Cookieeater

Did anyone notice that nearly none of the animations other else than running and walking are in the multiplayer? Heres a bunch of animations not synchronized: Reloading Hand gestures(target, regroup, hostiles spotted, etc) Head gestures(negative, copy) Didn't BIS make VOIP clientside so it isn't ran on the server? Why can't they make animations client side so I can tell if another person's reloading instead of just standing there? Also the animations are still changing the shape of the player. Try going in third person and saying negative, your character's head will be squished sideways like a pancake while he's turning his head left and right.

Would have just thought the player could only be the predator but the AI as well? AWESOME.

What do I do if my ArmA II is Steam and my Operation Arrowhead is from Sprocket?

Might be the same for weapons, but you can probably have a general idea of how far the grenade will go when you throw it in real life, compared to in game.

I really like this idea, why does BIS always add US as the Blufor, i'm American, but i'm sick of the gung ho American attitude. If BIS makes a campaign for it, PLEASE don't make it similar to ArmA II with gung-ho soldiers. The UN and the US could always be on the independent sidelines here.

OrlzBj2lIJg Ballistic knife, still probably wouldn't kill instantly but would hurt like hell.

Can somebody upload a video of this?

I agree, they should just eliminate the Blufor and Opfor, and add inside the Mission Editor what side factions are on and allow customization of specific units on what side they're on. In the mission editor, it should be like in the mission options: Set side of factions: US Army 1 2 3 4 USMC 1 2 3 4 Russia 1 2 3 4 Takistan Insurgents 1 2 3 4 Takistani Army 1 2 3 4 Chedaki insurgents 1 2 3 4 CDF 1 2 3 4 Civilians 1 2 3 4 Animals 1 2 3 4 For example, if US Army and USMC were both selected on the number 2 side, they would be considered allied to each other and shoot units that were not on the number 2 side. If US Army was 1 and USMC was 2, then they would be hostile to each other and vice versa. It would be very awesome to allow custom relationships with specific units as well. All you would do is just select on an individual unit, and change his relationship number so we could have maybe a renegade loose US Army squad that shot civilians or people from his faction.

All the Battlefield's and racing games AND Call of Duty MW2. And Source engine based games (Left 4 Dead, Half life 2)

The quick punch was only to lower the morale of your more zealous enemies so they would surrender. Also seriously, why would anybody think knifes guarantee a silent kill? If you stabbed somebody in the back, they would be screaming from the pain and wouldn't die instantly. Even if you freaking slit their throat, they're still alive albeit gurgling out of their throat and alerting everybody. It would be much more silent if you just shot them with a silent pistol.

I've been hard pressed to find a good coop mission that is designed for a small amount of players. Can anyone recommend me a mission?

Didn't Battlefield 2 implement this? I think what people mean by sticky animation switches are that the transition from one animation to the next is way too fast. You have people sprinting at max speed and then once you stop moving forward, your character instantly stops, standing straight up, and all the momentum becomes null. It looks incredibly robotic, ridiculous, and unrealistic. In Half Life 2 and Counter strike Source, you can see the characters deaccelerating and making additional but small steps that really aid the transition between running and stopping and making it look much more realistic. ArmA II oYPH0OSkAt4 Notice how when he stops moving, he instantly stops, and loses his momentum. It looks pretty robotic. Counter Strike Source EZx2tssNEoI When the characters stop moving, they deaccelerate for around 0.2 seconds and it looks much more realistic and "fluid".

Is there any way to disable formations at the start of the game to set up defensive positions? Or having sections of the squad being split up at points in the town without them running back to regroup with the leader?

But wouldn't it just stop AI from moving or taking cover as well? I want the AI to at least have some functionality such as going behind cover. Nevermind, doStop this works. Thanks!

Is there anyway to override waypoint behavior such as (Safe, Aware, Danger, Stealth) or speed when the squad is being shot at? I have tried making patrols that look relaxed and walk at a limited speed and whenever I shoot at them, they never shoot back or change their behavior. And if possible, after assuming that it is safe, could they go back on the waypoint?

Yeah, but all of those are just models that don't make anything more realistic gameplay wise.

Alright I will go try testing it again to see if they fire back. Also, how would I have a squad loaded into a helicopter at the start of the game, and then drop them off at a waypoint, and then have the helicopter go away?

I'm so shocked by how unresponsive AI is in CQC. In CQC in a town, AI can literally be running right next to each other, and then take 5 seconds to shoot at each other.

Comparing the two, ArmA II doesn't seem to be that more realistic than Operation Flashpoint. The same gameplay principles are there. See a dude from 400m away, shoot at him. In ArmA II, it adds weapon shakiness when you run alot and your vision gets all blurry and wavy from bloom and post processing.

I played ArmA II first and OFP second, and I prefer OFP more in terms of everything else except gameplay.

Looking forward to this! Really wished to have Operation Flashpoint in ArmA II instead of that pathetic excuse of Harvest Red.

Also to think about it, this can already be implemented in ArmA II's animation. All the units have a walking animation, and a running animation for all directions. Imagine if we could harness this, we could basically have dynamic move speeds for all units that look incredibly believable and in any direction. And it would be more fluid as well. ALSO if any of you have installed Unity web player, you can see this implementation in the Bootcamp demo, which procedural animation I can say looks incredibly believable. http://unity3d.com/gallery/live-demos/index.html#bootcamp

I would still say though that ArmA II and bloom in general is hugely unrealistic. You don't really see bloom that much in real life, even on an extremely sunny day, and the light bleed in is very small at best. EDIT: Fixed

I'm not comparing them in terms of actual realness and realism, i'm comparing them in the fact that there is a broad difference between something like Swat 4 and something like IL-2 Sturmovik. I know that ArmA II is not based off VBS2, I know that VBS came after OFP. It's more like saying, Swat 4 is a game that uses realism to make it very visceral and exciting as a video game, while IL-2 Sturmovik is more about cramming all the features in airplanes, and putting it in a video game format. One of them is a realistic shooter that requires teamwork elements and cooperation to get anything done, while the other one is just a simulator that is jam packed with features albeit very unpolished, and has no "zest" to it.

Yeah I think you summed up my thoughts pretty well! Compared to Operation Flashpoint Cold War Crisis, there just aren't that many improvements to ArmA II IMO. LMLzeZVgBw rBZlwqxUYxc ArmA II just seems more pathetic in terms of storyline and just overall presentation, even though Operation Flashpoint was made 8 years ago.