Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

C4SINO

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    29

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by C4SINO

  2. Posted

    Instead of being lazy, why don't you do a search on google or hell maybe this forum.

    It's all there or here, you can type you can search.

    I searched and I provided links, other than a difference in seasons those look the same to me.

    And congrats to BI for going for something different with Eastern Europe, but it's their third title and it's still the same setting. I prefer change, this looks like the same experience.

  3. Posted · Edited by C4SINO

    Ohhh, myy, gooosh. Please get yourself educated, or at least get the facts. Go play with a friend that actually has the game. You cannot look at the graphics and get a feel for this game. And you cannot get the WHOLE picture without playing the editor, SP, and MP. Each has its own unique display of the games depth, character, capabilities, and limits.

    Perhaps, but from videos I've seen...but yet no one has told me what's different about ArmA 2. You just say something like that.

    So tell me, how is the setting different?

    Let me show you:

    Flashpoint

    ArmA

    ArmA 2

  4. Posted

    As i said before. We need spectrum:)

    MW2 - BFBC2 - OFDPDR - ARMA2

    All can happily coexist next to each other (on console). Goes without saying that sales drop from left to right but even ArmA2 can shift multiple 100k's on 360 i think

    (a wild guess on 360 would be MW2=4-5M, BFBC2=2M, OFPDR=1-1,5M, Arma2=0,2-0,5M)

    Well that's not even my 0.02 cents. My 0.01 cents:)

    I would say that's fairly accurate, but wouldn't you say that OFPDR combined some of the mechanics of BF and MW with Flashpoint so that they can grasp more audiences while BI have stayed true to their fans and kept it the way it should be?

  5. Posted

    The settings, while being European in nature, is very different from OFP. The storyline, the map, the time period (1985 vs 2009), it's all different.

    I said the time period, and obviously the map and the storyline are different. But I didn't sit there taking notes on stuff like that, I mean gameplay.

    He had the Demo, but I just wattched as he was a U.S. soldier attacking a Russian occupied village in a setting similar to Eastern Europe. Everything felt the same to me, ArmA just felt like Flashpoint with better graphics, more equipment and a bit of spit and polish here and there.

    And ArmA wasn't Eastern European in the first place :rolleyes:

    Did I say I own it? I said I saw my mate play it. I didn't sit him down and interview him on the game, I just saw what it was like. And what I saw looked basically the same as Flashpoint, Eastern Europe. :rolleyes:

  6. Posted

    BI are not based in Germany.

    And Germany is not eastern Europe for that matter.

    I was told by someone they were German, I thought they were closer to the East but it's better to say German instead of somewhere in the East.

    And obviously German isn't Eastern, but it's on the same continent and they are very close to Eastern Europe and have greater access.

    It's surprising just how many people steer away from the question in these forums, they'd rather pick out small things not related to the thread.

  7. Posted

    The campaign and the BIS content are such a small part of the game. Ultimately it really doesn't matter when it comes to long term gameplay. All the mods for OFP and ArmA is what kept me playing for all these years, not the original BIS content.

    Is a new thread really necessary for this? Just throw it up in the "impressions" thread or one of those.

    I've not played it on PC so I don't get modded content. I played Flashpoint: Elite on Xbox, my mate showed me ArmA on his PC and now I find ArmA 2. In all honesty, I can't see much difference between Flashpoint: Elite and ArmA 2 except graphics, weapons and the time of the game.

  9. Posted

    I don't know about you, I'm sorry but the Eastern European just doesn't peak my interest. It's very plain and old. With this setting it just reminds me of a Modern Day World War 2. I know that BI are set up in Germany so it makes it easier for them and they can accurately make the setting much easier.

    But their past three Military Games have all been the same setting, Communists invading small Eastern European countries and the U.S. Capitalists intervene. First it was Flashpoint, then it was ArmA now it's ArmA 2. All the same thing, they're all basically expansions of one another.

    Obviously the setting is good for the game with open plains, villages, mountains and forest but there are many other places like that in the world. I really enjoyed the African setting of Far Cry 2 and I'm sure that this could be integrated into ArmA 3.

    But c'mon, another Eastern European setting? Let's try something different...

  10. Posted

    Just wait guys let all the PC markets get released and then let BOHEMIA put out some patches to make the game run like it should.

    The console version per MS guidelines must be almost BUG FREE. We only have a week and half just relax and sit back and watch ARMA2 get released world wide.

    We will get console information and it will be before OFPDR. This is just a feeling in my bones.

    For their sake it better be, ArmA 2 has targeted one audience, OFPDR has targeted several audiences and will get noticed much more than ArmA 2. Keep that in mind BI.

  11. Posted

    As for the reason, I don't think BI ever specified a specific reason you asked for, and left it up to your imagination.

    What we know is that CDF and the goverment asked for help, and someone responded, it turned out to be US and the USMC. Why did they do it since it doesn't benefit them in any way? Nobody knows, but we can imagine that BI imagined a world where there are selfless people, who'd come to help without any benefits for them.

    Yeah...I guess that's basically it. There's my answer, there is no reason, in this World everything is black and white, good and evil.

    Well if the Mission Editor is all it's cracked up to be (and this game comes out on 360), perhaps I can fill in the gaps.

    Or if BI decide to make ArmA 3, they might think through the true reasons.

    You can close this thread by the way, my question is answered.

  12. Posted

    True, very true, but the UK didn't send aid, how many nations did. Why is the U.S. the problem? The world sucks, no nation will commit without a political gain, it is the truth. Most superpowers won't commit unless they are connected by some sort of agreement or there is a political gain. Maybe back in the day people would fight for honor or justice but rarely does that happen on an international scale. I don't want to justify selfishness but I don't see why the U.S. should be on the spot when there are other nations that wouldn't do differently.

    But like Centipede said, you may be thinking to far into this. It is a war simulator not a political simulator.

    EDIT: Read your thing about OFPDR and somehow I doubt the U.S. would ever fight China and China would never fight the U.S. now that could be marketing. :D

    So I guess I have my answer, there is no real reason that the USMC are intervening, they only do it to be good guys. I guess I should get ready for another corny story, I'll still buy though.

    You ask why the U.S. is the problem? I only asked because their the main characters in the game, but if you want me to get political and tell you why their the real problem in real life, your better of PMing me.

    BTW, for OFPDR, it probably is a marketing strategy. Ever notice they got the biggest armies in the world and mashed them into one conflict on a small island?

    I just do hope that the 360 game comes out shortly, maybe I can fill in the gaps

  13. Posted

    For example, I'm sure everyone knows the Game Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising. The game's plot is that the Chinese and Russians are at war on an island that has the largest untapped oil and gas reserves in the World.

    The USMC back the Russians to remove the Chinese from the island.

    The reasons or motivation for doing so was not only to have a stronger alliance with the Russians, but more than likely to strike a deal to get the oil and gas for cheap or for free.

    Now look at ArmA 2, they intervene with this civil war, they back the democrats over the communists...but why? There's no oil or anything there, there's no plan to develop a base there so why?

    ---------- Post added at 02:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:06 PM ----------

    Please do not discuss politics and analyze real life conflicts and such here. If you wish to discuss events of real life conflicts and such, there's plenty of offtopic threads for that.

    My apologies, I didn't realise. It's just that this is on-topic as it has to do with the political side of the ArmA 2 storyline.

  14. Posted

    How many countries specifically ask for serious aid. The kind of aid that sends tanks, air support, land forces, etc, etc. I'm not saying that the United States would just send a million people to help those in Darfur or something. I'm not Naive but typically if a nation asks another nation for serious aid, they get something in return. Especially if they are in good standing with the other nation. I mean there is no doubt that the USMC was a good marketing choice but at the same time look at BI's audience. They haven't really signed on with a publisher like Atari which will put their game in front of Americans. They signed with 505 (European) and some German publishers first, Steam gets it later and while I will say Steam is well known I guarantee there is a ton of Americans that have no idea what ArmA is, or ArmA II for that matter.

    Countries that asked for serious aid, what about the Rwandan Genocide? Almost 1 million people killed in 100 days, no help came for them? And I'm sure they asked for aid.

    And yes, I agree with you that not many people know what ArmA is. I would say that's because this game is aimed at a specific audience, not the general population to maximize profits.

    may i suggest not to overanalyze things? or you could get creative... say chernarus is in caucasus area and they got oil there. kuwait was small also, and US respond with desert storm.

    maybe chernarus president is a very good friend of US president and the president, using his emotional response, send in the USMC...

    That's what I'm asking, what's the reason?

  15. Posted

    I think what you are trying to say that the storyline for the campaign does not reflect the complexities of the modern world geopolitics and that it demonizes Russia's protectionism of her compatriots in the near-abroad while idealizing the US hegemony... I would tend to agree with that. But guess what, I did not buy this game for the campaign, and I am certainly not disappointed with my purchase!

    Peace,

    DreDay

    Lol, touche. If this game ever comes out on 360, I'll buy. But one thing that annoyed me about Flashpoint 1 was the corny story. It just didn't feel realistic, I've yet to see a game that could portray a story that could potentially happen in real life.

  16. Posted

    See my hypotheticals above. :)

    Yeah, I saw yours after I posted mine. I know it's made up, obviously, and it's just a game. But if this is a Realistic Military Simulation, don't you think they could at least make a Realistic Story line?

  17. Posted

    Well Bohemia Interactive wanted to try and make a bit of a plot and for them the USMC was perfect. You have your independents, the Guerrillas, you have your EAST the Insurgents assisted by the Russians you can find the relation, and you have the West, the CDF assisted by the USMC. The USMC being the Western link that gives Chernarus aid, which in the Georgia war I don't believe any nation commited any actual fighting force but more so supplies and etc.

    For BI, the USMC was perfect for a role like this. The unit you play as are apart of a Marine Expeditionary Unit. These guys rove the oceans or are deployed to hostile regions of the world. They wait for crisis and orders from the President or Congress to be sent into a warzone. They are the United State's quick reaction force, sure you have your small special forces but an MEU can deploy an entire fighting force, air, sea, land, etc. So BI created this element in their Georgia-esque plot.

    That's good man, I like to see that you put in a long answer. Personally, I think BI put the USMC in for those reasons, but for marketing. More people in the World would rather play as the USMC than let's say the Chinese Army, or a Georgian Army.

    But once again, let's look at the story. Communists trying to overthrow the Democrats in this small country, the Democrats ask for help and the USMC respond? Why would they want to do that? This is a small country having a civil war, it happens all the time and the USMC never respond to those, so why this particular one?

  19. Posted

    The USMC is able to deploy without the authorization of Congress, thus it is usually sent in first. The USMC is able to deploy more rapidly than the US Army, so is used in a 'quick response' manner more often than the US Army, who is usually called up for large scale operations (i.e. full on war). There is a Marine saying 'First to fight' which often sums up this nicely. :)

    I would suggest playing the game to get the exact story.

    I know the Marines can be deployed quickly, I heard they can be deployed anywhere in the world within 18 hours.

    But no one has answered the question, why does the USMC intervene. Why does the US feel the necessity to get involved with a Civil War? As far as I can see, this doesn't affect them whatsoever, as I said, the Cold War is over so who cares if the Communists win.

  20. Posted

    So no one has really told me why the USMC, I've been told it's based of the Georgian Incident. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Georgia invaded Ossetia while killing Russian Peacekeepers.

    So after this, the Ossetians and the Russians drove back the Georgians and invaded them. Is this right?

    If so, I ask again, why the USMC? I've never even heard of these countries until this incident occured.

  21. Posted

    These insurgents are murdering civilians and causing unrest, so this Quick Response Force, the MEU, hits Chernarus so no more innocents are killed. I havn't touched the campaign in a while but that is what I recall at the beginning, something about civilians being killed and rounded up, etc, etc.

    So they're the Knight in Shining Armour? Lol, I won't start ranting, you have usmc in your name ;)

  22. Posted · Edited by C4SINO

    I don't know much about this game, but is the storyline about Communists trying to overthrow the Democrats?

    If this is the case of the storyline, why does the USMC intervene? The Cold War is over, the Communists are no longer a threat, so why would they care what happens in this small country. What do they get from it?

    So mainly, why does the US government feel the need to get involved in this war? What is it they benefit from it? It just seems they're being portrayed as Good Guys who just want to help without expecting anything in return.

×