Dair

I did not go through all the thread so this was probably said already. CryEngine is something totally different to what ARMA needs. You see nice screenshots and think "wow that looks so cool, I'd love to run there with my humwee" but bare in mind that the ARMA is a sandbox game. Whole engine has to be developed with keeping in mind that everything must work in multiplayer and AI (not pure scripted objects, AI!) has to be able to navigate and interact with the world around them. Just imagine how much information would have to be transfered over the network if everything would be destructable - every stone has its position. You have hundreds of AIs, dozens of players, verything they shoot would broke down into pieces. Engine/server has to handle every object's coordinates, speed, orientation in the world of hundreds of square km and send this data to the player... AI has to deal with those changing conditions as well, they should see you when you see them, they have got to find their way through the world, their projectiles has to be computed just like yours... Also the engine has to be able to render the world from different altitudes (without scenery being restricted by walls/trees/rocks) and in high speeds - still, you've got to be able to see and interact with small units on the ground. I'm pretty sure this is not something the CryEngine is prepared for. It is designed for something different. ARMA allows a lot of freedom which is what we love but it's also something that brings additional requirements. My nice-to-have list for the ARMA's engine would be: ragdoll bodies (this was even in BF2!) improved character/vehicle interaction with solid objects (like stones, bridges, buildings, ruins - it is so different to walk on the ground and to walk on any object - your character, as well as AIs, keeps stucking somewhere or strangely bouncing...) added waters - streams, rivers and waterfalls are the missing element in otherwise live and realistic world (i understand the river might not be that easy but small springs that do not require any changes to physics can't be such a problem - gimme roads with water texture! :) improved effects (fire, explosions, shooting into water, atmospheric effects behind aircraft... - coloured smoke particles are not everything :) Of course fixing all known bugs would be nice as-well :)

After updating to new version, when I try to Launch Arma via AddonSync I get prompted for "Securom" authentication and putting in the Arma's serial. No such request pops up when starting Arma through the normal Icon... Is this normal? :confused: It is quite suspicious behavior... edit: forget it, looks like this occured only during the first launch after installation. After starting AS again it seems that the behavior disappeared

I don't have Steam version neither I have OA expansion yet. But here is what I did to finally solve the similar problem with A2. Maybe it helps. I'm not sure which step was the crucial though: Reinstalled & Patched with security sw disabled (except for the firewall). (Funny stuff was I had to buy new DVD drive as the drive was unable to read the disk again) Got the BattlEye (updated?) - I downloaded the client version of BE dll from their page. Created the folders from description and put the files in there. I suspect this step to solve my issue but have no idea why there was no announcement about missing or wrong version of BE. Downloaded tons of AddOns - but generally the most important is CBA, i guess. Found some useful info here As for the game files location - i think Steam installs games into it's own folder. Something like ..../Steam/SteamApps/UserAccountName/

As for the dumbing-the-arma-down thing... I prefer complexity within the simulation itself to the complicated way of making it work. I think I understand what you meant, but the ergonomy of the interface is not something to sacrifice to any idiot of the world. Learning to swim was hard but I didn't have to make the water behave as a liquid before I stepped into it :).

Yes, I know BF2. But It had completely different philosophy. There were only few mods for the BF2 and servers running another mod were clearly marked so you never got confused. But the ArmA is different, almost every server runs some modification or addon - usually tons of these - but the game offers no handling for this. No information what is required for the given server before being kicked, no filtering. If it does not support the automatic downloads it should support the ability to identify the server I can't join at least. (I don't have the OA yet as the pack of both costs the same money as buying these separately here. So I bought only A2 to give it a try first.) Actually I tried the "no mod" name filter, but there were only four servers at all - all empty and only one with suitable ping :(. Ace mods were one of these i downloaded. However, I still have problems connecting most of the servers. Allways missing some addon or having different version.... I know it is a good game. I remember the fun I had with the original OFP. But the multiplayer interface is so unfriendly, discouraging and lacks such a basic functions... I think it probably puts off majority of potential players, which is really bad...

[Edit: Less patient can skip to the last paragraph as what follows seems to be mainly lamentation. Sorry for that. - Dair] Hi guys, I've bought Arma 2 as i loved the multiplaying OFP and OFPR and the Demo seemed to be OK for me. Now I'm terribly disappointed. The newbie's experience of trying the multiplayer turns into nightmare. There are dozens of servers available in the list but not even one that would be joinable. All of them using different addons or mods but there is no built-in mod/addon handling. No obvious way to filter servers that are playable with the current setup. If you join one, you will get into the loading screen and after 5 minutes you get disconnected. From time to time with the "missing addon" info but usually without any text or pop-up. "Luckilly" the game never forgets to remind me with the popup that I can download patch 1.7 on arma2.com, strange enough as the 1.7 already IS installed and shown in the corner. I can not imagine how is the newcommer supposed to start? I've spent hours and downloaded gigabytes of mods and addons already but still wasnt able to join the single populated server. This is the worst MP interface design I have ever seen (well, it didn't change too much since OFP - but it was 10 years ago!). Did the BIS guys thought that the community will do all their job instead of them? I can't believe something like this is being sold in 2010... In most other games, mods are downloaded and applied automatically after joining the server. In this game not even addons are downloaded. User is left to search the web for the particular file. The interface is so unfriendly! One would suppose this has been done by the band of amateurs! It is in such a contrast with the amazing engine and the game itself... You can admit player is supposed to join the clan and play on clan server. But come-on, does anyone really think this is how it happens in the real world? The typical development is: single player>trying multiplayer> if it's worth it - more serious multiplayer> considering joining the clan. In Arma, however, I'm pretty sure most people will give up before they get a chance to enjoy it. Am I missing something? Is there any Multiplayer Newbie's Walkthrough (with basic required addons/mods/setup etc.) arround? I loved OFP and Resistance, yes, the design was similar, but there were not so many addons used in MP and it was clearly stated when it was. Later there was the OFP Watch, the addon manager installing and setting the required addons automatically. For Arma2 I have found AddonSync09 but I haven't found any populated server using it. I have no idea why wasn't something so simple and basic already implemented by developers? This game requires SO MUCH manual tweaking... One spends so much time messing arround instead of enjoying the game itself... It is so frustrating!