ArmA II: Operation Arrowhead discussion thread

[CrazyAviator 10]

Im not too excited about an expansion for a game I cant even get to work

[dm 9]

PS: that is a time related issue for BIS as stated earlier.

No, it isnt. It would be a distribution issue. How would you distribute 6 or 7 GB worth of patch data?

Edited August 26, 2009 by DM

[Defunkt 431]

While I too tire of p75's naive and clumsy (yet somehow strangely entertaining) attempts to manipulate BIS and the modding community et. al, surely all that actually needs to be distributed is a replacement rvmat and the new heat-based texture itself? It's not like you should need to re-download other existing textures/shaders.

[dm 9]

surely all that actually needs to be distributed is a replacement rvmat and the new heat-based texture itself? It's not like you should need to re-download other existing textures/shaders.

A lot of the information is "baked" into the model by binarize during packing - the system is fairly complex, and isnt as easy as simply plugging in an extra texture.

[kozzy420 21]

Im not too excited about an expansion for a game I cant even get to work

If you are having alot of blue screens like it says in your sig, it probably isnt casue dby ARMA2. Blue screen 9 times out of 10 means a hardware problem. Check your ram, videocard,etc... Havnt had one blue screen on ARMA2 yet. Although the last 3 computers ive fixed that had Blue screen where casue by faulty ram and one had an issue with the motherboard. Once in awhile Blue Screen of Death can be caused by driver issues, but most the time its hardware problems. Even if ARMA2 is the only game giving you blue screen, doesnt mean its the game. One computer I worked on only had blue screen on Crysis and no other games, there was a big problem with his ram though, put in new ram and no more blue screen.

[4 IN 1 0]

that sucks. why not? why cant this engine have fully destructible environments? engine cant handle it?

I dont think it the engine that are under power, its the hardward that are under power.

I wish Bis had more staff and backing power. They could make a monster of a game better. However if this game was released say by some modders out there charging a PayPal fee I would still buy it because there is nothing like it out there. I still dont know how they can find the time to make an expansion when there is still so much work that could be done to A2.

like said tens of times before, in the times that BI are making Op arrowhead they still need look into the engine and make some changes in the problem areas and hance will be able to fix bug for a2 at the same time

Edited August 26, 2009 by 4 IN 1

[Fred DM 0]

I dont think it the engine that under power, its the hardward that are under power.

Dice's Frostbite engine features detailed environmental destruction and requires only an xbox 360 or a PS3 in terms of hardware. but then again, that engine was built from the ground up for destruction. the ArmA 2 engine simply wasn't built for that kind of destruction, and we should be glad we got at least partial destruction.

people should stop demanding everything for ArmA 2. it's getting annoying.

[4 IN 1 0]

Dice's Frostbite engine features detailed environmental destruction and requires only an xbox 360 or a PS3 in terms of hardware. but then again, that engine was built from the ground up for destruction. the ArmA 2 engine simply wasn't built for that kind of destruction, and we should be glad we got at least partial destruction.

people should stop demanding everything for ArmA 2. it's getting annoying.

dont forget there is a problem with the scale ans size too

[spooky lynx 73]

is anyone really going to NOT buy OA?

Me. If it will have the same amount of bugs that ArmA2 1.0 had. The time will show, what release version of OA will look like. So, let's not be hurry.

It's indeed a bit sad to know this but on the other hand it should be clear to anyone that making all vehicles and units FLIR compatible is an insane amount of work for which there is simply not enough time.

Agree, it's an insane amount of work. But BIS aren't modmakers but devs, and their work is paid. So personally me would prefer to wait some more time but to get more advanced expansion and vanilla game rather than another modpack by devs and the same situation as that with ArmA1.

[dm 9]

Dice's Frostbite engine features detailed environmental destruction and requires only an xbox 360 or a PS3 in terms of hardware.

The frostbite engine is also only capable of creating 2x2 or 4x4 km areas to play in (beyond that is a 32x32 "skybox" for aesthetics only - you cant go there)

[SASrecon 0]

BIS should sell 2 versions of OA;

one as an expansion pack for ARMA2 sold for half the price of a normal game.

one as a standalone game Sold at full game price.

This way BIS will make more money from the game, there will be a very clear community split instead of say, if you have OA and not ARMA2 and theres a server with ARMA2 content on it, you'll be frustrated because you can't play on it.

If however OA is sold the way suggested above, OA standalone players will only play on OA servers.

The only problem i see with this is that you can go from having ARMA2 to OA, but you can't go from OA standalone to buying ARMA2 for more content :( unless... they also release an ARMA2 expansion sold at half price for OA players :D

Bah whatever, BIS' choice, i'm giving them my support all the way, i'm just thinking of ways to stop whingers whinging

Me. If it will have the same amount of bugs that ArmA2 1.0 had. The time will show, what release version of OA will look like. So, let's not be hurry.

I've got a feeling BIS will get this one right, it already looks half-finished in the video of GC09 and they've always been good at expansion packs.

Remember ARMA1? it used to be sh*tty till patch 1.08 was released and that was at the same time as the QG expansion pack. BIS have fierce loyalty to their fanbase and work hard for money and the sense of accomplishment which is unique to the military simulators they make and i wish them a lot of good luck with their new project ;)

[BobbyDylan 10]

I got high hopes. If it's more mission based and less script based it should be fine. The communtiy has done some pretty damn good missions already. Given the new local... I'm quite optermistic. If OPFDR disapoints (which it looks like it will) this might get my next pre-order.:bounce3:

[echo1 0]

BIS should sell 2 versions of OA;

one as an expansion pack for ARMA2 sold for half the price of a normal game.

one as a standalone game Sold at full game price.

This way BIS will make more money from the game, there will be a very clear community split instead of say, if you have OA and not ARMA2 and theres a server with ARMA2 content on it, you'll be frustrated because you can't play on it.

If however OA is sold the way suggested above, OA standalone players will only play on OA servers.

I don't get your point, surely if you still only have a standalone OA edition, you'll still end up with the problem of some people only being able to play on OA servers, and the people who have the original ArmA 2 are still only going to have ArmA 2 anyway?

[Fred DM 0]

The frostbite engine is also only capable of creating 2x2 or 4x4 km areas to play in (beyond that is a 32x32 "skybox" for aesthetics only - you cant go there)

well, i don't know about that. what a game does and what it could do are usually two different matters. especially since Dice is improving the engine for BFBC2 and porting it over to the PC.

but it should be obvious by now that you can't have the scale of ArmA 2 and the destruction of BFBC at the same time. the hardware is simply not here, yet. not on a large enough scale, anyway. that's why it doesn't make sense to keep making demands that cannot realistically be met, yet.

some people here apparently have no idea what the gaming industry as a whole looks like today, and where the limits currently are.

[echo1 0]

Well then ArmA 2 shouldn't use that engine, because scale is it's main selling point.

[PuFu 4600]

A lot of the information is "baked" into the model by binarize during packing - the system is fairly complex, and isnt as easy as simply plugging in an extra texture.

I doubt it would be 6-7 GBs. I can count the size of the p3ds (since that is what it's worth the MBs).

You would need patched:

1. rvmats

2. added new "flir" textures

3. updated models that would incorporate the new textures.

The end result would be, indeed, pretty big.

it's not a hard job, if you got what you need (an example for instance -mlod), to update ALL A2 content. It would be a really boring job and would take a lot of time to do it. Needless to say that the size would be huge, and for the community to be able to host it and then to distribute it...well, not easily possible.

[p75 10]

I doubt it would be 6-7 GBs. I can count the size of the p3ds (since that is what it's worth the MBs).

You would need patched:

1. rvmats

2. added new "flir" textures

3. updated models that would incorporate the new textures.

The end result would be, indeed, pretty big.

it's not a hard job, if you got what you need (an example for instance -mlod), to update ALL A2 content. It would be a really boring job and would take a lot of time to do it. Needless to say that the size would be huge, and for the community to be able to host it and then to distribute it...well, not easily possible.

Torrent technology would help out there.....

[dunedain 48]

Just my opinion, but..

If they don't plan to update old units and weapons with OA's features "IR lasers, FLIR, Flashlight ect.." on the merged install because of a lack of time, technique issues ect.. which I can understand well. I'ld not see any other interest in this "merged install" than hush some unhappy customers with nice prospects..

I mean anyway if you own OA and want to play with Arma2 you'll have to install both and even if it "saves" time to use a single shortcut, still the problem of mission makers that may use contents from both games, not cool for those who won't have both Arma2.

I would rather wait for a community made Arma2 pack, and let Arma2 and Arma2 OA as two different games.

When I heard of this I was like "cool we'll see something like Maddox Games did with its combat flight simulator (FB, PF, AE, Pe2 ect..)" a game that takes profit of its sequel's features when merged. But now I'm kinda disapointed even if I still really interested by what Operation Arrowhead will provide.

I personally think that BiS should focus on both games separately, fix Arma2 and make OA worth its 30€ rather than wasting valuable time in something shaky.

Edited August 26, 2009 by dunedain

[Lauri90 10]

How can it be exspansion, when it is standalone? Im sure it will cost a full game price, something like arma 2 is.

[TimRiceSE 10]

Yeah. im sure it will cost full price too.

Oh wait.

What is the price for the expansion?

BIS: A medium ranged price, not a full price like for a regular new game.

[Fred DM 0]

How can it be exspansion, when it is standalone? Im sure it will cost a full game price, something like arma 2 is.

Commandos - Beyond the Call of Duty

Company of Heroes - Opposing Fronts

Crysis - Warhead

Civilization 4 - Colonization

all expansion packs. all stand-alone. so not exactly a new sales model. ;)

[JuggernautOfWar 1]

Commandos - Beyond the Call of Duty

Company of Heroes - Opposing Fronts

Crysis - Warhead

Civilization 4 - Colonization

all expansion packs. all stand-alone. so not exactly a new sales model. ;)

...and Company of Heroes - Tales of Valor, but that sucked. This is not anything new.

[jonneymendoza 10]

Dice's Frostbite engine features detailed environmental destruction and requires only an xbox 360 or a PS3 in terms of hardware. but then again, that engine was built from the ground up for destruction. the ArmA 2 engine simply wasn't built for that kind of destruction, and we should be glad we got at least partial destruction.

people should stop demanding everything for ArmA 2. it's getting annoying.

im not demanding everything. im just suggesting a feature they can have in Arma 2. Jeez man

[Fred DM 0]

im not demanding everything. im just suggesting a feature they can have in Arma 2. Jeez man

i didn't necessarily mean you. ;) just in general; people here tend to demand every little thing an action-oriented game could possibly ever have, which leads me to believe they know nothing about gaming in general and what is feasible today. makes you wonder what the devs think... :o

[Defunkt 431]

I know, it's awesome that the developers post in these forums but I also cringe every time thinking of the ingratitude they must be confronted by.