Review @ Out of Eight

[JaguarUSF 0]

A review of ArmA: Combat Operations has been posted at Out of Eight PC Game Reviews:

http://jaguarusf.blogspot.com/2007....ew.html

Enjoy!

[Rambo-16AAB 0]

It mentions Bullit physics at the end as one of rma's realism traits. Are the ballistics different in the US version as the 1.05 ones are hardly realistic. ??

[max power 21]

It mentions Bullit physics at the end as one of rma's realism traits. Are the ballistics different in the US version as the 1.05 ones are hardly realistic. ??

I think we have problems of scale, here. Would you say they are realistic compared to bf2's ballistics model? I would say it's more realistic than 98 percent of first person shooters...

[AWDrift 0]

Reviewer doesn't seem too familiar with the genre in general.

[Second 0]

Good points in there... But this guy doesn't (as usual) know a thing about AI's skills. Shame that they aren't used in ArmA's campaign or official missions and players and editors don't have solid facts from dev-team to the ways of AI and how it does things, which is bad side in BIS

[Offtopic]

That 'take cover'-routine would be great thing to read. Still I haven't figured out way how it determes what do and how to do it in OFP. Seems that it always supprises me, when i think that i know how it works:

"Okay, now it is going to hid behind that bush"

...waiting...

"Oh dear god! It pulled back into cover of forrest! I didn't know that it can do that!"

[/offtopic]

[Banzai! 0]

Woah woah woah so are you telling me that in the American Version you have to play minigames just to unlock the M1A1 in the editor????

[Gunney 0]

Seems like all the reviews I read are reviewing the game's campaign without any mods. Seems a bit unfair to me when all the fun is at coop, user made missions, or your own missions.

[Dallas 9]

Woah woah woah so are you telling me that in the American Version you have to play minigames just to unlock the M1A1 in the editor????

I think it's the armory:

http://www.armedassault.com/us_armory.html

Quote[/b] ]View and try all of ArmA's weapons and vehicles in a series of exciting dynamic challenges.

This is the place to check out if you want to get more information on the huge arsenal of weapons and vehicles in ArmA. Even better, you get to try all of this equipment for yourself and put it through a series of dynamic challenges. The Armory is the ultimate environment to master all of the specialized technologies available to you within the game and to have instant action fun with it at the same time.

Not the editor.

[Dwarden 1125]

Quote[/b] ]This is some of the most questionable pathfinding I’ve seen in any game. While the AI in Company of Heroes actively searches for cover when under attack, the AI in ArmA: Combat Operations is too busy running into things, getting out of formation, crouching with no cover near them, and constantly speeding up and slowing down or changing stances to be of any help. It’s quite comical in a sad way. I can’t remember the last time I’ve played a game where I had to restart a mission because the enemy AI crashed into something. And I certainly can’t remember a game where it happened in two separate missions. While the AI might not move intelligently unless specifically scripted to, they do shoot well, and you'll die quite frequently while playing the game. The enemy AI seems to instantly find you if you peek out in the open; this is exacerbated because of the unbalanced missions, where you are typically a lone soldier against superior numbers (including tanks and mixed forces).

must admit that lot of people see ArmA from this perspective only and uninstall just after ...

let's hope it gets resolved soon

[shataan 1]

"Would you say they are realistic compared to bf2's ballistics model"

You ARE joking right?? BF 2 doesn`t have a ballistics model. Unless they changed it recently that is. When I was playing it, encounters were won basicly what seemed to many of us to be a coin toss sort of system.

  The person who shoots 1st, and can see their rounds should be hitting the other players, often ended up dead, with the other peeps winning the engagements.

 In any case, what BF 2 had wasn`t what I`d call a ballistics system .

As for pathfinding in ArmA. FP as well at release had totally abysmal pathfinding bugs, especia;lly the A.I. driving.  A game like FP and ArmA offer so much in the way of code, if you expected it to be perfect outta the gates,  it is a no brainer that this wasn`t gonna happen.   BIS as always, will have patch release fixes.

I agree that it does indeed suck huge azz that the tryout area is locked. LAMER idea that.

As always, like FP, ArmA will still be being played, but mostly by the hardcores.  Those who choose to stick it out based upon what rocks as apposed to the release niggles.

[4 IN 1 0]

"Would you say they are realistic compared to bf2's ballistics model"

You ARE joking right?? BF 2 doesn`t have a ballistics model. Unless they changed it recently that is. When I was playing it, encounters were won basicly what seemed to many of us to be a coin toss sort of system.

  The person who shoots 1st, and can see their rounds should be hitting the other players, often ended up dead, with the other peeps winning the engagements.

 In any case, what BF 2 had wasn`t what I`d call a ballistics system .

As for pathfinding in ArmA. FP as well at release had totally abysmal pathfinding bugs, especia;lly the A.I. driving.  A game like FP and ArmA offer so much in the way of code, if you expected it to be perfect outta the gates,  it is a no brainer that this wasn`t gonna happen.   BIS as always, will have patch release fixes.

I agree that it does indeed suck huge azz that the tryout area is locked. LAMER idea that.

As always, like FP, ArmA will still be being played, but mostly by the hardcores.  Those who choose to stick it out based upon what rocks as apposed to the release niggles.

pile down m8 we all know that you really cant compare real ballistics model(orthrough have its flaw) to a fake one

fact is, ArmA and OFP is still doing something that no other game in the world tries to do, AI pathfinding is among one of them

[-Puma- 2]

I might report to bug tracker this DYNAMIC BUG, wich seems to evolve like a virus and change itself so that everytime the bug is fixed, it transforms to sumthing else

[shinRaiden 0]

Quote[/b] ]This is some of the most questionable pathfinding I’ve seen in any game. While the AI in Company of Heroes actively searches for cover when under attack, the AI in ArmA: Combat Operations is too busy running into things, getting out of formation, crouching with no cover near them, and constantly speeding up and slowing down or changing stances to be of any help. It’s quite comical in a sad way. I can’t remember the last time I’ve played a game where I had to restart a mission because the enemy AI crashed into something. And I certainly can’t remember a game where it happened in two separate missions. While the AI might not move intelligently unless specifically scripted to, they do shoot well, and you'll die quite frequently while playing the game. The enemy AI seems to instantly find you if you peek out in the open; this is exacerbated because of the unbalanced missions, where you are typically a lone soldier against superior numbers (including tanks and mixed forces).

must admit that lot of people see ArmA from this perspective only and uninstall just after ...

let's hope it gets resolved soon

Ahem, seeing as nobody bothered to pay attention the last time I said this, I'll remind you again.

1) BIS's AI simulation is truely dynamic, it discovers and creates paths in real time, there is no method of creating 'rails' as is familiar with all derivatives of corridor shooters. As a result, the paths will by their very nature be recalculated constantly, removing the predictability present in most other games.

2) Problems with psychotic AI pathfinding generally are NOT the fault of the engine, rather it is due to improper modeling, map design, mission design, or configs values. A vehicle may have a higher relative speed than it's configed down-the-road distance, or ambient vegetation improperly given a path-blocking cost, or a path-blocking object placed in such a way as to create an improper chokepoint. Those issues are content or designers issues, and have no business being thrown at the AI programming.

[4 IN 1 0]

"The only one who turely understand the AI is the mission maker"

the AI are as good as the mission makers script them to be

[kestrel7e7 0]

BIS's AI simulation is truely dynamic, it discovers and creates paths in real time, there is no method of creating 'rails' as is familiar with all derivatives of corridor shooters. As a result, the paths will by their very nature be recalculated constantly, removing the predictability present in most other games.

Most games use AI capable of dynamic pathfinding...

[Second 0]

"The only one who turely understand the AI is the mission maker"

the AI are as good as the mission makers script them to be

But there's lots of things that mission makers don't understand. Basic stuff is general knowledge, but advanced stuff is something that is almost totaly un-documented from official level... Left to be discovered or "discovered" by amateurs them selves. It's long and demanding road for newbies and results is: masses of missions with straight forward AI behaviour/tactics. sometimes it is good, sometimes not.

More i mess with AI more i think that i don't know a sh*t about it.

Offtopic all the way... Okay i'll shut my trap.

[whisper 0]

It mentions Bullit physics at the end as one of rma's realism traits. Are the ballistics different in the US version as the 1.05 ones are hardly realistic. ??

I'm still wondering about this "hardly realistic" comments.

Apart from friction, what is wrong? No one bothered to answer me so far.

[Dwarden 1125]

Ahem, seeing as nobody bothered to pay attention the last time I said this, I'll remind you again.

1) BIS's AI simulation is truely dynamic, it discovers and creates paths in real time, there is no method of creating 'rails' as is familiar with all derivatives of corridor shooters. As a result, the paths will by their very nature be recalculated constantly, removing the predictability present in most other games.

2) Problems with psychotic AI pathfinding generally are NOT the fault of the engine, rather it is due to improper modeling, map design, mission design, or configs values. A vehicle may have a higher relative speed than it's configed down-the-road distance, or ambient vegetation improperly given a path-blocking cost, or a path-blocking object placed in such a way as to create an improper chokepoint. Those issues are content or designers issues, and have no business being thrown at the AI programming.

You don't need tell me this...

my quote was about that "most of new customers encouter these problems and uninstall game"

plus most of problems are already resolved in 1.06 and 1.07

i'm old school ... i encouter bugs in games for past 15y ...

if i'm purist there will be no game for me except original Tetris to play

[shinRaiden 0]

...

let's hope it gets resolved soon

This is the point I was referring to, it's inaccurately encouraging the community throw more incorrect criticism and complaints. This is not at all constructive or helpful. It's misleading and not helpful to BIS or the community.

If a vehicle is zigzagging down the road, that's not the AI's fault, that's the configs's fault for feeding the AI with bad data. If a vehicle tangles up trying to navigate what should be a narrow passage, the models may be made incorrectly or placed wrongly on the map.

To say "wah, fix the engine, I want an engine fix" does not fix the problem. It wastes the programmers time, and shifts the blame masking other problems. The result is that to the community the problems aren't fixed, making them whine and complain more. This then leads to rioting on the forums and bad public reputation for the community and products.

[chops 111]

@Shinraiden

both your points may well be true, they are well made, but it doesn't change the fact that what the reviewer said is true. It's the end result that matters and I have to sadly agree with the quote in Dwaren's post.

I am another very disapointed OFP fan . ArmA is very sloppy.

Edit. BIS are responsible for the AI, the models, the islands, the whole mess. I dont care where the problem lies. It's their job to fix it.

[Yoma 0]

if i'm purist there will be no game for me except original Tetris to play

Tetris once bugged out on my oldscool gameboy:

suddenly it only gave me squares :-)