Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

Ragingbear505

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    44

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by Ragingbear505

  1. Posted

    ;2345937']During the singleplayer campaign' date=' the player will take the role of a British Special Forces soldier, Captain Scott Miller. Initially, the player must survive on their own after friendly forces are defeated in a failed NATO operation. During the campaign, the player will face everything from lone wolf infiltration missions to the commanding of large scale armored operations. The player will be able to choose different objectives and weaponry (such as UAVs, artillery, and air support) according to their play style.

    Taken from the wiki which has been available since ArmA 3 was announced, have you been hiding under a rock?

    NATO is a lot more then just US, US makes up a small part of many many countries within NATO, FYI I am British not European (If that's what you were getting at regarding my last comment).

    ______

    At least I do hope BIS will be focusing on s different primary nation for ArmA 3, god knows they've used the US enough as is. Which leads me on to the units themselves, are they actually noted as being US? I think they're labelled as Blue in the editor. Equipment means nothing since it's the future.

    Well I wouldn't say a small part. The US represents about 70% of NATO's funding and about 40% of its armed forces. Still I was under the impression that Arma 3 was a Euro-centric conflict with the US acting in a supporting role. According to the Wiki Bluefor is the US 7th Infantry Division (7th US Army Europe). Of course that's just the lore tidbit for the campaign. Given the future tech it's pretty hard to definitively distinguish much of anything we've seen so far as specifically American.

  4. Posted

    I hope not, that would be a step backwards. Be nice to get some clarrification on what exactly was meant.

    I don't think we should worry. Reading the interview I believe they're specifically referring to purely cosmetic animations for AI characters only. You know how when they sit in vehicles or be crouched and sometimes awkwardly rotate their head back and forth as if scanning the horizon? I think they're just saying that the AI will now just have a canned animation rather than try to utilize actual game mechanics. I think in practice the AI will still scan without rotating their bodies, we just won't see the awkward animation. At least that's what I took from it.

  5. Posted

    Me neither... But the Idea is Pure GOLD!

    It wouldn't be that difficult I imagine, just extra work. You choose the campaign from the main menu, it gives you the option to be in a command role or a grunt role. If you play the grunt role you have an AI squad leader who holds your hand and leads you around. If you play the squad leader you're given objectives and its up to you how you handle them like in Harvest Red. Of course I'm simplifying it, there's probably a whole lot of things that make doing that annoying but I'm not an expert.

  7. Posted

    lol very strange logic, what ever floats your boat.

    "what else is there?", that's the eternal question isn't it? :)

    Every once in a while I am blown away by the things that the community develops, where they break the mold and do something unique you never thought of and all with the restraints that modders have to deal with (some of ACE's features would be a good example). BIS (with its ability to do whatever the heck it wants with the engine etc) should be similarly able to amaze us with such things.

    Just my opinion, but buying clapt out predictable DLC that people have said they don't really want or have much enthusiasm for but are going to buy anyway is a really bad idea.

    Sure innovation is hard, but that's what makes the end result so desirable.

    My favorite part of the BAF DLC was actually the easy to use artillery module. I would pay about 5 bucks for a sizeable collection of easy to use scripts and modules that made mission creation much easier instead of having to hunt through the editing forums and then examining the test missions people put in to try and figure out how to tweak it to my needs. I'm stupid, I almost failed computer science, I would love if I could just get some useful things in easy to use modules.

    They could have it as like the Arma 2: Editors Pack or something. Completely optional for people who don't like to edit but very useful for people who do.

  9. Posted

    I think it is not popular because its down to earth. Because every 5 seconds a hind-24 doesn't miss be by 5 meters and even if one did miss me it would have anthor pass because the Ai or some person flying isn't going to isntantly get shot down. Because the game has recoil. Because oh god its slightly unfair and a Mp5 doesn't go as far as a Ak-47. Because you can't run and gun. Because its not action action omg action the entire time, that IMO is the reason its not popular. However it does have a good fan base that cares about it. Mods it and keeps it alive.

    It is well know though in almost every Gamespot thread about something v Pc it is brought up because it is a symbol of something different and a new take games.

    I also don't think its not popular because of the multiplayer Alot of people like Co-op. If you want non-stop shooting play AAS, also mods make multiplayer almost endless.

    I've also noticed that trend on System Wars on Gamespot. Typically it goes PS3 has Killzone 3, what does PC have? Then someone responds with pics of Arma 2 and tells them when their shooter has dynamic AI, a huge open world, over a hundred weapons and vehicles, and an easy to use editor with a huge modding scene they can come back and claim superiority.

  10. Posted

    See what I mean. I post one negative thing here and I'm suddenly a troll. It's threads like this that are why I usually stay off the forums. Over there is a bunch of sheep and over here there is a number of elitists on their high horses making this forum look like a bunch of gossiping school girls. I don't care for either.

    I'm not "trolling," I'm saying it like I see it.

    Let it die already, doesn't look like it needs your help doing that anyways. Go play some ArmA 2 or something. Or just continue, it's occasionally laughable.

    No. You said something people didn't like and they confronted you about it. Gossiping high schools girls would just get butthurt and call you mean and ban you from the forum.

  14. Posted

    Rise of Flight - The IL-2 of WW1 flight sims

    Shells of Fury - The Silent Hunter of WW1

    [insert a bunch of low budget strategy titles]

    Yeah that's about all we're working with.

  16. Posted

    If you want an indication of how much gamers liked Dragon Rising just look at the DR forums on PC (all 3 pages of it anyway, most of which are dead threads even after all the deletes) and see how many people are playing online right now. Oh wait they have a 3 page forum in the PC section and 0 players online. There's something like 6 total user missions created, no mods beyond adding free-look in vehicles, and...oh wait that's all that's happened to that game in the almost year since its been out.

  17. Posted

    Yeh Baff1 this is what i was trying to say... maybe i didnt put it as i shouldve done but that just about sums it up.

    Thnx Pathy lol

    They're doing what Ubisoft did with Far Cry 2. Lets just make a game that has enough similarities to the original that people don't immediately call bullshit but in essence make a totally different game that can be watered down and people will be none the wiser.

  19. Posted

    I just found out about this and let me get this straight...

    They've removed multiplayer except for co-op.

    There is no longer corpsmen/medics.

    There are no longer pilotable aircraft.

    The game is basically just a single campaign you can play co-op and there's a few quick pre-determined co-op missions.

    The first levels of the game are made to be like Bad Company/COD to not alienate players.

    They used Left 4 Dead and Nintendo as guides for making the game more fun.

    They feel the first game was too difficult and are scaling it back.

    Aim assist.

    Every class in the game carries an M4 in addition to a class weapon.

    The game does not allow players to play as the opposition as it is deemed tasteless, even in a fictional conflict.

    ...how is that not a massive fail just on paper?

  22. Posted

    I'm really shocked to see how many people is interested in reproducing nuclear disasters.

    I do not understand, how can you enjoy that in Arma?

    You should have at least most good taste...

    The war and honor, the respect for enemy and civilians is another thing, is the difference...

    Yours is not an exercise of freedom but a sign of low sensitivity and maturity

    The indifference of so-called moderators (who are quick to strike for little things) is also regrettable.

    I am deeply disgusted.

    Nuclear weapons are the pinnacle of warfare, it's not at all surprising that people are fascinated by them, their destructive power, and the consequences of their use.

  23. Posted

    I don't get why some people are so butthurt about all of this. It's not like they removed the ability to mod the game and are forcing you to buy the DLC. If you'd rather not pay money for it and would rather download one of the British troop mods out right now, nobody is stopping you. It was never promised in Operation Arrowhead and God forbid they actually want money for something they worked on. I'm sure any of you who have ever been in the game development business know making a video game takes a lot of time and a lot of money. BIS pays employees to make this content as a bonus to you. 10 bucks is not a huge amount of money.

    Hell you paid 40 dollars for 3 maps, the US army, some new vehicles, and generic middle eastern factions that reuse materials from Arma 2 yet are flabbergasted when they are essentially releasing a new faction that is designed for use with both original Arma 2 content and OA content for 10 dollars along with a campaign? I suppose OA was a waste too, hell modders have made desert maps, they've made FLIR, new weapons, why even buy the expansion. You people need to calm down and think about what you're saying.

  24. Posted

    I will say that I was pleasantly surprised with Cooper in Arma 2. A bilingual black guy in a war game who is apprehensive about the leadership role thrust upon him but maintains a high degree of professionalism, who isn't ghetto as hell, does not shout something everytime he kills someone, and is disturbed by some of the deaths that he sees? Holy shit.

    I do wish that they would have explored some of the relationships between the men a little more. Like Scarlett never got much shit for being Navy, Robo was just a douche bag and pretty much got away with it without any banter from his teammates, and Sykes was just a statue most of the game.

×