Sorry but I need to know

[Nutronic 1]

Ok so what is better BF2 / BF2142 / ArmA?

To me ArmA looks pretty much like BF2 vanilla, but 2142 has been reduced to 19.99 in some GAME stores, including mine but if ArmA is worth it ill get that instead.

I have seem some fan videos of the bugs that the games has and I just find them funny, another thing is what protection is they against the sad little idiots who use cheats to gain something?

So if someone can answer me the questions that would be ace!

[Rattus 0]

BF2 to ArmA is like apples and oranges.

It really depends what you are after. If you just look for quick MP action, go for BF2.

But if you are interested in a very verstile and realistic (in some aspects more than in other shtough) game that offers everything from Deathmatch to cooperative missions that take several hours to complete, a solid singleplayer experience and due to the editor an infinite number of Missions both MP and SP, then you should take ArmA into consideration.

Both games have flaws though, and ArmA is still quite rough around certain edges, but those will be, unlike in BF2, ironed out eitehr by the devs or by the community.

[Shadow NX 1]

Maybe try and rent it before or borrow from a friend.

BF2 is nice but i stopped playign it after few weeks cause it got boring, wouldnt even touch 2142 cause the setting is absolutely not for me.

ArmA offers fun for years, look at OFP it was buggy aswell but became better and better and today you got tons of great mods that often offer more than just fighting.

At the end its personal taste.

If you want somethign to have fun for a long time get ArmA, if you prefer quick action rich battles id say get BF2 and use some of the great mods for it.

[sirex 0]

I have seem some fan videos of the bugs that the games has and I just find them funny, another thing is what protection is they against the sad little idiots who use cheats to gain something?

this is where arma has a natural edge. - Its a small game community so the idiots dont really have anywhere to hide. When taken along with the fact the community is mostly mature players your fairly safe from the idiots.

The game is new, so its fairly rife at the moment. But its not a short shelf life game like bf2 anyhow so it should level out after a while. -- Both games have their plus points, but i think arma is strong in many of the areas i felt bf2 was let down (marketing that trys to kill it off to make you buy the new game, lack of any new content, a restrictive ranking system so you cant do much to your own server etc).

Anyhow, if you want a quick blast, get bf2.

Otherwise, arma (i think the teamwork smile factor when playing with friends is higher in armed assault)

[killaalf 0]

Ok so what is better BF2 / BF2142 / ArmA?

Asking this question in here, what do you think that most people will answer? But what is better for one guy does not necessarily mean it must also be better for you, now does it?

BF2 is an arcade shooter with realistic looks and thats were the realism ends whereas one of the strongest assets of ArmA is its realism. BF2 has discrete maps whereas Arma has one big (and compared to BF2 the mapsize is gigantic) island. Both can be sheer fun or extremely frustrating, depending on the people you play with. BF2 is pretty much player vs. player only, while ArmA features not only PvP, but also coop (it's the mode I like best). ArmA gives you a very powerful editor and with it even a beginner can throw up a simple mission in a matter of minutes.

In the end it boils down to what I wrote above, it's a matter of personal preference. Me, I like and play them both, but I care more about ArmA.

[Nutronic 1]

Would you say ArmA is more like the mod Project Reality then?

[EricM 0]

Note that Arma is more about cooperative mode (players team against AI forces in constructed scenarios) than Capture the Flag (even though you can play CTF, CTI, DM...)

And there is no special goodie to "Unlock" or Ranking to climb etc... You have everything at your disposal in the editor right from the start. Therefore there is less reason/incentive for one of your teamate to go berserk...

The style of play is less forgiving and thus relatively slower-paced too (you have to be cautious), so it tends to appeal to a different kind of public (less juvenile)

Most of the more mature friends I have are switching progessively from BF2 to Arma with every new patch.

So :

- Quick happy-trigger shameless fun => BF series

- Longer planned coop missions => Arma

[whisper 0]

You'll probably get way more "buy ArmA" opinions here, we're a bit biased, ofc

Imho, the plus points for ArmA over BF series, if your looking for BF-like kind of action (and some here would cry at that thought, but that's another debate ) and gameplay

- scale. BF is tiny. ArmA is huge. It's not always a bonus, as too large area with too few people can lead to a boring game, but good mission design takes care of that

- variety. In BF, you play the same thing, over and over, with only the locations changing. You are not limited like that in ArmA.It comes with a very powerfull mission editor that permits to create every kind of map and gameplay imaginable. Missions are downloaded on connection when you don't have it, so you'll find various things on servers. And the more the time passes, the more missions, gameplay, ideas you'll see on servers. It's a game that gets better with time.

- immersion, but that's probably down to taste. I find ArmA very immersive, compared to BF series.

- IF OFP history repeats itself, then BI usually have a rather good following of their product. It takes time, but they don't abandon a game and release patches somtimes even long after game is sold.

The minus compared to BF :

- it's slower (well, 2142 is slow as well) and current animations are not all well done. There's some annoying things in them, mainly the fact that too often you can't interrupt them.

- it's buggy at the moment. I don't have too much issue personnaly, but looking at the boards, there's still too much strong bugs existing.

- it's less optimized. Performance are not really up to the expectations sometimes, but usually graphics tweaking smooth them up while keeping enough eye-candy.

- it's less friendly, mainly GUI wise (it's very rough in the edges ).

But I would insist on the 2, for me, very strong points in ArmA over others FPS and tactical shooters, etc... : scale and variety. Worth it only for these 2.

[killaalf 0]

Would you say ArmA is more like the mod Project Reality then?

I would say that PRMM is a step in ArmA's general direction but it's still a way off. For example you still have the same small mapsizes that make aerial or armored combat a joke, imo.

[Nutronic 1]

Ok i'll check out ArmA later today in the shops, see where I can get it cheap

2142 is currently 19.99 so I think its gonna be hard but we'll see

I was expecting bias comments but I knew some people would be able to make a comment without sounding like a fanboy aswell....before I do buy it, what happens when a patch is released is it automagically sorted out or do u come to the ArmA site and download it, also are they free?

Do you pay to play this online?

[whisper 0]

You need to get on site to download the patch and apply it manually

Patches are free

and online is free. Unless you want a big server that you have to rent, like most other FPS

[EricM 0]

Patches : Free, of course, but you have to download it yourself. Some have additional content too. A new patch is already in the making. Expect one at least in may for the US release.

Online : Free as well, plenty of dedicated servers available.

Extra Missions : Mostly Free, plenty of SP and MP user made missions to download on the internet

Get BF2142 too if you're into it, it has nothing to do with Arma, you won't feel like buying twice the same game.

[Nutronic 1]

I have 2 kids to think off too thats why I want to get it for about £19.99, ive read that the last ArmA patch brought with it some new vehicles.

I have a logitech attack 3 joystick, will that work fine for flying ?

[CG Man 0]

Arma is a few hundred sqaure miles bigger than BF  and in around 3 months their will be 400 x more weapons and vehicles than BF  produced by the free addon makers and in 6 months ArmA will work. I was really into BF untill the patch came out and stoped the came working dispite hundreds not being able to play it the makers took a year to bring out another patch EA are usless.

BF is a video game for teenagers that grownups can enjoy till ARMA beta comes out.

[Possessed 0]

The title of this thread is a provocative flame war starter. You should be banned

Anyway, when Forgotten Hope 2 mod is released it will be most probably the end of my ArmA network playing. Flying as a bird and waiting for the next round to start OR waiting for 8007000 error or other bug is not a worthy way to use your free time.

[Undeceived 392]

Yes, the patches are free (they must be free, BIS is owing us this ) and you have to download them at the sites or here at the forum.

And no, you don't have to pay to play online like i.e. World of Warcraft.

My personal opinion about ArmA and Battlefield:

In Armed Assault you sometimes have to march...

And to march long ways off! And this is one point (beside all the others points posted here), why I prefer ArmA instead of BF, where you are directly deployed in the battlezone.

But like it was said before aswell: Specially this point can be boring for some people.

A friend of mine really doesn't like Operation Flashpoint, he always says to me: "Why should I run 15 minutes to get to a fight, just seeing boring forests and fields?!"

For me personally - I love to see the forests and fields and mountains. And now in ArmA, the island really is 3x more beautiful, than in OFP!

[whisper 0]

The title of this thread is a provocative flame war starter. You should be banned

Anyway, when Forgotten Hope 2 mod is released it will be most probably the end of my ArmA network playing. Flying as a bird and waiting for the next round to start OR waiting for 8007000 error or other bug is not a worthy way to use your free time.

Well, for the "waiting in a bird" issue, I can only advise to play other missions where there is more friendly gameplay with respawn, etc...

And for the bug.. can't say much more than "sorry for you" and hoping BI will fix it

[Nutronic 1]

The title of this thread is a provocative flame war starter. You should be banned

Oh dear, I dont want a flame war to start and hope it wont

So lads and ladies....cus apparently they play games too keep the war on the battlefield

I'm going to look in town today for ArmA and see how it gets on with me, im hoping that I can fetch my flight skills across but im getting a feeling that ArmA has changed the way of flight too.

[tj72 0]

In ARMA you shoot someone the damage model is more realistic. In BF2 you just hand near a medic and health up. I allways had medics revive me and I would get killed again in two seconds, like a treadmill. Base raping and very repetitive gameplay on maps. I thought blowing up bridges and the enemies equipment was fun in BF2 though. Laying mines was good too.

I just couldnt understand a Barret not killing in one shot (to the chest). If you look at what that gun does to a person IRL and compare it to BF2's damage model.....its like a creepy toy and the devs are just making a joke out of something very serious. ARMA seems more serious and mature. Its slower and more spread out and has alot more to offer with ingame edit and all the other functionality you seem to have buy new (not very good) expansions for BF2.

[wamingo 1]

I have seem some fan videos of the bugs that the games has and I just find them funny, another thing is what protection is they against the sad little idiots who use cheats to gain something?

this is where arma has a natural edge. - Its a small game community so the idiots dont really have anywhere to hide. When taken along with the fact the community is mostly mature players your fairly safe from the idiots.

There's also much less incentive to cheat in ArmA because it has no reward or ranking system. That's not saying there won't be asses, but it shouldn't be as bad.

Major pro's, against eachother:

BF: Arcade experience, relatively easy, ranking system, faster gameplay, instant battle, larger player base, always respawn, low fear of death, cheat protection.

ArmA: Simulation experience, relatively difficult, slower, AI, larger world, dynamic, easy editing, high fear of death, any objectives, any play mode, 1 to ~50 players, AI and more AI.

All of them can be pro's, many of them can be seen as con's. Many are only potentials, at least in arma's case. eg. you may not want to play with AI or you may not use the editor, etc. You'll have to weigh them yourself with what you think you'll use and what you won't.

I might have unintentionally missed some.

My advice though, in case the choice is still not obvious, try both demo's - if you can - and if still in doubt... buy both

I bought bf 1942+exp, 2142, ofp+res and arma and I have enjoyed them all very much (except the bf expansion, what a ripoff), but the possibilities that ofp/arma has are greater and that's what I prefer.

[sbsmac 0]

Quote[/b] ]I have 2 kids to think off too

Hmm - that may be the killer argument against ArmA. I lost a good couple of years of my life and missed some of my children's formative moments because of OFP's addictive nature. Arma shows little chance of being any different. My advice to you is to stop now before it is too late !

Seriously though, it's a great game. League CTF in Arma is probably the closest to BF but IMHO the 1-shot-1-kill aesthetic brings a lot more tension to this game.

[Bingo 0]

Personally, I wouldn't say "apples and oranges"... comparing the BF franchies to Arma is a bit like comparing badger-turds to tits.

BF1942 was new, and the conquest control-point thing was tons of fun, and I admit I had tons of fun on it.

Aside from aesthetics, changes of vehicles, Battlefield has not matured a bit since it's first incarnation. The control-point capturing quickly because boring as you run around fruitlessly from point to point like a blue-arsed fly. There are no tactics (outside of dedicated BF-clans, that is). There's no new objectives (BF2142 introduced titans, but the concept of control points is still exactly the same, and in my opinion did nothing but add lag to the server).

OFP/Armed Assault, with all their faults, are about tactics, organisation, strategy and thinking more about winning the combat my means of brain & brawn, and not just shooting like John Rambo.

For me, there's no competition.

[wamingo 1]

Quote[/b] ]I have 2 kids to think off too

Hmm - that may be the killer argument against ArmA.

or... force your kids to enjoy more complex games

[memnoch 0]

BF2 is nice but i stopped playign it after few weeks cause it got boring, wouldnt even touch 2142 cause the setting is absolutely not for me.

Totally agree with this comment. I stopped playing BF2 after a month to 6 weeks when I realised I was just playing to push that little orange XP bar over to the right. That has happened to me many times in recent years. I'm not sure if its me becoming jaded with the games but its as if part of me takes a step back and says "What are you doing this for?". Then I realise there is no point to playing it any more so I stop. A bit like the WOPR in Wargames playing Tic-Tac-Toe!

And it's exactly how I feel about MMOs. I last about a week or two till the treadmill sets in and realise that's all they have to offer to keep you playing.

I haven't experienced this with ArmA and I've played it almost every day since release for at least and hour and much longer periods at the weekend on Co-op. You'll never have that same experience with BF2/2142, at least not on the same scale.

[robert(uk) 0]

Many good examples have been given in this thread already.  Personally, I had great fun with the BF series, which I have owned all of except the console version and BF2142, because Titans and hover-tanks just aren't my scene.  The guys in my clan still play BF2, and when I'm on Ventrilo, I hear them talking and having fun with it, and I have many good memories of it.  But the reason I uninstalled it in the end was simply becasue the immersion wasn't there.  The maps were far, far too small, and the lack of teamwork on most servers was actually very disappointing.  ArmA will be a solid platfrom for years to come, thanks to the sort of company that BIS is, and also the community, who will make loads of stuff for the game...