ArmA reviews

[Scrub 0]

Just a bad frame to capture on. In video editing, gotta be careful, as every second or so when people are talking there's ALWAYS a frame or two that's embarassing to stop on. (just look at any political mags, the pictures of their rivals almost always look bad)

[NeMeSiS 11]

http://www.gamezone.cz/articles/show/16963/

(In Czech, 4/5, good new screens and a video, tested on a "1800 Mhz, 512 MB ram, ATI 9600 128 MB""(Which i kinda guessed, i cant read Czech))

EDIT: Link fixed

[Heatseeker 0]

...tested on a "1800 Mhz, 512 MB ram, ATI 9600 128 MB""(Which i kinda guessed, i cant read Czech))

In those settings it looks like GTA lol...

http://o.gamezone.cz/news/16963/t_arma1.jpg

but it works with older video cards atleast

.

[NeMeSiS 11]

...tested on a "1800 Mhz, 512 MB ram, ATI 9600 128 MB""(Which i kinda guessed, i cant read Czech))

In those settings it looks like GTA lol...

http://o.gamezone.cz/news/16963/t_arma1.jpg

but it works with older video cards atleast

.

Seems to be some of those weird texture bugs (Check the road, very close to the camera its all blury, while a bit further away its sharper..), all the other pics look better IMO

[anders^on 0]

Another review: 86% and an award

http://armed-assault.net/

[imported_bör 0]

I just read that german magazine PC Powerplay rated it 76%.

graphics 8

sound 9

controls 5

atmosphere 7

multi 7

"battlefield atmosphere"

[shataan 1]

Be nice when we can just read some English reviews. lol Damn Euros. They got Il Sturmovichs goodness. And now AA.

[esti_the_big 0]

I just read that german magazine PC Powerplay rated it 76%.

graphics 8

sound 9

controls 5

atmosphere 7

multi 7

"battlefield atmosphere"

I guess thats a fair review from the mag especially since they're not reviewing as hardcore ofp fans but as neutral testers. Course I hope some mags will give higher ratings (the german gamestar mag had pretty positive first reactions from testers till now and gamestars the best selling mag in europe I think)...

[Scrub 0]

Yeah! No fair! The US gets the greedy, bling whore developers/pubs and you get the ones that actually care.

(can we trade?)

I'm wondering, just like OFP, if ArmA will be climbing up the reviewers charts as it evolves through patches? Can't wait to see. 89% and an award ain't bad though

[imported_bör 0]

I just read that german magazine PC Powerplay rated it 76%.

graphics 8

sound 9

controls 5

atmosphere 7

multi 7

"battlefield atmosphere"

I've got info on the pro and contra of PCPP's test:

+ grandiose Schlachfeld-Atmosphäre

+ Vielzahl an Waffen und Fahrzeugen

+ riesige, detaillierte Spielwelt

+ viele Möglichkeiten zur Squad-Kontrolle

+ mächtiger Missionseditor

+ von Grund auf mod-freundlich

+ abwechslungsreiche Kampagne

+ KI-Soldaten, die zwar alles können...

- ...aber nicht so richtig gut

- unnötig umständliche Vehikel-Lenkung

- schwammige Steuerung

- anonyme Soldaten statt Bezugspersonen

- für Einsteiger zu schwierig

- vieles unfertig (Texte, Missionen, Physik)

+ terrific battlefield atmosphere

+ heaps of weapons and vehicles

+ huge detailed environment

+ lots of possibilities to control your squad

+ a mighty editor

+ modfriendly

+ a diversified campaign

+ AI soldiers that can do everything...

- ... but nothing really well

- vehicle control is unnecessarily complicated

- the controls are too cumbersome

- anonymous soldiers rather than individuals

- too difficult for newbies

- a lot of unfinished things (texts, missions, physics)

[Hammer Schultz 0]

- vehicle control is unnecessarily complicated

- too difficult for newbies

Hmmm...Am I the only one who sees those as positives??

[dmitri 0]

+ terrific battlefield atmosphere

+ heaps of weapons and vehicles

+ huge detailed environment

+ lots of possibilities to control your squad

+ a mighty editor

+ modfriendly

+ a diversified campaign

+ AI soldiers that can do everything...

- ... but nothing really well

- vehicle control is unnecessarily complicated

- the controls are too cumbersome

- anonymous soldiers rather than individuals

- too difficult for newbies

- a lot of unfinished things (texts, missions, physics)

Reminds me of the reviews OFP received "back in the day".

[KingC 0]

- vehicle control is unnecessarily complicated

- too difficult for newbies

Hmmm...Am I the only one who sees those as positives??

Not if they add to the depth, realism and functionality of the game, as they'll likely do.

I'd like to add this also to the not necessarily negative things

Quote[/b] ]- anonymous soldiers rather than individuals

[imported_bör 0]

- vehicle control is unnecessarily complicated

- too difficult for newbies

Hmmm...Am I the only one who sees those as positives??

Not if they add to the depth, realism and functionality of the game, as they'll likely do.

I'd like to add this also to the not necessarily negative things

Quote[/b] ]- anonymous soldiers rather than individuals

Maybe I misinterpreted: They say it's negative that you don't have individual characters no more like in OFP, but rather anonymous soldiers.

[esti_the_big 0]

the thing with having anonymous soldiers was already criticised in a czech review. Guess they had to sacrifice individual character development for having the possibility of changing character ingame. But having a central character is what made the ofp an Resistance campaigns so powerful and immersive (apart from the actual gameplay ). MAybe we'll get to see a campaign with "classic" bis-storytelling in an addon like resistance...

[madrussian 347]

- vehicle control is unnecessarily complicated

- too difficult for newbies

Hmmm...Am I the only one who sees those as positives??

I'm with ya.  

Add in the one about the controls being too cumbersome in general.  Realistic controls by their very nature will offend most "mainstream" gamers.  

And that's why God (err... BIS) made OFP and now ArmA!

[jantenner 0]

realistic controls are not cumbersome, they are dead easy and simple as can be to provide the soldier with an effective weapon.. duh

[frederf 0]

If I am good at flying in ArmA in the first five minutes. I will be disappointed.

In a proper game it should take a few weeks to get good at it, not 5 minutes. If it's "easy out of the box" that just means boredom down the road as you plateau your skill so early.

[shataan 1]

Ease of play usually means they have made the game for.... kiddies. I sure hope just about everything requires some semblemce of time spent in the fireld, and skill.

I don`t mind being an anonymous soldier btw. It allows me to immerse faster. If I am playing a character, I find it hard to get into the game as much. Not into long badly written overdone game stories either.

Just give my my acog mounted M4, and a mission please.

[Scrub 0]

If I am good at flying in ArmA in the first five minutes. I will be disappointed.

In a proper game it should take a few weeks to get good at it, not 5 minutes. If it's "easy out of the box" that just means boredom down the road as you plateau your skill so early.

Totally agree. I remember about 15-20 years ago (when Apaches first were introduced) There was a joke about a Georgia TI complaining about the new WOs hovering ability. He said "I gave up telling them 'liftoff and acend to 50 feet, hover over the pad.' I now tell them to 'at least stay in the same damn state'" Copters (aircraft in general) require a great amount of skill. I'd like to have some of that in ArmA.

[m@ster 0]

New review by www.doupe.cz

http://www.doupe.cz/h/PChry/AR.asp?ARI=115269

7.8 from 10

[EiZei 0]

New review by www.doupe.cz

http://www.doupe.cz/h/PChry/AR.asp?ARI=115269

7.8 from 10

Dont want to join the self-deceptive fanboy choir but they actually tested it with a XP 1600+, 768MB of ram and a "128MB graphics adapter"?

[frederf 0]

If I am good at flying in ArmA in the first five minutes. I will be disappointed.

In a proper game it should take a few weeks to get good at it, not 5 minutes. If it's "easy out of the box" that just means boredom down the road as you plateau your skill so early.

Totally agree. I remember about 15-20 years ago (when Apaches first were introduced) There was a joke about a Georgia TI complaining about the new WOs hovering ability. He said "I gave up telling them 'liftoff and acend to 50 feet, hover over the pad.' I now tell them to 'at least stay in the same damn state'" Copters (aircraft in general) require a great amount of skill. I'd like to have some of that in ArmA.

I'd like to amend my previous sentiment. Good games are:

1. Able to play it maybe-ok-kinda-good in 5 minutes.

1. Takes forever and a day to truely "master."

[bella1 0]

The artillery seems a bit week

[Shadak 0]

New review by www.doupe.cz

http://www.doupe.cz/h/PChry/AR.asp?ARI=115269

7.8 from 10

Considering the "cons" arguments at the end of the review... Im not troubled by "relatively low" marks. He basicaly says this -

cons:

* AI (i dont think its that bad)

* Difficulity (you normally dont go shooting peeps in RL either - its supposed to be "realistic")

* Massive HW requirements (no comment... testing on XP1600+ ?)

* Nothing new comparing to OFP

* Bad aircraft control (maybe too difficult for him? )

Sorry for flaming but i just dont like the reviewer's attitude.