What is the state of the game now?

[thewalrusking 10]

I originally decided to skip Arma2 due to all the glitches at launch but has the game been patched up well? Is it a much better game now?

[demonized 20]

Arma still has it quirks, but yeah some good patching have been done.

As to what i can only direct you to read release notes of patches.

[Ulanthorn 10]

Game is as always in the last 10 years: Constant state of flux!

[mic1402 10]

almost all critical bugs have been eliminated, but there are still a few minor ones.

[tacticalnuggets 24]

wait tell the next patch, the last pach was very mixed, for some it did wonders, for some it made the game literally unplayable.

[ArmAriffic 10]

Most have been fixed, still should get it

[SteveJA 12]

Grab OA or better yet CO if you can since i felt that it doubled the enjoyment i got from the game.

[thewalrusking 10]

Thanks guys! Whats OA and CO?

[ht-57 0]

CO is "combined operations" its a two disc set that is arma II and operation arrowhead.

[johncage 30]

I originally decided to skip Arma2 due to all the glitches at launch but has the game been patched up well? Is it a much better game now?

still unplayable due to lag for me.

[ahmedjbh 0]

I dont know what game some of these people are playing, but its the most played game for my friends and I.

Sure there maybe a few minor bugs, but I would say less than the average game now.

Its certainly worth the money, and I am a very fussy person with money.

[Jockson 10]

still unplayable due to lag for me.

You mean network lag or FPS issues? Frame rate wise, the game runs relatively well for me with latest patches. Netcode is what needs to be drastically improved and while not unplayable, it's still a pretty big issue in my opinion.

[Zipper5 74]

Take what zachanscom says with a grain of salt, Jockson. ;)

[cheezypoof 10]

hey i noticed steam is having a sale on arma2 today, its quite a deal... i played the demo a while back and the bugs and inconsistencies ruined it for me.

i'm pretty sure most of the bugs have been ironed out but theres one graphical problem that bothered me the most.

will grass & vegetation display on distant areas?

i.e: i played against my friend during the demo, i had a beefier computer than him and distant vegetation was no problem, i had it turned up and when he proned it was hard to distinguish his location

now my friend had turned down the vegetation and all distant hills/land were bare, no matter where i was... i stood out like a sore thumb, making prone cover useless.

this ruined the experience for me since, to get an edge i would have to turn down my graphics to the lowest common denominator... can servers lock this feature to full vegetation? is vegetation forced through any patches? i need to know this before i purchase... thank you

[celery 8]

Get your Arma 2 at Gamersgate for the same price as on Steam. The Steam version is infamous for unease of mod use and updating.

The obvious bugs of the demo version are all gone. The vegetation disappearance is an unknown issue to me.

Edited December 24, 2010 by Celery

[mosh 0]

If you're in the US and want to d/l it, this is a pretty good deal. I don't recommend this on Steam either.

The state of the game is just fine.

[johncage 30]

Take what zachanscom says with a grain of salt, Jockson. ;)

why would i lie about lag?

it's fps lag, by the way. and it's a perfectly valid criticism of the game/engine due to the fact that even the latest generation hardware still has problems running the game.

i wouldn't mind it so much, except the graphics are just above average. nowhere near crysis level. and that game still runs smoother.

in fact i hear mention that the hardware required to run this game at max still doesn't exist yet. that just seems weird as hell to me, no offense.

possible solutions: don't try to calculate everything. if you can get something to be within a plausible simulation of the actual physics, that's fine enough if it saves processing power. add in new processing effects once hardware exists to be able to run it.

and quite frankly those guys saying it runs fine on max on their systems are either too loyal to be honest, or they don't mind playing 20fps.

Edited December 25, 2010 by zachanscom

[enad 11]

still unplayable due to lag for me.

Buy a new computer then..?

Don't blame the game because it is too demanding.

People should realize they're going to have to shell out some cash to thoroughly enjoy a game like ArmA 2. :)

[Defunkt 431]

Take what zachanscom says with a grain of salt, Jockson. ;)

Zipper you're the only one here who bothers to even acknowledge anything he posts and it's an ultimately futile past-time. Anyone who cares to can look through his post history for themselves and will see what he is.

Runs just super for me on quite moderate hardware BTW.

[xxbbcc 6]

and quite frankly those guys saying it runs fine on max on their systems are either too loyal to be honest, or they don't mind playing 20fps.

I certainly don't have a latest generation system (32-bit XP, 3gb RAM, dual core) and I have no fps lag almost at all. Some missions gave me a headache but they were poorly implemented to begin with, massively bogging down the game. 99% of (SP) missions play just fine for me.

[johncage 30]

a lot of people making false assumptions here. the game doesn't run well on current generation hardware, period. i have an i7 920. that's quad core.

they even say in order to run it truly well you have to wait for the hardware to come out. please read the entire post and don't focus on one or two sentences. thank you.

[enad 11]

Runs fine for me on an i5.

So obviously, you're doing something wrong. Quit trollin.

[johncage 30]

crysis runs smooth as hell for me and so do all other hardware demanding games i have. the "you're doing something wrong" argument is such a lazy attempt at understanding the issue, it's ridiculous. again, i urge you to read the entire thing and realize that even the developers have confirmed the hardware that can truly run this game doesn't exist yet.

btw, most people's notion of "running fine" is rather skewed. and i don't trust their standards.

[mosh 0]

crysis runs smooth as hell for me and so do all other hardware demanding games i have. the "you're doing something wrong" argument is such a lazy attempt at understanding the issue, it's ridiculous. again, i urge you to read the entire thing and realize that even the developers have confirmed the hardware that can truly run this game doesn't exist yet.

btw, most people's notion of "running fine" is rather skewed. and i don't trust their standards.

The game runs fine for me. You're doing something wrong.

And really, who gives a shit about Crysis? :rolleyes:

[johncage 30]

great arguments, everyone.

and i'm the troll here:rolleyes: