PC Format review 88% and SP Demo disk

[walker 0]

Hi all

I just went down to the local mall and ArmA has reached Number 2 in the UK Game chart in less than a week!

Also there is a nice review of ArmA in PC Format magazine with ArmA getting 88%

And on top of that the UK release of the ArmA SP and MP Demo!

There is also an A2 colour Map of the ArmA islands.

Kind Regards walker

[Fred DM 0]

88% for a game this buggy and incomplete? i wonder what they had to say to the singleplayer part of the game...

[Journeyman 0]

Nice find Walker!

[whisper 0]

88% for a game this buggy and incomplete? i wonder what they had to say to the singleplayer part of the game...

Fortunately for BI I guess testers don't have time to peek seriously at the campaign

[Fred DM 0]

88% for a game this buggy and incomplete? i wonder what they had to say to the singleplayer part of the game...  

Fortunately for BI I guess testers don't have time to peek seriously at the campaign

what else would they have tested, then? ArmA is not a multiplayer only game. normally, a reviewer is expected to have completed the game/campaign so he can give an overview and tell how it progresses and ends.

[froggyluv 2136]

I remember back in 2000-2001, Computer Gaming World gave the never heard of War Sim , Operation Flashpoint a 79%.

Their review seemed to find the 'game' odd and credited it as more of a 'soldier sim' than a game. That was all I need to hear, score be damned and i've never regretted it.

Some people get it, some don't.

[Jack-UK 0]

I think people are being a little extreme with their perceptions of the campaign. Sure, it doesnt compare to OFP's campaigns, but its not THAT bad, i think the news reporting idea is quite cool, and most of the missions are quite fun.

Dont get me wrong, its nothing compared to CWC/RES but i think some people saying it completely ruins the game are a bit too critical...

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

88% for a game this buggy and incomplete? i wonder what they had to say to the singleplayer part of the game...  

Well if you read the article its not exactly a glowing report... its starts off:

Quote[/b] ]Arma could score 50% and the reviewer could have a point. The words 'accessable' or 'finished' will not appear anywhere over the next few pages, though.

The article echos the feeling of most of the community.  its got a tone of dissappointment, but edged with a lot of hope that ArmA could be somethign incredible once its "finished". Its an interesting read especially if you have actually paid attention to people's complaint on these forums.

The summary is:

Quote[/b] ]Far from flawless, but you have to admire the sheer ambition and scale of the game. I'll be playing this at home for years.

I think it got the 88% for what ArmA may become rather than what it is right now. Or is it that 505 Games have shelled out for ALOT of advertising space in most of Future publishings magazines?

...or am i just cynical?  

[Maddmatt 1]

I'm still a bit pissed that the SP demo wasn't released online, there is no reason to delay it. Must be some deal with the magazines.

Anyway, I'm going to pick up my copy tomorrow. The game finally came out down here .

[whisper 0]

88% for a game this buggy and incomplete? i wonder what they had to say to the singleplayer part of the game...

Well if you read the article its not exactly a glowing report... its starts off:

Quote[/b] ]Arma could score 50% and the reviewer could have a point. The words 'accessable' or 'finished' will not appear anywhere over the next few pages, though.

The article echos the feeling of most of the community. its got a tone of dissappointment, but edged with a lot of hope that ArmA could be somethign incredible once its "finished". Its an interesting read especially if you have actually paid attention to people's complaint on these forums.

The summary is:

Quote[/b] ]Far from flawless, but you have to admire the sheer ambition and scale of the game. I'll be playing this at home for years.

I think it got the 88% for what ArmA may become rather than what it is right now. Or is it that 505 Games have shelled out for ALOT of advertising space in most of Future publishings magazines?

...or am i just cynical?

Wow. Then the guys feels like I do

[MATRA 0]

Anyone tryed the SP Demo yet?

Im very curious about that.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

88% was more than fair, but I guess it could have got a higher grade if they'd have waited until 1.05

[Potatomasher 0]

Dont get me wrong, its nothing compared to CWC/RES but i think some people saying it completely ruins the game are a bit too critical...

Wise words. I'm 100 % behind that too.

[Easy_tiger 0]

I think people are being a little extreme with their perceptions of the campaign. Sure, it doesnt compare to OFP's campaigns, but its not THAT bad, i think the news reporting idea is quite cool, and most of the missions are quite fun.

Dont get me wrong, its nothing compared to CWC/RES but i think some people saying it completely ruins the game are a bit too critical...

lol true the campaign isnt THAT bad, however flying T72's falling out of the sky shortly followed by their crew does spoil it a bit

[Fred DM 0]

I think people are being a little extreme with their perceptions of the campaign. Sure, it doesnt compare to OFP's campaigns, but its not THAT bad, i think the news reporting idea is quite cool, and most of the missions are quite fun.

Dont get me wrong, its nothing compared to CWC/RES but i think some people saying it completely ruins the game are a bit too critical...

and how long have you been playing the game? how many missions have you completed?

it's not just that the campaign isn't as immersive and well thought out as FP1985 as was, it has bugs and faults everywhere. here's a selection:

- many missions do not end 4 out of 5 tries. i've encountered about 3 of them so far, others had problems with other missions as well.

- weapon selection: you get all the russian weapons, but no american ones

- illogical mission settings: a lone conventional soldier with an unsuppressed M-4 is supposed to take out tanks and steal documents? give me a break. or this one: a Special Forces officer guarding a tent of supplies all night long?

- sometimes, not always, pathetic pathfinding by the AI; a Stryker drives back and forth and back and forth a few meters a few dozen times in front of some bushes until it finds a way around them.

- stupid friendly AI soldiers, get killed way too soon while i manage to survive much more easily. i usually end up leaving them behind. that's not how it's meant to be, is it?

i agree that the campaign isn't really bad, but it's just not been given enough attention.

at first, i was excited, too, but the longer you play, the more you notice, what is missing or buggy.

[Messiah 2]

Anyone tryed the SP Demo yet?

Im very curious about that.

nope - it came with pc gamer on the same day my full version of the game was released, so didnt really see the point

[Jack-UK 0]

i think im about half way through the campaign.. wont say exactly cause i dont want to give anything away...

But are you playing version 1.02 or 1.04?

I have yet to encounter any issues with the Campaign and i'm guessing i'm about 50% of the way through the campaign, though i havent done all the 'side missions'

[Potatomasher 0]

Well, i played the campaign through 2 months ago. There are 2 missions which don't end when it should. The last one and the "great battle".

There are lot's of annoying and immersion killer bugs in campaign, but overall it's a great "tutorial" of the engine itself.

[Fred DM 0]

i think im about half way through the campaign.. wont say exactly cause i dont want to give anything away...

But are you playing version 1.02 or 1.04?

I have yet to encounter any issues with the Campaign and i'm guessing i'm about 50% of the way through the campaign, though i havent done all the 'side missions'

i'm playing v1.02. German retail. maybe v1.04 has improved the missions a bit, i'll see when v1.05 is released.

and if you're only playing the main missions, the campaign will be over way too soon.

just have a look in the "Official Missions" section and you'll see what i mean.

[Fred DM 0]

Well, i played the campaign through 2 months ago. There are 2 missions which don't end when it should. The last one and the "great battle".

There are lot's of annoying and immersion killer bugs in campaign, but overall it's a great "tutorial" of the engine itself.

the tank mission "Armored Fist" also doesn't end sometimes. i beat it twice (once in the campaign, once in the single missions) but failed to end it a dozen times, even though all objectives had been completed. i'm not the only one with this problem.

the bridge bombing mission in Dolores also causes many problems.

the mission that has your squad of Special Forces clear a village also sometimes doesn't end.

i didn't pay for a tutorial. i expected a single player experience similar to OpF.

[Jack-UK 0]

Well ive played some of the side missions, im gonna go back and play them after

And maybe 1.04 has improved it.. as ive yet to find any issues. I'll let you know once i play the great battle and the last mission whether or not they end... Though im really hoping BIS did fix it for the 505 release..

[whisper 0]

i didn't pay for a tutorial. i expected a single player experience similar to OpF.

Yup, the people getting ArmA for this very reason will be rather disapointed.

Very bad move from BI

[Dwarden 1125]

Quote[/b] ]

6.0 Presentation

Generally substandard presentation throughout, with a lot of poorly written dialogue.

7.0 Graphics

The graphics engine is showing its age, though it still displays a decent amount of detail.

8.0 Sound

Minimalist yet realistic sound effects create a genuinely believable world, especially when coupled with the brutal sounds of war.

8.5 Gameplay

Superbly realistic, freeform and grandiose, with lashings of lifelike infantry and vehicle-based combat, but some poor interface decisions do let the side down.

9.5 Lasting Appeal

Armed Assault’s freeform nature and epic scope are virtually unrivalled both in single and multi-player. There’s months of replayability to be had here.

8.6

Great OVERALL

(out of 10 / not an average)

this clearly indicates whats needs to improve (yet the note about aged visuals was strange, wonder what settings and card was used)

[Rg 0]

6.0 Presentation

Generally substandard presentation throughout, with a lot of poorly written dialogue.

7.0 Graphics

The graphics engine is showing its age, though it still displays a decent amount of detail.

8.0 Sound

Minimalist yet realistic sound effects create a genuinely believable world, especially when coupled with the brutal sounds of war.

8.5 Gameplay

Superbly realistic, freeform and grandiose, with lashings of lifelike infantry and vehicle-based combat, but some poor interface decisions do let the side down.

9.5 Lasting Appeal

Armed Assault’s freeform nature and epic scope are virtually unrivalled both in single and multi-player. There’s months of replayability to be had here.

8.6

Great OVERALL

(out of 10 / not an average)

I’m sorry, but that made me laugh. 9.5 for "months" of replayability, not years.

I mean how low are his and others expectations for lasting appeal of most games? weeks?

This shows you how f*cked up this whole "industry" is. Instant gratification.....rinse and repeat.

[Messiah 2]

rinse and repeat indeed...

remember thought that a large proportion of those who buy the game may never dable in mission editing or modding, and that the campaign is in essence the link between the game and its engine and the consumer... we all know that arma is far beyond that, but joe blogs doesnt...

If i bought a FPS game which are an awful set of missions to complete, I'd send it back... arma is saved because i know its potential and I love MP.