<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Full Metal Demo: Arma II</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 08:02:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Howard</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-4/#comment-212789</link>
		<dc:creator>Howard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:54:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-212789</guid>
		<description>Okay, this is probably most relevant to those with a GeForce 2XX card, but anyway: hope it helps.

Turn your Pre-Rendered Farames int eh Nvida control panel to 0.  8 Won&#039;t work but 0 seems to help
Turn OFF the PhysX accelration in the Nvidia control panel.
While you are setting the Pre-rendered frames, ensure that VSYNC is disabled.
Open up the .CFG file found in My Documents\ARMA2 and edit it so that your resolution and 3D resolution are the same.  
In ARMA2 itself ensure that you have &quot;hold breath&quot; bound to a separate key.  I did this but the game forgot so check it.  For some ungodly reason &quot;hold breath&quot; was at least part of the cause for the massive FPS drop I got when zoomed.
Last point: Ignore the benchmark.  As far as I can see it is broken (or at least brings out the worst in the game).  That very first scene you see with the man on the cliff has bugger all in it yet I cannot get out of the teens FPS wise.  To test your FPS play an actual mission.

With all this done I not have it set to 1600x1200, all details on very high bar AA which is on low (the AA they have implemented is geared for ATI cards it seems) and Post Processing which I have on Low (&#039;cos it is VERY badly implemented) and, in a mission, I get 25-35 FPS.  This is still pathetically low and I still have some mouselag issues, but I can at least play a mission to see what the game feels like.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, this is probably most relevant to those with a GeForce 2XX card, but anyway: hope it helps.</p>
<p>Turn your Pre-Rendered Farames int eh Nvida control panel to 0.  8 Won&#8217;t work but 0 seems to help<br />
Turn OFF the PhysX accelration in the Nvidia control panel.<br />
While you are setting the Pre-rendered frames, ensure that VSYNC is disabled.<br />
Open up the .CFG file found in My Documents\ARMA2 and edit it so that your resolution and 3D resolution are the same.<br />
In ARMA2 itself ensure that you have &#8220;hold breath&#8221; bound to a separate key.  I did this but the game forgot so check it.  For some ungodly reason &#8220;hold breath&#8221; was at least part of the cause for the massive FPS drop I got when zoomed.<br />
Last point: Ignore the benchmark.  As far as I can see it is broken (or at least brings out the worst in the game).  That very first scene you see with the man on the cliff has bugger all in it yet I cannot get out of the teens FPS wise.  To test your FPS play an actual mission.</p>
<p>With all this done I not have it set to 1600&#215;1200, all details on very high bar AA which is on low (the AA they have implemented is geared for ATI cards it seems) and Post Processing which I have on Low (&#8217;cos it is VERY badly implemented) and, in a mission, I get 25-35 FPS.  This is still pathetically low and I still have some mouselag issues, but I can at least play a mission to see what the game feels like.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chicken Dinner</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-4/#comment-212784</link>
		<dc:creator>Chicken Dinner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:42:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-212784</guid>
		<description>P4 2.8GHz, 1GB RAM and a 256MB AGP card...  runs smoothly on the lowest resolution. The blurring actually makes it seem more realistic than looking at hard, defined edges. I&#039;m shooting at blobs rather than pixels if I don&#039;t have a scope, but from what I remember of OpFP I spent a lot of time shooting at bushes anyway, which amounts to the same thing. Textures and mem are on low, but terrain and object detail, and Aniso are all Very High. It&#039;s certainly got a great feel to it, and the demo&#039;s convinced me to buy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>P4 2.8GHz, 1GB RAM and a 256MB AGP card&#8230;  runs smoothly on the lowest resolution. The blurring actually makes it seem more realistic than looking at hard, defined edges. I&#8217;m shooting at blobs rather than pixels if I don&#8217;t have a scope, but from what I remember of OpFP I spent a lot of time shooting at bushes anyway, which amounts to the same thing. Textures and mem are on low, but terrain and object detail, and Aniso are all Very High. It&#8217;s certainly got a great feel to it, and the demo&#8217;s convinced me to buy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Markoff Chaney</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-4/#comment-212721</link>
		<dc:creator>Markoff Chaney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 10:22:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-212721</guid>
		<description>Balderdash(in my experience)!  8 was the first setting I tried, based on that guide.  I saw no improvement, maybe even a decrease in FPS.  The drop to 1 or 2 is noticeable from 3 and I did gain a few FPS in the process.

Another thing I found really helped out was disabling Pointer Precision on my mouse.  I usually leave it off but ArmA2 was on a fresh install and I hadn&#039;t done it yet.  Feels less floaty now.  Of course, the higher FPS helps in that department too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Balderdash(in my experience)!  8 was the first setting I tried, based on that guide.  I saw no improvement, maybe even a decrease in FPS.  The drop to 1 or 2 is noticeable from 3 and I did gain a few FPS in the process.</p>
<p>Another thing I found really helped out was disabling Pointer Precision on my mouse.  I usually leave it off but ArmA2 was on a fresh install and I hadn&#8217;t done it yet.  Feels less floaty now.  Of course, the higher FPS helps in that department too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: psyk</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-4/#comment-212330</link>
		<dc:creator>psyk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Jun 2009 02:25:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-212330</guid>
		<description>mmmm the first page of http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=73947 says to set it on 8 havent read pass that so might of changed on a later page.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>mmmm the first page of <a href="http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=73947" rel="nofollow">http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=73947</a> says to set it on 8 havent read pass that so might of changed on a later page.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Markoff Chaney</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-4/#comment-211946</link>
		<dc:creator>Markoff Chaney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 00:37:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-211946</guid>
		<description>Come home to me edit button! - Also limiting the pre-rendered frames in the nVidia control panel to 1 helped a bit.  I need to try 2 and 0 as well, though.  3 is default.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Come home to me edit button! &#8211; Also limiting the pre-rendered frames in the nVidia control panel to 1 helped a bit.  I need to try 2 and 0 as well, though.  3 is default.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Markoff Chaney</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-4/#comment-211944</link>
		<dc:creator>Markoff Chaney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 00:35:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-211944</guid>
		<description>A few more tests and I&#039;ve got her to a pretty stable 40+ (in the woods lol) with my shame being that my visibility stays around 2000.  Post Processing and AA disabled.  Texture and Video card memory at high and everything else is normal.  Zoomed in I get to break 60, even with a few other on the screen at the same time.  I want the full 10000 one day but anything over about 2050 starts giving me a somewhat noticeable FPS dip whereas it barely drops but maybe 1-2 FPS per 600 until that 2000.  I&#039;m sure it will change when I&#039;m in a city though.  

I can toggle AF from off to Very High with 0 FPS hit (well, maybe 1).  AA, however, is a noticeable hit of about 20% even at low, for me.  That&#039;s ok, to me.  AA is the last thing I usually ever turn on when tuning an engine up.  Again, I like it fast as I can see it and 60 frames a second would get me killed out against the lions.  Good thing I&#039;ve moved on a bit as a primate goes...

I can see how playing this with mates would make it the ultimate coop experience, from a &quot;complete this objective&quot; viewpoint.  I have to try to talk some of mine into it or maybe we can get a group going somehow.  Intelligent people playing together is always a pleasure.  The modability of the game is what really brought me to the game and the infinite possibilities contained in the future of community building.

The motion blur is vomit inducing at best.  I liken it to me not having my glasses on while running.  I&#039;m legally blind without my glasses.  Off it stays.  :)  I hope we can put the rest of the pretty stuff in soon.  In the config file (if you edit it manually) the values for it vacillate between 8, 16 and 32, so I assume further delineation is somewhat possible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few more tests and I&#8217;ve got her to a pretty stable 40+ (in the woods lol) with my shame being that my visibility stays around 2000.  Post Processing and AA disabled.  Texture and Video card memory at high and everything else is normal.  Zoomed in I get to break 60, even with a few other on the screen at the same time.  I want the full 10000 one day but anything over about 2050 starts giving me a somewhat noticeable FPS dip whereas it barely drops but maybe 1-2 FPS per 600 until that 2000.  I&#8217;m sure it will change when I&#8217;m in a city though.  </p>
<p>I can toggle AF from off to Very High with 0 FPS hit (well, maybe 1).  AA, however, is a noticeable hit of about 20% even at low, for me.  That&#8217;s ok, to me.  AA is the last thing I usually ever turn on when tuning an engine up.  Again, I like it fast as I can see it and 60 frames a second would get me killed out against the lions.  Good thing I&#8217;ve moved on a bit as a primate goes&#8230;</p>
<p>I can see how playing this with mates would make it the ultimate coop experience, from a &#8220;complete this objective&#8221; viewpoint.  I have to try to talk some of mine into it or maybe we can get a group going somehow.  Intelligent people playing together is always a pleasure.  The modability of the game is what really brought me to the game and the infinite possibilities contained in the future of community building.</p>
<p>The motion blur is vomit inducing at best.  I liken it to me not having my glasses on while running.  I&#8217;m legally blind without my glasses.  Off it stays.  :)  I hope we can put the rest of the pretty stuff in soon.  In the config file (if you edit it manually) the values for it vacillate between 8, 16 and 32, so I assume further delineation is somewhat possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stromko</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-4/#comment-211881</link>
		<dc:creator>Stromko</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:59:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-211881</guid>
		<description>Two words - Motion Blur.

When your character turns, he experiences instant vertigo and his environment turns into a smear. This is not realistic, at least not for someone who hasn&#039;t suffered a serious concussion and needs immediate help. It doesn&#039;t help that due to the insane upsampling/downsampling shenanigans, the lead character clearly has myopia(short-sightedness).

It can&#039;t be disabled, except by disabling ALL post-processing effects.

I posted to the demo feedback thread, and hopefully they do make motion blur a separate option, someday, because I&#039;d quite like to play ARMA II but right now I have an option between a) vomiting uncontrollably / experiencing horrific migraines, or b) ruining the graphics by disabling a very important effect.

I can&#039;t fathom why BI decided to make their game look so horrible with this upsampling junk, and the sickening motion blur / no post-process choice. Did they not put this in front of testers, or did they assume the testers were vomiting uncontrollably because it was &#039;so awesome&#039;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two words &#8211; Motion Blur.</p>
<p>When your character turns, he experiences instant vertigo and his environment turns into a smear. This is not realistic, at least not for someone who hasn&#8217;t suffered a serious concussion and needs immediate help. It doesn&#8217;t help that due to the insane upsampling/downsampling shenanigans, the lead character clearly has myopia(short-sightedness).</p>
<p>It can&#8217;t be disabled, except by disabling ALL post-processing effects.</p>
<p>I posted to the demo feedback thread, and hopefully they do make motion blur a separate option, someday, because I&#8217;d quite like to play ARMA II but right now I have an option between a) vomiting uncontrollably / experiencing horrific migraines, or b) ruining the graphics by disabling a very important effect.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t fathom why BI decided to make their game look so horrible with this upsampling junk, and the sickening motion blur / no post-process choice. Did they not put this in front of testers, or did they assume the testers were vomiting uncontrollably because it was &#8217;so awesome&#8217;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Howard</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-4/#comment-211865</link>
		<dc:creator>Howard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:34:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-211865</guid>
		<description>@Dominic
Yes you are as I am playing the demo and you are not, and &quot;low&quot; AA does virtually nothing so its impact is unimportant, and because you apparently do not understand what a render path issue is.  Which this game has.

@Markoff
I think this may be the issue.  People who claim they are getting uber settings on hardware that clearly cannot handle it.  The game is simply not making the changes it claims to be, i.e., changing everything to Very High detail does no such thing, instead leaving the user on normal or so as the game realises it cannot handle what it is being asked to do.
We&#039;ll see in 6 months once Bohemia extract a digit from an orifice and patch this monstrosity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Dominic<br />
Yes you are as I am playing the demo and you are not, and &#8220;low&#8221; AA does virtually nothing so its impact is unimportant, and because you apparently do not understand what a render path issue is.  Which this game has.</p>
<p>@Markoff<br />
I think this may be the issue.  People who claim they are getting uber settings on hardware that clearly cannot handle it.  The game is simply not making the changes it claims to be, i.e., changing everything to Very High detail does no such thing, instead leaving the user on normal or so as the game realises it cannot handle what it is being asked to do.<br />
We&#8217;ll see in 6 months once Bohemia extract a digit from an orifice and patch this monstrosity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Markoff Chaney</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-4/#comment-211859</link>
		<dc:creator>Markoff Chaney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:13:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-211859</guid>
		<description>Wow.

So I just ran this &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=73610&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;ArmAII-Mark&lt;/a&gt; mission 3 times.  First time was with my 2 hours fiddled with &quot;optimized settings&quot;.  I got a 2798.  Then I lowered all settings to the worst possible.  I got a 4919.  I then cranked all settings to the absolute highest possible (outside of 3D resolution which I left at 100%).  I got a 2848.  I got &lt;strong&gt;a higher score&lt;/strong&gt; on the test with everything turned on than I did my optimized settings.

I had been reading that if you reduced everything to the lowest, then turned them back up that the game somehow rendered those new settings almost as fast as the lower ones.  I didn&#039;t believe it, but I have some tasty pudding here...  Now to run more tests.  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow.</p>
<p>So I just ran this <a href="http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=73610" rel="nofollow">ArmAII-Mark</a> mission 3 times.  First time was with my 2 hours fiddled with &#8220;optimized settings&#8221;.  I got a 2798.  Then I lowered all settings to the worst possible.  I got a 4919.  I then cranked all settings to the absolute highest possible (outside of 3D resolution which I left at 100%).  I got a 2848.  I got <strong>a higher score</strong> on the test with everything turned on than I did my optimized settings.</p>
<p>I had been reading that if you reduced everything to the lowest, then turned them back up that the game somehow rendered those new settings almost as fast as the lower ones.  I didn&#8217;t believe it, but I have some tasty pudding here&#8230;  Now to run more tests.  :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dominic White</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-3/#comment-211841</link>
		<dc:creator>Dominic White</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:10:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-211841</guid>
		<description>I only lose 2fps on average using low AA, so... yeah, you ARE playing a different game to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I only lose 2fps on average using low AA, so&#8230; yeah, you ARE playing a different game to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Howard</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-3/#comment-211835</link>
		<dc:creator>Howard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:52:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-211835</guid>
		<description>@Dominic
Those of us playing the demo already had that patch.  The AA is highly impacting on the performance: sorry and all...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Dominic<br />
Those of us playing the demo already had that patch.  The AA is highly impacting on the performance: sorry and all&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cowthief skank</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/25/arma-ii-demo/comment-page-3/#comment-211821</link>
		<dc:creator>cowthief skank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:18:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=13650#comment-211821</guid>
		<description>Installed the demo, made no changes to settings, ran smooth (except for the odd freeze - due almost certainly to my computer being fucked as it does exactly the same playing videos or mp3s). Think I have an E6700 (or something? Core 2 Duo; one of the first ones to come out. Been so long I forgot what), a Geforce 9800GT and 4GB RAM. Running Windows 7 RC. Been so long since I put my system together I have kinda forgotten what it contains.

Running at 1920x1200. Made no attempt to optimise, just wanted to give it a quick go to see how it felt. Simply default settings. Am almost definitely gonna buy it as it was great fun even just one play of the demo mission where you start in a helicopter. An unsuccessful attempt at the mission was more engaging than some entire games I have played. I love having to think about what I am doing. Even if I am rubbish at it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Installed the demo, made no changes to settings, ran smooth (except for the odd freeze &#8211; due almost certainly to my computer being fucked as it does exactly the same playing videos or mp3s). Think I have an E6700 (or something? Core 2 Duo; one of the first ones to come out. Been so long I forgot what), a Geforce 9800GT and 4GB RAM. Running Windows 7 RC. Been so long since I put my system together I have kinda forgotten what it contains.</p>
<p>Running at 1920&#215;1200. Made no attempt to optimise, just wanted to give it a quick go to see how it felt. Simply default settings. Am almost definitely gonna buy it as it was great fun even just one play of the demo mission where you start in a helicopter. An unsuccessful attempt at the mission was more engaging than some entire games I have played. I love having to think about what I am doing. Even if I am rubbish at it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.175 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2009-11-22 08:04:43 -->
