Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

  Click here to go to the first Developer post in this thread.  

Thread: ARMA 2: OA beta build 95168 (1.62 MP build)

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by UGLY58 View Post
    I have 1.60 (never been near the RC`s) and this Beta seems to run fine ?
    You can´t join a 1.60 or 1.61 server....

  2. #12
    I shall not insult moderators
    Join Date
    Nov 25 2010
    Posts
    1,576
    You can get bad performance if you install an RC and a beta. I noticed my installed game version (RC) was the same number as the beta, deleted the beta folder and it was ok after that. Had lag and jittery visuals turning etc, with them both together. I would just use the beta patch not the RC. I'm having to reinstall as I did not realise there was no rollback from the RC's.

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Smurf View Post
    You can´t join a 1.60 or 1.61 server....
    Thaaaaats what he means, thanks

  4. #14
    Can you please clarify what's going on with the 1.62 beta.

    I installed the latest beta's as they are made available on Six Launcher (to play DayZ).

    Since 1.62 (95168+) I have not been able to play vanilla ARMA2 (1.60) as I just get a crash to desktop after loading a mission file. Several other people reported the exact same problem to me, on different servers, playing different missions.


    The beta is NOT optional, to play DayZ.

    Does this mean every DayZ player can no longer play vanilla ARMA2?

  5. #15
    Freeborne 1.61+ needs a different battleye dll. BE 1.60 and 1.61/1.62 RC are NOT compatible
    Read: http://www.battleye.com/download.html

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by PvPscene View Post
    Freeborne 1.61+ needs a different battleye dll. BE 1.60 and 1.61/1.62 RC are NOT compatible
    Read: http://www.battleye.com/download.html
    Lol another unrequired fsck up. Seriously why didn't BI wait a week before release? It's not like anything was actually broken.

  7. #17
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Sep 21 2006
    Location
    In ze mountains
    Posts
    1,445
    Quote Originally Posted by Lokyi View Post
    Lol another unrequired fsck up. Seriously why didn't BI wait a week before release? It's not like anything was actually broken.
    BI have been testing beta patches for 6 months now. It was time enough for them to draw a line in the sand. An week extra become another week and then another and another... What people fail to realise that in the development of complex software, nothing is ever perfect. As a result, someone, somewhere has to draw a line and "That's good enough for a release". That's what was done. Honestly I'm also experiencing a loss of performance but at the same time, check-out the changelog to realise all the bugfixes and new features that have been added...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. ARMA 2: OA beta build 93586 (1.60 MP compatible build, post 1.60 release)
    By Dwarden in forum ARMA 2 & OA - BETA PATCH TESTING
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: Jun 9 2012, 00:55
  2. ARMA 2: OA beta build 93348 (1.60 MP compatible build, post 1.60 release)
    By Dwarden in forum ARMA 2 & OA - BETA PATCH TESTING
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Jun 1 2012, 06:43
  3. ARMA 2: OA beta build 88279 (1.60 MP compatible build, post 1.60 release)
    By MadDogX in forum ARMA 2 & OA - BETA PATCH TESTING
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: Jan 25 2012, 12:20
  4. ARMA 2: OA beta build 88207 (1.60 MP compatible build, post 1.60 release)
    By Dwarden in forum ARMA 2 & OA - BETA PATCH TESTING
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: Jan 19 2012, 08:06
  5. ARMA 2: OA beta build 88044 (1.60 MP compatible build, post 1.60 release)
    By Dwarden in forum ARMA 2 & OA - BETA PATCH TESTING
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Jan 16 2012, 15:11

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •