ArmA 2 Press Coverage

[Adamicz 3]

Also they criticized that the Arma environment is more likely "dead", means no default NPCs in cities and so on...

There are going to be civies... and you can even talk with them and get some informations (for example about enemy movement)

About buildings.. I don't have any problem with them... there's again a lot of classic commie buildings... and they're "simple"

[mr.g-c 6]

Quote[/b] ]There are going to be civies... and you can even talk with them and get some informations (for example about enemy movement)

Yes i also read this a few times ago, but i thought this will be placed in by the mission/campaign maker and its not default....

Quote[/b] ]About buildings.. I don't have any problem with them... there's again a lot of classic commie buildings... and they're "simple"

You are right with that, but "simple" and "ugly" are two totally different things... "simple" can look beautiful aswell

Its just the old OFP and VBS1 like textures mainly without clear windows and without much exterior or interior detail.

Look at this screen for example:

And don't tell me that you wouldn't like building more detailed like this?

Regards, Christian

[Adamicz 3]

And don't tell me that you wouldn't like building more detailed like this?

I would, but not for the cost of bloody HW requirements

[stakex 0]

And don't tell me that you wouldn't like building more detailed like this?  

I would, but not for the cost of bloody HW requirements  

Thoes houses are not super high detailed really... I see no reason why you couldn't make every building that detailed and still keep the HW requierments fairly low. What really makes the buildings look bad is everything else looks really good... the character/vehicles/trees all look very high quality. And the buildings don't look like they belong in the same game. Everything should to be around about the same quality and level of detail.

[Barely-injured 0]

well there is no reason to suspect that these particular buildings will not be included in the game, just not all buildings would be of the same quality as usual. So some might be enterable high quality, some enterable OFP/ARMA copys, and some non-enterable buildings. Any ways the quality of buildings and any visual stuff is far from being my main concern about the game. And like BIS said on the lack of dynamic distruction buildings it would be pointless to have a good quality building if the AI cant use it proparly.

Also it would be nice if some one can post a rough (but full) transilation of that article, thanks.

[mr.g-c 6]

Quote[/b] ]just not all buildings would be of the same quality as usual. So some might be enterable high quality, some enterable OFP/ARMA copys, and some non-enterable buildings

That would be ridiculous

But let us better continue the Buildings-discussion over here:

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=70506

I bet its in the best interest of us all, or this thread will get more and more confusing.

Regards, Christian

[kevb0 0]

This looks amazing. Look at the viewdistance in some of theses screenshots.

Keep up the great work, BIS.

[KaiserPanda 0]

The metal shader looks incredible, the foliage is looking much better, the weapons and vehicles are beyond what I was expecting. This press release is a massive pleasant surprise!

[jackass888 0]

is anyone translating the article or was everything important said already?

The vechicles are looking photorealistic but everything else needs a little more work. For example in this pic http://games.tiscali.cz/reviews/arma2brddojmy/img22.jpg the infantry just ruins it... can anybody tell what is wrong or what are they missing?

About enterable buildings... arent all enterable? In a building desturction video i think they showed shooting holes in a "non-enterable" building, but yea we would prefer doors

I hope they make it easy in-editor to add dialog options to npcs so we can ourselves make a living world easily.

But its already more then i was hoping.. good job BIS!

[bravo 6 0]

is anyone translating the article or was everything important said already?

The vechicles are looking photorealistic but everything else needs a little more work. For example in this pic http://games.tiscali.cz/reviews/arma2brddojmy/img22.jpg the infantry just ruins it... can anybody tell what is wrong or what are they missing?

About enterable buildings... arent all enterable? In a building desturction video i think they showed shooting holes in a "non-enterable" building, but yea we would prefer doors

I hope they make it easy in-editor to add dialog options to npcs so we can ourselves make a living world easily.

But its already more then i was hoping.. good job BIS!

Give them time to improve the visual effects.

Don't forget that BIS is still working on ArmA.

The pics we saw latelly can tell us they are on the right path to make ArmA2 a better and detailed game.

Also BIS said that the soldiers will be detailed, so it says they will improve them.

Time will come.

[funnyguy1 0]

Exactly Stop whinning about obvious things like fire and smoke effects etc. It's wip, and nobody's saying it's gonna look like that when you install it.

I think BIS will give us the real sequel of ofp this time...

[sandzibar 0]

looking good. very excited. that terrain fidelity is superb.

best grass ever.

[Average Joe 0]

Nicey Nice, If anyone could translate the article it would be more then appreciated

[berghoff 11]

looking good. very excited. that terrain fidelity is superb.

best grass ever.

Yes but only thing I hope it performs as nicely as new north sara grass.

My favo screen so far.. nice trees, nice view ='

[bravo 6 0]

Yes but only thing I hope it performs as nicely as new north sara grass.

My favo screen so far.. nice trees, nice view ='

Some months ago when ArmA had more problems with vegetation ohara said they had better performance with the new project..

So my guess says it will run much better

A small question:

What the hell is this? Or what is this suppose to be?

Click to enlarge

Observation: look at ground.. is it deformed? Does this mean something huge for ArmA2?

[sandzibar 0]

the what? the vehicle is an AAVP7A1

after looking at the screenies some more..

This one made me sad. ground texture = fail. grass drawdistance = fail. im hoping its some test using arma1.. and not when you are running arma2 on anything less than a 8 core nvidia prototype milspec super computer. time to start saving my pennies i guess.

[bravo 6 0]

the what? the vehicle is an AAVP7A1

ARF! Not the vehicle.. thats not new!

I don't mean the vehicle, i mean in the fire.. the ground to be more specific.. as if the ground is deformed or something.

EDIT: Another thing: why can't we see the effect of the wind chopper on the grass? The grass is hard as stick and theres not wind blow feeling ..

click to enlarge

[Commando84 0]

Arma 2 looks like its shaping up very nicely! the vehicles look very impressive so far. even soldiers look very nice textured!

Grass looks wonderful a bit bright sometimes but still very nice.

The Micro a.i seems intresting and a 320 sq. km big world isn't that much bigger than sahrani is?

BI always put high goals and they remind me sometime why i love them.

[Dan ick(uk) 0]

wow im very very impressed by what i see,apart from the fact tht on 1 of the pics,the soldiers hand is still sticking through the m203 launcher,hope they will fix this so soldiers will hold rifles with grenade launchers properly,thts sumthing tht really annoys me in arma

But all in all,its looking fookin amazing,impressive.

All teh best

Dan

[berghoff 11]

EDIT: Another thing: why can't we see the effect of the wind chopper on the grass? The grass is hard as stick and theres not wind blow feeling ..

Maybe its still work in progress there but would be an awesome sights to see clutter bend/sway realistically in stormy wind.

Quote[/b] ]This one made me sad. ground texture = fail. grass drawdistance = fail. im hoping

I think you're only seeing a sattelite map on ground in distance since if you look closer terrain looks good:)?

[Sergei_Q 0]

I don't mean the vehicle, i mean in the fire.. the ground to be more specific.. as if the ground is deformed or something.

No, it is some sort of vehicle on fire, but it's partly behind the hill and the flames and smoke hide the rest.

[sandzibar 0]

the what? the vehicle is an AAVP7A1

ARF! Not the vehicle.. thats not new!

I don't mean the vehicle, i mean in the fire.. the ground to be more specific.. as if the ground is deformed or something.

EDIT: Another thing: why can't we see the effect of the wind chopper on the grass? The grass is hard as stick and theres not wind blow feeling ..

Sorry wasnt sure what you were talking about.

Ground deformation is not likey to be included, given the reasons BIS gave for limiting building destruction to simple wall changes, as it effects all objects in the local area - unless you like floating roads/houses etc.

Just looks like the existing arma crater texture and fire, just over the lip of a small ridge to me.

Dynamic changes to vegetation/smoke position from heli downdraft would be awesome. I guess they could kind of do it by flattening grass (like when a unit it lying down) in a proximity to an aircraft with its engine on.

But i think having it wave around, or smoke being displaced realistically would be fairly cpu intensive?

[mr.g-c 6]

I bought it.... but i haven't any time to translate it into english.

Pics:

After reading the article where i must laugh was what BIS told the journalist: "We want to bring CQB, Close Quarters Battle more into focus of the player"......

Seriously i can tell you something i think about:

With mainly ugly and non-enterable buildings, you can forget to simulate the CQB as realistic as it should be.

Other thing: Armed Assault1 has sold so far 300.000 copies. Not bad i think. If Arma2 going to be what we expected to be and bug-free + enough good PR and sufficent test-conclusions in the Gaming Magazines, i bet it can be sold more than 1.000.000 times.

Regards, Christian

[sandzibar 0]

wow. great stuff mr g-c

[NeMeSiS 11]

Observation: look at ground.. is it deformed? Does this mean something huge for ArmA2?  

Doesnt look deformed at all IMO?