Don't you hate it when you try to spread the word of arma and...

[=kct=blackmamba 44]

i think BIS is less money hungry and a hell of a lot better for its community.

in the past i buyed a game title wich looked very promising.

i used to buy all titles of that developer and normaly they where great,

but this game wasnt.

it was called Rainbowsix Lockdown...

and after the first patch the devs allready gave up and went on to the next development, leaving us with a criple excuse for a game.

i never bought a game from that developer again....

[bensdale 0]

@myke

oh you use postfinance :D

[nomdeplume 0]

I am talking about the roll actually.

Go prone and press sidestep left then right then left again quickly. Reverse that to roll towards the other direction.

It's pretty damn useless because I can't always make it work at the first time.

When you're prone the lean left and lean right keys (Q and E by default) will cause you to roll, very reliably.

[Vick 19]

And you missed my point, I was just breaking balls, of course everything is point of view but I do think if arma 2 had proper backing both technically and through publishing/marketing it could better compete with the mainstreams.

Its kind of similar to why Nascar is more popular in the states then F1..

Still BI studios is awesome for staying true to their craft:yay:

Lets just hope if they do get proper backing they keep their integrity...

Nascar didnt become popular because of advertisment, its because they ran moonshine before it was racing in a big circle, the cars were made fast to outrun police

this in turn, has no place in your metaphor

and as for the 'why dont you join the military', that answer is mutually obvious. if you cant tell the difference between wanting to PLAY a simulation vs wanting to FIGHT a real life war, then you're already helpless

id also like to point out, its only a game, why argue over entertainment, only the stupid and envious hate

[Beagle 684]

...and as for the 'why dont you join the military', that answer is mutually obvious. if you cant tell the difference between wanting to PLAY a simulation vs wanting to FIGHT a real life war, then you're already helpless

...You have to count in the high Number of players and Forum user that already had more or less service times...how do they fit into the picture?

[nomdeplume 0]

I don't think Vick was implying that "people who want to play a war sim" and "people who want to fight in a real war" are mutually exclusive; merely that they're independent groups, and wanting to play a war sim does not imply wanting to fight in a real war, any more than wanting to fight in a real war implies they'd want to play a war sim.

[Whoatherefatty 10]

Yep, he's just bringing up how stupid it is when people say, "Why don't you just join the service if you want all that realism?". This is something I read all the time from COD fans and Halo fans. I ask them why would you want to play a game with a real military(cod), real weapons, real technology against a real enemy(terrorist) and sometimes real wars(WW2) that plays out nothing at all like the real situation would? Your game with all these realistic elements is fine in an arcade game shell, but make the situation a little more real and all of the sudden you may as well join the military for that? Silly.

If you like running full speed jumping over crates and killing nazis/terrorists by the hundreds that's all fine. If I like the fact that my 6 man team will get it's ass kicked 9 out of 10 times in an out numbered fight then that's fine too. There is room for both. You can play halo without joining the space marines and I can play arma without joining the real marines.

Edited April 7, 2010 by Whoatherefatty

[celery 8]

Remember not to patronize other genres and their players unless you're OK with them doing the same to you and your favorite genre.

[casimir4794 10]

I like the super realistic feature in cod where if you get shot 3 times in the chest you can hide in a bush for 10 seconds and you are able to run around the battle firing off rounds again. It makes it so realistic and enjoyible :)

[celery 8]

I like the super realistic feature in cod where if you get shot 3 times in the chest you can hide in a bush for 10 seconds and you are able to run around the battle firing off rounds again. It makes it so realistic and enjoyible :)

And I bet many others enjoy the super realistic feature in Arma 2 where you can just press tab in a helicopter and destroy every enemy vehicle in a timeframe of a few seconds. Or the one where your grenades bounce like superballs and sink into the floor of a building, damaging nobody. Or building a base out of thin air and buying soldiers and vehicles from the buildings you just placed. Not to mention getting shot, after which a medic completely heals you in 5 seconds, even less time than the regeneration ability of the CoD series.

[JdB 151]

And I bet many others enjoy the super realistic feature in Arma 2 where you can just press tab in a helicopter and destroy every enemy vehicle in a timeframe of a few seconds.

The Apache can target up to 16 targets at the same time, fire all of it's Hellfires in one go and a pair of them can take out a tank regiment in a few seconds. If anything, the killing power of BIS's attack helicopters in ArmA1 and ArmA2 has never been anywhere as great as it is in real life.

[katipo66 94]

I like the super realistic feature in cod where if you get shot 3 times in the chest you can hide in a bush for 10 seconds and you are able to run around the battle firing off rounds again. It makes it so realistic and enjoyible :)

One shot your dead in hardcore, you cant really hide to well in COD due to the fact your encouraged to fight.

My previous posts about realism in COD was more in response to all the "military experts" who seem to enjoy ridiculing people because they enjoy other games.

I can pretend to be anyone i like online... just like u soldier?

[Flash Thunder 10]

Arma 2: Medics can heal almost as fast as the health regeneration in COD games

AI can absorb 3 .50 caliber rounds and still crawl around and kill you from 500 meters in seconds!

AI in both games see through buildings! Marvelous

In both games you can reload AT4's Boo, and reload almost every weapon in less than 5 seconds.

Anyways I really enjoy playing MW2 for the most part online especially with friends, Arma 2 doesnt run well even on my 9800gtx currently using mods and medium settings can barley hold up a 30FPS which in arma 2 I think is unplayable and with the constant stuttering/inconsistant frame rate drops it doesnt play well for the most part and when you throw in 30+ AI forget it.

Arma 2 is very frusterating for me to play and currently my buds only get enough time to hop onto Moodern Fragfare 2 for a few quick matches.

God damn that "Frame Rate limited by AI" issue in RV is so ****** irritating. :mad:

How I view it:

MW2 is quick fun

Arma 2 is fun if I have friends on cuase the AI sucks, and I have issues running it like most people. :(

[r3volution 0]

I'm forced to conclude after seeing the 10 billionth ARMAX vs CODX argument that no game has ever been anywhere near absolutely realistic. What appears to happen though is that with the limited hardware resources available, different people (and game companies) attempt to simulate different components of combat experience. Arma2 has substantially more focus on the macro of combat, and the micro (movement transitions etc) suffers as a corollary. COD attempts to simulate an actionised version of close quarter urban combat (thus focussing on the micro), and because it neglects the macro entirely, feels like what it is, a corridor based shoot-em-up.

Its not a zero-sum game, COD works well at having a fluid (and altogether speeded up) urban close quarter combat, where nothing happens further away than 50 metres. Arma2 works well at simulating a battlefield environment, when you want to actually have all the components of a full scale combat environment taking place over a five kilometre battlefield, but as a consequence you can't actually move that fluidly because (gasp) its not just an infantry simulator.

Honestly this is like pissing on Company of Heroes because its graphics aren't as good as Call of Duty 2, the fact is, its an RTS and designed to do something totally different, simlulate tactics and strategy. I think that many people are decieved by the fact that MW2 and ARMA2 are both played primarily in first person, that doesn't make them the same sort of game any more than COH and COD2 are the same sort of game. In fact, I tend to view Arma2 as a massive modern strategy game sandbox, in which I happen to be able to play first person...

It works for me. :D

[galzohar 31]

The difference is not simulating different aspects of combat. The difference is that one is trying to simulate combat even when it has the cost of being less intuitive and more buggy, while the other takes out any aspect of realism that comes anywhere near hurting its gameplay, which is basically all aspects of realism other than graphics. Doesn't mean either game is better than the other, but really saying "realism" and "COD" in the same sentence in something that isn't purely related to graphics sounds very very bad. Even in CQB where Arma has the most issues, Arma still does it more realistically than COD. Whether that is actually better gameplay or not is up for personal opinion though.

[katipo66 94]

The difference is not simulating different aspects of combat. The difference is that one is trying to simulate combat even when it has the cost of being less intuitive and more buggy, while the other takes out any aspect of realism that comes anywhere near hurting its gameplay, which is basically all aspects of realism other than graphics. Doesn't mean either game is better than the other, but really saying "realism" and "COD" in the same sentence in something that isn't purely related to graphics sounds very very bad. Even in CQB where Arma has the most issues, Arma still does it more realistically than COD. Whether that is actually better gameplay or not is up for personal opinion though.

Yep, i agree... any reference to realism and cod was born out of frustration too all the haters out there, but it is what it is, run and gun... and its great for what it is :)

Arma!! is a like a drug, cant get enough! its evolving everyday thanks to this pretty amazing and diverse community... AI is pretty amazing (most times) using Ace, GL4, Zeus, hopefully they will continue to get even better... its bigger than just a game:D

[nomdeplume 0]

AI in both games see through buildings!

Are there some buildings in Arma that have broken vis LOD and AI can see through them? I've yet to encounter any building that doesn't provide 100% concealment, but I see this kind of thing repeated as fact fairly often.

[LJF 0]

You'll be surprised by the amount of people who use realism and/or authenticity in an argument about a game (it should have blabla because that's realistic) yet when it actually comes down to it they come out with "it's just a game, go join the army if you want realism".

They'll knock ArmA2 for being too realistic yet go on about how hardcore and "sim" COD is. It's like they want to play a something that's called "realistic" yet have it not actually be realistic. Kind of like the Codemasters games, they dress them up in realism but when you look at it it's just CoD with some bells on it and everyone somehow thinks that's realistic and ArmA is "too realistic".

Sad too, watching Zero Punctuation on the Escapist and he said "Bad Company 2 is a realistic war shooter" .... He also said "I'll be glad when the Modern Warfare bubble blows over and we can end the tyranny of realism" ...... oooooooooooookkkkkaaaayyyyy ..... You know, because COD was just like real life :D

[katipo66 94]

Ive never seen any us versus them or antagonizing type comments regarding "Other games" anywhere else except here when i joined this forum? maybe i need to get out more... beware if you speak favorably of any other FPS thats not arma around these parts.

[HyperU2 11]

It's not perfect, just the best there is. If you look at the state of games though, it's obviously we're a niche.

[Whoatherefatty 10]

It's not perfect, just the best there is. If you look at the state of games though, it's obviously we're a niche.

Which is why I was trying to spread the word in the first place :)

[HyperU2 11]

Yeah, but it's like trying to get some folks to like something they never will.

[nomdeplume 0]

He also said "I'll be glad when the Modern Warfare bubble blows over and we can end the tyranny of realism"

If I remember correctly, this was specifically referencing the amount of smoke/dust in he air when anything happens, as well as the "drab" gray environments. Which again goes to show that for most people, even a pretty intelligent guy like Ben, graphics are a major part of the experience, and if it "looks realistic" then it's declared to be a realistic game.

I'm sure a lot of 2010 gamer kids would look at screenshots of, say, Falcon 4, and declare it to be unrealistic because the graphics are a bit outdated. I'm sure you could shots from DCS: Black Shark that showed the worst of the graphics engine (unrealistic polygonal landscapes) and get a similar reaction.

It's an interesting concept. Still, it's hard to argue that Arma 2 is particularly realistic in anything it "simulates", with the one possible exception being the "overall battlefield environment". Yet it still manages to be one of the better (if not the best) "military simulators" out there.

[casimir4794 10]

hey guys enough raging, i enjoy both games, as celery pointed out arma has its downfall and flaws but on an all encompasing scale its a far more realistic simulator of warfare.

MW2 if much better lookign, much easier to play and at times far more fun. I play it regularly with my mates on teh playstations and ocassionally on the pc. Hopwever this doesnt get aroudnt ehf act that it is quite unrealistic. Hardcore doesnt make it much more realistic, it just increases the amount of damage givena nd removes your HUD. Great.

Both games have their pros and cons and there are many bad things to be said about both games but at the end of the day Arma is more realistic anyway you look at it.

Im not a fan boy or an elitist before theres any more accusations thrown around on these forums but the ty[es of players vary from each game, they have completly differnt scale fan bases and they are 2 very differnet games.

[JdB 151]

Are there some buildings in Arma that have broken vis LOD and AI can see through them? I've yet to encounter any building that doesn't provide 100% concealment, but I see this kind of thing repeated as fact fairly often.

I think a significant chunk of these "Ai looking through buildings"-"bug" reports are actually the result of Ai being able to hear, and being able to predict movement, and players, especially ones new to the games, not expecting this kind of "intelligence".

That is main problem for new players. They get slaughtered by the Ai because they are playing the game like they would play BF or CoD, which just doesn't work in ArmA2, and causes a lot of replays before they start to adapt. I know I had to when I first played the OFP demo. After some weeks/months, you get better at it. Sadly games have increasingly shorter lifespans, so people get more and more impatient with games that have a fairly steep learning curve. So most would discard the game rather than adapt their strategy to it.

Edited April 8, 2010 by JdB