Nothing in Arma2 Seems much Different

[ExtracTioN 0]

I think we all should calm down folks I am sure there will be a DEMO of Arma2 than we can decide if it is good or bad.

I have good hopes that Arma2 will make us happy.

Let's just wait and see

[JeRK 0]

Quote[/b] ]The problem is that we don't want to play a modernized OFP, we want a game with some brand new features.

That's more your personal wish not an problem

Like ArmA 2 should be "The ultimative and close-to-reality combat simulator that ever hit the pc game market!".

Isn't it better to have a game with less gameplay/performance bugs and very good edititing and modding tools?

In the end most customers prefer playing the game instead of watching most time only at nice graphic & sound features.

Let's just wait and see what happens!

?!

What I was saying is that rather than having a modernized OFP (Better graphics and the very few new features that have been mentioned up to now) ArmA II should have some new stuff that's too hard to mod in like weapon resting, fluid posture, 3D scopes etc.

[colkurtz 0]

Quote[/b] ]The problem is that we don't want to play a modernized OFP, we want a game with some brand new features.

That's more your personal wish not an problem

Like ArmA 2 should be "The ultimative and close-to-reality combat simulator that ever hit the pc game market!".

Isn't it better to have a game with less gameplay/performance bugs and very good edititing and modding tools?

In the end most customers prefer playing the game instead of watching most time only at nice graphic & sound features.

Let's just wait and see what happens!

?!

What I was saying is that rather than having a modernized OFP (Better graphics and the very few new features that have been mentioned up to now) ArmA II should have some new stuff that's too hard to mod in like weapon resting, fluid posture, 3D scopes etc.

Well I can see jerk's point, some new features would make a refreshing change, as Arma was basically our much loved OFP but with better graphics and a few enhancements to the engine.

I was sort hoping that game2 would have features such as 'digging in', better incorporation of artillery and platoon command structures, but when ARMAII was revealed as game 2, I now suspect we might be in store another refinement of OFP, which isn't a bad thing although it does leave one feeling a little underwhelmed.

[JeRK 0]

This thread needs more attention. ArmA2 needs to be something new.

[sluggCDN 0]

I think OFP already had the winning formula, just had to expand on its outdated engine and keep all the good stuff that made it the hit. Unfortunately - due to lack of understanding or otherwise - ArmA was created with the whole array of annoying "innovations" which can hardly be explained from a rational point of view and was missing quite a few good features that it used to have. One just have to hope that BIS shakes its head up and straightens its act.

Big OFP pros:

OFP had amazing for its times 3D world, nicely balanced freedom of action and milsim aspects.

OFP cons:

OFP always lacked in immersion and combat atmosphere like its contemporaries - GR original series or R6 for example. How did GR did it? - soo simple, just a bit of camera-shaking effect to simulate shockwave from canon fire or shell/nade explosion.

One thing BIS failed to capture in ArmA is the visceral nature of combat. It simply has to have the effects that draw a player into the game world: when a 'nade goes off 15 feet away from a player, the latter has to at least temporarily lose his hearing, if not the sight. The AI has to scream, communicate and show some "life" - otherwise they just act like zombies charging headlong at you. BIS should definately check out combat & effects in Crysis. Crysis is a SiFi FPS, but it has some great realistic features: wound and concussion effects, weapon handling, AI behaviour, personality, character. If you look at how vehicle damage model is done in Crysis I think it's the best available out there. It's quite a sight to watch a lit up tank in Crysis, how its ammo is cooking off sending fireworks into the sky. They did their homework.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to glorify Crysis. I'm using it as an example only. I don't like it, but I like many of its aspects. Look at it this way - if BIS incorporates the cooking-off ammo effect in tanks it doesn't mean they are trying to copy Crysis. No, by no means no! They would incorporate it because this is what happens when a tank is lit up and burning, just like a house fence would collapse if a heavy vehicle drives over it or fuel barrel would explode if it's lit up. BIS - don't be greedy with effects. I just hope they listen.

[mattxr 9]

Well i dont care about you guys but the GFX doesnt matter to me if it looks the same as not, just as long as its stable on my 8800GTX...

What i care about is the game play AI improvements and so on and by looking at the AI videos they have done just that. And all the other screenshots i have seen i will definitly be buying this game..

Remeber Kids.. Its not about the GFX and looking better. Did OFP:R Look Much better than OFP?

And all this talk about new features.. Cant You guys read or something, or did u just skip the developers post.. saying there will be more features and if you wait to find out.. you will see.. you's are all talking bullshit atm and getting your selfes worked up about nothing.

[JeRK 0]

Well i dont care about you guys but the GFX doesnt matter to me if it looks the same as not, just as long as its stable on my 8800GTX...

What i care about is the game play AI improvements and so on and by looking at the AI videos they have done just that. And all the other screenshots i have seen i will definitly be buying this game..

Remeber Kids.. Its not about the GFX and looking better. Did OFP:R Look Much better than OFP?

And all this talk about new features.. Cant You guys read or something, or did u just skip the developers post.. saying there will be more features and if you wait to find out.. you will see.. you's are all talking bullshit atm and getting your selfes worked up about nothing.

ArmA1's graphics are good enough for me, but I've gotta say it needs a sound effects improvement (ear ringing and co) and some other effects that make things more immersive.

The speed of sound simulation that's been in since OFP + great sound effects=Best sound of the year awards for BIS :P

[sluggCDN 0]

Quote[/b] ]you's are all talking bullshit atm and getting your selfes worked up about nothing.

No it's not a bullshit talk at all. I remember when the BIS released the first screens of ArmA with high knee-deep dynamically rendered grass. Ppl were raving - I though I can't believe they are doing it. I knew right there that we are gonna have serious probs with visibility and AI when it can see thru grass and we can't. I tried to raise sh**t storm on the forum, no one listened. Look, right know hardly any servers run maps with grass at "high" - so much complaining was done about this "innovation". If BIS could only listen and think it thru maybe they wouldn't have to go thru the pain of correcting it with patches. I believe it's better to make constructive feedback beforehand than complain after. Ppl say "we don't need GFX" - well but do u need perfecty animated wild life running around you in ArmA2 while the AI is still OFP-grade intelligent? I'd rather have special combat effects than rabits in grass field. If BIS confident they can do both combat GFX and such little thing as wild life in the new game then great. But if they are animating rabbits while, for example, the special effects or vehicle damage model are still untouched then they are probably working on a wrong simulator; maybe they should release ArmA2 as an ultimate hunting sim then. U know what I mean. It's all about focusing on the areas that matter the most in this genre.

[Flat!!! 0]

Counter-Strike, Counter-Strike Condition Zero, Counter-Strike Source... Same thing just different graphics^^

[frostwyrm333 1]

If i am right arma was developed for 2 years, its not enough for almost any game.

Arma 2 is going to be developed for another 2 years so there is very much time for improvements. One more year along with stuff they didnt announced.

"Next-gen" is something completly stupid, what is next-gen, call of duty 4 or that stupid hyped guitar games? Name NG was started by consolists and it dosesnt have any real meaning on pc, there are good games and bas ones.

If you have game like ofp you cant make sequel without $.

Arma got 6-7-8 mark in reviews so what the hell?

Arma 2 can be only more than arma.

And games arent only bis income, you forget vbs, so all ofp series is definitly not primary made for consoles.

[Phantom Mark 0]

Gimme working AI and a decent controller interface to actually setup my josticks/controls and I for one be much happier, for those reasons alone Arma 1 sits collectiing dust....

[SlipperyJim 0]

As I have already said in other parts of the forum, I suspect BIS is starting to act like other game companies like UBI or Vivendi. They release a "sequel" that really is just a patched version of the previous release. Fix Arma 1 if you want our money BIS. How many fanboys can you depend on to blindly buy your games? Your name will only be as good as your last release.

I love Arma 1 (even with all its faults) but please don't go for the easy cash grab.

[MehMan 0]

Yes, surely, because it looks like ArmA, it'll be like ArmA. FFS. If you only know how much ArmA changed in looks in 1 year. And we still have one more year of a dev cycle, if not even more, so who knows what will happen. It's simply too soon to say anything. But we can surely say a bit more about ArmA2 than OFP2. We have seen nothing but artists impression for OFP2.

[SaBrE_UK 0]

Also, only towards the end of ArmA's development was the entire BIS team working on it. Most of the time, half was working on Game 2 (now ArmA 2) instead.

[Phantom Mark 0]

The fact that arma 1 still has a useless and outdated controls interface annoys me somewhat, if even something so basic cant be fixed and put right for Arma2 then it begs the question what actually is right apart from a flashy new gfx engine ?

Let me setup my god damn controls so I can actually play the game in the first place !!

[sandzibar 0]

The fact that arma 1 still has a useless and outdated controls interface annoys me somewhat, if even something so basic cant be fixed and put right for Arma2 then it begs the question what actually is right apart from a flashy new gfx engine ?

eh? arma has one of the more configurable control setups around.. ive not seen any other games that allow you to specify hold/double tap key and multiple key combo's for commands.

what bit are you having issues with? the ofp style action menu? the squad interface?

on action menu id agree - god its dated and clunky.. but so used to using the F keys and numbers for ordering ai soldier commands that im not sure how id react to a change for that.

[Phantom Mark 0]

yes indeed, however if you have more than one device plugged in then you have no chance of actually telling the game exactly which device you want to use !!

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I'll have to agree. The ArmA interface is probably the most configurable around for a game, but I kind of fear for this if it has been decided it should be console friendly. How could you possibly do all this with a console? Never had one, never want one, ever, just because of this limitation. And yes, I guess I belong to the group that is afraid the controls will be made stupid in order to be possible to do on a console. Other games have done it, but done it successfully? And I don't think no games have ever even scratched the possibilities that are available in the ArmA engine.

As for suggestion - drop the action menu once and for all for all in-game functions such as get in, reload, switch to gunner and all that. It should be available for mission specific options only of the type get documents, surrender and so on, or a sort of back-compatible function -- old systems that use action menu for its options doesn't have to be recoded (although they could be).

Instead, bring in the compass menu. I use this in several applications and it's a blessing to use. Hold a key that is mapped to a certain type of functions (i.e. all vehicle related functions) for a certain type of situation (i.e. one menu while outside a vehicle, and one while inside). Now a compass menu shows up in the middle of the screen and all you need to do is move the mouse in the direction containing the item you need (i.e. get in as driver) and release the key. Certain "dangerous" items (i.e. detonate satchel charges) should be highlighted in a danger color and might require holding shift as well in order to be executed when you release the key. Sometimes certain actions might be unavailable (i.e. get in as commander on a truck), in which the item should still be there but in a shaded (unavailable) color.

A typical compass menu is supposed to be easy to learn and remember. If done right, it will be extremely intuitive to use within just a few tries, because *the hand learns*. In order for this to work, any given menu must be consise; i.e. a vehicle interaction menu must ALWAYS be arranged in the same matter. Get In as Driver = NE, Get In as Gunner = N, Get In as Commander = NW, Access Inventory (gear) = E, Quick Refill (rearm) = W, and so on, NO MATTER THE VEHICLE, even if this option is not available. Vehicles may have in common that they have special abilities. Make it so that these specialities (Reload HEAT, Switch to KVP) is located in the same place. Easy and logical!

Compass should have 8 directions, and could be used with numpad if desired. So, NW = 7 on the numpad. The compass should have a needle, dynamically indicating (resizing depending on distance from center, and obviously rotating) depending on mouse position.

In certain cases, an 8-way compass is insufficient. In my application I use (Realsoft3D), bigger menus have an additional ring outside of the inner ring with additional menu items. Now you have 16 items to choose from. On keypad, this would be a double tap on whatever direction (7 7 for the NW item on the outer ring).

In other cases (not within my app, but I can see the possibility), it might instead expand to a secondary ring with one or two rings while the key is pressed. Means, the first compass menu is replaced with a new one once an item is selected.

The bonus here, is that this might actually work pretty well even on a console.

But this was only suggestions on how to improve the current, outdated, horrible-and-dangerous-to-use, action menu.

Squad and team (and hopefully even platoon) commanding is also something that needs to be adressed. I like the idea of being able to micromanage if I feel I need to. However, I *need* to do this a lot more than I wish to do while playing a mission as a leader. I.e, if my guys are running out of ammo, I can't use the rearm function most of the time, because units seem to rearm according to class. So I need to select one guy, have him move to the vehicle, and hopefully he will use the vehicle when I hit the gear option. This might be very hard with vehicles not properly configured (ammo truck is loaded as standard with 300000, but have a capacity of only 200 I think). Now, move this guy out of the way and repeat for the remaining 7.

IF there is 7 remaining, because in order to check my buddies health, I need to use commands to make them report back. Okay, so this is kind of realistic, but fiddling with the commands takes soooo much more time than simply asking everyone by voice in real life. Same thing for ammunition, I really don't know until I ask. This is to me too much micromanagement involved for even the simplest tasks.

What I would like to see instead, is indicators for many things:

* Current stance.

* Assigned role should be MUCH clearer.

* Ammo below half (of default or if changed during weapons selection).

* Lightly injured, typically bleeding (can fix self if has a medikit).

* Severely injured (need a medic).

* Incapacitated (need a medic, and cannot move, maybe extraction needed with replacement available from vehicle).

* Deceased (yes, do NOT remove him, more in this later).

* Team color (if assigned to a team).

These should be shown for all units in squad level (if leader).

If NOT a leader, I'd still like myself to be highlighted at my position in the squad, and show status of team mates. This is because finding out this info is usually shared within the squad. If someone is hurt in real life, you will know about it from others. Furthermore, it will ease team switching since you can hold a key and simply click on the unit in the unitbar you want to become, for easy switching within that squad (or whatever level is chosen).

What I ment with leave the dead one there, is that when I get reinforcements, I can pick from the available dead guys spots for him to replace. That way, I maintain my squad in the setup I like without any fuzz. The new team leader I can exchange my #2 team leader. And the marksman I can exchange my dead #9 marksman.

So, yes, I would like a squad commanding key, similar to commander mode today. However, I'd like it seriously improved. While holding the key, it should be possible to i.e. rightclick on a unit for a menu. OR, and here is the clue, left click and drag a line to any position on the map. When you release the button, a context sensitive menu (compass again?) should show up giving you the options available depending on what the mouse was over when you release it. Get it? Here are some examples:

Drag a line from the unit to an empty position will get you options to i.e. Move To in different types, defend area, look at, find cover, scan, search&destroy and so on.

Drag a line from the unit to a car, a vehicle specific menu should pop up with all its menu items; get in as driver, rearm self, rearm vehicle, repair, use radio, defend, take cover behind, attack, sneak towards, target and so on.

Drag a line from one unit to another, a unit specific menu shows up with menu items; exchange items, change formation position, cover this unit, aid this unit (if specialist), recieve aid from this unit, and so on.

Also, shift right clicking should open menu that are specific to this type of unit. I.e. if the unit is an AT soldier, a menu should appear that are specific to AT soldiders. If this AT soldier happens to be team leader because team leader is dead, this menu should also have a "command menu" item. If this is a compass menu, this item should always be in the North position, and here is when "expandable menus" comes into play. When you move the mouse to north, it instantly replaces with a new compass menu with a commanding specific menu.

Furthermore, while in "command mode" (via the spacebar), you should be able to drag directly from your units on the battlefield to anywhere else or other units with this same menu system. But only in command mode, since it would otherwise hinder friendly fire by you. Or, again, maybe a modifyer key (holding space).

It could also work well on the map. Drag a line from a unit on the map to a vehicle, and the vehicle interaction menu pops up.

Another great feature that would help the scanning part of using a compass menu system, would be to have it color coded backgrounds into sectors. That is i.e., N NW NE is colorcoded red because they might be offencive in nature. E & W is colorcoded yellow because they are dealing with vehicles. SW & SE colorcoded Green because they are squad based in nature. And S is colorcoded White because this direction always opens up a new menu. But naturally it should depend on what compass was being used.

And finally, in opposite of today, fully compatible with AI (AI should actually use this system automatically), and scripting;

//unit select

compass.Select [unit1, unit2]

compass.Select [unit1, "markerName"]

compass.Select [unit1, groupname]

compass.Select [unit1, location]

You get the idea; compass.Select is the input paramters, the line you drag from one unit to another, the first one being the one you command.

//compass execution

compass.Execute ["N"]

compass.Execute ["N2", "NE2", "SW"]

The first one being a simple compass selecting the north cardinal direction as you would with the mouse or numkeys

The second one is an excessively complex menu system, where you first select the north direction on the outer ring, then the north east direction on the outer ring of the first menu expansion, then the south west direction on the inner ring of the second expansion.

Or as a mixed array:

unit1 || group compass [[target unit || target group || "marker" or location], ["N2","NE2","SW"]];

I wouldn't reccommend having to perform the last menu execution though, because having such a complex menu surely defies it's purpose of making things more simpler.

It does mean however, that the system knows what would be the appropriate menu automatically based on what the compass.Select gave as input.

Some other tips:

1. The engine today should be easily enough upgraded so that it would be possible to set a hud background color and hud background opacity level.

2. Organizing the squad should be done in a graphical interface. Assign teams and leaders, positions in squad. Also a level based formation type should be available, such as platoon moving in a staggered column, squads in a line formation, and teams in echelon. That way, an attached armored squad told to operate with an infantry squad, can move in formation properly without the higher ranked tank platoon officer going first just because of rank.

3. Squad strip on the bottom of the screen should be level based. Arrange a squad in the editor (or while in game) into chain of command. Double clicking on a team leader brings you further down in the command and allows you to command that team. Hitting the backspace instead, bring you UP in the chain of command, listing each platoons leader pluss any attachments leaders. Double clicking on one of these again, lets you see (but maybe not command without teamswitch) their units. This gives you the possibility for a highly increased situational awareness that modern soldiers take for granted. Communications within a Stryker team and the rest of the force is EXTREME compared to the cold war.

4. Btw, regarding point 3, I'd also like to see the possibility of automatic info sharing among different forces, AS AN OPTION (don't force it).

5. Also regarding point 3, I'd like to see A LOT of more ranks available. I've noticed that Arma2 campaign is set to be a USMC unit, does this mean that other branches are gone? I suggest having any type of unit belonging to any kind of branch, but that ALL ranks within a branch is included to select from, at least up to general ranks.

Punchline:

See the link toward todays system, with an expandeable menu? Sure, you do loose one option to choose from in an 8-way compass. But the pros:

1. Much easier to navigate, as you select with a mouse movement.

2. OR select with numpad, BUT now number corresponds to a direction.

3. Easier to search and look in if properly grouped, as you only have to search in a certain part of the compass, because you know instictively that the south directions may deal with defencive orders, i.e.

4. Expandeable, as today.

5. Propely linked to scripting functions, which is not the case today.

6. Possibility to become context sensitive. Have unit(s) selected, aim at a vehicle, and the default compass becomes that of vehicle interaction for the selected unit(s).

7. In a double ring compass, you can see two sets of options withint the same compass, instead of having to enter two different menus as you would today.

Conclusion:

I'm confident that BIS is fully capable of programming and do the necessary brainstorming required for such a system.

But is this something the general gamer, mission designer, or addon maker would like to see? I don't see it realistic for Arma2 though, but maybe Arma3?

Or are you all happy with the way things work? I REALLY think many engine systems -- especially the interface -- are extremely out of date, painful to use, and simply feels and looks bad.

[max power 21]

ArmA was advertised as OFP 1.5. Lots of people were complaining that ArmA was too much like OFP. Now, based on some screenshots, people are saying that ArmA 2 will be too much like ArmA. The problem here is that we should be comparing ArmA 2 to OFP. ArmA is supposedly still using the OFP engine, whereas ArmA 2 is supposed to have a completely new engine from the ground up. ArmA 2 is supposedly the sequel. It's Game 2, and OFP was Game 1, not ArmA. I speculate that some of the features that they put into ArmA will appear in ArmA 2- or, more probably, some of the features they developed for ArmA 2 found their way into ArmA. If this is true, then ArmA 2 will be like ArmA 1.5... But the overlying thing to remember is that BIS decided to do the ArmA project in order to keep the development on Game 2 going. So without ArmA, ArmA 2 wouldn't exist, even though ArmA 2 was in development BEFORE ArmA. It's not simple a matter of BIS throwing shit together on the cheap because the gamers will swallow it, it's them designing games for a very small group of people and trying to stay in the game developing business independently- as opposed to just the mocap business or whatever else they are into besides these game projects.

All that said, the features I've read about ArmA 2 seem like the game will be much different. *IF* they still have a dynamic campaign going on, *IF* they still have the roleplaying stuff in, and since they have more expressive AI and a much more detailed pathfinding system, etc, it seems to be like it's going to offer a lot of improvements and a very compelling setting. I don't think that fans of the ArmA game will be disappointed with ArmA 2.

[miles teg 1]

As far as I'm concerned, I think that the BIGGEST POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS that could be made to ArmA 2 is as follow:

1. Ability to load vehicles into large cargo aircraft, helicopters, and ships (such as landing craft).

2. The ability to walk around inside an aircraft like you can in Novalogic's Joint Operations FPS game (in my opinion the best multiplayer FPS game if you like smooth MP play, large maps, and the ability to fly or drive vehicles).

3. The ability to add mulitiple turrets to aircraft (for good WWII aircraft and Soviet Cold War aircraft with gun turrets).

If those capabilities are added, then all the rest is just icing on the cake in my opinion. Those 3 capabilities would ABSOLUTELY make me want to buy ArmA2.

Finally last but not least, I have to say (please take this as constructive criticism), that BIS has done a PISS POOOOOOR job of advertising OFP, ArmA, and the upcoming ArmA2 here in the United States (a massively untapped market for BIS). Not a single gamer I know has ever heard of ArmA. They ALL have heard of games like Call of Duty 4. Gaming conferences do not sell games. Advertising sells games. If you look at for example the AWESOME advertising done for "Call of Duty 4" and other games like "Assassins Creed", they make you say, "WOW!" and drum up tremendous hype and anticipation for the game. There are some VERY talented cutscene makers at BIS and amongst the OFP/ArmA community who do a tremendous job. BIS needs to start looking at investing some serious $$$$ in advertising.

For making truly the absolute uncontested best FPS game EVER until now, they need to add in the three items I listed.

My other biggest fear however is that ArmA 2 will force addon makers to heavily re-modify addons in order for them to work in ArmA2. Its been tough enough for OFP to ArmA conversions (no easy task by any means). If ArmA2 makes it even more difficult, (the domain of super geeks with infinite patience and skills) then sadly the ArmA 2 addon maker/mod community will likely shrink dramatically.

I know my mod will likely just stick to OFP and ArmA if it is very difficult to convert or make addons in ArmA2.

On a positive note however, I can only applaud the KICK ASS job that BIS has done on patch 1.09. I for one am very satisifed with the fixes especially now that the Javelin does not clip through the soldier's head and that the LGB's now operate perfectly and you no longer have to be grouped to a plane to designate a target with a laser designator.

So keep up the great work BIS and hopefuly ArmA2 will be a real knock-out improvement.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Lou Montana 101]

3. The ability to add mulitiple turrets to aircraft (for good WWII aircraft and Soviet Cold War aircraft with gun turrets).

Can't we already, considering double MG UH60 ?

But, about relative velocity and movement in vehicles, it's all thumbs up from me.

[SunDragonx10 0]

3. The ability to add mulitiple turrets to aircraft (for good WWII aircraft and Soviet Cold War aircraft with gun turrets).

Can't we already, considering double MG UH60 ?

But, about relative velocity and movement in vehicles, it's all thumbs up from me.

It sounds like I'm stealing this from COD4 but what about adding a AC-130 Pave Spectre II into the game?

[funnyguy1 0]

2.  The ability to walk around inside an aircraft like you can in Novalogic's Joint Operations FPS game (in my opinion the best multiplayer FPS game if you like smooth MP play, large maps, and the ability to fly or drive vehicles).

Is it just me, or was it confirmed by BIS that this is not going to happen?

[sickboy 13]

yes indeed, however if you have more than one device plugged in then you have no chance of actually telling the game exactly which device you want to use !!

Isn't that called "Default Device" in Windows Control Panel -> Game Controllers ??

[MartinCrank 0]

AFAIK ArmA2 going to be same graphical engine as ArmA, so no hardware update needed?