Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

Stimpak_Addict

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    146

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by Stimpak_Addict

  4. Posted

    Folks focusing on features and graphical limitations, keep in mind that an average gamer is looking for some fun, to be entertained, not technical details.

    ArmA2 is great, but what if OFP2 offers the same feel with less pain and less hassles, for example? The sales would certainly reflect that. Suppose 6 months from now I download AA2 demo and OFP2 demo, and play them. In AA2 demo I get stuck looking at the team screen for 10 mins before the match finishes, in OFP2 I get put into observer mode and get to check out the fighting. When I finally get into the game, I get immediately sniped by the jeep machinegunner from 600m while hiding behind a tree with only my eye showing, but in OFP2 the accuracy is not that precise, and I win the match, it's still challenging but doesn't make me want to throw the keyboard at the wall and yell "WTF!" when the APC gunner snipes me in the gunner's seat of an attack chopper doing a tight turn at top speed. This repeats 5 times. And then next day on my way from work I walk into the videogame store. What do you think I'll buy? For an average gamer, the answer will be pretty darn obvious.

    On a conscious level I realize AA2 is infinitely deeper and far more customizable, if "more" is the right word. But none of it will matter if the other game is simply fun, entertaining, hassle-free, while offering the same FEEL as AA2. An average gamer will not get that far, an average gamer will fire up the demo, and join a match. If that experience is awful in AA2 and in OFP2 this experience is pleasant and entertaining, albeit still challenging, that's the game the average gamer will buy. If they don't enjoy the initial gameplay, they will NOT rush into the editor where AA2 really shines and say "Aaaah, this is cool!", nobody does that.

    In layman's terms, nothing I've seen so far says that AA2 is a superior GAME to OFP2. It's superior sim, with superior customization potential, but those don't make it a better GAME. All that OFP2 has to do to survive and thrive is to beat AA2 in gameplay aspect of it, even if it comes up short on simulation and customization. Why do you think WoW has survived so long? Because it was superior to other MMOs graphically? Or because of its superior customization potential? No, of course not. It survived because the gameplay was accessible and fun, while in other games it was painful and clunky. If you want to see this in FPS genre, COD series is a good example. It's an old franchise and keeps on going strong because every installment always offers one thing: highly responsive, visceral close quarters FPS combat. If COD suddenly dropped that and went into a sniper simulator where 30 mins of crawling finally culminated in a shot from 1100m and if you missed you'd have to start over, would the sales for this game come anywhere close to the previous installment? No, of course not. Why not? Gameplay would no longer be fun. Sure, it would be fun for some - the few, the proud, the geeky, but it not for mainstream.

    So I wouldn't celebrate just yet. Not until we've all tried it and saw what it feels like in actual gameplay. Because that, not graphics or technical aspects, are what makes the game live or die.

    Play on Recruit mode first and do all of the Boot Camp missions. They put those things there for a reason.

  5. Posted

    How I found this out:

    I was testing out to see if teamates can be shot in the head and healed in the Editor. It turns out that the video was false. The soldier died on the first headshot from an M9. I liked the death animation. That got me thinking, "How are the grenade death animations?". So, I threw one at my feet. The grenade didn't explode. I kept trying to blow myself up with other explosives, but it wouldn't work.

    Fact.

  10. Posted

    That equals to being killed. Imagine you're leaning around a corner and there's a UAZ there with a machine gun, looking just in your direction. They'll start shooting immediately. Wasting even ~1.5 seconds to toggle the lean means you're dead. That time could've been used to move away from the corner right away.

    Try playing with it for a while and you'll know what I mean.

    I know there are other issues with the game but this has been bugging me for a long time with ArmA 1, too.

    Nope. It's not a problem for me. It seems that you're just too slow, and are blaming the game on it.

  12. Posted · Edited by Stimpak_Addict

    Optimization suggestion:

    When Player Character moves, temporarily stop vegetation animation. When player character stops, resume animation. If possible, though, make vegetation animation stop/start after player's speed goes past/behind a certain speed. Some people, if they look close enough, may notice that the animation has stopped when they are walking, so stopping it when they're running would be ideal. It's wouldn't be really noticeable, and would possibly increase performance. But would this be possible to do? I'm not a coding expert, but have always wondered why developers didn't do this as a way for optimization.

    LoD change hiding suggestion:

    Could you possibly make it so the LoD changes fade in and out instead of simply popping into existence?

    Depth of Field suggestion:

    Change the simple depth of field distance to... say... 500 to 1500 meters. So things close up will be crisp and clear, but things far off in the distance will be blurry.

    Bug fix: Team mates' body parts will sometimes disappear then reappear while in vehicles. I believe it has something to do with getting too close to them while in first person.

    Bug fix: Sometimes, if I look directly behind me while riding in vehicles, I can see that my head is missing, and there is just a hole. You could possibly make the possible head turn slightly less while in vehicles.

    Bug fix: Some characters' arms will clip through their sleeves. Possibly make their arms a little bit thinner.

  13. Posted

    The only thing I don't like about the demo is the blurriness. If I wanted my game to be blurry like that, I would just go back to standard definition instead of high definition. The reason we went to HD is because of how clear and crisp it is. Oh, and the grain at the title screen. Basically, every post processing except for motion blur and depth of field when aiming down sights. I'm fine with those things. Other than that, the demo is great!

×