Arma 2 like Project Reality?

[Barry1039 10]

I stumbled on Arma 2 a little while ago and it looked amazing in its HD videos and trailers. Anways, having never played the game or series I was wondering what its like... It looks alot like the BF2 mod "Project Reality" but with better graphics and an AI system. So for anyone who has played PR, is Arma 2 anything like it? (The AI threw me on the multiplayer aspect because very few FPS games have both these days)

If its posible could somone just give me a bit of an idea on the gameplay and multiplayer + AI things, looks like an awesome game.

By the way sorry if this is in 100 other places, I just really want to find out and can't do a lot of looking right now.

[4 IN 1 0]

Raw ArmA1 without any mod cannot match PR in function TBH, but the play style is very different from the start, while PR mainly focus on team vs. Team matches up to 32 people each side, arma are designed under the concept of much larger group of player on each side, general gameplay is much slower phase(or chunky, as someone like to say), but what it still have is a very solid base of scripting system for modders to creat highly realistic mods(ie. ACE mod)

Edited May 4, 2009 by 4 IN 1

[Zipper5 74]

No, ArmA, and soon to be ArmA II, are much more serious than Project Reality. Project Reality is "realistic", ArmA and ArmA II are considered simulators. Proper ballistics, realistic damage values, etc. One shot through the head will kill you instantly, and even one shot to the torso could kill you as well.

In ArmA, you have the ability to pilot multiple different aircraft, crew tanks and drive a number of different wheeled vehicles. It is going to be the same in ArmA II, with even more additions to each field.

Multiplayer in ArmA has always been enjoyable. Sadly, some over-played maps and mods have taken over the multiplayer scene in ArmA and it becomes really hard to find a good server to play on. With the advent of ArmA II, I'm sure that there'll be tons of good servers for us to choose from.

There are multiple different modes available for multiplayer in ArmA. You have your usual deathmatches, team deathmatches, capture the flag, etc. but then you also have coops and PvP maps. One of the most popular being Warfare, which was released in the v1.14 patch. Coops and Warfare are the most popular modes in ArmA multiplayer.

The AI has never been absolutely amazing in either OFP or ArmA, but ArmA II looks like it's going to change all of that with the addition of MicroAI. Check out some of the videos and you can see just what they can do when reacting to any given stimulus dynamically.

[POTS 0]

ArmA2 is the sequel to ArmA, which is the civilian version of VBS2. VBS2 is a military simulator used by armies around the world. ArmA2 will be far more realistic compared to BF2 project reality. You get shot you are screwed. The bullets have a 90% accuracy compared to real life (currently in arma1). The AI are completely independent of pre-scripted events. That means they use actual artificial intelligence. This can be bad and good, as the AI are relatively limited compared to real life intelligence. Which is understandable, but ArmA2's AI are said to use micro ai, which gives them centimeter precision, enhanced communication, and more human like thought processes.

They can be used in multiplayer if you want. This game isn't considered just an "FPS" as you can use any vehicle you want, including jets, boats, tanks, apc's, all types of cars. The AI can handle each one also.

Edited May 4, 2009 by POTS

[celery 8]

I'm not so sure that the multiplayer missions will be so amazing out of the box. Almost any kind of gameplay is possible in theory but it always needs someone to make it into a mission first. Multiplayer will not be a complete package right at the start.

[ahmedjbh 0]

I really hope BIS have had a long look at PR, its a very popular game, and appeals to the same audience they are targeting.

If they can get Arma 2 to play like PR ( or better !), we are going to have an amazing game.

[Zipper5 74]

No, you wouldn't. You would get Dragon Rising. :D

[odjob 0]

I really hope BIS have had a long look at PR, its a very popular game, and appeals to the same audience they are targeting.

If they can get Arma 2 to play like PR ( or better !), we are going to have an amazing game.

Asking BIS to make Arma2 play like PR is an insult in my books :eek:

[De_little_Bubi 1]

put him in the tower :O (so he can spend some time playing ofp and arma :) )

[whisper 0]

I really hope BIS have had a long look at PR, its a very popular game, and appeals to the same audience they are targeting.

If they can get Arma 2 to play like PR ( or better !), we are going to have an amazing game.

What has PR that is missing in ArmA2?

[Undeceived 392]

Asking BIS to make Arma2 play like PR is an insult in my books :eek:

The same for me! :icon_rolleyes:

[dunedain 48]

Good pvp.

[maddogx 13]

Good pvp.

How would you define "good PvP"? I've experienced some excellent and intense PvP in ArmA1, and from what I've read the improved animations should make PvP in Arma2 even more enjoyable.

[whisper 0]

Good pvp.

Care to be precise?

I like Quake PvP.

That doesn't mean I want Quake PvP for ArmA2 .....

[vilas 477]

you cannot compare community made mod for BF to official game by developer

Arma 1 graphics is better than BF graphics, it depends on mod makers what they will achieve

Arma is more open engine and allows to do any army you want

Edited May 4, 2009 by vilas

[dunedain 48]

"whisper" We talk about PR, aren't we ?

I'm not a native english speaker so i won't get an headache describing eveything, if you played the game you critize you should understand what in mean by good pvp, specially the teamplay, coherence of kits and classes, chain of command, game modes with interesting maps and objectives ect...

Edited May 4, 2009 by dunedain

[maddogx 13]

"whisper" We talk about PR, aren't we ?

I'm not a native english speaker so i won't get an headache describing eveything, if you played the game you critize you should understand what in mean by good pvp.

Whisper is criticizing PR? As far as I can tell, he is simply asking what aspects of PR should be in Arma2, and I am asking the same. That's not exactly criticizing.

And so far, no one has been able to name any tangible features in PR that would be missing in Arma2. Both have PvP, both have teamplay. What is there in PR that could be missing in Arma2?

[mr.g-c 6]

What has PR that is missing in ArmA2?

Technical/Functional Realism (in term of weapons, equipment and stuff), which in Arma1 so far only seen similar in ACE-Mod. :o

But yes we can't compare a mod to a retail game.

I think for the thread starter: Arma is really more like a simulator compared to all other first-person "shooters" out there.

I don't want to list all differences here, but the best is you watch some game footages from good teamplay on Youtube or similar. Or simply give Arma1 a try - it cost hardly more than 10 bucks on ebay.

Recommend Videos are the ones from GOL-Clan, ShackTac, Tactical-Gamer and many other who focus on realistic teamplay.

Example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVUyMrQJdnQ&feature=PlayList&p=A668793137550B57&index=0

[whisper 0]

"whisper" We talk about PR, aren't we ?

I'm not a native english speaker so i won't get an headache describing eveything, if you played the game you critize you should understand what in mean by good pvp, specially the teamplay, coherence of kits and classes, chain of command, game modes with interesting maps and objectives ect...

oO

Asking a simple question here. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't try to read between the lines, I've hidden nothing there ;)

[dunedain 48]

I didn't want to be rude, i apologize for that i'm just a little upset of what i read, my english sucks sorry about that.

MadDogX i edited my post while you were finishing yours with what i like in Pr which could make Arma much better.

Edited May 4, 2009 by dunedain

[Squint 0]

Project Reality is an excellent mod, but comparing it to Arma is like comparing apples and oranges. They deliver two different gameplay experiences by design.

To claim one is better than the other is to claim that a plane made by Cessna is better than a boat made by Bayliner.

[Uroboros 10]

Difference between the 2 games lies mostly in engine.

At least I think arma2 will have a lot of of following stuff fixed till a certain extend. But still gives you a bit of a idea of the difference between these 2 games.

Battlefield is bigger than counter strike but still the server uses about the same intern fps ( about 1000 fps intern ). It is lower than this value but decend enough for both reasonable large scale fighting and cqc combat. I have heard not that much complaints about the movabillity in these games, but in discussions between the game source always seems to attract the more fast paced players + I get kicked way faster with higher latency on Counter Strike. Ping vs Bandwith: Ping is still more important than bandwith. Even though project reality aims on more realistic aproach the engine is all about fast paced and being able to contiuanly hit a person before this person hits the floor while most of the times still moving themselfes to avoid getting hit. What im trieing to say is that bf is pretty fast paced with responding controls.

From Armed Assault I dont know the exact server fps but the servers that I had privilige of getting admin never reached above 80 fps ( and this was with about 20 people on it and no ai ) ( average was around 20-30 )

This seems to be whole tactic that allows the large scale warfare in arma.

Ping can reach up to 300 without any visible lag as long as the bandwith is ok, i think it can go even higher compared to flashpoint.

This means though that the movabillity in this game is a issue. It doesnt matter that much since the game focusses on being realistic and often takes place in larger enviroments, but still you can often find yourself being a tad to slow even for being realistic. Since aiming takes longer and often having the chance to spot the enemy sooner ( or other way around ). This all works out great unless you get into cqc.

Not only is the moveability off your character slower and sometimes even inresponsive. Also you will often die in situations where normally you would have survived in battlefield.

For example someone is shooting you and you just manage to dash around a wall...you will still die, the game is not fast enough for this. ( again might get fixed with new ai system in arma2 )

One the things that also different is aiming system. In battlefield most your aiming is constant to your mouse speed. In armed assault you can put your mouse over a target but it will take time before your gun actually alligns with this. There are some tricks to bypass this though for the experts ;).

Using the aiming of the gun itself and you will find out that each gun has unique handling, the aiming system is so complex that when a new addon arrives you will have trouble adjusting 2 new weapons. ( or could just be me )

And last but not least the animations. While in bf you get into a vehicle, rearm your rocketweapon while running and jumping to the ground almost instantly. This all takes sometimes takes up to seconds in arma. Which often also decides whetever you live or die. This makes the game really interesting when making these choices but on other hand if you just pressed r and see a gun pointing in your direction you rather want to just throw that clip into the air and duck behind cover instead of waiting 3 seconds while enemy getting clear shot. And I often do a silly dance when a sniper switches to handgun before i pull him full of lead to show him that not switching to handgun was probably a better idea.

What I am trieing to say is that even though arma is super concept and decently worked out. It is because of this concept that the gameplay is overall slower compared to other games. I personally like it a lot because of all the cover and concealment + 1 hit kill and I even heard arma2 will randomise the places of concealment. But the start is definantly not going to be easy. From flashpoint ( previous game of bis ) to arma there were already tons of people quiting because of the slower controls so I guess for a battlefield player like you it is going to be even harder.

But this game is loved because of following:

Its realistic, really large and all this with decent gameplay

The game leaves a lot of opening for the player his style anything takes skill from piloting a chopper to even handling a rifle.

And of course its really easy to mod and almost everything appart from the engine can be changed. This means that next to normal coop/pvp maps you get rpgmaps/rts maps/rts pvp combined maps/zombie survival and with the easy mission editor its possible to make simple maps for yourself and friends 2. Although bit discouraging sometimes when you see what a good scripter can do with a simple coop mission ;)

Hope this shows the difference a bit in those games.

[vilas 477]

BF and other games have very big difference comparing to Arma

i am not playing too much multiplayer, mostly singleplayer, but animations issue/problems stated above are Arma/OFP disadvantage

other problems are : AI waste AA-rockets into tanks, and when it comes to fight with attacking choper, ooops, they wasted 2 Stingers on BMP

the same happened many times when AI waisted RPG vs. team of men and when it came to fight with tank, my RPG soldier said "no ammo"

other games offer more fun in MP and SP but

there is one think that they cannot offer, they not alow to easy put whatever addon you want and supervise big mission toying as commander :)

OFP and Arma biggest advantage is addonmaking, big space to fight, mission editor that allows you to show your creativity

other games may be funnier, but they are closed as their developers did

there is some modding in other games, but when you want easy do army of your country full of units, vehicles, island for it - you have only OFP and Arma games :]

if there was no addonmaking in Arma, this games would not be alive, cause it had a lot of bugs causing CTD before 1.08 patch came (in my case i was not able to play it since 1.05 till 1.08, on screen i had only grey, brown cubics)

but what make BIS game better than others - you want your own soldier, it is easy, you can do it and play your country's army :)

island made by Valhalla mod (Klurs) shows that Arma can be turned into completly different world - when great people have some free time and good will :)

other games not give you this

and Arma1 (not even talking about Arma2) has much better graphical level of details than BF

when i looked on BF PR weapons - they looked like OFP addons from 3 years ago

detalisation of AK from BF is much lower and AK from BIS

BF AK looks like BIS AK in LOD 2, not even on LOD1

BIS models have much more details

PR is mod made by community, if that community was making such mod on Arma, they would achieve higher level of detalisation, cause BIS game level would force it, realistic weapons models by community, here in Arma, are most realistic weapons in games ever

for me BF graphical level is something between OFP and Arma1, so even with best mod for BF (PR), graphical details level will be worse than Arma1 addon

Arma2 can hold more verticles, so models made by community for Arma 2 will be much , much better than BF mods ever can (with all respect to their work, cause their job is super)

BIS terrain is also much more advanced than BF, BF mountains looks for me like OFP worlds

BIS nature in Arma 2 will be much much better than BF

comparing Arma and BF, has something from comparing AVP1 and AVP2, RTCW and MOHAA

AVP1 , RTCW had "feeling, atmosphere" while AVP2 and MOHAA were more advanced graphically and weapons were more accurate by models, nature was better etc.

mod makers can turn BIS Arma 1 into something completly different and create this "feel" , like many mods in OFP made such things

and Arma 2 will have terrain with this "feel", so BF will remain as "another shooter like 50 others", Arma 2 will be better even without mods, than BF with mods

Arma2 mods will be something huge, some WW2 teams work hard and probably in Arma 2 we will see many mods releases with huge quality and realism, which BF will never offer

also Arma/OFP increases your creativity, while other many many FPS games make "stupiditisation of teenagers"

OFP community among few years prooved , they were very skilled and creative people making many many mods

BF won't offer you to play Civil War 1864, BF will not give you 3 Viet-Nam era mods full of super islands, BF will not give you WW1 1914-1918, BF will not give you cold war, BF will not give you Aliens attacking miss Ripley, BF will not give you crazy ants and rabbits attacking with zombies, BF will not give you ROTFL-copter, BF will not give you baloon with PK and Leonardo Da Vinci autogyro, BF will not give you dinosaurs !......

what OFP and Arma and Arma 2 will give if only some people have some free time

cause in BIS games we had mods about aliens, ww1, dinosaurs, even LEGO warriors ! we even had John Rambo mod here :)

and all depends on you, on your creativity, you can have all here if you have time, skills, good will

noone ever had such fun as we had since 2002

Edited May 5, 2009 by vilas

[whisper 0]

Mmmmh, Vilas, imho, getting overhyped with ArmA2 is the best way to be hyper-dissatisfied with the final product.

Be sure that there will be remaining annoying bugs and limitations, even more annoying new ones, and one must be ready for that

[Uroboros 10]

mod makers can turn BIS Arma 1 into something completly different and create this "feel"

Well I do disagree a bit there if you dont like flashpoint/arma you will not like mods made for it either. The base feel stays pretty much the same meaning movement and aiming system. Its all modable sure but there is large difference between riverbatlle/berzerk and battlefield other than just body hitpoints :D

It will keep you from getting bored though.