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

[Raphier 0]

do you have a link for that ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfvn8_gM1os&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.codemasters.com%2Fforum%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D349912&feature=player_embedded

this is pretty much the same as that another bigger (premium) one.

I would like to know how they did know that OFPDR AI is good, without any game preview...

Er... they had a preview :D (they just weren't allowed to show any footage from their time). Overally they avoided to rip it off.

Edited April 25, 2009 by Raphier

[jakerod 254]

If things are like in OFP then the animation isn't bound to the chair(or object). So I'd guess the mission maker just should move the chair a bit and everything would be right.

Yeah I know but I mean that I wish that the guy would fall to the ground because the chair isn't under him not just float. The thing that I was thinking though was that maybe the physics here made the chair push back when the guy was supposed to be on top of it. The animation might be a bit too low for the guy to coexist with the chair.

[sk3pt 0]

Feeling vibrations at near explosions, or screen shakes on hit or in vehicles are completely missing

The camera shake in Ghost Recon 1 was great ; it really adds to the immersion.

[7 0]

Turin Turambar is another contributor to the decay of the OFP-series (not OFPDR). How is BIS current engine ever going to evolve if they don't try anything new? Where's the ambition? Where's the optimism? You give up before even trying. Sure, there's a limit to what can be achieved today in a sandbox game, but that limit keeps getting pushed further and further each day thanks to creative programmers/designers and hardware upgrades.

"a huge varied game like this can't have all the little details polished."

That exact reasoning is why ArmA2 would fail if the BI dev team adopted it.

[Second 0]

The only guess I can take is setSkill influencing the behaviour.

Some how word modules comes to my mind. SetSkill is also valid speculation... Reviewer's mistake is also one. Like when testing Half-Life about half of AI features were missed by testers of game, they just didn't see them. Or they did see but didn't register them.

Hopefully this ain't faction related, as Alex[Dev]72 suggested. I really wish to see some badass Elite NAPAs, who can do more than being practice targets for player. Or just have well performing NAPA line-infantry, with good training and experience.

[kavoven 4]

Yeah I know but I mean that I wish that the guy would fall to the ground because the chair isn't under him not just float. The thing that I was thinking though was that maybe the physics here made the chair push back when the guy was supposed to be on top of it. The animation might be a bit too low for the guy to coexist with the chair.

Ah, ok, sorry... I missunderstood you, my mistake. Yeah, that would be cool :) (*cough* addon *cough*)

[POTS 0]

Some how word modules comes to my mind. SetSkill is also valid speculation... Reviewer's mistake is also one. Like when testing Half-Life about half of AI features were missed by testers of game, they just didn't see them. Or they did see but didn't register them.

Hopefully this ain't faction related, as Alex[Dev]72 suggested. I really wish to see some badass Elite NAPAs, who can do more than being practice targets for player. Or just have well performing NAPA line-infantry, with good training and experience.

I hope napa behaves like real guerrillas and not like little kids with guns in iraq. No guerrilla would attack straight on, its always an ambush.

[mr reality 0]

About the gamestar preview:

the original Operation Flashpoint had all these problems and many more but people enjoyed the game and understood intuitively (even without technical knowledge) that a huge varied game like this can't have all the little details polished.

I pretty much agree with what your saying, but if Flashpoint had these problems, then don't you think ten years later, we should be seeing improvements, and not repetitions of the same mistakes.

[turin turambar 0]

I pretty much agree with what your saying, but if Flashpoint had these problems, then don't you think ten years later, we should be seeing improvements, and not repetitions of the same mistakes.

I would say we are seeing improvements. AI seems better, animation (one of the more common complain of the mainstream gamers to Opf and Arma) is better, the simulation overall is more realistic, landscape is bigger, rpg aspects in the campaign are new, more vehicles and weapons, wounded dragging feature is new, etc etc. I am sure people here can make a big list of what changed between Opf in 2001 and ArmA 2 in 2009.

If there is some worrying repetition of the same mistakes i would point at another direction (instead of understable problems like AI or physics), i would point at overall stability and bugginess and high requisites. Let's hope for a less rocky release of ArmA 2.

[Praelium 0]

Feeling vibrations at near explosions, or screen shakes on hit or in vehicles are completely missing

I never thought of that before, but it would be a good feature if done right, (and judging by how BIS did the running and rolling effects, I think they could do this well). Things like:

Screen going out of focus and vibrating

Vehicles shaking and momentarily loss of control

Caused by nearby explosions would be awesome. Sorry for going off subject, but I'm getting excited.

Anyways, I think it's a shame the Codemasters wouldn't let them record any footage.

[mr.g-c 6]

Yeahh would also be cool if you had similar screen shaking when driving in a vehicle outside of roads like with walking, i mean like a very quick micro-shaking.... and when a Tank is hit and you are inside, it should blur out/rotate whatever...

Na we'll see i bet there will be scripting commands for that....

[Alex72 1]

I didnt think NAPA should be target practise. Where did i say that? I just thaught i heard that BIS stated there was difference between military trained soldiers and others wich to me sounded great. I dont want them to be target practise ofcourse (who does?), just that the mil guys use more mil like tactics and the others have their. Instead of having all using proper mil tactics wich would be unrealistic. NAPA=Civilians pick up arms kind of faction exectue perfect trained mil moving tactics sounds a bit weird to me. Not to say wrong. If a highly trained military meets civilians that picked up arms you mean that the civis could outmaneuver the soldiers? To me they would do sneaky stuff but if faced against a real mil squad some of them would do stupid things - at times maybe out of scare and not knowing how to move properly - and that another mil trained faction wouldnt do that same kind of mistake.

But hey thats just me. Maybe you want all factions to move the same - like trained soldiers. To each and own really. But to be honest i dont think we even have to speculate about this as im sure it wont be that detailed in ArmA2. Pretty sure they will be set with "skill=" only.

Alex

[BLSmith2112 0]

I hope that like, when you select a unit and click on the landscape it shows that move order on your map. In OFP and Arma, in order to know where each unit was told to move - you would have to give your units orders on the map.

The map would show a (5) or something at that units waypoint. However, if you order a unit in-game, that order does not show up on the map. :(

[BLSmith2112 0]

it entered twice?? :X

Oh did you see that part in the gamestar preview where he shot him in the kidney and he feel as if he were shot in the head? lol

Edited April 25, 2009 by Victor
delete

[Rak 0]

In other words, i think they are missing the forest for the trees.

That, and using rose-tinted glasses, the original Operation Flashpoint had all these problems and many more but people enjoyed the game and understood intuitively (even without technical knowledge) that a huge varied game like this can't have all the little details polished.

That's the problem, the game has the same problems(and limitations) for over 10 years and you guys are very happy about having them. It's like "holy book" for some people, the game should not be changed or improved.

It's about time we get a polished "true successor" from BIS; not an OFP 1.5 again.

[ziiip 1]

It kinda feels like the preview version has all the problems that a game in beta usually does. ;) Even the beta-testing was announced 'round the time from which this game build originates, so I don't think there's gonna be a problem in the end.

[sparks50 0]

I need to understand something. Are those large clutters of grass, that can hide soldiers, at the exact same place at all time, for all players on the server, when close enough to render? So that you can hide behind them at close range?

Edited April 25, 2009 by sparks50

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Hmm.. the last few previews have been basicaly good and BIS have claimed to be working on a number of their mentioned bug issues since the Feburary build so I'm optimistic that we will get a reasonably complete game after the extra 5 months development.

And I think it's right that the media talk about the bugs they see with the build they have been given. After all it's thier job. They don't get paid to keep quiet about the faults, they are doing the best (mostly) to keep thier readers informed of the games development. Its up to BIS to release statments to keep them informed on progress, and there is the "work in progress" statment quite clear across the top of the screen. Ive seen similar critical previews of high exposure titles and they haven't hurt, as long as the final package delivers.

[stakex 0]

That's the problem, the game has the same problems(and limitations) for over 10 years and you guys are very happy about having them. It's like "holy book" for some people, the game should not be changed or improved.

It's about time we get a polished "true successor" from BIS; not an OFP 1.5 again.

I totally agree...

Heres a great analogy to the situation. Its like a guy who has an old car that has engine trouble and doesn't run too well at times (OFP/ArmA1), and he sits down to fix it and overhaul his old car so it runs much better, just like a new car. But instead of fixing all the problems under the hood, he gives the car a new paint job, changes the tires, and refills the windshield washer fluid and calls it a day. The car might looks great on the surface, but under the hood the same issues remain.

ArmA2s likely going to be a good game... but going by all the latest press, will it be anything more then an ArmA1 mod/expansion? Not very likely. The funny thing is, all the things the community are praising about ArmA2, are the very things they said were the least important things in a game during the OFP days... such as graphics. Its amazing how easily the community can change its tone.

[mr.g-c 6]

I need to understand something. Are those large clutters of grass, that can hide soldiers, at the exact same place at all time, for all players on the server, when close enough to render? So that you can hide behind them at close range?

Most likely.... I agree that this is a very big issue since the dense grass vegetation gives you (like you can see 2mins before end of the gamestart-video) a excellent cover! However you just need to move 150m away from a guy hiding and you can see him again - lol this is ridiculous! :rolleyes::butbut:

In Joint Operations, after grass rendering distance, the peoiple got like a transparent alpha-texture applied so they were still hidden at the spots/body parts the had too, i hope BIS implements a similar system, or make it able to draw grass x-time further away.

I hope Ohara or someone else can share some info on this, since this is a big issue i believe.

@stakex, a very good comparision and actually (from what we could read from all the previews) it hits the nail on his head.

[Benoist 0]

ArmA2s likely going to be a good game... but going by all the latest press, will it be anything more then an ArmA1 mod/expansion? Not very likely. The funny thing is, all the things the community are praising about ArmA2, are the very things they said were the least important things in a game during the OFP days... such as graphics. Its amazing how easily the community can change its tone.

BIS is making better graphics? Good for them!

I really don't care, ArmA ones were already good for me, but if they want to improve them I'm not going to stop them. Besides, improving the graphic quality of a game is easier than fixing/adding things, so at least we get a "bonus". Also, BIS has to eat, and in this market with 11 year old CoD4 fanboys, the graphics are a very important "feature".

For me, meh, I would have prefer to have more things, bug fixing, a more dinamic gameplay (by that I'm not saying something as a CoD). But I already knew that they weren't going to be a lot of changes in this part of the game.

[Scrub 0]

Liking the honesty from the reviewers, and can't wait for this new build preview!! You know, looking at that Gamestar vid again, I'm starting to get really impressed. Looking at it from Ohara's perspective of features not in that build, I'm 100% agreeing with the 'not seeing the forest for all the trees' post. This is looking rocking awesome in my book. Thank you BIS!

Noted that the vid showed no free aim, total lockdown for the weapon to the center screen pip. Good to show it off, knowing there is a slider for that, and most everything else. This is a very customizable engine. I need to remember that. It has the potential to be what any player wants (within reason).

For those of you compairing Arma II quality to OFP:DR. The latter is on a completley devoid island, they have no animals, no real urban areas, no civvies, no fixedwing, limited # of AI (do they even have real projectile arty? or is it scripted in to drop on target?). So there's a sterile, less involved, limited environment to put more polish on, and have less to contend with processor-wise... And less potential and variety in the long run.

Edited April 26, 2009 by Scrub

[privateguba 0]

There's one aspect of ARMA2 that should ease the worries of most people:

MULTI-CORE SUPPORT!!!!!

Those AI worries? Think again:

MULTI-CORE SUPPORT!!!!!

There's much more room to maneuver and improve the AI (if BIS or community) with this compared to OFP/R and ARMA.

I'm only starting to take a look at all the previews, but it seems BIS says that you should have 'at least' a dual-core. The scaleability will be fantastic.

[Praelium 0]

That's the problem, the game has the same problems(and limitations) for over 10 years and you guys are very happy about having them. It's like "holy book" for some people, the game should not be changed or improved.

It's about time we get a polished "true successor" from BIS; not an OFP 1.5 again.

Your opinion could be valid, though if you could give a list of the problems or limitations you're talking about then that would be awesome. I'm not trying to argue and put you in a tight spot to quickly make stuff up, I'm just interested in reading what these problems are.

ArmA2s likely going to be a good game... but going by all the latest press, will it be anything more then an ArmA1 mod/expansion? Not very likely. The funny thing is, all the things the community are praising about ArmA2, are the very things they said were the least important things in a game during the OFP days... such as graphics. Its amazing how easily the community can change its tone.

It's ironic how you said "going by all the latest press", because I've been active in this topic since the updates started, and I've seen all the screenshots, watched all the videos, and read all the English previews that I could find and I don't recall one author stating that Arma II just felt like a mod.

I'm not saying that anybody's wrong, as everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but personally I'm holding off on judging this game too much before I get to actually play it for myself. Until then, I'll trust those who have played it and suggest everyone else do the same.

[4 IN 1 0]

Ain't the game just entered close beta phase? Things could still be change, and I personal don't think that gamestar preview is any different to others, and I don't know how did they get the idea that preview version is date early April while bi say it's from feb, they don't really think that the day they received the preview copy is the day bi pack-up the game and send it out rgr?