Arma 2 like Project Reality?

[Noraf 0]

TCEd, i realy don't think tou need a mod for that, just a mission ;)

I've played several missions were you had to be a pilot to use the choppers\planes, a crew member to use armoured ( m113\stryker\t72 and the like ). Respawn time can be set by the mission maker ( should be set..) respawn amount also ( group respawn anyone?).

The power is all in the hands of the mission makers.

Ofcourse BIS could put in a few top notch missions with the game, i'd love that as well, but whitin hours of the release, i'm sure the first missions would be turning out for arma2 ( hopefully not just evo port, but other great missions as well )

And if you want bleed outs and the likes, try the ace mod in arma :)

[waylay00 0]

Some of you guys actually need to play PR first before making such blind assumptions/accusations.

As stated, PR and ArmA are different. But there is a large portion that overlaps. To me, you still get the epic feel of big battles. But the advantage of PR is that the teamwork is much better "out of the box". You can literally join a squad of five other people you've never met, and usually you can work really well as a team. Also, although it might be more "arcadish," the feel of PR is more responsive. So in this way, I'd say it actually is more realistic than ArmA, simply because I feel like I have more control over my player (just like I do with my body in real life).

I noticed one poster said that an example of more realistic gameplay would be looking down at a watch instead of pressing a key. But really, is this really more realistic? I think it would be less realistic, as it's far easier simply to press a key than to move your mouse down while simultaneously moving your arms to your face to see the watch. However a developer might incorporate it, it's bound to be a whole lot more cumbersome than looking at your watch in real life is. So that fact right there makes it less "realistic" in terms of cognitive reflexes, etc...

It's all a compromise.

[kocrachon 2]

Some of you guys actually need to play PR first before making such blind assumptions/accusations.

As stated, PR and ArmA are different. But there is a large portion that overlaps. To me, you still get the epic feel of big battles. But the advantage of PR is that the teamwork is much better "out of the box". You can literally join a squad of five other people you've never met, and usually you can work really well as a team. Also, although it might be more "arcadish," the feel of PR is more responsive. So in this way, I'd say it actually is more realistic than ArmA, simply because I feel like I have more control over my player (just like I do with my body in real life).

I was an EA admin for BF2 through the BF2RS program. I played PR almost as much as I played BF2 itself.

On that note, PR is not a realism mod... its a mod that adds realism feeling to the equipment and damage and That's it. Its an arcade pick up and play game where you can hop in and out at your leisure. The equipment is where the realism ends.

ArmA's realism comes from more than the equipment. But its also based on what players make of the realism. Such as, the missions we make.

Having served my time with the Army I try to make my missions similar to my experience. One example is, there is no respawning. I make my missions hardcore realism. Players can't just get into any tank, if they are an 11B in my clan, they sit with their weapon. I can use ArmAs scripting to even enable that. I can make it so that only specific people can be pilots, I can make it to where you can only equip a specific rifle. Thats what ArmA offers to the world of scripters.

All PR does is make realistic equipment with some realistic movements. Its not realism, its an arcadish shooter that puts in realistic physics. Yes its nice, but no where near the level of ArmA. One thing i hate about PR is even though there is Realism, it suffers the normal BF flaw of too many lone wolves sniper wanna bes and aircraft whores (pardon my french). Too much team killing because they want the aircraft and too much stupid stuff going on. While that stuff can still happen in ArmA you can easilly script ways around it (such as no one can pilot an aircraft with out proper authorization like in the evolution servers)

ArmA was made for a Cooperative Experience and thats what most of us play it for. Yes you CAN do deathmatch, but thats not the target demograph. But at the same time there is no limitations. I have death match games. I have TDM, I have DM, I have sniper wars, I even have Americas Army style games where its Blufor vs Opfor mission based like VIP extraction such as Americas Army hospital map.

There is no limitation in ArmA like there is in PR, and thats where ArmA earns its realism award, is in the no limitation world.

[Litos 10]

Agreed. Good post.

[Steakslim 1]

I was an EA admin for BF2 through the BF2RS program. I played PR almost as much as I played BF2 itself.

On that note, PR is not a realism mod... its a mod that adds realism feeling to the equipment and damage and That's it. Its an arcade pick up and play game where you can hop in and out at your leisure. The equipment is where the realism ends.

ArmA's realism comes from more than the equipment. But its also based on what players make of the realism. Such as, the missions we make.

Having served my time with the Army I try to make my missions similar to my experience. One example is, there is no respawning. I make my missions hardcore realism. Players can't just get into any tank, if they are an 11B in my clan, they sit with their weapon. I can use ArmAs scripting to even enable that. I can make it so that only specific people can be pilots, I can make it to where you can only equip a specific rifle. Thats what ArmA offers to the world of scripters.

All PR does is make realistic equipment with some realistic movements. Its not realism, its an arcadish shooter that puts in realistic physics. Yes its nice, but no where near the level of ArmA. One thing i hate about PR is even though there is Realism, it suffers the normal BF flaw of too many lone wolves sniper wanna bes and aircraft whores (pardon my french). Too much team killing because they want the aircraft and too much stupid stuff going on. While that stuff can still happen in ArmA you can easilly script ways around it (such as no one can pilot an aircraft with out proper authorization like in the evolution servers)

ArmA was made for a Cooperative Experience and thats what most of us play it for. Yes you CAN do deathmatch, but thats not the target demograph. But at the same time there is no limitations. I have death match games. I have TDM, I have DM, I have sniper wars, I even have Americas Army style games where its Blufor vs Opfor mission based like VIP extraction such as Americas Army hospital map.

There is no limitation in ArmA like there is in PR, and thats where ArmA earns its realism award, is in the no limitation world.

/thread

[Incognito84 10]

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.

Project Reality isn't as realistic as it should be mainly because of engine limitations. For example, the BF2 engine doesn't support weapon sway and it's hardcoded. Sad, really.

I bet PR will become very realistic once they port over to a new engine.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Thanks Dr_Eyeball. That was a long and informative read. I reccommend everyone to read that manual before bashing PR. Btw I never liked BF. Just yet another quick shooter with no sense of realism.

You can't compare BF:PR to AA. You have to compare BF to AA and BF:PR to AA:ACE. As I see it AA vs BF gives 2000 vs 500 in 'score'. AA:ACE vs BF:PR gives 4000 vs 2500 in 'score'. ACE have added a hell of a lot of nice things to AA. But PR have added even more to original BF. 5 times better is higher than 2. Although I'm an ACE 'fanboy' deluxe, I'd say PR value is greater than ACE value.

Despite BF being a much less mod friendly platform than AA, AA is by no means perfect or 'limit less'. There are VERY many things that cannot be done in AA without rewriting the engine. Some are simulated. Some sort of works. Others work but looks aweful. Some cost too much to be practical. Some cannot be overcome, at least not without going outside the scripting and addon nature of AA.

PR adds 'negative' effects and forces players to deal with it. When ACE tries the same, many people complaints their ass off and wants to have it removed. Remember how many that wants to play without the stamina effects, because they didn't want to become tired?

Limitations are needed, some by game or addon design, others by mission design. Given the engine limitations of BF, I think the PR crew has done a brilliant job on this. By the looks of it very nicely balanced. I tried enforcing a two minute respawn delay in my Domination edit. If remote waterboarding was possible, I'd be in trouble! I've put countless limitations and roleplay enforcement systems in, but I'm getting yelled at because the medic can't get an M107. Only a few players actually like these changes. Why? Because a game/mod/mission will never get any better than the maturity level of the players that play it. And for the 'most popular' missions in AA, this level just isn't very high. I think PR produce more realistic oriented BF gamers than than ACE does for AA. Not being involved with BF, that's very speculative though, only a hunch.

Naturally there exist much more realistic missions in AA, where I as i.e. a SAW gunner get my SAW and not much else. But these are usually played on very dedicated servers like TG. I say that the freedom that AA gives, has come at a cost of making the most popular missions less realistic than (I) desired.

Finally a note to HavocDemon:

I don't mind the occasional hard core no respawn game, unless they are too long. 'Quick', dedicated objectives are fine, but nothing more than that. I also find it very hard to recruit new players to these games because of no respawn. That 'accident' or 'freak enemy bullet' cost is too much for many, especially new to the game, players to handle.

On the other extreme, Warfare, Domination, and Evolution (the most popular missions) with their insta-respawn, are just too forgiving.

Look how brilliantly PR solved this. Varying respawn timer depending on number of mistakes, severity of mistake, and even possible to reduce. This can be simulated in AA using insta respawn (0 seconds) at base, but you are in a 'lock up' (i.e. some hotel closed room) for a given amount of time.

Is it time to find a middleway for AA in order to produce more serious players but without going from insta-respawn to hard-core in a single jump?

Okay, so I babble when I'm tired, sue me :)

[Second 0]

PR adds 'negative' effects and forces players to deal with it. When ACE tries the same, many people complaints their ass off and wants to have it removed. Remember how many that wants to play without the stamina effects, because they didn't want to become tired?

Yeah. This is problem. People are free. What free people does? Stupid things. Look how free people are ruining mother earth because automobiles and wasting limited natural resources are "freedom", trying to take out that away from them and you will have riots, civil wars and all kinds of ugly shite.

With those capabilities to cause harm with freedoms, freedom easily can destroy whole game. Freedoms doesn't even need to sweat to do that. Besides rules and limitations equal for all creates comfort and stability. Kids raised based on freedoms instead of discipline are prone to become junkies, hookers and all kinds ugly shite.

And i'm being partially even serious.

[-)rStrangelove 0]

Maybe if someone of the PR players here could provide a feature list what makes PR fun to play, an ArmA mission scripter might be able to get something together.

If you study online server lists these days missions where you build up bases, capture cities and revive wounded players seem to go a long way. It seems that by mixing the best features of a reality milsim and the BF2 flag system you have the best balance between realism & fun for the most ppl.

[=wfl= sgt bilko 10]

Remember how many that wants to play without the stamina effects, because they didn't want to become tired?

Lolz ... sounds like some of the community comments on PRM forum after every new release. But in the end it turns out to change the gameplay for the better, in effect stepping further away from the run'n'gun game style of the vBF2.

Someone mentioned vBF2 flag games. They're completely re-done in PRM, the flag jumping is long gone. It's mainly changed into large area domination where you can only take areas in a certain order. Also the latest releases have expanded on this by introducing a pool of areas that spawns randomly to keep rounds on same map more dynamic, instead of playing the same static set-up round after round.

It'll be intersting to see what Arma2 will bring to the table. I see great potential in scripting that I'd personally will explore once A2 is released.

[whisper 0]

Beware, once you get stucked (sucked, in fact) into ArmA mission making/scripting, you're screwed

[nodunit 397]

)rStrangelove;1284263']Maybe if someone of the PR players here could provide a feature list what makes PR fun to play

One of the main factor is the forced aspect' date=' making the team work together. I highly recommend you refer to the manual.

Well I know its off topic but since the topic itself has strayed OT on several account we might as well cover a bit more of PR.

Loading Music for those that might be curious to hear some of the tunes.

[url']http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLlPwkaaOSs[/url] "The Promotion/main menu music"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v1FrOqmJ6Q&feature=related "Reality Check"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcOYP6rMyns "Predator"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxPzkpMEcKI "Battle Formation"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUQMuxJczKY&feature=related "Heavy Resistance"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1cZklHDk8A&feature=related "Terracotta"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGcRF6REz3s&feature=related "Afghan Uprising"

There are more sound tracks but they should be in the "Related Video's" section.

Music by Alkali and PirateX

If anyone hears something they like and want the clear version send me a PM and I'll rar the song (or songs) for you.

(The ones with the PR picture under the user Alkaliy2s are very clear.

Edited May 14, 2009 by NodUnit

[dunedain 48]

)rStrangelove;1284263']Maybe if someone of the PR players here could provide a feature list what makes PR fun to play [...]

I would like much to see those features in a future expansion of Arma2 instead of heavily scripted/bugged missions with things that average player won't use as it is right now on Arma.

Personnaly what i like the most in PR is..

-Squad system, easy to use and as it is on PR hugely enforce teamplay.

-Strict chain of command, everyone plays his role.

-Suppresive fire, in Pr when you're under fire it's really something.

-Coherence of kits and classes, realistic attribution of kits.

And even if a big island is great, maybe they should think about some less big maps more gameplay based like Pr does very well without lacking of realism.

I don't think that community can answer effectively to this with Arma, it's up to Bis to bring within everyone's reach such features.

[whisper 0]

- squad system : depending on what you want there, imho, once again, it's up to the mission maker and NOT BI

- CoC : I don't know how it is done in PR, so I don't know what you mean here.

- I'm 50/50. BI could do it. community could do it also. probably better done by BI though

- Kits : mission maker's job. Plz BI don't try to touch/limit it hardcoded.

- map size : what is your concern? Purely size? Can be limited by mission maker without any issue.

[-)rStrangelove 0]

I would like much to see those features in a future expansion of Arma2 instead of heavily scripted/bugged missions with things that average player won't use as it is right now on Arma.

....

I don't think that community can answer effectively to this with Arma, it's up to Bis to bring within everyone's reach such features.

What this community here has proven during the last years is that almost nothing is impossible. If something is really needed/wanted badly enough, one or more ppl will try to make it happen, or get as close to it as you can. We always used the BIS games as a platform to work from. If we would've waited for BIS to include features this community wouldn't be what it is today. This is a 'CAN DO' community.

Lol propaganda aside, if you played a bugged ArmA mission in the past you should have done your fair share of contacting the author and report what to do to make it better. Also, what is 'the average player' ? There's such a wide range of custom missions possible with the editor and scripting, you can't simply please everyone/ the average player. Most missions are very specific, if you didn't like the context of that mission, play a different mission or provide feedback to the author.

Personnaly what i like the most in PR is..

-Squad system, easy to use and as it is on PR hugely enforce teamplay.

Already in ArmA. You stay together and you live longer. Done. ;)

Did i miss something? I guess lots of the squad system game mechanics in BF2 come from the kits the players are using. A good combination of different kits make sense when working together as a squad.

-Strict chain of command, everyone plays his role.

We can do this via scripting in ArmA. There are already missions where you can only fly when you're a pilot for example. You choose your role when connecting to a server, as easy as that.

-Suppresive fire, in Pr when you're under fire it's really something.

Again, already in ArmA and the rest was already done via scripting. If you're hit and you're still not dead, your arms may be shaking and/or you can only crawl. Mod scripts like ACE and others simulate being thrown down when bullets whizz by, you can slowly bleed to death when not healed etc etc. Only thing i haven't yet seen (i don't know everything about the ArmA mod scene, nobody does) is that the AI is reacting to MG fire from the players.

-Coherence of kits and classes, realistic attribution of kits.

This has yet to be done i think. I really liked the kits in BF2, but so far only common things used in ArmA are the medic giving back health (revive only via scripting) and the engineer repairing stuff with a truck / and laying mines.

Other kits can be scripted in ArmA, like that MG gunner providing ammo to others etc. This should be discussed in depth here some more, i think it has the greatest potential.

And even if a big island is great, maybe they should think about some less big maps more gameplay based like Pr does very well without lacking of realism.

Big islands aren't bad tbh, it's great to attack cities from several sides without a com HQ telling you to 'return to the mission area or die in 4 seconds'.

However, if you really want to narrow down the area the players are using - scripting comes in again. It's just about how you implement it while still retaining a realistic scenario. The COM HQ message won't work in ArmA, but respawning shilkas and other dangers can do wonders.

Great discussion. :D

Edited May 14, 2009 by ])rStrangelove

[nodunit 397]

"Already in ArmA. You stay together and you live longer. Done. ;)

Did i miss something? I guess lots of the squad system game mechanics in BF2 come from the kits the players are using. A good combination of different kits make sense when working together as a squad."

Yes and no, you create squads at the mission editor and assign the "to be played" character to the squad, in bf2/PR its a dynamic, you can create or disband squads at anytime. But with the limiting of the amount of kits used at a given time (and that they take 5 minutes to replace if lost) it does force even more needed cooperation.

Also you HAVE to be in a squad to request a kit (rtfm) otherwise you can only use the basic kits which is standard rifle and maybe some goodies, grenades, maybe a medic..you can't get LMG's, AT kits, combat engineers, sniper, marksman, etc.

We can do this via scripting in ArmA. There are already missions where you can only fly when you're a pilot for example. You choose your role when connecting to a server, as easy as that.

Correct

"Again, already in ArmA and the rest was already done via scripting. If you're hit and you're still not dead, your arms may be shaking and/or you can only crawl. Mod scripts like ACE and others simulate being thrown down when bullets whizz by, you can slowly bleed to death when not healed etc etc. Only thing i haven't yet seen (i don't know everything about the ArmA mod scene, nobody does) is that the AI is reacting to MG fire from the players."

Again shown in the manual supressive fire causes more then the "oh crap I'm being shot at".

In PR your vision will blur for a bit if enough bullets (or something like that) pass by your head, not sure if that is realistic or a mechanic to get rid of the "rambo vs squad" players.

Won't comment much on the bleeding since as you said ACE has done it so everything is set there.

The commander in PR doesn't work the same as in BF2, you don't get UAV's or scans. Instead you sit in your HQ and keep in close contact with your squads, they report enemy movements and you mark it on the map for all to see.

Your primary job basicly to help the squads help eachother, this may sound dull and unhelpful but a good commander can be a very good asset.

[whisper 0]

Right, all of the above (minus perhaps suppressive fire effects on player where BI could also put in their own system) is doable by mission makers. Including on the fly squad creation & management (see Evolution system for an example)

Even for suppression, for which ACE did imho a good job. Best of all being in the vincinity of a tank or other big cannon firing. The ear ringings is just awesome

[dunedain 48]

Thanks for you answer ])rStrangelove,

Already in ArmA. You stay together and you live longer. Done.

I wish everyone would think the same and do it as well.

By suppresive fire effects, I mean very loud crack and blurred vision from close bullets, you have no choice but to get down. Not the same as in ACE.

I know well Arma, I didn't liked it at first since I was a big player of Ofp, I love ACE but the statement I did in my last post wasn't taking account of what is possible via scripting but of what i can see when I go online and play ACE.

Right now there almost only two type of servers, private and Domination games.

I don't have enough free time to join a community of players so I can't experiment real games apart from GOL's and ShackTac's vids.

Most players and me play on Domination which lack of everything I've listed before.

Faithfull Bis supporters, reminded here that everything is possible via scripting and usable via command menu ingame. I know that. The last 5 years I played online I experienced that on OFp/Arma, but what could make this game better would be to have all this by default, instead of heavily scripted missions with systems via command menu that nobody use, and I say that from personnal experience from Evolution maps ects..

About islands, I like them huge it's perfect for coop or cti, but for pvp i would like much more gameplay based maps as Pr which make less big but fit perfect for pvp.

Honestly what i've listed in my previous post are the reasons I continu to play Project Reality instead of Arma when I want some PvP, besides a great sandpit Bis could release a multiplayer part well designed, polished which would attrack for sure many players.

Edited May 14, 2009 by dunedain

[whisper 0]

My wild guess : they don't have time to do it all. Seeing the normal island is not yet finished (the last blog entry mentionned work to do on clutter mask for example), I don't see them working on top of that on one (or more) little, well polished PvP map (it takes LOADS of time doing it at the scale ArmA permits, as it takes already loads of time on usual FPS with less scale)

Seeing that the big issues I had with ArmA out of the box are things that cannot be changed (easily) by community, I'd rather have BI working on them (performance, AI, physics, official campaign which is a big selling point, addition like the suppressive fire you mentioned, we agree on this one ;) ) rather than on gameplay settings that can be tweaked by community.

[waylay00 0]

)rStrangelove;1284263']Maybe if someone of the PR players here could provide a feature list what makes PR fun to play' date=' an ArmA mission scripter might be able to get something together.[/quote']

-One thing I like about PR is that there are usually more human beings in each game. Plus, ALL the action is done by human beings (which can be both bad (ie - limiting) and good, but usually it's good).

-Also, I like the fact that you basically "create" your missions in the game. You'll group up with a squad and say, "we need to take the hill in A7KP4." And it's all player-done, with many other squads moving in the same area. But of course, this can be limiting, since PR doesn't utilize special "objective" based missions, like hostage rescues, etc...

-I like the whole punishment system. It really does force people to act realistically (for the most part), and people value their lives. And this is all done without removing respawns.

-I also like the vehicle control systems for players. If you're in a tank, for instance, you can't be a driver and then just suddenly switch to the gunner position. You can switch, but you have to wait 30 seconds before doing anything.

-Now as far as environments go, I prefer ArmA by far. I love the huge open maps and the freedom to go wherever.

[kocrachon 2]

-One thing I like about PR is that there are usually more human beings in each game. Plus, ALL the action is done by human beings (which can be both bad (ie - limiting) and good, but usually it's good).

You must be playing in the wrong servers... I have been in an evolution server with 64 people. And my previous clan had roughly 32 people running large scale missions.

-Also, I like the fact that you basically "create" your missions in the game. You'll group up with a squad and say, "we need to take the hill in A7KP4." And it's all player-done, with many other squads moving in the same area. But of course, this can be limiting, since PR doesn't utilize special "objective" based missions, like hostage rescues, etc...

I don't consider that a mission making ordeal. Its more of a tactical decision to turn the tide of battle. And even then it will eventually res pawn and you will have to repeat the process...

-I like the whole punishment system. It really does force people to act realistically (for the most part), and people value their lives. And this is all done without removing respawns.

In ArmA I seldom see people team killing eachother. And I think the ArmA style TK punishing is realistic. If you TK, you are no longer on a team, you are consider a traitor and you become an open target anyone can kill. Or you can script it to where the person is auto baned from the server...

-I also like the vehicle control systems for players. If you're in a tank, for instance, you can't be a driver and then just suddenly switch to the gunner position. You can switch, but you have to wait 30 seconds before doing anything.

Thats not realism, thats just an annoyance. Personally i prefer to make it to where my players are a driver, gunner, or commander, they cant switch seats period.

[kocrachon 2]

My wild guess : they don't have time to do it all. Seeing the normal island is not yet finished (the last blog entry mentionned work to do on clutter mask for example), I don't see them working on top of that on one (or more) little, well polished PvP map (it takes LOADS of time doing it at the scale ArmA permits, as it takes already loads of time on usual FPS with less scale)

Seeing that the big issues I had with ArmA out of the box are things that cannot be changed (easily) by community, I'd rather have BI working on them (performance, AI, physics, official campaign which is a big selling point, addition like the suppressive fire you mentioned, we agree on this one ;) ) rather than on gameplay settings that can be tweaked by community.

Is that why Project Reality has to exist? After all, that is a community made mod, not a real game. A mod that is 5 years in the making and still in beta phases...

[nodunit 397]

Thats not realism, thats just an annoyance. Personally i prefer to make it to where my players are a driver, gunner, or commander, they cant switch seats period.

All three? Thats even less realistic and not really what we need. Unless of course you mean Fixed seats.

The 30 second warmup on the main guns however isn't really such a bad thing, infact it is positive since it further enforced teamplay effort, you can't simply make a quick switch in a battlezone between driver and gunner, killing to guard yourself quickly..Instead the 30 second timer would make you a sitting duck, thus it discourages rambo stylers.

Edited May 14, 2009 by NodUnit

[White_Hat 0]

Is that why Project Reality has to exist? After all, that is a community made mod, not a real game. A mod that is 5 years in the making and still in beta phases...

Dunno why you despise PR so much but in my book the multiplayer experience in PR is way better than anything i played in ArmA. Maybe it´s because i don´t like coop and the PvP gameplay on the public servers of ArmA is in the majority of the cases lot´s of lone wolfing without any teamplay with tons of teamkilling and cheating but that´s all my subjective pov.

[kocrachon 2]

Dunno why you despise PR so much but in my book the multiplayer experience in PR is way better than anything i played in ArmA. Maybe it´s because i don´t like coop and the PvP gameplay on the public servers of ArmA is in the majority of the cases lot´s of lone wolfing without any teamplay with tons of teamkilling and cheating but that´s all my subjective pov.

I think you are confusing games. Last time I played BF2... last week.. I was team killed repeatedly.. For variosue of reasons. Mainly because people wanted the vehicle I was about to get in. Very common when it comes to aircraft.

And lone wolfing? Again you MUST be confusing games. Because 99% of the time I join a squad on their where the whole point of the squad is just so that everyone else can use the squad leader as a mobile spawn point, and the team work ends there...

Again this game was not a target demograph for the individuals complaining about its style. If you do not want coop, this game was never meant for you in the first place. This franchise is doing pretty damn good on its own. With a much large mod base then BF2 has ever seen. If you want to play an Arcadish run and gun respawn game, go stick with PR. ArmA was not meant to be that, nor will it ever be that. Thats not why we enjoy it.

This game is just a CIVILIANISED version of a combat simulator. I trained on Virtual Battlespace 2, and I can tell you, that this is pretty damn close for what the civilian world will ever get.

Alot of us players on here are Military Vets, who like to replicate and play things that go along with the life we once had. If I wanted to play run and gun unrealistic games I would switch over to Call of Duty 4 right now. But that is not what made this game what it is. If it would have stuck with that route this game would have been dead in the water already because theres a flooded market of those games types.