S!fkaIaC

Budget: 600k$ ????????????? :D Can't be true. 600.000 / 4 years / 10 devs = 15.000$ per year if it was only spend for the full time devs Partly they wrote/spoke it already about ArmA 1. I honor this honesty, but it was a little late. I would give them 100€ for ArmA 2 without bugs and some features missing since 2001.

So to summarise it: Even if one BIS leader told us straight into the face that he scratched what he had from the disks and released it as ArmA 1 to get some money from us - we are ALL idiots - not only me - and we will buy again, knowing that it will be full of bugs. BIS can count on us. Wow, what a coming out, now it is public :D yes, I am a cash cow. I feel hurt.

Well, I evaluate the game how it arrived at my disk, not the way it was intended. Sure many new features, but if we talk about "feeling", being dragged into a virtual world, then it is like I suggested: OFP = diamond, ArmA 1 = Because? Because whenever you start into a mission in ArmA you came pretty soon to a point where ether the mission logic was broken or simply a bug destroyed the atmosphere. You were trapped by enemy forces and running to the next cover - but what? Why I can not crouch under this fence? It is 90cm space between ground and first bar! Bang....dead. Or you brought your 6 tank platoon successfully to the front line.....then you stop suddenly plong! and one tank is on its turret. And it goes on like that. Endless. Pure technically ArmA 1 was much better then OFP1, but what does this mean? You can not sell me a Ferrari if it is pink!

The game story is like that. Of course it would be nice to play it with one character out of every of the six factions. But that would mean 6 x Campain+Missions. It is the old-new approach introduced by BIS: if you do not like our mission(s) make your own. That was driven to the top with ArmA 1, where only a few missions were playable, but I hope they have this time bug free SP content.

The idea was brought to BIS attention (does not mean their recognition) in 2002 already. That AI is able to go back to any object/subject defined as ammo pick-up point is in service since OFP. The only missing (maybe it is possible already?) is the ability to set the ROF ingame like [do_fire;xxxrounds;ROF=YYYY]. The confirmation by AI should be split in 2 stages, 1st the confirmation of the command and 2nd completion of fire mission with status (succ/nonsucc) as well as the ammo repository after completion. That would give the modder the ability to do his own scripting logic of the "awarness" of the AI about ammo pick-up points and the resulting AI behaviour. Remarkable is that there must be a limit. AI currently fires the ammo until the bitter end. In my suggestion the command is always limited.

IF BIS would have an sophisticated cargo/inventory management in several stages (mag in weapon/vest/next cargo depot) they could adapt AI ROF accordingly. If AI is "aware" that in addition to his 6 x 30 bullets in vest also 500 rounds waiting in an APC 400m away, he COULD adapt.

You should search in youtube for Afghan vids. There are several vids where russians drive with BTRs over IEDs, on top of BTRs 3-10 soldiers. In one vid one guy came back out of the skye 5 seconds after explosion, alive, until he hit the ground. Nice flight. maybe sometimes it is better to burn.

This species does not exist.

AI works 2D in ArmA 1, height will be a secret for AI also in ArmA2. This statement is based on nothing else then experience.

There is no experience from other games. If you ever touched OFP1, then there is no other game. ArmA was a kind of "Flitzkacke" out of the brain of BIS, but I hope they will do another "OFP" with ArmA2.

I will buy ArmA2 because I am an idiot.

I dunno why, but it is somehow how BIS AI worked and workes and will work forever. The Comanche in OFP had the same, from far it started to fire random bursts and the closer to target, the more often the AI gunner fired a burst until it sounds like full auto always on. Whoever is defending that crap, it is nonsense bull crap, most of the time it is a problem of the addon maker, but the root of the problem is with BIS.

Which ****** told you such a ****** ?

The reality is: a forum is made only to make wild speculations because otherwise you do not need such a forum at all. Following your logic we can close this forum and just read the manual of ArmA 2 when we buy it in the shop.

Stupid me :o Yep, by accident I dragged into ArmA context pretending that they deal with modern weapons.

Are you aware that Marder is out of use? http://www.planetopia.de/archiv/2009/planetopia/05_03/21.html You see, if you want to simulate the actual state correctly, use the damage-crumbled model of OFP as normal one in ArmA 1 :)

Did you managed to get those 2 x 7.62 MGs working in that BMP3 with dedicated gunner positions?

Speculating, but it is necessary to know before making a possibly useless attempt to get it right for ArmA2 for Freetrack.

I remember, the often forgotten default. Wasn't there a request to make "none" as default? Troopmon is an addon/mod/bunch of addon? CoC I know, but I do not remember that CoC CEX is able to move units from one team to another e.t.c. But somehow I am sure that it is not a matter of mission functions/commands in ArmA, it is rather the lack of willingness by BIS to hide that behind a decent GUI. But maybe the CoC group or any other modding team will solve it. MAPFACT are half way of what I like with their nice tools.

@furiosity: maybe you wait until a good modding team is interested in this bird. Maybe some teams that made stunning addons for OFP will be reborn with ArmA 2. Check what was, and will be again possible: http://www.opflashpoint.org/addons.php?t=1

:eek: :confused_o: First you discuss with vilas and others HW and performance related stuff and now you hammering him into the ground for asking if there was something mentioned about collisions in ArmA 2 in an PRESS article about ArmA 2? Well, I am confused, can you publish a list of things which can be discussed for the next few pages until you change your mind again? Back to topic: This "step over the fence/obstacle" seen in some videos, up to which height of an obstacle it works?

Well, it is hypothetical, there might be not such a influencing behaviour. Hence it is pointless to send NP an e-mail. So "if an UNKNOWN company MIGHT have a exclusive right on an implemented API in ArmA 2" would be acceptable for you? Btw this "Kafkaesque" restriction of the topic makes me feel like I am in a Chinese forum. If something is influencing the topic to be discussed it should be ok to discuss it. And I criticized a POSSIBLE decision by BIS, nobody knows if it is like that. I was NOT discussing NPs business behaviour, it was rather BIS possible business behaviour. A clear word could end it. Maybe I PM you my next post so that you can control it before publishing?

With all respect, I guess it is pretty hard to discuss freetrack only if there might be a contract(phrase) between BIS and NP that might influence the (possible future) relation BIS<->freetrack. Btw, where is the thread to discuss the NP business behavior, is it here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=72436 ? If it is anyway a hoax, please end this by stating "There is no exclusivity right for NPs API".

OMG, Seen this one a long time ago, could not find it again. This is an evergreen, should be played all day long on a large screen as an endless loop in BIS premises :D But hey, nobody can say that AI in a truck is stupid, have you ever seen in any other game that AI is capable of such stunts? :D :D :D

@Squint: You did not got the point. No problem with a contract protecting NPs business interests, but as I mentioned before, making exclusivity rights part of such a contract is pretty stupid IMHO. And in Europe it is anyway problematic to implement such defacto-monopole, you see how EU was after Microsoft for similar actions. But BIS can do what they want, but they might get another minus on their account. But there is the huge plus that they implemented head tracking at all.