatment then character models lose all their detail. This texture trashing is really annoying as it removes all immersion when the grass turns into some amorphous blob of a single colour and all your troops look like they were coloured in by a 3 year old.
Anyone got any ideas?
Oh yeah, and it happens even when the game is running at the 60 fps cap, I can run it perfectly smooth with high anti-aliasing and everything on very high. Any ideas?
-
I suppose it's for the same reasons that Planetside wasn't massively popular.
Perhaps some people here have played Planetside, but it is very similar to ARMA/OFP. Obviously it's not nearly as realistic due to it's sci-fi setting but the whole idea of teamwork and planning being better than an individuals skill at running and gunning was the main idea behind the game and it's similar with ARMA.
Basically Planetside was a step ahead of many games at the time, it had an accuracy system so being crouched and firing controlled bursts actually mattered, there were bullet ballistics albeit basic ones and there were hundreds of support roles just as valuable as combat roles. It had a brilliant netcode and graphics and remains the only game in which 500+ people could have a fight on a huge continent, and then fly off to another continent and fight there without switching servers or anything. It was a persistant massively multiplayer shooter.
However at the time (2003) it had surprisingly few subscribers, PC Gamer UK, one of the few Gaming reviewers I trust gave it massive amounts of support, providing trials to the game and disks with the game on it. They made it game of the year and featured it in every top 100 games of the year from 2003-2010. Generally in the 20-1 band. SOE did nothing to advertise it, they practically hid it. I think at its peak it had about 5000 players on the EU server, far more on the US ones, perhaps 30,000-40,000 all in all. For a game of it's calibre and brilliance that was a tiny amount, this game was a revolution at the time and I still haven't played a game as good as it was at it's peak, however Sony Online Entertainment gave all it's advertising money to Everquest 2 and let Planetside die a death so that generic WoW clone alpha could rake in the cash. ARMA 2, like Planetside, has a tiny following despite its massive depth, technical brilliance, high fidelity and massive modability. People on the consoles pay 15 quid to get 3 maps for Call of Duty, in ARMA you can just look to the community and download high quality mods for free and change the game any number of ways. You can get a zombie mod for fun, or ACE if you want an even deeper experience, I imagine if BIS was a developer the size of EA, ARMA 2 would be this years Call of Duty and would have millions of players but reviewers like IGN and Gamespot don't recieve money in the back pocket to overhype the sheeple about it so it doesn't get the popularity it deserves.
PC Gamer have also put massive support for ARMA 2, they commonly write stories about their experiences and give it a massive thumbs up, just as they did with Planetside. However since the vast majority of gamers judge how good a game is on what Official Xbox Magazine gives it or IGN says we end up with relatively generic games being the top ones.
---------- Post added at 03:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:24 AM ----------
As has all industry.... mindless consumers... fashion victims.Each generation gets stupider and easier to dupe... they're called sheeple.
Nah, each generation is just as easy as each other to dupe. You just have to dupe them in a different way.
Just as people convinced others they had magical powers in prehistory, or kings convinced their people they were sent from god or were divine. Corporations today stick a designer label on the sweat-shop made clothes that other shops sell for £5 and charge £1000 for it. They sell drinks to 'improve regularity' and say they have bacteria like 'Activus Digestvium' or 'Bifidus Regularis' which are just renamed common bacteria that are already present in your digestive system. They just play on the laypersons total lack of basic biological/scientific knowledge. From the most basics of knowledge you can determine that all their claims are pure-BS since even if you were 'low' on bacteria they reproduce so quickly that there is no need to consume them and they reach their maximum sustainable population in hours, at most a day. The only reason they wouldn't be there is because something is killing them off, in which case drinking more bacteria won't help because they'll just die as well. Not to mention the fact that they'll be destroyed by the bodies many defenses which are there for the very purpose of killing ingested microorganisms.
Just as food companies make laughable claims with Yoghurts or snack bars game companies like EA just buy up the unique developers (Westwood, DICE etc) and just force them to re-release terrible versions of their original product. Generally massively stripped down from their original state and with all their originality and flair destroyed. They then pay the games reviewers to advertise their game and hype it up as the 'Next big release' so that when it comes out everyone buys it.
Just look at Bad Company/Bad Company 2. EA completely missed the idea of Battlefield 2/ Battlefield 1942. They totally changed the product, removed dedi servers removed all the community. Spoiled the game, totally stripped down the mechanics and destroyed what little balance the games had in the first place. Now we have an EXTREMELY casual shooter riddled with balance problems and crippled due to their console port nature. Even further look at Call Of Duty, the only unique game of the series was Call of Duty 1. The rest were either rehashes or just plain bad games. The netcode of Modern Warfare 2 is terrible, they basically urinated in the faces of all PC gamers worldwide and the game is unbalanced to a point that it's funny, that's actually an incredible achievement given that inbalance is generally nothing but rage-inducing. However because they have infinity-bajillion dollars they can just pay for 10/10 ratings and for Microsoft etc to make loads of hype over it. I mean it had a 4 hour long campaign, and that's if you played it SLOWLY, if you just do it as fast as you can you can complete it in under an hour yet it got Game of the year from all the mainstream reviewers.
Being a unique or good game very rarely gets you the credit you deserve, as ARMA 2 shows. People rather fawn over Genero-Console-FPS X because some official magazine gave it 100%
-
Playing OA since release now, I can safely say performance has been reduced massively.
I played ARMA 2 every day, max settings, full AA. I hit 60 FPS all the time, I could run through a forest and not see it drop one bit. I load up OA, put it on the same settings and hit 30 FPS max, 22ish average on the same settings. I disable Post Processing and it doesn't change one bit. I put all the graphics settings on minimum so the game looks like Doom 1 and it's still 20-30 FPS.
On very high textures don't load, in 3rd person my characters BDU's and webbing are just a mess of horrible unloaded textures. The ground looks like a pastel drawing and I thought for about 2 days that BI had removed the 3d ground textures from ARMA 2 until it eventually loaded and I saw 3d rocks etc.
The game stutters horribly freezing for around 0.1 seconds every 3-4 seconds or so.
My computer runs every game fine, ARMA 2 runs like a dream, Crysis runs like a dream. I can spin around in chernogorsk while 1000's of C-130J's crash and it'll maybe drop down to 50 or so. Operation Arrowhead is just totally borked. For a laugh I decided to run Arma 2 on 1 GPU and I still got 50 or so FPS so it isn't a crossfire issue.
I'm running the game on the latest catalyst drivers/profiles (10.6) with OA.exe renamed to Arma2.exe. As for GPU performance I averaged about 20-25% GPU load in an average play session, GPU load reached a MAX of 47% on GPU 1 42% GPU 2. CPU never rose above 10% or so. Where the hell am I going wrong?
-
Seriously BI, I get 20 frigging FPS on very low. 3D res 33%. The game looks like Doom 1. Need I mention I get 20 FPS on very high as well?
Something has gone wrong in production. On arma 2 I got 60 FPS constantly, I could be in Chernagorsk in a huge fight and be happily running along at 60, I go into the midlde of the Takistani desert and I max out at 20 and the graphics look horrible, the textures don't load and turn into a huge splodge. Horrible issues.
-
- You can still blow up armoured vehicles with small arms fire. I blew up a t72 with nothing but a PKM on the front armour. I thought OA fixed this problem.
- AI have returned to their ridiculously accurate/godlike hearing form they had in ARMA 2 1.00 . I've been sniped in the head while walking from 1000m + single shot with an AK, then had my mate who was about 20m away from me shot again. In 2 bullets. vehicles have insane detection capabilities, AI use rockets on infantry when there are tanks nearby, somtimes the AI even pulls out an RPG to engage lone infantry when it has a perfectly fine gun
- Absoloutely horrible performance issues and texture issues, horrible stutter (though not much lag), game doesn't use SLI GPU's, massive texture issues. Sometimes textures just refuse to load so from third person view my soldiers armour and BDU's look like they are from a game in 1995. It all goes blobby and unloaded, especially with the ground. At first I thought the ground textures were just bad as they were all 2D then I realized they were actually 3D when they mystically started loading again. My rig is by no measure a terrible one, yet performance in this is far, far worse than I got in Chernarus when I'm just travelling around the desert with a relatively low view distance.
- Sometimes AI just turns totally stupid, I put myself against about 20 T-72's at around 2000m, me in an Abrams and I killed 14 before I ran out of ammo without a single shot fired back at me. This is especially bad online and/or with armoured vehicles mostly infantry seem fine but I've driven around enemy armour and not even been engaged, it's extremely weird (although I admit this may be a server lag/ping/bandwidth issue so don't rage against me over this one).
- Ballistics seem a bit off, I had about a 1 second travel time with an M107 at 400m, I'm no military buff but I'm sure the muzzle velocity of that thing is in the thousands of m/s. It should take milliseconds to travel that distance, not seconds. To put it in perspective the travel time at 400m in OA is the same as the travel time of 1000m in A2.
Just some stuff I've noticed
-
1) ARMA is an infantry combat simulator as its primary, making maps 1000km by 1000km makes it 'too realistic'. People don't want the 'real experience', the real experience is spending 2 months in a camp per hour of fighting. Spending 8 hours travelling to the patrol zone, 8 hours back. People want firefights on detailed maps
2) ARMA 2 is 10 odd GB and takes a way above average computer to run, it's easily one of the most demanding games, you make the map 1 million square km and we're gonna need supercomputers to host our servers. What does it really add anyway, you lock and blow up something 80km that you can't see when you're in a F22, sure it's realistic but it doesn't lead to good gameplay. People don't wanna fly around at 40,000 feet 100km away from the action firing missiles at each other. It's all about getting a good balance.
-
It's a game and there's war in it. Good enough war simulator for me.
-
Well, I'd definately agree with the OP, I have played and do play both 'Tactical' 'intelligent' games and 'dumb' games like Modern Warfare and Bad Company 2 and I definately see a difference in asstardery in the games. In Arma 2 muppets get weeded out since they get killed quickly and get bored if they don't adapt to the gameplay (compare the amount of people on release to the amount now). In Modern Warfare 2 the average game has no teamwork in it whatsoever, people actively try to disadvantage their teammates so they can steal all the glory. The average talk is people calling each other hackers or noobs or whining about people being 'gay' or 'bush lovers' or 'obama lovers' in pre-pubescent voices.
In Arma 2 the average game has people who help each other, will sacrifice their own fun and enjoyment to provide fun for others and generally try to provide a good gaming environment, obviously there is still some asstardery but everyone does it once in a while.
-
Well I've got non-overclock and overclock profiles saved on my BIOS so it's a 10 second job to turn it off and on, may as well try :)
-
Should I remove the overclock on my processor and see if that clears it up.
-
Ugh FFS, I got one of the first 5970's. I heard they were pretty faulty, probably got shipped with some buggered RAM. Anyone got any ideas about how long RMA will take?
Zeus AI Combat Skills
in ARMA 2 & OA - ADDONS & MODS: COMPLETE
Posted
I just finished a few missions of the OA/BAF campaigns and had the greatest time of my life, ever.
My settings were Skill friend/foe 0.98500001
Precision friend: 0.5 Precision foe : 0.2
I had ACE 2, WarFX, J.S.R.S sounds and a myriad of other atmosphere enhancing mods. In 'Good Morning Takistan' my squad landed and nearly dealt with the T-55's single handedly. They covered each other, the LMG laid down supressing fire and they moved into cover, when the M1A1 Abrams tanks appeared they stormed forward, taking ground and firing on targets multiple kilometers away with their cannons.
Not once in the campaign did I see AI just standing in the open looking around. They used the numerous walls for cover, gave each other covering fire and they used vehicles intelligently. Landrovers laid back and supressed infantry with their .50 cal. The AI tried to flank me and used complex tactics. The only thing I can complain about is that sometimes the AI just refuses to move and sits in prone doing nothing but I think that's just a standard ARMA 2 problem rather than a Zeus AI one.
Out of interest what appears to be the best skill/precision values for use ingame? I just used the ones recommended in the readme. What aspects of AI behaviour does skill affect.