ArmA is just ... disappointing

[funkee 0]

could someone answer? I wonder on it too. at the moment the game is unplayble due to lack of servers, players, and anti-cheat program (exept lag, smoothness, and other known bugs). and I'm afraid that BIS is not going to relase another patches, so we must pay for add-on to patch this crappy game

[Major Fubar 0]

You forgot the rest of my quote:

...now can we please drop this particular line of discussion, as it is not the purpose of this thread. Feel free to air your grievances about the game, but let's drop the whole "metaforum" discussion please.

I'm asking politely. Once.

Major, why dont you yourself add something substantial to this discussion? We can all bitch 25 more pages but for what? Is this some kind of a free market research scheme? If so, let it be, but give us some feeling that we are being heard.

Therefore, since you are most probably working for BIS, can we expect another patch OR we will be forced to buy the expansion pack OR maybe even ArmA2?

Let me clear up a few things here:

1. I don't "work for BIS". I am a volunteer moderator at these forums. I have no financial interest in BIS or these forums whatsoever.

2. Moderation decisions are not to be discussed in public. If you have a problem or a question, discuss it with a moderator via PM. It says so right there in the forum rules.

3. This thread exists to give people a place to air their complaints about ArmA. We allowed this thread as people kept creating their own individual threads, cluttering up the forums - not as "free market research". I'm sure BIS do take a look at this thread and take the opinions expressed into account. This thread is NOT for pointless gloating/sarcasm, bashing of people or companies, or as anyone's private playground.

=======

I have seriously had it with moderators instructions completely being ignored in this thread. Next person who breaks ANY rules here will result in the thread being locked indefinitely.

We've tried being polite and patient, but that simply does not seem to work with some people. Can it really be so hard? Just stick to the topic the thread was intended for, obey the forum rules, and obey moderator instructions.

As far as I'm concerned, that is the end of the discussion. Anyone who claims they weren't giving enough warnings must be joking...

[BLSmith2112 0]

^ 10 points. Hurrah! Well said.

[Madus_Maximus 0]

Serious bugs:

-Visual quality is effected by seemingly 'opposite of intuitive' settings i.e.: Setting resolution higher makes the game run better.

This is more to do with your graphics card than the game. Graphics cards have a "native" resolution in which it was optimised for as it's the generic resolution most games will be played, usually its 1024 x 768 on more recent cards. It's just the way it's designed. You can notice this on many many 3D games, not just ArmA, so considering this an ArmA bug is somewhat unfair.

[xpz 0]

Serious bugs:

-Visual quality is effected by seemingly 'opposite of intuitive' settings i.e.: Setting resolution higher makes the game run better.

This is more to do with your graphics card than the game. Graphics cards have a "native" resolution in which it was optimised for as it's the generic resolution most games will be played, usually its 1024 x 768 on more recent cards. It's just the way it's designed. You can notice this on many many 3D games, not just ArmA, so considering this an ArmA bug is somewhat unfair.

Sorry but you have no idea what you're talking about. A gfx card works no different in 1024 than in 1280 for example. It's all a matter of resources.

[456820 0]

No most cards are recomended in certain resolutions, if you against the recomendation then it might be a bit slower for example. As Madus_Maximus the recomended is 1024x768 most of the time, if you go below this then it may be slightly slower aswell as if you go above.

My old Geforce 6600 ran games much better with 1024x768, my fps dropped in most games if I ran aboe or below.

[Drozdov 0]

I'm really getting fed up with my stupid squad members being left behind. It seems the AI squad was developed to be led by another AI - they have much longer pathing routes around any kind obstacle than any human player would ever take. They can't find their way through bushes or past rocks - instead they all go on a big circuitous loop around them and end up 50m behind you. It's even worse going through towns - you think your squad is following close behind you, and then realise that instead of going through the opening in that wall you just walked through they've ALL gone running miles round the other side of the building, leaving you alone for ages until they find their AI path to you.

Even on flat clear ground you'll notice a gap develops between you and the rest of the squad, and they don't sprint to close that gap like they did in OFP. And to top it all off, as soon as you stop and wait for them they all stop running and walk up slowly to where they should be, as if there's no reason to hurry whatsoever, even if you're getting shot at. They should be sprinting to get into position damn it! The soldiers are lazy, they should always be jogging to carry out orders or keep formation even if it's only a short distance.

AI pathing is also very bad when it comes to vehicles. They act as if there's only one path they can follow to reach the door to a vehicle when they're ordered to get in. This means that sometimes they will all walk (walking again, the lazy buggers) in a big circle all the way around the other side of the vehicle just to approach the door from the pre-set angle of approach. It makes getting into vehicles anywhere pretty bizarre, and sometimes virtually impossible in a tight space. Again in OFP they had no problem with running up to the vehicle from whichever angle was quickest.

I could mention the robotic aspects of their behaviour as well, but those were present in OFP as well and it didn't suffer terribly for it. By this I mean that the soldiers all behave as if they've been drugged to not care about what happens to them, and as if they're robots just following a pre-programmed model of behaviour without any leeway for independent thought (which of course is exactly what they are doing). Like someone else said, if they're being massacred by armour and they have no means of fighting back, they won't run or find cover, they'll just stay there looking confused and die. If they get caught by an enemy in the middle of a street, they won't run away and find cover, they'll just go prone and crawl, or turn around and try to shoot at whatever's killing them regardless of the odds. They never stop behind cover and stay there to shoot at you - they just get their attack order from their officer and come running up towards you. I could go on and on, but anyway, suffice to say that the squad AI is very shoddy at many tasks. The least they could do is pathfind properly and keep formation.

[mr reality 0]

all of the above

I couldn't agree more. Infact i posted, some time ago, about this on the bug tracker. I think the eventual repy doesn't make me think things will improve. In Flashpoint this problem was noway near as bad as it is in ArmA.

Here it is click me

[Correction 0]

I wasn't going to post in this thread, because I was relatively happy with Armed Assault despite all the quirks, and I was confident that they would be fixed in time. However, eventually I came to set it down for a couple of months or so to wait for some fixes to all the problems I've been having. Then after all that time, I checked the site today hoping for some updates or at least some news, and I am disappointed in BIS to say the least.

Right now you have about an 80%-working game on the market, and instead of fixing it you're working on an expansion pack and just announced a sequel! I understand that Game 2 has been in development for a long time, but now that it's been officially announced, we all know that's your priority.

Meanwhile, Armed Assault 1 is still on the verge of unplayable! I'm still getting shot by demon AI who walk through walls while my guys struggle to figure out which direction to face before walking between two buildings. I'm still getting picked off by enemy AK74s 2km away that sound like they're right next to me. I still can't even use a scope within view of any foliage without suffering a frame rate of about 7. I can still run Oblivion on nicer settings and still at a more playable frame rate, and that is just absolutely inexcusable in my opinion.

BIS, you have my word that I will never buy another one of your products until you fix the one you just released. You honestly had me fooled: I really thought you were putting effort into fixing ArmA, but when I see you announcing all these other products, I can't help but feel ripped off.

[Prej 0]

Why, oh, why?

Being a true admirer of OFP, I bought ArmA hoping that it will be OFP but with better graphics and without the bugs of the earlier game.

I got home, installed the game and decided to patch it.

Well, lookee here, 1 Gb of patches.

You gotta be kidding me. That's like 1/4th of the damn DVD!

Nevertheless, I downloaded the damn patches, installed them and ran the game.

Long story short:

The AI is just pure BS. My soldiers are just dumb mannequins waiting to catch a bullet from the enemy AI which is almost god-like.

My AI co-pilot is completely useless (just like he was in OFP). This results in me having to fly, target (which is just annoying since the keyboard config is confusing) and destroy at the same time (while evading enemy fire, since my Cobra can be shot down with a slingshot).

There are many other annoying flaws which exist even after patching up to 1.08. This is unacceptable. I already had to download 1 Gb, how much more will it take to make the game enjoyable?

I really didn't want to start my career on this forum with moaning but I am gravely disappointed with this game. It is fun and I want to play it, but there are just too many things which diss me off.

[76 0]

YAH...Placebo is now back, but I don't see how he going to change anything except more statements that BIS cant deliver on...

[Major Fubar 0]

@ Sep. 12 2007,14:37)]YAH...Placebo is now back, but I don't see how he going to change anything except more statements that BIS cant deliver on...

See my multiple warnings earlier in the thread: +1 WL & 48hr PR.

Next person gets double.

Keep it ontopic, don't flame anyone.

[Patrocles 0]

Overall ArmA is a fair game IMHO. It has potential but it is buggy. Hopefully, they will keep the patches coming! I do not plan to buy the addons or sequels until reading game reviews and player comments. For now I fall into the ArmA is just disappointing camp but i reserve the right to switch camps if the game improves.

[Danbri 0]

I finally got to grips with the graphical issues and have been able to play ARMA without having to alt-tab every 2 minutes. To discover an unbelivable boring environment in the campaign. The one and only thing that I disliked in OFP was the desert. And what do we have in ARMA? Realy missing the woods from OFP.

I dont know if its related to the desert thing, but I dont get the same "feeling" that i got and still gets in OFP/Resistance.

But thats just MY thoughts

[FinGuerilla 0]

So far I have been mostly creating small scenarios in the Editor, and started the campaign. I'm getting more and more disappointed. Maybe the first thing I tried in the editor was: "I wonder if the AI can no longer see through the smoke". Oh, hell. Sure they can. As well as grass and bushes. (Don't know if the patches fixed this). And AI is just as stupid as it was in the OFP. Just as robotic and unreal.

50 euros for a facelifted OFP (without a decent SP campaign, with just one big island) is way too much. I feel a little betrayed. I thought that BIS would fix at least some of the things that the OFP community has beem whining for six years, but no.

Next thing, I think, would be to explore the user-made (or third-party) campaigns, if such exist, and if they would make this purchase worth it.

[xxbbcc 6]

The Perpetua campaign is pretty good, you might want to try it. Fedain is good, too. And there was a third one (PMC First something - I cannot recall right now the name, not at gaming machine), that's good.

[Second 0]

ArmA (as well as OFP) sucks nowdays. Came across with Vietcong and have to agree that it's AI+whole system seems much more advanced in combat situation. Infantry aspect of ArmA (The last strong hold! ) feels far too hollow. AI is passive and dumb, firefights are not challenging and they don't have any feeling, terrain is flat (in "microlevel") and not suitable for infantry. List is long... Only positive word comes from freelook, which is superb!

Well ArmA and OFP lasted from years so i don't wonder.

[chops 111]

I was relieved to hear there's a 1.09 patch in the works, the game is more bugged than a Chinese embassy in it's present state and i was having nightmares about Queen's Gambit being an upgrade that proceding patches would require, leaving those of us uninterested in it stranded.

Though why start work on a new game, when the present one is still far from complete?

[3lions 0]

Chiching....goes the cash register!

[Rhodite 3]

Chiching....goes the cash register!

This doesn't discuss anything or pose a question.

It's barely relevant if by some convoluted thought process.

SPAM is how this pointless post can be summed up.

You have been here a good deal of time and are very aware of the standards and policies on this board.

+1WL

[Lepardi 0]

A good AI would have saved the game... but... but it's just dumb. In combat situation they just crawl. Crawl all the way. Or no combat situation, you shoot, they will crawl. Crawl crawl crawl, all they can do.

[snakefang 0]

I was relieved to hear there's a 1.09 patch in the works, the game is more bugged than a Chinese embassy in it's present state and i was having nightmares about Queen's Gambit being an upgrade that  proceding patches would require, leaving those of us uninterested in it stranded.

Though why start work on a new game, when the present one is still far from complete?

Money.

Why release a combat sim thats about as real as paintball?

[Jack 0]

ArmA was released as a final product even though it was still in a developmental/beta stage.

If not for fiscal reasons, then why?

[zulu1 145]

My first impression from the inital release was very disappointed while using my nvidia 6800GT (256mb). All the settings had to be placed on low to get any kind of performance. Aimming and shooting was unstable and hard to hit anything.

After my card blew up, I replaced it with a nvidia 8800GTS (320Mmb). Now I have a whole new outlook. Settings can now be made at high or very high. Aimming is so much more stable now. The light and dark changes are still kind of disconcerting. I just read about and downloaded the 163.39 beta video driver, going to install it and see if graphics improve as some claim.

I have a renewed insterest now so I'll give some of the addons I've downloaded a whirl.

[Dudester 0]

My first impression from the inital release was very disappointed while using my nvidia 6800GT (256mb). All the settings had to be placed on low to get any kind of performance. Aimming and shooting was unstable and hard to hit anything.

After my card blew up, I replaced it with a nvidia 8800GTS (320Mmb). Now I have a whole new outlook. Settings can now be made at high or very high. Aimming is so much more stable now. The light and dark changes are still kind of disconcerting. I just read about and downloaded the 163.39 beta video driver, going to install it and see if graphics improve as some claim.

I have a renewed insterest now so I'll give some of the addons I've downloaded a whirl.

Why are you posting in the disappointed thread, if you like it now?