What happened to the Ofp way?

[Bulldogs 10]

No probs, I can only remember cause I started playing through both campaigns again this week.

[NZXSHADOWS 0]

I just checked it an this might be off topic abit but i just wanted to show this since some might think the campaign content in Arma 1 was a let down. they must have had to change it due to it being mostly in a different language i dunno.but i wanted to bring this to some ppl's attention that the campaigns are different. Which would make you say that the campaign sucked vs someone saying it was good. So guess it all depends on which version of the game you got your hands on?

Examples are from the same cut scene area. They are like 2 different stories for the campaign. OFP style an WTF is this style. I played the German release campaign because it wasn't in the states yet but when i got it i played the campaign again an was extremely disappointed with the campaign. If im wrong someone clear me up please. Hell maybe this is old news.

Example 1: Arma: Armed Assault German downloaded version.

Example 2: Arma: Combat Operations US version Distributed by Atari

[Guest]

I appreciate the comments -

I know a few said I 'dismissed' the many comments saying the content was that good.. Honestly I really just sort of flew off the handle at the few that somewhat directly attacked me for my posted concerns.. not right.. but still.. I wasn't ignoring anyone.

I am a bit confused, as I have seen numerous posts here from people saying they didn't like the mission content provided, etc.

But I'd be honest to say that the volume of posts here in this topic are HEAVILY leaning towards the fact the content is extremely good, even close to ofp.. Which I would never have expected to hear..

Well..

Me being wrong about all of this, if I am, I can handle.. But I wasn't prepared to possibly change my mind and consider rigging up for this game and buying it..

This is a trip.. Honestly, maybe a big part of it was that Arma1 pissed me off so bad after all the trouble I went through to get it running I just couldn't get past the fact maybe they actually did the mission content right in Arma2..

Going to be a while before I can afford the update here, but I might just have to get this game in x months.. thanks to all of the dang positive comments on it from all you good folks ;)

Cheers!

[viibez 10]

So you're saying ARMA 2 would sell millions of copies if it had no bugs, diving, shooting from vehicles and fastropes?

Sorry, I don't think so.

Besides, Far Cry 2 is the worst example you could have used. It is the most artificially prolonged, annoying and boring game I have ever played.

Sure, it was good and entertaining in the start, but when I had to shoot through the same exact checkpoint for the millionth time I had just about enough.

LOL u dont think so.. more like u dont want it to! u feel like a special group that only certain ppl should be a part of? selfishness..

Yep if the game had less problems more positive things would be said about it, thus more sales. -- example: i pushed this game telling a friend how epic it was (when i was really reminising about OFP) after a month he went out and bought it, i was all excited lets have a game! What do u think of it (arma2)? what would u rate it out of 10? he said its pretty crap (in comparison to my sales pitch!) and he rated it a 5 / 10 :(

anyway this is a ridiculous waste of time trying to make mention our dissapointment to some of you, you only want to hear all positives (reality check is needed), because u live for this game, its all some of u have, so i cant sway u @ all .. lolz

arma 2 straight to the pool room :p

[Bulldogs 10]

arma 2 straight to the pool room :p

heh, great quote.

Anyways... I think it comes down to personal preference and how well it runs. In my line of work I don't really, well... work, at least not very often. But it gives me a lot of time to game (and a lot of money to waste on games), so I buy ay game that comes out with a review of over 70%, and in most cases it comes down to me mixing a new games play time in with Arma 2 play time. The only reason I do this is because all the other games I tend to finish in a matter of hours then have no other use for them.

That's just as a reference of how much time of my life I spend on games (wouldn't use the word "waste", 'cause thanks to games like fallout 3, I'll be ready for when the apocolypse comes :))

Anyways, as I was saying, I find Arma 2 as one of the best games because I can really enjoy hours of straight play for months if not years. I say this because I haven't encountered any game breaking bugs. Matter of fact, I've barely seen any bugs, the only bugs I've encountered that actually annoyed me are the AI driving (admittidly, not really a bug) and the AI pilots (the amount of times I've spent hours setting up a perfect chopper load/unload into heavy enemy combat missions only to start the mission and have all 8 of the choppers fly straight into the trees wiping out the entire US force)

---------- Post added at 02:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:14 PM ----------

I just checked it an this might be off topic abit but i just wanted to show this since some might think the campaign content in Arma 1 was a let down. they must have had to change it due to it being mostly in a different language i dunno.but i wanted to bring this to some ppl's attention that the campaigns are different. Which would make you say that the campaign sucked vs someone saying it was good. So guess it all depends on which version of the game you got your hands on?

Examples are from the same cut scene area. They are like 2 different stories for the campaign. OFP style an WTF is this style. I played the German release campaign because it wasn't in the states yet but when i got it i played the campaign again an was extremely disappointed with the campaign. If im wrong someone clear me up please. Hell maybe this is old news.

(Images)

That's odd, I have the North American version and all the cut scenes are the AAN ones like the one you posted in the first SS. What version do you have? GOTY?

[Monkwarrior 0]

Modders will never make up for the lack of great quality content.. because we do not have the funds nor time to provide what a major gaming company can provide.. and expecting that they will fill the gap equalsOut.

Actually it's the other way around.

Companies can never match the huge load of content a community can produce. Companies provide the tools for that.

I do agree on your statement towards grafics tho, arma1 level is more then fine for me. In fact arma2 offers very little extra for it's price.

Greetingz, Monk.

[NZXSHADOWS 0]

That's odd, I have the North American version and all the cut scenes are the AAN ones like the one you posted in the first SS. What version do you have? GOTY?

I have This one

An this one

You have 505? If so how is the cut scenes for queens gambit are they background picture with a narrator? If not im going to be pissed.

Edited September 25, 2009 by NZXSHADOWS

[Bulldogs 10]

Yeah, my QG version (bought on release) has the black silhouette cut scenes with voice over

[Guest]

Actually it's the other way around.

Companies can never match the huge load of content a community can produce. Companies provide the tools for that.

I do agree on your statement towards grafics tho, arma1 level is more then fine for me. In fact arma2 offers very little extra for it's price.

Greetingz, Monk.

I will agree as far as mass produce goes, but I cannot agree as far as each individual mission goes in quality.

Most gaming companies that release their games have access to large teams, and funds enough to actually pay voice actors for their work.

I played tons of Ofp modded missions, many hailed as "the best'.. and to be honest, only a few rivaled the best Ofp missions that were provided by the game itself in complete overall immersive quality. (as far as Arma1 default missions went.. no need to bother going there.. almost anything was better)

The only major mission that stands out in my mind above all else in Ofp missions was Abandoned Armies.. There was alot of effort even put into the voicings..

But for the most part, I would say that most modded missions provide alot of game play qualities we haven't seen in the standard missions, but as far as overall content goes in quality, there are IMO very few that rival what the companies can produce... There is a gigantic difference between getting a friend or 5 to do voicings in a thrown together padded closet and paying top quality voice actors to do voicings that are using a sealed tight sound proof studio.

Just like Kolgujev Conflict.. it's design was to completely give life to an entire island, mass populate towns, create a huge atmosphere of many many factions warring against eachother.. Sure.. It works.. And ever since it was ported into Arma1.. it STILL works (porting was months of work).. BUT.. BUT

So we pulled it off.. yet what a boring scenario in the details.. although the war is raging across the island.. where is the further content? Where are the embedded missions? Where is the life of the various important npc's in the towns?

See? Without a large team, stuff like this is impossible between just a few modders to pull off. I already spent around 2 years (plus my Rl job) getting up 30 some scripts and 5000 lines of code to get the factional wars working, which works so dang good it's not funny.. were talking an average of 25 fps on a map that is populated with like 3000 units (because of the townHide scripts running), + tanks and artillery, + a universal helo script system for reinforcing towns that CSL originally wrote the scripts for.. great!.. So now what.. Everything else is missing.. EVERYTHING..

Oblivion was able to pull it off, having a gigantic world alive with constant life because of the size of their team, and the funds avaliable.

us as modders, can only do so much. I don't personally think I could ever afford to get Jennifer Hale to voice my female main character in my wip mod BladeSong for Oblivion.. or afford to get similar quality voice actors for a number of other npc's in the mod.. Or can afford to get tons of new weapon and armor models made for it.. etc. We are limited.

Btw.. on a side note I found a femal voice actor that is amazing anyhow.. :D.. but it's beside the point.. normally, it's not there for free.

Edit/

To go a little farther here.

What Kolgujev Conflict needs now is at least 3 or 4 missions per town, which includes the actions of something like 30 npc's, plus voice acting for all of them, plus the scripting involved.. Again.. Oblivion did it.. with an 80 member team.. 2 modders.. heck even 5 modders.. likely impossible.. and even more so.. the bigger a modding team gets.. the less likely things will turn out as expected.. simply because in all truth.. no one can be truly relied on to get things done exactly as the project leader expects due to the simple fact everyone works for free.. and most of the people have RL jobs..

Now take a group of workers in a game project that are actually getting paid for it.. the expectation bar can be raised higher, and amazing things can happen.. but it's unrealistic and even more so.. insensitive for a project leader of a *mod* to *demand* the utmost quality from a small, medium, even large scale team of free working modders.. It's just the way it is.

Edited September 25, 2009 by Guest

[dmarkwick 261]

I suggest you're trying to turn ArmA/ArmA2 into something it was NOT DESIGNED TO BE.

IMO voiced content is the single biggest waste of resources in a game. It's repetitive, inflexible, costly, has a huge footprint, and very rarely sounds convincing.

Unlike read text, you cannot even implement some sort of rudimentary conversation logic without sounding like you're talking to 3 people all with 5 different things to say. It suits linear gameplay but not open gameplay.

Edited September 25, 2009 by DMarkwick

[Guest]

I suggest you're trying to turn ArmA/ArmA2 into something it was NOT DESIGNED TO BE.

IMO voiced content is the single biggest waste of resources in a game. It's repetitive, inflexible, costly, has a huge footprint, and very rarely sounds convincing.

Unlike read text, you cannot even implement some sort of rudimentary conversation logic without sounding like you're talking to 3 people all with 5 different things to say. It suits linear gameplay but not open gameplay.

I do hear you. Although our goal was simply to provide a universal atmosphere of war that made sense in Sp.. I dont see how that equals something ofp/Arma was not designed to be.

If there are enough voice actors, and enough time put into the details, there is no reason why voicings would not work in an 'open style' gameplay scenario.

Note CSL converted over the scripts from the original Ofp created dialog system made by CrashDome.. Which simply meant you could click on a unit and hence bring up a menu based dialog which allowed both full voice and lip sync and allowed implementation of animations as well for any selection made by the player. I had begun to attach these dialog sessions to missions imbedded within the scenario of the island war.. but it stopped rather quickly.. as I realized we have no voice actors.. and the scripting volume required to pull off all of this was not reasonable between a few people..

It's all doable, but requires more than 2 people working for free to do it.

Edit/

Truly, it should be noted that the gameplay style really has nothing to do with what is possible as far as interaction with npc's.

Regardless if its a game more leaning towards 'Linear' or leaning towards open.. anyone who knows how to code can easily setup various scripted scenarios involving conversations amongst various npc's where the player is injected into the scene as well. Further more.. this is what helps hugely to bring to life an in game experience.

Remember one of the early missions from Ofp, where you sat in a circle with the other troopers, and a conversation evolved.. some of the goofy stuff some of them said.. etc.. man.. that was truly epic.. and in the background.. trucks and jeeps rolling by.. A true epic sense of a large scale war going on.. And then the jeep pulls up with the commander and the player ends up taking a ride with him while he talks his jaw off about the war and what's going on?

Then later on.. remember the radio chatter that comes in with the combat going on in the background while their requesting help..

Man! Detailed scenes that are well done that pull the player in have to have great voice acting.. or else it's just robot talk..

It all goes hand in hand. I for one, end up holding on to the great mission content provided when I move into playing Mp missions made by modders.. I still feel like I'm there in their world the original devs made.. just in a new atmosphere..

Lastly.. talk about a game that was *not* designed to provide an atmosphere of constant life and battle.. Ofp/Arma.. no way man.. I disagree. I agree it was never designed for this purpose in direct.. but it also EASILY compliments this sort of mass scale, almost never ending mission.

Simple examples it works fine : Mfcti.. Abandoned Armies.. Warefare..

Those are all across the island full scale wars going on. If you meant Ofp/Arma does not support interaction with other npc's.. take a look at the content in Ofp for all the mission content..

Seriously, IMO, there is probably no other platform out there that would more perfectly suit a mass scale Sp mission that created a constantly evolving and revolving life of war and npc interaction than Ofp/Arma (1/2)..

Some moderately complex scripting is needed to manage the units outside of the players load area.. beyond that.. it's just code for the few towns of current management in loaded area's, and getting great content in there to be avaliable.

Don't beleive me still? The TownHide script system actually saves each individual npc's position at point of hiding.. stores it's routine - are you a patrol? Stores it's patrol routine.. Are you manning a stationary Mg? Stores it and the mg, and will return it once player is in x distance.. Stores tower guards.. and returns them to their correct height position on the tower.. This means - you could populate EVERY town across the map (say 15 towns) with 500 units per town.. patrols, static guards, defensive Mg gunners that are manning Mg's, tower guards, and also civilians that are on simple 'wander' style ai paths.. and the system will remove ALL of them except for the closest town to the player.. which truly equals an island alive with life. (broken down.. One could use the TonwHide system and populate an island with 3000 units, and the player gets a no lag at all from it, except from the lag induced from the nearest town of 'unhidden' occupants)

One might not beleive me still.. I tested the thing 100 times over.. it works. The problem is.. few can use it.. because it take a giant team to pull off properly populating an island like this and be able to include great quality content in size to support the mass population.

Completely doable.

In fact, it's so cool how doable it is.. it's scary.. but that's why my project died.. not because it's not doable.. but because in game content of that scale requires so much effort it is impossible amongst a few modders.. It didn't fail because Ofp/Arma was not designed to do that... it failed because we are not a gaming company, it failed because we don't have the numbers and funding to support that sort of scale in mission content.. i.e.. voice overs.. 'sub' missions.. scripting to pull off both at correct times and locations..

In fact..

This game Ofp/Arma/Arma2 could support something SO truly amazing, it would knock the socks off of everyone for months and months, heck just in SP.. a universal free flowing world of conlfict that made sense, and was constantly evolving.. that the player could take part in and make a difference.. even to go so far as to allow merchants.. weapon and vehicle purchasing.. (at a realistic scale to the somewhat 'mad max' style world.. where an Ak47 is golden (a jeep means your rich..).. etc.. and put in tons of 'sub' quests within the major island conflict.. Like .. Assist in defending a convoy of supplies to an allied town.. or assault an enemy camp of marauders.. And during it all, 25 factions, about half of them allied and half of them 'enemy' wage war across the island.. and if the player does nothing.. most of the allied towns will fall over great time.. but if the player makes an effort to assist.. the Allies might just survive..

This is exactly what kolgujev Conflict (Now Kolgujev Conlfict Arma) does... And it died *not* because the game does not support it.. but because 2 modders can't put in the final *detailed* content to pull it off right.. which would normally take like 10 or more workers that actually were getting paid for it.. plus voice actors..

Anyone remember Twilight 2000.. It was mildly the inspiration behind the concept of Kolgujev Conflict.

Edited September 26, 2009 by Guest

[viibez 10]

ah features content u know what i mean ;)

initially i was a lil unhappy purely because i was having difficulty with the campaign (then i hit revert and it deleted my saved campaign!), thats what lead me to need to vent perhaps, but all is good now.. there is heaps o goodies thanks to the community and the mission editor :)

[DevilBass 0]

I dont like Arma 2, you need to upgrade your computer again to play, Bis just go forward about graphic engine, remove many things, from Ofp and arma, but arma 2 just suck, how many copy you gone a sell for Arma 2? just enought to paid what he cost to create ? am not sure, about that, cause many peoples, not able to play actualy.

Yeah all your right, Ofp, have old engine, but, old engine but amazing gameplay, effects... i remember ECP just add some cool effects, crater on the ground, after hit amour ect... crew just exit , cry and run on fire, thats the small things like that, peoples like, not at all only graphic.

Every compagny not understand business things, and Bis is not and the right position actualy trust me, he turn the success into a big disaster for commercial game sell.

Bis just ask me some things please.

How many copy of Ofp your selling?

How many addons, creating by the community made for Ofp?

How many copy of Arma 1 your selling?

How many addons, creating by the community ?

How many copy your selling of Arma 2 ?

How many addons, creating by the community ?

How many copy your selling of VBS 1?

How many copy your selling of VBS 2?

And how many peoles buy Arma 1 and Arma 2 and never playing? because maximum system specs are crazy, where the middle on thats? graphic things? cmon, am out, tired, playing low settings, just to have some fun.

Poeples, tired, lost moneys just playing game, game costing only 50$ to play? and 600$ and more, because all the time, you need to upgrade your system, to make fun, what a waste of moneys and time.

You gone see here if level up graphic so faster and remove some old shit pay for that.

The big success From Ofp, is lost forever now, if you dont change your mind, and marketing strategy in future, your probably lost all the serious gamer inself, and you probably stop made public game, but sell commercial use only like vsb 3?

Arma 2 is unplayable, they engine is to hight, many good things peoples like, just removing, unrealistic things, adding, removing, + many news bug, engine, stability ect.. what king of the game you try to create? i dont understand.

Sorry for me english... french Canadian here :)

Edited October 3, 2009 by DevilBass

[Bulldogs 10]

So your arguement is that graphics shouldn't advance and bis should just release flashpoint several times under different names?

I agree that the bugs are annoying, but the game industry is based around advancement, especially in the graphics field, otherwise we'd still be playing pong

[Mclan 10]

I dont like Arma 2, you need to upgrade your computer again to play, Bis just go forward about graphic engine, remove many things, from Ofp and arma, but arma 2 just suck, how many copy you gone a sell for Arma 2? just enought to paid what he cost to create ? am not sure, about that, cause many peoples, not able to play actualy.

Yeah all your right, Ofp, have old engine, but, old engine but amazing gameplay, effects... i remember ECP just add some cool effects, crater on the ground, after hit amour ect... crew just exit , cry and run on fire, thats the small things like that, peoples like, not at all only graphic.

Every compagny not understand business things, and Bis is not and the right position actualy trust me, he turn the success into a big disaster for commercial game sell.

Bis just ask me some things please.

How many copy of Ofp your selling?

How many addons, creating by the community made for Ofp?

How many copy of Arma 1 your selling?

How many addons, creating by the community ?

How many copy your selling of Arma 2 ?

How many addons, creating by the community ?

How many copy your selling of VBS 1?

How many copy your selling of VBS 2?

And how many peoles buy Arma 1 and Arma 2 and never playing? because maximum system specs are crazy, where the middle on thats? graphic things? cmon, am out, tired, playing low settings, just to have some fun.

Poeples, tired, lost moneys just playing game, game costing only 50$ to play? and 600$ and more, because all the time, you need to upgrade your system, to make fun, what a waste of moneys and time.

You gone see here if level up graphic so faster and remove some old shit pay for that.

The big success From Ofp, is lost forever now, if you dont change your mind, and marketing strategy in future, your probably lost all the serious gamer inself, and you probably stop made public game, but sell commercial use only like vsb 3?

Arma 2 is unplayable, they engine is to hight, many good things peoples like, just removing, unrealistic things, adding, removing, + many news bug, engine, stability ect.. what king of the game you try to create? i dont understand.

Sorry for me english... french Canadian here :)

:j::j: I totally agree what you said. and disappointed to the ArmA, ArmA2, seems most improvement is GRAPHIC but with worse AI than OFP, but frankly speaking, even OFP's graphic, similar as opaque watercolour painting( I like it), just need some new technology decoration, improve missed which are discussed in BIS forum many times, it will already satisfied me.

[33BO11OF00 10]

Content first. Graphics Second. Enough said. ;)

[ProfTournesol 956]

:j::j: I totally agree what you said. and disappointed to the ArmA, ArmA2, seems most improvement is GRAPHIC but with worse AI than OFP, but frankly speaking, even OFP's graphic, similar as opaque watercolour painting( I like it), just need some new technology decoration, improve missed which are discussed in BIS forum many times, it will already satisfied me.

This is urban legend. You cannot have seriously played OFP and ArmA2 and say such things. I'm still playing and modding OFP, i'm playing ArmA2 often, you cannot compare AI in both game. It's true that pathfinding is still problematic, that the flight model isn't good but, AI handling is far, far better in ArmA2. And i don't speak about scripting / functions / commands which have been greatly enhanced, breaking a lot of OFP limitations.

[madine75 0]

This is exactly what kolgujev Conflict (Now Kolgujev Conlfict Arma) does... And it died *not* because the game does not support it.. but because 2 modders can't put in the final *detailed* content to pull it off right.. which would normally take like 10 or more workers that actually were getting paid for it.. plus voice actors..

Ahh, so the truth finally appears. You seem to want BIS to provide content above and beyond what is required for MP and the SP Campaign. This is not their job, if you need additional content you need to source it yourself. I'm currently making a map for Arma2 and the more work I do on it, the more convinced I am that it's a team effort for the guys at BIS, this isn't going to stop me finishing it.

This is urban legend. You cannot have seriously played OFP and ArmA2 and say such things. I'm still playing and modding OFP, i'm playing ArmA2 often, you cannot compare AI in both game. It's true that pathfinding is still problematic, that the flight model isn't good but, AI handling is far, far better in ArmA2. And i don't speak about scripting / functions / commands which have been greatly enhanced, breaking a lot of OFP limitations.

I'm with you Prof. Pathfinding is still a issue, but the AI are a damn sight better in Arma2 than either vanilla Arma or OFP. As an example, whilst clearing a village I ran into several of my AI squad mates inside various buildings as we advanced through the village. This is something that never happened in vanilla OFP and I never saw in Arma without mods.

[Apocal 10]

A whole lot of people are looking at OFP with some serious rose-tinted glasses. Seriously, I play OFP now and realize that the voice acting was shit back then. And the campaign seemed awesome only because I was young and dumb enough to be immersed by anything with guns, tanks and helicopters in it.

Edited October 5, 2009 by Apocal

[whisper 0]

ArmA2, seems most improvement is GRAPHIC but with worse AI than OFP,

lol

just lol

[lwlooz 0]

Hello,

and we are laughing about what now?

The AI in Arma2 actually has improved pathfinding. But that is it. That is all the improvement the AI got.

Other than that they are tactically inept as ever.

No Team-Behaviour, No Survival Instinct , Little to no difference between a soldier AI and a vehicle AI.

It also has unfortunate Vanilla config values as opposed to OFP modded ones , but that is something we can change ourselves.

Apart from that since ArmA they are also heavily scripted.

This is nice as long as you just shoot at them, but if you want to control themselves , that fucks up the game good.

They don't listen to your orders very well and they act unpredictably.

Combined with no improvements in the Command Interface , but actual making the command interface continually worse over the years ,

I for one can at least say: "Playing with AI is worse than in OFP".

So I while I don't know what Mclan is referring to , but getting frustrated with the lack of progress with the AI/AI control in this "battlefield simulator" is not something laughable in my eyes.

This game is turning into a pure human-only PvP game , that paradoxically is very quake-unlike , quicker than you can say "SHUT THE FUCK UP" everytime the AI thinks it has to sound cool in Combat-mode.

Edited October 8, 2009 by lwlooz
Edited for Typo, Marked in Italics

[Deadfast 43]

The AI in Arma2 actually has improved pathfinding. But that is it. That is all the improvement the AI got.

Uh, no, not really...:rolleyes:

[whisper 0]

No Team-Behaviour

Dead wrong, they move as a team using bounding overwatch (and no, it's not coincidental you see some stopped checking arc of fire while others move), they send groups in chase instead of 1 guy after the other (typical dumb behavior in A1)

No Survival Instinct

Dead wrong again, they take cover most of the time (omg, it's not 100% perfect, CRY AND OUTRAGE AT BI!!!1111), they use suppressive fire to keep ennemy heads down

Little to no difference between a soldier AI and a vehicle AI.

A2 vehicle AI is dumb, that is true

This is nice as long as you just shoot at them, but if you want to control themselves , that fucks up the game good.

They don't listen to your orders very well and they act predictably.

if they are predictable, you can control them

Combined with no improvements in the Command Interface , but actual making the command interface continually worse over the years ,

I for one can at least say: "Playing with AI is worse than in OFP".

I've twice less orders to give to my AI now compared to OFP days (I don't compare to A1 since these ones were truely broken) for the same effect, ie most of the time I don't have to micro-manage them like I always had to in OFP. They actually helped me, on their own, in missions way, way more than they ever did in OFP.

Beating AI in OFP was dead simple (and the issue was 10x bigger in A1), put up some ambush point on both sides of an obstacle between you and AI group, taunt the group with a few shots, wait for them to come 1 after the other chasing you toward your obstacle. No decision, no group moving, nothing

Technique not anymore feasible in A2

[Bulldogs 10]

Hello,

and we are laughing about what now?

The AI in Arma2 actually has improved pathfinding. But that is it. That is all the improvement the AI got.

Other than that they are tactically inept as ever.

No Team-Behaviour, No Survival Instinct , Little to no difference between a soldier AI and a vehicle AI.

It also has unfortunate Vanilla config values as opposed to OFP modded ones , but that is something we can change ourselves.

Apart from that since ArmA they are also heavily scripted.

This is nice as long as you just shoot at them, but if you want to control themselves , that fucks up the game good.

They don't listen to your orders very well and they act predictably.

Combined with no improvements in the Command Interface , but actual making the command interface continually worse over the years ,

I for one can at least say: "Playing with AI is worse than in OFP".

So I while I don't know what Mclan is referring to , but getting frustrated with the lack of progress with the AI/AI control in this "battlefield simulator" is not something laughable in my eyes.

This game is turning into a pure human-only PvP game , that paradoxically is very quake-unlike , quicker than you can say "SHUT THE FUCK UP" everytime the AI thinks it has to sound cool in Combat-mode.

I must be playing a different game.

BTW, if you want the AI to have survival instinct, just put them in "Danger" mode. If you tell them it's safe when it's not, they'll trust you and get themselves killed.

The AI is actually extremely advanced, but for most it's better to be in a squad of AI than the AI leader because it takes a lot of skill, timing, and button pressing to accurately control the AI, to the point where you don't get to fight yourself, but a true squad leader rarely ever fires a shot.

[rübe 127]

for most it's better to be in a squad of AI than the AI leader because it takes a lot of skill, timing, and button pressing to accurately control the AI, to the point where you don't get to fight yourself, but a true squad leader rarely ever fires a shot.

^^ exactly.

IMHO a lot of this misconception of poor AI results from the fact, that indeed the different combat-modes play a major role for your own squad (if you're the leader).

Maybe there should be a new default/automatic combat-mode which switches the different modes automatically for you.. (and maybe, there should be several different rule-sets on how/when to switch combat-modes.. from defensive to aggressive or something like that... plus an event-system for fast reactions.. a unit doesn't need an order to escape from incoming hg's, etc.)

(yeah, I'm for sure in the wrong thread by now. Sorry. Let me elaborate on this a wee bit, then I'll shut up or open my own thread, hehe)

Btw. combatMode is only half the deal. There is the behaviour too, which makes the situation even worse, and if you will, you can also identify the speed-mode as a decisive factor. Thus we have to deal with a 3xn matrix for the behaviour of our squad as a leader. There are 5 behaviours, 5 combatModes and 3 speedModes. 75 options to choose from. 75! You coudn't even choose the proper combination if it were only half that much. Sure, a lot combinations would yield similar results, yet you still have to decide. What happens is the following: experienced users will start to restrict themselfes to a fraction of the possible combinations and won't use some combinations or even single factors at all. To find the `usefull` combinations, they had to suffer in lots of fights... and therefore newcomers fail miserably. Even worse, they will think they did good, but the AI was just plain poor... and to be fair, you can't blaim them for this misconception. It's the interface that sucks.

Solution: I'm not arguing that combatMode/behaviour/speed should be dumbed down. Heck, you can introduce even more factors if it'd be useful. But there has to be a layer for those factors, which would offer a lot less options/combinations to choose from, while you'd still be able to `fine-tune` your orders.

So, for one, for all these factors that you can set in detail (combatMode/behaviour/speed) there should be a default which toggles automatically.

Second, there should be a higher/meta-instance, which abstracts and offers a small set of usefull options (much like the combination experienced players use frequently). If any of the factors are set to auto, this option here decides how/when we toggle the set mode. This would allow for example to set all (combatMode/behaviour) to auto., while manually toggeling the speed only. As you like. As modes for this meta-instance I could imagine a set of options from defesinve to aggressive behaviour. One had to elaborate what would work...

Something like that could IMHO easily improve the percieved quality of AI.