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

[maddogx 13]

look at 1:12 (on the new video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4bQQHTj7FI ) - on the windows you can see reflections

Looking at that video, I can draw several conclusions as to why the quality and FPS were so bad:

1. Recorded on an ATI 2600XT, yet the video is in HD and appears anti-aliased. High resolion and anti-aliasing is not a good idea with that kind of card on a modern game.

2. Reflections were visible in windows. Assuming reflections are controlled by shaders, this guy had the settings too high.

3. Running Fraps kills framerates, especially on low spec systems.

All in all, I'd say the game is playable on that system, providing the video settings are tweaked and Fraps isn't recording.

[De_little_Bubi 1]

I saw the videos now. I agree, looked very laggy.

BUT IT WAS GREAT!

I dont know why so much guys talk so negative about it :/

AI - As someon said, there wasnt any AI on the road and it seemed that they cover several directions. Of course they are still no human players. You shouldnt expect the perfect 100% humanlike acting AI. I think we wont get in anywhere in the next 5 years (or more).

Graphics - Some textures and the LOD of the Bushes where wrong, but saw the watertower (or what it was)? It looked cool :) And there where a lot of objects in town to take cover too.

The bush and texture problems wasnt in other videos, so i think (like MadDogX) it was to much settings for the machine.

Personaly i'm satisfied with the stuff i saw :) Remember its a early preview and a lot of things willsurely be changed/make better.

Edit: WOo the Rainbow. Awesome! Think about Domination map, you just take the town while there was a realy hard storm. And now you have to repair the vehicles, no death, nobody shoot at you and this rainbow appear at the horizon = )

Edited April 23, 2009 by De_little_Bubi

[maddogx 13]

You can use google translate to translate it, there is a link on the frontpage on armaholic.com

Not wanting to sound too much like an ArmA/BIS fanboy (:bounce3:), but I find the ArmA2 screens superior to the OFPDR ones for several reasons:

1. The OFPDR screens have this "gritty" look, which is being totally overdone nowadays. ArmA2 on the other hand looks a bit too clean, but I prefer some nice natural colors to a glorified COD4 clone.

2. ArmA2 trees and bushes are by far more detailed and much more atmospheric. (see pic #11 for OFPDR example)

3. The grass in ArmA2 looks almost real. In OFPDR you can see the grass polygons sticking out of the flat surface. (pic #11 again, and pic#30)

4. The "noise" on the OFPDR screens is overdone (pic #31 for example). I prefer noise to be subtle, or none at all.

5. Some of the OFPDR screens are definitely edited (filters etc.). Look at #3 for example. No way are those the natural colors in the game.

[Steakslim 1]

Those OFPDR screenshots which have been out for a while now heavily filtered with grain. Some of the members of the official forums are trying to play it off like it's trying to be the natural grain you see in your eye at night. That's not true, they just added the grain to make it look "cool", especially since it's present in the daytime screenshots too.

So far the only good things I've seen about OFPDR look and gameplay is what the magazine previews have been saying about it, because CM keep giving these sketchy video and images making you wonder what exactly they're aiming for. I'm sure the grain/noise in the OFPDR screenshots can be turned off because it'd be too aggrivating to have to deal with visually and is not realistic in any way unless you're using some kind of optics. While I'm more leaning towards ArmA2, I do hold a good deal of interest in the new OFP, but it's like they're press releases are trying to impress two different crowds (and they are actually), and it's causing a bit of a firestorm. I refuse to registure to CM's site because I know I'd rage and get caught up in it.

[Andi 10]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCx_4W6isY8

Did anyone notice the icon of the small wall when he builds it at the end of the video? :D

[ScorpionGuard 10]

I just hope BIS changes the Rank insignia form US Army SSgt to US Marine Corps Sgt before release. As I said before; witch I see in the video again. For us who know the rank structure of the armed forces of the US. It will be hard press to explain the insignia of an SSgt (Platoon Sgt in the USMC from a Squad Leader in the US Army). Unless there changing the game/simulation from a squad base to platoon based game/simulation. No problem with that here.

[BLSmith2112 0]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCx_4W6isY8

Did anyone notice the icon of the small wall when he builds it at the end of the video? :D

W00t! Warfare looks good.

[Johnnie_Walker 0]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCx_4W6isY8

Did anyone notice the icon of the small wall when he builds it at the end of the video? :D

Hehe, well spoted, something have to be fixed.

[An-225 0]

Hmm...I wonder if the commander will have complete control over the finances this time?

Warfare wouldn't be as bad if the soldiers did not have to finance their own weapons. The commander should be the one purchasing vehicles or weapons. A rifleman does not walk up to Lockheed Martin, so he can say: "One F-16 please" only to get it a few seconds later. That is done by the higher-ups in the military, and so should be reflected in warfare.

[mikebart 1]

I think buying weopons yourself works well as a game mode, who would want to micro manage each squads vehicles and weapons as a commander?

[An-225 0]

I would think that that is the commanders job. To command, and focus on commanding.

The commander could simply buy a large ammo crate, place it in the base so that it is accessible only by...Squad Alpha, for example. You wouldn't be told to wipe out some tanks but unless you cough up $2500 you don't have access to a Javelin or AT4.

I can see where it would get tedious if the commander had to purchase every magazine for a soldier, so a squad restricted weapons crate would do nicely.

For vehicles, it isn't as tedious. One squad of 4 people only need one HMMWV.

But the soldier should at no point be restricted access to equipment required to carry out the mission simply because he does not have enough money.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

How come we haven't seen any video of supression and the effects of supression?

[An-225 0]

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.

[Andi 10]

For vehicles, it isn't as tedious. One squad of 4 people only need one HMMWV.

But the soldier should at no point be restricted access to equipment required to carry out the mission simply because he does not have enough money.

I don't like this idea at all.

Firstly, not all players are pro's. So you spawn a HMMWV to a squad, and the noob gets in and drives to some funny place and the other guys are screwed. Happened even in ArmA1 more than enough.

Secondly, half the players would stand at the base begging for equipment making the comm just overstrained. While in the base, they can't capture towns or kill enemies, anything the like. Ergo you get less money and so on and so on. Happened also in ArmA1 more than enough.

I like it the way it is, you can choose whether to play in a team or to do the lone wolf. The comm just provides facs and moves the base one time or another. And if he's funny, he can even command the teams around.

[Alex72 1]

Litte offtopic:

About zooming. If im not mistaken the zoomed in view is the actual "real life" view the player "should" have? It is being zoomed out just for the fact that our monitors arent big enough to give us the real view (FOV). When zoomed in you are actually having your eyes where the screen begins. The players head is JUST behind the monitor and the eyes are where the screen is. So if they would use that kind of FOV (zoomed in) we wouldnt get any peripheral vision at all as our monitors are small compared to our real life view.

I think all games do the same so that we are given some peripheral vision. With bigger screens coming it can be set closer and closer to real FOV.

Not sure if i just talk BS here, but i think there is some truth in it. So the zoom makes sense even though its a bit weird to be able to zoom in and out. For the reason i said (if anywhere near truth) it should stay as is. We have to think of gamers with small monitors as well.

[hoot 0]

Some new screens from PCGames.de:

http://www.pcgames.de/aid,682443/ArmA-2-Neue-selbstgemachte-Screenshots-aus-der-Vorschau-Version/PC/News/

The Hunted seems to be a funny challenge ;)

[BLSmith2112 0]

Hmm...I wonder if the commander will have complete control over the finances this time?

Warfare wouldn't be as bad if the soldiers did not have to finance their own weapons. The commander should be the one purchasing vehicles or weapons. A rifleman does not walk up to Lockheed Martin, so he can say: "One F-16 please" only to get it a few seconds later. That is done by the higher-ups in the military, and so should be reflected in warfare.

Having "the commander do it", is a completely unrealistic goal. Unrealistic in that it just would yield horrible results. Not that its a bad idea.

What happens if you have 4 people on your team and no one wants to command? The person that is forced to command will do a poor job and your entire team will suffer. I know the responce to this, "well vote him out"... But no one wanted to command in the first place - therefore your team is screwed. Independance of the players is really the only way to "spread the blame around" when it comes to your team winning or losing.

-What if the commander disconnects and no one picks up the plate?

On the other hand, organized games, organized players & matches with specified and trusted commanders, would be great. But again, that's not most games. I'd really have to hate every other game I played because the commander just happened to be a complete idiot and I couldn't get the votes to overthrow him (mainly because players are lazy and don't often vote a second time).

================

On another note... this (to me) looks almost exactly the same as Arma.. :confused:

--The UI icons showing the units under your command are still HUGE after all this time... I hope I can make them 60% smaller.

Edited April 24, 2009 by Victor

[Second 0]

AI - As someon said, there wasnt any AI on the road and it seemed that they cover several directions. Of course they are still no human players. You shouldnt expect the perfect 100% humanlike acting AI. I think we wont get in anywhere in the next 5 years (or more).

Well to think that ArmA2 AI seemed to act like ArmA AI... What for example i am expecting is to AI to reach 2007 or 2008 year's level of "AI in combat"

Problems?

1. AIs rushed forward even when player killed couple of it's mates few seconds earlier. They had wall which they could have used as cover, they had tree which they could have used as cover. But what did they? They rushed forward in ArmA-style. Another kind of reactions have been part of computer games for years.

2. On later part of video, AIs (two of them) just stood still on the open when there was several objects offering cover such as walls and buildings. Player wiped out both them one-by-one. What was AI's reaction in both cases. Another kinds of reactions also have been part of computer games for years.

Sure those things could be put on chaos of combat-situation and not on worthlessness of AI. But overall this is quite common in ArmA2 trailers which presents infantry combat of ArmA2: AI doesnt' seem to have anything truly new. They are bunch of headless chicken still, so to speak.

So... Until proven that AI is really better i will not believe it. And each time i see AI reacts/acts like AI in ArmA, instead of new and shiny Arma2, i grow more weary and uncertain.

Should BIS do something about it? Release enlighting trailer of AI capabilities? Have Suma or someone smashing the whining with few facts? Overall seems that 30-50% of "whining" comes from AI. Or something...

[Raphier 0]

Agreed. Heck...why haven't we seen them do something like in this:

http://www.armedassault.eu/images/morfeoshow/inside_arma2-7989/big/SR_russian_mout_2.jpg

Is there a good reason why we haven't seen them act smart and do amazing things? like in that AI video where one AI was tactically moving around in the city. Where's that centimeter precision ?

All we've seen is AI laying on the floor. :/

[An-225 0]

Well I understand the concerns about people acting like idiots when the commander is supposed to provide the units with weapons and vehicles.

But if no one wants to go commander in the first place, you are fighting a losing war, and you most likely don't have enough players to have a fully functioning battlefield. I wouldn't say vote him out if the commander is doing a poor job and does not want to command. But I would say that you probably should leave and look for another server, because if your team is not cooperating in such a way, they will not cooperate on the battlefield either.

Why should the idea of a realistic warzone go to waste just because there are idiots ruining the game? Take happiness in the fact that you are playing the game correctly, and move onto a different server.

Alex, I concur. I couldn't see much down my (unzoomed) optics, not even when using an aimpoint. Holding down RMB solved that, but if we could do that without having to hold RMB, it would be brilliant.

[sparks50 0]

Should BIS do something about it? Release enlighting trailer of AI capabilities? Have Suma or someone smashing the whining with few facts? Overall seems that 30-50% of "whining" comes from AI. Or something...

There has been plenty of videos showing AI taking cover already. The videos that came out recently doesn't change that.

Victor, theres a "GUI size" parameter in the options.

[noamles 0]

anyone knows what this area is supposed to be?

[Second 0]

There has been plenty of videos showing AI taking cover already. The videos that came out recently doesn't change that.

Sure... From days of OFP AI has been able to take cover. So not very great great progression there. Leaning has been showed, over year ago. On one video. There are tons of videos released after that, but no leaning in any of them.

[Andi 10]

Some new screens from PCGames.de

Hahaha, Smitty's shitty city. I love it :D

Take happiness in the fact that you are playing the game correctly, and move onto a different server.

That would be the logical conclusion for me as well.

BUT the way I see it, in ArmA, there was only one single server which actually was playable for 16v16 Warfare (at least for me) and that was XR Warfare Server (later XR #2 as well), because all the other servers just had poor specs (terrible lag) or were in the US or RUS (terrible pings and lots of laggers).

(past tense because last time I played was in February.)

anyone knows what this area is supposed to be?

I can see binocular icons on those spaces. Lots of binocular icons :D

Edited April 24, 2009 by Andi

[Raphier 0]

anyone knows what this area is supposed to be?

WIP Backpack?