Armed Assault so far....

[dmarkwick 261]

It's frustrating to see some of the apologist explanations for why a clearly missing feature is "ok" to not be present. If it weren't for the engine limitations that prevent this from happening, this conversation would never happen, because it would already be a feature of the game and you guys wouldn't have to sit around trying to justify why it wasn't there to begin with.

Dslyecxi, when you just argue the same thing over & again with more & more apparent hostility you don't actually make more sense y'know. Relax, you made your point, others made theirs. You don't absolutely need to be seen to win every small tussle over such a minor issue.

This is a forum, for discussion. It's not some sort of multi-blog for one-way conversations. Again, relax

I think people can see benefits and downsides to reload-on-the-move, so it's obviously an issue for points of views, not absolute rights & wrongs.

*edit* in fact, to prevent the permanent derailment of this thread, I'll start a new one just for this discussion

[Scrub 0]

Here we go again:

Quote[/b] ]Here I totally disagree, there are much older titles doing this 1000 times better -> more real. I would rather say it is the worst I have seen. It improved slightly til 1.05 but is still odd.

-----------------------------------------------------------

I totally disagree, it improved compared with OFP, but years behind competitors. Maybe the capabilities are in the engine, but not used, missing:

- general destructible glass in buildings

- more sensitive spots at vehicles (optics, radar dishes, ammo compartment)

- the strange way buildings collapsing

While I agree there are definately games that do these operations better, please name the game that does this while pulling off the scale ArmA does. (I.E.  open xxxkm territory, and hundreds of combined arms units doing their own unscripted thing)  And does so with out anyone complaining about the 5fps they get.  

I do have to say I like ArmA a great deal, and am happy with the continued progress, but it seems the graphics (at least in the demo) are getting more and more blurry. Anyone else see this? Or is it just my system?

[froggyluv 2130]

Good point Scrub. The scope of OPF/ARMA really seems to have a lot to do with implementing the minutiae we all desire. Recently I've been trying some other 'realism mods' such as BF2's Project Reality and HL2's Smod tactical delta 4.PR has some nice squad like tactics but overall left with a feeling far from 'reality'. I could still feel the cartoony nature of BF2 as if trying to be restrained but busting through the seams.Smod has some nice features, mainly due to the Source engine's physics capabilties and a nice ironsight feature but still felt contained in a very small environment. I really hope Game 2 builds from the physics engine up. Whenever i fire up one of these mods I'm highly entertained for about 2 hours, wishing ARMA has this or that feature but then grow tired and play Evolution for 6+ hours

[Dwarden 1124]

reload on the move could be done ...

just trigger reload effect on ammo counter and made sure actual animation isn't stopped for reload animation to play (no reload animation while moving at all)

problem solved, stop crying ...

someone with mood to modding do it for gods sake (i'm still recovering from paperwork)

so we can argue about something else like weapon resting on edges like in ROO*

* IMHO way more important than just some reload while moving lol

gotcha? and please stop with the hate against each other it's all just your view on game but no need to attack each other ...

[7 0]

It's not unscripted. The mission designer has to script the units. :S

[MehMan 0]

In my eyes we(or I) expected too much from ArmA. I was expecting more than just a graphical update which is now causing quite a bit of trouble on many systems, but that's getting taken care of.

I was expecting many gameplay updates such as adjustable ironsights, actual directional armour values, removal of the hitpoint system for something better, better tank and helicopter sight, refurbished radar at the top of the screen, etc. The infantry feel...strange. Mainly because of the anims. They are hard to control at some moments and that makes them a bit hard to control.

I think most of the dissapointment comes from the people who played OFP over these five years, I played it a bit less but I know what you're feeling. I was hoping to see many more updates, but the average player wouldn't really noticed them.

Hopefully things will be improved in Game2.

All in all, ArmA is a step forward, while there are bugs that were back in OFP and I didn't expect to see them in ArmA and there are new bugs that I can't believe got through the system, it's still a nice game. Like many have said, ArmA is a rough diamond, but it's definatley a step forward from OFP.

[kid 0]

@Dslyecxi

Quote[/b] ]If we applied this same logic to other areas of the game, every infantry feature would end up being a "tremendous hassle" and never would have been implemented by your logic. You're really over-complicating this, and when you're literally fighting against how reality is, you're in a losing battle.

My logic does not stand on the precipice of a steep, slippery slope One needs to look at individual aspects and how they fit together. Firing your weapon can be modelled, and so it is, in complete simplicity (good thing, in a war sim) but triping over a rock cannot be modelled, nor can a fumble with one's hands. One can approximate, at best, by slowing down the animations, or having scenarios that run on probability, but then questions arise as to the probabilistic algorithm and the "correct" speed of the animation. That's not fighting reality, that's looking at computer limitations from an unbiased perspective.

Quote[/b] ]Do you want the game to be modeled around an "average human" or a "trained soldier"? I know my answer. I don't know if you've served, but you are making points and using examples that make it seem like you have not, and thus you're over-exaggerating the discussed topic (reloading while moving), taking it to extremes, and trying to use that to make your point.

No, indeed I have not served, and I do for that reason read your posts (and those of the others who have) with greater care, but there comes a point when common sense does rear it's ugly head. I'm not suggesting that all characters should be terrified morons, and I'm not taking anything to extremes, I'm merely pointing out the limitations of a computer game and the aspects that it cannot model.

Quote[/b] ]It's frustrating to see some of the apologist explanations for why a clearly missing feature is "ok" to not be present. If it weren't for the engine limitations that prevent this from happening, this conversation would never happen, because it would already be a feature of the game and you guys wouldn't have to sit around trying to justify why it wasn't there to begin with.

Now this is getting dirty :P

You've made some good points, but don't just brush everything else aside. You've made it clear that you see this as a shameless limitation of the engine, but others clearly don't. I'm not justifying why it's not there, I'm justifying not putting it in. read: "I prefer ArmA without it". Crazy, but there it is

It's not about what a human can do, it's about what a human would do in RL and in the game. I prefer the "feel" of the game if it requires more foresight and care.

Quote[/b] ]The same can be seen with binoculars. What kind of lame excuses are you going to shovel at me when I say that you should be able to realistically move with your binoculars out? It's the same principle. Animations for it are not present, and while it may be possible (binos are easier to do than reloading due to how it would be animated), it's not there.

Actually, while I've never tried to reload a weapon on the move (and certainly not under fire) amongst some rubble of a town or in an open field, moving with binocs is something everyone tries, and there's a limit, a magnification level beyond which you just can't keep your object in focus. It would be nice to keep the binocs in hand though...

As an aside, do real armies really use those old school roof binoculars instead of prism or hybrid binoculars or monoculars? Seems like a real waste of weight and space...

Nice to see one reply to my post (is it really that indimidating? :P ) but really, to quote a few lines, ignore the rest, and reply like I'm a child that needs to be coaxed towards the light... not what I expected from the writer of those articles... You have not replied with a single counter argument that was not (at least marginally) an ad-hominem fallacy.

[Scrub 0]

It's not unscripted. The mission designer has to script the units. :S

No they don't. They place the unit, give them the waypoint and the expected action (search and destroy, move, get in). HOW the AI does it is up to them. Movement, evasives, SF using satchels, using AT, flanking snipers.. All AI, no scripting. Given orders like a human would be. 'Go and get in this helo, Helo take these units to this spot. Units search and destroy any enemy.' But I leave open the possibility that scripting means different things to you.

[avi13 0]

but still felt contained in a very small environment.

Erm do you actually use these gazillion kilometers when you play in MP or do you play in a small area?most missions are around a relatively small area and its hardly any difference from the 'maps' system thats present in BF2:PR etc.

Larger missions such as Evolution are confined to small towns that the action take place - same scale as BF2 really.

Slightly offtopic but...

I think most people are overestimating ArmA's technical requirements, Like how much stress it puts on your CPU - right now when ArmA is on and during a large mission the CPU is barely peaking at 40% on my E6300[1.8GHz dual core] on one core, the other is just idle, I'm sure the remaining 60% and the other core can be used for stuff like physics[that add ALLOT of immersion to the game!], weapon ballistics and collisions - All of that are stuff that would make the game awesome..and I'm clueless on why they're not added, physics are standard in all games now days, "first ragdoll-physics" game I played was Postal 2 back in 2003.

More modern games are half-life 2, that has some of the best physics to date yet even games such as half-life 2 barely use our cpu to its maximum.

Quote[/b] ]Kid:

do real armies really use those old school roof binoculars instead of prism or hybrid binoculars or monoculars?

Yes they do, Armies rarely ever throw stuff to the garbage bin.

One of the things that annoy me - you cant jump in ArmA..I really expected the ability to jump in ArmA when i bought it.

How would it add anything to the game?We'll be able to climb rocks for better positions, or jump over fences for whatever reason (Naturally, I'd expect that you wont be able to fire while jumping...)

[Maddmatt 1]

Larger missions such as Evolution are confined to small towns that the action take place - same scale as BF2 really.

Ever played Evolution? BF2 scale doesn't come close to that. Some missions do make use of the large maps in OFP/ArmA.

[avi13 0]

Larger missions such as Evolution are confined to small towns that the action take place - same scale as BF2 really.

Ever played Evolution? BF2 scale doesn't come close to that. Some missions do make use of the large maps in OFP/ArmA.

Yep i have, get your self in to a helicopter or jeep, head to a city, clear it - repeat that about 10 times and your done

Most missions that make use of the huge maps in ArmA/OFP are mainly for transportation and not huge battles, most battles are confined to small pre-determined areas by the mission designer.

[Maddmatt 1]

Larger missions such as Evolution are confined to small towns that the action take place - same scale as BF2 really.

Ever played Evolution? BF2 scale doesn't come close to that. Some missions do make use of the large maps in OFP/ArmA.

Yep i have, get your self in to a helicopter or jeep, head to a city, clear it - repeat that about 10 times and your done

I see your point, but it is still something which BF2 doesn't come close to.

Evolution isn't the ultimate example of how to make a large scale mission. Not that it's a bad mission.

Quote[/b] ]

Most missions that make use of the huge maps in ArmA/OFP are mainly for transportation and not huge battles, most battles are confined to small pre-determined areas by the mission designer.

'Most' being the key word here. It is possible to make proper use of the large maps, it's just that smaller missions are easier to make and end up being far more common.

Besides, the transportation is part of the game

[ArmaVidz 0]

For all its flaws, I'm smitten with Armed Assault. In agreement with some, it does feel rather unfinished. Yet, the modders, reskinners and the all-inclusive community propells this engine to its success.

I've contacted my parts distributor to see if they can get me a copy of Atari's release here in NA. *crosses fingers*

As for reloading on the move: if you must reload on the move you are doing something wrong. No man in his right mind would move from cover while not having ammo in the chamber. I do think being able to go prone while reloading, is crucially beneficial, though.

....now only if I could fly the harrier like an ace

[whisper 0]

Quote[/b] ]

New damage model, goodbye cardboard effects.

I totally disagree, it improved compared with OFP, but years behind competitors. Maybe the capabilities are in the engine, but not used, missing:

- general destructible glass in buildings

- more sensitive spots at vehicles (optics, radar dishes, ammo compartment)

- the strange way buildings collapsing

And again, and again and again...

Name me ONE so called "competitor" that does EVERYTHING done by ArmA. One. Just one.

Simply put : there is none. Others are better in certain specific areas.

Absolutely none do it all like ArmA does.

No wonder there's none : they couldn't handle much more than ArmA does. They couldn't have all their neat features implemented either with the number of units possible in ArmA, or over the scale possible in ArmA, or with the wide range of units/weapons/vehicles present in ArmA.

If you concentrate on one area, you will find better than ArmA, no doubt about that. And ArmA is probably not a game for you.

There's definitely room for improvement. But it's not a bad game, and no other games do it better (because no other game do it, as simple as that)

[Banzai! 0]

Quote[/b] ]

New damage model, goodbye cardboard effects.

I totally disagree, it improved compared with OFP, but years behind competitors. Maybe the capabilities are in the engine, but not used, missing:

- general destructible glass in buildings

- more sensitive spots at vehicles (optics, radar dishes, ammo compartment)

- the strange way buildings collapsing

And again, and again and again...

Name me ONE so called "competitor" that does EVERYTHING done by ArmA. One. Just one.

Simply put : there is none. Others are better in certain specific areas.

Absolutely none do it all like ArmA does.

No wonder there's none : they couldn't handle much more than ArmA does. They couldn't have all their neat features implemented either with the number of units possible in ArmA, or over the scale possible in ArmA, or with the wide range of units/weapons/vehicles present in ArmA.

If you concentrate on one area, you will find better than ArmA, no doubt about that. And ArmA is probably not a game for you.

There's definitely room for improvement. But it's not a bad game, and no other games do it better (because no other game do it, as simple as that)

Oblivion?

[NeMeSiS 11]

Oblivion?

Yeah, because Oblivion has like what... 5 enemies fighting with eachother at max and there is no need for vehicles which range from bikes to tanks to choppers...

[Heatseeker 0]

Arma will always be nitpicked to death, for not being the perfect fixed wing sim, rotary wing sim, tank operating sim, truck driving sim, motorcycle handling sim...

Even if it was all perfect you would still get a farmer in here complaining about the tractor handling.

I like the infantry gameplay of this game, i also liked the on foot soldiering gameplay of its predecessor, Operation Flashpoint Resistance, i've been around for a while... because of the game and because of the people that embraced this unique experience too, definetly a diferent bunch.

Other fps'ers tried and somewhat achieved a good amount of gameplay realism but the experience just wasnt the same, so much that i sticked with good old OPF all these years.

I can name a bunch of "tac shooters" that simulate real life mechanics but still feel like small, tactical arcade, a diferent genre from where i stand.

[Scrub 0]

Even if it was all perfect you would still get a farmer in here complaining about the tractor handling.

Spot on! I think ArmA INVITES criticism because of all the different elements that are included.. Just like you said, because they're not perfect. But what the critics miss is what Arm-A IS.

[froggyluv 2130]

but still felt contained in a very small environment.

Erm do you actually use these gazillion kilometers when you play in MP or do you play in a small area?most missions are around a relatively small area and its hardly any difference from the 'maps' system thats present in BF2:PR etc.

Larger missions such as Evolution are confined to small towns that the action take place - same scale as BF2 really.

You've got to be kidding. For one thing many of us still love Sp which beats BF hands down any way you cut it. I remember trying out SP mods for BF2 and any map bigger than the minimim 16 player size, the bots would just freeze not knowing where to go outside of their little world.

As far as MP, Berzerk and CTI maps utilize huge regions for every sort of combat but thats not really my point. It does something to the tactical part of my brain just knowing there 's a huge amount of land to be navigated ,flown over, fought over etc...I remember a CTI+DAC game in which i was shot down far from friendlies and had to navigate home for what seemed like days,through crazy amounts of enemies forces.

BF2 -not so much

[Dwarden 1124]

Oblivion?

Yeah, because Oblivion has like what... 5 enemies fighting with eachother at max and there is no need for vehicles which range from bikes to tanks to choppers...

don't please undershoot Oblivion ... it's very scalable game (multicore support for example this include I/O, AI and Physics and not to mention very configurable rendering system)

You can easily get tens vs tens AI fights both range (e.g. bow or magic) and close combat ...

i wasn't following if anyone made yet mod for mounted combat but i bet it's possible as O modding community is strong ...

viewdistance with "active" AI (in loaded cellbufers) is again depending on machine power etc.

so it's not just game You buy, play once, finish and forget ...

as You can download some mods and expand experience way beyond the basic boundary ...

anyway ArmA offers good potencial for that too...

it's all up to user ... either they want just play the basic or want more (fun, depth, realism, etc)

[4 IN 1 0]

Oblivion?

Yeah, because Oblivion has like what... 5 enemies fighting with eachother at max and there is no need for vehicles which range from bikes to tanks to choppers...

don't please undershoot Oblivion ... it's very scalable game (multicore support for example this include I/O, AI and Physics and not to mention very configurable rendering system)

You can easily get tens vs tens AI fights both range (e.g. bow or magic) and close combat ...

i wasn't following if anyone made yet mod for mounted combat but i bet it's possible as O modding community is strong ...

viewdistance with "active" AI (in loaded cellbufers) is again depending on machine power etc.

so it's not just game You buy, play once, finish and forget ...

as You can download some mods and expand experience way beyond the basic boundary ...

anyway ArmA offers good potencial for that too...

it's all up to user ... either they want just play the basic or want more (fun, depth, realism, etc)

but then Oblivion developers are a branch under a mother company, which, frankily speaking, have much more developing power within

sometime, size (money) does matter