ArmA II Game Of The Year Nomination?

[walker 0]

Hi all

Do you think ArmA II should be nominated for Game Of The Year?

Kind Regards walker

[kremator 1064]

YES YES YES !

Show me where to click for the vote !

[walker 0]

Hi Kremator

It seems you like have to write the poll after you write the post in this Forum.

Kind Regards walker

Edited June 27, 2009 by walker

[Windexglow 10]

It should be game of the year.

But it won't, as that title goes to bland games with massive budgets and publicity. Arma2 does not fit any of those 3 criteria.

[KeyCat 131]

Would love to see it nominated and of course win but to be honest ArmA II is not really there yet!

Many people experiencing various issues (myself included) which I'm sure will be sorted out by BIS in upcoming patches, I say ask again in 4-5 months.

/KC

[Potatomasher 0]

It definetly should be, but like someone mentioned one of those mainstream BS games takes the trophy more likely.

Because we have to face it. Even though most of us here think this is something like second coming of Jesus, but most of the regular gamers like easy COD like games.

What is important is that BIS continues to make these kind of warfare simulators to minority even though it isn't as profitable as making mainstream games.

Edited June 27, 2009 by Potatomasher

[Heatseeker 0]

No way jose...

[froggyluv 2130]

No way jose...

Yes way Ese!

Despite it's bugs and the well known growing pains of BI games, it's a keeper and no other game that I've seen or heard of comes close to the scale, mil-porn fun, and ultimately longevity of this grand title.

[dunedain 48]

It should be game of the year.

But it won't, as that title goes to bland games with massive budgets and publicity. Arma2 does not fit any of those 3 criteria.

Whereas Ofp has been Goty ...

I voted no, not at its current status.

[WhoCares 0]

...

I voted no, not at its current status.

I highlighted the important part - considering that BIS has another half a year to iron out the bigger problems, by the time of the GOTY elections next year ArmA2 might have turned in a(n almost) perfectly polished game. :rolleyes:

[dunedain 48]

Armed Assault is a perfectly polished game to you ?

Don't get me wrong i love this game its much better than Arma but Ofp got the title because it was really innovating, back in july 2001 it was the best virtual experience i ever had.

I don't feel the same 8 years later on Armed Assault and even ArmA2, so wait&see. :)

Edited June 27, 2009 by dunedain

[Azamato 0]

It could easily be Game of the last 2 years.. but since we got MW2, AC2 etc this year ...

[Binkowski 26]

Sure why not? But then again, the simulation community isn't to large and this game isn't as popular as TEH CALL OF DUTEHZ! But yeah. I think it should.

[privatenoob 0]

Who are the dumbf**** that voted no?!

Its the game of the millenium even at this state, if you cant run the game on your homebuild economical computer, dont blame the game for that.

[Blake 0]

Definately worth a GOTY even at this stage. The feeling of war has never felt so real in any other game in my opinion.

One contender could be strategy game Hearts of Iron 3 if it delivers what is promised. But it's unlikely winner, being a bit of a hard-corish WW2 grand strategy game.

Mainstream games will win the title this year.

[cartier90 0]

I cant see any other game reaching anywhere near the immersive nature of Chernarus.

Iv never seen vegetation like it over such a sprawling environment, and bugs ! and chickens !

This isnt really a game, more a training tool, as VBS demonstrated - you 'live' your character, not play it.

[HunterPT 10]

In short no. Now the long version, it could be game of the year if we where living in a world where a game only had to be good for the hardcore PC gamers, unfortunatly we don't live in such world and as such the game doesn't even qualify to make the list, it has to many bugs, it's way to hard to get into it, it isn't forgiving, it's way to complex, etc... etc... Basically it has to many things that keep it from being a public wide game, and as such it will not be GoTY nominee and it shouldn't be.

I would like to clarify although I'm saying this I truly love the game, I have reinstalled the OS to windows 7, bought the game before the demo came out, bought a new graphic card just for it, and will probably end up spending around 1000€ for it (graphic card included, but excluded the trackIR/Freetrack), I have been playing the demo (still waiting for the copy) and loving every minute of it, even when I fall in the water with the parachute and get to the shore with absolutely no weapons. But seeing things in a objective manner I just simply cannot justify a GoTY nomination, I can however justify a nomination for something like "Boundary pushing game".

[Heatseeker 0]

Call me whatever you want, i voted no and its a realistic opinion.

Arma II is not polished enough, there are bugs in the game content, in the missions, in the campaign...

Arma II is not very well optimised, or atleast its requirements are too steep for the little improvement it brings over the first Arma (have you been online yet?).

Arma II is not a revolutionary or even evolutionary upgrade from Arma, its pretty much the same game with a few changes and some minor improvements, more like a standalone expantion.

The a.i. is a good improvement but not a major one.

Vehicle simulation, physics, colision detection, etc is the same, even if there were no bugs and performance was awsome (i wish it was) i still think Arma II is just Armed Assault somewhere else.

A game of the year needs to put something new on the table. OPF did it, Armed Assault brought us new technology, Arma II?

Edited June 27, 2009 by Heatseeker

[Sturmer 10]

Voted also no.

Not as its current status. But this game has lot of potential to be game of the year.

Will see how much Bohemia is ready to change and fix game.

[Thunderbird 0]

Arma II is not polished enough, there are bugs in the game content, in the missions, in the campaign...

Arma II is not very well optimised, or atleast its requirements are too steep for the little improvement it brings over the first Arma (have you been online yet?).

All nowadays games have bugs, I haven't seen a bugs-free game since years, and if you look carefully at the most successful games (such as GTA IV or COD 4, you will notice that these both got horrible bugs at their releases and GTA 4 was way from being optimized... not to mention you had to wait for many patches before this aspect gets a little enhanced).

Furthermore, ArmA II bugs compared to what does the game bring and to what the game IS, is just not comparable.

Regarding the optimization of ArmA II, well, with the new patch 1.02, things seem to be slightly better and we all know here that soon or later, the performance will get fixed with the upcoming patches.

You have been long enough here to know how things do evolve, of course, they don't always change as we want them to be, but at least, they change, heh.

Regards,

TB

Edited June 27, 2009 by Thunderbird

[wipman 1]

Hi, i've voted No. Because with the ammount of bugs that it have rightnow... i'll vote

for a beat up instead for the Game Of The Year award, and i'll change my vote... . Let's C ya

[HunterPT 10]

All nowadays games have bugs, I haven't seen a bugs-free game since years, and if you look carefully at the most successful games (such as GTA IV or COD 4, you will notice that these both got horrible bugs at their releases and GTA 4 was way from being optimized... not to mention you had to wait for many patches before this aspect gets a little enhanced).

Furthermore, ArmA II bugs compared to what does the game bring and to what the game IS, is just not comparable.

Regarding the optimization of ArmA II, well, with the new patch 1.02, things seem to be slightly better and we all know here that soon or later, the performance will get fixed with the upcoming patches.

You have been long enough here to know how things do evolve, of course, they don't always change as we want them to be, but at least, they change, heh.

Regards,

TB

Yes but not all games came out like arma 2 did with 1.00, and even with the 1.02 still has good share of bugs, they are probably not that major but still it affects the experience, and in all honesty you can't even compare it to GTA IV, the performance in GTA IV was horrible in the PC, it run pretty well in the xbox 360 and PS3 and the nominations where for those platforms, also the game was pretty much for everyone, it was easy to get in to it, it had depth, it was also huge, it brought new things in what concerns animations with the euphoria engine, and the all product was top quality very high budget stuff (100 million dollars to make lol). Not saying that it has more merit than arma 2, I'm just saying that are 2 completely different products and one is much more suitable for the general public while the other (arma 2) is much better for the hardcore people.

[Heatseeker 0]

All nowadays games have bugs, I haven't seen a bugs-free game since years, and if you look carefully at the most successful games (such as GTA IV or COD 4, you will notice that these both got horrible bugs at their releases and GTA 4 was way from being optimized... not to mention you had to wait for many patches before this aspect gets a little enhanced).

Yes TB, but GTA IV was a huge technical achievement and step up to the GTA series, it introduced new graphics, euphoria, great physics, advanced vehicle damage, etc all in a very large, open game. The steep requirements were justified by the fact it was a console port wich is even more impressive (that the game ran on console specifications).

Furthermore, ArmA II bugs compared to what does the game bring and what the game IS, is just not comparable.

Thats my point, Arma II doesnt bring a whole lot more to the series than Armed Assault already did few years ago :confused: .

[MehMan 0]

GTA IV has a very limited view distance, a very limited MP and it's not persistent in it's world. The enviroment is pretty much static(buildings can't be torn down, trees are static, not much to destroy). GTA really wasn't a huge technical achivement. It had it's fair share of bugs and tried only a part of the huge world size that arma2 is doing.

Thats my point, Arma II doesnt bring a whole lot more to the series than Armed Assault already did few years ago

It looks better, plays better, is much smoother, AI is way better, atmosphere is better, content is better. It's better overall.

[tac.Witness 10]

No way should this be nominated for game of the year. It's bug-ridden, clunky and character movement is the equivalent of typing with mittens on. Bleh. This needs to get better, FAST.