Latest screenshots available

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Ok, hold on, just because we don't see multiple gunner positions doesn't mean that it isn't possible with the new engine. Let's just hope that BIS didn't include multiple weapons on their vehicles but the possability to add them is there, I mean if BIS went screwing with the nature of their vehicles, they would have to redo most (if not all) of the missions in the old campaigns, which we were told would be included.

[orange juice 0]

...with an emphasis on "hope".

[ag_smith 0]

I won't repeat what other already said... I also hope they're gonna get the scaling of vehicles (BMP!! right this time.

[Heatseeker 0]

@Heartseeker

Do you expect nukes every minute so that all buildings collaps at ones?

And I guess there won't be 1000 buildings either.

So there are no performance issues if there is a fight between two squads...

The DDS we saw in that VBS video was quiet fine in my opinion, wh don't use it?

No, thats another reason why i dont see the huge effort and HW resource usage being justified, people want DIB just like they want that new, shiny addon or to blow up the bridge in Nogova, after they blow up some buildings in the editor they wont care about it so much.

About the 1000 buildings we dont know, but i read something about BIS doing has large of a city has possible so i wouldnt rule it out.

The DDS in the VBS video was scripted and not dynamic, the efect was hidden by a large cloud of smoke , i am not a scripter or addon maker but i can easily imagine how it was done and even if it was built in the game code and done properly at a big scale it would be alot of work.

If walls provide realistic cover, the colision issues are fixed and the damage model is better i'll be happy to wait for dib in Game2 .

[Gux 0]

Ok, hold on, just because we don't see multiple gunner positions doesn't mean that it isn't possible with the new engine.

That's what I'm thinking. Multiple gun positions is a design decision and there are probably some very good reasons to not retrofit units used in the original campaigns. Imagine how much they have had to test the game with the features they've added since OFP:E.

[Scarlet_Pimp 0]

you can't seriously belive that they couldn't add the multiple gunners to the blackhawk because it would affect the original campaign. Think about it the blak hawk never used it's guns in the campaign anyway. Plus thay ae updating the campiagn's shouldn't take that long to balance missions out with a coupleof extra guns, they've had plenty of time. I just hope they don't spend too much time on Armed Assault since game 2 is what we really want.

[NKVD 0]

nice screens! I hope BH is as powerful as in BF

[StealthTiger 0]

I like the fireball/flames in the explosions on this picture:

LARGE.

Presumably that's the T-72 behind..

[Gux 0]

you can't seriously belive that they couldn't add the multiple gunners to the blackhawk because it would affect the original campaign.

No, I think they decided to ditch it because they had a good reason.

Quote[/b] ]Plus thay ae updating the campiagn's shouldn't take that long to balance missions out with a coupleof extra guns, they've had plenty of time.

I think you're underestimating how complex things can get and how much time it adds in testing by "adding a couple of guns".

But what do we know? We can only speculate and have silly arguments with each other.

[guyguy1 0]

Wow is it just me or did stealthtiger find new screenshots? It says on the page that it was updated 2.11.06, so i guess it was updated earlier today. Yay, new screenshots!!! (i think). ArmA Screenshots- new ones i think

Edit: nvm they aren't new..

Anyways..I think that the vehicles and terrain are very well done, but I think that they can be better and hope that we can get some seriously high-res textures as an option in the video settings menu.

[ziiip 1]

I like the fireball/flames in the explosions on this picture:

http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f185/ODB_StealthTiger/c_small.jpg

LARGE.

Presumably that's the T-72 behind..

What the heck? I've never seen this pic before!

[VerySolidSnake 0]

I mean if BIS went screwing with the nature of their vehicles, they would have to redo most (if not all) of the missions in the old campaigns, which we were told would be included.

Woah woah woah wait a second, this is news to me. Does this mean they are redoing the original islands like Everon!?

[ryankaplan 1]

yes, from what i know. i suspect it'll be model and texture changes, not repositioning of anything.

that's the biggest load of bullshit reason i heard for not including multiple gunners. All that would change in the game(original campaigns) would be the tanks would have an extra mg gunner, if the commander feels brave enough. All the other vehicles don't have extra guns anyway.

If they don't have that and also not even have the possibility of having that with addons, then they might as well delay the game until 2010, or whenever they can manage to get it done by.

[NeMeSiS 11]

I mean if BIS went screwing with the nature of their vehicles, they would have to redo most (if not all) of the missions in the old campaigns, which we were told would be included.

Woah woah woah wait a second, this is news to me. Does this mean they are redoing the original islands like Everon!?

Yes, As far as we now they include only 1 new island (bigger then the others combined though )

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Hmm.. No multiple gunner positions so far.. Sure, these are just Alpha screenies, but if multiple gunner positions won't be possible in ArmA it could only mean one of two things; Either BIS are "incompetent" or either they're just ignorant. I guees we just have to hope for the best.

[gonk 0]

Hmm.. No multiple gunner positions so far.. Sure, these are just Alpha screenies, but if multiple gunner positions won't be possible in ArmA it could only mean one of two things; Either BIS are "incompetent" or either they're just ignorant. I guees we just have to hope for the best.

Chill... This is how to get this post locked.  AA is only supposed to be a tweak, so there will still be a few original limitations.  As for multiple gunner positions... I see in VBS1 you can walk around inside a vehicle.  If this is possible with AA then you should be able to return fire with the weapon you are carrying... That feature will do me just fine....but then again assumption is the mother of all stuff ups...

Time will tell...

Now back on topic... Great screenies... Please sir can I have a little more.. ;-)

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Hmm.. No multiple gunner positions so far.. Sure, these are just Alpha screenies, but if multiple gunner positions won't be possible in ArmA it could only mean one of two things; Either BIS are "incompetent" or either they're just ignorant. I guees we just have to hope for the best.

Chill... This is how to get this post locked. AA is only supposed to be a tweak, so there will still be a few original limitations. As for multiple gunner positions... I see in VBS1 you can walk around inside a vehicle. If this is possible with AA then you should be able to return fire with the weapon you are carrying... That feature will do me just fine....but then again assumption is the mother of all stuff ups...

Time will tell...

Now back on topic... Great screenies... Please sir can I have a little more.. ;-)

I'm just giving some constructive critisism. I don't think I will get this topic locked by hinting out things that BIS should improve. Or at least I hope so. I think it could be pretty healthy for them to have some kind of pressure on themselfs from the fans.

[Sniperwolf572 758]

What I don't understand is why do we have to beg for these features? They are supposed to be the standard by now, if EA and many other games and companies can do it (Multi-gunner and walking on moving vehicles) I don't see why it should be so difficult for BIS, and if they already implemented it in VBS1, I don't see the point in keeping it VBS1 only feature. Maybe to get more profit from people who are tricked by "Military simulator" tag and overpriced product witch sells under that label?

I wont get into the fight about this, but that is my opinion, and if I could make a better game, then I would, but since I can't, I will shut up because I already know what next VBS1 owner will say when he sees my post.

[advocatexxx 0]

I don't see why some of you are so preoccupied with these little inane details (multiple gunner positions, etc.). I mean grow up, seriously. I check the website from time to time, and when I do I'm happy to see whatever progress there is. I certainly don't stress out or get mad when there is no official "update" in a given month; Nor do I lash out insults at BIS for keeping fans in the dark. Seriously, some of you need a new hobby, and quit refreshing the ArmA web site day after day. That's usually the first stage of a obsessive compulsive disorder.

What surprises me is the overall immaturity herein. It certainly goes without saying that any hardcore fan will over-analyze and dissect every single screenshot, every press release, and surely every word that a BIS team member may mention about the game, but let's keep this juvenile bickering in Counter Strike forums. And please, stop speculating and forming elusive facts about the game and its features based on alpha-stage screenshots.

[Scrub 0]

Well, as for pressure and desires, they have years of it from all these topics. As for 'constructive' criticism, being called incompetent or ignorant is a bit of a slap in the face based on what we have already recieved. And as for the images, ah, already mentioned.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

yes, from what i know. i suspect it'll be model and texture changes, not repositioning of anything.

that's the biggest load of bullshit reason i heard for not including multiple gunners. All that would change in the game(original campaigns) would be the tanks would have an extra mg gunner, if the commander feels brave enough. All the other vehicles don't have extra guns anyway.

If they don't have that and also not even have the possibility of having that with addons, then they might as well delay the game until 2010, or whenever they can manage to get it done by.

Let me propose an idea. If multiple gunner positions are possible, and BIS put a machinegun on top of all of their tanks for the commander to use, it STILL wouldn't work. The commander would have to be switched to a gunner, and second, the way the engine currently works he would A) still be able to use the weapon while turned in, B) only be able to aim the weapon in 3rd person view while turned out, and C) have no optics/sights view while turned out. And, this is all assuming that the new code would allow for one turret as part of another. Do you realize how much work it would be to accopmlish this? It might require extreme modification to the engine, which would delay the game even more.

Second, if BIS puts multiple guns on their helicopters, the only candidate would be the MG blackhawk, because putting them on any others would require major model changes.

And even if none of this is true, then this is; if BIS doesn't put multiple gunner positions in ArmA, then they have a GOOD reason for it. If they simply can't do it, then it's not going to happen. They aren't magicians, they have to work with what they can.

I mean, if I was angry because I wanted you to pull a rabbit out of your butt, wouldn't you just laugh and say "I'd like to see you try it?"

I am more than happy with BIS's outstanding work, and I don't think even a whole planet made out of gold could repay them for it.

[rundll.exe 12]

edit: somehow the trees have no shadows and every object seems to be lluminated correctly except the vegetation(?)...don't wanna bitch, but its just eye-catching...

And why does the BMP turret have no shadow? Thats really disappointing... All those 'minor' things can be a pain in the ass later I think..

[brataccas 0]

And why does the BMP turret have no shadow? Thats really disappointing... All those 'minor' things can be a pain in the ass later I think..

its still WIP remember

[Sniperwolf572 758]

I understand what you are trying to say Kyle, but if it is already possible with VBS1 with a simple patch, I don't see why it shouldn't be possible even in OFP with a patch. But they stopped the OFP support long time ago and nobody expected them to add that.

They are making a whole new game here, it's not simple OFP extension as it used to be, if they are capable of editing the engine to allow for such a nice graphics, I can't possibly think that adding extra gunners and MiV is THAT hard, altough since I don't know s** about how it's done, I could be wrong.

[Gux 0]

What surprises me is the overall immaturity herein. It certainly goes without saying that any hardcore fan will over-analyze and dissect every single screenshot, every press release, and surely every word that a BIS team member may mention about the game, but let's keep this juvenile bickering in Counter Strike forums. And please, stop speculating and forming elusive facts about the game and its features based on alpha-stage screenshots.

Quoted for truth. It's like a syndrome that arises only on game messageboards. "Gimme gimme" mentality coupled with the inability to think rationally. You really don't have to be into game development to understand that you can't tack on features that weren't in the design in the first place(most likely for a very good reason) just because you want it.

Btw BIS, if you're listening; I want pink unicorns with amraam's attached and also the commander of the unicorn should have a gun that shoots lasers sideways and there should be funky music in the radio with 50 stations with djs like gta and it should be an rpg game with swords and everything has shadows thx.