Fuse

I have no problem being handicapped in the game if I push too hard. What I don't want is it to be done in a way that looks bad and/or causes me actual physical discomfort. I don't really understand why anyone would have a problem with that. Sure, ideally I'll never run that much and never see it, so the fact that it actually makes me physically ill and unable to continue functioning shouldn't matter. Ideally we'd never get shot either, so let's start making a USB device that stabs you when it happens. :)

So far I have not crashed since beta launched. *knock on wood* Got a couple of nice long sessions under my belt so far.

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. My post was not intended that way. I thought the smiley faces would help convey that.

I agree whole heartedly. I've loved everything I've owned by Logitech and most of it has lasted longer than I've used it. If they would make a keyboard with mechanical keys and a Gamepanel LCD I would kiss them. That and a true successor to the Z-5500s.

I think he was referring to the fact that Planetside's craptastic engine was apparently made with no consideration to the type of game it would be running, thus it suffers from the same problem Arma has where a high clock speed is pretty much the most important factor in running it well. Edit: Or my dumb ass could have just misread Worm's post and not noticed the OP was named after a once-great title. Don't worry, I feel sufficiently stupid.

I have to say, the demo on that page is laughable. The sample track is just a compressed piece of crap. The biggest "enhancement" I notice is that they ran the track through an equalizer. It may sound a tiny bit more sourround-ish, but it's hard to tell how much of that is just the "enhanced" version not sounding like it's being played through Walkman headphones. Did you notice a big improvement once you got your custom settings worked out, or were you happy with the results shown by their sample? I also wish Razer would stop forcing cloud storage on their users as an excuse to collect data. Synapse was lightyears better before 2.0, and few gamers LAN enough to make this cloud storage excuse passable.

I've never been diving anywhere near the Mediterranean, but in water that is relatively calm and clear you can see for quite a ways. I actually thought the vision was a bit too restricted when I was looking for the boat to sabotage in the showcase, but finding a boat while diving is a huge PITA in real life as well. :)

The server I play on apparently tried loading up one of the new transport helos with paratroopers, but the server crashed when everyone bailed out and opened their parachutes. I don't think we know how many chutes it takes to crash a server exactly, but transport choppers have now been removed to prevent large numbers of players from using the parachute at the same time.

This thread seems to have been well derailed, but in case you're still looking at it in regards to the original issue: Here is an example, full resolution and without significant compression. I'm running on an i5 & GTX 570. The game is running at 1920x1080, 100% sampling, all settings on very high or above, 4x AA & FXAA Ultra, both blurs are at 0, DoF at 10. I had not seen the heavy blur in alpha, all I remember noticing was the pulsing shadow that would creep in from the edges. I believe I had post-processing effects disabled in the alpha options menu because blur and heavy DoF tend to make me feel ill. Some gamers, my self included, get nauseous when playing games with significant blur and distortion. Even were this not the case, I think the current effect does not look good. The blur is very heavy and, as you can see, causes the image to appear pixelated. The quoted post makes it sound like it's not working as intended, and I certainly hope that is the case! My friend had to leave me behind yesterday because my character got fatigued and I had to stop for a while before I could look at the screen again. And no, thank YOU! :p

Yeah, I don't think we have the same definition of "science". If we can tell the location of audio using only two ears then doesn't that support the argument that quality stereo cans are better than, well, almost anything marketed towards gamers? ;) Fact is that most gaming headsets are significantly worse than if that money were spent on regular headphones, and the money you spend should be the only indicator you need. Do you really think you're going to spend the same amount as you would for a good pair of stereo headphones and get a pair that has multiple drivers + a mic + software all crammed on, and it's going to match the quality of two drivers for the same price? Some of the more expensive gaming headsets actually sound really good (though I've come to realize most gamers just have no idea what "good" sounds like), but they still wont match the quality of true surround sound speakers. A good soundcard + real headphones or true physical 5.1/7.1 speakers is your best bet. It doesn't mean other products aren't worth using, but they're never going to sound as good. Sure there's some personal preference involved, but "personal preference" is the same argument I've heard from people who think Turtle Beach X31s don't sound like dollar-store headphones. Now if only people didn't get so personally invested in their purchases this might actually get through to someone. Hahaha. We've all spent money on products we maybe shouldn't have, that's the whole goal of advertising. No one will look down on you for it, so no need to entrench your self along side a subpar product simply because you already spent money on it. :) (This is meant as a general statement, not solely directed at one person. It's an issue that seems to crop up everywhere products are discussed.)

How did you even find this thread? lol

The physical size of a screen doesn't impact the demand it places on your system. Where you see the performance hit is trying to maintain image quality when you scale it up that much. You typically either run a higher resolution or higher anti-aliasing so the image stays smooth rather than looking like it's made of Lego bricks, and that is where you see the additional demand placed on the GPU. Just FYI. :)

That item has been assigned, so there is no need to vote on it any further. Notice when it was assigned. :(

Plug in the controller, start Arma, then disable the default profile or whatever. I think that was it.

I think he needs to know what parts he wants first. Also, prebuilts are for chumps. :p

This is not uncommon for poorly coded server browsers. Typically what is happening (in laymans terms, I'm not a networking guy) is that as a game tries to ping all these servers quickly it overloads your router. It's usually only really a problem for users with older routers trying to play games with poorly coded server browsers. It doesn't sound exactly like the same problem, but they sound similar. Maybe that will help you guys nail it down. :(

Odd, I finally got around to trying my gamepad in Arma 3 and was able to bind the controls without any problems. The only hitch I ran in to is that my controller used to be very precise but now the sticks have just a hair of play in them. It wouldn't matter for the standard Xbox 360 gamepad, but mine it's enough to cause drift if I'm not careful to center the sticks. Win7 does not allow me to set up deadzones nor does Arma, unless I was just braindead while looking (always possible). If they let you calibrate properly it seems like it would work fine, but as it is I have to decide if I'm going to buy another gamepad just for flying in Arma 3.

Not currently at least.

So is everyone who is having the issue using 6-ch direct for their audio out? (I am.) EDIT: Nevermind, forgot a user posted in the other thread about having this issue with their USB headset.

No. At least not for these purposes... And why recommend it to him when you posted in another thread saying you were still having performance issues? Yeah, that's not exactly uncommon or unique to these forums, that's just the internet. Buy a CPU that can be easily OCed and a GPU that has, and this is just a guesstimate, at least 1.5GB of VRAM if you want to push the detail out nice and far. i5 2500k @ 4.8GHz, GTX 570 (also OCed). PC is over a year old and cost less than $1k USD when it was new. Still runs Arma 3 very well with almost everything maxxed out except the distance. My only real hitch when playing is the low VRAM on this card (1.2GB). The 2500k has been discontinued (it's old!), I merely provide it as an example of what you want, nothing fancy just lots of headroom to OC (though I do see people recommending used i5 I haven't ever bought a used part so I don't feel comfortable suggesting that). Go poking around and see what is in your budget and will get up to a high clock speed without doubling your costs with a real watercooling set up ("real" meaning not a pre-made closed loop, which is usually less efficient than a cheaper air heatsink).

Thanks. I'll try optical tomorrow hopefully, see if that helps.

PhysX in Arma doesn't have anything to do with your GPU AFAIK.

Congratulations? Mine are not. What kind of set up do you have?

What build are you guys using? I swear it was working for me yesterday, but today I switched to the dev build and now half my speakers are silent despite sounds obviously being placed on that channel by the game (meaning if I look at a guy while he talks I can't hear him at all, he's clearly on the center speaker but the sound isn't getting there, turn to the side and he starts coming through the front side speaker).

5.1 surround sound was working for me before switching to the dev build. Center and rear speakers are now completely dead while playing. It sounds as if the game is only outputting in 2.1 despite rendering(?) the sound for 5.1.