official complaint to BIS

[Sgt_Eversmann 1]

I agree with shadow

there are questions which haven't answered and which are necessary to be answered I think!

and shadow, I don't really think that BIS likes their flightmodel too, I think that they wanted to make a good one but noticed that they ran out of time.

dunno though.

there are some points we don't understand and it would be nice if someone of the developers would answer them.

Evers

[T J 0]

The only flaw I have noticed so far in armed assault though is the troops depicted in it wear Army ACU camo yet the officers and some NCO's in the game wear Marine caps.What is up with that?Marines have their own digicam they dont wear ACU.:D

Finally somebody notices! Did you notice the mashup of equipment?

This console game, supposedly years in the making, (although I believe it to be a hybrid of OFP:E and some elements from game2, patched together in a matter of months) feels very much like a half-assed attempt.

Doesn't seem to be any commitment to quality control, and the game is laden, laden, laden with bugs. Really obvious and bad ones.

What kind of beta tester misses the glaringly obvious things such as we see?

No wonder they didn't put a demo out.

As for somebody who said, "which models were better in OFP?", I strongly suggest taking a look at the BAS Blackhawks and Littlebirds, where you will find more polygons, more animations. (the current cockpits suck).

I think, but dont know, that the uh60 and littlebird models are actually similar to the BAS ones, just dumbed down a bit. Somebody will know?

Then take a look at the other major addon releases. I was hoping for something at least as good as, but hopefully far exceeding the best of OFP addons.

Maybe BIS could pull it back by doing a major update along with the 505 release, like patch 1.3 was for flashpoint. Lots of new content, missions, and BUGFIXES please!

TJ

[Nephris 0]

Totally agree with T-J.

At present time ArmA is presenting itsself as loveless created hybrid of OFP ,attempting to get on the horizon with standarts in 2006 - imho.

I was disappointed too, but my system requ. are at the minimums ,so i can´t get an objective opinion.

Nevertheless i am able to recognize the bugs.The problem are not 2 or 3 major bugs but the mass of "minor" bugs which annoy while playing the game in each minute.

[Kirq 0]

I dont own ArmA yet but i must admit that all those bugreports and "arcade-features" reports are disturbing. It would be great if BIS could create a list of things that they cosinders as a bug or unfinished stuff on which they are working atm and post it in somekind of annoucement thread. For an example im still not sure if stuff like : very arcade crosshair long distance aiming or useless heli guiding rocket sceen without any manual control are finished features and BIS is planing to leave it at current state or maybe it is still in WIP state ( i hope so). Also some sutff we consider as a bug may be intentionally features to gain some FPS. All this BIS silence about big amount of major bugs is no good for further sales IMHO.

[action man 0]

 i'm an infantryman in the US army,

Soldat wrote=

Quote[/b] ]As an Airborne Infantryman in the U.S Army I have to agree with olemissrebel on what he has said.

Is their a lot of U.S army personel who play war games on thier p c's?

[Ian Malcolm 0]

What kind of beta tester misses the glaringly obvious things such as we see?

Do you seriously think, they don't know about most of the bugs? There is always some point in development, when you have to release it, simply because you have some contract or because you have no money for development. So while are you complaining, did you thought about scenario of canceled project? What do you think? Isn't it better to have it as it is (it's playable yet buggy) and patched, than do not have it at all?

Or have it perfect as STALKER or Duke Nukem Forever...

[Heatseeker 0]

As for somebody who said, "which models were better in OFP?", I strongly suggest taking a look at the BAS Blackhawks and Littlebirds, where you will find more polygons, more animations. (the current cockpits suck).

I think, but dont know, that the uh60 and littlebird models are actually similar to the BAS ones, just dumbed down a bit. Somebody will know?

I have no idea about polycounts but the Arma models look much smoother, if the polycounts were actually lower that couldnt be a bad thing, i agree about the UH60 cockpit but other than that i dont see how the Arma models were dumbed down graphically speaking.

I can think of some models that match or maybe surpass Arma graphically (OWP Mi-26) but that addon took years in the works and Arma cant be compared to an addon, its a full game with an overall major graphics leap. They have to distribute the load on everything you see ingame consistently..

Armas LB model looks like the vbs one wich was far more detailed than any other i've seen .

[Soldat32 0]

i'm an infantryman in the US army,

Soldat wrote=

Quote[/b] ]As an Airborne Infantryman in the U.S Army I have to agree with olemissrebel on what he has said.

Is their a lot of U.S army personel who play war games on thier p c's?

Well considering VBS1 is used by several militaries around the world Id have to say yes.As for myself I know 3 other soldiers who use OFP.

As for someone mentioning BAS above gotta agree that was some of the finest work Ive seen along with COC artillery.

I guess one thing I am noticing though in AA is the AI is a lot more deadlier and spot you immediately no matter what kind of tactics you use.I even set Enemy AI down to around 25-30 and they still are dead on.

[Shadow NX 1]

Yeah among the obvious bugs and glitches ( yesterday i had my first bluescreen since years thanks to ArmA ) is the hardcore Ai one of the most annoying things, seems they were thinking

"If the AI is dumb as a brick still then lets make them challenging by giving them all sniper abilitys and x-ray vision"

I Know that they were already good shooters in OFP but not like that, also they seem to see me even in bushes or high grass ( doubt they notice the grass at all ).

Its rather unfunky if you play for example the campaign mission with the  Specop team where they run ( not sneak but run... ) right into a village to get blasted away by regular joe infantry... only think you can do to save you "high skilled" buddys is try be faster as them and kill the enemy before they can kill our guys... wich is indeed a bit hard with the supressed M4 as it seems it has nearly no power and doesnt even hit a haybarn on 100 meters.

---

Btw, if you guys also want a lil Q/A with BIS then post it here, maybe they notice.

At least a lil "heres a list what we fix next so dont moan about it" from the devs would do it for me

---

[Guest]

it is obvious that Armed Assault has been designed with game consoles in mind. The control menus are showing it big time.

I hope this is true.... This game would run smooth on an xbox 360.

OFP elite is the best game to ever come out on xbox.... nothing better than laying back on a couch while doing a 30 minute realtime recon.

I also agree with heatseeker

The future does look very bright indeed!

but atm its still nightime in the present and any brightness is going to come in the morning.

VBS2 is going to be the best flavor imo,

and if TONAL gets the redux that will be amazing!!

[Ian Malcolm 0]

it is obvious that Armed Assault has been designed with game consoles in mind. The control menus are showing it big time.

I doubt it. IMO it's reversed story. It just inherited a lot of stuff from OFP:Elite. Didn't heard even any rumors about possible release of ArmA on consoles... or i'm wrong?

[Shadow NX 1]

Am i wrong or was OFP - Elite rather bad saleswise?

If yes then i guess BIS will think twice before they invest the time and money to this.

For now i want my PC game fixed and as i paid for a working product and not some loose pieces glued together

Sometimes i love ArmA and sometimes i wish it to hell when i see how much better some stuff worked in OFP

[WhoCares 0]

...

- very bad performance even on normal settings

- very often no sounds, with Hardware Accelaration or EAX

 on/off

...

It would be helpful if you posted your system specs and game settings if you talk about bad performance.

I have an A64 3500+, 1GB RAM, GF6600GT 128MB and my framerate ranges from lower 10s to ~50 with most settings on low and a resolution of 1024x768.

Also regarding the Sound, system specs and settings would be quite useful.

Yesterday I took a little time and played around with the settings of my Soundblaster X-Fi Xtreme Music.

In the editor I setup a mission with many choppers and tanks near and far from my position on the hill south of Corazol and then I started playing around with the in-game (EAX on/off, Hardware acceleration on/off) and the X-Fi Audio Console settings.

Things I noticed:

- the already well-known bug that with hardware accellaration you hear helicopters and tanks accross the island (I really heard some I put up on the northern coast; I like this bug as it exploits the many voices supported by the X-Fi compared to my on-board RealTek AC97 )

- without hardware acceleration some distant sounds seem still pretty loud, though the total audible range has definatly decreased.

No sounds I got as well - depending on the settings in the X-Fi Audio console. Depending on these settings, when I shot with my M24 via scope I did not hear my shot, though when shooting with the crosshair the sound was fine. Pushing a little around the Audo Console Sliders showed that this strange effect can be solved by changing the EAX surround setting (from surround to near, IIRC).

Long story short - if you really want to help improving ArmA try to make a detailed and reproducible description of your problem(s) - what do you want BIS to do based on such general statements, 'bad performance', 'no sound'... (these are more like accusations if you put them just like that...)

[Alpha-Kilo 36]

I also think it is time to ask BIS for an official statement about which bugs they are going to fix in the near future and which features they are planning to add to the game, if any. The thread "ArmA News" might serve this purpose.

Such an official statement or - even better - a Q&A session with the community could probably stop most of the "whining" which basically is just the repeated mentioning of bugs to which BIS has obviously chosen not to reply at present.

Fortunately, the talented members of this community have already begun to fix some of the biggest issues. If BIS would decide to communicate its plans, this might save the modders a lot of unneccessary work.

Apart from the discussion of numerous bugs and promised but omitted features there is still huge potential in ArmA because of its unique game concept and its mod-friendly structure. Most OFP fans are aware of this and are probably willing to simply wait for the communinty to put things right. Only the casual gamer in his ignorance might still believe that this should be done by the manufacturer prior to selling the product for money. The casual gamer would certainly benefit from a less restrictive information policy by BIS.

By the way - those who keep posting that BIS is already working on a patch, or that the programmers themselves are not satisfied with the current flight model, etc. - would you mind saying on which information these postings are based?

My personal opinion on the matter is: Every product may be faulty, every human being may make mistakes or rush a job under pressure, etc. These things happen and they can be justified and rectified if the communication between supplier and customer works well. In this forum and many others the customers have shown their willingness to communicate and offered their help and cooperation in many ways - now the ball is definetely on BIS' side of the field...

[WhoCares 0]

I also think it is time to ask BIS for an official statement about which bugs they are going to fix in the near future and which features they are planning to add to the game, if any.

...

By the way - those who keep posting that BIS is already working on a patch, ... - would you mind saying on which information these postings are based?

...

Like this: Truck Viewpoint

[Zorbtek 0]

Let's see how the community will react when the 505 games edition is out in Febraury 2007. I on my part predict that the community will be really disappointed. This could be the end of a very good relationship between BIS and the OFP community.

Whoa now just a minute. Someone probably already posted what I'm about to say, but just to make sure I'll repeat it.

1. By the time 505 releases their versions, there will be tons of bugs fixed by that time. So, no, I highly disagree that the community will be really dissapointed.

2. No, this is not the end of a very good relationship between BIS and the OFP community, this is the start of an even better community.

Let's sit back, take a deep breath, and step away from the bug problems. BIS is'nt hanging out in Hawaii right now sipping their lemonade kicking back and getting tans.

They still have a ton of work on their hands, and I'm almost positive their office is still bustling with activity.

[CanisDEK 1]

BIS doesn't create the game for you, they create it because they enjoy it, and to make money, so if you don't approve, don't play it.

"2. The fact that you can easily aim with the saw-249 using the quake crosshair while standing and easily hit targets is lame. It's completely arcade. There should be no such reliable shooting from the hip."

that is incorrect.  i'm an infantryman in the US army, and can say for a fact the saw is at least decent in ArmA.  it is used in CQB, and with reflexive fire drills just as much as the m4.  it actually IS possible, although rarely done, to shoot from the hip, and it's really not that difficult, much less difficult to hit naything with the saw.  then again, what would most of you know about military life other than through flashpoint and i do mean that in the nicest way possible

This is a game and not real life. From a gameplay perspective the saw (and other guns like it) is completely out of control.

I am not talking about running around a corner, stop for half a second and fire a volley from the hip into the belly of a target 25m away using the SAW.

That may be possible for an experienced soldier.

No I am talking about doing the same to a target 100-200m away... which is possible in ARMA.

I do however find it highly unlikely that it is easily done in real life on a regular basis.

And IF you would claim that Van Damme and the Marines are capable of such a feat... I still believe it sucks donkey balls as a feature of ARMA for the sake of gameplay!

And while I enjoy the input from real life soldiers... I don't really see the relevance in regards to ARMA. Your oppinion does in no way balance gameplay. We already have respawn, people don't die from chock or bleeding, you can get patched up in 5 seconds when your legs are "broken"... all in the name of gameplay.

So no... it's not a simulation. It's a game.

[T J 0]

What kind of beta tester misses the glaringly obvious things such as we see?

Do you seriously think, they don't know about most of the bugs? There is always some point in development, when you have to release it, simply because you have some contract or because you have no money for development. So while are you complaining, did you thought about scenario of canceled project? What do you think? Isn't it better to have it as it is (it's playable yet buggy) and patched, than do not have it at all?

Or have it perfect as STALKER or Duke Nukem Forever...

Imagine the slating an addon maker would have gotten if they had released such a buggy addon, and that for FREE.

Let's not forget that this is a game they have (supposedly) spent YEARS in the making.

Sure, some, no, a lot of bugs will only show up after repeated playing on multiple systems of varying specs. I'm not talking about those. Rather the type of bugs that should have been spotted at their birth, eg, the wrong viewpoint in the trucks, noted now by BIS as a bug. Things like that should never make it into a final release.

It would be interesting to take Marek aside privately, and ask him if he was happy with the level of pre-release Quality Assurance. My guess would be No.

Seems to me, they took OFP:E, ported it BACK to PC, added some extra graphiccy stuff, probably from work on Game2, threw in some kit and models from VBS, and hastily mixed them all together. (without noting the mix up of kit between US Marine & US Army etc)

Follow the screenshots released over the months and you will sort of see that happening.

Dont get me wrong, I like the game, with all its quirks. But it could have been so much better. Should have been.

It would be very nice to see BIS launch a topic "ACKNOWLEDGED BUGS" just for BIS staff to post in, showing that they have noted each one, and an approximate timescale or something for the fix E.G: Next patch.

Im sure they know all about things we are yet to discover, but it would be nice to have an official forum acknowledgement, dont you think?

Cheers

TJ

[Sgt_Eversmann 1]

agreed with you TJ.

you are right and I think the same.

Evers

[CanisDEK 1]

I agree TJ... I would like to see some acknowledgement from BIS concerning bugs posted.

[jerryhopper 285]

may i state that there is a slight difference with a game with 400km2 maps, which cannot be compared to ANY other map based game.

 all whiners to the wall!!

[HitSqdhaXor 0]

To all that complain about it:

Don't buy it. Don't Play it. And most important - STAY OFF MY SERVER!

To all that praise it and see the light:

^5 for seeing the positive potential.

[Dallas 9]

Seems like a perfect waste of coding hours. Just report the bug and let the BIS magic happen.

P.S. HitSqd server, for lack of better wording, rocks.

[DodgyGeeza 0]

To all that complain about it:

Don't buy it. Don't Play it. And most important - STAY OFF MY SERVER!

To all that praise it and see the light:

^5 for seeing the positive potential.

How do you suggest we actually try it if we don't buy it or even play the damn thing?

Some people are as thick as sh**

[Stealth3 0]

Quote[/b] ]1. By the time 505 releases their versions, there will be tons of bugs fixed by that time. So, no, I highly disagree that the community will be really dissapointed.

2. No, this is not the end of a very good relationship between BIS and the OFP community, this is the start of an even better community.

And you know that how?

There are at least 100 known bugs in ARMA, and that doesn't include the air dynamics flaws which ruin the gameplay.

505 will release in the UK in about 2-3 months. Now don't get me wrong, but knowing how long it usually takes developers to fix bugs, theres no way BIS will fix even half of that in the given time.

Only the air dynamics will most likely take a few months to fix, if they want to make something good.

Take Stalker for example. They've been fixing bugs for about a year now. Thats why they didn't release.

Look at Medieval total war 2. It doesn't even have 1/4th the number of bugs as in ARMA, but still a month plus passed, and they didn't relaese a patch. And a patch was announced before it was even released.

And to people talking about potential, well let me tell you about potential. Most of the games released have "potential" Potential doesn't mean much when most of the people abandon the game in the first months. It doesn't matter if great mods will release on the engine in 3 years from now. The greatest threat to ARMA is the lack of players. If it will take a year to get the game playable, then only the hardcore fans will play, because most people will leave.