mr reality

I check your website religiously everyday. I was waiting for this and i'm looking forward to anything you guys release as i know it will be top quality. Thanks for keeping flashpoint alive..... Have you guys any plans on retexturing your units for ArmAs. As i know they would be superb. PS, when do we get the bike

Deffinatley not, but we will see a change in these forums as the game will bring in the FPS crowd. I'm probably over-reacting but after the Oblivion fiasco i can see where this game maybe heading. I suppose i'll find it had to let go of OFP...it's one of a kind. When i played B17 Flying fortress i stayed as the top turret gunner throughout a mission, sometimes i would be the tail gunner or a side gunner but i never flew the darn thing that's for sure Â

Having choices is not always a good thing. What made this community great is the loyalty to the original game and the fan base respected the fact you could die in a missioin very easily if you didn't use your head. A lot of gamers were put off by this aspect of OFP which inturn lead to a more concrete community as we all strived for the same things. Now with the implementation of no actual penalty for death while in a mission (unless you get the whole squad wiped out) the fan base will have gamers of a differant ilk...ala BF2... It was stated that ArmAs will be more realistic than OFP but only in the way a weapon recoils and some other things i forget-but having switching and jumping into the next soldier upon death is NOT realistic. This is where my concerns lie.

This is a direct quote from the review. The "playable" character is for switching soldiers, not the soldier you jump into upon your death.

I'm pretty sure i've read that when your character gets killed you will jump into the body of the next soldier in your squad. i can't remember where i read that but i'm 90% sure i'm correct.

I think he's refering to the fall-out period rather than the actual blast and shock wave as that would turn a tank into a coke can.

Well Nyles the only way this will happen is with the community made addons. As i see the vehicles in ArmAs to be what we've seen already. I'm thinking that we wont see a Bradley or a linebaker or vehicles like this because of the USARMY1 pack. We all know how much that cost and to give ArmAs a vehicle list similar to that of the USARMY pack at a much reduced price would have VBS1 haters laughing there tits off. Maybe i'm wrong but it's just a thought..

I would like to see the AI fallback when they run out of ammunition or if there is none available on the ground. Or maybe have the option as a unit commander to spread the magazines around the units at a lull in the mission without having to order individual drops and pick-ups. A soldier should be able to collect ammo from a dead buddies body without having to be ordered to do so (not sure if this is already implemented). If the gunner of a tank or APC is badly wounded he's unable to operate it-thus the vehicle would have to retreat. The retreating aspect of OFP has to be done better as the current system tells the squad to retreat but they return to attack the same position from the same point with fewer men. No logic whatsoever. If a squad loses 60% (editors choice) of it's men they should suffer "morale" breakdown where the leader may order the remaining men out of the area. Medics should not be in a squad as they are non-combatants. Squads have ALL soldiers trained in basic first-aid. This way the nearest man to you would heal you rather than the medic 100 metres away who invariably gets shot while leaving his cover to help you. These ideas are probably more for game2 but i would think there doable.

Maybe 9 or 10 days is not a great deal but if you remember when Iraqi freedom was ongoing there were constant updates from troops on the ground which were activley involved in fighting. This guys over there training basically what seems to be no more than a militia and we've not heard from him in 10 days. He's slack..very slack-but what else can you expect from an American soldier . I'm just supprised he hasn't posted a picture of his own arse yet..

The problem with that is ArmAs will be more or less the same unless the AI has been updated. It was because your squad had been killed (admitidly this pissed me off about OFP) that YOU had to retrieve the law from your buddies dead body to finnish of the tank. How else could you do it, restart the whole mission-i don't think so...I would also like to know how you actually went about retrieveing the AT weapon. Did you run rambo style into the open to get it then equip it and fire it. I don't think so pal-because you would of had your nuts shot off from the 7.62 ak round that you never even heard coming....One man army this game isn't...If you accomplished a mission on your own it's because you used your brain-unlike many other games where you just use your right hand (and i'm not talking about leisure suit larry either  ). @SEAL84 I know some units still have the outdated vehicles pressed back into service but we've had those in OFP and although they look better textured and modeled there basically the same. Unless BIS are hideing some content from us then i'll keep quiet about this but i'm not holding my breath.

Well correct me if i'm wrong but wont ArmAs be exaclty like that except instead of using one soldier in a mission you can use three differant soldiers at any time of the mission. So now instead of trying to find that AT weapon all by yourself in the field of battle you now just have to switch to the tank gunner and hey-presto the tank is dead, now i'll just switch back to my squad soldier coz i've got rid of that peskie tank. IMHO this is a dumbing down aspect of a great genre and like i've mentioned already it's a scenario where you can be multiple soldiers in one mission. That just plain sucks. one of the reasons this game didn't go down too well was the ease with which you could die and the lack of save games meant the use of tactical awarness in the mission was needed. Having more auto saves and the switching when your character dies is the result of that. Being given the choice to switch is not the issue, it's the fact the devs have put it in in the first place which leads to more FPS fans buying this game-which as i believe is an obvious step to sell more copies. Unfortunalty-trying to appeal to the masses only ends up with dissatisfied die-hard fans. That being said we'll have to wait and see the final product.

VBS1 has a new AT animation but that's just being able to stand up when you press "walk back". You still can't fire it though if i remember correctly which has always bothered me. I highly doubt ArmAss will differ from OFP in this regard.

How about letting me have an early version without MP compatability as i NEVER play MP. Most of the issues that take time to iron out will be MP bugs, so because i don't use that why do i have to wait for that to be fixed. Now my other point regarding incorrect lettering of vehicle varients. Why add a letter in the first place if it's not correct-why do they have to give us the letter name instead of the more familiar "cobra" or "abrams". And another..With the implementation of character switching i see a game aimed at "BF2 rambo i don't wanna die when i'm hit once so i will switch characters ingame coz this dude is boring and i wanna shoot my tank gun at those men coz i'm shit at tactics so i'll win by blasting every thing to death" type of gamers. I love OFP...i have played no other Pc game since 2004..i will purchase armed assault and i will play it the way i like...but!!!

I'm hoping the vehicles that we've seen in the videos are "placeholders". I would prefer a more realistic contingent with regards to the units that have been deployed on Saharia. As you've already mentioned, the majority of vehicles could belong to the southern forces. I asked a question earlier regarding types of vehicles but the responce was "It doesn't have to be exact, and the community will mod it anyway". My responce to that is-why should the community have to make realistic varients when it shouldn't pose too much of a problem to get it right the first time. I prefer realistic units but there are others who don't care and there philosophy is-a soldier is a soldier and a tank is a tank. I would also like to know how large the northern forces could be as the island size tells me it couldn't be more than a 1000 strong-that's including conscripts. There airforce would be virtually-for want of a better word-shit..There naval strength would be laughable so i'm assuming the north has some southern rebels acting as terrorist units. I personaly think the campaign will be aimed at newcomers to the OFP genre-hence the "switching characters". This will keep the "rambo" players happy and unfortunatly the realism fans like myself will be left feeling a little letdown.

One word- Abuse...............

Well my assumption on that is either the player wishes to stay alive long enough for us to see goings on in the video so is holding back from the action or he/she has no idea what he's doing or what squad he belongs to. He doesn't seem to know where the rest of his squad is and ends up stumbling into them. I watched the MP video and one guy had the dreaded "click" of the weapon as he took aim-and yes he did die.......my point being-there testing it out rather than playing the game.

I feel the opposite as i want my AI buddies to be able to handle there own situation without me having to come to there aid all the time. I honestly will not use this aspect of the game-not even for "fun" as it doesn't fit with what i think flashpoint is all about. This option has been implemented to gain some fans from the shootem-ups so they can have a larger selection of vehicles and weapons all in one mission and at the start. What i love about flashpoint is being part of a squad and trying to get your squad safely through a mission with your own tactics and weapons, not having at my disposal a tank so i can jump in and blast everyone to death. Edit: Does anyone else think this maybe a way around uninteligent AI because it lets you do most of the donkey work instead of the AI?. Just a thought.

True, but if the name is inaccurate why not simplify things by calling them what they are-rather than what specific version it is. That way everyones happy. Seeing as there is just one version of a (eg)T72 ingame i don't see the reason to name the varient. Also on the statement about VBS1 being highly accurate is also incorrect. I noticed right away that the core M16s are too long.

Yes I know...I mean whenever I have run with a weapon, the natural tendency without thinking about anything is to point the weapon down...like you said, you're not really thinking when sprinting, so your arms put the weapon in whatever is natural, which in most cases is downward. Which is why I find it odd he is sprinting with his weapon pointed upward...it looks somewhat silly. Err anyway...unecessary nitpicking/whining on my part...but I thought I might as well bring it up since we're talking about running animation I understand what you mean but it would also depend on your weapon. I used an SA80 and i would often run while holding the weapon pistol grip with my right hand and i would use my left hand to hand signal or break my fall when i took a fire position. The picture you posted is a "comfortable" way to run with a weapon but not exactly accurate for ALL types of weapons. I would say that picture is a MG carrying position as there far heavier, but as the game engine doesn't allow for differant weapon anims they have to make one to suit all. Maybe they think they have found the right one. Only time will tell...

The OFrP helos do exactly this except for the breathing part as this depends on the physical state of your soldier, ie running or walking hightens the breathing rate so if your just sitting in a cockpit you wont be out of breath. It could be coded into the aircrafts config i would of thought.

To be honest, while your "sprinting" with a weapon you obviously can't aim it correctly so the position is irrelevant. When your running for cover or to a determined position your first thought is to get there and then take up a fire position. Running and sprinting are differant in real life as they are in flashpoint. As long as they have a good running animation i don't care about the sprint.

Looking at bravo 6s picture again i can see the middle soldiers weapon is lying next to his body and he's not holding it. Maybe there's a few differant death anims and some are holding the weapon and some arn't.

After i installed Ti0n3rs Elite sound file into flashpoint it got me thinking of one sound that is still missing in the game. I'd like to know what you guys think- have the engine sound running even when the driver gets out, if he hasn't turned the engine off. Probably best suited for players only as the AI would have to be scripted. What used to bother me was the rotors on the helo would slow down when you jumped out and just wanted to scout around for a minute or so. It would be far better to have the engine running.

It's been a while since i used the original M60mg in OFP but this sounds freaking awsome. It reminded me of Full metal jacket, "Get some, get some". If this is a little taster before we get ArmAss then i'm very much looking forward to the improved sounds in that.

I read that the US forces are about to withdraw when the invasion starts. Not have withdrawn. If the US were there to train the southern forces why do they need to return. Was there training in vain and what were they training them for if it wasn't to protect there borders from such an invasion. And if the US deemed it nesescary to train the southern forces they must have known an invasion was forthcoming. So why withdraw. And when have US forces ever withdrawn troops from a soon to be capatalist country.