Armed Assault..

[action man 0]

I have a low-mid end PC (x2 4200+, 1,5gb ram, x1600XT)

Low mid end?? Dude you might want to refrase that! I sopose if you were loaded or a spoilt kid you could describ it as low mid end.But in my book that ain't "low mid end"

[Placebo 28]

dont be such a jackass , im asking for peoples opions not telling them what to say , maybe you need to learn how to read and then ur in the wrong community, you should be at school!

Do you know how close you just came to your 5th warning level? I suggest you apologise to the poster you just flamed immediately.

[bangtail 0]

I have a low-mid end PC (x2 4200+, 1,5gb ram, x1600XT)

Low mid end?? Dude you might want to refrase that! I sopose if you were loaded or a spoilt kid you could describ it as low mid end.But in my book that ain't "low mid end"

Unfortunately this is the root of many complaints and it is wholly unfair to BIS. The system specs described are at best mid range, and even then, that's pushing it. Gaming wise, in terms of CPU/Graphics, if its over a year old, it's mid range. A PC you bought in 2004 is not going to run a game released in 2006 very well. Thats just a reality some of you need to start dealing with instead of blaming BIS for a badly optimized game. There are bugs, no doubt, but the fact that it wont run at max detail on your mid spec PC is not BIS's fault!

E

[desertfox 2]

Anyone with a decent PC, who is still getting low framerates should have a look into their process tree. Especially AV programs, Spyware protection, IDS and other security tools, as well as a any other non-OS related processes will consume vast amounts of physical RAM and load your CPU.

Go to the START button --> Select 'Run' --> type 'msconfig' and have a look at the processes/applications started up with windows. If your PC has not had a fresh installation of Windows, or if you have not carefully administrated your system, it is full of trash.

My PC is mega old. 2.8 Ghz / 1.5 Gigz RAM / Ati X850 gfx card. Yet ArmA still runs at very decent frame rates with medium to high settings. Everything is set to high, except texture detail and disabled shadows.

You must be doing something wrong if you have twice my PC's hardware resources and CPU speed, and still bitch about lag.

[bravo 6 0]

2.8 Ghz / 1.5 Gigz RAM / Ati X850 gfx card.

is not meg old!

its kinda recent pc kinda good for ARMA.

[desertfox 2]

Looking at the specifications of the CPUs and GPUs currently in the shops it appears to be antique.

*EDIT to add*

Did I mention my mainboard is made from plywood ? lol

[bangtail 0]

Looking at the specifications of the CPUs and GPUs currently in the shops it appears to be antique.  

*EDIT to add*

Did I mention my mainboard is made from plywood ? lol

Hey, if you're happy with it, more power to you mate

E

[craigsa 0]

I dont think some of you get it, how long is long enough to release a game? What the hell do you mean it was released early? They have been busy with this game for years and i do not accept the fact that there are so many problems after such a long time of development.

[bravo 6 0]

Think this way...

This CZ and German versions were for beta testers and there will be free patches to improve the game along its developement.

Arma will look better and will be improved as they already said

[craigsa 0]

Bravo i really hope you are right. OFP is my life - Yes i am addicted !!

[bravo 6 0]

Bravo i really hope you are right. OFP is my life - Yes i am addicted !!

you can say that again..

I also consider myself am addicted.

Im saving 1300€ to buy a new computer because i want to run ARMA at its high quality! (im sick of playing at very low details on the past 5 years)

Im not rich, believe me. I only fight/work for what i believe.

BIS don't let me down, or else i will cry!

[SpaceAlex 0]

Arma is fine... graphicly it's like a whole new game, but inside it's still pretty much the same. I wish that they wouldn't mess with the gameplay so much though, because i feel like a noob when playing ArmA. I liked OFP gameplay better, overall (i can just forget about running and shooting at close quarters in this game... it might be realistic, but it's a bitch in MP)

I'm not very impressed with the campaign either. It's missing a good stroy and characters with personalities. It would help if original and Resistance campaigns would make it into ArmA. I would most definitely play through them again. Oh well, maybe some other time.

Multiplayer seems about the same, except that there's a "join in progress"...i'm most grateful for that. No more waiting for players for 30 minutes anymore folks.

Overall, i think it's a worthy sequel, that will really start to shine in a couple of months, when BIS releases a couple of patches to fix the game, and mods start coming out.

[sickboy 13]

100% worth it. Already been playing ArmA from day1 in MP coop, around 10 guys eachday, we have about 50 coop missions and we have great fun together, we work our ways around the bugs and share workarounds/little mods to make it less problematic. ArmA is exactly what I expected: ofp 1.5, with even more. Sure it aint the high tech next generation "Game 2" as everyone expected, well, we gotto wait another 2 years for that one But it sure as hell is a great ofp replacement in terms of graphics, scriptability, features. I think the menu kicks ass btw... I'm sure some crazy mod will make a high resolution OFP-alike interface though...

Sure there are bugs, 1.01 made it already better, now lets move on to the next!

- Happy ArmA Player

[dm 9]

I dont think some of you get it, how long is long enough to release a game? What the hell do you mean it was released early? They have been busy with this game for years and i do not accept the fact that there are so many problems after such a long time of development.

Wrong, wrong and wrong again.

Why does everyone automaticlly assume that ArmA development started the second BI was finished with OFP:R.

ArmA as we know it only really came into existance in late 2005, infact I'm more inclined to suggest that in its current state it probably didnt come into existance until early 2006.

Look at it like this: in mid 2005 (at E3 or whatever expo it was) BI announced ArmA. Look at the screenshots of ArmA back then, it was the OFP:E engine brought back to PC. Look at ArmA now, it's totally different and looks a bit like Game2 was starting to look like ~10 months ago. What can we deduce from this? We can deduce this: ArmA as it was when it was announced, is NOT the same ArmA as we have now. Therefore, ArmA we have now is <1 year old. Not bad when you consider the dev time for most other games (excluding the bullshit movie tie ins and all that other crap).

[Sniperwolf572 758]

I fully agree with DeadMeat. The screenshots shown of the OFP:E-on-PC build haven't impressed me at all, looking at them graphics wise, but when they showed the close up of the new model with M113 in back screenshot, I was totally hooked.

Also, the reason why you see so many people posting that they don't like the game, and whining about minor bugs is mainly because people who actually like the game, are enjoying it and not posting on the forums.

I was getting an ugly feeling from all the people that posted negative stuff about the game before I got it that the game will be a disappointment, but I actually found it to be more than I imagined it would be.

Now, I understand game was a bit rushed on German and Czech markets. Fine. I got the product early and I will get free upgrades to it, by the time 505 releases the game, I expect major bugs to be fixed. If not, I will share my gripes, politely.

On the back hand, everyone is getting frustrated with the small bugs, that aren't really noticeable when you're actually playing the game. But also, no-one is noticing those small features that make the game more pleasing, but also are so natural that you don't actually notice them unless you look for them, like stationary character turning, the soldier actually plays a small animation of actually turning his body around, and not spinning around like an ice-skater. This effect was only achievable in OFP by turning with X and C buttons.

Now, I'm going to enjoy the game some more...

[Soldat32 0]

Sure its great it has potential but until weapons are zeroed correctly and the AI is tweaked (sack uber accuracy,their super fast reaction times, and uber spotting abilities)it wont be complete imho.

[willybeef 0]

all i say is. how can you shoot things u cant see?

my objects are invisible

[rwillis 0]

Right now it's feature complete with a pretty good amount of bugs. The bugs WILL be fixed though (or at least most of them) and Armed Assault will really be awesome when they do. I'm glad 505 games isn't releasing it until early next year, especially to the UK.

[mr reality 0]

Right now it's feature complete with a pretty good amount of bugs.  The bugs WILL be fixed though (or at least most of them) and Armed Assault will really be awesome when they do.  I'm glad 505 games isn't releasing it until early next year, especially to the UK.

I'm glad i'm a patient person as i'm waiting for the 505 UK release. I think though that we should have a sweep stake to see what version ArmA will be at by then...I'm thinking ver 1.3

[Fred DM 0]

yeah, ArmA does have (serious) issues. i don't know why it has been released early, maybe they just needed the money to keep working on it. after they lost Codemasters (or got rid of them) they had to work on their own.

all issues aside, it's a great game. i'm having so much fun with it, it's like old OpF times.

with my system (3.6GHz, 2GB, X1900XT) i run it on mid-high settings, 2km visibility, 1280x1024, and it's doing just fine. i'd expect to be able to use higher settings with a system like mine (i run Gothic 3 and Oblivion on max settings), but maybe a future patch will increase performance.

i have experienced some totally awesome moments in the SP missions; you really feel like you're in a battle when you defend your position with an M-240, firing bursts of 7.62mm gunfire to keep the enemy at bay, while bullets fly past you and impact in the ground and the sandbags in front of you. you hear your teammates yell orders, grenades explode etc.

i'm already having lots of fun with this game, and it'll only get better with future patches.  

[jaffo 0]

I voted no because imo the infantry combat and the helos aren't anywhere near as good in ArmA as they were in OFP 1.96 (I disagree with the posts that compare ArmA to OFP 1.0; 1.96 is where BIS were starting from) and those are the things I play OFP for. At the moment, the controls and aiming are very loose and feel lagged and the helos are a mess.

I'm not too concerned about all the niggly little bugs as I'm sure most of those will get ironed out but the game would have to have some serious work done on the the movement, aiming, flight model, general performance etc before I would consider trying it again and as these are fundamentals of the game I'm not too confident that they'll change much.

Nevermind, maybe G2 will be the one!

[denoir 0]

When OFP 1.0 was released, it was incredibly buggy and so was Resistance. ArmA just follows the same tradition. The bugs will hopefully be fixed as they were in OFP and Res.

If you ignore the bugs, ArmA is a great improvement in graphics and multiplayer over OFP. It runs just fine (1600x1200, high settings 4000m view distance) on a modern computer (X6800 Core 2, 3 GB ram,  Radeon X1900 under Vista x32 RTM), but I can imagine that older computers might have a problem with it.

I have only one major complaint: the new vehicle steering. Helicopters and fixed wing aircraft are impossible to fly with a mouse, difficult with the keyboard and cumbersome with a joystick. Yes, the flight model for the helos is more realistic - but since the steering interface is useless it's not an improvement in practice. This IMO sucks big time.

In addition the game seems pretty spartan - when you are used  to an OFP with tons of addons installed.

[Stealth3 0]

OFP 1.0 was not as buggy and mest up as ARMA. They didn't have to rework the helicopter code or any code in OFP 1.0. They do in ARMA, wonder why?

Resistance didn't have any serious bug or flaw that takes away gameplay.

There was a flaw in the code of Res that could delete windows, but it was so rare, that it was really insignificant. And I doubt anybody experienced it.

[dm 9]

OFP 1.0 was not as buggy and mest up as ARMA. They didn't have to rework the helicopter code or any code in OFP 1.0. They do in ARMA, wonder why?

Resistance didn't have any serious bug or flaw that takes away gameplay.

There was a flaw in the code of Res that could delete windows, but it was so rare, that it was really insignificant. And I doubt anybody experienced it.

Seriously, get off your high horse and stop whineing constantly about how "bad" ArmA is. You've had your say, theres no need to keep on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on...

OFP 1.00 was just as buggy as ArmA is, and they had to add just as much, if not more to OFP to bring it up to "standard".

If you remember, OFP 1.00 was limited to 512x512 (iirc) textures, 12.5 x 12.5km maps, soldiers had no pistols, tanks would slide down hill etc. "Features" like rotary barrels, pistols, improved texture resolution and island size were not introduced until 1.75 (more commonly known as OFP:Resistance)

When you ballence all that up against the gameplay capabilities, there really is no problem with these "bugs", and you don't even notice 99% of them when you're actually PLAYING and not just hunting around for bugs.

If ArmA upsets you that much, take it back to the shop, go back to OFP and don't ever come in the ArmA section of the forum again. If not, then relax, appreciate that BI are working on patches, and just enjoy the game for what it is - amazing.

[badlymad 0]

From all of the impressions i've seen so far, Arma was probably rushed to shelves. However i cannot fault BIS for that, since they never even had a publisher until half-way through development and probably needed the money. Still, i hope that by the time 505 releases their version of Arma, most of the major problems reported so far will be fixed.

IIRC, OFP took much longer to develop and had many more bugs when it was released, so many of the complaints against Arma seem to be more based off the high expectations for the game rather than anything else.