Is Arma 3 a reasonable replacement for Arma 2?

[Wiki 1558]

When you must compare something, always do it in vanilla version.

Addon, mods etc... definitely change the game, which changes the comparison.

[DavidCastle 1]

When you must compare something, always do it in vanilla version.

Addon, mods etc... definitely change the game, which changes the comparison.

Why would I do that when it comparing vanilla games won't accurately represent the full potential of both games or how both games are generally played by communities.

My comparison is based on available features whether from mods or not and how one might achieve a smoother target experience from Arma 3.

Plus Bohemia's actions have shown they built their game with the intention to be used with mods as has been shown through their addition of mod tools, mod competition, and them taking a big mod (dayz) and making it a game, etc.

IF I were to compare vanilla games though, I would say both are disinteresting. I would rather play disinteresting with smoother movement than with clunky movement. =/

[Jona33 51]

For me, well I only had ARMA II free (Yeah, I'm a cheapskate :D) so my comparison is only to that. However comparing base games, ARMA III is leaps and bounds ahead, I would prefer a more complex medical system but I do remember how frustrating it was in ARMA II to be in "agony" and your AI team mate 5m away refuse to heal you. At least the current one is more playable (in my opinion, of course.) Obviously graphically ARMA III is a million times prettier, even on my crap computer. It does feel more exciting as well, comparing "Trial by fire" in ARMA II to the Infantry showcase in ARMA III, things like the radio chatter and animations (COMBAT PACE!!!!) really improve the experience for me. The big thing ARMA II has going for it is mods, since ARMA II free disabled mods I can't really comment on that. In terms of the futuristic kit, I like it. Of course it requires a bit of a stretch of imagination but I don't see why people just want the same old M4s and AK47s, they've been done enough now that I can't get crazily excited by them, I personally think BI did a good thing by striking out and being a bit more adventurous. So overall, I would say yes.

@Wiki, what are your thoughts on the ARMA III campaign, because I really enjoyed it? (Especially in it's latest iteration with proper gear persistence and the ability to take a team on patrol)

[Wiki 1558]

Didn't enjoy it very much. I would say I had the same feeling as the one I had after BF3 campaign.

It's a good thing that there is a campaign, but not really fancied it.

Same for ArmA 1 and ArmA 2. OFP is still the best IMO.

That's why I make campaigns: to try to make what I wanted / expected in a campaign.

[j4you 10]

Who had loved ArmA II like me it's so hard that can find ArmA III ...better.

They are 2 complety different game concept where you must chose about to accept ArmA III as it is...or back to the preview ArmA II.

And Mods?...Mod it's nice for who love play in SP but for the MP gamer it's a nightmare, because you must continue to download dozens mods just for play in one server,and you begin again if you change in another one.

Just in case i am talking about this 2 titles in vanilla realase,because if we talking about Mods.... just ACE II + ACRE II pulverizes even the few improvements about ArmA III like:

Fatigue effect. (more realistic)

Balistic. (more complex)

Medical sistem. (more realistic)

Bipods...???...(ah...no yet in arma III sorry!)

sound. (...uff...another planet)

...what else?

ArmA III it's going to be a great mainstream title,where the compromise it's so evidence,but just whit better textures and some improvements dosent bring it as a worthy successor ArmA series....if you like the full Sim-Mil of course.

In this edition there are too many problems,too many variants,too many ideas and projects.....but if i think about what i get i feel so much about lack content to 360°!

I dont wont touch that argoment about 2035 age because ,if i must to be honest,i see that Uniforms--Choppers so ridicouls!

To go so far into the future brings not credibility to ArmA III,and frankly I did not feel the need,and because you can not call a thing realistic if you have not seen it in action,because otherwise even the Crysis nanosuite we can call it.. realistic!

...Who never know what will happen in the future ? :rolleyes:

For me ArmA III it's nice compromise if you wont come out from the classic arcade FPS like COD or BF,but if you wont a full immersion ArmA II it's still much better...as well all his problems ... but even ArmA III dosent joke about problems!

If this title was develop by another Software House then BIS, i could say, then it was a nice alternative to play whit ArmA II,,,,but just for a easy fun.... almost boring after 1000 Hrs that i've played it in MP!

CTI was my prefer mode and now it's become...so patetic and unless..a missed opportunity!!

Edited July 4, 2014 by j4you

[nodunit 397]

Why would I do that when it comparing vanilla games won't accurately represent the full potential of both games or how both games are generally played by communities.

My comparison is based on available features whether from mods or not and how one might achieve a smoother target experience from Arma 3.

Plus Bohemia's actions have shown they built their game with the intention to be used with mods as has been shown through their addition of mod tools, mod competition, and them taking a big mod (dayz) and making it a game, etc.

IF I were to compare vanilla games though, I would say both are disinteresting. I would rather play disinteresting with smoother movement than with clunky movement. =/

But if you compare Arma 2 vs Arma 3 based on addons and mods then Arma 2 wins hands down because it has a far more vast library of addons, mods, and other tools.

[froggyluv 2136]

Stills sucks in both games:

-AI

-Pathfinding

See I just don't get this. Arma 3 AI sucks and it's pathfinding?! Ok maybe your talking vehicles here but the infantry pathfinding (what i most care about) is nothing short of fantastic. Do people forget OFP when an AI couldn't enter a simple door? Do they forget "Can't get there" when stuck on a yard toy or 2 ft step in the early Arma's? When I see how the infantry can now navigate complex towns, yards, rocks etc and never hearing "Can't get there" all the while using corners and what not for cover. There simply just aren't any other games Ive seen that has that many pawns micromanaging terrain in a 3d world. Christ, I had an AI tell me "Can't get there" when 100m away in the desert of VBS2. Maybe we have different standards but I really get a kick out of Arma3's infantry pathfinding evolution.

As far as the rest, I'd take Arma 3 vanilla over fully modded Arma2. If I never see another corpse hanging by a toe 30ft overhead like a plank or falling to my death after a 3 foot drop I won't lose a wink of sleep.

[Spider 1]

How can you go through a single firefight in A2 next to that low brick/mud wall, and think in any way whatsoever that choosing between full prone, taking a full single knee, or fully standing as your only options is more immersive in any way what so ever than being able to realistically mold your body to cover with the multiple stances of A3.

How can you enjoy the unit movement of A2, which feels like driving a car that just looks like a man, is better than A3. How can you say A3 movement is more unrealistic than A2 when any half fit skinny person in real life can move with the same ease in acceleration and decelleration. And just because A3 makes a movement toward the non-clunky now makes it a candidate to compare it to Battlefield?

(1) With Smookie's A2 animation mod (and even better, Mao's lite version) you can duck down from standing and crouching positions. Plus it has a low sitting position that is way more natural than the A3 equivalent, the high prone.

The A3 stances are unrealistic because you can stay in them indefinitely. In the real world, those high/low crouch positions are uncomfortable and very tiring. I doubt it's any easier while carrying extra weight and aiming a rifle.

(2) If you watch A3 characters moving, they look like robots able to change stance, direction, and speed almost instantaneously.

that shows what I mean. People say that it 'feels' natural in 1st-person, but that can't be objectively true.

Arma is one of the few games with true-first-person (TFP) perspective, so what you see in 1st-person is what is happening. If your character is moving with superhuman ability, your sense of realistic movement must be off. That and BIS obviously butchered the animations so the A3 TFP could look more 'fluid' like Battlefield.

To put it another way, see how much

? They move like people carrying heavy equipment while avoiding over-exertion. More importantly they don't act as if always perfectly well-rested. That's what the A2 TFP shows you. BIS could have tweaked the settings and sped up a few transitions, but they got it more-or-less right.

If that feels extremely clunky, I think that's your problem. Not trying to be mean about it, that's just my opinion.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Spider

[mistyronin 1181]

If that feels extremely clunky, I think that's your problem. Not trying to be mean about it, that's just my opinion.

To me A2 movement in first person feels like when after a couple of days of military exercises, I was so sleep deprived and tired that I moved like a drunk zombie. While in A3 it feels like a normal day.

And the external movement in A2 it's really awful, probably made in a PC with weights, instead of motion capture sessions like in A3. I can promise that with a rifle or a machine gun you don't walk/run at all like in A2 ( unless you ar faking that you are a retarded sea lion ).

About keeping uncomfortable fire positions... You would be admired of how much a human body can bear, specially if your live is in danger ( adrenaline, and so on ).

[calin_banc 19]

See I just don't get this. Arma 3 AI sucks and it's pathfinding?! Ok maybe your talking vehicles here but the infantry pathfinding (what i most care about) is nothing short of fantastic. Do people forget OFP when an AI couldn't enter a simple door? Do they forget "Can't get there" when stuck on a yard toy or 2 ft step in the early Arma's? When I see how the infantry can now navigate complex towns, yards, rocks etc and never hearing "Can't get there" all the while using corners and what not for cover. There simply just aren't any other games Ive seen that has that many pawns micromanaging terrain in a 3d world. Christ, I had an AI tell me "Can't get there" when 100m away in the desert of VBS2. Maybe we have different standards but I really get a kick out of Arma3's infantry pathfinding evolution.

As far as the rest, I'd take Arma 3 vanilla over fully modded Arma2. If I never see another corpse hanging by a toe 30ft overhead like a plank or falling to my death after a 3 foot drop I won't lose a wink of sleep.

Of course player standards move ahead. More so when you order an AI to shot an he doesn't or he exposes himself like an idiot to the enemy; doesn't know how to rearm by himself or PROPERLY navigate the terrain from cover to cover; use nades; can't drive for sh!t etc. If you play small infantry it's relatively fine, but other then that it's just ArmA: doing a lot of stuff, but nothing particular well, quite the contrary.

[j4you 10]

To me A2 movement in first person feels like when after a couple of days of military exercises, I was so sleep deprived and tired that I moved like a drunk zombie. While in A3 it feels like a normal day.

I'd be curious to know what your job when you say:

..... While in A3 it feels like a normal day.

May be assistant for disable people?

And the external movement in A2 it's really awful, probably made in a PC with weights, instead of motion capture sessions like in A3. I can promise that with a rifle or a machine gun you don't walk/run at all like in A2 ( unless you ar faking that you are a retarded sea lion ).

To get this conviction i imagine that you have been in the special forces and then .... we can make sure right?

About keeping uncomfortable fire positions... You would be admired of how much a human body can bear, specially if your live is in danger ( adrenaline, and so on ).

You would be admired how much a human body can whitstand under tension and danger....but not so much as you think ,and especially not for a very long time ...otherwise you go under stress and you risk a fatal mistake!

I dont understand why you wont recall the reale action in a war zone whit this videogame....it's absurd and out of place!

Sitting in front of a monitor can not bring certain feelings, and therefore, they can only be played through the similarities likely.

There are many games where smoothness of motion is a thousand times better than this title,and the sensations that you feel is much more intuitive and less mechanical ....infact there is a long way for see it in ArmA III.

Edited July 4, 2014 by j4you

[mistyronin 1181]

I'd be curious to know what your job when you say:

..... While in A3 it feels like a normal day.

I was meaning when I was a professional soldier.

To get this conviction i imagine that you have been in the special forces and then .... we can make sure right?

Go back to the first answer.

You would be admired how much a human body can whitstand under tension and danger....but not so much as you think ,and especially not for a very long time ...otherwise you go under stress and you risk a fatal mistake!

I talked from my experience ( I'm pretty sure anyone with military experience can agree ). "you would go under stress and make a fatal mistake", yeah because after days of sleeping 6 hours or less, in a warzone, etc. a soldier would have no stress by default... and just keeping a firing position stress you a lot.

So for instance, when I prepared drill ceremonies, that I have to keep the same position for hours ( well I had some tricks like pushing a bit the rifle against me to make the body share the weight instead of the arm ), then I was supposed to be really stressed, and commit fatal mistakes?

I dont understand why you wont recall the reale action in a war zone whit this videogame....it's absurd and out of place!

What? This is a game that tries to "simulate" real soldiers for entertainment purposes. So it's quite a logic comparison.

[j4you 10]

And you will agree than ArmA III it's the more closed game about the authenticity ?

You right when you saied.....It's tried to "simulate"....but still i dont undertstand what!

Ah!...just in case...I was in Folgore Parachute Brigade when i was still young for 2 years,for to be exactly---> 9th Paratroopers Assault Regiment Col Moschin in Livorno, and i dont rember something similar about what i see in this....GAME!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9th_Parachute_Assault_Regiment

May be the future title age take a advance about the present and the past?

Edited July 4, 2014 by j4you

[mistyronin 1181]

And you will agree than ArmA III it's the more closed game about the authenticity ?

You right when you saied.....It's tried to "simulate"....but still i dont undertstand what!

The OFP / Arma series is know to recreate war ( within certain recreational limits ). Of course it's a game made to entertain, not a pure simulator, but it simulate certain aspects of it.

And besides the setting, and if you were in the Folgore Parachute Brigade, you'll agree with me that Arma 3 recreates certain things better than Arma 2 ( in movement and animation ), basically because in A2 it was made in a PC and A3 with motion capture. Also if you have been there, you should already know how long can soldiers maintain certain positions.

[j4you 10]

The OFP / Arma series is know to recreate war ( within certain recreational limits ). Of course it's a game made to entertain, not a pure simulator, but it simulate certain aspects of it.

And besides the setting, and if you were in the Folgore Parachute Brigade, you'll agree with me that Arma 3 recreates certain things better than Arma 2 ( in movement and animation ), basically because in A2 it was made in a PC and A3 with motion capture. Also if you have been there, you should already know how long can soldiers maintain certain positions.

I remember very well the grueling marches with equipment for a family with 4 children in Holidays time.

And I admit that BIS have made some correction of equipment to improve certain mechanisms.

But if i must say that ArmA III it's what i wanted to see after ArmA II .... I'm sorry but for me it's a "still" a disappointment!

PS.

For still it's mind after 11 mouths later the his coming out realase.....or patch vers. 1.22 + fix ! :)

Let's say I do not recognize myself with this armament and veicols....etc..etc, and then i see it a little bit less immersive and believable.

It's true that i am not more a young boy...but that dosent mind then i come from of the WW II!

Regard

Edited July 4, 2014 by j4you

[mistyronin 1181]

For still it's mind after 11 mouths later the his coming out realase.....or patch vers. 1.22 + fix ! :)

Let's say I do not recognize myself with this armament and veicols....etc..etc, and then i see it a little bit less immersive and believable.

I agree 100% with you that the new setting was disappointing ( and still is for me ), even if I have now some mods that more or less correct certain aspects. I strongly hate it. And although I think that I understand part of the logic of it, to me it is a treason to all the past iterations of the series.

In fact, the only part that I use from the vanilla game is the AAF side, because it can still make some sense ( it could happen in the actuality that a country could have more or less that resources ).

But said that, I must recognize that in the animation, lightning, and increase of other features, A3 is a big step forward in the series.

Conclusion, IMHO A3 has a way better "engine/base" for gaming, but only to use it with mods, as the vanilla sides/setting are awful.

[j4you 10]

I agree 100% with you that the new setting was disappointing ( and still is for me ), even if I have now some mods that more or less correct certain aspects. I strongly hate it. And although I think that I understand part of the logic of it, to me it is a treason to all the past iterations of the series.

In fact, the only part that I use from the vanilla game is the AAF side, because it can still make some sense ( it could happen in the actuality that a country could have more or less that resources ).

But said that, I must recognize that in the animation, lightning, and increase of other features, A3 is a big step forward in the series.

Conclusion, IMHO A3 has a way better "engine/base" for gaming, but only to use it with mods, as the vanilla sides/setting are awful.

In this way i agree whit you to 100%....you can customer ArmA III and you will get in one shot 2 kills,but the problems are always that public servers and so many variant about mods.

And if you play to default title there are so many servers then ridicule this game with the settings to shame,just for keep enjoy the users friendly, without giving spirit that distinguishes this title from an arcade.

The only my hope it's to wait for a expansion,a nice expansion like OA, and if it happen,i am sure then so many veteran will back to play this title whitout problems...with the peace of all old gamers!

Edited July 4, 2014 by j4you

[mistyronin 1181]

The only my hope it's to wait for a expansion,a nice expansion like OA, and if it happen,i am sure then so many veteran will back to play this title whitout problems...with the peace of all old gamers!

That would be really awesome, but I don't thing it's probable. BUT once RHS release their Russian & US armies mod, I think that could compensate a lot and become some kind of standard for those who love the "true spirit" of the OFP/Arma series.

[x3kj 1247]

One thing in A3 is definitely worse: sound, by a big margin. Not the samples themself but the implementation (surround sound, volume levels, etc). I dont understand why BIS doesnt do anything about it...

Tried A2 again after a long time - no way i'm going back to it again xD The horrid clumsy movement is unbearable.

[-=seany=- 5]

Yep, I've said it loads but, until I hear someone is actually seriously working on trying to fix it, I'll keep saying...

Sound Engine sucks compared to Arma2/oa. Fire fights are confusing/environment/3d sound space/occlusion and all similar sound engine features you would expect to be as good as Arma2, or better, are far worse in arma3. The samples themselves are good, but the way they are played is bad.

Tracked and Wheeled Vehicle Physics. The have so much potential to be better with the new Physx. But they just arnt. Most vehicles have some comical handling characteristic that just look and feel bad. Tracked vehicles are totally uninspiring to drive and don't come close to Arma2's (supposedly) inferior technology. Vehicle physics in Arma3 are of the sort of quality I would expect for a 1st release of an average community mod. I guess they might be working on fixing it, but it seems pretty low on their list atm.....Sucks...same with sound.

In most other areas Arma3 is much more enjoyable to play. Hands down, by far the best feature of it is the new terrain and graphics engine. It really is a nice environment to play in....that's all the cookies your getting today BIS :P

[Spider 1]

To me A2 movement in first person feels like when after a couple of days of military exercises, I was so sleep deprived and tired that I moved like a drunk zombie. While in A3 it feels like a normal day.

And the external movement in A2 it's really awful, probably made in a PC with weights, instead of motion capture sessions like in A3.

As I see it, animations for changing stance, side-stepping, stepping-off, and turning are the same no matter if they're for an un-fatigued civilian walking around or a tired soldier carrying a rifle + an ATGM launcher. So it not's about how fast someone can move but how often they would do it.

In A2 these were kept slow to better simulate when your character is (a) weighed down or (b) not trying to move as fast as possible. Now in A3 animations are always fast, twitchy and lacking any inertia.

What we need is an animation system that is controlled by fatigue, encumbrance, suppression, and inertia. A3 is no closer to that than A2 was.

[j4you 10]

As I see it, animations for changing stance, side-stepping, stepping-off, and turning are the same no matter if they're for an un-fatigued civilian walking around or a tired soldier carrying a rifle + an ATGM launcher. So it not's about how fast someone can move but how often they would do it.

In A2 these were kept slow to better simulate when your character is (a) weighed down or (b) not trying to move as fast as possible. Now in A3 animations are always fast, twitchy and lacking any inertia.

What we need is an animation system that is controlled by fatigue, encumbrance, suppression, and inertia. A3 is no closer to that than A2 was.

I agree but you know that just for fix a little thing here we wait for so many mouths,so if BIS will made a list of things to do and ask about in which priority about that improvements......fatigue effect more credible, and better smooth animation, would be the frist one for me.

The third one i wanted to mention it's wounded effect,because it's unacceptable to see somebody after to being hit,for example to the leg......he can still run like a happy gazelle!

And if you remember well this was already operating in default ArmA II !

But i know that i am talking about miracles..it's will be more easy to see come out a Watercraft DLC..free of course!:rolleyes:

Edited July 5, 2014 by j4you

[13islucky 10]

The third one i wanted to mention it's wounded effect,because it's unacceptable to see somebody after to being hit,for example to the leg......he can still run like a happy gazelle!

And if you remember well this was already operating in default ArmA II !

I agree with what you say, but I'd like to say that this isn't true. In default ArmA 3 being shot in the legs affects you quite badly. Sometimes you get into a forced walk and can't run until you heal, and sometimes there seems to be no effect, which is a bit inconsistent. Not impossible, but inconsistent.

Also, being shot in the arms also really increases sway, which I think is a pretty big penalty.

[-Coulum- 35]

With new sway system in dev branch, you really, really don't want to get hit in the arms. There is a massive accuracy penalty. I would say even more so than in arma 2.

[laverniusregalis 10]

I really want to like ArmA 2 more, but I just can't stand the blandness of how it looks, the terrible animations, and how robotic soldiers feel. I can actually do something in 3, but in 2 I feel like I'm disabled somehow all the time.