Zipper5

There were more bugs in both OFP's and ArmA's releases than there were on Arma 2's, but still, no, rocks do not catapult vehicles into the air. I can't recall them even doing so in Arma 2 to be honest, but I knew they did in ArmA. The only issue with rocks at the moment in OA is that you can get stuck on them sometimes and they may injure you or your team mates, but yes, BIS are aware of it, and I'm sure are looking for ways to fix it. The patches have indeed fixed so many issues that comparing Arma 2 at release to the latest OA beta is like night and day.

Don't forget about BAF Lite and, most likely, PMC Lite. No MP computability issues. If you don't think it's worth it then replace your BAF or PMC-specific weapon with a different one. We don't need another thread that hastily jumps to conclusions that BIS handle their DLC just like every other company out there. They're different in the sense that they care about their community.

Yes, many issues causing low FPS have been fixed, but no, your computer hasn't changed. Good FPS in games is a partnership between the game's optimization and you're computer, and if you were having constant framerates below, say... 20 FPS last time you tried Arma 2, your PC is causing the issue.

Hey! Those are the creators of VBS you're talking about! :p

OFP is a classic. The fact I still happily play it today with friends is testament to games not needing flashy graphics to be good. :D

It's a community in the same sense that YouTube Call of Duty commentators are a community. Reading over there for the first time in a while, there are some interesting posts I've come across. Namely this and this. The first lulz-worthy, with CM claiming these things to be engine limitations whereas they're actually just console limitations, further indicating how little they care about their PC community given the same limitations were present in DR's port. The second is just... interesting. ;)

Indeed, I rarely sign online petitions as they mostly end up doing nothing. I won't sign this one for the same reason, but also because I can't think of any good coming out of Red River being successful due to the direction they're taking it while keeping the OFP name.

Team switching is there, it's just not part of the missions you're playing.

Apart from the people in power, i.e. the moderators.

I don't get why you bother with those people, Ben. It's such a waste of your time.

I am stumped as to why supposed currently-serving members of PMCs are openly posting about their jobs on a video game forum... And, again, you failed to simply ignore the people looking to cause shit. :rolleyes:

Czechoslovakia no longer exists. There is now only the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Therefore, they speak Czech, and they speak it because they're either Czech or Chernarussian forces. It doesn't make much sense having them speaking in English, let alone with American or British accents. None of the default modules affect this. None of the default modules prevent team switching, and Arma 2 is a simulator. In real life, you don't have the ability to switch to a different body. By default - you die, you're dead. You can only team switch to a different squad member if they are set to "Playable" in the Mission Editor, or if you're playing MP with respawns, or if the mission is specially scripted. The scripting language is actually pretty basic at it's core, but you're right that it has some irregularities. Nonetheless, practicing with it is the only way to learn it.

I presume that between the release of the final 1.07 patch and final 1.54 patch they fixed that issue, so if and when the next patch for Arma 2 rolls around I bet you'll see it as a fix. But one question - why are you using Arma 2 if you have OA? :confused:

You need to realize that this is the internet and people will say exactly what you don't want to hear in order to get a reaction from you. Therefore, don't play into their hands, as you did with most of that post. Otherwise it will be you being offended by them that will cause stupidity to break out in the discussion. ;)

No matter how good or bad it is, I think we can all agree that it isn't worth it's ridiculous price tag.

It will never end, MadDogX. We've developed an incredibly anal community here, for better and for worse. :p

CAN - YOU - FAN - BOYS - STOP - JUMPING - TO - CONCLUSIONS? :rolleyes: I don't see anything in his post hinting towards the notion that "it's not like Arma 2 therefore it sucks". His point is completely legitimate; the formula is becoming incredibly monotonous. MOH does nothing to make it stand out from the pool that has become the modern FPS genre. It's not unique at all, and I have no reason right now to buy it over any of its competitors, but it's the same with them. COD, MOH, BF, they've all become the same because they're all trying to out-do each other. The question is which one is the highest quality, and out of those 3, MOH is the lowest on the list at the moment. They had a chance to stand out, and they blew it entirely. Here's some visual representation.

It's entirely likely that BIS has been working on this since before we had any idea it would even be coming, therefore the suggestions were coming too late in the game for the focus of this particular DLC to be changed. But as I said earlier in this thread, the RPS interview hinted at them looking towards adding a new OPFOR to the Armaverse, so we'll just have to wait and see if that is what comes next. I, however, think this DLC looks pretty epic so far, and given the fact Karel is working on it, the campaign, at the very least, will be great. People have simply heard it's PMCs and automatically labeled it QG 2.0, but I don't see any similarities to it, yet, outside the protagonists being PMCs...

Why would they go for Frontline and not Allied Assault? Are they that out-of-touch with their fans? :confused:

NdKqzNp8-No I get what it's trying to get across, but I don't get it. Not very well executed. Oh, and we can see where part of the dev strength has been going, rather than on MOH 2010. :rolleyes:

^This. I am very intrigued by those. I look forward to getting some more specifics.

Kill it with fire! Those words mean nothing but bad in the gaming industry. I don't know if you're using them in the same context as, say, for the sake or remaining on-topic, Codemasters, but they still bring a lot of bad things with them every time they are mentioned... I could see PR2 selling more than Arma 2 because PR started off as a mod for BF2, which is a trillion times more popular than Arma 2 is. Therefore many more people know about it than they know about Arma 2.

This is an argument I never understand. I simply find swearing to add to the immersion of the situation, because pretending that soldiers don't swear like there's no tomorrow, doesn't mean they don't. If it's excessive, and I'd consider the swearing in "games" like Rogue Soldier excessive, then it's in bad taste. Here it's just fine, and simply adds to the emotion of the scene (which, for the record, sounds a lot better-voice-acted than ever before). I always find it odd how people are completely contempt with killing virtual soldiers and civilians, sometimes in very gruesome ways, but as soon as there is swearing people are all up-in-arms. It's most laughable and obvious in games like COD and the no-swearing rules on servers. :rolleyes: /offtopic

$10 for the BAF DLC was a much greater value than the $15 for both MW2 map packs, yet those set the record for the most-sold DLC ever on both consoles. :rolleyes: I don't see the PMC DLC being any less than the size and quality of the BAF DLC, and it may even exceed it given the new engine improvements being teased.

Well, listen to this too, from the RPS interview: And this: It looks like they're planning some OPFOR upgrades. ;)