Answer me frankly, plz.

[Maddmatt 1]

to you all, (pesimists) wait just 5(five) years and you will see, that armed assault will be even better than OFP!

Game 2 should be out before that. ArmA is already better than OFP anyway.

[jaffo 0]

The only way in which it is better is that it has join in progress. It does look nicer if you have a powerful PC but being proper gamers we aren't swayed by eye candy.. are we?

In every other way it's inferior to OFP. Maybe after another year of patches but certainly not at the moment.

[Maddmatt 1]

The only way in which it is better is that it has join in progress. It does look nicer if you have a powerful PC but being proper gamers we aren't swayed by eye candy.. are we?

In every other way it's inferior to OFP. Maybe after another year of patches but certainly not at the moment.

Well can OFP handle a 400 man battle without running like a slideshow? OFP can't even have multiple gun turrets .

[Luciano 0]

Of course OFP is better. The only good thing about ARMA is graphics, and JIP. But people playing such a game don't care about graphics, so you can take that out.

-OFP flight system was better

-OFP handling of vehicles was superior (No fixed camera)

-Infantry combat system was better (You actually felt like being the soldier instead of giving inputs to a robat and seeing delays on screen.) Bis tried to implement mementum and they failed.

-No annoying HDR in OFP. Till BIS fixes the HDR in ARMA, this stands.

-OFP 1.22 can be compared to ARMA 1.04, NOT OFP 1.00. And OFP 1.22 didn't crash randomly every few hours, less bugs, more stable.

-Superior campaign in every way

-Smaller island BUT better in MP because you don't have to wait 20 seconds everytime you check a map.

-More clan friendly

-More MP friendly in MP games that are not COOP.

JIP is kind of useless right now because there are so few people playing. So if you want to be fair, JIP would be the only thing (gameplay wise) where ARMA is better.

Multiple gun turrets and everything else you guys stated are good additions, but they don't really affect the gameplay. I rather have a stable ARMA then all this eyecandy crap like grass.

Want more?

[Maddmatt 1]

Of course OFP is better. The only good thing about ARMA is graphics, and JIP. But people playing such a game don't care about graphics, so you can take that out.

-OFP flight system was better

-OFP handling of vehicles was superior (No fixed camera)

-Infantry combat system was better (You actually felt like being the soldier instead of giving inputs to a robat and seeing delays on screen.) Bis tried to implement mementum and they failed.

-No annoying HDR in OFP. Till BIS fixes the HDR in ARMA, this stands.

-OFP 1.22 can be compared to ARMA 1.04, NOT OFP 1.00. And OFP 1.22 didn't crash randomly every few hours, less bugs, more stable.

-Superior campaign in every way

-Smaller island BUT better in MP because you don't have to wait 20 seconds everytime you check a map.

-More clan friendly

-More MP friendly in MP games that are not COOP.

JIP is kind of useless right now because there are so few people playing. So if you want to be fair, JIP would be the only thing (gameplay wise) where ARMA is better.

Want more?

OFP helicopter flightmodel better? Just because it was easier you think it's better. ArmA simulates choppers much better than ArmA did.

The handling of vehicles is the same as OFP, maybe not for the mouse-drivers but the keyboard is fine.

Infantry combat feels fine to me, what the hell are you talking about?

The HDR problem is something only some people have, when it works fine it's not annoying. Set brightness to 1.00 - that might fix it.

The 20 second wait when checking the map is pretty much solved with the GPS in 1.04.

And what do you mean more MP friendly and more clan friendly?

And no, I don't want to see more of your crap posts. You don't contribute anything useful, and some of your points are just a load of crap.

[blackdog~ 0]

I totally agree with you on all points there Luciano...

[ck-claw 1]

our clan and the other clans that we have had JO in the past with in ofp have made the transition to Arma!!

and i dont see one of em/us ever going back to ofp!

[Bunks 0]

Is ArmA any better than OPF?

If yes, what makes you think so?

Is it better? Yes, its a newer and more shiny toy with a few gadgets. When they do fix the bugs and playability issues it will be far superior. But in its current form it is less enjoyable, more frustrating, and very disappointing to what it could/should have been with current technology. Relative to its time, OFP was a new concept with many issues with some being fixed and some not. Arma is an old concept with even more issues and still some of the same old problems exist that should have been the 1st fixes from the old game. So the short answer, yes its better but not for some who could care less about shiny new toys.

[Tracer 0]

Of course OFP is better.  The only good thing about ARMA is graphics, and JIP.  But people playing such a game don't care about graphics, so you can take that out.  

-OFP flight system was better

-OFP handling of vehicles was superior (No fixed camera)

-Infantry combat system was better (You actually felt like being the soldier instead of giving inputs to a robat and seeing delays on screen.)  Bis tried to implement mementum and they failed.

-No annoying HDR in OFP.  Till BIS fixes the HDR in ARMA, this stands.

-OFP 1.22 can be compared to ARMA 1.04, NOT OFP 1.00.  And OFP 1.22 didn't crash randomly every few hours, less bugs, more stable.

-Superior campaign in every way

-Smaller island BUT better in MP because you don't have to wait 20 seconds everytime you check a map.

-More clan friendly

-More MP friendly in MP games that are not COOP.

JIP is kind of useless right now because there are so few people playing.  So if you want to be fair, JIP would be the only thing (gameplay wise) where ARMA is better.  

Multiple gun turrets and everything else you guys stated are good additions, but they don't really affect the gameplay.  I rather have a stable ARMA then all this eyecandy crap like grass.

Want more?

It's nothing at all to do with graphics for PC games sake!

(What a lame excuse)

Graphics are for realism -oh look not a blade of grass in OFP.

Last i looked when i lay down on the ground was i couldn't see much because of real GRASS and PLANTS!!

Those that moan about the graphics can't actualy admit that their machine can't utilise them.....:whi: So they blame the software....

As for your comments about the flight models...lol get real! Here's a tip; go to an airshow and actualy fly a helicopter simulator or jet sim that the base uses for it's own pilots (it will cost you quite a bit mind and generaly on exclusive visitor packages -not talking the rubbish that the masses pay pennies for Lol) and you'll be in for a real eye-opener!!

[Luciano 0]

UPDATE:

To clarify some things, when I was talking about the flight system and vehicle control system, I was referring to controling them with mouse and keyboard. I'm just not the type of player who feels that you need to have 2 joysticks on your table to play a game. And I don't feel like switching from joystick to keyboard everytime I get in/out of a vehicle. For the people with joysticks, this probably doesn't apply, but your the minority, so I speak for the majority of gamers here.

@Madman,

If I understand corectly from your previous posts, your from SA and you don't even have the game yet, so why even bother talking about it in this thread?

[imustkill 0]

UPDATE:

To clarify some things, when I was talking about the flight system and vehicle control system, I was referring to controling them with mouse and keyboard. I'm just not the type of player who feels that you need to have 2 joysticks on your table to play a game. And I don't feel like switching from joystick to keyboard everytime I get in/out of a vehicle. For the people with joysticks, this probably doesn't apply, but your the minority, so I speak for the majority of gamers here.

I think the majority people who do fly will fly with the joystick...

You act as if having a joystick is a huge investment.

Anywho, ArmA has its issues, but every game does, especially when it comes from a smaller company. BIS is not EA...give them a break.

[Jack-UK 0]

UPDATE:

To clarify some things, when I was talking about the flight system and vehicle control system, I was referring to controling them with mouse and keyboard.   I'm just not the type of player who feels that you need to have 2 joysticks on your table to play a game.  And I don't feel like switching from joystick to keyboard everytime I get in/out of a vehicle.  For the people with joysticks, this probably doesn't apply, but your the minority, so I speak for the majority of gamers here.

@Madman,

If I understand corectly from your previous posts, your from SA and you don't even have the game yet, so why even bother talking about it in this thread?

I use mouse and keyboard, no joysticks, no pads, no fancy track IR or anything.

I've played the demo since the day it was released, and im fine with it. I've ordered my full version too, it should be here by Friday at the latest, then i can give my opineon on the campaign etc.

But i find ArmA much more enjoyable, realistic and fun than OFP.

The only things i agree with you on is the campaign (ive yet to see any positive comments about it apart from its more complicated) and the couple of second waiting time between switching the map. Big deal, i'll get over waiting half a second, plus ive heard the UK version has a minimap feature or something like that. The campaign i am dissapointed about, but the community will make one twice as good, plus the OFP campaigns are being ported over. So im happy.

[Skumball 0]

@Madman,

If I understand corectly from your previous posts, your from SA and you don't even have the game yet, so why even bother talking about it in this thread?

Owning the game, I can say that all MaddMatt's points are valid. Helicopter flying is much better because it is more realistic, e.g. flying height does not match the terrain height

[andersson 285]

In my experience arma is more difficult to play than OFP. That is because there is more simulation when controlling a soldier.

I wasnt impressed in the beginning when playing as a soldier because I was used with OFPs controls. But if I compare OFPs control over a soldier to the "normal" FPS with the floating arms, I think OFP is difficult. It did turn away of some my friends, they couldnt frag the way they were used to. You had to get used to the more sluggish way OFP simulated soldiers.

I think ArmA has taken that a step further and made it more realistic. When I accepted that I really start to like the new way you must controll the soldier. Its much more realistic, in my opinion. When I compare it with my own experience from real world, I´m not so quick and good as a soldier in OFP. I´m closer to the more slow sluggish movements in ArmA (for the record, I am trained and also used to move and shoot). Go out in the forest and run around and go prone, crawl around and get up. Compared to that ArmAs soldiersimulation is more realistic than OFPs.

But I had to really get over OFP and accept the new feeling before I could appreciate ArmA. But now there is no reason to go back (maybe to everon for nostalgic reasons).

Soldier-simulation and getting used to that aside, this is what I think is better in ArmA compared to OFP:

AI - they are much more aggresive and you cant take them out ''delta force way". They do notice that someone is shooting at them and try to find you. That is better. I cant think of one thing where they are worse than in OFP.

Flying - You must think ahead and practise, but the feeling of flying is there. In my humble opinion much more realistic than OFP (I always fly with joystick)

Driving - I feel the weight of the car much more now, I think its a big improvement (and when I use a wheel itsreally fun to drive)

Grafics - cant compare ArmA and OFP. And yes, the grafics makes it more realistic. The only thing moving in OFP was friendlies and enemys. You couldnt get the sun in your eyes. More difficult, like in real life.

JIP - OFP needed that badly

Multiturret - OFP needed that to..

Editing - More scripting commands

This is MY experience, mostly based on the demo with the crappy missions. I miss Steal the car and 1985  

edit: grammar...

[froggyluv 2136]

Nice post Anderson I agree with you on all points.

It took me a while to get used to the soldier's momentum but now there's no going back. Simulations are supposed to feel 'weighty' or else your really just playing 'mouse wars'.

I've never been an on-line gamer with crappy dial-up and sociopathic teammates but I've been having a great time with just the ArmA demo MP. Having serious teamates makes all the difference. The Demo itself (MP) is already worth money as I play it more than my 5 day-old R6 Vegas ($55) .

[sixfour 0]

....

Multiturret - OFP needed that to..

....

What exactly does that mean ?

[Average Joe 0]

I think that means he feels OFP needed multiple gunning positions.

[action man 0]

Is ArmA any better than OPF?

If yes, what makes you think so?

No! Because ofp with the right customised mod is much better! Why? i hear you ask.Simple you don't need the kind of comp you would only find at N.A.S.S.A EDIT = for the sake of people who don't"get it" It takes a lot of hardware to play it at acceptable fps

[ck-claw 1]

??

i dont have a N.A.S.A pc??

[Dudester 0]

I like Armed assault for multiplayer CH and coop, but CTF has become a joke now. I used to play CTF all the time in OFP, but in this i find it horrible to play. I don't recall anyone capping a flag anytime i have played it, but that might be down to some crap map making.

[guerilla -MCY- 0]

i think it depends on the point of view. ArmA is better in allmost every aspect to ofp 1.96. sad is that it went really more into the direction of coop players as for the ctf - dm part it is just too slow paced and like mentioned, it feels like guiding a robot. BIS stated that they will keep the balance of simulating and having gamefun and thats where they failed a bit or lets say its 70% vs 30%. don't get me wrong, i'll never return to ofp, because the graphical beauty of ArmA is just far suprior to ofp and if i image what it will look like in ArmA 1.96 well...

give BIS a change

[boake 0]

Considering that ArmA is not the true sequel of OFP, it would be appropriate to call this game as upgraded version of OFP.

Of course, ArmA is much more superior graphically than OFP, but I can't say its gameplay is better than OFP. It seems they spent most of the time in revamping the game engine. But they should've invest more time in making solid single player game as good as OFP.

[max power 21]

ArmA v.1.03 (demo) vs. OFP v.1.0...oh, I dunno, take your pick.

Well.. the campaign in ofp was cool... everything else is pretty much the same except that the graphics are good and there are some slight differences in game mechanics. I think ArmA is alittle less broken and bland than OFP was when it first came out. That said, I was all over OFP since it came out like Oprah on a baked ham!

The sounds in ArmA are a mixed bag, just like they were in ofp. There seems to be a more infantry centric gameplay dynamic in that there are less tanks, the tanks are less powerful, and there are more armoured cars and jeeps in ArmA.

Also, there seems to be a move toward a more team-play and tactics driven gameplay dynamic. Soldier skill seems to be less of an issue in that you can't, say, hunker down in a line formation at the top of a hill and cut apart a superior force as they wiggle around in a confused manner trying to figure out how to maneover. This tactic gets you dead... and in the case of the coop in ArmA, it gets you dead, then the guy you're trying to respawn into, then the next guy... you get the picture.

There are community complaints about the ArmA campaign being unrealistic and not character driven, which makes it less immersive and engaging. I can't comment until I get the full game but I can see this as being a real concern but not so much a deal breaker for me. People do like their stories, though, me included.

I direct comparison between ArmA vs. OFP will only really be possible in a few years after we see how BIS develops the thing. Hopefully the game will do reasonably well in NA and Europe and BIS will have the resources and the dollar-induced motivation to further develop the game with an expansion.

[Luciano 0]

Quote[/b] ] I think ArmA is alittle less broken and bland than OFP was when it first came out. That said, I was all over OFP since it came out like Oprah on a baked ham!

Its not fair to compare ARMA 1.03 to OFP 1.00.

ARMA had 2 patches already, 1.03 being the third built. And the UK release is the 4th built. Just because they released the demo after the third built, thats their problem.

ARMA 1.03 should be compared to OFP 1.22 since 1.22 was OFP's second patch.

But why compare them in this way? That would mean BIS learned nothing from the OFP release. I would have at least expected old bugs from OFP not to apear in ARMA. How wrong I was.

[max power 21]

It's more fair to compare some pieces of software with similar development times than to compare one to another with two or three times more.