Cannon Fodder

This is a very tough mission to start out with - but you've set the mission in the perfect location for the player's tactical advantage. You've got height, and you've got the cover and concealment of the woods below you to approach your objective. With either one or two men, it's possible - but tough. This is a mission to take your time and attempt to get the AI to come to you, because if you charge head on into a defended position, or get caught out in the open, it's curtains. The mission is simple, which I like, but I've got a few suggestions. Firstly, when taking your AI pal out, if he takes a round in the leg, he can slow you down so much (because you can't kill him else it's mission fail) it becomes very frustrating. This is especially true at the start of the mission - if he gets caught, you're screwed as there's no first aid to be had as far as I can see. The answer? Don't get shot I suppose, but someone's injury spells 'restart' in this mission. Secondly, about the AI as well, crossing the bridge is VERY hit and miss. I know you can't control this but IF the AI gets in the water, he'll lose his (unique) weapon and will have to pick up an AI's high dispersion gun - which puts you at a significant disadvantage. I don't know how you could solve this, to be honest, it seems to be an unfortunate drawback of ArmA, and can really upset the mission. Lastly, the draw distance is very tight in this mission, which brings with its advantages and disadvantages - two men, engaging at longer ranges, would be easily flanked and taken out. Still, observation is difficult and without the binoculars, you and your AI buddy can fail to report enemies as hostile due to the peculiar way ArmA works regarding enemy visibility in low view distances - which could mean the difference between life and death. Perhaps it is worth extending it slightly? Other than that, this is a very fun, challenging and straight forward mission that is well presented (with voice overs etc.) and offers you some decisions about which way to approach it (with AI buddy, without, nice selection of weapons). Of course, any opportunity to break out the RACs M14 is a joy in itself. It's tough and I enjoyed the challenge.

That AI looked brilliant - and there IS sidestepping, if you check out the bit at the end of the first video, the AI sidesteps around a little alcove to check it down an alleyway. At last - decent urban combat! The hand signals give the AI a real sense of life, too. More incidental animations like these are absolutely vital to remove the 'AI grunt' syndrome of OFP/ArmA. Also, did anyone notice the accurately modelled sight on the AK in video 3? Looks like they've still got a bit of work to do on that though, seeing as how it escaped from the rest of the gun!

Excellent work - very, very atmospheric and a great achievement. Thanks!

In movie number 9, you can see in the action menu there is the option to 'Show Diary'. I wonder what that means, exactly? It is, however, further indication of the RPG elements that are said to mark ArmA2 apart. I think with a lot of these options they will probably remove them from the action menu and add them to a keyboard shotcut, much like was done with the NVGs in ArmA.

Isone - the missions are mostly excellent. I can't get enough of observation - settling into a nice OP and watching troop movements through a scope, ghille suited and armed to the teeth, is a great feeling. Thanks for all your hard work.

I think you are taking it too far now, its probably just one of the random names which are already in OFP and ArmA. (Well, maybe there will be some developed characters, but most will probably just be default soldiers) Ah yes, good point. I do think, however, that even if it was as basic as this, then we'd still feel a little bit more connected to the characters than we do already. Think about ES:Oblivion, where all that separates a lot of characters is merely their name - yet you remember who they are. If we were to ask our MGer a question, or merely give him an order, and we know him as 'Daniel', then when he dies we'll know it was him and not just another grunt/AI. The foundation of having any RPG element in any game is that of building character. Most FPS/RPG hybrids base their RPG elements around skill accumulation but also dialogue options and character building (in fact, that is pretty much all that separates Deus Ex, for example, from another FPS). A greater degree of non-linearity would help immeasurably in making ArmA2 something revolutionary.

Here you go Forrestal - here's a few of the more interesting ones thrown on rapidshare. Be warned though - you don't really see anything spectacularly interesting. http://rapidshare.com/files....vi.html Landscape video. http://rapidshare.com/files....vi.html A quick jog around some streets. http://rapidshare.com/files....vi.html A glimpse of the elusive 'talk' action. EDIT: Nice one Spoock - a much better job of it than I!

Very, very interesting developments re: the videos and new information. The fact that the conversation system has been retained is amazingly good news - it indicates a level of interaction in the soldier sim genre previously unseen. Have you noticed the action listed it as 'Talk to Daniel Lee'? Perhaps we'll get to know our soldiers by name and forge personalities a little more instead of them merely being number 1-12+ in the command menu?

Yeah, half my squad in the 'Sierra' mission are ending up bloody and battered when they exit the UH60... Strange! Even so, this mod is EXTREMELY professionally set up and the addition of sample missions really sets this mod apart. Thank you for all your hard work and I don't think I'll tire of these fantastically satisfying weapons.

I can't quite get my head around the massive outpouring of negativity when it is based upon essentially nothing other the similarity of a bunch of screenshots, pre-release and work in progress, to what we have at the moment. Of course it's going to look similar - think about how similar Armed Assault looked to OFP:Elite when it was first announced. They were virtually identical. ArmA came on in massive leaps (graphically) compared to how it was when it was originally announced - oweing to BIS' track record, is it not unreasonable to hold fire on the damning criticism?

I can't quite get my head around the massive outpouring of negativity when it is based upon essentially nothing other the similarity of a bunch of screenshots, pre-release and work in progress, to what we have at the moment. Of course it's going to look similar - think about how similar Armed Assault looked to OFP:Elite when it was first announced. They were virtually identical. ArmA came on in massive leaps (graphically) compared to how it was when it was originally announced - oweing to BIS' track record, is it not unreasonable to hold fire on the damning criticism?

The ironic thing is that I thought those old 'Game 2' screens were absolutely mindblowing in their quality and advancement. Now they look postively ancient and archaic.

The ironic thing is that I thought those old 'Game 2' screens were absolutely mindblowing in their quality and advancement. Now they look postively ancient and archaic.

If anybody can pull it off, I think BIS can. From the myriad previews we have access to so far, their ambition knows no bounds and they have (it seems) a genuine passion for making a soldier sim more than just about firing a weapon. If it wasn't for BIS' ambition thus far, we wouldn't have the all-encompassing OFP and its incremental update ArmA. It's STILL the only game on the market to convincingly render all major facets of the modern battlefield, something nobody else has equalled on either scale or fidelity. Some of the ambition, danger, risk and invention that was present in OFP should translate well to ArmA2.

In particular reference to the way the 'bigger' publishers treat tactical shooters, I'm inclined to be a little bit suspicious of Codemasters in this instance. I'm expecting a significantly diluted experience. That said, they did release the original OFP... So I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. As with all unreleased games, a wait and see atttitude is perhaps the best one to adopt.

I think they've been very tactile with regards to their releasing of screenshots. The shot of the Spetznatz with the bandanas on and Bizons is very, very reminiscent of OFP and the shot of the Hinds on the skyline looks very similar to the two page spread advert of OFP that did the rounds in the UK press around the time of its release. I mean, the Hind is an iconic part of Flash and its absence from ArmA makes its return all the more significant. Has anyone noticed, as well, as to how far the shadow for the chimney extends over the back of the APC in the first screenshot on the teaser site? I can't remember shadows extending that far in ArmA. I think it's also been done to illustrate the excellent effect of shadows on smoke that's present in the original ArmA - one of my favourite (and most impressive) effects. I do wonder about the screenshots illustrating combat in more built up areas, though. Their presence is no assurance of improved pathfinding and improved MOUT modelling - which surely should be a priority for the sequel.

I think they've been very tactile with regards to their releasing of screenshots. The shot of the Spetznatz with the bandanas on and Bizons is very, very reminiscent of OFP and the shot of the Hinds on the skyline looks very similar to the two page spread advert of OFP that did the rounds in the UK press around the time of its release. I mean, the Hind is an iconic part of Flash and its absence from ArmA makes its return all the more significant. Has anyone noticed, as well, as to how far the shadow for the chimney extends over the back of the APC in the first screenshot on the teaser site? I can't remember shadows extending that far in ArmA. I think it's also been done to illustrate the excellent effect of shadows on smoke that's present in the original ArmA - one of my favourite (and most impressive) effects. I do wonder about the screenshots illustrating combat in more built up areas, though. Their presence is no assurance of improved pathfinding and improved MOUT modelling - which surely should be a priority for the sequel.

I'm really enjoying this, thank you Kronzky. I've learned a hell of a lot about hit and run tactics using this mission - taking the first town with 4 men is an incredibly difficult task, and I had to make use of a fraught heli extraction more than once! It's taught me much about loading up vehicles with additional ammo for longer ops deep in enemy territory, and the intelligent engagement of much larger odds from cover, firing and moving. The first spec ops-esque raid for the radio tower during the early stages of each siege is great fun and you have to continously change your tactics on the fly - the fact that you have a base to return to and regroup, rearm and replenish your forces also lends the whole mission a level of strategy previously missing. It's difficult and a little daunting to get started, but as soon as you're set up you can really go for it and the mission becomes supremely satisfying and enjoyable. Excellent work!

It may be possible, but is it included as content in the game by default? I know the line between BIS created content and user provided content is forever narrowing, but the presence of possibility within the engine does not equate to having the feature available within the sequel. EDIT - By default, I mean. I know it may make relatively little difference in a game as (potentially) modifiable as ArmA2, but it is always preferable to have such features as standard, no?

It may be possible, but is it included as content in the game by default? I know the line between BIS created content and user provided content is forever narrowing, but the presence of possibility within the engine does not equate to having the feature available within the sequel. EDIT - By default, I mean. I know it may make relatively little difference in a game as (potentially) modifiable as ArmA2, but it is always preferable to have such features as standard, no?

Haha, will do. I do remember however that there were various chunks of a variety of vehicles (I remember an Su-27 specifically) in a number of different screenshots that would seem to indicate the presence of vehicles that could be broken down into their constituent components, although you are perfectly correct in saying this is more supposition than anything else. I do think, however, that much vaunted features such as the dynamic campaign should only be mentioned should they be included with 100% certainty - such a groundbreaking feature and a first for the genre would be heartbreaking if not included.

Haha, will do. I do remember however that there were various chunks of a variety of vehicles (I remember an Su-27 specifically) in a number of different screenshots that would seem to indicate the presence of vehicles that could be broken down into their constituent components, although you are perfectly correct in saying this is more supposition than anything else. I do think, however, that much vaunted features such as the dynamic campaign should only be mentioned should they be included with 100% certainty - such a groundbreaking feature and a first for the genre would be heartbreaking if not included.

I have edited my post, prior to your posting, to reflect that fact, although I have to say that any material released into the public domain, and is thusly cited as a sequel and in development, if then lacking said feature, should be regarded with a certain amount of disappointment. I honestly think a lot of anger and frustration could be avoided if developers did not give us the slightest indication as to whether or not certain groundbreaking features are included outside of knowing with 100% certainty that they will make the final cut. I realise that is almost impossible regarding ongoing development but the documentation we have on 'ArmA2', going back for some considerable time now, would perhaps indicate that its unveiling as a playable prototype was perhaps too premature if certain features that formed its demonstration disappear. Such occurances only result in disappointment for the fanbase and frustration for the developer.

I have edited my post, prior to your posting, to reflect that fact, although I have to say that any material released into the public domain, and is thusly cited as a sequel and in development, if then lacking said feature, should be regarded with a certain amount of disappointment. I honestly think a lot of anger and frustration could be avoided if developers did not give us the slightest indication as to whether or not certain groundbreaking features are included outside of knowing with 100% certainty that they will make the final cut. I realise that is almost impossible regarding ongoing development but the documentation we have on 'ArmA2', going back for some considerable time now, would perhaps indicate that its unveiling as a playable prototype was perhaps too premature if certain features that formed its demonstration disappear. Such occurances only result in disappointment for the fanbase and frustration for the developer.

Maybe they're placeholders for the fully destructible units we were promised? I should imagine that getting a moderately playable game in the first instance, to test the fully dynamic nature of the conflict (supposedly) would be first priority. I hope. EDIT - Actually, I shouldn't say promised. 'Looking forward to' is perhaps more accurate. Still, this is all based on information officially released via previews and interviews so any false hopes should have an equal distribution of blame should they prove unrealised.