-kelet0r

Read the interview here now! click thumbnail for fullsize Also posted and discussed on www.armed-assault-zone.com

Not entirely true, Dragonskin body armor withstands multiple muzzle velocity AP assault rifle hits with minimum trauma to the wearer. If ARMA is in a modern setting, body armor could play a huge role. Think about it, its often one bullet that hits you and kills you in OFP, while the others zoom past, nevertheless, mission failed. Body armor improves your chances drastically. 50% body coverage? That cuts your chances of death and injury in half, if the enemy actually manage to hit you. More often than not a soldier will aim for centre mass, in fact thats how they're all trained, all over the world. Therefore you could quiet safely apply these chance statistics. In summary: Half the lives of your men who would otherwise be dead would be saved if wearing good armor. Body armor is to be taken very seriously, if realism is to be catered for. i've read the marketing blurb besides no army uses that armour yet if ever and I seriously doubt its ability to withstand multiple full metal jacket assault rifle rounds - it might stop one and leave your ribs crushed and your heart and lungs bruised killing you more slowly but stop 2 or more? Not a change so yes I agree it may increase your longetivity ingame somewhat but not by much

nice find NKVD

On the other hand - i'm not sure what good it will do seeing as assault rifle weapons can still defeat all known body armour, maybe not on the first shot but on the second or third they still are only capable of stopping low calibre and pistol rounds so while they increase the chance of saving your life in combat somewhat, in Armed Assault, it will still be a case of 1-2 bullets and you are critically injured and unable to fight/dead as opposed to just being dead in OpF I fail to see how that will affect gameplay at all - the result is still the same the only reason I can see them including it is because body armour makes soldiers look cool and because it is a sim after all

don't know what to make of that after all Cold War NATO battle groups wore flak jackets on exercise and modern soldiers often wear no armour at all.... I'll go under the assumption for the moment that there will be body armour ingame seeing as I would love to see it in Armed Assault

well the Xbox controller works in pcs anyway so just bind the keys you want they might have controller support for vehicles but i doubt it - it would limit the control options you can have too much

And who ever said that making games is a democracy Peoples, as has been said over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over [/Dr Cox Mode] BI will release infos when they are good and ready to release infos. Whining on their forums isnt going to pressure them into releasing anything earlier. no one - we were arguing over the correct use of the phrase i reckon getting back on topic would be a good idea lest placebo wield his banning stick What I want to know is that if BIS didnt take GDC as a serious marketing opportunity, I hope this doesnt bode ill for e3 I would love to see an all out effort

No it doesn't. The voice of God? Are you mad? Political power != the concept of God. vox populi vox dei = the voice of the people is the word of god ie the people are the power, the first tenet of democracy

i think it has been stated that body armour will not be included ingame

I would say that 'Vox populi vox Dei' is the correct phrase on its own - it represents alot of what we believe in today

Well I dont know about you guys but Duke Nukem Forever gets my vote

there's a game that actually turns you into a killer dude are you familiar with the phrase faux pas? - stop digging is my advice There's is just no point arguing with that - i'll just point it out in all its glory/stupidity

lies - Battlefield 2 rocks i envy all you people with your expensive toys

LOMAC rocks I still see them as viable opponents - the fact that they depict modern conflict differently doesnt make them different genres - in fact they would both be placed under the title tactical shooters if they did things the same I would be worried tbh for me it is a tough call - Arma or GRAW for my PC especially as they are both 'due' in May the fact that they are different doesnt help the decision - they are both combat simulations (yes GRAW is a combat simulator and a very good one at that)

You gotta be kidding, that's like saying Ace Combat 5 is a direct competition of Falcon 4.0 Allied Force. It's not. ...is nothing but a few (8?) old screenshots and some year old news for all we know. Sure it could be released spring 2006 but it does seem very unlikely. Even Atari's website has no information what so ever about it though Illusion says Atari will publish it. It might be the same genre as OFP though when it possibly comes someday. I disagree - as an example of next generation advanced urban war it is and will be without parallel for some time, Arma cannot compete on that level at all It alco has so much going for it - the above decent squad AI, Mexico City, the fact that it looks incredible and the realism is a nice blend of realism with fun gameplay If Falcon 4 is the pinnacle of aviation combat simulation than consider GRAW to be Lock On: Modern Air Combat If Arma is delayed which is more than likely (no publisher, little publicity etc.) GRAW will be on my computer very soon