ArmA 2 on Xbox 360

[Grimnirsson 0]

The PC upgrading reminds me of the CCGs like Magic-The Gathering

Grim

[Kirby 2]

Lepardi you are one of the most ignorant, pig headed, closed minded, sad little people I've seen in the internet. And that's saying something.

Would it hurt you if BIS ported the game to 360? No it wouldn't. Did it hurt OFP? No.

Personaly, I would prefer to buy it on PC. But I haven't the time, patience, or money, to buy a gazzlillion pound PC, make it work, install the game, fiddle with patches, ect.

With the 360 you plug it in. Connect the internet. Sign up a few things (For LIVE). Put the disk in. Voila. Automatic patches, easy online, stable platform.

Personaly, I would actualy buy both versions. I have OFP on PC and OFP on Xbox.

I just played the Xbox one mostly because of ease. I only really played the PC one after my Xbox burnt out and I got a 360.

I admitt the PC version is better in terms of modability, expansions and a small amount of other things... But thats about it.

[paragraphic l 2]

As a start I would like to say that I loved OFP:E and sometimes still play in on my old console. atm I love ArmA even though my notebook does not.

I would rather say ArmA2 going a bit of the same path as OFP did, only not with the 5year gap in between. I think it would be better for both versions, to first have the pc version ready and stable. Then if possible take what you've learned from that and finish the 360 version in the 6months following.

ArmA allready showed that the dates in between releases did not put off that many players, made them only more anticipated to finally get it in their stores.

and I allready posted this some months ago, Microsoft now has created some coding to allow the 360 and their OS to communicate online and allow multiplayer gaming between PC and Xbox360

I HOPE that ArmA2 will have this as well, just to have some WE ROCK YOU ON OUR PLATFORM gaming nights

Edit: With that being possible, and with the 360 having it's own HD, how hard would it be to have some addon system for the console? I can allready get music and videos from my pc onto my 360, how much more work will it be to put some addons on there aswell. OFP:E allowed costum missions to be put on the console if I recall correct, I never did it as I did not have the needed 'gameshark?' but that was allready possible

[Coffin Joe 0]

Downloadable content, as in something new like models or some such(not something like missions that are made with tools that already exist in the game) have to go through certification from Microsoft[even patches and updates].

I would assume Bohemia could pick some community made content and put it through the certification process, which would actually be really really cool but I doubt it would happen.

Don't know if it would be possible to do what the community did with Elite. Using an Action Replay type thing to transfer the files.

Edit: Actually, if Bohemia did that with community content it would really give them a lot of good press and make there game stand out quite a bit. Something like that hasn't been done yet for consoles and if they did they would essentially be breaking new, exciting ground in console gaming.

Do it Bohemia! It would seriously get major coverage in gaming news.

If you want your game to really stand out I think this would be the way to do it. Something no other console game has done before. Strike now before some other developer does it.

[maxqubit 1]

I'm sure the hack/mod 360 scene would embrace ArmA2/360 and its modding very quickly (as some guys did with Elite)

Unfortunately modded 360 is probably out of the question in relation to XBL (risk of banning and stuff) ... but as a 'playground' it could be very intersting:)

Atm, i have no modded 360 and i'm not intending to go mod

(but i would like a mission editor:)

[hp7130p 0]

It's just amazes me on how PC players (including myself back in the day) say that consoles are a waste of money. The fact is you upgrade at lease once a year for RAM  (price varies) and a video card ($250 to $400) just for a game or two (if you are lucky). That is the only thing good about PC gaming you can get current technology now instead of waiting every 3 to 4 years like console players have too.

PC players pay

Video card = $250 (older tech)

Video Card = $400 (udated tech)

RAM = $50 est.

About $500 a year or two

Console players

system $600 (for ps3 excluding XBOX360)) every 4 years

So PC players are basically buying a new console every year

with curent tech.    

Stabilty (cost effective = consoles) wins over variation (cost you more money = PC) all the time. If you were a developer of product "A" you would be a fool not to a have a stable process. It's real world economics, don't hate me for it

[baddo 0]

When people study more and more about anything, eventually they will realize how little they actually know despite all the studying.

[hp7130p 0]

I commend you for your restraint.

Oh well... too each his own, can I suggest that you read about Deming's or Juaran's philosophy maybe that will shed some light. Education rules over ignorance.

[baddo 0]

hp7130p, I should have made it clear that my comment was not aimed at your comment.

I agreed with your post.

Of course education rules over ignorance. We have here people who rule some technology as being not good, as being unsuitable for the purpose. I was trying to hint that maybe those people need to go further in their life, study more (by studying I mean anything in life, not just being in school and reading a book), maybe they will see differently then. Maybe they learn to appreciate other technologies too, than just their personal favourite.

In my ideology, things can go seriously wrong when a technology becomes THE Thing. It opens a can of ignorance and blindness.

I hope I didn't get your comment wrong

[hp7130p 0]

No offense... I break bread with thee

[maxqubit 1]

When people study more and more about anything, eventually they will realize how little they actually know despite all the studying.

Very nice!

It applies to practically everything, be it technology, knowledge or e.g. wealth.

So if you start to realize you will never reach a point at which you can 'relax and sit back' (because 10 seconds later things start to slip out of control again, techonology advances yet again, and you have to 'get up and keep up') you are ready to experiment with letting go. The 'less is more' thingy.

So you buy a console because with that you get 90% of the experience for 10% of the price.

That is why i said that you need to be a very dedicated gamer if you want to play e.g. Crysis ... most gamers would like to play Crysis now but simply can't afford to be THAT dedicated (family, funds, time, you name it) ... so they have to go for the more 'relaxed' option of e.g. waiting for a console 'port' of the game. But that has nothing to do with 'dumbing down'.

[Heatseeker 0]

It's just amazes me on how PC players (including myself back in the day) say that consoles are a waste of money. The fact is you upgrade at lease once a year for RAM (price varies) and a video card ($250 to $400) just for a game or two (if you are lucky). That is the only thing good about PC gaming you can get current technology now instead of waiting every 3 to 4 years like console players have too.

PC players pay

Video card = $250 (older tech)

Video Card = $400 (udated tech)

RAM = $50 est.

About $500 a year or two

Console players

system $600 (for ps3 excluding XBOX360)) every 4 years

So PC players are basically buying a new console every year

with curent tech.

Stabilty (cost effective = consoles) wins over variation (cost you more money = PC) all the time. If you were a developer of product "A" you would be a fool not to a have a stable process. It's real world economics, don't hate me for it

No..

-I only upgrade every 2/3 years or more, i always pick my parts carefully to make a stable, future proof investment.

-I dont play many games, only a select few. Console <s>gamers</s> players spend more on play & throw away games than i do on HW.

-There isnt 1 single game for the 360 im interested in playing.

And the PC doesnt require all that tweakage.. i havent found the need to tweak or change anything in order to play any game and i can play anything from old dx8 games (like OPF) up to Crysis perfectly, and i love the sandbox2 editor .

[maxqubit 1]

i always pick my parts carefully to make a stable, future proof investment.

I dont play many games, only a select few.

And the PC doesnt require all that tweakage.. i havent found the need to tweak or change anything in order to play any game and i can play anything from old dx8 games (like OPF) up to Crysis perfectly, and i love the sandbox2 editor :love: .

I just searched for heatseeker in the Arma - troubleshooting forum ... click for results ... you fit my 'dedicated gamer' definition quite nicely imo:)

As for the quoted stuff, that seems to indicate the same 'dedicatedness' ... which you just can't ask from an average gamer (and the average gamer has to pay the bills of BIS in the end)

[paragraphic l 2]

max I may agree with you on some stuff, but not on most stuff.

Just to get back to the entire console vs pc discussion, I would go on and dare to say that if OFP was published on a console ONLY we would never been here today discussing about ArmA2 (not this discussion as it would be silly then).

Indeed an console gives way more ease to play any sort of game, although recently trying PES2008 and damn I can't handle such gameplay without an keyboard, it does also keep the future of that current game verry limited in expandabilities(sp?)

I've played Raindbow Six 3 Ravenshield to dead and started it up every day for some hours of online play, but I got borred so easy after a while, this also happens allready while playing Halo3 atm, now I HAVE to wait for bungie to come with something new, which sadly only means 1 or 2 new levels and maybe a new gametype. After that it's probably history and I will have to move on to another game, which will repeat this.

In most PC games I can atleast tweak some stuff and most I've played will allow new levels, weapons, characters and game types to be made by the community, which will give my gaming experience in those games a much longer lifeline.

So I would say that even though consoles make it way more easier to have a game session for me, they would not last as long as pc gaming sessions will. Hence I would say that a PC is a way better gaming platform then a console woulf be if they stay as limited in tweaks and adjustments as a pc is.

[maxqubit 1]

What you describe is the 'been there, done that' in gaming. Some community work won't be enough to halt that, but can slow it down a bit. 'Been there, done that', that is a fact of life, not only for games, but movies, tv, music, politics even real life soccer fall in that category.

Once you were hooked to OFP for 2 years, perhaps ArmA hooks you for 6 months (factor 4) ... what about ArmA 2? Because, well ArmA 2 is ... well OFP ... part 3 (as in Halo 3 is ... well Halo ... part 3:)

That is why gamers in general say that games were 'better' back than ... but at that time they were NEW GROUND. Doom, Quake, C&C, OFP:), RS

Question is, what is 'new ground' NOW? Is Crysis 'new ground' or is Mass Effect 'new ground'? Well, i'm hoping that Mass Effect is new ground in terms of story telling. For ArmA2 and OFP2 i just hope for a decent and enjoyable game ... but the 'been there, done that' feeling will certainly rise its ugly gead.

[Coffin Joe 0]

Forge :P

And I'd really love to see ArmA2's editor be something like that. Able to fly around and plop a tank down or whatever. Isn't VBS2's editor something like that?

Would be grand to be able to put in 2 AI armies and watch them go at it as I fly around looking at the battle unfold.

But yeah I understand, new maps are great. Forge is just really really enjoyable for me.

[NightShade 0]

How much do you think ArmA 2 on Xbox 360 would be different than ArmA 2 on PC? For me it's a great news that ArmA 2 would be on Xbox 360, becouse you don't need think about the hardware requirements. And you can have achivements and the graphic would be probably so good, how in High-End PC , for not so many money. I hope that the game would be different from PC version only with other interface. They other things should be this same, how in the PC version. What do you think about it?

Well its really hard to venture a guess at how much diffrent the game will be. If the graphics stay the same as they are now, which is on the level of Arma's... then its likely the game won't differ too much. Simply becuase ArmA's graphics, while good given the scale of the environment, aren't really anything special. However I would expect the amount of units on the map at any given time will be lower, and the view distance will probly be considerably lower then the max PC view distance. Other then that any graphical diffrances will likely be minor.

Now... personally I think its a terrible idea to make a 360 version. Its at least somewhat possible the PC version might suffer at the hands of a consol version. If the devs wish to just port the game, and not spend a long development time on the 360 version... they might just cut things from the overall game... things like dynamic destruction perhaps.

This happened to The Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion as anyone who really followed that games development will know... the devs ended up makeing the game with the 360 version in mind more then the PC version, and cut several features and scaled back the graphics in areas to make it smooth on the 360... problem was they made the same changes to the PC version, which on a good PC would have worked fine. Lets face it... the 360 is 2 years old. It was compared to a high end PC at the time of release. Two years is a long time in PC technology... and a current high end PC is far more advanced then the 360.

On the bright side... play ArmA2 while Im away from my PC? Sure thing.

Lol. I think you are a PC Fanboy. I see you have no Idea (I mean yet not you, but the other people they writing in this forum about such things like "Arma 2 will be horrible on Xbox 360 or something such things") what BIS would have from Xbox 360 version. Today, from PC games, developers like BIS would not have many money becouse the sellings of this games on PC is horrible. Why? Don't ask me. It is so. The best way to have many money is make a game for consoles. I think the BIS with ArmA 2 would have a very great future on X360. On X360 such games are very very expected. Well, PC with Geforce 8800 GTS 320mb, 2 GB and Dual Core e6600 is only a little better than Xbox 360. I mean with games not specifications. And what I found very bad in this forum is the fact, that when comes ArmA only on PC the people says "yeah this game would rox, and so..." and in the pc magazines and rankings this game I must say "sux"Sorry, I like ArmA but is it only a fact. Now the people are saying like you "this game would be not good on X360" and I think it would be complett different. On PC the Hype would be not so good how on the X360. When BIS found the publisher than with a great marketing campaign the people would see this ArmA 2 and they would buy it. It's my opinion. Ah and Oblivion, was so bad sometimes on X360 becouse they have a little time the devkits. Today, Oblivion on PS3 is so good how in the PC. Well, it is possible to do this, I mean make a game so good how on PC or allmost so good . You would see in the next year that ArmA 2 on X360 would be success.

He wasn't at all. In the past every time a game was made for PCs and then they decided to make it for consoles too, it's become crap and generally much worse than it could have been. Two examples:

Oblivion - Was going to be like Morrowind but to make it easier for consoles they used the crap inventory (one big list rather than the nice grid inventory) same for all the other things, big lists rather than everything laid out nicely.

Deus Ex : Invisible War - Same story, went from a decent grid inventory and information displays to crappy tiny scrollable little things to make it easier to use with a game-pad. The textures were also crippled so that it would work better on the X-Box.

[maxqubit 1]

So basically you guys just want the pc version?

Now, go tell THAT to BIS ... and give them the extra cash, they probably miss out on the console version, because if somebody would give me a million Euro's i wouldn't bother to go to work anymore ... i'm pretty sure the same goes for BIS. So pay them off and keep it to yourselfs if that is what makes you pc gamers tick.

It couldn't be more simple ... but the 'whining' over consoles, it is so childish. Jeeezzzz. BIS makes games for a living (at least that is my educated guess, but i could be wrong, they could come from another planet were money grows on trees), that is why they also want to make and hopefully sell a 360 version. PERIOD.

[hp7130p 0]

Big brother (PC) is just going to have to get use to little brother (console). Developers what a stable platform and are looking for better ways to make a profit. This reminds me of all the complaining about Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon from PC players saying they should have dibs first over consoles and guess what the developers did not listen. So basically the me first and you second mentality has backfired

[NoRailgunner 0]

Conversions from console games to pc are often pretty bad. Many of pc gamers are afraid of that... and this run'n'gun gameplay of most "military" console games.

Maybe in future we can afford more new techology and holo suite.

What will our great-great-great-grandson say to actual PC/consoles?

[hp7130p 0]

You are right about PC to console conversions being bad NoRailgunner but that does not change the fact that developers will continue make ports or duel releases.

Developers do not want to lose money on making (time is money) patches and fixing security issues (depending on hardware and OS= variation). The excessive security/hacking issues with ARMA1 proves my point about an "unstable platform".

Look at it from buisness standpoint.