stakex

Your also talking about multiplayer... remember, OFP, ARMA, and ARMA2 are not multiplayer only games. Whos to say the single player game won't have a dynamic destruction system (as was reported two years ago) and the MP aspect of the game will be diffrent? Anythings possible right now... but obviouslly the developers thought it was more then possible before.

First off, read a little more then the first post before YOU post. OFP2 IS NOT A BIS GAME AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM. Second, when BIS first announced ArmA, it was clearly stated that ArmA2 (Game2 back then) would be released fairly shortly afterwards. So no one can complain, we have known this for years. Developers can't hold off releaseing games because some people might have to upgrade their hardwear, or the modding community wants mroe time to make mods. It just dosn't work that way. As long as ArmA2 is a big step above ArmA, everything should be fine. If ArmA2 is just like ArmA.... then there is plenty of reason to complain. We just have to wait and see.

First off, read a little more then the first post before YOU post. OFP2 IS NOT A BIS GAME AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM. Second, when BIS first announced ArmA, it was clearly stated that ArmA2 (Game2 back then) would be released fairly shortly afterwards. So no one can complain, we have known this for years. Developers can't hold off releaseing games because some people might have to upgrade their hardwear, or the modding community wants mroe time to make mods. It just dosn't work that way. As long as ArmA2 is a big step above ArmA, everything should be fine. If ArmA2 is just like ArmA.... then there is plenty of reason to complain. We just have to wait and see.

lol nope... Game2 just has a name now, thats all. Game2 and ArmA2 are the same game.

lol nope... Game2 just has a name now, thats all. Game2 and ArmA2 are the same game.

Well its really hard to tell right now... but if things haven't changed from two years ago, all vehicles are suppose to blow up realisticly and dynamicly. To quote one article... "There are filly destructable buildings and vehicles. Each capable of being reduced to their component elements." Thats what was originally suppose to be in ArmA2... obviouslly from these screens its really hard to tell. Sure dosn't look like that... but could just be fillers. Really have to wait for more info. As for multi-core support.... I sure hope so

Well its really hard to tell right now... but if things haven't changed from two years ago, all vehicles are suppose to blow up realisticly and dynamicly. To quote one article... "There are filly destructable buildings and vehicles. Each capable of being reduced to their component elements." Thats what was originally suppose to be in ArmA2... obviouslly from these screens its really hard to tell. Sure dosn't look like that... but could just be fillers. Really have to wait for more info. As for multi-core support.... I sure hope so

Exactlly... Lets face the facts, its impossible to tell anything from the few screens we have now... First of all, just because it LOOKS like ArmA, dosn't mean its going to be like ArmA. If the games RPG elements, and true physics system have survived the last two years, then its already a whole new game. Also, alot of the elements we see could very well be fillers for right now, that have been borrowed from ArmA. If you will all recall, ArmA looked just like OFP when we first saw it... so its only logical to assume that in a year (if it makes a 2008 release date) the game will look alot diffrent. And to the comments reguarding paying for a "beta" game when it comes to ArmA... its common practice to use the same engine (which may not even be the case here) for more then one game. Call of Duty is built on a lesser version of the Quake engine then Call od Duty 2. That dosn't make Call of Duty a beta game now does it? ArmA was always played as an in between game anyway , and that Game2/ArmA2 would follow shortly after... so what that ArmA became a little more ambitious, that dosn't change its purpose. It was, and still remains just a filler game. Which personally I still don't see how anyone can call ArmA a whole new game. Its got better graphics and minor engine fixes. HARDLY a new game over OFP. With all of that said... I personally am very excited to see what else we learn in the near future about ArmA2. If destroyable environments, RPG elements, and many of the other previouslly mentioned features of Game2/ArmA2 have survived... then it will be a great new game. However... if it really IS just a chopped down version of VBS2 and not really a big step past ArmA, then it will be very disapointing. Only time will tell.

Exactlly... Lets face the facts, its impossible to tell anything from the few screens we have now... First of all, just because it LOOKS like ArmA, dosn't mean its going to be like ArmA. If the games RPG elements, and true physics system have survived the last two years, then its already a whole new game. Also, alot of the elements we see could very well be fillers for right now, that have been borrowed from ArmA. If you will all recall, ArmA looked just like OFP when we first saw it... so its only logical to assume that in a year (if it makes a 2008 release date) the game will look alot diffrent. And to the comments reguarding paying for a "beta" game when it comes to ArmA... its common practice to use the same engine (which may not even be the case here) for more then one game. Call of Duty is built on a lesser version of the Quake engine then Call od Duty 2. That dosn't make Call of Duty a beta game now does it? ArmA was always played as an in between game anyway , and that Game2/ArmA2 would follow shortly after... so what that ArmA became a little more ambitious, that dosn't change its purpose. It was, and still remains just a filler game. Which personally I still don't see how anyone can call ArmA a whole new game. Its got better graphics and minor engine fixes. HARDLY a new game over OFP. With all of that said... I personally am very excited to see what else we learn in the near future about ArmA2. If destroyable environments, RPG elements, and many of the other previouslly mentioned features of Game2/ArmA2 have survived... then it will be a great new game. However... if it really IS just a chopped down version of VBS2 and not really a big step past ArmA, then it will be very disapointing. Only time will tell.

Well first of all, we haven't had a new game in nearly seven years. As far as Im concerned ArmA is not a new game at all. Its just a remake of OFP with slightly better graphics and a few engine fixes. Its hardly a "new game". From what we have heard of Game2, it sounds like Game2 is going to be truely Next Gen and an actual "new" game. So in your theory of a new game every 5-6 years... Game2 is it. And if BIS should happen to have it ready to be released in the next year or so, there going to release it.... there not going to hold off on it becuase some people are still enjoying ArmA/OFP. Tho Game2 was only in a very early stage back durring E3 05, its only logical to assume its come a long way since then. Its not like were asking BIS to work on a new game, or crank out games at the pace of EA, we just want info on the Game they are already working on. And don't kid yourself... if BIS had the resource and ability to crank out games every 6 months to a year, they would. Lets also not forget the big issue here... its not cheap to release a game every 5-6 years. It was that very issue that likely led to the creation, and rush development of ArmA, and ArmAs relatively poor quality (Fixed alot threw patches, but still far from a high quality game). If ArmA was never made, and Game2 wasn't released yet... that would have been another two year of almost no income for BIS, while they are paying a full dev staff... not very smart from a bussiness stand point. ArmA helped pay the bills and keep Game2 in development.

Hmmm this is great news... tho of course theres no way to know for sure right now that its Game2 they are talking about. personally I can't see BIS having another game in the works, or telling us about some other game and leaving Game2 out... so the evidence would say its Game2. If it turns out to be a port of ArmA... I'll scream. Id really just like to see a couple updated screenshots, and an update as to where Game2 is in development, and where things are heading. Thats all... nothing much, just something to keep us going.

Well after spending months with ArmA... its safe to say ArmA has to be one of the most dissapointing games I have ever played. Its not that the game itself is terrible. Sure, the engine (same as Flashpoints) is flawed in a lot of ways. Several things you would think would be in a game like this are missing, there are still a ton of bugs, and the mod community, is still waiting for the tools. But theres more to it then just that... its a 6-7 year old game engine, so its going to have problems. For me tho, its simply the fact that playing ArmA, is like playing a modded Flashpoint. Its Flashpoint with better graphics, MINOR engine fixes, and bigger islands. Its not a new game by any stretch of the imagination, and lacks so much that could have been added to the game to make it better. The truely sad thing is... a couple years were spent to re-release a several year old game, when that development time could have been spent on something truely next-gen. Instead we are now left with ArmA, for who knows how long, as an "inbetween" project and Game2 has fallen off the radar with no updates in the last two years. Of course... BIS needs to make money, and you only do that by releasing games. So while it would seem there was little choice for them.. its still dissapointing that ArmA even exist.

Yes its gonna be same except in game2 there will be more of a RPG (role playing game)  , i cant wait for it. One thing for sure BIS cant afford to make brand new engine  it will use arma tech and probalby units ,so the only unseen elements of game2 are the interface and what island :0. Bring it on Bis whey hey. I wish you people would stop pulling facts strait out of your ass about this game... nothing you said there other then the fact that the game will have "RPG elements" is anything near a confirmed fact... And in fact the engine for Game2 is very likely going to be new. Who are you to say what BIS can and can't afford? Game2 will LIKELY be totally diffrent then Armed Assault, with a new engine (or at least a much more advanced version of the current one). Ifs going to have several features that ArmA is missing, such as everything being able to be dynamicly destroyed. Try searching for, and reading the old news articles about Game2... and then remember that they were all writen years ago, meaning Game2 is likely well more advanced then is stated in them.

Im sorry but IMHO ArmA is a game that is far from deserving of an expasnion. Give the community the tools, let us add content, and get to work on something new. They have been flogging this engine for 6 years now... its time to move on to Game2. Don't get me wrong... ArmA is a fine game, but its just OFP with better graphics. As I have said in the past... ArmA was more an expansion for Flashpoint then a stand alone game. None of its "new" features are worth the 5 year wait and alot of people want to see something next gen in terms of gameplay. Sure, graphics wise ArmA took a leap forward, but its gameplay is exactlly the same... forget beating $$$ out of ArmA and work on Game2. Thats my opinion of what the devs should do anyway.....

This is something I have had a lot of trouble with... there appears to be no way to tell a chopper to land other then telling its crew to get out or other AI to get in. In my opinion... there should be a Land command under the Action menu. As well as a turn engine off command...

Thats actually incorrect from what I understand... I was reading threw the magazine articles and such from E3 2005, and they said the game had been in development for nearly 3 years at that time. So its likely that actual game development started in 2003,... FOUR years ago. So if it came out at the end of next year, that would be at least five years of development. Thats alot of development time... so it would be very possible to see a release next year. And any number of reasons could have contributed to the length it took for the Xbox version... dosn't mean anything when it comes to Game2. Lets also look at the possitive side of things... if Game2 development had stopped, we would very likely know it. So its safe to assume its still kicking. Hopefully we will see info about the game around about the time of E3...

I still don't understand why people seem to think Game2 is going to take so many more years of development. It has been in the works for at least 4 or 5 years now, and we saw a very alpha version of the game at E3 2005. So if BIS has been activly working on Game2 since then, its not impossible... in fact its quite plausible we could see a release in the next year and a half. And Opteryx, durring E3 a couple years ago (and in several magazines since) we have heard about several features Game2 has promised, many of them very ambitious... so I doubt your reasoning is correct, as its far too late for that. The fact is, they have actually said quite a lot about Game2, just nothing new in the last two years... Personally I hope a progress report is around the corner somewhere. It would be really nice.

Being disapointed or not with ArmA really depends on what you were expecting... if you were expecting a whole new game, your probly going to be disapointed. If you were expecing just a beefed up Flashpoint, you wil probly love it. Its all about perspective... Personally I love ArmA for the fact it is just an advanced Flashpoint... I also have negative feelings about it for the same reason. Theres not enough new stuff added to the game... sure, the graphics are better, the moddles are better, and the engine has some fixes. But its basiclly just a mod to the old Flashpoint engine, its nothing new. Which like I said, I like that... but in terms of buying a brand new game thats essentially a mod, not so much. And I agree with Chops, that it seriouslly lacks a finished quality... its not what I would expect for a finished game. Its to be expected I guess... ArmA was thrown together in the last two years as a filler game, and its represented by its quality. Personally I would have rather no filler game, and just get Game2 thats full quality, but it is what it is. ArmA is fun, and will serve its purpose as a filler till Game2 arives, but its nothing really new and dosn't have the quality that OFP 1.96 had (to be expected of course, OFP had years of patches to that point). So if your expecting a totally new, bug free game... prepare for disapointment.

Finally got around to getting my retail copy today, picked it up at an EB Games in Middletown NY... the store had only gotten one copy the last week, and I bought it. Only place I have actually seen it on shelfs yet...

Hate to rain on your parade, but your estimate of Game2's release date is almost certainly very far off... and it does exsist as we have seen the game already, two years ago. First off, ArmA runs just fine on older machines... I have a four year old PC with a graphics card thats a little over a year old... and I can run it on almost max settings without any lag. Now, Game2 will be a totally new engine, built from scratch with modern PC's in mind... as where ArmA was built on top of a several year old engine. Who knows what tech advances Game2 will have to make things it has promised possible. Not to mention it has been said the game is very scaleable... so it should run just fine on current and even older machines. Second, there not going to hold a game off till the modding community has run its course... if they had Game2 to release this year, you better believe it would be released. ArmA is nothing more then a slightly better looking Flashpoint... it does ALMOST nothing new and is primarily to keep money flowing in, and get people intrested in BIS again (not to mention get the name Armed Assault out there... as it would be my guess Game2 will be 'ArmA2'. To say that ArmA is a whole new game in itself is a joke... its more like a mod for OFP, as its the exact same game with better graphics and new moddles. Game2 is the prize... nothing has changed from the E3 announcements a couple years ago. ArmA is a bridge, and a totally diffrent game then Game2. It is my hope that we will see Game2 in the next year or two... and if it delivers everything it promises, everyone will quickly forget about ArmA, becuase ArmA is a good game... but its not good enough to milk for years for come. Of course a lot of this bickering could be cleared up with an announcement by BIS as to what Game2's status currently is. Its been years since we have heard about it...

Thats not really true... the Army dosn't buy VBS2 becuase of the vehicles in it, they buy it for the countless features that it has over ArmA that make it a training tool, not a game. Adding thoes vehicles to ArmA would no way in hell cause the Army to buy ArmA over VBS2... As for the main post, Im not totally sure why thoes vehicles have not made their way into ArmA... but I have a feeling it might have something to do with Game2, as at least the HUEY has been seen in a Game2 screenshot. If they are for Game2 then we probly will never see them in ArmA... thats just my guess tho.

Well personally I have never seen an online server with 100 players in ArmA. Every server I have ever been in that get above 30 or so players starts to lag pretty bad. Could just be my luck tho, I honestly don't play much online. But its more a matter of having a server capable of running with high amounts of people, then the games design itself. MMO game servers are very expensive and are not very cheap to keep running... so again, tho not techniclly impossible, the odds of seeing hundreds and thousands of people online at the same time are pretty unlikely. Also, not so sure about gainable attributes in the game... its my understanding that the RPG elements are simply that you have to interact with the local population, and the game puts you more into the role of an actual soldier... Instead of just saying "Kill this, Kill that, go here, Kill that" you actually have to perform other tasks a soldier would have to do. (could be wrong tho) As for the AI... again we haven't seen anything of the game in years, so who knows where its at. Im sure the AI in Game2 will be much better.

The old system is less complicated. Everyone knows the clock system, so why replace it with a new system thats basiclly the same thing, just less efficent? Its one of thoes "don't fix it, if its not broken" type things. Thats my opinion anyway.

The game is not being built as an MMO, thus it will not play like an MMO... tho you can probly expect to see online play with 64+ players, in missions that are made to run persistently. Beyond that tho, don't expect to see persistent, online, MMO sized battlefields with hundreds and thousands of players in one game. As for offline tho... from the info we have so far, it looks like the offline game will take place on large persistent battlefields with thousands of NPC's. So while its not online, its still going to be a lot of fun if they pull it off. Of course this is all based on info thats almost exactlly two years old... so who knows.

Maybe its becuase OFP, and more so OFP:R had really good stories... as where ArmA's feels half hearted and very flat IMO. As for the setting of "Game2", modern setting is better I believe. Especially with the dynamic campaign. It just seems to fit better with a modern setting as opposed to a vietnam time frame. Communications, and technology of the modern era will make a dynamic campaign alot more intresting, and believable... at least I think so.