• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Official ArmA 2 Thread of DOGCHUTES RGR

chespace said:
Performance was good on my rig, but obviously not 60+ fps stellar.

Q9550 @ 3.8
8GB DDR2
ATI 4870x2
Vista x64

I'm playing the game with everything on Very High running 1920x1200 with the fillrate (or 3D resolution, whatever the fuck that means) at 100% and getting average of 45 fps. I haven't done a real test with Fraps but this is just what I was seeing every time I looked in the corner of my screen. I played around with the mission editor and dropped in a ton of tanks and helicopters and sure enough the framerate dipped to around 30, sometimes going as low as 25fps.

There you have it. This game is a hog and officially runs slower than Crysis for me. :lol
This is bad new for me :(

shit
 
Ok so im in the US and bought one of those keys from g2play for 20 bucks, worked perfectly.

Well anyways, as for the game, WOW, the first thing I did was a scenario mission, wasnt apart of the full SP game, just side things you can train on, etc. Well anyways, I had to turn the headbob down first, makin me sick, I liked it, but it was just too much, now I still have it, just not as much. Ok, first things first, the dynamic mission structure is amazing, the same mission over and over again revealed differences each time, one time I had chopper help, next time I didnt, one time I had help from random US soldiers that werent there the first, second, or third time, I mean this game is random, Im not to up to date on the tech they are using, but im assuming that depending on whats in the area and that certain time, determines what, if any kind of help you can get. The visuals in some parts rival Crysis, when you are on the aircraft carrier especially, its really close to Crysis quality, then other parts arnt really even close to Crysism, just depends, but regardless, for a open world it is amazing what they have done here.

Performance wise, im on a decent system and im able to run it on High-Very High around 30-50 fps @ 1680x1050

System specs:

GTX 260 core 216
q6600 @ 3.6
4gb DDR2 1066

So anyways, I might post some screens in a bit.
 
chespace said:
Performance was good on my rig, but obviously not 60+ fps stellar.

Q9550 @ 3.8
8GB DDR2
ATI 4870x2
Vista x64

I'm playing the game with everything on Very High running 1920x1200 with the fillrate (or 3D resolution, whatever the fuck that means) at 100% and getting average of 45 fps. I haven't done a real test with Fraps but this is just what I was seeing every time I looked in the corner of my screen. I played around with the mission editor and dropped in a ton of tanks and helicopters and sure enough the framerate dipped to around 30, sometimes going as low as 25fps.

There you have it. This game is a hog and officially runs slower than Crysis for me. :lol

Apparently there is an issue with SLI/Crossfire. Only way some got SLI working was by renaming the exe to something like crysis.exe and running in XP mode: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=75363&page=2

Crossfire, similar situation: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=75362

Give that a shot.
 

chespace

It's not actually trolling if you don't admit it
Mr. Snrub said:
Apparently there is an issue with SLI/Crossfire. Only way some got SLI working was by renaming the exe to something like crysis.exe and running in XP mode: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=75363&page=2

Crossfire, similar situation: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=75362

Give that a shot.

WHAT ARE YOU FUCKING WITH ME?

edit: wow, that thread is all sorts of crazy. I'm definitely going to try this tonight. It never occured to me that I might not be using both GPUs. It's been so long since a game has given me trouble like that.
 

chespace

It's not actually trolling if you don't admit it
Beautiful. What a difference a 2nd GPU makes. :lol

Getting 60 fps at 1920x1200 with 100% fillrate with everything on very high.

At 200%, I get between 25-30fps.
 

Shawsie64

Banned
chespace said:
Beautiful. What a difference a 2nd GPU makes. :lol

Getting 60 fps at 1920x1200 with 100% fillrate with everything on very high.

At 200%, I get between 25-30fps.

:D

Good to hear as i was worried about my PC being able to cope with the game after the performance from your beast of a rig compared to mine :lol
 

Forsete

Gold Member
The game seems to have the same AI as in ArmA? :/ Aka, you can shoot a whole squad and they wont react much, just sit there and wait to be taken out?
 

chespace

It's not actually trolling if you don't admit it
Time for some screenshots:

1425wlx.jpg


2md5v6g.jpg


2agl2qb.jpg


rc3891.jpg


312cnj6.jpg


2cht0gl.jpg


2hx269x.jpg


16869on.jpg


oixwz.jpg


5miosl.jpg


286zk1v.jpg


I love this game. :p
 

Zenith

Banned
I'm having trouble with the mission Razor Two. I've followed 5 different leads and they've all been dead ends. I read about Akula not really spawning so I didn't bother chasing him when I got the 20 minute message. Does arriving at his destination trigger something, even if you're not supposed to find him? Haven't found any war crime evidence so far.
 

Atrophis

Member
After seeing all the Youtube vids and reading the impressions in this thread its not hard to see why one of the BI developers got pissed at that 4/10 review :lol
 

Zenith

Banned
Atrophis said:
After seeing all the Youtube vids and reading the impressions in this thread its not hard to see why one of the BI developers got pissed at that 4/10 review :lol

but they claimed none of those bugs existed and that they were "shocked" to hear about them. and then went on to claim the mag must have a grudge about them or no reason. but then all the user reviews came in and confirmed it was true.
 

Diggler

Member
Che, can you please post which video settings and/or nvidia panel options you use? I have the game and it looks nothing like that :(
 

Zeliard

Member
Chespace, do you find yourself switching between first and third-person a lot? I mostly play in first-person but I switch between the two fairly often. Both views look great and offer very different but equally useful perspectives on your surroundings.

Just walking/running around the environment is hugely immersive, especially in first-person. Something as relatively simple as taking a helicopter ride and being dropped off into a clearing, and then trudging through a forest with your pals, staying low and trying not to be spotted while looking for a specific target - it has a much more realistic and tense feel to it than in any game I've played.
 
chespace said:
Beautiful. What a difference a 2nd GPU makes. :lol

Getting 60 fps at 1920x1200 with 100% fillrate with everything on very high.

At 200%, I get between 25-30fps.

Yeah, it's so weird, apparently the America's Army game has this issue of renaming the .exe to enable certain features, too. I don't get it.

Forsete said:
The game seems to have the same AI as in ArmA? :/ Aka, you can shoot a whole squad and they wont react much, just sit there and wait to be taken out?

Apparently its been a bit of both...half of ArmA players say its amazing AI, the others say its dumb, cheats, etc. There've been some interesting vids posted on youtube, testing the AI. Some are favorable, some aren't.

Zenith said:
but they claimed none of those bugs existed and that they were "shocked" to hear about them. and then went on to claim the mag must have a grudge about them or no reason. but then all the user reviews came in and confirmed it was true.

Well, not all of those were confirmed as true. I think it was a bit half/half--the German version was released earlier than the rest, and maybe they had time to clean up all those bugs.
 

Zeliard

Member
Mr. Snrub said:
Apparently its been a bit of both...half of ArmA players say its amazing AI, the others say its dumb, cheats, etc. There've been some interesting vids posted on youtube, testing the AI. Some are favorable, some aren't.

The problem is bug-related, IMO. When the A.I. actually works, it can be incredibly impressive, both teammate and A.I. Their movement and their individual decision-making is remarkable at times, to the point that it can actually be pretty freaky due to the atmosphere the rest of the game achieves. They're very careful about the shots they take, so you can pretty much hear every individual bullet, and they're also excellent at suppressive fire. Being in a prone position and hearing a shot ring out and hit a tree right above your head will give you a jolt. :p

The issue is that sometimes your teammates will do stupid shit like get caught in the scenery, or simply decide they'd rather no longer move for no particular reason, or ignore your specific orders. Or an enemy A.I. will have no idea you're there even when you're practically on top of him. I chalk these up to bugs rather than true deficiencies in the A.I. because it doesn't happen all the time, and the A.I. has shown quite a few glimpses of brilliance.
 
bigswords said:
Is it easy to get in? From the youtube the guy who played the single player campaign didn't see any action.

Well the first mission you have to make it to a small village at night, there is some traveling at first, but its tense because this game is totally random and enemys can be anywhere at anytime, ive failed missions assuming it would go a certain way (played to much of COD) :lol I wouldnt say its an easy game to get into, its different, controls are a little complex, but it pays to have patients, and boy does it pay. :D
 
This "Warfare" mode sounds awesome, and apparently is in the demo:

Think large-large scale combat, with each player (or AI) representing a squad of up to 12 units. These squads are then controlled and given orders by a "Commander".

Commander builds the base and order around the units.

Squads capture "strong points" that in return spawn supply trucks that deliver supplies back to town. All strong points are controlled by guerilla fighters hostile to everyone.

Ultimate goal can be defined before mission start (capture x amount of strong points, 30 minute time limit and many more, but usually "Destroy enemy base").

Thats a short rundown of Warfare
 

Hitmeneer

Member
130 kb/sec atm with Gamershell and 7 kb/sec with the torrent :(. This is going to be one long wait....

Any word if Steam will host the demo? Would be great, to download with my max download speed and not wait 5 hours.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
As suspected, the demo feels janky as fuck. They gave the options UI a facelift but t's still a tremendous pain in the ass to remap the controls (since just about everything is bound, and you can't easily unbind everything, so everything you change has a conflict...and it's not very fast to address them). Numerous major bugs, game seems strangely choppy at 30+, shooting feels ancient, controls remain extremely unintuitive.

Will give the demo another chance, but yeah, no sale, especially not at full price. Maybe at $20 + a bunch of patches and available mods w/ a dx11 video card if I warm up to it.
 
EviLore said:
As suspected, the demo feels janky as fuck. They gave the options UI a facelift but t's still a tremendous pain in the ass to remap the controls (since just about everything is bound, and you can't easily unbind everything, so everything you change has a conflict...and it's not very fast to address them). Numerous major bugs, game seems strangely choppy at 30+, shooting feels ancient, controls remain extremely unintuitive.

Will give the demo another chance, but yeah, no sale, especially not at full price. Maybe at $20 + a bunch of patches and available mods w/ a dx11 video card if I warm up to it.

Demo != Full product?

Original ArmA demo was awful, still not playable for a lot of people.
 

Zeliard

Member
EviLore said:
As suspected, the demo feels janky as fuck. They gave the options UI a facelift but t's still a tremendous pain in the ass to remap the controls (since just about everything is bound, and you can't easily unbind everything, so everything you change has a conflict...and it's not very fast to address them). Numerous major bugs, game seems strangely choppy at 30+, shooting feels ancient, controls remain extremely unintuitive.

I expect mods will fix the UI, which is indeed quite a disaster at the moment. Not sure if it's even possible to remap backspace turning off your order menus. Feels like I'm having to move my hand from the mouse too often to do various things, which isn't good.

The game's certainly bug-ridden and not everyone will be able to get past that, but I've had enough cool moments with it that the potential is easy to see. I think your rig should be running it pretty nicely, though. You should check arma2.cfg and see if the render values match the resolution - the fillrate stuff can sometimes be inaccurate through the menu and it's a heavy toll on performance.
 
EviLore said:
Uhhh what? Relevance?

Sorry, my initial readthrough of your post looked like you didn't like how the demo was performing and were basing your "buy" decision on the demo. Seems like you don't like the general feel of the game. Fair enough, it's not for everyone.
 

Darklord

Banned
EviLore said:
As suspected, the demo feels janky as fuck. They gave the options UI a facelift but t's still a tremendous pain in the ass to remap the controls (since just about everything is bound, and you can't easily unbind everything, so everything you change has a conflict...and it's not very fast to address them). Numerous major bugs, game seems strangely choppy at 30+, shooting feels ancient, controls remain extremely unintuitive.

Will give the demo another chance, but yeah, no sale, especially not at full price. Maybe at $20 + a bunch of patches and available mods w/ a dx11 video card if I warm up to it.

Shooting feels ancient? How?
 
Mr. Snrub said:
Sorry, my initial readthrough of your post looked like you didn't like how the demo was performing and were basing your "buy" decision on the demo. Seems like you don't like the general feel of the game. Fair enough, it's not for everyone.



What the fuck is the point of a demo if not to base your 'buy' decision on.
 
Fallout-NL said:
What the fuck is the point of a demo if not to base your 'buy' decision on.

Well, I already know I'm buying it. Demo would just be nice to play around in. Demos don't make or break a game, in my opinion, and I don't see why anyone else would think so.
 

Steeven

Member
So anything new in multiplayer? Is Capture The Island still in it, and does it work? Nothing beats waiting one hour in some city in a perfect ambush position just to shoot an RPG in someone's APC while he's tagging the town :lol. And you just know it took him at least 20 minutes to reach the goddamn town.
 

TheExodu5

Banned
Mr. Snrub said:
Well, I already know I'm buying it. Demo would just be nice to play around in. Demos don't make or break a game, in my opinion, and I don't see why anyone else would think so.

Why would I not base my decision to buy or not to buy around a demo?

I'm downloading it now to see how it controls, how it performs, and how it looks. This is an engine test for me. If it's not adequate, I'm not paying $50 at launch for it.
 
TheExodu5 said:
Why would I not base my decision to buy or not to buy around a demo?

I'm downloading it now to see how it controls, how it performs, and how it looks. This is an engine test for me. If it's not adequate, I'm not paying $50 at launch for it.

Because a demo isn't always an accurate representation. Many companies have released sub par, boring, and/or glitchy demos, where the full product was much better.

I'm just saying, I base my decision more on impressions, reviews, feedback, etc., rather than a 20-30 minute gameplay slice.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
Darklord said:
Shooting feels ancient? How?

Several reasons.

-Recoil mechanic. Feels artificial/binary. And "hold breath" seems to mainly act as a zoom, which is pretty strange.

-Muzzle flash/smoke is visually archaic, and bullets contacting surfaces barely registers anything at all, just the same tiny puff of smoke/dirt on the ground (same whether it's paved or soil) and nothing even happens with most other surfaces.

-No ricochets.

-No bullet drop that I could discern.

-No proper reload animations (yeah, I know, crapload of guns)


On the plus side:


-Locational damage, at least on the player's receiving end. I took a bullet to the arm and had trouble steadying my aim. Nice.

-Bullet crack, and the directional sound engine seemed to work well enough.

-The muzzle smoke, while kinda shitty looking visually, is fairly realistic.

-If you have a rocket launcher on your back it'll stick out a bit and enter your first person field of view if you're prone.

-Bullets appear to have travel time.


...Yeah, AA3 has already spoiled me.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
kodt said:
Just so you know there is ricochet and gravity falloff on the bullets, maybe you didn't notice.

Huh, I tested for both and couldn't discern any. Okay then, will take your word for it.

...I will say that I stood in front of various hard surfaces and unloaded boxes of m249 ammo and not a thing happened, on the ricochet front. But re: testing bullet drop I may have needed longer ranges, will try in a bit.
 
I'm still not particulary far into the campaign but I have to say.

It already shits all over ArmA's campaign, which quite frankly was abysmal.

Still I presume by the format I won't get any spec op missions like in OpFor. Lone Spec Op entering a base without getting spotted, blowing up tanks then crawling up a hill. One of my favourite moments in gaming and I didn't shoot a damn person.
 
Top Bottom