Zipper5

That looks like it was around the half-way mark moving from the OFP:E engine to the ArmA engine. I really wish that "Flashpoint 1.5" saw the light of day on the PC. :(

At that range, sure, but I also go for trick shots with them from large distances. Rarely do they hit, but they are fun to get. :p

Nope. I'll admit, I do it myself: 7blY_7b0uIM That's quite the old video... Anyways, I do it just for some fun as it can be quite entertaining. The problem is when everyone's creating these COD-rules that you have to use a sniper in a certain way otherwise you're a noob. That shit is one of the many reasons why people hate COD players.

The Officer unit has one.

Not aiming down the sights with the Cheytec sniper rifle and trying to get a kill with one shot. Anyways, Flash Thunder, that's not going to happen, not when COD's biggest audience are console 'tards. ;)

I find that Arma 2 isn't so badly optimized as it is developed for the future, I find. When I was playing OFP on my really old desktop PC I could barely get 20 FPS, but then I got my new laptop and suddenly I had 300 FPS but 20 FPS in ArmA. Then I got my current rig and went to over 100 FPS in ArmA and around 40 - 60 FPS in Arma 2 & OA. Since they're designed to last a very long time I guess they want you to experience it at an increasingly higher level as time goes on, provided you upgrade a long with it. :p Speaking of which, I need some more RAM and a new processor...

BIS should do a Vietnam expansion pack... :D Or DLC, depending on its size.

Pentium 4? Kill it with fire! :eek: Seriously dude, if you get that bad of performance on such a blatant console port, then you are in dire need of an upgrade. :D

I've been making a campaign almost constantly since shortly after OA's release, using every new beta patch that has come out, and I have not had to change any of my 4 completed missions to make them work because of something the betas did. Same exact scenario when I was developing Operation Cobalt for Arma 2. Plus, when something does go wrong, have you not seen how quickly BIS get a hotfix out? They just released one on the weekend! I've yet to be forced to change anything of mine because of patches. They are labeled beta for a reason. While their quality and stability is certainly above the betas I've played in pretty much every other game, they're still not 100% stable or certified for an official BIS patch release. You use them at your own risk.

Why, or how, was it leaked? :confused:

ACE2's level of realism should always remain an option. Some people don't find playing the game hyper-realistically to be fun, like myself. ;)

If you look closely you'll notice the camo of the "Russian" soldier is actually the SLA's camo. Those weren't pre-renders, they were just very early pictures taken in enclosed-but-highly-detailed areas with a low view distance. Some of them actually show assets that were in both ArmA and are in Arma 2, like the M249 (ArmA's model and textures) or the AAV (Arma 2). :p But man alive did they look awesome back then!

Never mind. Tired, didn't read properly, made a stupid post... Please delete. :p

It's been in the game since the beta patches before OA's release.

Removing what are staples of the franchise already makes it a failure to fans, we just lucked out on also them giving us their business ethics to hate on.

Lol, who asks on the internet if it's legal to start a militia in New York state? Seriously, that's something I thought I'd never see. The internet's just a barrel of fun. :D One can only hope Placebo's chargin' his banhammer... :p

ohara, you rock. That is all. :D

Nah, he was only said to have departed the project and later we found out he went to Crytek and has been there since. Either he simply got a better offer, he was fired, or he himself resigned, but none of that was released. I'm going for he got pissed off for working for the liars that are Conmasters. :rolleyes:

Yes, you're right, but he still says really stupid shit that I cannot see is coming from CM telling him to say it. :rolleyes:

I agree JdB. Every time something goes wrong after development changes people always jump on the fact the game would have been so much better with the original dev team. Given the fact that the reasons for DR failing so much and RR continuing that trend seem to come from either the gaining or lack of money by CM, I doubt even with the original dev team we'd have had a much better outcome. CM are a mainstream developer in every regard, and their sole objective is to make money now, not make a good game.

Great thread idea! If I was to take the obvious answer of the AI out of the question, I'd say they should concentrate on the mission content. That includes the campaigns, the SP missions and the MP missions. They have done exactly what I'm looking for in Eagle Wing and Crimson Lance, but they were only added to the game after it's release and are not part of release version. If they could make campaigns similar to or exceeding the excellence of Eagle Wing and Crimson Lance, and make them a little longer, then it would be perfect. One piece of advice I'd give to BIS is you don't have to make them MP compatible. It's a great feature to advertise, but it doesn't really work 100% in any of them so far, it makes for bland mission design sometimes, and can cause some severe performance headaches. Both Eagle Wing and Crimson Lance are SP-only (apart from mission 3 of Crimson Lance) and they're able to push it further in terms of quality as a result. The SP and MP missions of OA and the BAF DLC are already exactly how they should be, they just need to keep it up. :p Edit: Just saw you added a poll but didn't put anything about the mission content. Are you able to add it?

I like how people over there think DR's user score was low because people found it too difficult to play due to it's aspects of realism. True, there are those who say that about it on Metacritic, but they are definitely the minority. Look at the rest and count how many say the game is a disgrace to the OFP name, or it's not an OFP game, or CM treat their customers like shit. ;)

I just bought Ostfront today on Steam for $10. Seems I can also get the Darkest Hour mod for free, which I found out has Canadians! :D Definitely going to give it a try when I get the chance and see what it's about.

You can actually learn how they best work when in Danger mode with enough practice. For example, I completed AnimalMother's Reaper mission just now without losing a single team mate, yet they were always engaging, being shot at, and in forced Danger mode. And this isn't a one-off; rarely do I lose many AI-controlled team mates when playing in SP because of how long I've spent working with them. If you spend long enough you'll be the same. However, I'm not defending the issue raised, I too would like it changed back, I'm just arguing the notion that it's impossible to control them when they're Danger-forced. ;)

A game is a failure in my eyes if it doesn't please it's fanbase first and foremost. Obviously a profit needs to be made, but that doesn't mean screwing over those who are supposed to be giving you said profit, which is exactly what CM are doing.