Jona33 51 Posted September 30, 2014 A3 all the way, although Chernarus was probably one of the best maps (Chernarus to A3 standards would be damn cool) I was never hugely impressed with Takistan (technologically I'm sure it was great, maybe I'm just not a fan of the desert.:D). I like the whole future setting as well, it's still believable but something different. The M4 has been in literally every military game in recent years, and it's not even that cool! I'm not too fussed about content in A3, I think we've got enough but content is probably the easiest thing for the community (and damn do they do it well) to do rather than making major changes to the game. The AI voice acting is also so much better, as an SP guy that really matters to me and it's much better than the generic robots that were in A2. Certainly for SP (where stability is just fine) I think A3 is better. Steam workshop for missions is also fantastic, makes it so much simpler (though perusing Armaholic is always worth it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VanZant 48 Posted September 30, 2014 A3 definitely has better base, a lot of potential, and many technical improvements, but an extremely slow development, a predictably disappointing, expensive and short DLC's, the huge lack of content, too high dependence on mods for a decent game, and especially for me, the lack of the charisma that A2 has, has made me to lost the interest in the game. In short terms, for me A3 could be better than A2, but not for now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistyronin 1181 Posted September 30, 2014 Hahaha. Yeah I liked arma 1. It was great for a brand new franchise however the graphics scared me a little but the performances were amazing and great FPS. Arma 1 was the second game of the series. If its graphics scared you I don't wanna know what would you think about OFP. BTW OFP was, and still is quite an awesome game with still the best story of the series with OFP:R ( but the graphics are really outdated ). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrHuachuca 10 Posted October 1, 2014 Oh it was? I never even heard of OFP. I'll have to try it out sometime. Thanks for informing me! Arma 1 was the second game of the series. If its graphics scared you I don't wanna know what would you think about OFP.BTW OFP was, and still is quite an awesome game with still the best story of the series with OFP:R ( but the graphics are really outdated ). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slatts 1978 Posted October 1, 2014 Oh it was? I never even heard of OFP. Only for the fact your were born around the time it came out. You'd be hang drawn and quartered for saying that here :p /jk Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mistyronin 1181 Posted October 1, 2014 Only for the fact your were born around the time it came out. I'm now feeling really old hahahaha ( I bought OFP the day it was released and I was already an adult at that time :butbut: ) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
papanowel 120 Posted October 1, 2014 OFP is my choice, because I started from there and have great memories about some mods (BAS, OFrP) and missions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ProfTournesol 956 Posted October 1, 2014 OFP is my choice, because I started from there and have great memories about some mods (BAS, OFrP) and missions. Indeed. I still enjoy it a lot (doesn't look that bad with correct addons and settings), in fact i play it more than ArmA3, go figure... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Defunkt 431 Posted October 1, 2014 I want A2's content on A3's engine and I think it's short-sighted of BI to not be more proactive in supporting the community's porting of said content (ponds, infinite terrain, legacy physics simulation etc.). I've no doubt it would drive sales appreciably and better now than a year or two down the road when people will expect to pay less. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrHuachuca 10 Posted October 2, 2014 I agree with A2's content with the modern day military equipment and I agree on more terrain ideas like ponds, rivers, cliffs, etc. However the more content a3 will have the more it will be.......... (most likely) I want A2's content on A3's engine and I think it's short-sighted of BI to not be more proactive in supporting the community's porting of said content (ponds, infinite terrain, legacy physics simulation etc.). I've no doubt it would drive sales appreciably and better now than a year or two down the road when people will expect to pay less. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrHuachuca 10 Posted October 2, 2014 I wanted to ask.....on all this impact of the 2 helicopters DLC's coming November. Would you want them in Arma 2 or stay in Arma 3? Comment below! :o Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Variable 322 Posted October 3, 2014 I don't want to expand myself much so:I prefer Arma 3 with mods ( RHS Escalation, VTN, FFAA, East vs West, etc. ). This, in addition to CUP, because the biggest lack of Arma 3 is content, and with CUP we will have all Arma 2's content in Arma 3. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teilx 4 Posted October 6, 2014 (edited) OPF and A2(voted) are enjoying .......A3 is a hell of trail and error and the worst release. Can I ask.... no, it doesn't matter :D Edited October 6, 2014 by TeilX Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bouben 3 Posted October 6, 2014 OPF and A2(voted) are enjoying .......A3 is a hell of trail and error and the worst release. Can I ask when have you played Arma 3 for the last time? Thank you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Polygon 11 Posted October 6, 2014 A3, no doubt. A2 had some weird default character anims, FOVs (right-click mouse, etc.). Many interesting decisions in terms of gameplay, UI, etc. Interesting isn't always good and welcome. In A3 tanks at least doesn't fully stop (~0 MPH) then they hit a mere tree. Sure, armor gameplay can always be so much better with tank interiors, Physx realistic building destruction and proper armor collision simulation on various materials & structures. We can only dream of a better future and hopefully A3 devs will never lose their passion and inspiration. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dav 22 Posted October 7, 2014 I love the real weapons & vehicles and prefer the character models of Arma 2. Arma 2 has a more heavy feel to movement which I also prefer. I get better performance from Arma 2. Put about 400 hours into each. I think the Arma 3 unknown weapons and vehicles is an immersion breaker. I also prefer the corpses and medical system in Arma 2. Arma 3 is a step back in hindsight. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Night 1 Posted October 9, 2014 As a game Arma 2 is more friendly. As a proof of concept, Arma 3 is cool, but there is just so much that needs to be cleaned up. Its practically still in beta. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iceman77 18 Posted October 10, 2014 For me it's A3 all the way since it offers more overall functionality and possibilities. Especially in regards to the available functions and commands for the mission maker. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KeyCat 131 Posted October 10, 2014 Visual- I honestly think Arma 3 is leagues better simply because of its HDR, (that is not to say I don't love the sharp textures and new shaders) no more headache or annoying forcing of a dark scene to become bright and the other way around. Stances/movement along with the above is two major things that makes it hard to go back to A2 for me, just wished we had all the assets from A2 but they may eventually come... /KC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rich_R 1087 Posted October 10, 2014 Arma 3 went above and beyond for the next generation of this awesome series. Everything just feels better and as much as I loved Arma 2, I boot it up less and less. Do agree however, that the game needs more assets, but here's the thing. Personally, I wasn't around from day one of Arma 2, joining the series at the release of Arrowhead, so this has been my question; how long did it take for all the assets we were enjoying to make it into the game. If it was 18 months from the release of Arma 2 (not arrowhead) we could be on the same schedule for Arma 3. The number of assets available for this game a growing nicely everyweek with mod packs going into the multiple GB sizes. BI is certainly spurring this on with the contest and think we could be looking at whole new game this time next year :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrHuachuca 10 Posted October 14, 2014 That is true. You have a great point there :confused: Arma 3 went above and beyond for the next generation of this awesome series. Everything just feels better and as much as I loved Arma 2, I boot it up less and less. Do agree however, that the game needs more assets, but here's the thing. Personally, I wasn't around from day one of Arma 2, joining the series at the release of Arrowhead, so this has been my question; how long did it take for all the assets we were enjoying to make it into the game. If it was 18 months from the release of Arma 2 (not arrowhead) we could be on the same schedule for Arma 3.The number of assets available for this game a growing nicely everyweek with mod packs going into the multiple GB sizes. BI is certainly spurring this on with the contest and think we could be looking at whole new game this time next year :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eVCySkul378488Ve 10 Posted October 14, 2014 Personally i love arma 3 once you get a few mods like the f-18 and the m4. Both are still great though. Arma 2 is great because of ACE which i hope will come to Arma 3 shortly Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tortuosit 485 Posted October 15, 2014 Too much stuff in Arma 3 I do not want to miss. Currently it is Zeus, MCC and its GAIA AI which I use heavily even in my SP environment. If there weren't dependencies of Arma 2 stuff and assets, I'd even consider to remove it. Watched a video which is from a Zeus perspective the other day and was pretty impressed. How could we live without all those possibilities? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ruPal 143 Posted October 16, 2014 We don't have Arma 3, we have Arma 2.5. Arma 3 is the same as Arma 2 but with new textures, possibilities, bugs and less performance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
devilslayersbane 28 Posted October 16, 2014 We don't have Arma 3, we have Arma 2.5. Arma 3 is the same as Arma 2 but with new textures, possibilities, bugs and less performance. By your logic, all we really have is OFP 1.4. I disagree entirely. I just can't play arma 2 anymore. You can tell that everything in Arma 3, whether or not you like it, was crafted specifically for that game. Arma 3 is not just a facelift for arma 2. Only a few assets from arma 2 made it into arma 3, where as a lot of A1 content made it into A2. If anything, A2 was really Arma 1.5 and Arma 3 is Arma 2. There are just too many engine improvements that factor in. And tbh, the only time I don't get better performance from A3 is when I'm playing single player. Multiplayer is smooth as hell for me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites