My impressions after 20 hours of play

[Rhammstein 10]

Well, my impressions have changed greatly. Now that I have a lot of experience with it, and I've gotten used to it, it's become great. I'm thoroughly enjoying the campaign, every mission is top notch, and I've enjoyed replaying every one of them several times, trying different approaches. I'm now playing on the hardest difficulty setting and enjoying every moment.

Honestly, even tho they call it a simulator, I didn't believe at any point my real world military background would help me in any way, but maybe it has, I can't tell. It's certainly helped me transition from ten years of team deathmatch type FPS gaming, to this game. The one thing most obvious for any soldier, like myself, involved in the recent conflict in Iraq/Afghanistan is something I think would have brought a great deal of excitement to this game. It's something missing that just shouldn't be, in Single Player, NOT multiplayer. And what this is, is the complete disregard for how many of these operations would be run, hence, the kicking in of doors, and searching room by room, building by building. Secondly the lack of roadside bombs, this would have been IMHO an extraordinary approach to realism/immersion. The lack of IED's I can live with, no big deal, and perhaps even makes sense, when obviously many of the civilians in the area of operation are sympathetic to those mentioned in game.

Okay that wasn't really what I wanted to address. I'm loving this game, it "feels" good, movement is rock solid, (I'm a modder [[One of the many who worked very hard on the Stalker games just repairing game breaking bugs so people who couldn't play, could do so, and later on helped with other enhancement type modds]] so I kinda feel like I can judge a game//sim, especially this one, given my military background) it really is, I feel the speed of the movement is right. I like the binoculars, and and movement as you make pulling them out, um, off the realism joint for a sec, I like that the enemies drop their gear, I would've been pretty damn disapointed had that not been done.

Only one thing is troubling me, although I'm still in the process of figuring out if it's something they spent time working on, and if, at all, it's something they tried to simulate, and that's ballistics/gunplay. Maybe somebody can throw me a bone here, save me the trouble. And I don't just mean, muzzle velocity and stopping power of each gun, I'm talking like, when firing a weapon, does that round drop over a distance, these are my questions. So far only one game I've played has had incredible realism with this, even tho a few guns weren't accurate, they were fixed in patches. That came is Stalker - Clear Sky. Now, this isn't the first Stalker game, the first was Shadow of Chernobyl, although the newer of the two, Clear Sky was a prequel to Shadow of Chernobyl. The A-life system is the most impressive part of the game, but the incredible realism of the weapons blew my mind and I'm not sure even Arma 2, or any Arma game can mess with Stalker. These fella's at GSC weren't playing around, they got it right. The Stalker series is by far my favorite games ever outside of the sims of play, but I don't compare apples to oranges. However I do think it's fair to compare weapon realism from a "game" such as Stalker, to that of a military simulator.

So, I'd love to know exactly how realistic the weapons are, it's just too hard to tell in the gameplay. Whereas in stalker, it's very easy. Anyways, Arma II I don't know yet, so without including Arma 2 in my next comment, Stalker - Clear Sky (I chose the newer Stalker game because it's much improved) without a doubt has the most realistic gun play, mechanics, ballistics, you name it. Arma not included, all other game developer should look to the Stalker series for an example of gun play, nothing feels more real.

Sorry about the length, if you made it through, great, feel free to respond, I really do seek info on the realism of the weapons, such as: Sound, rate of fire, magazine size, the look (3d model), realistic accuracy, recoil; although much of this I can live without if innacurate, one thing I expect of a military simulator is real world effects on rounds fired. For example, pulling out your rifle, and (and this would be the luckiest shot ever, but it's only an example to make a point) taking aim on a target around, hmm, 400 yards would be ridiculous, so, lets so I boot into Arma 2, load a mission, etc etc, locate enemy, I have say, an AK, great rifle, and obviously not a sniper rifle, and I line up perfectly, forget my skills, I get my enemy in my crosshairs, I'm not aim up, down, I'm aiming "straight" at him, and I just happen to be perfectly lined up for a hit, I fire, and score a hit; this would piss me off, the bullet would have run into the ground well before reaching the target.

Okay maybe I didn't need to explain myself to this extent, but I'm developing passion for this simulator and I want to know what's up with this aspect of the game. I don't think the weather is dynamic or affect the game in any way, so I won't even ask about it. Thank you for any and all input.

P.S. If I could get only one answer, I would want answered what I asked about last, does it bullet drop as it should, and if so, does it so so at the rate it should, and does it differ with each weapon, because weapon, configuration of weapon> (silencer), ammo type and muzzle velocity are all contributing factors, there are more but these are what matter and what belong in a simulator. Or at least some, I'd be happy, like I said, with just realistic physics on the ammo.

Thanks again, and absolutely any info at all will be appreciated. In the meantime I'll use the editor and test what I can. Hopefully this game will utilize the Nvidia physx ability of my Gpu's, or at least one. If not there must be a thread for physics (Like a game that uses Havoc)

Edited September 4, 2009 by Rhammstein

[Apache-Cobra 0]

Ballistics are modeled fairly accurately in this game. Try going into the editor and using a vehicle. You'll be able to see the bullet-drop easily.

[randir14 10]

Bullet penetration is bad though, you can shoot through an A-10 canopy with a 9mm.

It's cool that you're a modder for Stalker, I used to play the hell out of that game especially with the Oblivion Lost mod. There's actually an mod based on Stalker (I don't know if it's for ArmA 1 or 2) called NightStalkers - Shadow of Namalsk.

Edited September 4, 2009 by randir14

[Rhammstein 10]

Ballistics are modeled fairly accurately in this game. Try going into the editor and using a vehicle. You'll be able to see the bullet-drop easily.

I'll try that. Thx apache. But can you explain a little more what you mean, how using a vehicle will help me see that, thx.

And randir14, are you active in the GSC Community forums at all? Anyways, that's great, then you know exactly what I'm talking about when I mention how incredible the gun play is in Stalker..although one or two weapons are off a bit. Well only one, I forget the in game name, but it's a M-16, in Clear Sky everyone uses it in the Dark Valley.

Edited September 4, 2009 by Rhammstein

[randir14 10]

And randir14, are you active you the GSC Community forums at all?

I used to post there a lot before Clear Sky came out, not much anymore. Maybe Call of Pripyat will bring me back.

[dogz 10]

Rhammstein

I find ur post a little confusing... first you say you have a military background then dont seem to really understand what its like shooting the type of weapons modeled...

an AK will shoot 400m without hitting the ground if it is aimed correctly although it wont have much remaining energy and even if it would not be easy it is still possible to hit targets at that range, by zeroing or holding over...

Then you say you have played the game and have not noticed the very different ballistics for various weapons in game and you have not noticed the very obvious bullet drop over distance?

Without the data we cant know if it simulates RL but I have extensive shooting experience at LR and the game feels right in that regard.

The things that may be too subtle are the recoil on some weapons and the overall volume of them.

The fact is if you are going full auto with an AK or an M249 you cant hear anything else.

The other is how often you can score a LR body hit with a 7.62 rnd and the opfor stays on his feet and turns to return fire without so much as a flinch.( follow up hits drop them)

I can live with any shortfalls with regard to weaps they feel pretty good.

I can only see this game getting better with time.

ps ppl should not compare the performance of this game/sim to most the others out there as it has way more going on in the game world than just about any other title out there.

Edited September 4, 2009 by dogz

[interox 10]

Bullet drop. Watch the tracer fire, as an ex soldier you would know this.

[Thirdup 0]

P.S. If I could get only one answer, I would want answered what I asked about last, does it bullet drop as it should, and if so, does it so so at the rate it should, and does it differ with each weapon, because weapon, configuration of weapon> (silencer), ammo type and muzzle velocity are all contributing factors, there are more but these are what matter and what belong in a simulator. Or at least some, I'd be happy, like I said, with just realistic physics on the ammo.

Simple enough to test and see the results yourself. Equip a pistol, go prone, fire it, and watch where the round falls. Now equip a sniper rifle and do the same. The variation is obvious to the naked eye.

I've never tested to see if adding a silencer to a weapon changes the ballistics. I somehow doubt it effects more than the sound in game.

[JackandBlood 10]

Wow you can do the campaign at hard difficulty, that's pretty awesome:eek:. As far as the projectile ballistics modeling goes, I think all the optics are zero'ed to 300m, except for the 0.50 rifles. So for the ACOG for example you start using the lower lines for targets past that range.

I know that in ARMA 1 kinetic energy is a consideration for different calibers at different distances. I made a range with pop-up targets. I practiced at that range obsessively. I found that at around 430m NATO 5.56 will no longer knock down the red targets, u just see a puff of smoke where you hit. Unfortunately I think the ammo is the only consideration, so both the 5.56 marksmen rifle does this as the m4, course the M4 isn't availble with optics for hitting at 430m. There was also a range at which 7.62 NATO would no longer knock down red targets (cant remember, somewhere between 700-800m). I can only assume ARMA 2 would at least have imported that model.

---------- Post added at 10:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:21 PM ----------

As a kinda funny addendum, in ARMA 1 there are sooo many weapons additions (and in time ARMA2 will likely have em). But some modders would create great models and textures but not really configure the weapons performance too well. In particular one mod added Chinese firearms, 5.8x42 rifles. I could hit and knock down targets at 1200m (A range I reserved for the Barrett 0.50) with those Chinese rifles :D. Fun stuff.

[max power 21]

How can someone play the campaign multiple times and not notice the bullet drop?

[.kju 3240]

Try this mission

http://kronzky.info/targetrange/index.htm

[vilas 473]

OFP/AA1/Arma2 are no simulators, they are simulators by title

so when you discuss military aspect - many people who knows configs and etc. will laugh

there is no penetration ability, there is no engine power etc.

simple vehicle has no acceleration but mass and max speed determines it, when you make too small mass - sometimes collision problem

concerning weapon - shoot 2 M249 magazines at armed target :D

in AA1 2 boxes of 5.56 could destroy T72, because in this game there is global armor of unit, there is no diference between ammo like in real life, there is hit power and speed

there is no bulletproof vests, armed sheets of metal/glass etc.

so you can destroy armed vehicle like APC with 9mm pistol bullets here, just shoot 5 magazines of MP5 or etc.

every bullet "takes away" some armor of class (vehicle, unit etc.)

geometry, fire geometry, hitpoints - all things are like in OFP

[Apache-Cobra 0]

I'll try that. Thx apache. But can you explain a little more what you mean, how using a vehicle will help me see that, thx.

You can zoom in with the optics in most (all?) vehicles and clearly watch the tracer rounds fall and slow down over distance. I believe damage is actually dependent on the speed of the bullet in ArmA 2, so the further the round travels, the less force it will have. You can also witness the penetration in game if for example you place a caliber .50 M2 on the tarmac in Utes and fire some tracer rounds through the northwest hangar. You should be able to see some of the tracer rounds change course as they penetrate and sometimes ricochet off the ground, both nice features that add to the immersion and realism.

[doakwolf 10]

I believe damage is actually dependent on the speed of the bullet in ArmA 2, so the further the round travels, the less force it will have.

I agree. It's quite noticable when using something like the M16 with scope to take long distance shots - often it takes a few 'hits' to bring a man down.

I love the bullet drop, too.

[Rhammstein 10]

I won't take offense to the comments about my military background, I'm asking about a Military Simulator. And I disagree at 400 yards a M16 will be dead on its target, maybe I went to far to say it hitting the ground, but if you think at that range an m16 is going to hit an apple at dead aim, you're wrong.

However I do not debate or argue on the internet, and thanks for the info posted I'll use it, although I've answered most of my questions this morning using the editor and testing for myself. It feels pretty solid and accurate.

Peace.

P.S. You have no idea about my military background and shouldn't make any comment or assumptions as to it, I find it offensive.

Edited September 4, 2009 by Rhammstein

[JackandBlood 10]

OFP/AA1/Arma2 are no simulators, they are simulators by title

so when you discuss military aspect - many people who knows configs and etc. will laugh

there is no penetration ability, there is no engine power etc.

simple vehicle has no acceleration but mass and max speed determines it, when you make too small mass - sometimes collision problem

concerning weapon - shoot 2 M249 magazines at armed target :D

in AA1 2 boxes of 5.56 could destroy T72, because in this game there is global armor of unit, there is no diference between ammo like in real life, there is hit power and speed

there is no bulletproof vests, armed sheets of metal/glass etc.

so you can destroy armed vehicle like APC with 9mm pistol bullets here, just shoot 5 magazines of MP5 or etc.

every bullet "takes away" some armor of class (vehicle, unit etc.)

geometry, fire geometry, hitpoints - all things are like in OFP

Never tried emptying hundreds of small arms rounds in light armor. I did find it odd that when I used the Barrett 0.5 as anti-material rifle, emptied full clips into BRDMs and BMP-2s, no damage. Only damages was when I blow out the BRDMs tires (which a regular rifle could do) or when I hit the tracks on the BMP with a few clips worth. This was in ARMA 1 ver 1.16.

---------- Post added at 02:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:05 AM ----------

I won't take offense to the comments about my military background, I'm asking about a Military Simulator. And I disagree at 400 yards a M16 will be dead on its target, maybe I went to far to say it hitting the ground, but if you think at that range an m16 is going to hit an apple at dead aim, you're wrong.

However I do not debate or argue on the internet, and thanks for the info posted I'll use it, although I've answered most of my questions this morning using the editor and testing for myself. It feels pretty solid and accurate.

Peace.

P.S. You have no idea about my military background and shouldn't make any comment or assumptions as to it, I find it offensive.

I dont think anyone here was implying anything about your military background. (I read the posts, didnt see any offense). In the campaign I dont recall many instances where I had to engage at long ranges, and many times the sit. would call for sneak up for a nice easy firing squad tactic than trying to hit at range and alerting the whole garrison, so I can see how you may not have really encountered the ballistics aspect. Some of my custom missions have me playing sniper, doing targets at 500+m, I get a better sense of the ballistics modeling in those mission than the campaign. From your experience M-16 loses most of its energy at 400yards? That's pretty close to what I saw with 5.56NATO weapons in my ARMA 1 range. Red targets would not drop at around 430m. I'd say BIS did pretty good.

[Second 0]

I at least got the tone from posts that Rhammstein's background isn't taken with full acceptance. Usually bringing military background too visibly to crowd makes crowd to suspect a phony.

General tendency to do that doesn't seem to be now that bad unlike during ArmA's release, lots of phonies seemed to be around.

Heck some were even requested to show they military passport or what ever they have in US military :D (well that was more about which unit and branch one served if i recall)

JackandBlood: Reason why you would like to go antimatrial in ArmA2 with M240 or PKM or similar is that they have volume of fire. Barret aint' much more damage producing weapons. Barret my cause 2-3 three times amount of damage per hit than MG can, but then again M240 can pour more damage to target in much faster time AND shooter still has enough rounds left. M2 is totally different beast of course, as it should be.