Comments on: ArmA 2: Dudes Make War, Not Love. Probably.

By: cassus

cassus — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 19:43:38 +0000

Gotta say another thing that i forgot.. OFP2 will probably offer greater playability than ARMA2. Just cause Codemasters have been shoving tons of cash into it. It’s probably going to be really polished and nice. It’s probably also going to be a bit more arcade-like than OFP/ARMA, but hey, if it offers some really deep tactical gameplay with solid multiplayer, i might go with OFP2 over ARMA2 even if the guns don’t feel authentic, or the choppers are a bit too easy to fly (which i think they are in ARMA and OFP as well..).

By: cassus

cassus — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 19:39:13 +0000

About the radio commands, they could be done better, but the fact is that no one has ever done that type of radio commands better, ever. No one has even tried. If they recorded all of the lines possible in individual soundfiles you’d have gigs of them on your drive, and they would slow shit down BIGTIME. Thing is, they are just tiny bits of audio mashed together to form lines. You rightclick a vehicle and it plops a few bits together to form a line [Enemy][Truck][5'o clock] [50 meters]
That does get kinda stephen hawkingy, but hey, it works.

I agree about the engine and netcode being kinda shyte though. They really need to get some big buck backing and someone to help them with the engine and netcode. Cause they’ve proven time and again that they can’t do that properly..

Overall though, no game comes even close to the immersion that OFP and ARMA have delivered. In my opinion anyways. Just need to have patience with those games.. Which only about 5% of gamers have.. “oh this is not fun! i’ve walked for 3 minutes and no action! F*** this!!! I’m firing up CoD4 for som real sim action shenanigans!”

By: Christian

Christian — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 19:01:27 +0000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-HNIlZI4j0

HD-ified directors cut trailer.

By: Simpsoid

Simpsoid — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:27:55 +0000

To be honest I wasn’t really impressed with this. I loved OFP and still play it regularly LANed with a mate who makes missions, campaigns etc.

The mods are what kept it alive. But in this day of GFX cards with 1GB of RAM (like mine :P) and multi cores the “wooden” animation that someone mentioned before look quite plain and horrible.

Granted this game will mostly rely on gameplay but it doesn’t look much better than the original Ghost Recon did from way back in the late 90’s/early 2000’s.

I’m looking closely at this and OFP2 as I need something to fill the void that only OFP can. I haven’t decided which one that will be yet. More than likely it’ll be ArmA2 but OFP2 graphically looks far nicer from what I’ve seen.

By: Tim Stone

Tim Stone — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:59:30 +0000

@dozer1986

“You were slaved to the animation cycle”

I’ve always regarded that as a positive. ArmA didn’t pretend real soldiers can swap weapons and change stances in an instant.

Your rocket launcher example is pretty specific too. If you’re just running along carrying a rocket launcher then you can hit the deck very quickly. If you are in the process of aiming that rocket launcher then, yes it takes longer a bit longer (though even then there isn’t the automatic ‘get out M-16′ stage you refer too).

By: soul

soul — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 06:49:20 +0000

ownage^

By: caesarbear

caesarbear — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 03:41:45 +0000

Actually, how many games when OpFap was released had damage that killed or crippled after only a couple of hits? I can’t think of anything except perhaps Counterstrike. In that sense it was more realistic than anything on the market at the time.

Except for that whole Rainbow Six thing.

By: TheDeadlyShoe

TheDeadlyShoe — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 01:52:54 +0000

I didn’t see any long grass in your face. It’s already better than ArmA.

By: Gap Gen

Gap Gen — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:56:01 +0000

Actually, what’s interesting is that Bohemia seem to be implementing the mods that the community have made, such as a revive mechanism and suppression, into this game.

ArmA and OpFap were never realistic in the sense of graphical fidelity, but the first OpFap mission I ever played I was shitting myself the whole way through, going prone all the time and not even seeing the enemy beyond a few distant objects and lots of bullets zipping past.

Actually, how many games when OpFap was released had damage that killed or crippled after only a couple of hits? I can’t think of anything except perhaps Counterstrike. In that sense it was more realistic than anything on the market at the time.

By: dozer1986

dozer1986 — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:32:18 +0000

It looks just like I remember ArmA to be, to be honest. What killed ArmA for me (other than the unreliability I experienced) was the animations. You were slaved to the animation cycle. If, for instance, you’re kneeling with a rocket launcher, trying to ambush a convoy, and some infantry show up, you want to throw yourself on the ground. So you press the ’stance down’ key. But the game then plays the ‘put away rocket launcher’ animation, then the ‘get out M-16′ animation, then the ‘lie down from crouch’ animation, then the ‘roll over dead’ animation because someone shot you in that time.

Or, if you kill a running man, he won’t fall over dead or show any sign of being hit until he gets to the end of his current ‘run forward two steps’ looping animation. This type of pause became really obtrusive.

Also I sucked royally at the game. But the TrackIR support was fantastic!

By: El_MUERkO

El_MUERkO — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:32:37 +0000

the animation still looks a litter wooden and the blood looks a bit crap

By: Jesucristo

Jesucristo — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:28:36 +0000

Steelfist, Arma2 = realistic, OFP2 = Arcadish