Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Shigsy

I won't be buying ArmA :(

Recommended Posts

To start off, i was a huge fan of Flashpoint and to this day i still rate it as one of my favourite games of all time, and one of the best games ever released on any platform. I remember getting the 1st Flashpoint demo a couple of months before its release and playing that mission over and over, never getting bored of it. Like many others, i bought Flashpoint the day of its release and for a couple of years it was pretty much the only game i played (when i wasn't playing CS online smile_o.gif). I expecially loved the editor, and i still don't think there has been an editor anywhere near as good to this day, despite it being 6 years since the release of Flashpoint.

And its this 6 year gap that brings me onto my main point, the reason i will not be buying ArmA. Flashpoint was, in its day, a fantastic game. Head and shoulders above anything else, unmatched freedom with a huge environment that nothing else could compete with. It felt lke a true war simulation as opposed to the typical arcade shooters of the time. In many ways, Flashpoint was revolutionary. Any vehicle was useable, weather it was land based, air or sea, civilian or millitary. If you could see it, you could drive/fly it. This alone made Flashpoint a huge leap forward in gaming. Think about it, the next big game to offer this was Battlefield 1942 which didnt arrive for another year and half, and even then it didn't offer as big an environment as Flashpoint, as many vehicles or the simulation feel. Not to mention the outstanding editor and 1-player campaigns.

Its now 2007 and we are on the verge of the long anticipated release (europe/usa) of the sequel to one the greatest games of all time, Armed Assault. Like everyone here i could not wait for the demo, which i downloaded as soon as it was released. I've been playing it since and have held off making a final judgement, that is until now.

First off, ArmA has clearly improved on the graphics of Flashpoint. The world is more detailed, with fancier textures and lighting etc. Having said that, ArmA is still a long way off the modern competition when it comes to eye candy, looking more like a game from 2004 as opposed to 2007. But that was never going to be an issue for me, ArmA (like Flashpoint) was going to be all about gameplay. However, amazingly this is where ArmA falls over. It seems very clear that the vast majority of this game is nothing more than a slightly sugar coated version of Flashpoint. We all knew ArmA was not going to be a whole new game, built from the ground-up to take advantage off the modern bells and whistles, but we all expected at least a small update to some core features such as AI, collision detection, physics etc. The fact is, these very things have not moved on an inch since Flashpoint. While they were good for their day in 2001, they look nothing short of antique in 2007. Gaming advances very quickly, and 6 years is a lifetime in terms of gaming technology.

To bring this article to a conclusion, ill just list a few of my biggest disappointments with ArmA:

1 ~ The AI is exactly the same as Flashpoint, with soldiers zig-zagging aimlessly across the terrain. If you approach a group of enemy soldiers in your M1A1 you will see just how dated the AI is, as the soldiers attempt to deal with this extreme threat by lying down and waiting to be run over. Or better yet, stand still while the tank attempts to run them over, pushing them along until they accumilate enough damage points to drop dead. Its just as lame to see a soldier take 10 - 20 rounds from your M1A1 MG while he is in the middle of lying down (or standing up), only to see it have no affect. That is until he reaches his lying down or standing up state, when all the hits are registered at once and he drops dead.

2 ~ Its this very damage points system, which was mildly acceptable in Flashpoint 6 years ago, that frustrates more than most other flaws. Stand beside a Hummer and continue to empty your M16 into one of the doors. For a while, it looks like its having no effect, but don't worry, the vehicle is accumilating damage points and before you know it, it has reached enough points to magically change into damage stage 1. This transition is nothing short of comical, as the vehicle now instantly appears to have major damage to every panel (thats right, not just the door you were shooting at), and looks more like it has just tumbled end-over-end down a hill. Continue to shoot and along comes damage stage two (fully wrecked), with a transition that is just about as smooth as stepping on a mine. Apparently now there is some better detection of damage to certain vehicle parts, such as being able to disable tail rotors on a heli, but in my opinion tacking on a few extras to a fundamentally flawed damage system is nowhere near acceptable.

3 ~ Collisions are handled in a Flashpoint-esk way. Drive your tank through a field and all looks fine, continue on through a forest and watch as your amazing tank glides through the dense forest with the same ease it did through the empty field. While tanks are powerfull, a dense forest is more than a major obsticle for any tank, and to see your M1A1 part the forest like the red sea with not so much as a slight flinch is unsettling at best. And the way in which trees and other objects fall has 2001 written all over it. Once a tree gets knocked into by a vehicle (this goes for poles and fences too, to mention just a few), it goes into 'fall-mode' and falls in a random direction. While in this mystical 'fall-mode' the the object becomes a hollogram and so any other object (such as the vehicle that just hit it) can freely drive right through it as if it wasn't there. Fences are worse, and always seem to fall towards the vehicle that drove into them as opposed to away like they should. Unless of course you drive into the fence length ways (hitting the narrow edge on the end as opposed to straight on), which results in the fense still falling down flat to the left or right. Again, the hologram effect ensures your Hummer will happily cruise right through the imaginary fence with no damage at all.

To be honest, i have only highlighted 3 features because these are so fundimental to any game these days (6 years on from Flashpoint) that if they are so hurrendously implemented then there really is no point picking out any other flaws. There are probably 10 or 12 more major flaws such as the 3 above, some of which are just as big.

So to sum up, ArmA would have been a nice game to get in 2002 or 2003 as an expansion/patch to Flashpoint, but in 2007, it is nothing short of an epic disappointment.

Overall: 4/10  sad_o.gif

My System: I thought it might be worth posting my system spec incase people are wondering why i feel the graphics are dated. Without bragging, i strongly doubt many here can claim system spec close to this.

. Pentium 2.67GHZ Core 2 Duo

. 2GB Corair twin-matched RAM

. geForce x8800GTS 640mb Graphics card

. 640GB HD (RAID 0 setup)

With this spec, i have ArmA running with every setting to the absolute max and it runs 100% smoothly with ease, no problems at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You claim some things in Arma are not acceptable for a 2007 PC game, personally i believe Arma is the only acceptable 2007 PC game... everything else is too small for 2007, prettier but still as small as 2001 games, Arma is actually larger than flashpoint and handles more stuff going on.

Bigger and much better smile_o.gif .

edit: To say that Arma should have been a flashpoint expantion in 2004 is very ignorant of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You claim some things in Arma are not acceptable for a 2007 PC game, personally i believe Arma is the only acceptable 2007 PC game... everything else is too small for 2007, prettier but still as small as 2001 games, Arma is actually larger than flashpoint and handles more stuff going on.

Bigger and much better smile_o.gif .

Please don't gloss over the points i made in my original post by simply saying that im wrong, and ArmA has improved on everything in Flashpoint. I made some very valid points, and none of the flaws i have pointed out can be denied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shigsy - I'm surprised that someone like you would have liked OFP in the first place. Is there any other game where you can level an entire forest or city? Sure it's not perfect in ArmA, but at least it's possible.

I don't understand your comments about the graphics. Do you have it on low settings or something? It looks better than the latest Battlefield crap, it beats the cartooney look of Oblivion (and things at a distance don't look nearly as bad), has a view distance that goes beyond even the size of maps from most games. The graphics certainly look good to me.

I think you're just full of crap because you don't like the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand your comments about the graphics. Do you have it on low settings or something?

Just to clear things up, i added some system spec and graphics info to the end of my original post.

And as for your comment about me not liking the game, your dead right. Read my post again, i go into very specific details and facts about why that is. Remeber, i was as big a Flashpoint fan as most, im just not a blind follower of ArmA. It can't live off Flashpoints name, it has to stand on its own and it simply doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, name a game in 2004 that had HDR  whistle.gif

Graphics are surely up to date, if they made it even heavier, people would be complaining about the game being unplayable(which some already do) So i miss your point there.

Also I think the AI was greatly improved, the example you show was probably in CTI I expect, and ok, it isn't that great, but no AI is perfect, and with a gameworld this large, it's hard to let them react on every different situation, as there are thousands of them. The AI was greatly improved to me, they actually try to find you, come after you, surround you and much more, which wasn't in OFP.

The damage system isn't ok either, but they improved it, and it isn't a sequal to ofp, it's more like an upgrade to OFP. A lot of other games have the same issue you know  wink_o.gif

To your final point, collision detection has way improved, ok, the thing with trees isn't exactly realistic, but hey, at least you don't bump to the tree and are halted suddenly against a tiny tree like in other games. No game is perfect(if you see one, I'd be happy to know )

Also what is the use of posting this? you don't want to buy the game, fine, but all people know about it, and it's their decission to buy it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well see it like this:

On all other games (except that 0,1%) trees and buildings are completely static.

If you had to choose between ugly destruction or no destruction, what would be your decision?

I prefer this.. whistle.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also what is the use of posting this? you don't want to buy the game, fine, but all people know about it, and it's their decission to buy it or not.

I posted this to see how many other people are in the same situation as me. I just want to know how many others out there loved Flashpoint and are disappointed with ArmA.

And im glad you mentioned the sudden halting issue, your M1A1 will plough through a forrest with ease but will be suddenly halted by a bus shelter! These are all MAJOR flaws that are 100% not acceptable in gaming anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To start off, i was a huge fan of Flashpoint and to this day i still rate it as one of my favourite games of all time, and one of the best games ever released on any platform. I remember getting the 1st Flashpoint demo a couple of months before its release and playing that mission over and over, never getting bored of it. Like many others, i bought Flashpoint the day of its release and for a couple of years it was pretty much the only game i played (when i wasn't playing CS online smile_o.gif). I expecially loved the editor, and i still don't think there has been an editor anywhere near as good to this day, despite it being 6 years since the release of Flashpoint.

And its this 6 year gap that brings me onto my main point, the reason i will not be buying ArmA. Flashpoint was, in its day, a fantastic game. Head and shoulders above anything else, unmatched freedom with a huge environment that nothing else could compete with. It felt lke a true war simulation as opposed to the typical arcade shooters of the time. In many ways, Flashpoint was revolutionary. Any vehicle was useable, weather it was land based, air or sea, civilian or millitary. If you could see it, you could drive/fly it. This alone made Flashpoint a huge leap forward in gaming. Think about it, the next big game to offer this was Battlefield 1942 which didnt arrive for another year and half, and even then it didn't offer as big an environment as Flashpoint, as many vehicles or the simulation feel. Not to mention the outstanding editor and 1-player campaigns.

Its now 2007 and we are on the verge of the long anticipated release (europe/usa) of the sequel to one the greatest games of all time, Armed Assault. Like everyone here i could not wait for the demo, which i downloaded as soon as it was released. I've been playing it since and have held off making a final judgement, that is until now.

First off, ArmA has clearly improved on the graphics of Flashpoint. The world is more detailed, with fancier textures and lighting etc. Having said that, ArmA is still a long way off the modern competition when it comes to eye candy, looking more like a game from 2004 as opposed to 2007. But that was never going to be an issue for me, ArmA (like Flashpoint) was going to be all about gameplay. However, amazingly this is where ArmA falls over. It seems very clear that the vast majority of this game is nothing more than a slightly sugar coated version of Flashpoint. We all knew ArmA was not going to be a whole new game, built from the ground-up to take advantage off the modern bells and whistles, but we all expected at least a small update to some core features such as AI, collision detection, physics etc. The fact is, these very things have not moved on an inch since Flashpoint. While they were good for their day in 2001, they look nothing short of antique in 2007. Gaming advances very quickly, and 6 years is a lifetime in terms of gaming technology.

To bring this article to a conclusion, ill just list a few of my biggest disappointments with ArmA:

1 ~ The AI is exactly the same as Flashpoint, with soldiers zig-zagging aimlessly across the terrain. If you approach a group of enemy soldiers in your M1A1 you will see just how dated the AI is, as the soldiers attempt to deal with this extreme threat by lying down and waiting to be run over. Or better yet, stand still while the tank attempts to run them over, pushing them along until they accumilate enough damage points to drop dead. Its just as lame to see a soldier take 10 - 20 rounds from your M1A1 MG while he is in the middle of lying down (or standing up), only to see it have no affect. That is until he reaches his lying down or standing up state, when all the hits are registered at once and he drops dead.

2 ~ Its this very damage points system, which was mildly acceptable in Flashpoint 6 years ago, that frustrates more than most other flaws. Stand beside a Hummer and continue to empty your M16 into one of the doors. For a while, it looks like its having no effect, but don't worry, the vehicle is accumilating damage points and before you know it, it has reached enough points to magically change into damage stage 1. This transition is nothing short of comical, as the vehicle now instantly appears to have major damage to every panel (thats right, not just the door you were shooting at), and looks more like it has just tumbled end-over-end down a hill. Continue to shoot and along comes damage stage two (fully wrecked), with a transition that is just about as smooth as stepping on a mine. Apparently now there is some better detection of damage to certain vehicle parts, such as being able to disable tail rotors on a heli, but in my opinion tacking on a few extras to a fundamentally flawed damage system is nowhere near acceptable.

3 ~ Collisions are handled in a Flashpoint-esk way. Drive your tank through a field and all looks fine, continue on through a forest and watch as your amazing tank glides through the dense forest with the same ease it did through the empty field. While tanks are powerfull, a dense forest is more than a major obsticle for any tank, and to see your M1A1 part the forest like the red sea with not so much as a slight flinch is unsettling at best. And the way in which trees and other objects fall has 2001 written all over it. Once a tree gets knocked into by a vehicle (this goes for poles and fences too, to mention just a few), it goes into 'fall-mode' and falls in a random direction. While in this mystical 'fall-mode' the the object becomes a hollogram and so any other object (such as the vehicle that just hit it) can freely drive right through it as if it wasn't there. Fences are worse, and always seem to fall towards the vehicle that drove into them as opposed to away like they should. Unless of course you drive into the fence length ways (hitting the narrow edge on the end as opposed to straight on), which results in the fense still falling down flat to the left or right. Again, the hologram effect ensures your Hummer will happily cruise right through the imaginary fence with no damage at all.

To be honest, i have only highlighted 3 features because these are so fundimental to any game these days (6 years on from Flashpoint) that if they are so hurrendously implemented then there really is no point picking out any other flaws. There are probably 10 or 12 more major flaws such as the 3 above, some of which are just as big.

So to sum up, ArmA would have been a nice game to get in 2002 or 2003 as an expansion/patch to Flashpoint, but in 2007, it is nothing short of an epic disappointment.

Overall: 4/10  sad_o.gif

Well, you have some very valid points, although I see all of them (except one) as minor glitches that doesn't ruin the gameplay nor the athmosphear for me.

The AI is a dissapointment indeed... I cannot find ANY improvement at all, by looking at it compared to Flashpoint. The Flashpoint AI was very impressive back in 2001, but the lack of 'humanness' is shining through very clear with these modern graphics. I am just thankful BI made it so we can edit the AI and make it work like it is supposed to.

I like the graphics in this game, but as you say yourself - graphics isn't everything. I would disagree about the collision detection, though. While it certainly can be improved (fence/tree falling over, as you stated) it is ALOT better than in OFP where you could get stuck in around every corner of the buildings etc. The collision detection offered in ArmA gives us the oppertunity to do CQB which puts an entire new aspect of gameplay compared to OFP.

The 'model/texture-change' of the jeep being shot upon is, indeed, pretty sad. I even liked the OFP one more than that, since now it simply looks sort of magical?! But it doesn't remove any of he athmosphear of the game to me. I really enjoy the game, and play it alot MP coop using TS.

There are alot of things that needs to be tweaked, but I havent lost faith. Here are a few I can mention of the back of my head (all in MP):

'minimap' (ESC) shouldnt center on your position.

Voice should work and should not crash server.

Spawning near water shouldnt make clients crash.

Fix the AI and make it look like actual soldiers.

Fix the grass to work at longer distances, such as how Delta Force did it - by putting an alpha channel just above ground making units more and more invisible over distance if there is grass.

VTOL should be implemented. It is pretty bizar that they added the Harrier but forgot to enable the number one feature that it is known for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well, name a game in 2004 that had HDR

Your missing the point, im not saying the game has no modern graphics improvements, im saying it is still dated. Plently of games pre-HRD were better to look at than ArmA is. HDR does not magically convert an ugly game to a work of art.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do we want to know that your not buying arma what a pointless thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, you have some very valid points,  although I see all of them (except one) as minor glitches that doesn't ruin the gameplay nor the athmosphear for me.

Finally, a sensible and worthy reply smile_o.gif Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You also have to remember this is only BIS second big game they are releasing for PC. You cant expect the world of goodies and BF Gfx and all the rest. mad_o.gif

edit: And saying you were a fan of cs says it all. mad_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do we want to know that your not buying arma what a pointless thread.

Don't let the thread title cause you to miss the points being made here. If it helps you, pretend its titled 'ArmA (2007) Vs Flashpoint (2001)'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also what is the use of posting this? you don't want to buy the game, fine, but all people know about it, and it's their decission to buy it or not.

I posted this to see how many other people are in the same situation as me. I just want to know how many others out there loved Flashpoint and are disappointed with ArmA.

And im glad you mentioned the sudden halting issue, your M1A1 will plough through a forrest with ease but will be suddenly halted by a bus shelter! These are all MAJOR flaws that are 100% not acceptable in gaming anymore.

There have been posts by people that were similar to yours, although mostly because they were having problems running the game. There is a threat with peoples opinions about this game further down the forum, it seems like most people are happy with it though.

Give the game some time, the CTI in the demo doesn't really give a good impression of the game. I still don't see why you find the graphics so bad, looks a lot better than many current games.

If the game had a realistic physics engine then I doubt the game would be able to handle hundreds of tanks and soldiers smoothly like it does now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please don't gloss over the points i made in my original post by simply saying that im wrong, and ArmA has improved on everything in Flashpoint. I made some very valid points, and none of the flaws i have pointed out can be denied.
Quote[/b] ]

ArmA is still a long way off the modern competition when it comes to eye candy, looking more like a game from 2004 as opposed to 2007.

Oh please, it must be just you...

Quote[/b] ]

It seems very clear that the vast majority of this game is nothing more than a slightly sugar coated version of Flashpoint. We all knew ArmA was not going to be a whole new game, built from the ground-up to take advantage off the modern bells and whistles.

Arma is a whole new game using an improved version of bohemia's engine, its not one of those games that license a comercial graphics engine (like UT) and build up from there.

Arma uses bump mapping, advanced shadders and normal mapping, real time shadows and HDR lighting. The quality of the artwork and effects is very high, for a game this large Arma looks above everything else out there. Thats bells and whisles for you.

The a.i. is not much diferent but its far from bad, in most new 2007 games you dont have an editor to see how the a.i. works with absolutely zero editing. There are actions that must be left editable for the mission maker to manipulate and have you ever heard of the FSM editor?

The damage point system... i agree and dislike it but i know that making a precise damage system on a game that uses so many units would be very dificult and system resource intensive.

Colision detection has been much improved (game is now more solid), the damaged objects missing geometry is valid but did you know that there are almost 1 million objects in Sahrani?

Its a compromise im sure most will live with instead of having a perfect 300x300 meters environment to interact with.

Complaints go from people that find the game to be too diferent to others that dont find the game to be diferent enough, they (BIS) cant please everyone. IMO they have done a great job improving the engine graphically, animation and gameplay wise and they are still working on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The points made about the AI's very restricted repertoire,

the overly simplified damage modelling and the comical tank

vs forest interaction I think are all very valid. In particular

tanks absolutely must be prevented from ploughing through

forests as if they weren't there. That is beyond ridiculous

and presumably easily fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is pointless. I can't believe I am replying to 1 guy saying he is not buying the game, who cares wink_o.gif

People will buy the game to play what they want to play, and just now and for the last 6 years, there is no game that gives you the total freedom that ArmA gives you.

Sure there are lots of bugs and some things suck (AI) but it is still way better than anything out there.

Give the modders 6 months and we will have a very nice gamming experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ti0n3r
Quote[/b] ]I won't be buying ArmA sad_o.gif

Bad for you wow_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My advice would be to trust your instincts and Bis.

you have pointed out 3 things and have many more,that have made you come to this conclusion "i wont buy arma".

You should know that it has been admitted recently that arma was released a litle to early and it dosent yet represent its full potential.

why dont you wait until the 505 release and see if Bis have continued there policy of listening to there community, you are one of many that have pointed out the problems and should give them there chance to respond.

I personally believe that apart from a few of the problems , those being ones that we must always accept are nesseccary in order for

Bis products to be so large scale,will be fixed as much as it is possible.

If when the 505 release is nowhere near your expectaions,then you will have a legitimate right to say to yourself, this game isnt for me i have done all this in ofp for 4 years i dont want to do it for another 4 in arma.

I agree with some of your points, but in a different way i must accept that in order to play such a large scale game with large environments , there must be compromise,but some are needing a fix.

And finally i would say that the biggest reason for not buying arma is that, you are not able to make your opinions heard ,without being slagged off in the forums wink_o.gif.

yours

DB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And finally i would say that the biggest reason for not buying arma is that, you are not able to make your opinions heard ,without being slagged off in the forums

Part and parcel of forum culture wink_o.gif

(Show me a forum where it doesnt happen, and it'll either be a private board or have no members)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VTOL should be implemented. It is pretty bizar that they added the Harrier but forgot to enable the number one feature that it is known for.

You'll be glad to know that they'll be doing just that when the 505 release/next patch is available.

Shigsy has made clear some major flaws which are in ArmA

and were there in Flashpoint that i will admit make me cringe when they occur, but i was sure we all knew that ArmA was only going to be an updated flashpoint so i can't see why that would put him off buying the game.

I've been playing the demo and i'm not totally satisfied with what i've seen but i'll still buy the full game, and that's not because i'm a fanboy to BIS, it's because i've had hundreds if not thousands of hours of enjoyment out of flashpoint and i know i'll get the same from ArmA. I would say 25 pounds is a very small price for what i know will be some fun times ahead.

By the way it's not possible to run this game with everything on full. When you set your view distance to more than 3000 ( i think) your terrain detail will only go to high and not very high. tounge2.gif

edit, my pound sign isn't working

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Backing up Deanosbeano to suggest you're being a bit hasty:

It's not done yet. Think of 505 as the proper release, and look for the small patches then to fix the small bugs. But to each their own. If you don't buy it, cya. confused_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shigsy, my advice is to ignore those who don't want to acknowledge that their "Emperor has no clothes". They seem to be just upset because those who had some of your expectations are more than just a small group. So in a way they feel threatened by the reality of the situation. To be honest, if Arma was just a reskinned OFP I would have been happy to pay for that. But you are right about some of the things that are obvious when it comes to how this game was developed. My list is much longer than yours but the only difference is I do expect to buy the game and here is why.

1)BIS is not a big company with deep pockets, and they do need to stay in business because if they fail, all we have left is what? Normally I don't support companies that don't put out good product but BIS has a track record of coming through in the end. So until they give me a reason not to trust them, for now I will. Not to mention the modders who will fine tune the game like they did for OFP.

2)Potential- seriously, ask yourself what game has the potential that OFP and Arma have. Sure right now this game is a shell of what it can be. However, while I m playing the game and getting frustrated by so many irritating things about the game, my head explodes when I start thinking about how I can make missions in this new environment when some of the kinks do get worked out. MY group got a lot of milage out of OFP, but ARMA has much much more when i think about it.

3)Its a monopoly. Yes thats right, this game is a monopoly and we are the victims of that because we love it. Lets be serious for a second and think, when I read an interview with the devs of OFP many moons ago, I remember them saying that they don't intend on reinventing the wheel year after year, but to keep expanding the game on its current course toward a total battlefield experience when technology allows it. So this kind of goes back to reason #1. If they fail, we will never see that final goal. Do you think EA or UBI would ever put a goal like that out, since their only goal seems to be next quarters profit report. BIS is our only hope of seeing that end result.

So as you can see I too am tortured by the game as it is. I don't plan on playing the game in its current form, if they fix a few things here and there I may play it occasionally but never like OFP. But when the modders get there hands on this it will be far far better than anything out there right now. This im certain of. But even so, this game is just a stepping stone to that next level down the road and I will buy the game. Not to play right now, but to support BIS and to show them they have my trust. What they do with it is now up to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×