Latest ArmA2 & ArmA2:OA Press Coverage | NO discussion here!

[Second 0]

72;1276193']lol Second. you know what i mean. :)

The setSkill will only make them aim worse right? Or does that change even how they move? I thaught fighting units that train on a daily basis would cover eachother better for example. But like i said' date=' we prolly dont have to worry about this.[/quote']

This is far too multifaced issue to be told here how i see it.

As a short answer. Skill has huge impact on everything. But lack of it shouldn't make them to act dumbly in shooter dumb way, like that they don't take cover but stand on middle of street begging for bullet. The basics should be same.

With more routine (=training) under their belts they reach better individual skills as they reach better squad cohesion in stressful enviroment.

From what these factors in ArmA2 should compose of? From perspective of ill-trained squads.

-Maybe they should forget to support their mates by fire sometimes, forget to maintain formation sometimes, forget to keep watching their sectors sometimes.

-Maybe leaders capability to issue orders should be toned down while under fire.

-Maybe their ability to communicate should be toned down while under fire.

-Maybe their abilities as individuals should be toned down more while under fire. Such as more unaccurate fire, some sort blindness and deafness.

Example. I took part of MOUT training. At first day we did basic drills, forexample room's stormings and movement on streets. Done in stress free conditions we did them rather well after few runs in simple cases such as box shaped room where door is in middle of wall and rooms didn't have anything inside them. Next day we started to apply those drills into more difficult conditions, having opposing force and more complicated room structures. And things started to fall apart. Men didn't understand on fly with slight pressure how and where to move into room and where he is supposed to aim (=what are his sectors).

On all levels we were inferiour to more trained unit, weapon handling, squad/team cohesion. Only execption might we that we probably as just as unwilling to die as more trained units ;). We did know how basics works, it's just that we were much less reliable to handle them in stressful situation.

Edited April 27, 2009 by Second

[Rocco 0]

The missing grass in the distance and the fact that it is easier to spot an enemy 150m away from you compared to one lying 50m away from you concerns me most, followed by the typical "standup-turn 90 degrees like a robot - prone - immediately standup again" AI behaviour.

[GepardenK 0]

The missing grass in the distance and the fact that it is easier to spot an enemy 150m away from you compared to one lying 50m away from you concerns me most, followed by the typical "standup-turn 90 degrees like a robot - prone - immediately standup again" AI behaviour.

I think previous versions solved this by making the basic ground texture appear above ground around where the tip of the grass blades would have been. This way prone units gets partly concealed under the texture to simulate high grass.

[Alex72 1]

On the one hand I really want to believe that the press preview version of ArmA2 is missing the major features that will make ArmA2 as awesome as I hope it will be. But on the other hand I don't see the logic in BIS giving out something as a "preview" that is lacking said features. I guess time constraints played a significant role there, but if I were doing PR for BIS, I personally would have rather delayed or cancelled the press preview release as opposed to giving people something that may cast a bad light on my product.

In the end, I know I'm going to buy the game on release day anyway, but I would feel more excited about it if it weren't for the negative previews. :)

Couldnt agree more. Seems weird to give out a very unfinished product that is said to have amazing AI and other features and then give out a version that doesnt show this. So people will automatically say "that looks like ARMA1 and it looks crap", and this might lead to sales going down. Not from our wallets, but the general publics.

EDIT: @ Second, once again my friend i dont mean that they should "stand in the middle of the street". I dont understand why you see what im saying as 100% super smart or "nothing". I meant that they move differentlly. Maybe the less trained dont cover eachother as good as a well trained military squad. Tbh thats how it is in reality isnt it. If you think all people in the world have the same military tactics when fighting thats your right to think so. NAPA wouldnt have the same superb logistics as US for example, and shouldnt have as good communication system etc. Dont have training everyday that US can do due to a lot of cash and so on and so forth. I just hoped that other factions would fight a bit DIFFERENTLY. Not standing in the middle of the road like retards as you wouldnt in real life either even if your trained or not. But your movements and tactics would ofcourse look different to highly trained soldiers.

Just my opinion ofcourse.

Alex

Edited April 27, 2009 by Alex72

[Commando84 0]

Maybe Bis just wants to suprise everyone, first send out the preview/ beta version with not all the pieces in place to lower the expectactions and then when the send out the more final for review they will blow the reviewers away :D

[KAASKOP 10]

Maybe Bis just wants to suprise everyone, first send out the preview/ beta version with not all the pieces in place to lower the expectactions and then when the send out the more final for review they will blow the reviewers away :D

Wishful thinking I'm afraid. And too risky to say the least. Such tactics could seriously backfire.

Judging from the soldiers AI behaviour, it seems we still have some old an odd AI issues which still have not been fixed.

But let's look at it from the bright side. Fantastic environment, great arsenal of weapons and vehicles, nice lighting (although on a cloudy day sharp shadows are a bit...strange? (see vids)) and supposedly a good storyline. With the loyal and dedicated community, I'm sure most AI issues will be solved by the community.

I agree that BIS should make a kick-ass AI, but if they can't make it, you can.

[tribun83 0]

first: "bad" press is better than no press...

second: it's not that bad! they just suppose to take some extra time for this and that...

thrid: I'm hopeing for a demo quite soon cause that's what that press release version sounds like... hehe maybe they just got it "exclusive" to make them feel special and let them beta test the demo version... :D

[twisted 128]

first: "bad" press is better than no press...

Bad press can kill a game before it even released.

Not for the hardcore Arma guys, but for the fans, potential customers and most notably for those people who were burned with Arma (those who tried to play the early versions - as the latest version is definitely good to play) and would be very scared to pay money again and get burnt again.

BIS need to make sure that the most positive spin on its game comes out now and things stay positve and people look forward to the release more and more.

[Raphier 0]

Bad press can kill a game before it even released.

Not for the hardcore Arma guys, but for the fans, potential customers and most notably for those people who were burned with Arma (those who tried to play the early versions - as the latest version is definitely good to play) and would be very scared to pay money again and get burnt again.

BIS need to make sure that the most positive spin on its game comes out now and things stay positve and people look forward to the release more and more.

Or maybe you just expect way too much :-/

If Bad Press is honest, then it's a good press, for telling about a game.

Althought, all of you whiners about this 'bad press' seem as if giving a bad game a good preview/review is the way to go. (vice versa makes you angry too)

[maddogx 13]

... all of you whiners about this 'bad press' seem as if giving a bad game a good preview/review is the way to go. (vice versa makes you angry too)

Maybe you should read the posts a bit more thouroughly. At least in my case, I wasn't complaining or "whining" about the bad press per se - I was questioning BIS for providing (p)reviewers with an unfinished product and therefore causing the bad press in the first place. It's not like reviewers can be faulted for pointing out obvious flaws.

[twisted 128]

Or maybe you just expect way too much :-/

If Bad Press is honest, then it's a good press, for telling about a game.

Althought, all of you whiners about this 'bad press' seem as if giving a bad game a good preview/review is the way to go. (vice versa makes you angry too)

fantastic! You have no grasp of marketing nor it seems even a rudimentary level of reading comprehension yet have an opinion that you are determined to share primarily for the purpose of inciting a reaction. I applaud you.

edit - back on topic. I think BIS could take this chance to highlight the games more progressive features themselves in a series of short videos.

Edited April 27, 2009 by twisted
back on topic

[Placebo 29]

Maybe you should read the posts a bit more thouroughly. At least in my case, I wasn't complaining or "whining" about the bad press per se - I was questioning BIS for providing (p)reviewers with an unfinished product and therefore causing the bad press in the first place. It's not like reviewers can be faulted for pointing out obvious flaws.

Actually a preview is supposed to "judge a book by its cover", whereas a review is supposed to address the insides, warts and all.

[JB Time 0]

fantastic! You have no grasp of marketing nor it seems even a rudimentary level of reading comprehension yet have an opinion that you are determined to share primarily for the purpose of inciting a reaction. I applaud you.

I was thinking the same thing :)

Anyway, I hope BIS are able to release some console info soon.

In terms of increasing market share, OFP has decided to exclude the mission editor from console versions so I'm sure many console gamers will be interested in what BIS has to offer. I saw an old video which features Ivan Buchta stating that consoles will have a basic mission editor. The replay value an editor offers is massive and turns a 2/3 month title into a 12 month+ title, so I hope BIS produce some console-friendly info soon and with it attract some new buyers to the table.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

We have seen a video of suppression, in fact, it was in the ChDKZ video. Unless you mean a video dedicated to suppression.

I think it was the section where a Russian MG (DSHK or Kord) was being fired, and you get a brilliant example there.

Shooting a gun doesn't qualify for supression. To me it looked like he relaxed his aim when he stopped shooting, but I'm not convinced it was supression in action. What I mean is I want to see units being pinned down by enemy units who can't hit them but fires anyway. With anything that can deal out larger volumes of fire.

Also, I'm still wondering about that old OFP monster. View blocking effects of smoke, smoke grenades being most important naturally.

And what about 'support fire'. Will we once again see only the bangs, or will we actually have illumination and smoke delivered as support?

To me these are extremely important factors for any "military sim" in 2009. I mean, if ArmA2 becomes a new 'frontal attack only support', I think I'll cry. I have seen no reviews touching these issues. Then again, I have given up google translate, as it only makes me laugh instead of being informative :)

[Second 0]

72;1276233']Second' date=' once again my friend i dont mean that they should "stand in the middle of the street". I dont understand why you see what im saying as 100% super smart or "nothing". I meant that they move differentlly. Maybe the less trained dont cover eachother as good as a well trained military squad. Tbh thats how it is in reality isnt it. If you think all people in the world have the same military tactics when fighting thats your right to think so. NAPA wouldnt have the same superb logistics as US for example, and shouldnt have as good communication system etc. Dont have training everyday that US can do due to a lot of cash and so on and so forth. I just hoped that other factions would fight a bit DIFFERENTLY. Not standing in the middle of the road like retards as you wouldnt in real life either even if your trained or not. But your movements and tactics would ofcourse look different to highly trained soldiers.

[/quote']

Now i understand and i wish to say that i'm sorry.

[Raphier 0]

fantastic! You have no grasp of marketing nor it seems even a rudimentary level of reading comprehension yet have an opinion that you are determined to share primarily for the purpose of inciting a reaction. I applaud you.

edit - back on topic. I think BIS could take this chance to highlight the games more progressive features themselves in a series of short videos.

:D don't blame me, I just wanted to participate in a conversation, but I don't want to read same shiat for 3-5 pages before replying :eek:

[NeMeSiS 11]

Actually a preview is supposed to "judge a book by its cover", whereas a review is supposed to address the insides, warts and all.

Most previews ive read just tell some general information about the game, plus the state of the played version (If any), and some promises by the developers about what is going to change, usually no judgement.

[Thunderbird 0]

In my judgement, it would be interesting to establish a sort of 'MANTIS' to collect people's suggestions in order to improve what needs to be enhanced [Regarding all aspects = (Realism/Authenticity/Gameplay/Effects...)] before the game reaches the golden status.

I think that BIS needs to hear now more than ever people's feedbacks, even if the game is still WIP, but the 'WIP' status doesn't justify everything and is way to get ride of my apprehensions concerning some significant aspects such as:

- Destruction physics.

- Realism Details [Animated Firearms models/FLIR/Wrong Loadouts/Wrong Marines Gear/Wrong Osprey Engine simulation...etc]

- AI reactions in Open Areas [They just need to be slightly improved by making them hit the dirt automatically and hold their position by using the different elements close to them without standing up or advancing].

...

ETC

In fact the WIP status should be used as a great opportunity to take into account people's suggestions to further improve the game.

Regards,

TB

Edited April 27, 2009 by Thunderbird

[Johannes 10]

Wrong Loadouts/Wrong Marines Gear

care to elaborate?

[SilverBullet 0]

Wrong Osprey Engine simulation

Whats wrong with the Osprey?

[WhoCares 0]

...

ETC

In fact the WIP status should be used as a great opportunity to take into account people's suggestions to further improve the game.

I'd like to disagree.

It is odd how people deduce from the fact that something is missing or hasn't apparently changed, that there is no progress made by BIS.

What do we know about the improvements 'under the hood' that do not show by some shiny models or fancy sounds, things that Mod-Makers would never be able to modify, things much more difficult to implement and verify, like stability, hard- and software support, performance improvements, modeling, enhanced scripting, ...

Things that have been done by the Mods in the past can be done again, by Mods or maybe even by BIS with a later patch. Short before release BIS has to focus that they get a solid product out on the market. A solid foundation is what we need, not ten dozens of half-baked new features.

[BLSmith2112 0]

Yea from what I've seen at this point I'm pretty much content. I'd hope they are primarily focusing on making the game as solid as possible at this point.

[BOTA:16 0]

I'd like to disagree.

It is odd how people deduce from the fact that something is missing or hasn't apparently changed, that there is no progress made by BIS.

What do we know about the improvements 'under the hood' that do not show by some shiny models or fancy sounds, things that Mod-Makers would never be able to modify, things much more difficult to implement and verify, like stability, hard- and software support, performance improvements, modeling, enhanced scripting, ...

Things that have been done by the Mods in the past can be done again, by Mods or maybe even by BIS with a later patch. Short before release BIS has to focus that they get a solid product out on the market. A solid foundation is what we need, not ten dozens of half-baked new features.

Very true and agree 100%. It happens to too many franchises where the developers try to "push" the envelope too far in "adding" to the franchise. Not saying its entirely wrong to push the envelope but more often than not it ends up biting you in the arse.

[KAASKOP 10]

I'd like to disagree.

It is odd how people deduce from the fact that something is missing or hasn't apparently changed, that there is no progress made by BIS.

What do we know about the improvements 'under the hood' that do not show by some shiny models or fancy sounds, things that Mod-Makers would never be able to modify, things much more difficult to implement and verify, like stability, hard- and software support, performance improvements, modeling, enhanced scripting, ...

Things that have been done by the Mods in the past can be done again, by Mods or maybe even by BIS with a later patch. Short before release BIS has to focus that they get a solid product out on the market. A solid foundation is what we need, not ten dozens of half-baked new features.

I couldn't agree more.

And whatever is missing, the community will add it later.

All I want for Christmas is an improved AI, my dear ACE modders.

[.kju 3244]

Getting new features in or significantly changed is FAR TOO LATE at this point.

This is done in the design phase of a game - so like 1-2 years ago.

BI made its choices of design goals. We will see, if we can survive their choice...

PS: There is something called irony and context. ;)

PSS: For people not aware of these aspects of language. People making a drama

about X and Y not in hopefully survive A2 adding only A, B, C, D ... Z.

Edited April 28, 2009 by kju