ArmA2 1.03 Impressions - ALL Impressions/Videos/Screenies Here

[An Fiach 10]

ArmA needs to be better optimized for sure but I think there are a lot of people blaming the game when the problem is really on their end. I don't have a great system and I run the game fine. This is the first BIS game I've ever owned. If I had purchased the German version I would have been pissed. However, I am used to playing on games with old engines and willing to deal with it for a quality game. You are on the right track regarding bolt-ons, it eventually kills the game performance and fails to function properly. At some point things need to be upgraded.

[EricM 0]

Fanboys don't come out of nowhere and for no reason either. They are not masochists. If they defend the game (sometimes blindly), it's because they are playing and enjoying it. I'm one of them.

From the demo and patch polls, I'd say 75/80 % of the people have a lot of fun and don't encounter gamebreaking bugs, and 20/25% do. That's a lot, but still a minority (which have all the rights to complain as it's still way too much).

Truthfully, I haven't encountered any major bugs in the campaign so far (small animation glitches, but nothing that prevents me from going on, I played with hotfix). I consider myself lucky seeing that many people seem to have trouble with it (or are also simply lost). I also enjoyed some very fun MP moments without a pb (except some occasional TK). I play at average 28FPS on a 8800GTX and I'm fine with it.

Saying that no one can play the game and that it is completely broken is just as exagerrated as saying the game is flawless.

Single player solo missions work well, editor works well, mission wizard is super fun, MP works well, tons of missions to download... even without the controversial campaign you have hundreds of hours of gameplay ahead.

I'm sorry for all the people who cannot enjoy it as they should, I understand their frustration, ask for a refund if you wish, but please understand that many people have a lot of fun and love the game right now, and will enjoy it even more in the future.

[Chebychev 10]

There's issues that need fixing, some more urgently than others, but at the end of the day, there's not one other game out there that will give you the satisfaction that ArmA2 does. Despite the bugs and performance issues, I still manage to enjoy the campaign a lot (and I'm not BI or OFP fanboy, never played ArmA1 or OFP for longer than 5 minutes).

[stagga 10]

Fanboys don't come out of nowhere and for no reason either. They are not masochists. If they defend the game (sometimes blindly), it's because they are playing and enjoying it. I'm one of them.

EricM some of what you say is true. But i've had quite a lot of experience with fanboys myself. I worked on a recently released console game that received a lot of media attention and pre-release hype over several years. We managed to pick up an incredible amount of fanboys before anyone had even played the game! People who would argue constantly on forums about features of the game that didn't exist or technical aspects that they'd heard rumoured but were in fact entirely fabricated. Occasionally I would post anonomously on some of these flamewar forums asking the most extreme fanboys to back up what they were saying with some evidence or their source of information - you know, just for self amusement and all :). And you know what? The second they believe you're attitude towards THEM is negative they accuse you of being against the game they love! I was called a 'troll' and and fanboy of the 'other' console for asking a guy how he knew that an object had 1 million polys in it and pointing out that he was full of s*** when he claimed to have written a program that could analyse the poly count from a screenshot :p Anyway I haven't seen anyone that extreme here but my point is there are people who build up what seems to be their own mental image of the perfect game and refuse to budge on it even when faced with the obvious truth!

I'm not a 'troll' or a 'fanboy'. I wanted ARMA 2 to be amazing. I've been anticipating it for months if not years. I used to point out that ARMA 1's bugs were forgiveable because it was just a stop gap and ARMA 2 would be the real deal, bug free and all the features we ever wanted. And the truth? It's an incredible sandbox to play in. Varied, beautiful, packed with details and I genuinely believe that (given the scope and size of the terrain) it's the best looking game out there. The vehicles (mostly) look good, they sound good, the atmosphere is fantastic and just looking through the screenshots forum you can see at times BIS have got close to photorealism. It really is an amazing accomplishment.

BUT we're not just talking about an environment sim. ARMA 2 is packaged and sold as a game and therefore whether some people like it or not it has to be compared with other games. And other games have certain rules regarding quality. If Crysis or Call of Duty had so many faults there would have been public outcry! If I played a game of FIFA and found that not only were my goals not being counted but the match would never end because the clock hadn't triggered the end screen script I think that would be a big deal. Yet with ARMA2 it seems people take a strange attitude where this kind of stuff is ok (if I go back to FIFA it would be like saying "you can't play a season but you can practice free kicks and play friendlies and the rest will be fixed later, be happy with that!") when they wouldn't stand for it with any other game. At my company during the final QA stage we were all involved in hunting for and fixing bugs. They were categorised as Class A, B and C. Class A meant that it was game breaking and all other work was put on hold until the causes of those bugs had been identified and fixed. In my first hour of playing ARMA 2 I was faced with at least 3 Class A Bugs, both technical and script errors. On this forum there's a guy who's condescending and patronising to people who complain about bugs, refuses to acknowledge that there are any and then admits that he hasn't even played the campaign yet still believes he has the right to an opinion on the subject! This is precisely the 'fanboyism' that winds people up.

So sorry for the long rant but I want to sum up by saying those of us who HAVE experienced problems that have NOTHING to do with our hardware, NOTHING to do with our lack of knowledge and experience about OFP/ARMA and EVERYTHING to do with a failure by BIS to make sure their product worked before they shipped it have a right to complain about it without being denounced as 'trolls' by certain people. We just wanted the game to be done properly.

[cartier90 0]

I wouldn't get confused with 'fanboys' of console games and enthusiastic supporters of ARMA2 - their two different animals. The former being younger and as you say unable to back up claims, the latter at least referring to aspects that keep them 'occupied' until the campaign is sorted.

A game such as this is , to use a well worn phrase, is a 'sandbox' game that cant be compared to FIFA or other games that are very constrained in what one can do in game. Its quite possible to avoid many of the faults in the campaign by just playing around with the editor and insta missions. Of course there are bugs there too, just fewer.

Your reference to Crysis or COD is an interesting one, look at the demographics of the players, the expected volumes to be sold and the pedigree of those franchises. With anyone from a 8- to the proverbial 80 year old expected to play them, they need to work off the bat, the competition in those markets is fierce and those more 'casual' gamers will jump ship and play competitors games if need be. OFP/R ARMA had a more mature, serious gamer to cater for, one whom was used to patches and improvements - dare I say it expected it. BIS can get away with it because the campaign is just one part of the game, one that isnt really intrinsic to enjoying it.

[Potatomasher 0]

I really liked what Stagga wrote. Good points there.

Only problem is the ultimate question. Is there anything like Arma2, Arma or OFP games out there ? NO.

So you can't really compare Arma2 to any game. It's just warfare simulator that no one has ever done. So if there is (and there are lot's them) bugs more than any other game had it doesn't mean BIS haven't as efficiently tried to fix those bugs before release date. I guess in a game like this there is possible bugs 10000 x more than usual arcade shooter like COD4.

Edited July 7, 2009 by Potatomasher

[stagga 10]

No I'm sorry I still don't buy that. You're suggesting that as fans of Arma are 'mature and serious' we should be prepared to put up with an unfinished product? That we should expect the standard to be lower because it's a niche market? That might be true with some indie developers but BIS has been working on this product for a decade and sells versions of it to various world militaries who, as you can see on the VBS2 website, pay rather well. I'm looking at my games collection now....DCS:Black Shark, LOMAC, Steel Fury, T34 versus Tiger, GTR Evo.... to name a few 'niche' products that would never top the bestsellers list but despite containing bugs were certainly playable on release. Going back to ARMA 2, I bought the game for it's campaign ok? I wanted to experience the same fun I had with CWC etc. It's not anybody's right here to tell me that the campaign is not important because I can do other things in this game!

And PotatoMasher, you're right that there's nothing comparable (for the next few weeks at least) and I'm sure BIS tried hard to kill the bugs before release. But I suspect they released early to beat OFP2 to the market. My question is, is this really fair on the fans? I guess one way to look at it is to pretend that they haven't actually released the game yet and all we're getting is a sneak preview and the real game will be released in a few months when that inevitable 1gb patch turns up :) But like I said before I don't think there's any other game on the market that people would be so forgiving for. And before I get accused of being overly negative I do want to say thanks to BIS for actually being that one developer who actually brings this type of game to us. Really, your games have brought me more hours of fun than any other. Which is why it hurts so much that this one is broken!

Edited July 7, 2009 by stagga

[cartier90 0]

Course, tbh I find it very annoying that generally I can run the game well in the editor but the later missions crawl. Its the degree of rants that I suppose some cant stand. History has taught us that BIS support their games and do work on issues so its just a matter of time till things are fixed.

None of the games you mention are as complex as ARMA or deal with a terrain as large ( and dense ) . LOMAC was shambolic at release as well ! . I suppose I am slightly blinded by enjoyment of other parts of the game, not too mention Im not keen on several aspects of the campaigns mission structure. There you go - try and take from it what you can.

[maddogx 13]

@cartier90,

you pretty much nailed it. :)

Just to add my €0.02, I think no one here can honestly argue with the fact that the game is bugged. It's not the complaints themselves but their tone and wording that gets people labelled as trolls. Signing up on the forums just to post an epic thousand-word rant about how the game is broken and you want your money back and everyone who likes the game must be a fanboy and it all just OMG WTF suxx0rs just won't earn you any sympathy here. Hyperbole and insults won't fix your game, and honestly no one here gives a damn if you want to return it to the store.

And no, just because you are solely interested in the campaign, doesn't mean the entire game is broken just because the campaign doesn't work properly. I took part in a 2 hour long 80-player PvP battle on Sunday and it was fucking awesome. I guess the game isn't quite so broken after all.

[An Fiach 10]

@ Stagga, you are misinterpreting what he said. He was referring to the tolerances of the series' fan base. Those other niche games you mentioned? None of them are sandbox games. Here is the deal, I have yet to encounter any sandbox game that is not completely loaded with issues. I think it is the nature of the beast. You end up with small companies taking on huge tasks that the big gaming companies will not even touch, doing the best that they can.

What makes these things succeed or fail is the relationship the developers have with their community and their dedication to making things better/right. The size and quality of the community is a close second. In the short time that I have been a member of this community (can be measured in weeks) BIS has moved to #2 on my list in that regard and that is saying a lot.

Myself, I'm stuck on the campaign, don't know if it is an issue with the game so much as I wasn't paying attention to the dialog and I'm at a loss as what to do next. I'll update you when I can, but so far I haven't encountered any game breaking bugs (I have the Steam version). Most of us seem to agree though that the campaign is of relatively poor quality in regard to story line and mission structure. The truth is though that the majority of people do not play this game for the campaign as it is a small portion of the game's scope.

[froggyluv 2136]

@ Stagga, you are misinterpreting what he said. He was referring to the tolerances of the series' fan base. Those other niche games you mentioned? None of them are sandbox games. Here is the deal, I have yet to encounter any sandbox game that is not completely loaded with issues. I think it is the nature of the beast. You end up with small companies taking on huge tasks that the big gaming companies will not even touch, doing the best that they can.

.

This is a truth not to be overlooked. To act as if BIS game's are far below the Gold Standard of the mil-Sim market is a fallacy. Like it or not, they set the standard. It is no mystery why other companies with far larger budgets and manpower do not even attempt a game as vast as an Arma2 opting to go the far less tedious (and buggy) routes of removing AI, shrinking the map size into a controlled environment and/or limiting the amount of units. CM's ambitions are case in point -they actually are trying to create that 'new engine' that certain people are clamouring for, whether or not they pull it off remains to be seen, but we have already witnessed them retracting on the initial goal to create "The True Successor to OFP" to now "It will retain some of the Spirit of OFP".

I see nothing wrong and everything right with individuals reporting bugs and working collectively to make Arma2 a better performing less buggy experience but to those who want to take every opportunity to just bash it at every chance completely oblivious or antaganostic to the majority who actually are enjoying the game, I ask, what game does set the standard in the mil-sim market?

[eyetumor 10]

the bottom line is that at the end of the day, no matter how many things do work right in the game, the ones that don't work right, make the experience a very frustrating and disapointing undergo.

I care about this game...I really do. Thats the reason why i get so frustrated. In my honest opinion, this game was not ready to get shiped out. Its at beta stage at the very best right now. I don't mind having to wait extra if it's for the good of the game.

This game is not ready. Period.

[froggyluv 2136]

the bottom line is that at the end of the day, no matter how many things do work right in the game, the ones that don't work right, make the experience a very frustrating and disapointing undergo.

I care about this game...I really do. Thats the reason why i get so frustrated. In my honest opinion, this game was not ready to get shiped out. Its at beta stage at the very best right now. I don't mind having to wait extra if it's for the good of the game.

This game is not ready. Period.

I feel ya mate but why repeat that disappointment ad-nauseum? I was prepared to wait 6 months-year, before buying it but after reading posters who had similar tastes as mine I decided to take the gamble and have enjoyed it ever since. Do I want AI fixing/performance patches? You bet your monkey's banana I do but I knew that going into it. I'd rather have the game now and grow with the patches than wait another 2 years for a more polished version.

Why not shelve it or start issues on the Community Issue Tracker and get more proactive. It sure beats wallowing in misery mate...

[cartier90 0]

Who knows what pressure BIS was under to release, their not exactly prolific in releasing games...

[Dallas 9]

the bottom line is that at the end of the day, no matter how many things do work right in the game, the ones that don't work right, make the experience a very frustrating and disapointing undergo.

I care about this game...I really do. Thats the reason why i get so frustrated. In my honest opinion, this game was not ready to get shiped out. Its at beta stage at the very best right now. I don't mind having to wait extra if it's for the good of the game.

This game is not ready. Period.

You have not understood what you bought, you mistakenly demanding something finished. It is not, it's LEGO.

[Scrub 0]

Hey, you're in Chernarus.. It's different here, watch it grow, get better. It's a different developmental policy then the norm, for a different game than the norm. You invested the money, and from BIS's track record, it'll pay off. Be patient. (and please don't start with the 'ya, ya patience.. How long will that take?' Ed Grubermann stuff, lol)

@eyetumor: It's great you will wait for it to be released.. Is it so bad that you can now enjoy those working aspects of the game while you do? ;)

Edited July 7, 2009 by Scrub

[irishbloke 10]

Just want to add my impressions i love the game the first mission was intence and reminded me of the feeling i had playing Operation Flashpoint. The performance of the first mission was good had the details cranked up but the 2nd one in the town slowed my PC to a halt where i had to fiddle with the settings and sorta ruined the immersion and enjoyment of the game.

However hopefully future patches will fix performance problems my PC is fairly good.

AMD Phenom BE 9850 x4,4 gigs Ram,ATI Radeon 4870 512mb,Vista 64Bit

[mlmcasual 10]

I am seriously doubting a Patch will make significant performance gains. You are dealing with a 10 year old engine that has been bolted onto. I was thinking it was the AI that was causing the low FPS tiring editor with no AI am still getting very low framerates.

As far as the Fanboy argument, The bar of what is acceptable is Obviously set at completely different levels between the two groups. If 20 FPS with low settings on a high end PC is acceptable and only portions of the game work and you call that acceptable, more power to you. I mean heh, the Dukenukem forever fans had to take on some new project why not Arma2? ;) lol.. To be fair I would like to see what a or prospecting customer new to this franchise would say if you told them it has alot of small and some large game breaking bugs but other parts of the game works and you can get 20 fps on a high end machine at low graphics settings. Let that be the test of full disclosure. Ultimately no one can tell YOU what is acceptable and what isn't.. You may think my bar is too high expecting over 30FPS and non showstoping bugs but it's my bar. Iv purchased the game so am on for the ride.. Well at least till *cough* OFP2 comes out..

Edited July 8, 2009 by mlmcasual

[Alphadriver 10]

Hello

I would like to purchase ARMA 2, but I am not sure if my computer will be able to handle it.

Not too tech savay but willing to learn in order play this exciting game.

My System as follows:

Power Spec brand computer

Windows Vista

2GB of RAM

32 bit Operating System

Intel®Core2cpw 4300@1.80GHZ

NVIDIA GeForce 8500GT

Should I purchase more RAM,upgrade a video card or a new system all together?

Thanks for your help!

Alphadriver

[funkee 0]

you didn't say anything about your motherboard chipset which is very important, but what you listed above (especially CPU) is not enough to run the game smoothly. I would suggest you some high-end Intel Core2Duo or (better but more expensive option) one of the Core2Quad processors and GTX260-GTX285 / ATI 4870 or higher video card. amount of RAM doesn't matter to the framerate and I think 2GB will be quite enough.

[cartier90 0]

Mlm - Patches made quite a difference to performance of ARMA. I have a mid-high end machine - I7 - GTS250 - 4GB and get 30fps not 20. Thats in a hefty battle as well.

[Master gamawa 0]

Oh shit I forgot to mention something.

Don't you guys thinks that the campaign has less action and violence than... Armed Assault? Or many other war games?

Maybe it's because of this Recon business but it just occurred to me. I hardly ever used my gun. I was mostly driving around the beautiful countryside doing errands for the army and trying to keep my team alive.

Maybe it seems like that because in the previous games I also played as a pilot, a commander in a tank, as a foot soldier, a recon unit, a prisoner etc..

I don't know... I still love this damn game the same way I would love my retarded kid. This is my "special" little game!

[Journeyman 0]

I am seriously doubting a Patch will make significant performance gains. You are dealing with a 10 year old engine that has been bolted onto. I was thinking it was the AI that was causing the low FPS tiring editor with no AI am still getting very low framerates.

As far as the Fanboy argument, The bar of what is acceptable is Obviously set at completely different levels between the two groups. If 20 FPS with low settings on a high end PC is acceptable and only portions of the game work and you call that acceptable, more power to you. I mean heh, the Dukenukem forever fans had to take on some new project why not Arma2? ;) lol.. To be fair I would like to see what a or prospecting customer new to this franchise would say if you told them it has alot of small and some large game breaking bugs but other parts of the game works and you can get 20 fps on a high end machine at low graphics settings. Let that be the test of full disclosure. Ultimately no one can tell YOU what is acceptable and what isn't.. You may think my bar is too high expecting over 30FPS and non showstoping bugs but it's my bar. Iv purchased the game so am on for the ride.. Well at least till *cough* OFP2 comes out..

IMO above all else it's the performance issues that BIS need to address first. I can get some pretty good frames on my old 8800GTS 512mb and Core 2duo 3.0ghz with 4mb ram (by old I mean built last year!), but it is moments when you zoom in on that enemy through your scope just has he turns to face you, then suddenly you've got a slide show!! ARGH! So he lowers his gun, gets out a fag and says "When you're ready mate!" Well actually not, you just get shot, and not because you were a shit shooter but because your PC suddenly couldn't handle looking through a scope! It sucks!

My rig might not be top notch but it plays every other recent shooter on high or very high with fluidity. These are definitely BIS' performance and optimisation issues and have been reported many times. If these issues are not fixed soon there will be a lot of folks migrating to another very similar game coming soon.

I love this game, so I will be very disappointed if performance is not given priority in the next patch! :)

[stagga 10]

Oh shit I forgot to mention something.

Don't you guys thinks that the campaign has less action and violence than... Armed Assault? Or many other war games?

Maybe it's because of this Recon business but it just occurred to me. I hardly ever used my gun. I was mostly driving around the beautiful countryside doing errands for the army and trying to keep my team alive.

Maybe it seems like that because in the previous games I also played as a pilot, a commander in a tank, as a foot soldier, a recon unit, a prisoner etc..

I don't know... I still love this damn game the same way I would love my retarded kid. This is my "special" little game!

Absolutely. I think I mentioned this already but yeah, I found the campaign to be not as fun as the older games. I mean I enjoyed what there was but I was expecting it to escalate like it did in the old games and that I'd get to change characters to fly choppers and jets, drive tanks and all the other stuff that we could in OFP. I can see BIS tried to do something new and in a way it's more immersive as they've tried to bring the country to life but there's definitely a lack of variety now. I just feel that they've missed an opportunity with the campaign by just limiting you to the spec ops team. And even WITH that limitation they didn't exactly cover all the mission types. For example the only parachute jump I got to do (remember it was a big thing in the trailer) was from low level into my own base! Why no dropping behind enemy lines to destroy the bridge or other spec ops type missions?

But as you also said I can't stop playing around with it. Hopefully someone will convert the original campaigns into Arma2, that would be amazing!

[MehMan 0]

The enviroment is awsome, but man the campaign annoys me. I mean, the voice acting is sometimes bland, sometimes annoying and I just don't like being the macho main character that I think the character wants to portray me as. Kinda breaks the immersion.

Somebody should make a campaign through the eyes of Colby Buzzell. Because that's where I think I'd be in the end, in the infantry, not the marines, not the SF, nothing special.