manberries

Yeah, I cannot wait until you make some missions. You cannot even construct an intelligent sentence without a major flaw. It is not just a spelling mistake or typo, the things you screw up are the basic concepts of the English language. I wonder if you realize that such specific inability is quite damaging in any attempt to follow the syntax for scripting. Oh wait, this master of mission making won't even be able to script. Compared to some of the great work of current mission makers, your masterpiece will just be a "piece". You people just buy into his crap don't you? He is not an adult, he is a sixteen year old drop-out who makes claims that the console version is closer than it was months ago. This entire thread has nothing to do with PC vs. console. I clearly stated long ago that a console version simply means more money for Bohemia, should it be successfully built. Yet, this child does little more than lump me into the "I fear my game being ruined by console" crowd. Few here have any idea about modding, scripting, or anything on the computer beyond this forum and Twitter. However, I read post after post claiming your genius knowledge about both the gaming market (PC and console) and the console's abilities. Here are the real facts, for those of you who missed the intelligent and well constructed debate from far earlier in this thread. Arma 2 cannot be run on any current console in its present state. Arma 2 can be simplified, graphics wise, to make it console capable (mostly a shader change, maybe a loss of resolution, and a huge hit on draw distance). OA is far more likely to make it to the 360 than original Arma 2 for a number of reasons (grass vs. sand, hopefully less buggy campaign, etc). In fact, Bohemia gave a slight hint during a demo of OA by having two developer kit 360s within plain view (not on). The control scheme can be done, as it was done in Elite. An editor can be done, but with limited capability. The console version of Arma 2 is virtually non-existent at this time. Any "test" variant of the game built for consoles could only be very alpha version, as it is clear Bohemia abandoned a console release at any time close to the PC release early on (lack of any info on a console version from announcement to now). A PS3 release is far less likely than a 360 release, as there have been zero hints from Bohemia to show a PS3 variant was ever in the works. The likely release schedule of either an OA or original Arma 2 release is no sooner than summer 2010, and more likely late 2010 or 2011 (if at all). Finally, a console release is very unlikely to affect the PC version as Bohemia clearly desires to release and patch on PC prior to major development of a console version. That is the extent of the news and knowledge on this entire topic, and it was all stated long before. AVBIRD and other members have done nothing but spread flat out lies about the future of a console version and inspired the same PC vs. console fight that we have all seen before. This thread is not yours, PC players can come here all they wish, lying to gain support is wrong, and the discussion about the cost or difficulty of using a PC for Arma 2 is totally irrelevant. For those rare members actually disproving the "console players are stupid" stereotype, I feel bad that your peers work so hard against you.

I know you all think your so prophetic, but your not. The PC gaming industry is not dying, as it allows for greater variability than anything a single consistent console can. PC gaming is becoming a specialist market, not a dead market. Console gaming will be the one to die because consoles will eventually have to be so powerful that there would be no reason not to throw an OS on it as well. Of course by this time we will be wearing computers on us, but still. The real truth is that both will merge into some new land warrior type system. Let's not forget the decline in returns for the x360 is now falling faster than the PC. X360 piracy has nearly surpassed PC piracy now a days. Learn some history. The least sophistaced and basic tool is NEVER the winner. Windows shall always beat Mac, the gun beats the arrow, machines beat man, and the computer will beat the console. If you think you can sit here and complain at PC gamers and tell them their gaming style is dead, but then say console gaming is the best and PC gamers are dumb, your wrong. It is childish little acts like this that make the console crowd look dumb. Smooth move, playing into your own stereotype and all. Maybe Bohemia will be willing to talk about a console version when someone on the forums is a console player who does not lie about their entire life to make themselves look great and intelligent. Yes, I am talking to you AVBIRD. You cannot even spell waste correctly, yet you claim your an adult in paramedic school (Waist? I mean really, how dumb is it to say I waist my time?). Your all trying to start a war while surrounded in enemy territory, I would advise against it.

Pretty childish. Everyone here knows that website has no official information and is nothing but a guess. Attempting to hype up the crowd knowing full well that it isn't confirmation of anything is trolling.

Eh, I forgot the give the exception of AA vehicles.

I was not aware Dx11 was that far along! Great news! Too bad only ATI has an 11 capable card out so far, but Nvidia should have one soon. However, I still don't see Arma 2 going any more detailed with its models than it already is, which is what Dx11 is all about.

Well, I don't think that will get anyone very far. If I had to guess, BIS refuses to confirm or deny because they are not sure if they can promise a release. OA will be released and the console version will be affected by this release. If it goes well I would bet more chances of a console version, if it ends up really buggy then the chances go down. I really do feel that if Arma 2 was to make consoles that it would be OA and not the original game. This is because OA has a number of cool and flashy features added, plus it doesn't require a complete bugfix of the prior campaign. Sometimes it is better to take a fresh start. However, no amount of petitions or demands will expedite this process. I don't blame you for being a tad frustraded, but if I had a suggestion it would be to come back and check for a console affirmation after OA release.

Not that Directx 10 actually has much to it, but Directx 11 is a no chance. The 3 series cards aren't even out yet so I highly doubt any game is working on Directx 11 as of yet. Hopefully Directx 11 will be a significant change from Directx 9.

I assume they did because Operation Arrowhead sounds nice, and perhaps is a reference to "the tip of the spear". I cannot say for sure.

Good riddance. I am sick and tired of people demanding BIS make the game easier whilst killing the realism. BRDM's do not have radars. A turret to hull position indicator wouldn't be a bad idea as in real life you can tell how it is oriented. However, this radar on any ground vehicle business is crap and they need to be removed for the tanks as well.

The 360 version of the game is neither confirmed coming nor confirmed canceled. BIS has given little not so hidden hints that it is still in their minds, but even if BIS fully intends to create a 360 version it would most likely be of OA and not released until late 2010 to 2011.

Well thats great and all, but not so impressive as OFP elite was released 3-4 years after the original. This was one of my major points on the xbox specific thread, being that elite was released on a console considered above in generation to the computers that originally ran it. Fitting it on a current gen console when current computers struggle with it is another kettle of fish. Do able, so says my guess, but difficult.

Still haven't learned the meaning of the phrase bread and butter have you? This phrase means the main stay of this company. It does not mean that compared to other games it must do well to be considered BIS's bread and butter. It only has the be the main source of product income for that company. However, to say OFPDR was a success means to say it was a success compared to other games (this is why I used the phrase bread and butter because it doesn't make such a comparison). OFPDR was not a success. Codemasters would be in a better position now if they never bothered with it. They could of just created another racing game that would of been far more successful. *sigh* Unfortunately, I don't believe your English is good enough to understand this explanation.

The game was buggy on release, but now the campaign works full through for me, and the crashes I get in mp are far and few inbetween. However, if your main interest is the campaign then I fear you picked up the wrong game.

There should be no standard between the vehicles. They all handle differently because they are supposed to. Suggestions for making the already lacking vehicle simulation worse will not get you points from most around here. As far as the commander seat goes, just use the QWEASD keys to command them around manually just like you were driving. Also, if you want a game where you can be the gunner, yet drive then go play BF2. You are in the wrong forums for these kind of suggestions. Oh wait, you are in the wrong part of the forum for any suggestions actually.

Gloves are not mandatory issue for the military. People buy them according to their own prerogative. Also, rolling up sleeves is uncommon in Afghan and Iraq because it is dry heat. This means the human body is quite capable of throwing off that heat so long as it has proper circulation. Rolling up your sleeves cuts down on that inner uniform circulation so they do not do it. However, rolled up sleeves in hot and humid areas is a common practice. I guess the assumption is that it is hot enough in Chenarus for them to do as such. BIS could try to make gun gloves, as they are pretty common. The major issue is that each army only has quite a limited selection in models. Mix this reality with the fact there are hundreds of different types of gloves that are being used in combat now and you get little desire to actually make them. Taking a look through Iraq and Afghan photos shows pretty clearly that the US Army is about half and half in terms of those with gloves and those without, as for Marines I tend to see a lower number of gloves. ACE1 did include a type of mechanic glove that is available in any major market store here in the US for the soldiers, actually quite popular in the military. If you have a personal desire for gloves on your model you can create an XML with gloves that can be pretty convincing.

Those Xbox's were not turned on. Despite being a dev kit, the light still must be shining green or the system is not on. I think they strategically placed them there to hint that they are keeping that possibility in mind.

Well, the difficulty in Arma for players to find their attackers is just due to the game. I rarely even hear the hit when an rpg hits me. In real life the sound would be more easily tracked. The commander would instantly know the general direction of the attack, be able to turn very quickly, and probably spot some sort of smoke or trail from the shot location. Personally, I would rather the AI act more like a real person in a real situation would, than have them act as a person hindered by the nature of playing a game.

Hmm, I have to say I never experienced anything that made me think they were super spotters. I tend to run around in the brush trying to get a smaw shot and be fine. In general, the AI becomes far more focused and able to spot when shots are being fired from that area, or have been recently. You can be pretty blatant even directly in front of a tank at a distance, but once a shot has been fired good luck hiding. I also think that is pretty realistic. If it was PVP, once a player knew it was that area which was full of enemies their prying eyes would spot you out pretty quickly and easily also. The other thing to note is that while the AI cannot see through large bushes, it can see through the small random grass. Also, the exact parts of a bush and tree that the AI cannot see through doesn't quite match what humans could see through. I remember in older patches I could be in the thickest of woods and they would be putting accurate rounds down, but since 1.03 I have not had that experience.

^ *ding*. Point for you.

Yes, PC on arma 2 was BIS's bread and butter. Reasoning. BIA makes VBS, BIS only makes the Arma series. The game was designed for PC, and based around the PC market. Enjoy that laugh of yours. Also, I really don't get your logic behind attacking me by countering a question or statement that I never made. I never made any mention regarding whether or not Arma 2 for the PC can fit within a 360 with its entirety. Since you brought it up, no it cannot. It can fit quite a bit, but there would have to be some amount of toned down graphics (which isn't a serious issue). I believe with enough work it could be transferred to 360 with nearly all the functionality of the PC version (especially OA as the map size is smaller). Of course, this is up to BIS to decide what stays and what goes to make it work. You enjoying OFPDR does not make it a success. People claim "it is all they have", which is true, but frankly that affront to all that is realism hurts more than helps. As for those telling us PC gamers to leave, no. This is not your forum, or your thread. Just because you put a console name in the title does not give you ownership of anything. This is a forum based off a game that is PC only (for now), you cannot expect to have any amount of segregation despite how you desire it. If a PC player wishes to add something, he/she can and will. Now, console hating flamebaiting is not allowed. Not because it involves console hating, but because it involves flamebating (which is not OK under any circumstance). All members of this forum can post here with any amount of frequency and degree, whilst expressing their ideas or opinions, so long as it is not extremely off topic nor against any pre-defined forum rules.

The maturity and intelligence of the posters in this thread is overflowing. After so many calling console gamers dumb, a console gamer turns around and calls a PC gamer dumb. Listen up hypocrites, as what I post is not an argument, but an education. Developing a PC game and Console game side by side does hurt the production quality of both. The PC version, or the console version may suffer worse depending on which platform the company considers it its bread and butter. OFPDR. Not a success. Not a treasure cove. Not anything. OFPDR forums are bathed in fire. "But so was Arma 2s." True, but the difference is they were bugs. OFPDR's base engine is incapable of becoming anything but Battlefield 2 with a bigger map and just generally less fun. Nearly every weapon is unrealistically modeled, and FLIR is mounted atop of everything you can imagine. Beyond the base games failure to deliver fun, so too did its sales flop. While not a complete bomb, the sales were extremely mediocre. It topped the charts for 1 day, then it topped the charts of returned games. 1 day before the release used copies were already available at EB Games. We PC gamers do not wish to see Arma 2 remain a PC exclusive. If BIS can figure out how to get the true game running on the 360 I will be happy. Not because I will ever play it on console, but because the better Arma 2 does the better Arma 3 will be. I have to say, the possibility that some bastard child of Arma 2 would end up on 360, and no one wishes to see that. However, I would like to see OA developed on the PC, then taken to consoles (if possible) afterward. The reasons being that focusing on one thing at a time will produce higher quality (this cannot be argued) and the PC version is far easier to fix. Once OA is a proven product, the 360 should come to mind, but not until. Now pay attention because here comes some important information. Freaking out and calling certain negative members PC fanboys is to be a fanboy yourself. You do not raise yourself above anything by claiming ridiculous and fictious things, extreme defensiveness, or any sort of that illogical behavior. Frankly, your actions place you (that is "you" to those members being inappropriate) on the same level of console hating nay-sayers.

Actually, the 3rd generation ARPAT is quite a bit more olive and tan. Originally, ACU was meant to have a ton of different colors, and certain ones would show up in different lights. The first generation was crap (the bright grey and blue). The second generation got rid of all the gray and blue and replaced with a pure tan and green scheme. This third generation has reimplemented the gray but at a lesser tone. The effect now is a decent camo in all environments. Once the camo gets dirty, ACU becomes almost perfect in color. Take a look at the ACU of people that have been in Afghan for a while, it matches just as well as the Desert MARPAT. As for the Army. I will be happy to have some more tough units. The Marines are all about violence of action and breakthroughs (which has proven to be more effective than the slower Army doctrine). A Bradley vehicle with a heavy mout squad will make for a great defend the hill type mission. Little Birds: People freak out over these far too much. Put down the Blackhawk down movie for a bit guys. While Little Birds have found a small niche within both the Army and Navy, the frequency of their use is pretty small. Most special forces insert with hmmves or Chinooks. Ill take the UH-1Y over the MH-6 anyday. Also, No. The recent attack on the terrorist in Somalia does not prove the Little Bird sees a lot of activity.

Guys, really. All discussion about consoles related to Arma 2 belongs in the already created console threads (PS3 and Xbox360 threads). The possibility of a console port, the good and bads, and all what has been posted here has been discussed there to a greater degree. Save the admins the trouble of locking this, and move the discussion there.

Ya, it is a shame the French finally started to bring in vehicles and fire support; otherwise it would be perfectly realistic just to have the soldiers. ;). I can't say BIS has done wrong by going with the Czech army, just that I would find more use for Brits (I bet most would). US Army is plenty of a treat though.

Well, a fully functional US army would be something that appeals to a very large group. Probably to a larger group than Russians, especially since we already have a pretty decent Russian force with which to make our own campaigns. As for the British Forces, realistically we would all prefer them over the Czech military but that is out of our hands.