First ARMA impressions

[charliereddog 9]

Quote[/b] ]Sgt_Eversmann Posted on Nov. 27 2006,12:02

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote (Charliereddog @ Nov. 27 2006,11:58)

1) Which is better (at this time) ArmA, or OFP(with your choice of mods/addons)

completely sensless.

you could compare OFP V1.0 and ArmA V1.0 but not ArmA V1.0 and OFP V1.96...and you cannot compare any game with all the mods & addons available for OFP

Sorry, I don't agree. Its 5 years on since OFP v1. That should mean something in terms of progress. Secondly, the above choice is the one each and every one of us is presented AT this time when considering whether it's worth buying.

[OIK 0]

Have we heard anyhing about BIS working on a patch?

I would feel much better if they announced a patch officially.

There are a lot of bugs and dissapointment about the game and im sure BIS couldnt make everyone happy with all these issues.

However the game could turn good if patches are been worked on by BIS.

[RedStorm 0]

For me OFP 1,96 with all the best mods, FFUR, FDF, I44, all the effects packs does NOT compete with ArmA's feeling. There's a reason all these mods are moving on to ArmA. It is simply MUCH, MUCH better.

I think the main problem what we see here is what you get with many games. A new one gets released and people afraid or apprehensive of moving on will always swear by the old, however good the new is. Nostalgia is what is making most people here say OFP is somehow better than ArmA.

I think any modder would agree that with all the engine limitations lifted, ArmA simply blows OFP away. Big time.

[bangtail 0]

For me OFP 1,96 with all the best mods, FFUR, FDF, I44, all the effects packs does NOT compete with ArmA's feeling. There's a reason all these mods are moving on to ArmA. It is simply MUCH, MUCH better.

I think the main problem what we see here is what you get with many games. A new one gets released and people afraid or apprehensive of moving on will always swear by the old, however good the new is. Nostalgia is what is making most people here say OFP is somehow better than ArmA.

I think any modder would agree that with all the engine limitations lifted, ArmA simply blows OFP away. Big time.

Nonsense, you can't compare ArmA to OFP 1.96 (with mods) in 2006. Yes it looks pretty but the potential has yet to be realised. Your talking as if its been out for years! When I see something like Tonal in ArmA then we can start drawing comparisons. As it stands now, we have a good foundation, but saying that ArmA "blows OFP away" is far fetched to say the least.

E

[RedStorm 0]

For me OFP 1,96 with all the best mods, FFUR, FDF, I44, all the effects packs does NOT compete with ArmA's feeling. There's a reason all these mods are moving on to ArmA. It is simply MUCH, MUCH better.

I think the main problem what we see here is what you get with many games. A new one gets released and people afraid or apprehensive of moving on will always swear by the old, however good the new is. Nostalgia is what is making most people here say OFP is somehow better than ArmA.

I think any modder would agree that with all the engine limitations lifted, ArmA simply blows OFP away. Big time.

Nonsense, you can't compare ArmA to OFP 1.96 (with mods) in 2006. Yes it looks pretty but the potential has yet to be realised. Your talking as if its been out for years!

E

Ofcourse I agree with you there! Content-wise it doesn not compete yet. Not even close. In fact, I daresay ArmA at the moment has less content than the original OFP. But you (as a fellow player ) will have to agree that how it is executed - the little details and the engine limitations that have been lifted - make the game feel so much more amazing than the current OFP, however heavily modified, can ever make you feel.

But I agree, it does not have tons and tons of content *yet*.

[bangtail 0]

For me OFP 1,96 with all the best mods, FFUR, FDF, I44, all the effects packs does NOT compete with ArmA's feeling. There's a reason all these mods are moving on to ArmA. It is simply MUCH, MUCH better.

I think the main problem what we see here is what you get with many games. A new one gets released and people afraid or apprehensive of moving on will always swear by the old, however good the new is. Nostalgia is what is making most people here say OFP is somehow better than ArmA.

I think any modder would agree that with all the engine limitations lifted, ArmA simply blows OFP away. Big time.

Nonsense, you can't compare ArmA to OFP 1.96 (with mods) in 2006. Yes it looks pretty but the potential has yet to be realised. Your talking as if its been out for years!

E

Ofcourse I agree with you there! Content-wise it doesn not compete yet. Not even close. In fact, I daresay ArmA at the moment has less content than the original OFP. But you (as a fellow player ) will have to agree that how it is executed - the little details and the engine limitations that have been lifted - make the game feel so much more amazing than the current OFP, however heavily modified, can ever make you feel.

But I agree, it does not have tons and tons of content *yet*.

Yes, I agree, the foundation is there and the engine is great. It will take time for ArmA to reach the maturity of the current OFP. I have no doubt that it will

E

[Dallas 9]

OFP had a five year headstart, but ArmA will catch up alot sooner.

[Zombie_Mod 0]

For me OFP 1,96 with all the best mods, FFUR, FDF, I44, all the effects packs does NOT compete with ArmA's feeling. There's a reason all these mods are moving on to ArmA. It is simply MUCH, MUCH better.

I think the main problem what we see here is what you get with many games. A new one gets released and people afraid or apprehensive of moving on will always swear by the old, however good the new is. Nostalgia is what is making most people here say OFP is somehow better than ArmA.

I think any modder would agree that with all the engine limitations lifted, ArmA simply blows OFP away. Big time.

Here Redstorm, you are based in Holland (I read your profile)

How come you have a copy of the game to play..... ?

Also, my 2$ on ArmA: thanks to my contacts within the community I've had opportunities to see the game in action.

I must say, I'm not THAT impressed.. some bugs:-

1) Hit a BMP with an M136 and there's no explosion cloud. Why is this so? I don't have a copy of the game so I dunno if it's pixel shaders missing or whatnot, but I am sure its not that...

2) Hit a T72 with M136 and the tank is disabled, yet no explosion cloud, flame or whatever? The tank also doesnt look as if it has a scratch on it.

3) The enemy seems to know where you are the minute they leap out of a disabled bmp/tank, even though the player position should be unknown to them. In the convoy single mission, hit the BMP with the satchel charge and hide behind a tree near the ambush point. Unless you are prone, the enemy will shoot at you almost immediately, even though you are well hidden.

4) Enemy is pretty accurate too, even on "regular" level, even at >100m distance where player kills would be difficult? (Apologies if regular is wrong, I am told that is the translation)

Any idea if its the rig or the game at fault for this? I can't tell by video.

[dm 9]

Lets not start going on an "OMG pirate!!!" witch hunt now zombie. Its perfectly reasonable that people outside CZ/PL have ordered the CZ version of ArmA, I know quite a few that have.

As for your bugs:

1 and 2. All I've seen on the videos of ArmA is explosion clouds when shooting anything with an M136, are you sure those effects weren't disabled in the options?

3. I suppose its down to how well you're hidden. I've seen cases where the AI has known where the player was and I've seen cases where the AI runs around like blind idiots (getting shot I might add )

4. Its very hard to make what is essentially an aimbot NOT have perfect aim. Yes its frustrating to get slotted from 500m with the first round from an AK, but from what I've seen it can be very hit and miss (excuse the pun) but it would be even more frustrating for all the AI to spend an entire magazine and still not hit you.

[Zombie_Mod 0]

Lets not start going on an "OMG pirate!!!" witch hunt now zombie. Its perfectly reasonable that people outside CZ/PL have ordered the CZ version of ArmA, I know quite a few that have.

As for your bugs:

1 and 2. All I've seen on the videos of ArmA is explosion clouds when shooting anything with an M136, are you sure those effects weren't disabled in the options?

3. I suppose its down to how well you're hidden. I've seen cases where the AI has known where the player was and I've seen cases where the AI runs around like blind idiots (getting shot I might add )

4. Its very hard to make what is essentially an aimbot NOT have perfect aim. Yes its frustrating to get slotted from 500m with the first round from an AK, but from what I've seen it can be very hit and miss (excuse the pun) but it would be even more frustrating for all the AI to spend an entire magazine and still not hit you.

Yep I think Placebo should ask these people outside Czech with the game what their serials are... 99% of them are probably RE*P-

(You think I'm going to write that serial down lol and let people google for it??? I can wait til May for a proper bug free version thanks)

1 & 2: I dunno, I'll need to ask the author of the video. I can't see why he would turn it down though, he's using a X850 Pro???

3. No, I know when a man is in cover and when he's not in cover. Unless the grass is see through (a bug), then the player was in cover. The fact of the matter is, when 3 troopers jump out of a burning BMP, they should not immediately turn and face the player then waste him.

4. Fair enough, but I suspect the AI is more like superman than a normal human being (or Ai approximation to such). It is strange, on the destroy the bridge mission, the soldiers on the bridge are dumb and easily killed it seems, yet the T72 drivers, when they eject from their tanks, are uncannily accurate....

[Heatseeker 0]

Nonsense, you can't compare ArmA to OFP 1.96 (with mods) in 2006. Yes it looks pretty but the potential has yet to be realised. Your talking as if its been out for years! When I see something like Tonal in ArmA then we can start drawing comparisons. As it stands now, we have a good foundation, but saying that ArmA "blows OFP away" is far fetched to say the least.

E

You cant compare because Arma blows OPFR away, quality vs quantity. Its much more than a foundation, its a new game with new graphics, new capabilities and many new features, a quality OPF mod like Tonal will give you a new setting to play with diferent looking models but thats it. It will take a long time (if ever) for someone to create better content for Arma than whats already in there, especially now that things got more complex.

Keep in mind that the first mods will most likely be reskins and edits of Arma content .

[meyamoti 0]

Problem here is that people comparing OFP to Armed Assault have been playing the OFP mods waaay too long that they forget what the very first original one was like

Armed Assault does beat the community in quality and here is the reason,the OFP community uses several texture files for a single tank,the usual is atleast six for each vehicle,usually exterior. Armed Assault on the other hand would have only one texture for exterior alone.

As for model,they may not be as enthusiastic about getting every curve as we are. As for functioning,they don't have the leeway we have. We'll use BIS apache and franze apache for this.

BIS apache was incorrect but a good game apache (what ones are correct anyway by default?) The helicopter was edited time and time again. Then you have franze apache,this one could do alot more in functioning,originally BOH's longbow had the ability to give map displays but that was it,franze had system failures and different hellfire modes and so on,more realisim+ more time but it wasn't balanced with some of the lower class helicopters and vehicles. Its all about balance,even though the game may not be balanced by vehicles on sides,it is by their functioning.

OFP mods have these radio effects,burning effects and so many other things because? The community made them,had BIS made a better version of these things it would take longer,and I'm mostly regarding ECP type things.

Voice. Sure there are some parts of the voice that sound out of place,but what game has? Oh wait...thats right,each game has only one character voice and usually you only hear them talk in cutscenes rather than having several variants of voices which say similar yet different things.

Character movement. Somebody had originally said OFP had better character movement,to hold my tounge and respond in the kindest way possible I can only say,go out and get something the size of a rifle,or you don't even have to do that. Just go outside,stand straight up and just straight walking,then try it with your back bent and see how soon you are incorrect.

Swimming. Whats wrong with it? The animation looks great,actual swimming,and having your weapon fall into it is a plus.

Jumping. Hooray for not implimenting this

End result,okay so the game has bugs,look at the time it was developed and don't go giving me that. "well its had five years on it" yackaty shmackity. The game has not been developed for five years,don't assume that once OFP was out that Armed Assault was immediatly in the works.

Some bugs are worse than others,but what game doesn't have bugs honestly? The problem is that it seems that when some people bought AA,that is all they went looking for,wanting to go off and make the game look horrid for the rest of us,well it didn't work on me buddy.

System specs. Okay so not all of us will be able to run the game on the best graphics,but what does that matter? Are you wanting the game for graphics or gameplay?

[colt 0]

Given that the majority of people who will pick up Armed Assault have also played Operation Flashpoint, comparisons are enevitable. They will say ArmA doen't have this or that compared to OFP, It's slower than OFP, It's quicker than OFP, the flight model isn't as good as OFP and so on.

I think it would be interesting to hear what people who have had no previous knowledge or experience of playing OFP make of Armed Assault.

[maxqubit 1]

I think it would be interesting to hear what people who have had no previous knowledge or experience of playing OFP make of Armed Assault.

True.

But only wise ppl are able to play any game (or for that matter live any day) as if it was the first time they touched it. In that respect OFP is just as precious as ArmA (as your girlfriend, as your job, as your health, as your ... you name it). So, move on, go with the flow, and the flow in this case is ArmA.

[dmakatra 1]

I personally find it hard to understand how someone can prefer OFP over ArmA. Like someone off another forum said:

Before.

After.

All the complaints I've seen thus far have been small, but irritable, problems. I do not deny that they are annoying but this community really need to see to the big picture. This is starting to look like the trigger finger animation debate all over again.

And please, be realistic. This isn't HL2, CoD2 or some other corridor-shooter were bugs are more easily detected (and almost certainly - harder to eliminate). This is a dynamic game and in dynamic games there will ALWAYS be bugs. If you want a polished game - go play your average FPS. It's sad, but you all know it's true. Even OFP 1.96 isn't without it's fair share of bugs it's just that you have all played it for such a long time you don't even notice them. Flying pallets, destroyed houses creating invisible walls that are impossible to fire through, AI getting stuck in back-alleys, collision detection, not being able to kill paratroopers, boats driving on land, the list goes on. Stop the frantic bug-hunting and just play the game. You're all starting to sound like bravo6 or whatever his name is.

I also find it rather amusing that some of the people that complained about delays are now complaining that the game is feeling rushed...

[meyamoti 0]

Yes it is quite ironicly amusing isn't it?

[charliereddog 9]

I haven't got the game, but I'll tell you why I'm asking. Its because in order to play this game, I'm gonna need to spend about a month's wages for a new pc, and the game I suspect. Now, I'm all for a new game and all, but all this shit about its perfectly acceptable to release a game which is full of bugs, and from what the people who have it say, it is, and worse include bugs which the developers have known for some time about is crock.

Secondly, all this stuff about not comparing OFP to ArmA, and mods to ArmA. I don't recall ever PAYING for a mod? Therefore, you can't really say you've been ripped off when it turns out to be a crap release. Secondly, in most cases and certainly with the popular stuff, how long does it take these UNPAID people to churn out patches?

Why should the people in Czech and Germany have to wait until the community patches the game? Did they get a discount? I can't think that one person has said that the release mechanism has been anything other than a disaster, and the fact of the matter is that by releasing the game in advanced beta to a select few, is more likely to put people off, than encourage them to get it.

Most people have let their excitement and enthusiasm build up unrealistic expectations. I have only one. If I pay for a game billed as a successor, i expect it to perform as such. As strange as this sounds and no offence to BIS, I'd actually prefer ArmA to bomb. Not because I don't want to play a great game, but because a) its showing no signs of being such so far, and b) It'd save me a shit load of cash.

Whenever anyone raises a concern, someone in the *community* raises the sceptre of the *community*. This all knowing, all encompassing, all doing thing. What's it accomplished so far? Nothing, because everyone's waiting on a patch from BIS. Not the way things should be is it.

[FatNinjaKid 0]

You are absolutely right. For most people this is going to be the most expensive game they are ever going to purchase (because of the hardware-requirements they have otherwise no use for).

[dmakatra 1]

No-one here is saying bugs are OK. We're just saying that the bugs are acceptable (for the time being) relative to how dynamic this engine is. People are freaking out because of small bugs that doesn't really matter anyhow, when they should be looking at what a great game this is. The view distance, the amount of units on screen, ballistics, new scripting commands, join-in-progress. These are the features which are important. And these are also the features that the community can't give OFP through modifications and addons.

Seriously, who gives a shit whether Abrams don't drop from bridges that are destroyed when you can have 300 units on the screen with minimum FPS-drop? You can't have everything in this world. If you want a bug-free game go play something that uses the Quake III-engine or something. Us others will gladly trade in a few bugs for a helluva lot of cool features.

[Zombie_Mod 0]

No-one here is saying bugs are OK. We're just saying that the bugs are acceptable (for the time being) relative to how dynamic this engine is. People are freaking out because of small bugs that doesn't really matter anyhow, when they should be looking at what a great game this is. The view distance, the amount of units on screen, ballistics, new scripting commands, join-in-progress. These are the features which are important. And these are also the features that the community can't give OFP through modifications and addons.

Seriously, who gives a shit whether Abrams don't drop from bridges that are destroyed when you can have 300 units on the screen with minimum FPS-drop? You can't have everything in this world. If you want a bug-free game go play something that uses the Quake III-engine or something. Us others will gladly trade in a few bugs for a helluva lot of cool features.

Well I disagree with you. I don't give a shit about cool features, I want the game to work properly, first time. Cool features can be addons later.

Were it not for the internet, companies wouldn't get away with releasing 200mb patches every 3 months or so, they'd have to get the product [mostly] right first time. Impossible? Think about this - did you see games released with obvious flaws on console, before consoles had hard disks & broadband access?

I am pig sick of buying games that have terrible bugs then having to wait for the patch. I used to work for the NHS - when I released software it was tested until it squeaked! If there were serious bugs, people could die - simple as that.

As the poster before said, why should the Germans & Czechs pay top dollar for what is a "version 0.99" release. It sounds like those 2 nations are being used as free testers before the US release, that ain't right.

[dmakatra 1]

Well, why did you play OFP then? Last time I checked it was fairly buggy and raw, so to speak.

[KaiserPanda 0]

Reporting bugs is helping. Requesting features is ok.

Complaining is annoying. If you're here to complain, you obviously don't want or like the game. Why are you here? If you did want the game, you're not doing either of the first two things I said, and are not helping the game.

All you're accomplishing is filling up threads, pissing off other people, and jacking off your ego. This is why people get mad. Help the us or leave us. Stop complaining.

[Heatseeker 0]

did you see games released with obvious flaws on console, before consoles had hard disks & broadband access?

I am pig sick of buying games that have terrible bugs then having to wait for the patch. I used to work for the NHS - when I released software it was tested until it squeaked! If there were serious bugs, people could die - simple as that.

Its a valid point, but look at OPF:E, it took so damn long in the making that when it got out it was already old, games today require much more work and effort due to extra complexity and thats why most current gen games are smaller compared to older ones.

Arma is not the typical corridor FPS game, its very large and open ended and BIS put it together quite fast. The bugs people are reporting were not unexpected, most seem like small flaws that can be easily corrected. Even if BIS had more development time i would rather see it used implementing more improvements, features and models than fixing minor bugs, minor flaws can be fixed, implementing new features usually cant .

People should be exploring the potential and possibilities of the new engine and be happy about the many improvements instead of dissing the game everytime they can because of minor flaws that should be fixed and improved upon anyway..

[dm 9]

As the poster before said, why should the Germans & Czechs pay top dollar for what is a "version 0.99" release. It sounds like those 2 nations are being used as free testers before the US release, that ain't right.

Err... They DO get the same patches as everyone else will... Its not like they paid "top dollar" to get version 0.99 and are then forced to play version 0.99 OR pay again to upgrade. The patches will be free and will ensure that everyone is on a level playing field.

Nothing wrong with using your fanbase to beta test...

[Guest]

People should be exploring the potential and possibilities of the new engine and be happy about the many improvements instead of dissing the game everytime they can because of minor flaws that should be fixed and improved upon anyway..

I wish many more would keep even a little tiny bit part of the above in their minds when talking about bugs.

I am confident in BIS they will fix many, I am also confident many bugs wont be fixed.............

Thats life.......if you get a wife and maybe kids later I bet there will be bugs too..........and believe me, many of those cant be fixed neither

Ohh, and they will cost you a lot more than just a comp and a game

But thats the way I see it, many will disagree with it.

Lets say I am kind of used to bugs in a "game" (talking about computer software, not my ex)

Nevertheless I love it 200%