-Rifles-_Charlie

Yeah, I am of the opinion that it is bad form. Sorry if you don't like that. That doesn't make me a BIS-hater that shouldn't be here. I have already said that I think CM's tactics have been out of line. The problem is that BIS have actually reacted to it, in a way that could be potentially damaging for BOTH comanies. That press 'statement' has gone to loads of websites. To the casual gamer it now looks like all BIS does is care about preserviing the past with their games, and not moving on and breaking new ground. It just looks like they want to bicker. That is my personal view. Don't like it? Fair enough. You've got to have someone advocating another opinion for this to be a discussion... ...and also so we don't all turn into BIS fanatics who would blindly follow them 'til the very end, even if they made the next CoD

Yes. I am not disagreeing with BIS' argument at all. I agree CM are out of line a little, going around saying they're making a sequel without referencing BIS. All I disagree with is the whole public nature of their argument. Press releases are not there to start legal disputes. Maruk says CM wasn't contacted before releasing the press release and IMO that is bad form. I think we're all essentially agreeing anyway. We all want ArmAII to be the best and we want it to get all the credit it deserves when it's due. However, as Maruk says, the whole situation is very complex and the press release doesn't cover all of it. What Maruk also says is this: ...and this: He is exactly right. There's no need to develop partisan or malicious feelings about this at all. All that matters is that OFP1 is inspiring 2 major new games, both of which will be great (in different ways, obviously). So, let's just leave it to the lawyers, shall we? At the end of the day, all we can do is speculate, which implies that none of us have lives .

I don't think they've ever explicitly said that. Thus, the public declaration was unneeded as, to be honest, there wasn't any 'record' to straighten out. If you look around (in ArmA reviews in magazines, on gaming community sites, wikipedia, etc.), the facts are there. Maruk's press release and interview just shows (to me personally) that they are very conscious about something relatively unimportant, when they should be concentrating on making a potentially great game. The only moral high ground to take here is getting one's head down and making a decent game. Starting a public feud is, for lack of a better word, childish. Again, it will just making gamers, who might have already decided upon which game to buy, needlessly confused. Therefore, this should be done privately. Sorry, but no, we haven't. Videos and pictures may look great, but as everyone here loves to point out, gameplay is something totally different. That is what I'm saying: all that matters is the quality of the games upon release. Again, if ArmAII turns out to be a huge anticlimax, then, to be brutally honest, BIS will look very silly indeed. That, in my opinion, is one of the major flaws in this community: Jealousy and bitterness. All people have done here is express a fiercely partisan attitude and simply bashed Codemasters, who for all you know are going to release a truly awesome game that only enhances the reputation of the OFP franchise. On the CM forums however, any BIS-bashing is quickly rooted out with a stern word from the moderator. This thread, and theirs, is about discussion, not flaming. Anyway, it's all been said now, BIS' dirty laundry is out there for all to see. Let's let the games do the talking.

Hello everyone. I haven't posted here often (if at all), but I've been a member of this community since 2005 and this issue has infuriated me so much I feel I should throw in my two pence worth: The main issue at stake here is not who owns what and whether we hate CM or not. What is at stake here is reputation. What BIS have said these past few days has been very unprofessional, no matter how cheeky CM are being. The problem is that BIS are missing a ridiculously crucial point: Yes, it's 'the game, not the name' ...but we, or the wider gaming community as a whole, haven't seen either of the games yet! Now that BIS have basically issued a public challenge to CM with this new press release and interview, Spanel's got the wider gaming community (i.e. those who don't necessarily play ArmA) confused over which game is the 'true sequel' to OFP: CWC. People here and at other ArmA sites will already know ArmAII is the 'spiritual successor', but in the grand scheme of things that's not very many people. However, being the 'spiritual successor' means nothing if the game's awful when compared to OFPII. BIS now have to make a truly awesome game to prove to everyone that it is indeed 'the game, not the name'. So in a sense, they're screwed. CM will trash them at retail no matter what. Charlie

Afternoon Mr. Conroy. Check out the Rifles GC at www.riflesgc.com - UK-based co-op unit that uses British kit and has been around for a good few years. I recall you played a bit of OFP with us back when we were in the [23rd] but as you say, real life took over. We're a welcoming unit that tries to accomodate people's real life commitments and I'm sure we'd have no problem with your TS issues .

The Rifles' website has moved to http://www.riflesgc.com as of May 2008

Why am I not on there yet Griff. EHHH? username: rifleslcplcharlie

I'm not surprised the recruiting posts don't interest you. They all say the same thing. Why? Because there's nothing else for them to say apart from 'We're cool because we play tactically. Join us'. To get a proper view on a unit and whether it's for you, looking at their websites and forums should help a lot. Speaking of websites and forums, check out ours : www.riflesgc.com Why do I think you'll be interested?.... We are that clan. I would. In my experience of helping run a gaming unit that requires high standards, there are plently of people aged 13-16 that fit in very well with mature, strongly-lead, consistent units. Of course, the average age of a unit is important as the differences in things such as sense of humour and general life experience can conflict and cause problems. However, in terms of attitude to gameplay and determination to fit in, ages can be disregarded in many cases. At the end of the day, a good clan recuitment officer (i.e. most clan leaders and NCOs) should not only be able to weed out unsuitable recruits, but also get past mere ageism and look at the real qualities of the gamer.

In a gaming community, age doesn't matter... as long as you're not still in primary school.

Hello Dale. I'm a senior member of the Rifles Gaming Community. We're a UK-based, very close-knit community with a solid structure that works. We are mad about COOPs and realism, but the most important thing is having a good laugh! We are always recruiting and love meeting new people. Check us out at www.riflegc.com. Jump on our TS at 217.112.82.5:8767 if you like what you see. Cpl Charlie

Hawke, I'm afraid it is you that are being babies over a few words. The name is ours, and you seem to be very protective of that name ever though it isn't yours... strange. All the original [23rd] websites are still up... Instead of disbanding, the 23rd was formally handed over to Capt Viper by Q. There was never any official message of disbandment... As a result, members of the community, who are now in the current '23rd' picked, up on this and started up a [23rd] of their own. That's the full story. The main problem is that their newer generation of members have been kept completely in the dark about this, and many insist that they themselves represent the original [23rd]. What is more, the made use of the old 23rd's own recruitment posts and training ideas. Although this has been resolved, they still refuse to acknowedge the fact that their clan name, and their clan idea, is not their own. It is ours. As for the Rifles, it is merely a branch-off from the original [23rd] set up by Griff. The 23rd carried on after this happened under Q until the above happened. That is the full picture of the issue. I'm not going to spam their recruitment threadany more. Our position is clear.

Rommel, thanks a lot for the great comment. We genuinely appreciate it . Completely sums it all up. Glad to see that some members of the wider community remember the real [23rd] and understand why we're doing this.

Problem unresolved. This unit is the 23rdGD in name only. They have absolutely no links whatsoever with the original 23rd ran by Raynor and Questor. Unfortunately we have no power to make them change their name. We shouldn't have to make them, as any other unit would change its name out of courtesy. However, they are very protective of a name that isn't theirs. The old 23rd advises the community to bear all of the above in mind when dealing with them in the future. We would also like to point out that all the original [23rd] Ground Division members playing ArmA are currently playing with the Rifles Gaming Community, who, endorsed by Colonel Questor, are the real successors to the [23rd] name and legacy. Charlie