maruk

Dear all, I just wanted to let you know that the information circulated by various major media sources about Bohemia Interactive acquired by Tencent is not true. We were talking to numerous potential partners in the past about possible strategic cooperation and we may do so in the future as well but as of now, we remain an independent studio. P.S.: I am just an old man working on games for more than 30 years of my life. But the valuation circulated in the media sounds tempting. Maybe I should think about my retirement plans after all now? Any better offers 😀? Anyway, I guess in the meantime I should get back to work to help our Team Bohemia to continue work on our existing and future games. And last but not least, I want to thank this amazing community for the support over the years. Without you, Arma, DayZ and Bohemia Interactive could never achieve this major success in the world of games.

See https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/setPos So something like [url="https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/player"]player[/url][color=#000000][font=Lucida Console] setPos [ [/font][/color][url="https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/getPos"]getPos[/url][color=#000000][font=Lucida Console] this [/font][/color][url="https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/select"]select[/url][color=#000000][font=Lucida Console] 0, [/font][/color][url="https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/getPos"]getPos[/url][color=#000000][font=Lucida Console] this [/font][/color][url="https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/select"]select[/url][color=#000000][font=Lucida Console] 1, ([/font][/color][url="https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/getPos"]getPos[/url][color=#000000][font=Lucida Console] this [/font][/color][url="https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/select"]select[/url][color=#000000][font=Lucida Console] 2) -1] [/font][/color] should do it

True, this can be very good solution for popular servers, see also https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/hosts.txt for more detailed information and example how to use it.

This message is caused by the fact Gamespy matchmaking is no longer availlable for this game but it does not prevent you from going to Remote and typing there IP and port of server you would like to join. That said, mp was played only by very limited audience in TKOH and there were not that many servers. I can see only one server registered here http://master.bistudio.com/ and I have succesfuly tried to connect to this one server.

You should be able to play multiplayer in Take On Helicopters even after Gamespy has ended operations. If you want to host your server (listen server or dedicated server), you need to ensure the ports required for multiplayer are open in your firewall/router settings. In order to join a server, you need to know its IP address and port used. We are also providing this website for people to be able to register and find servers http://master.bistudio.com/

Not trusting these clowns :party:anymore!!! I got fooled by fArma five years ago but you ain't got me no more. I still want fArma and not this racing non-sense. Plus they really should get over fighting with Codies over nothing all the time for years: they get OPF brand so what? Get over it, babiez. Are you trying to beat them up in the racing games genre? Neve gonna happen. But this is too much for me to handle and I do not think I am gonna play Arma 3 anymore. :moto::moto::681:Let me know when you finally get your act together and fix all the bugs and add all the missing features we all have been requesting for bloody 15 years!!!!!!!!!!!!! And now you want me to pay you for this kids kartz DLC? So you know what??? I even do not care if I am banned from these forums 'cause I can only show you this....

Important notice: effective May 31, 2014, Gamespy will cease providing all hosted services for all games. This is going to affect multiplayer in our games that use Gamespy for matchmaking, cd keys authentification and NAT traversal from Arma: Resistance to Arma 3. We are planning to introduce an alternative solution using Steam to Arma 2: Operation Arrowhead and Arma 3 users. Other games (Take On Helicopters, Arma 2, Arma 2: Free, Arma, Arma: Cold War Assault) will have more limited multiplayer experience with loss of server browser, cd key authentification and NAT traversal systems. That said, direct IP connection to servers should work even after Gamespy services are no longer available. We apologize for any inconvenience.

It is plain simple: nearly full Arma 2 was running on Xbox 360 but we never managed to really finish it (performance was never good enough) or release it for various reasons. In fact, we really wanted to make the game for X360, similary to OFP Elite for Xbox 1 (the first one).

CCP is community project so either the community does there are no CCP fixes. I do not recall the exact process but I believe kju was so kind he volunteered to review and submit ccp addons to us for release in the past.

Incorrect. What I said is that concurency is not a goal at all, only real performance (higher fps, more objects on screen, more units performing complex AI computations etc.) is what matters, so end users trying to measure their CPU or GPU concurency are simply focusing their attention in wrong direction. Those interested learning more about complexity of multicore optimizations and architecture are always welcome to read this article.

Well, I guess I just should repeat the same blog for people to bother to read before they get involved in the threading discussion: http://www.bistudio.com/english/company/developers-blog/91-real-virtuality-going-multicore In short: Path finding is multithreaded since Arma 2 (in that blog you can hover your mouse over the image to get user friendly description about what each thread is doing in that situation profiled there).

Yes, there are quad core CPUs in all my computers.

Problem here is that you are simply using wrong logic here. I am not sure how you exactly measure GPU usage and what does it technically mean but as I said before: the bottleneck most likely is the main thread on the CPU in any such scenario. You may try to lower settings heavy on the CPU main thread (view distance could be one of the most important here) and you can safely up some of the graphics settings that have not that big impact on your CPU usage (e.g. texture resolution, supersampling, post process quality etc.). In any case, I am running the game on three different nvidia GPU computers and I am getting performance that is quite good for me (generally better than Arma 2) so I am probably not suffering the way some other users may be, hard to tell.

Just to avoid more confusion and theories: I am not stressed at all nore I am trying to dismiss anyones concerns or issues related to game performance. I mostly want to give some more insight to the users in hope to allow them focus on what really matters. Does fps matter? Yes it does. Does multicore CPU usage matter? Well, not much to be honest, unless you for some reason like to play the performance monitor game of course. Performance is the goal, not concurrency. It is not that there is no possibility by better multithreading getting more performance, it is just that you can not measure it the way you are trying to do at all. I apologize diverting the topic in any case, I simply wanted to give this message out for some time already and spontaneously reacted in random topic chosen and also for once wanted to feel just normal part of the forums as in the good old days. I will try to find out if there is any specific driver optimization incoming in future on Nvidia, as the original poster asked and what is the real point on this thread anyway.

Of course if the main thread is stuck for whatever reason, you are going to see drop in utilization of all other cores (and GPU). In any case, why you try to read between the lines and come to conclusion that we are not interested and will not be trying hard to improve the game performance is beyond me. But in reality, multicore is not solution to all problems and it is easily possible, that right now there could be some other problem in mp that leads people into building their own theories. So as always, problem has to be identified, reproduced and as such particular bug can be addressed. All I wanted to say is that users measuring their CPU and GPU usage are focusing attention in false direction. Focusing on game fps itself is much more valid approach for example but more critical are occasional significant drops in performance than average fps. That was my main point, not trying to defend our "lazy and incompetent" engineers (as I see them called on the forums often: and I strongly disagree with this view btw) or hide behind nice words. But on a side note: I have been tempted few times to ask engineers to spawn all cores with dummy loops to please this type of audience. The problem is that it benefits no one. So on more constructive note: there easily could be some problem (or many different problems) in multiplayer causing serious performance degration and that certainly is high prioirty to track down and fix asap for us. It is just there is no magical multicore optimization that could out of sudden improve everything available as some may seem to hope for when they see some of their cores are nearly idle most of the time. Most important is this: there is no single "general performance problem of CPU or GPU utlization", there are only specific problems (and these may easily be completely different in mp, sp, different depending on users hw etc.) that need to be fixed.