How is this considered ARMA 2?

[Ghost_Zulu 0]

The questions is asked after watching a few videos.

The game looks no different than, "ARMA 1."

I do notice trees are colored but who cares?

BIS is using the same engine and the same animations they previously had.

Telling me on paper that there are a numerous amount of changes. Yet the videos show nothing that merits anything less than an, "addon fee."

If I compare this to OPF2 if you will, the game isnt even in the same arena and I would just like to know what they are trying to pull on us, were not blind.

[Kirby 2]

How is ArmA not OFP? =P

Similer engine, just updated, as ArmA 2's is from ArmA's...

Looked exactly the same in earlier screenshots...

ArmA2 looks good, dont complain untill we know whats its release state is.

[Blackhawk 0]

it is ArmA 2 because it's the Successor to Armed Assault, Thats why it's considered ArmA2 PERIOD

[Maddmatt 1]

BIS is using the same engine...

Makes me wonder if you know what an engine is.

Based on the ArmA engine yes, but not the same. No point in a total rewrite.

Quote[/b] ]If I compare this to OPF2 if you will, the game isnt even in the same arena

Can you explain what puts OFP2 in a better 'arena'?

And I believe it is considered "ArmA 2" because that is the name that was given to it

[Placebo 28]

</span>

The questions is asked after watching a few videos.

<span =''>

Then why not reply in the thread about the videos? A separate thread isn't required.