ben_s

Hence the "he's a BIS agent" conspiricies. However, Perhaps he signed up because he was in range of being able to do this, and signed up to tell us that he would do it?

"Take on submarines" as BIS' next title? ;)

If it was for Take on Helicopters I think there's gonna be alot of dissapointed people. :D

So was ArmA :troll: RUSE only failed because the devs dropped it, Up to release it was looking very good. And I liked the concepts behind it, too. Mostly the very well balanced larger scale battles, whilst incooprating tactics using the idea of ruses and deception. Putting infantry in forests to destroy enemy tanks was fun. :)

That's a long shot. I was more looking towards it being hinted towards Royal Navy addons? Britian entering Chernarus perhaps? EDIT: However, Perhaps both. :D

So this whole thread rests on the shoulders of this 1 guy? Who's not come back. Anyone suspect kidnapping by BIS? :D p.s Why's there loads of XXII and II's drawn on that image. Found out yet?

MY. GOD. This thread has grown HUGE ammounts since last night. Anyone wanna do a recap over what's happend so far, :o

Yeah. But there's good ways of saything things, and there's the totally wrong way. With Sion preferring the latter.

You all still belive BIS would actually put something in the physical location there? haha :D If there IS something there, i'll give whoever found it a fiver. :p

What DLC could it be pointing towards. I don't think anyone has put together an actual picture on what the hell is going on yet. It would be funny if it was a geniune hack that BIS sorted up quickly. :D

It said Person Black Hat Boys. (Probably a play on the Iranian Boys Black Hat hacker group that goes around) Hmm. Does someone wanna check the mission? (I never got that far in the campaign in A2) and check to see (as said) if anything has mysteriously been added in a patch? :)

I wanna see the face of one of the BIS devs watching this thread. haha

Hmm, Well it's back to normal now.

It's already been closed before, it just got reopened.

I just took a look - That's bad. It was a well written, pretty much unbiased review. It was very well detailed and covered most points that you can write down. (if not all). I've been going to the CM forums less and less. Since there's less stuff to do with scripting, less intresting members/discussions and more blatant fanboyism there (Seriously, anyone who thinks i'm a fanboy really needs to read some of their posts). It's just not fun anymore. Well, my Birtday is next week and will be [hopefully] getting a new PC then. And then, I'll be able to enjoy larger scale ArmA. :)

Nah, He obviously got them from BIS' private spacestation. :p Dwarden, Are those from Orbiter? (i've not seen it before, so don't complain at me)

Ok, I have a few questions for this community. With no current plans for a console version for ArmA, I was wondering something. What do you all think of the idea of porting a version of ArmA to the consoles, much like what happened with OFP:Elite, Do you think it would be a good thing. Or not worth the time/effort? Can anyone see any problems with having a version of ArmA ported to a console version? (Hardware, Gameplay, or other problems) If ArmA did get released for PS3 or XBOX, would you buy it? I know this was discussed, a long time ago. Back before OA. But, I was wondering what your views are now (Especially after the OFP Incidents), and perhaps about future consoles. (??) I don't know how you'll react to an idea like this now. So, try keep it constructive. :)

Because the EGO engine has really small draw distances? :D It's probably more to do with bad mission design and placing the mission boundry box in an odd place. (i.e. forgetting to place it) @zipper, People buy it because some people like it .. Much like how ArmA is only enjoyed by a specific market, or how flight sims are only enjoyed by a specfic market. This new OFP is only enjoyed by a, very, specific market. However, CM are pretty stupid and are aiming to release it to the wrong market. (BF/COD one). Which we all know ends up with a game that is too action-styled to be fun for OFP/ArmA guys, and too tactical and boring for BF/CoD guys. If CM picked a single market to make the game for. It might work ... better.

My 'reasoning' was in 2 parts. The reason wasn't the fact it had low memory, that's just the reason why they never attempted a work around. The game only draws around the player, hence the tether. Once removed, you can see the Ai standing on everly reducing terrian in DR. An obvious flaw in EGO tech. Since the game streams around the player, you can't have the player wandering off out of the AO whilst the AI are still in the AO. Or you get the Ai standing on non-rendered (and persumably, non-physics based) ground. And as you wander back, and that terrain gets streamed and rendered again. The AI would be stuck in terrian and probably have all manner of glitches/problems. obviously, one way to overcome this would be to despawn/resapwn AI as you move about the island. (much like the ACM module does). However, to do this in a campaign you would have to save the state, and location of all AI's as you despawn them. Obviously, this would be stored in memory or via save files. Hence the problem with the workaround, the console system (the one the game is designed for), Would have too much strain putting all that information into memory or do the constant I/O processing of it all, all the time. I can't see how your reasoning for the problem was any different from mine, except I gave a reason for not having a workaround as well. :confused:

.. Isn't that what I said ricbar, it's not rendering them if you walk off. And since the consoles memory is low, it can't just save the Ai's location to despawn/respawn them as you walk in/out of the AO ..

The tether/boundry will be there to stop the player wandering off so far that the ground the Ai and objectives are on are not rendered, and problems occur like the AI getting stuck in terrian as it gets re-rendered as you move back into your AO. I would guess this would be to consoles low memory - not allowing them to save the data for all AI's as you move about the island; to despawn/respawn them, in memory. A flaw that was uncovered in DR when you remove the "tether" in COOP games. As for RR itself, I got to play it earlier. It's more 'fun' than DR in one sense, but alot more boring in another. The game isn't so bland, you've got XP and classes to let you try new things and play differently. But there's too little content, and the content is so restricted and rather lacking, It's not worth it without a mission editor to keep content there. I mean, There's 4 FTE Modes, Last Stand, Rolling Thunder, CSAR and Combat Sweep. Each with 2 missions. That's a campaign (that is rather - lacking from what i've seen so far), and 8 FTE missions. IIRC you have to 'unlock' 4 of them, so when you startup the game. You have 5 missions to chose from. 4 of the FTE's, and the Campaign (as you need to start from Mission1, obviously). Each one would give you a small ammount of play time (maybe, 20/30 minutes per FTE). But that's not going to last you months awaiting for DLC ... if DLC ever comes, Remembering Dragon Rising ..

Most likley the consoles stick-to-aim stuff. Whether it will rotate you or not, but i aint sure.

Does this look familiar? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQVACRco9vw

Of course people get worked up over a British company misnaming an American force by calling one of their precious Marines a 'Soldier'. Which isn't unusual or slightly odd in any way.

They 'mod' game files, that change the AI, Weapon values and types and things like PostProcessing and effects. Not full blown modding like you get in ArmA.