guyguy1

is my internet just crappy or does it take longer to load bmp files??

omg the graphics are SO good

As Placebo stated, it is old and BI did not put it together. Many of the problems you see in the video could have been fixed & improved on by now.

The radio sounds and weapon sounds are much more believable, and the view distance is greatly improved as well as the terrain detail. However, the navigation inside buildings still looks strange (textures could be MUCH better on the walls), and the animations are from OFP i hope, but im pretty sure that this is old and the game is much improved now. Looks great, keep up the good work BIS. Hope for more info soon

can't wait till april 8 for the interview and hope to see that video soon on armedassault.org good times ahead Â

It's Armed Assault by the way. Anyway, AA has been delayed since late 2005 already and everybody is anxious to get their hands on it. The graphics are somewhat near the range of HL2 (the water isn't probably), but you know...the gameplay will compensate for the graphics if they are not eye candy. Game2 looks like it has some excellent lighting and HDR effects, as well as good textures and shadows (not those razor sharp edges, but more closely resemblent of "soft shadows"). ppl have to remember that even though the gamma may seem really high, you can turn it down in the options menu. Same goes with the difficulty that everybody's been so crazy about lately. The only weakness I've seen so far graphicswise is the ground texture. OFP and a few screenshots from ArmA are known to have..well, not the best ground textures out there. Other than that though, I can't find anything to nag about Game2's awesome graphics.

alright well the presentations are over now (its 6:16 PM here, which is local time in San Jose as well), and today was the last day of the presentations. We can only wait and hope for some screenshots and more news. I hope they come out by the weekend (if somebody is writing an article about ArmA), and hopefully we'll get some new screenshots that show off the current ArmA engine.

ArmA is going to be more "mainstream" player-friendly, but by no means should the realism be sacraficed in game 2 (or ArmA). No matter what the difficulty, damage modelling, physics, AI, sounds, and the environment should all be the same. IMO the difficulty should concern crosshair, player identification (as featured in OFP), nightvision, and other things that aren't at the core of BI games. I seriously hope that ArmA and Game2 will not stretch its realism by allowing the option of taking 10 hits or having "balanced" vehicles. The difficulty system in OFP was great, and as long as the player can customly select certain aspects of the game to be turned on/off, it's fine with me. The realism should be in place in order for the game to be itself, but things on the screen (recoil, crosshair, identification, etc) should be able of being changed in the difficulty menu. I'm just a bit worried that this whole difficulty issue mentioned in the article might turn out worse than I thought.

how is this forum communist when there is already an opportunity to talk about the topic of your previous thread in an already active thread concerning steam? (oh yeah, this should be locked for sure)

Exactly the same situation here. My friends and I are all going to chip in to upgrade a 5 computers so that they can run ArmA. Can't wait for the summer. Hopefully ArmA will be released in the US by june-mid july.

I'm guessing itll be released in late May but since I live in the US then probably June-Mid July. Game2 sounds amazing, but ArmA will be good enough to keep me occupied for a few years. I just need something good to play after school's out, this year has been crazy. ArmA will be a welcome gift .

I like the idea that ArmA is inspired by the Korean situation, and sticking to that formula, perhaps Game2 can be based on the US and fictional conflicts based on situations around the world today. Since there will be many theaters of battle, i came up with a few situations from current times. For example, the BlueFor (US) is deployed to an island that is threatened with retaliation (China-Taiwan situation) by a rival power that has many economic ties with the US (or country of origin of the BlueFor). Another one is that the BlueFor is deployed in the middle east to protect a country from attack (Israel-palestine,iran,syria situation) because the states have some religious dissagreements or resentment. In all hopes, the campaign will be well thought out and understandable. Adding onto this, it would actually be pretty neat if the appearances and equipment of the troops and units vary from theater to theater. keep up the good work BIS

these screenshots aren't as good as ones we've seen before (hopefully theyre a bit old). In the UH 60 pic the machine gunner isn't even looking into the sights, but when BI takes care of the animations I'm sure that it will be fixed. Great screens, we need a translation of that interview!! ASAP

I agree with GBee. Skeletor, there are many more possibilities in OFP than any other fps game to date. You probably think that OFP is unfair because you made some unecessary maneuvers and engagements. In fact, when I played after montignac, i completed it with relative ease. I am not a hardcore OFP gamer, i play CS, BF2, Empire earth 2, and many more- and i love them all. However, OFP is by far the most realistic war simulator ever developed (aside from VBS), and if you think about it, an hour isn't a long time for an After-Montignac type mission. IRL it would take much more than that, and the risk of being killed would be much greater. OFP is definitely not unfair, it's in fact the opposite. If you think that the realism in OFP is too harsh then i suggest you look up single player cheats for OFP and play with those. ArmA will be even more detailed and allow many more possibilities to be played through, so if you think that OFP is unfair then i suggest you not play ArmA and play more accessible games like call of duty, or use singleplayer cheats.

They're reworking the animations, so the running will be different. Most of the pics released were from a while ago, and ArmA will include the old campaigns from OFP and OFP: Resistance, as well as the new ArmA campaign.

Here's the idea: Soldiers carrying machine guns or automatic weapons with bipods should have the ability to deploy a bipod and mount their weapons on a wall or table or the ground. This would make the guns much more stable and thus allowing the shooter to easily provide large volumes of accurate fire to take out enemies whether it's an ambush, raid, or defense, or if it's for covering teammates. This also brings me to suggest that more than one machine gun for each side be modelled so we can have a bit more variety to choose from. M60s, M240s, M249s, PKMs, RPKs, are all very widely used throughout the world and it would be nice if there are more machine guns to choose from. A good way to sort things out is to make different classes of machine gunners such as light machine gunner (RPK and m249), medium machine gunner (m60, m240, PKM), or something similar to that.

I'm hoping for realistic shadows (Not blade sharp shadows everywhere, but soft shadows as well) and high resolution textures that can surpass those of Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault. If game2 is coming out in 2007 then im definitely hoping that it has better graphics than medal of honor or battlefield 2 (which both came out in 2005), but if not, oh well I'll still buy the amazing game .

Wow is it just me or did stealthtiger find new screenshots? It says on the page that it was updated 2.11.06, so i guess it was updated earlier today. Yay, new screenshots!!! (i think). ArmA Screenshots- new ones i think Edit: nvm they aren't new.. Anyways..I think that the vehicles and terrain are very well done, but I think that they can be better and hope that we can get some seriously high-res textures as an option in the video settings menu.

Quote Viktor "...Now it's not just an "extension" or something; the game has become a real successor to Operation Flashpoint in terms of scale, detail and possibilities". Hopefully what he means by "detail" are all of the things mentioned above (Damage modelling, realistic handling, etc). I know for sure that the map is huge and that bullets can actually penetrate objects now (from score magazine Czech previews). I've also heard that the AI is improved, so overall i wouldn't have any reasons to be pessimistic, although I would like BI to polish ArmA as much as they can.

Finally some more screenshots!!!! One thing: Does anyone notice that there is an unusual bulge on the T-72 turret? Other than that, excellent work..can't wait for ArmA Keep up the good work BI

Naw I think that BI has a good development team and making them cooperate with another developer would cost them more time (to arrange things) and I doubt that it would make the game any better (if not worse). Just let BI finish the game in whatever amount of time it takes and you will not be dissapointed. Remember ArmA is coming out soon...

I agree with all of the above and more. Ragdoll physics are pretty unrealistic (source engine example: ragdolls doing cartwheels when shot in the side of head with .357, ragdolls being blown around like flyweights). Keep in mind that when people are shot, they have muscle spasms and they twist and do whatever because of the shock. Simply shooting someone in the leg a few times and watching him fall over like a sack of potatoes (as in ragdolls) is pretty awkward. IMO a large variety of death animations (10+ per hit area) based on where the character model is hit is the best way to go.

The main issue with body armor now is the trauma effect of a bullet, not so much penetration. The dragon skin vest is far too expensive to issue to every soldier in the battlefield, but it seems that in Game2 the soldiers are being modelled wearing it . With the regular interceptor vest, troops on the field are usually OK after taking one or two hits (unless hit in the solar plexus area which is responsible for the "wind knocked out of you" feeling). There have been many instances where troops wearing the interceptor have been hit once, twice, or even three times (mostly during convoy duty) and being able to carry on. Helmets have also been known, on rare occasions, to stop AK rounds effectively enough so the user can continue to fight, although this would be unrealistic to put in effect a game like ArmA because it is very, very rare (Unless shot from long range, only if the ballistics in ArmA or game2 are accurate enough). The Dragon Skin vest has been around for almost a decade, but because of its price the military could not afford to purchase them (maybe only for hardcore special ops). It seems from the screenshots in Game2 that the troops are wearing the dragon skin vest (the back of it resembles the vest worn by west soldiers in game 2 closer than any other vest i can think of..take a look through the link [feel free to correct me]), though I'm not too sure. Dragon Skin vests have been known to prevent tissue damage and most bruising sustained from users wearing plate reinforced Interceptors that were shot by rifle rounds (so it is much more effective), and provides complete torso coverage (not just two plates, meaning that the sides, shoulders, upper chest & back and lower chest & back are all protected) from most rifle rounds.Source & Info

well on the flashpoint2 site you can actually hear the soldiers saying the name of another...so since this game will be like an RPG (which means always having the same squad unless you "upgrade" according to some article i read a while back) the men should be ordering each other by their names (i hope) rather than just 1 2 or 5 7 (or anything number related). It would really add to the realism and environment, besides, when have you ever seen soldiers calling each other by numbers?

Here's my idea: Units shout out orders/replies when they're in combat. In Half Life 2, the Combine soldiers would talk over their radios when they were taking fire or when they spotted an enemy. I find that kinda impractical since you could hear their radios from a long distance away. Soldiers in Ghost Recon would also shout liners like "I'm Hit" or "Kill confirmed" or something like that. Anyways, I thought that ambushing a column of soldiers would be fun (duh), but hearing their commander barking orders and the soldiers replying would make it  even more fun (and realistic). Hearing the troops in the game actually shouting or talking without using the radio during combat would be welcome. A COUPLE (not all) of lines that I think would be important: Get down Take cover I'm Hit Enemy spotted at (whatever direction) Go go go (Name) is down..MEDIC! Taking heavy fire! etc etc... I think it's a great idea because it adds to the environment around the player and makes combat seem much more life-like. Hopefully the orders/replies (if considered and worked on) will feature emotions and facial motions so the AI won't sound or look like mindless drones on the battlefield.