ArmA is just ... disappointing

[Thomas Ryan 0]

Eugh... That is the reason I stopped posting on here for so long. All constructive criticism threads on this forum lead to a flame war...

ArmA has lots of potential, but that's really only with the modders and such doing their bit. I wouldn't have minded if BIS put the release on hold until they sorted out the game's problems, but obviously the publishers were pushing them to release it. Ah well, we still have a game that will likely last us for years to come. As I tell myself, ArmA is mainly a fill-in-the-gap game for Game 2.

[DVD 0]

Yup fanboys turn everything into a mess, sooner or later..

So now..

What would make people happy?

- TexView 2

- Oxygen 2

- Visitor 3

- Linux server

- fixed animations (smooth and fast like in OFP)

- fixed & better sound

- working setpos commands for static objekts TT 2166

- no flying objects TT 2229

- no ugly pulsing HDR

- shadows which not disappear after 90m (visible up to 1000m would be cool)

- a T80UM or T90S

- working crosshair in helicopter & planes (OFP like) ..

a) to lock on targets with mouse,

b) for a smoother flight example on youtube

[MehMan 0]

One of my biggest griefs with ArmA is the AI. I can get over the whole fancy pancy graphics and what not, but the AI is way too limited in urban action and even in open space combat. With the introduction of more urbanised areas I'd expect that the AI would get refined to work properly there. Instead they walk in the middle of the street, their idea of cover is to lie down in the middle of the street and the only chance of decent combat with the AI is their unique sniping ability and better detection skills than T-700. Same goes for open spaces, while they do flank and also leap frog to an extent, they do it without using proper cover. They leapfrog by running and stopping in open spaces, instead of going through cover to cover. Then again the cover is always sparse, a few rocks here and there but the terrain is too flat to actually provide good cover by itself. No small natural trenches or the likes that would provde good covering abilites. I'd like to see some microterrain managment, not just macro. I'd like to see some more options of cover besides those two rocks and lying down. Small bumps, drainiage trenches, roads are usually lifted off the ground etc, stuff that provides cover. Not just either really flat, or really hilly. And then the ability that the AI would use it without me having to drag it there and set all it's poses.

[Dudester 0]

For me the game is disapointing because hardly anyone plays multiplayer. I logged on the other day at 5pm and found 3 CTF servers. I logged on again at 7pm and found 4 CTF servers. Now that tells me this game cannot be as popular, or as good as people here make out.

I do still play this game, but still find the controls suck. Especially for the Attack choppers and planes. Unless you have the lockon missiles, lining up your target with any other missiles is just a matter of luck. I would compare the controls with been asked to touch the tip of your nose with your little finger, whilst been extremely drunk.

Now i know people here go on about this game been realistic, but just tell me what soldier cannot climb over a small fence or wall. I dont like bunny hoppers, but i'm sure a small jump wouldn't of hurt.

The animation sucks. The times i have had to shoot extra bullets into somone because the animation continues even when they are dead. LOL what soldier carries on reloading his weapon when hes been shot dead.

People here laugh at games like BF2, (wich i don't play often) but atleast even after all this time, it has plenty of full servers and for all types to play on. And i'm not talking 4 or 5  servers. I am talking double numbers.

[Marines 0]

I have to agree with what the majority has posted, so I won't go into repeating what others have said. However, as a long-time OFPr', I too was excited when ArmA was announced, and following my initial purchase of the German version, and after a few weeks of actually playing it, I simply lost interest. Which wasn't the case with OFP. Something has to be said for a game that held it's own for so long, a game while damned ulgy by todays standards, continues to maintain a fanatical following (gameplay over eye-candy wins anyday). ArmA on the other hand does not and may not ever be as great. Perhaps it's due to the awful preformance so many experience. Maybe it's the fact that the AI is shoddy at best or downright horrid in the least. Perchance it's due too a clunky control scheme, or a MP interface that doesn't seem to work the way it was intended.

Operation Flashpoint, with all it's early issues and failings, was still able to suck the player in, keeping them immersed in the setting. ArmA simply doesn't achieve that... for me at least. I believe we all expected a bit too much, improvements we hoped would've been implimented. Unfortunantly though, they were not, and now we're left with a buggy/unstable game, a game that is severly lacking by todays standards even in the most minimal aspects.

EDIT - I begining to wonder if these preformance issues are related to the engine being ported from a console.

[slingblade20000 0]

lol...my post earlier in this thread was deleted... how nice of the mods. Well lets start why i think Arma is just disappointing because i cant say the other.

1: Using a ported Xbox engine that streams all the data[ Textures,sound and HDR]from the hard drive causing everyone that bought the game to have major issues.

2: Because they went in this direction to cache stream there is no way for your computer to know how many Xmps of textures to load. This is the reason why there is so many people complaining about LOD. Bis in the first set of patches lowered the texture switching to the lowest point possible and still theres LOD bugs.

3: View distance button is not working because of point 2 that i made, the only way to control how much Xmps of streaming textures is to be able to move the control for it which its not.

4: BIS is unwilling or doesnt know how many Xmps at a 1000 view distance arma needs to stream textures,sound and HDR

so people can make the choice if there system cant handle it.

Final thought: i have been able to run Arma at high frame rates with no issues but i have uninstalled because it is boring period and no anti hack protection. What Killed OFP was it was hack to death, it wasnt because people didnt like to play it.

[vilas 477]

how can game be enjoyable if it crashes to desktop in middle of mission, after 20 minutes ?

okayt 1.07 is beta, but in the 1.05 performance was so low that missing textures and LOD made this game looking like s***

i could play this game only 1.02

i had to buy new PC for it !

so for me this game cost over 700 euro !

[gazmen 0]

I am thoroughly disappointed, mainly because I just don't find the game enjoyable. I don't know why, maybe it's the terrible performance (Normal preset at 1024x768 on an exceeding-minimum-specifications computer at ~20FPS), bugs, bad SP campaign, etc. But I just can't find it in me to enjoy it.

Some of you may be happy with 20 FPS, but when I play other games (I know, not at the same scale as ArmA) I get much a much higher FPS on average with all settings at maximum.

In fact the human eyes need 25 FPS for a movie, to have a smooth animation, personnaly i will say 50 FPS for a game to have nice animation & good render...

[Mora2 0]

The game is too bugged to play right. OFP was just right, it had the perfect balance between sim and game and I had great firefights in OFP.

This sums up why ARMA is so bad.

The " military proven" label and the excess of realism just killed the game.

Those fanboys claiming to not touch the realism are in reality the ones that killed ARMA, well, them and BIS, for listening and going the realism path ( *cough VBS1/2*cough*)

Also, supporters of this game no matter what should take a break and think why does this topic have the double of pages the possitive feedback one has.

This reminds me of George Lucas and Star wars.

HE took so much in consideration what the nonsense fanboys that dressed with darth Vader pijamas had to say that he just ruined the new saga, being  those movies very poor quality cinema.

Arma is nearly the same, lots of eye candy ( which btw take too much drop performance and is worst than many games ) with no content at all. ( the game playability just sucks, and that is the biggest problem of the game )

Fanboys can milk it all they want, but this thread and the lack of multiplayer success speaks for itself.

I expect Operation Flashpoint 2 from Codemasters to be a much better GAME ( notice the caps on the word ) because it will meant to entertain, not to please the realism whores.

Could you imagine an OFP with better graphics and physics?? It would be heaven.

[Heatseeker 0]

Isn't this the reason behind 2 threads, so that those who like the game can post in the other thread and not argue the point with people here.

Im not posting about liking the game or not, just facts .

I understand that some people may find the game disapointing and im interested in knowing their reasons but i expect arguements that can be backed up, not stuff pulled out of a magic hat.

I have my personal disapointments too.

Damage/hit model for example or missing vehicle interiors, steerable chutes, etc.

[shataan 1]

B/S. All games are released before being completely finished. It was a given that ArmA like FP, was not perfect at release. I gotta say man, I can`t believe the sheer amount of whining I am seeing.

It is like you think that by whining, you feel the fixes will come quicker. You`d have to be on Crack to think ArmA with all the code it has would arrive in perfect playable condition for every differing rig out there.

Imho it would be more positive/logical to point out bugs, then play and enjoy the games many positives. If ya just can`t do that, drop the game, play something else till the fixes arrive that WILL allow you to enjoy the game.

But I myself have not seen 1 thing to date that would make me think that it was a showstopper bug. Are there bugs? Hell yeah. Will they be fixed? In time.

Another thing. There is infact a middle ground. On 1 hand, you get your whiners who feel if it ain`t perfect, it suxors and is unplayable. They also feel if it suxors for them, then everyone else saying they like the game and are not having problems are obviously lying. LOL

On another hand ya got fan bois who say the game is perfect, which we know it isn`t.

I on the other hand take the obvious middleground. I see peeps are having problems. Recognised and noted. I myself am not seeing any visuals or performance problems that many have cited. But I believe that peeps got problems due to obvious patch fixes needed, or driver issues, or low powered systems, unoptimized rigs, the list goes on. Plus, it is a given that the game needs performance fixes/patching.

But I can still dig what I DO see about ArmA that roxors. If some peeps don`t understand what I just posted, please reread. I see ArmAs cup as half full, not half empty.

If that makes me a fanboi, ok fine. Better that then the alternative.

[kabong 1]

Love the game except, the campaign is WAY too short. Hope the developers become generous and release a new FREE campaign - there is something that happens near the end of the game that leaves the door wide open for this (but I'm not going to spoil it for those that haven't gotten there). I suppose though that the developers are probably planning a commercial add-on, like Resistance for OFP.

Or, here's hoping that the community will put together a campaign of their own. Tons of potential for this - HUGE map, robust editor, lots of units, if I only had the time...but, that real life thing is pretty real for me these days. :P

[whisper 0]

@Wolle: Nice attempt, but it is like it happens with communism: you did not calculated with the human nature. I see here disappointed people and strong supporters biting as in any other usual "good or bad?" thread.

Yes, because it's quite difficult to resist when you see something FALSE written (like the point that DeadMeat talked about) as an argument to put the game to trash.

Performances, sure. Well, not for me now, but it required quite a lot of work.

Constant CTD, why not, even though I did not encounter this one myself.

Not really CTF compliant? I agree, it's not the strong point of the game, quite the opposite. After having played for a while, I can see that, I even think now that CTF is really not a good way to use ArmA engine "properly" (I don't like to use that term because it implies I dictate how people play ArmA, which I don't want to do).

And many more (amongst which the biggest imho is a subpar campaign experience, and unevolved AI apart from tweakable one)

But, no, OFP has not more object density than ArmA. It's false, like some other things stated in the torrent of hate we see here, and when I or others dare to point this out, we're immediatly labeled as fanboi (probably because it's quite an easier answer than recognising that perhaps you can be wrong in some area).

You're quick to point out so called fanboism, while OTOH having the exact same behavior in the opposite direction.

Double standard, anyone?

[maddogx 13]

My main complaint right now is the AI. If the AI were sufficiently improved to make them feel more like soldiers and less like two year olds with supernatural abilities, I would be totally ecstatic.

Apart from that and the problems with GeForce 8 series cards and windows Vista, there isn't really much to whine about. I don't have either, so I'm almost 100% happy.

[vilas 477]

Quote[/b] ]If ArmA is dissapointing, I'd still wait for the CWC and Resistance mods to be released

hahahaha ?

do CWC will change pulsing HDR, will they do something to game not crash after 20 minutes ?

mod is just addons+missions+island or start screen, they cannot chand engine, they cannot change AI, they can do other rifle or vehicle models, but if game crashes to desktop , it will be, no matter of any MOD

or maybe they can change flying BMPs ? coliding with every vehicle on road ?

in my missions (when there is armored a column of SLA moving to attack) 20-25 % of missions fail, because BMP atre coliding with T72 and they are out of mission, and soldiers are wounded or killed because of landing without patrachute

or maybe other mentioned mod will do parashootes for cargo of BMP ?

haahaha

crash to desktop topic

[maddogx 13]

Not everyone is unhappy with the HDR. I like it the way it is, and I don't think they're going to change it much, since only very few people are complaining about it.

CTDs are a totally different cup of tea, and anyone who experiences them would be well advized to send a DXDiag dump + problem description to BIS.

[vilas 477]

have you seen movies on youtube, i can give links, HDR is pusling like on disco, it makes game so annoying

likns in my post

[maddogx 13]

have you seen movies on youtube, i can give links, HDR is pusling like on disco, it makes game so annoying

Yeah I've seen them, and I can understand why people complain about that - but that's some kind of bug, not the proper HDR effect they should be seeing.

Another good reason to send BIS a DXDiag dump and problem description, since it's probably cause by drivers/Vista/etc.

[vilas 477]

i have XP SP2, Nvidia 7900 and i cannot play this game

when man in white shirt is near, all gets dark

when police unit in black suit is near all became bright

when i fire from mgun, light is pulsing

i have precision =16

in december completly new PC for ARMA (i loved OFP) but now i just cannot have any fun from it

i no other games i had problems

but i can not turn back time, if i could, i would not buy new PC for it (also i live in poor country, for me buying PC for 700 EU was very very big effort , while usual man earns 300 in my country)

[wipman 1]

Hi, my main disapointment with the ArmA, is the performance and

the translation (spanish version) that just both suck.

*Heatseeker Said:

Quote[/b] ]OFP never really looked very hot and in 2001's systems it performed quite bad.

Well... i had no bad performance in the OFP until the DXLL 1.0 by

Kegetys was released, plus the USMC Mod stuff, "my own" M4's pack,

and some other Mods or Addons like the Laser's De/Ra, the HYK Infantry,

the DSL A10 1.2 and things like that; all High-Res (over all my M4's).

I had an AMD at 1400mhz by that time and belive me, the OFP(RES)

without addons or only with the ECP 1.085, never went below the

14fps, never. The ArmA, without addons... use to run at like 20

to 28fps in open spaces with the grass, but when you aim, then

the fps drop down to 14fps or even 10fps (depending on the weapon)

that's a drop down that makes the game unplayable, now sume

there the constant LOD switching bug (in my 1.05EU), convine

that with the pointless recoil (inverted in the AR's), the amazing

dispersion of the bullets at mid ranges, is that to simulate that

the weapons have the barrels banked?, melted?, turned?, plain?

or what!?, because i don't get it; and i could continue with the

list of things againist the nature laws, againist the logic and againist

the way of work of many things in this game. Let's C ya

[maddogx 13]

My guess is that the dispersion is supposed to simulate the innacuracy of the shooter, not the weapon. In real life, you will never be holding the weapon 100% straight, but always at a slight angle, depending on how skilled you are. This gets worse once you open fire.

Since this is hard to simulate realistically, the dispersion compensates for it.

Remember this is not Counterstrike.

[4 IN 1 0]

HDR problem......i am using a 4 year old LCD and i have to look really carefully to see the very very little suddent dark and lighten vilas see, and it is not always there too

[Jambo107 0]

Quote[/b] ]The eye candy doesnt drop performance here and while it might not be better than some games (for obvious reasons) it is better than many games. OPF never really looked very hot and in 2001's systems it performed quite bad, Arma looks incredible and runs well if you have the HW, it also ships with a very generous amount of playable content (weapons, vehicles, etc).

I have a Intel Quad Core and 8800GTX running in SLi w/ 4gig of total ram on a new brand new system. I still can't get more then 25 FPS at any given time, is that acceptable? (With every other game running on max with no problems) Take alook in the tech forum you'll see literrally dozens of people with the same issue.

Quote[/b] ]The physics arent there but i dont think you will see a physics intensive, large scale game in a while...

Like Oblivion? Battlefield 2/2142 though maps are no where near the size of Arma can handle 64 players, with full physics, high polygon models, effects thats are top notch. Maybe BIS should re-examine there engine and take advice from the games that are selling - scale down there maps and dramtically reduce the LOD for distant objects. Maybe even allow the 2nd core to be used!

- Expanding on the smaller map - Notice of Sahrni lite runs much much better then the normal version?

[whisper 0]

The strangest thing for me, is for example the typical example of Vilas.

I get none of what he describes.

That's exactly why I can't label ArmA as "shit" myself.

Performance : after a lot of tweaking (I don't thank BI on this, far from it ), I get "somewhat decent and playable" FPS with HDRPrecision=16, and "PvP MP level" FPS with HDRPrecision=8, on my C2D E6400 + X1800XL + 2G RAM setup. I barely ever get pulsating HDR, nothing annoying, in fact despite some overdone brightness in zoom I quite like the lighting effects.

"Shamefull" no support of DC : barely any game "supports" DC, they can run on DC and take advantage of global improvements of DC porcessors, but are not designed and programmed for using both cores at the same time.

Flying BMP : I got the grand total of 1 flying armored vehicle in all my experience, it was with 1.01 version of the game.

Armor columns, no problem, working as intended, apart from the fact that they are too keen on breaking the formation to engage threats when VD is set high and they detect something far away and threatening (mainly choppers), or when I myself put a soldier right under a T72 tracks, in which case, he gets squished. Also, no wounded on getting out of BMP, only some gunner position of some vehicles in the latest beta patch.

So I really can't follow him in his constant barrage of hate toward the game. I can understand he has issues, but when he says "ArmA sucks because of X, Y, Z", how can I agree when X, Y and Z are working as intended on my PC? So I try to give advices (don't think I've done in his case, but I guess he would reply by "I've done everything possible") to help, and point out that it CAN undoubtfully work.

Nota on dispersion : I don't think ArmA dispersion depicts player innacuracy, as this is mainly done through natural constant movement of your weapon, like it was in OFP. ArmA weapons are just less accurate than OFP one. If you ask me, OFP weapons were wayyyy too accurate laser rifles. Easy as hell to shoot long range, tbh.

[Skaven 0]

I'm generraly happy with this game, but still, I have some complains so here they go.

1 - Unaceptable having the M249 and PK with the belt animation running the wrong way, the weapon is feeding the box on both of them. How could this not have been spotted? And how can it still be happeing after 3 patches, it's unbeliavable, I don't think I ever saw such a mistake in a game.

2 - The textures on most of the soldiers could have been a lot better, 75% of the re-textures made by addon makers beat BIS work big time, 70% of the addon makers ain't even professionals.

3 - Having such a big island which lags the game big time for most of the players doesn't make much sense to me, it would have been a lot better for example to release 3 smaller Islands like Jungle, Winter and Desert, more diversety and better gameplay for all.

4 - The Campaign is a mess, again 75% of the mission makers in a week can do a better job (as they do already), remeber mission makers ain't professionals they ain't paid and still they beat BIS work big time.

5 - Too many bugs for both ATI and GeForce cards, how can a top graphic card have so much problems in a game, again I don't remenber seeing a game being released with so many bugs.

6 - Bugs like the boats not being able to disembark soldiers near the shores, helicopters not attacking ground soldiers properly and so on are again tottaly unaceptable and a proof that this game was probably made in a hurry and now they are trying to fix it with patches, which as we know will take a long time to do.

7 - How is it possible to have the community actually fixing the game instead of the guys that actually made the game, tracers and sounds are a good example of it.

8 - How can a professionional enterprise release patches that fix some bugs and than open new ones. For example how can the G36 since 1.07 have the scope zoomed and how can the RACS Vulcan be invisible in the Editor?

9 - How can they already be posting the next Operation Flashpoint's screenshots instead of making this one (ARMA) actually playable full time and working with as few bugs as possible.

To me the problem here was lack of organisation and lack of time. Releasing this game at the same time as Vista was a big mistake, probably lack of time and money I don't know.

I work in a multinacional enterprise as part of the managing staff, when I am in charge of a project if I made half of this mistakes I would have been fired a long time ago.