hoot

OFP:CWC was running quite well on my TNT2 back in the days, but ArmA1 just gave me 12-13 FPS in the beginning because of that nasty copy-protection issue in 2006...so...ummm....no ;) Yesterday I was playing some good old Battlefield-style maps in OFP:CWC/R and DVD's BWCTI and there is definitely a difference in handling your soldier. OFP:CWC/R feels more responsive than Arma2 does. Don't get me wrong, Arma2 is "nice" for coops and immersion, but when it comes to PVP, OFP:CWC/R beats Arma2 easily although there is no reloading when running and your movement is quite limited in comparison to Arma2. However.... ^^

To keep a long story short: I like it :D

I'm also missing our usual 'Adagio for Horns' during armed-assault.de coop sessions :rolleyes:

Is OA listed somewhere else already? I wonder that it is not available at Amazon since the release is in late June and iirc Arma2 was listed there two or three months before the actual release. Mh...

German Gamestar also published a preview @ http://www.gamestar.de/preview/action/taktik-shooter/2314394/arma_2_operation_arrowhead.html . They've not found any serious bugs, but they are criticizing the AI a little, the robotic animations and accessibility. But it seems they find OA is in a pretty good shape so far. Edit: OMG! 'KI' switched to the proper English term/abbreviation AI :D

The 5mins video showing that neat AH64 supported by the AHX UAV has finally arrived at PCGames.de. No new intel given and also no prejudgment or potshots there although they were the most anti-BIS page during the release of Arma2.

Yep that first screener is so *wooooooooohaaaaaaa*.

Ah okee, makes sense ;)

But it has its origin in RV, or does it not?! It really looks familiar somehow :D

Nice...........:p

You can also decompile binaries, so you also have 'freedom' on proprietary operating systems, somehow *lol*. And that's illustrating pretty well what I meant. If you are lacking in knowledge of certain things, the whole open source 'freedom' becomes a pseudo one. The normal user doesn't care about code much. Those users want systems they can handle without needing an university degree in computer science. Linux made some good steps into that direction during the last decade, but it's still lacking in some software where WINE cannot help or where you would need a virtual machine, and the dual-boot is more handy. I don't want to bash any OS. Everybody may use what he or she likes, and above all, what fit to their needs. But often I get the impression that folks pro Linux are mostly arguing from a wrong base, because they want to proselytize people to use Linux whether or not this OS would fit their needs.

If you want to run servers (mail, ssh, sftps, http(s) or whatever) stick with FreeBSD or OpenBSD which are more lightweight and shell-oriented, but if you want something desktop-like and easy to handle give PC-BSD a try. PC-BSD is based on FreeBSD.

True! That's why I'm with BSD most of the time now, that simply keeps me outside of those stupid debates why the own OS is much better than this or that. And since the last kernel updates for Ubuntu shut down my WLAN automagically I also tend to say that's the same difference with every OS, advatanges and disadvantages. Most people just use open source to feel better, although they never had stuck their heads into the code before, never analyzed what is going on. So in the end, they also depend on folks telling them that all is fine. Of course, open source OSs gives one the possibility to have a look under the hood, but be honest, most of the today's Linuxusers never ever touched something like C before so reading through LOCs is like reading a book about übermath without being skilled in math at all. And this does not stop here. Because of being able to read code does not mean to understand what happens there and with related things. Most would need a deeper knowledge of coding structures, techniques, patterns, do's-and-dont's plus all the stuff that comes with a specific language - pointer arithmetics anyone? So for my liking, the whole thing open-source is interesting for folks knowing their profession, the rest sticks with precompiled binaries and generic kernels! I would say there is simply not enough ROI for BIS. And as BIS will never open up their sources because it's their business to sell engines in a compiled form, the open-source idea will rest with the OS, but not the game.

For all who are bitching at tab+fire should have a look at Mando's Missiles instead. 'Nuff said...

Being around here since the days of OFP:CWC. True is, there is no game out there offering so much freedom in every possible way. And hell, I've tried many of them during my long lasting gamer 'career'. I was a bit disapointed with ArmA, but defended it where ever I could since besides its OFP 1.5 nature it still offers more than most competitors do. With Arma2 I am a bit more pleased although I still find that BIS, without CM, is focusing a bit too much on coop modes with their current titles. I wish back the good old days of Battlefield1985 (jump in, have fun for half an hour and forget your stressful weekday), but gameplay is still a little slow for that. So I do hope that OA can bring it back somehow. Animations in Arma2 are way faster then in ArmA, but it is still missing the response times of OFP, to my liking. However, Arma2 was a big step back to OFP - what is meant positive - with good enhancements here and there. I really like it. The setting is superb. Eastern Europa ftw! I would put all my money to BI titles again. I don't regret any purchase since 2001!!! No game ever made me play it that long - not a single one!!! And so OFP is still on my HDD...with ArmA and Arma2 of course.

Sweet indeed! Nice shots.

"Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." And so the term 'Enough has been said!' seems to never get applied here. I mean sometimes I've got the feeling that every single bit of DR was discussed, actually, but then I get happily surprised with a new topic from the guys of 'how to beat a dead horse best in the longer term'-club. Funny? In parts! ;)

Once more on the BI forums: Thanks folks! I really like to see my old fat lady back in a BI game! Great work :D

From my local observations, the patch also updates the arma2server.exe to 1.05, or replaces it. And isn't that how it works since ArmA (or even OFP)? Apply the patch to the client and put its files to your server. Same goes for linux but instead of using the win server binary you use the linux binary (after applying ./tolower ;))? But maybe I'm wrong.

That patch version is now missing on the beta build's page. Guess they reverted it ;)

That's why most of us were so impressed by the original Flashpoint back in 2001 already. It was hell of immersive back these days and you see it yourself, we have 2009 now, and there is only a limit amount of games, offering such an immersive feeling. 'Most' of them are BIS games. Think now for combining this with Track-IR and you will get a step closer to tooooootaaaaaaal immersion

OFP is no way better than Arma2 for me, neither technically-wise nor when it comes to scale. What most people seem to misinterprete is their feelings that they've had back in 2001. When OFP hit the shelves, we were all stunned by the freedom it has given, the re-playability and all that terrifc stuff that holds us bound to this very community. We have not seen this in a game before, or just in shallow submittals like the Delta Force series for example. So, we sat there continuous swearing about the little glitches but with a lasting Woooooow on our lips. It is like running up a hill. To reach OFP we needed to climb on top of it that hill, a hill of adrenaline and a heck of testosterone. Then we stayed there for a long time and were glancing down to all the other games that are and were just some kind of corridors with just a little of the features that OFP was or is offering. We waited and waited and then came ArmA - 'nuff said. We all expected something similar, another hill to climb but we were given just an OFP1.5. Fine for most of us, since ArmA still beats the shit out of most of those competitive games mechanics-wise. After ArmA, BIS promised us Game2 and we finally got it with Arma2. I don't know if it is really what BIS wished to be Game2 but however, a lot of folks do like it, including myself. But again, the feeling of 2001 is still missing. It is not because I am not frightened in serious situations anymore, or that I'm missing the adrenaline. It is not because of the visual presentation that is not ugly enough for a BIS title, it is because of the freedom. Yes, simple as this. BIS have again opened their sandbox a little more to us with enhancing features or introducing new features to their sandbox VR3. We again expected something like going from zero to one hundred percent like with OFP - a steep slope. But it is like that the sons (modders / mappers / scripters) emancipate themselves from their dads (BIS). BIS has given enough stuff to let the community do a lot of things that would probably ruin any other big-ass company. I guess the whole thing is about that people want to have back that stunning feeling that they had in 2001 when we were given something entirely new. To make those people say, yes it's better than OFP for sure, would need BIS to build a game with what you can go on a Star Trek or what turns your PC into a 65-metric-tons-Leopard-steelbeast-transformer. It's like saying the oldies from the 60's were the best music ever made, but this was also stated for classic music of the 18th century or some kind of movie scores. It's like Ennio Morricone (from his early works) vs Hans Zimmer. OFP had it's time, but now Arma2 is the 'solid copy'...same same, but different.

Yep nicely done so far. But on the other hand, bring back the mp horn :music: pls. It's like the rotor downwash in ArmA. It was gone with a patch, and silently switched on again in later patches. I need this to keep Mr.Burns awake when we are cruising through Chernarus. ...i know, it's frickin' important :p

Finally. I mean WINE with OFP:CWC/RH/R runs damn fine, except for this shadow flickering :D Edit@CryEngine3: Iirc Crytek is selling their engine for a neat value since FarCry, and I also think that they have not sold so many licenses this far. Of course I don't know any numbers for sure, but i remember some discussions on Gamasutra or GameDev.Net that were whispering it. However, i find it important that some studios are tossing such nicely done engines onto the market from time to time. Not only for telling competitors what they can do, but to also get those frickin' Siggraph papers applied finally.

What is your qualification to judge those things? Guess you are one of those millions of computer scientists out there, who can judge from outside the box whether an engine sucks or not by just staring at the screen. So LOL indeed...