Is ArmA better than OFP?

[chops 111]

In a nutshell: Addon variety, AI behaviour, overall feeling - those are the points that made me vote Ofp here.

Well said.

I voted OFP. From my point of view, better graphics, more scripting commands, swimming and multiple turrets aren't enough to counter the superior AI, stability of the game and just overall feel of OFP.

I own both, mucked around a bit with Arma at release, was appalled at the state of it, not just bugs, fundamental flaws. And have popped in and out with each new patch.

I was involved in ACE very briefly, but left. Nothing in Arma has really ignited my interest like OFP has.

The graphics are obviously better in Arma, but for me they look a little cartoonish somehow, hard to describe exactly.

The animations are nowhere near as good as Sanctuary's work in OFP.

No insult intended to the very talented teams and individuals who are producing some incredible stuff currently for Arma, but there's a long list of great addon-making teams and individuals that disappeared for whatever reasons after Arma was released;

BAS (only make missions now I think?)

ORCS

Hyakyushi

Laser

Our Weapons

Combat!

SEP

Ah the good old days. WWIIEC are still doing some great work in OFP.

[EricM 0]

Arma is technically better, and with CWR available, there isn't much left to OFP.

So I voted for Arma, but back in the day I enjoyed OFP more that I enjoyed Arma when it came out.

So Arma is better, but OFP was more groundbreaking and enjoyable.

[bravo 6 0]

Its hard to vote because of several points of view.

I tell you that OFP gave me better emotional feelings then ArmA.

I have a lot of great and good memories with OFP that i didn't had and i still didn't reached with ArmA. Although in terms of technology ArmA is more advanced, improved in several ways.

I hope ArmA2 is a mix of both.

[zwobot 17]

The graphics are obviously better in Arma, but for me they look a little cartoonish somehow, hard to describe exactly.

Haha yeah, that annoys me about Arma too. Look at the explosions: with several "arms" of smoke emerging into the air they almost look like some sort of octopus or so to me. Not that the standard Ofp explosions are less ridiculous, just think of the mushroom clouds of the handrenades. But at least it dosen't look like an octopus :)

[[aps]gnat 28]

Wheres the "SAME" option ?

Because its balances, OFP had much better "gameplay" but ArmA was more "flexible" and looked FAR better.

Yes yes .... ArmA come out several year later, but hey, its not a balanced poll question anyway.

[celery 8]

Gnat;1286822']Wheres the "SAME" option ?

Because its balances' date=' OFP had much better "gameplay" but ArmA was more "flexible" and looked FAR better.

Yes yes .... ArmA come out several year later, but hey, its not a balanced poll question anyway.[/quote']

I'm not going to buy that the games are exactly as good as the other. It's just indecisiveness and overcomplicating things.

[bravo 6 0]

Thats why i didn't vote.

[Mr_Tea 0]

What is better?

Now that the CWR Mod is out, ArmA without a doubt.:)

[CameronMcDonald 146]

what is better?

Now that the cwr mod is out, arma without a doubt.:)

qft. :)

[Commando84 0]

technically arma is better and graphically imo, normal maps, specular maps ect..

Leaning is cool and rolling on the ground saved my butt once or twice.

Story and campaign parts felt better made in Ofp though.

Mp is way better in Arma though with the more stable netcode and so on.

Yeah now with Cwr out, yeah Arma hands down :D

Edited May 20, 2009 by Commando84
CWR

[mcvittees 0]

For me OFP was a better game than ArmA for several reasons:

1) Better missions and campaigns in OFP and expansions

2) Relatively simple graphics of OFP matched the gameplay and AI. ArmA upgraded the graphics but the gameplay remained the same. This meant the experience (for me) was inferior. A more realistic environment demands more realistically interacting elements.

However, having said all that, I play ArmA and not OFP, so maybe I should have voted ArmA is the better game.

[mr burns 131]

ujS4wJ0RUcY

Leaning, rolling, tracers and stuff all found into OFP via mods, im still playing it from time to time. Especially after watching that trailer :D
Nothing comes even close to the feeling it has :rolleyes:

But i´m a gfx whore and mostly playing ArmA ... so imho it´s a draw :)

[Gorgi Knootewoot 0]

I voted for OFP. Mainly because OFP was the first military combat simulation I played. I was overwhelmed by it's excellent non-repetitive gameplay with much freedom. I didn't have that same feeling when I bought ArmA, but that is normal. Same thing is for the 1st MMO you play, the 2nd doesn't feel as good.

Just like OFP, ArmA had many issues on release. But because OFP was patched beyond recognition it felt better then ArmA when that was released. On release of ArmA, I couldn't fly a chopper normally but now it's much better.

One big letdown in OFP was that it had no Join game in Progress, and that is why I play ArmA more. Also the patches (and my new PC) allow me to play ArmA on all high settings and most bugs are squashed.

The campaign however was much much better in OFP. The main campaign and the 2 expansions I played more then the ArmA campaign. So for single player I rather do OFP, but now with the current version of ArmA I rather do ArmA mutliplayer.

However, I will drop both OFP and ArmA when I get my hands on ArmA II

[dmarkwick 261]

Leaning, rolling, tracers and stuff all found into OFP via mods, im still playing it from time to time. Especially after watching that trailer :D

Nothing comes even close to the feeling it has

They work TrackIR into it, and I'm right back in :)

[1in1class 0]

ArmA just better graphics now OFP had its all around goods:bounce3: Maybe if they keep tight on one game for an while and give the tools to public to use maybe ArmA could get some good mods and stuff done like in OFP, there where so many good mods units all around good options for OFP.

[zwobot 17]

Actually I think no Join In Progress is one of the things which make Ofp unique. I have to admit though that I maybe wasted some hours of lifetime by now with going back and forth between the Ofp Briefing and slot screeen because someone joined late. Both has it's strenghts and weaknesses (as always...).

[kuIoodporny 45]

ArmA lacks in continuity, single player and animations. These things keep me having OFP on my HDD.

I also keep in mind what Marek Spanel said: "[...] ArmA 1 it was just random, really. We made some units because we had to". ;)

Other strong argument for OFP is that this old game is playable without mods, while IMO ArmA isn't.

I hope ArmA 2 won't be random and I won't have to create Compact Fix 2 ;)

[SWT_Janowich 10]

Other strong argument for OFP is that this old game is playable without mods, while IMO ArmA isn't.

Its more flipwise, you have a hard time finding an OFP server without Addons in contrast to arma.

Even i do not have any mods installed.

[kuIoodporny 45]

Its more flipwise, you have a hard time finding an OFP server without Addons in contrast to arma.

Even i do not have any mods installed.

It is enforced by many servers which use signature protection against cheaters... that's why I gave up playing ArmA and got into addon development.

I play OFP with slight modifications only, because most of complex addons are killing performance much more effectively than in ArmA.

[Jack-UK 0]

Well, all i can say is that the longevity of OFP was so much more.

Brilliant campaign(s), Decent multiplayer community, Decent performance even on my horrible rig at the time...

ArmA i've had 2 rigs, one good, one bad, performance still bad on the good rig, its the main killer for me. Campaign was also a bit dry.

They both have their positives and negatives, but putting them on a level playing field.. i'd choose OFP any day.

[sEveron 10]

The Better one?

From the gamer point of view...

Playing Operation Flashpoint as your first full scaled military simulator is something that you will never forget. It marks your psyche forever. Any pseudo-realistic military simulation that comes across after you've played ofp is briefly commented as "not as good".

Ofp was the first game of it's class, and among the all games involving shooting people it was The Best One. The amount of emotions you got from playing Operation Flashpoint is just unmatchable.

I think that if you played Operation Flashpoint before playing ArmA, the question which one is better doesn't really have much sense. ArmA is nothing more than few fixes put on the previous engine.

Positive changes (kinda):

+ Join in progress

+ Build with 'openness' for moding in mind, (involving three letters sqf) (but does it really have more mods than OFP?)

+ TrackIR.

+ Looking around while in ironsight mode (love it).

+ Look-thru model ironsights.

+ Leaning.

+ Binds for things like 'eject' and new binds options in general.

+ Swimming (but you loose your gear, so why would you swim anyway).

+ Grass (Ok, it adds immersion, lowers fps, and obstructs vision while prone, but it's all for realism, so its a plus).

But there are also some changes which are more of a step-back than progress.

- Arcade style action icons (c'mon, what were you thinking guys?)

- New balance (tanks dying from 1 at shot, non-bulletproof hummvies)

- New vehicles? Not really. Mi24 and AH64 was taken away. Some replacements, in general I'm dissapointed with default ArmA vehicles set compared to OFP.

Since the actual quality of your experience depends on the time you invest in finding mods. We can only compare those two games in their vanilla officially patched state. In that state, although ArmA is looking better, it isn't working that much better, it doesn't offer much more than operation flashpoint did in terms of actual gameplay. The feeling of a game comes from how all the bits work together, how do you feel playing the campaign, what types of missions are available for fast singleplayer actions, how is the whole thing put together and what level of enjoyment it gives you. Now, sit down and ask yourself, does ArmA give me more than Operation Flashpoint?

ArmA is a successor for OFP, but we can't exactly say that playing ArmA is an experience more worthwhile than playing Operation Flashpoint. The very core of the joy you experience while playing one of those comes from the things they share. The freedom, the immersion, the scale. The things that differ them make going from OFP to Arma a tradeoff, not a gain. You get something new, which is nice, but you give something up.

All in all, ArmA is maybe a better engine, but it sure as hell is not a better Game than Operation Flashpoint.

I've spoken.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Some people seem to be "OFP-biased" and their own dreams + wishful thinking about the next "new and groundbreaking succesor".

Play OFP vanilla and then play ArmA vanilla - you will see the differences. Keep in mind that "better" is very often a personal taste/feeling. ;)

If ArmA campaigns were more plausible & including character/role-playing - how would you "judge" it?

[kuIoodporny 45]

If ArmA campaigns were more plausible & including character/role-playing - how would you "judge" it?

"Everything's okay or at least better than in OFP, with exceptions: animations are clunky and worse, there are no vehicles so popular among the world that have already appeared in OFP, tanks are wasted and you should buy me the time wasted on patching." ;)

[smeg head 10]

Things I preferred about OFP

- The Russians

- The characters & story

- The tank interiors

- The vehicle damage system

- The "physics" (and i use that term loosely)

- The AI

- The mods

Things I preferred about ARMA

- The 10km view distance that made flying fun

- The ironsights

- The graphics

- The music

- mounted vehciles had ironsights

- The armory - wheee!

Overall I preferred OFP, but this may be due to the fact that my hardware never allowed me to run ARMA so well. When mission making in ARMA I could never have more than a few squads or my CPU would die. In OFP i can use gajillions of soldiers. Since mission making is where its at, I am forced to stick with OFP due to hardware limitations :)

[Baldman 10]

I think first impressions count alot here. Running through the OFP campaign was a memorable thing, it was an amazing experience which made the game stick in the minds of alot people. ARMA has no campaign to speak of when it comes down to it, it was a horribly thought out and executed experience.

I view ARMA as BIS stumbling around in the dark, not quite sure of whats going on. BUT I think its because of that ARMA2 will be great. I view ARMA2 as ARMA with a real vision and some good direction. ARMA was kind of like an uncertain foundation to build on, and it seems like ARMA2 will be the great building that ARMA was intended to be sitting on that (now) solid foundation. But as it stands, OFP provided a much more pleasant and memorable experience.

I just wish BIS would drop the "elite team" direction (I mean team Razor? Give me a break, it sounds like an SF team straight out of an 80's action movie. Might as well have called them "the unit" and based them out of area 51) and go with something more conventional and believable. I think that was one of the reasons OFP was so great, you felt like a pawn, just another soldier in a war. You weren't the pivoting point with the fate of the world in your hands.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Baldman