Zipper5

Wow. You know, I think that Polaris guy is insane. I would hedge my bets that the rest of that DR Heroes group are, as well. After all, he is the leader of it.

As you may or may not have noticed, the v1.04 final patch is several times larger than any of the beta patches. That's because it includes other, more space-filling fixes. Therefore, I have a feeling v1.05 will include more of these, but they don't have enough fixes that are small enough to justify putting them in to a smaller beta patch. I wouldn't be surprised if the next patch we see is v1.05, rather than a v1.04 beta.

Is it just me or has this discussion gone waaaaaaaay offtopic? :confused:

I noticed when loading 1.6.0 it now detects the beta folder as a mod folder, but the same option to load it as before is still there under the Settings tab. Do I have to load the beta folder to get it to work properly? Or is that a bug?

And ArmA's vehicles aren't to the same standard that ArmA II's are. The textures are much lower res. They would/do look very odd in ArmA II when contrasted with ArmA II's default vehicles. I'd say we should wait for OA, when we'll have many of the same vehicles as in ArmA but of much higher quality. Or, until someone else makes them.

Yes, I did look at it. Quite thoroughly in fact. It has a section on LUA scripting but it's hardly as complex as any mission designer would want it to be. It doesn't just offer you the commands, it tells you how to only do specific things... Such as adding a "letter box" :j: ... LUA is definitely much more complex than they make it seem in that guide, and no where else has it been laid out in detail so that editors could really get at it. Until such time as that happens, missions will only be able to reach the mediocrity level of the ones provided in the game by default. But hey, I don't think there are that many people left who are actively modding the game.

What I'm saying is that it's fact that DR's AI is heavily scripted and ArmA II's is not. Given the range of things that ArmA II's AI does successfully & dynamically compared to the range of things DR's AI does successfully & dynamically, it is a proven fact that ArmA II's AI is the winner out of the two. I don't know what you're seeing that makes it seem better, as I have yet to see anything done by their AI equal to or better than what ArmA II's can. Yes, it does. Have you even tried the mission editor? You have to tell it to do even the most basic parts of AI programing. Not once did I ever feel I was threatened by the AI, only when they rolled up in tanks. Suddenly their accuracy shot up when that happened... But hey, to each his own. If you enjoy DR then alright, enjoy it. It just saddens me that this gives them the incentive to make any sequels to the game...

To say that DR's AI is better than ArmA II's AI over and over and over again should be considered trolling. Before the game's release, sure, you could say that. But post-release it's incredibly evident that the AI in DR is terrible by default, and anyone who says otherwise must be blind to the countless videos, statements, screenshots, and even to them playing the game themselves. It is AI like in COD4. It's spawned, shoots, and does little else but be cannon fodder for the player. It needs heavy scripting and the placement of many different gamelogic-like elements in the editor to get them to do incredibly simple things that they should already do by default. Sure, ArmA II's AI isn't perfect at all, but it's so obviously better than DR's AI, despite it's flaws.

Hey, william1, could you please stay out of this thread in the future? Posts like yours contributed to the last one being closed, and now you're doing the same thing in this thread. We're discussing, and you're flamebaiting.

I cannot attest to v1.0, but v1.01 that got shipped with the 505 Games version worked perfectly fine for me. It's only gotten better since. Even then, v1.0 was out for, what, a day or two before v1.01 was released? DR has been released for over a week and nothing has changed. Hm, I highly doubt someone has already been able to do such a complex modification to the AI system without any tools what so ever. Judging from how DR's AI already acts by default, however, it might not be that complex... :j: I never knew this fix you speak of existed, I only tried that dispersion fix, which is what I based my comment off.

Saying that ArmA and ArmA II don't work and aren't playable is just wrong. Both work flawlessly for me. DR also performs very well, but doesn't exactly bear a huge load. Well, DR is uninstalled on my PC, never to be installed again. However, I did try the AI tweaks and messed around with a few custom missions, even tried creating my own. The AI tweaks are just stupid, now instead of never hitting you, they always hit you. It seems you can only have one extreme or the other due to the way CM made their AI. Also, all custom missions currently released for the game are extremely poorly made, but I don't blame them. I blame the lack of any scripting information being released to the public, as well as CM encrypting their files obviously intending on people not to look at them. Denying the fanbase the ability to mod already makes this game a bastard child of the OFP name. Saying the game evokes any form of a "Flashpoint feeling" is wrong in my opinion. I played through the entire campaign (once I got past one mission that just randomly decided to end on the 5th playthrough) and played all of the SP missions, and then played in MP. Not a single time did I enjoy myself. Not only does it not give a feeling of playing OFP, but it doesn't give any sense of fun at all. For me, at least. Hardcore is also ridiculous and just a cop-out by the developers. Not once did I see anyone in their fanbase say that they should remove everything. If there was, it was probably only one. It's worse than COD4's Hardcore mode, and makes the game even less enjoyable. Eugh...

If you have never played OFP, ArmA or ArmA II on the PC, for whatever reason, then you'll probably love what DR brings you. If you have, even if it was OFP, and you understood even just the basics of it, you'll be extremely disappointed, like most of us here were.

Yes, or just regular Notepad.

You should just make sure you're making missions with only the mods enabled that you want to make players need. Some addons quietly sneak themselves into the mission even if you aren't placing anything to do with it, like VopSound. That way you won't have these problems. And if in doubt, just open the mission.sqm file and check for the addons under addOns[]= and addOnsAuto[]=.

Flashlights on weapons are one of the features that will come with Operation: Arrowhead. It's more complicated to do them *properly* than you would think.

ArmA and ArmA II are definitely the spiritual successors to OFP. While not really sequels, they've continued the OFP legacy. DR is not OFP's real sequel, despite what CM might advertise. Officially, it is, but in my opinion, it doesn't deserve such a title.

If you had any idea of how the game actually worked, Mango, you would know that it would be very difficult for BIS to remove the ability to use MHQs anyways. They're done by scripts, and each is different for each map. It would require tons of scripting to even have a small chance of blocking the use of MHQs, especially due to the robust scripting languages. Also, I like to play with crosshairs sometimes, thanks. I can play just as well without them, but I usually always play in SP with them. And I'm not a "noob" to the game either. It's how I like to play the game, and BIS doesn't stop me from enjoying myself. For the love of God, stop posting the same stuff over and over and over, and then to not expect getting the same answers over and over and over. It's literally like it won't get through to you. Maybe this will help. FREEDOM IS WHAT MAKES BIS' GAMES GREAT

I would hardly call it a trainwreck. Sure, many people had issues at the start, but the majority of them have been patched out by BIS. Some may still have issues, but it's becoming more and more likely that it's due to a fault of their own, not BIS'. Plus, BIS continue to actively patch the game while they're working on Operation: Arrowhead, unlike, let's say, Crytek, who stopped working on Crysis to bring out Crysis: Warhead. Furthermore, BIS have said many times that they will not be ceasing developer support for ArmA II just because they're coming out with Operation: Arrowhead. Both games will get the same support. Personally, I've never had an issue with the game. But that's largely because I did research on how I could configure a new PC to get ArmA running as best as possible, and it has continued to work flawlessly with ArmA II. I've also finished the campaign at least 6 times the whole way through, as I wanted to see each ending without using a cheat. Therefore, I would suggest to you that you make sure that your issues are through no fault of your own before you blame BIS, or anyone else for that matter. Many of us have the game working fine, so you can't say that ArmA II doesn't work. And if ArmA II works, then so will Operation: Arrowhead.

According to the mission.sqm, the author has forgot that you need two other addons. Chernarussian Red Army troops NIM Dynamic Weather If using those doesn't fix your problems, then the author will have to look in to what's causing it.

Again, ziiip, look at the user scores. DR is at 5.2 and ArmA II is at 7.7. That says more than the official reviews do. Granted there may be some fanboyish statements made in here, but for the most part we're discussing DR. And due to the nature of what that discussion should be, we discuss the positives as well as the negatives. There just happen to be many more negatives in relation to DR, and that is only the fault of CM themselves. Not once has anyone said ArmA II is flawless, but it's definitely less flawed than DR is.

Frankly, given the statement that he made after the release praising how the game turned out, that wouldn't surprise me. Meanwhile their forums were being flooded with negativity.

Another interesting point about this is that ubermachtig was one of those DR Heroes, or the so-called "pretend moderators" over on the CM forums. I guess CM are now hiring the "pretend moderators" as real moderators? Wonder if there's a reason behind that. But what an awesome letter none-the-less. :D

And I highly doubt that it ever will, given the reaction people have had to the game. I don't think Codemasters will want to actually save it a few months from now. Unless that news post about Codemasters announcing a sequel to DR is true, in which case...

No, because, again, that limits the creativity a mission maker can have. People, please understand. The thing that makes these games great is their freedom. Sure, it causes people to screw around, but that's a small price to pay for such unprecedented freedom. Don't take that away from the game. It will losing something significant that distinguishes BIS' games from the rest of the industry.

Jesus. Another person saying that no one plays ArmA II... Why are we getting the run-off from CM's forum? :butbut: