Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

onlyrazor

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1387

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by onlyrazor

  1. Posted

    Just me haranguing on the whole BI =/= BISim thing (in the sense that BI can't​ do it for VBS because it's not theirs), I'm perfectly aware (and I thought I even said) that they've do something similar for Arma already.

    The whole BI/BISim thing is but an expectable consequence of posting pretty videos of VBS to Youtube combined with a reluctance to spend hundreds of dollars on professional-level software. People can dream, and maybe one day Soonâ„¢ those dreams will be a reality...

    Probably not, though.

  3. Posted

    So apparently this project's moving into a pre-alpha release on the 22nd, so quite soon. Apparently there's no combat implemented as of yet, but that's kind of to be expected with pre-alpha. They also have a trailer up:

    Some articles:

    PCG

    RPS

    Eurogamer

    Who knows, maybe this'll turn out to be another successful franchise (which we'll eventually get to subject to accusations of dumbing down, as the internet is wont to do). I really need to get around to making a M&B2 thread here, as well.

  4. Posted

    besides, I really don't feel like Bohemia is in dire need of continual financial support from its customers...:rolleyes:

    In the end, they are a business and a business' prerogative is to make money. Think of the price as their way of compensating for the money they didn't make locking off the new features or modding tools or what-have-you.

  5. Posted

    The way I see it, this is probably subsidising the 'free' part of the update - namely the new mechanics. Basically, the DLC owners are paying to enable BI to give everyone the same abilities. But yeah, two helicopters aren't really a lot, especially since the CSAT and AAF are still without an A/MH-9 analogue. Maybe they'll patch more stuff in.

    I feel like I'm the only optimist *cough*fanboy*cough* left in here. Sad days.

  6. Posted

    They fucked up before, so they can do it again?

    That is really no excuse. The common interpretation is that the Emperor Edition is Rome 2 how it should have been at release (everything before was Beta testing), and now it still needs more features and patches wich simply aren´t going to come. Parts of the game are fundamentally broken. Sieges and Ship battles in particular. And that is pretty sad. CA used to be a good customer friendly company, that has really changed a lot under the rule of Sega.

    Eh, I bought Empire and gave up on ever trying to understand strategy games. I keep losing a flank because I'm focusing on the other one and my reserves are slow to deploy (I'm not paying you people to march over there god damn it).

  9. Posted · Edited by OnlyRazor

    Adjusting the cargo positions has left me a bit stumped until the BIKI is updated with the new code. Since FFV positions appear to act more like turrets than cargo positions, assignAsCargo and moveInCargo only move units to the FFV-disabled cargo positions first, before advancing to the FFV positions (tested on MH-9). If someone could enlighten me with the cargoIndex of FFV positions, I'd appreciate it.

    Also, testing out a small scenario, units ordered to board a helicopter via waypoint are only able to enter the regular cargo positions, which means that the MH-9's capacity is effectively reduced to 2 passengers.

    In addition to everyone else's comments, some of the aiming radius restrictions are a bit off (Hellcat lateral, Offroad elevational and lateral, since you can't really fire at anyone below 90° which is bad if you're on a downward slope), but I have full trust that that'll get tweaked.

  12. Posted

    Even going back to cold war woudn´t render thermals useless at all - frankly the only reason why thermal was such a hot & pressing issue during the OFP & ArmA years was that it was missing from tanks (same as with FCS), more or less rendering them down to quite mobile catapults!

    When Bohemia finally stepped in and did thermals, adding them for rifle scopes, is another story.

    To be honest, I was trying to guide the discussion in my diabolical master plan to turn Arma into a First/Third person World in Conflict game. That's another plan spoiled by these troublesome forum users.

  13. Posted · Edited by OnlyRazor

    I think the Arma lore is so fragmented that it'd be more difficult to tie together than the whole of the MGS canon.

    Personally, I would favor a reboot with Arma 4, going back to the middle of the cold war, roundabout the 1960s. With a small south american conflict with CIA and USSR supporting both sides, overshadowed by the larger events (cuba crisis, or going back to earlier dates, bay of pigs invasion.). And I mean, whole reboot. Take the world history, and fit in a string of coherent events. Maybe revisit the Nogova Island republics with a new campaign, similarily good characters, and a common thread to tie everything together from the outset.

    I haven't finished east wind yet, so idk if the story gets better/more coherent, but a certain occurrence in the prologue bootcamp campaign and the presence of the tempest "device" thing (which I have not looked at yet, so please, no more screenshots or hints or anything. I've also not even been in the biodomes yet because I want to find out why they're there via the campaign. And even if they're not in there, please don't tell me.) makes me suspect something out of a 1950s pulp science fiction short novel.

    I dunno if a reboot would be a good Idea, though, because mostly I think about it since I would like to see an early cold war arma next. You'd have to retcon that into the canon.

    A timeline reboot would probably result in a lot of unused technology, though. People may give Arma 3 flak for things like the thermal-optics-everywhere thing, but back when OA was getting released, this was a hot feature. Same goes for NVGs and NV scopes, as well as lots of that tacticool tech.

    That said, returning to an OFP-like timeline might not hurt. They'd still get conventional warfare and the average rifleman would be balanced out by getting nothing but a rifle, a compass and a set of boots. Things like TI and NV would still be around, but they'd be limited in use to units like pilots or spec ops. One would think that kind of balance would be agreeable to everyone. To be fair, it's probably a bad thing to give up on an attempt at some creative freedom and return to M16 manshooting, but I would seriously love to see a 1989 expansion for Arma 4 or whatever comes next.

    I trust BIS to take this in a sensible direction, though. /rant

  16. Posted

    In the purview of Arma, I'd love to see a 'Cold War gone hot in the 1980s' scenario again. Conventional warfare, urban and rural European environments and it'd give BIS a chance to work on their nuke technology. Also, asset reuse and it would shut up the incessant stream of complaints about how Arma is forever ruined because it's in the future now. The biggest disadvantage here is that it could turn out to be "too same" and yet another stream of complaints. Sometimes you can't win.

  20. Posted

    Space is the new final frontier. If people in the late 15th century could've made video games, they probably would have been Call of Constantinople and games about exploring the Atlantic and colonising the Americas. Nice to see the genre made a comeback, I still play FreeSpace 2 every now and then.

  21. Posted

    I'd wager the Valve system of monetising user-made content isn't popular because of the effects on the community so much as for the fact it works from a business perspective. Definitely could be a motivating factor. Again, this thread's veering off into knee-jerk reactions and hasty judgements over things that haven't even happened yet. May I suggest we delay the "ruined forever!" train until after this has irrevocably destroyed the Arma name, its community and the entirety of the Internet? And if it really does, vote with your wallets. In my experience, it's more practical than going to every forum and proclaiming your moral outrage (not to say that that doesn't help either).

  22. Posted

    It can be done. I'd actually want to see BI remove the UI locking system and fix the HUD so that targets actually show up on In Vehicle HUD's like in Arma 2. But yeah, i'm sure it can be done.

    Given the fact Arma 3 focused on infantry gameplay, perhaps there is yet hope for vehicles in the future. Although, even with a limited knowledge of game development, I'd say developing a full simulation of each vehicle would be prohibitive both financially and chronologically. Definitely something I'd like to see worked on, though.

    Now to wait for a dev to respond...

  23. Posted

    Yea i suppose, some games can do it, GTA & Deus Ex for example they were pretty good but they do have good storylines to follow and a lot of things to do. Crysis 2 was very cinematic and linear, the storyline was rather comical and cheesy. So 'll add to my post / Its a lot harder to pull off a good SP game these days then. They should have focused on a MP game they did with Warface some F2P shooter which was fun for about 5mins and then it was boring dogshit.

    I'd say Deus Ex and GTA both tend toward comical and cheesy plots. Illuminati, greys and poorly-accented conspirators aside (let's not even get started on GTA's unique brand of satire or whatever) I'd say the games are beloved because of the way their mechanics allow players to have a fun experience. A game that lets a player tell his own story of how he once accidentally broke both his legs and had to slowly crawl to the terrorist leader tends to get more community loving than one which lets a player to tell how he shot some people and then an explosion happened and a building fell down and whoa cool.

×