Zipper5

Most of us "dislike"/"hate" Call of Duty more because of what it's done, and is continuing to do, to the gaming industry. The games themselves, while nothing special by any stretch and certainly not deserving of the ratings they get, are usually solid, even if the single player can be ridiculously short/stupid at times. I have a lot of rage in me towards Call of Duty because MW2 disregarded PC users entirely, and Black Ops made false promises of suddenly caring about PC users. Funny how the game still doesn't work properly on dual-core PCs. Arma 2 runs better on higher settings for me than Black Ops does. Apparently I would have to switch back to Windows XP to have Black Ops run properly. (And fuck that!) MW3, to me, is called MW2: New York.

The internet is the only place where everyone is simultaneously right and wrong.

I didn't ever think that they were 13 years-old, I always thought they had the mental capacity of a 13 year-old. ;) The majority of them, at least. And I played MW2 on PC, PS3 and Xbox 360.

Thread sticky'd. :)

Contact the server admins.

Why do we even want one to sell better than the other? Especially these two? We are talking about both Activision and EA here. People need to wake up and realize we need to stop giving these suits control over the gaming industry and put it back in the hands of those who actually play games.

That is the unfortunate reality of what AAA FPS games have become.

The videos shown so far are using the same animations that Arma 2 used. Ivan said multiple times that the new animation system is work in progress.

Sure is butthurt in here, but I can't figure out why. Something about Mitchell sounding close to Miller, which it doesn't.

No, the SP campaign has the potential to be significantly better without relying on it being MP compatible. And I'm speaking from experience.

5chars.

ArmA, Arma 2 & Arma 2: Operation Arrowhead all ran for me on release, completely fine. I think the issue most of the time is people need to take better care of their PCs, or learn how they work better.

It's the same as with anything: devs do one thing, people hate it, devs fix/remove the problem, people hate it. You just have to be sure you're pleasing the majority.

BIS and Codemasters parted ways a long time ago now, even before Armed Assault was released. The last title they released together was Operation Flashpoint: Elite for the Xbox. The reasons for the split were never made public, and probably never will be made public. Some hypothesize that BIS wanted to take Operation Flashpoint 2 in a different direction than Codemasters did. An old OFP2 promo pic indicates a possible Vietnam setting, rather than a modern one: Though, again, they're just theories.

What sense would ArmA have made had it been called Cold War Crisis? It's not set in the Cold War... Edit: Damnit Cameron!

Apart from, you know, a major selling point of Take On is the improved flight modeling...

Exactly. It's like how people wanted ArmA's content ported to Arma 2 by BIS. It wouldn't make much sense.

Please watch your image filesizes. The maximum size allowed for hotlinked images is 100kb. In regards to your request, this screenshot suggests that something similar may be planned.

Codemasters was hacked on June 3rd. Just got this email: Seems people don't take kindly to being charged for second-rate products, CM.

Some GameTrailers E3 footage of Take On.

I was simply stating our policy towards it to make sure that you had properly credited and/or got permission to use any and all 3rd party content in your mission. If you are unable to get permission, you definitely need to still credit the creators. Your reaction seems out of place, but it's your choice.

I'm not disappointed at all to see the campaign's MP compatibility go, if that's the case. :)

Yes, and I seem to have recalled it wrong. :D

E3 2011 trailer posted by Rock, Paper, Shotgun: bi0hwFuuUAE

Well, he's more than welcome to come here. :)