Wot I Think: ArmA III

Look at that screenshot. Study it. That’s not just any ass. That is a rear view of former PC Gamer writer Richard McCormick, and a few days ago I spent at least an hour with this in my face while guiding us around the extensive coast of Altis in an assault boat. It took up so much of my screen for such a long time that I came to see it as not just a digital derriere, but an emblem of ArmA III.

Let’s find out why.

The most important, and perhaps the only, important thing about ArmA III is that it is what you make of it. Or, more likely still: it is what others will make of it for you. ArmA is all toolkit. The editor and scripting system which constitute the major part of the game, and give you access to all the AI tanks and soldiers, all the helicopters, drones, and near-future battle gadgets, is a sort of shonky masterwork of instant modding, and will be the forge in which brilliant ideas are, um, forged. As with the previous entries developers Bohemia have built a grand toybox, but done precious little with it themselves – a feeling that may be down, in large part, to a long period of alpha and beta testing of largely the same content. So the elements, the building bricks of ArmA III are one thing. And quite another is the handful of training missions, co-op scenarios, and challenges, with the promise of a campaign to follow.

This detail about the campaign doesn’t sit well with me. ArmA II came out in March 2009 which means, while admitting Bohemia’s attention has been split, ArmA III has had around four years of development, give or take an expansion pack. You could argue that a campaign is largely irrelevant to a toybox and you’d have a point – the Arma II campaign was fascinatingly over-ambitious, but ultimately entertained a diminishing audience. To acknowledge that the campaign is fruitless would also indicate you’re an ArmA player already. My perspective is simply do a campaign or don’t – but don’t launch without one and then boast about the fact it’s coming in three ‘free’ episodes as if this is some kind of revolutionary business model.

What the promise of a campaign to come does is focus your attention on the paucity of Bohemia’s own showcases for ArmA III and, much more importantly, how they sometimes fall apart. The in-built missions can suffer from glitches that force a restart, but much more often the problem is with AI squad members and enemies going full moron and screwing things up.

The tale of Arma III’s AI going haywire is the tale of why I ended up staring at Richard McCormick’s ass for so long.

Here’s another picture of it, to set the scene:

Rich and I had been playing a co-op mission slightly haphazardly and, after an explosive time at the airport and lots of headless chicken-ing around the map on quad bikes, our squad was all over the place. Our objective was to escape the island, but after an hour or two the game started doing odd things – the objective would flash up as failed, then start anew. One of our squad just would not move from the airport, so was now something like 6km away while we yelled ‘regroup’ constantly.

While the AI squad had a picnic, Rich and I reached the port and cleaned out the enemies. We ordered our squad to get into the boats, climbed into one and set off. Out into the deep blue. This is one of the moments that brings home how big ArmA III really is, as you drive the boat forwards for ten or twenty minutes solid but still have a ways to go to the map’s edge – and, soon enough, we saw a little island. Rich and I decided to have a look.

We pulled up and got onto the island. Trying to climb up an incline, Rich got trapped in a rock. While he tried to get out I checked the map. Remember those squadmates we’d told to get in the boats? Yeah. Instead they’d chosen to follow us by swimming, and were now either dead or apparently glitching deeper into the water. Rich had been stuck in the rock for minutes now, and somehow his attempts to escape had, like quicksand, pulled his soldier deeper in. Do not stand at my grave and weep, he said, before suiciding with a grenade.

I toddled back over to the boat and Rich respawned a few metres away in the ocean. Our squad was basically screwed. Number 9 was still at the Airfield. So we just sailed for the horizon. I had that view of his behind again – on and on we sailed, with nothing happening, with the objective sporadically failing and resetting. We were well outside the confines of Altis’s map, sailing to nowhere while discussing whether we could still complete the mission, whether there was anything out here, and what our idiotic squad were doing.

We eventually decided to drown ourselves. Finally Rich’s ass disappeared from my monitor, as in we both went. There were no sharks out here. There was just a featureless and textureless pale blue, with nothing visible in any direction. The edges of the screen gradually darkened, the starkness creeped us out, and then we died. No more ass. But the idea of Rich’s ass remained. What it stands for is important.

The thing is that the mission was great fun despite all this, and that counts for a lot – I was pissed off about the AI ruining things, but I didn’t feel those hours were wasted time. ArmA III shows clearly in these moments that it’s a platform rather than an FPS, and also how profoundly its developers depend on the community; which does mean that this is really about the board and pieces rather than any one game you can play with them.

Given this, you’d expect ArmA III’s constituent parts to run and look like a dream. It’s a gorgeous game, for sure, with the island of Altis playing the dual roles of bucolic paradise and military fantasy – acres of woodland divided only by trees and the odd dirt path, breaking out into the the cement and steel of military bases and scraps of suburbia. You spend a lot of time in ArmA III humping around the place, and so it’s a good thing the sights are this beautiful; it’s a game that has you continually tapping the screenshot button.

It is a place that lacks only finesse. Consider the beauty of Altis, next to the fact that many basic animations are considered an unnecessary luxury. Bohemia’s focus is in the right place – there are multiple new ways to fine-tune your soldier’s posture when aiming and moving, for example. But get into a car and watch how your his android hand lifts, palm-first, and warps him into the seat.

Things like this are in a sense unnecessary, and no doubt there are those who hold some ludicrous notion ArmA is ‘purer’ this way. But such an overwhelmingly functional approach also bleeds into Altis’s interiors. I remember my first mission that involved assaulting the airfield – our squad humped over the map, chatting about what we’d find there. An hour and several dispatched enemy patrols later, we found a huge grey lot with a smattering of choppers, buildings resembling concrete barns, and cavernous hangars that house almost nothing. The same goes for ‘normal’ buildings like apartments – everything’s so sparse and stark, with assets like doors endlessly recycled, that it feels like gunning through limbo.

Still, details such as these are forgivable. Much less satisfactory is Altis’s performance online (this is less of an issue with the second, smaller map Stratis) – not necessarily because it’s bad, but because what you get often feels random. This has always been an issue with ArmA, and a particular culprit is the framerate being magnetically drawn to 20FPS as you play in larger games.

Basically here is the golden rule. ArmA III runs beautifully in singleplayer and small co-op missions, but in multiplayer it’s an absolute toss-up whether you’ll get 40 FPS or 4. There are obvious things to avoid, like the bizarrely popular Wasteland gametype – which may very well be great, but doesn’t so much run as smear across your monitor. And anything on Altis with more than around forty players is hoping for far too much. This environment would give any processor a stiff test, and that’s fair enough, but it also feels temperamental with it.

It’s only fair to note that these problems are largely a result of ArmA’s incredible scope and determination to stay absolutely true to the spirit of simulation – inasmuch as nothing is faked here, there really is a giant island being generated in your PC, with all of its inhabitants being tracked in detail by every one of the others. So while ArmA III should absolutely be in a better state than it is, it does very well as long as you rein in that gigantic scope a little. This is why it’s such a difficult thing to capture. What other game would you say that about?

Thanks to an extended alpha and beta phase there are hundreds of pieces of community content already, approximately 50% of which is remakes of Operation Flashpoint missions (I’m kidding – just). I’ve spent plenty of time playing Domination and Annex missions, which probably qualify as ArmA’s standard gametypes and are as great as ever, alongside a lot of stuff that – to put a fine point on it – reminds me awfully of ArmA II. This is no bad thing, of course, but the game does feel like it could have used more new elements in general – it’s especially disappointing that there’s only one type of boat shared across all factions, for example.

With that said there’s already plenty of nutty stuff at the margins – Operation Afterburner has you streaking jets over convoys, an atmospheric Metal Gear Solid mission will have any fanboy grinning, and a recreation of the Navy Seals assault that killed Osama Bin Laden had me wondering what I was doing with my life. Despite the objections of purists who don’t want to see the great simulation tied to Valve’s teat, the integration of the community content to Steam Workshop is one of ArmA III’s best new features, with acquiring missions simply a matter of browsing and subscribing or, in terms of multiplayer gametypes, joining the server and downloading in-game.

Despite the workshop’s ease of use it still feels like Bohemia have done themselves a disservice in terms of introducing ArmA to a new audience – the included missions are too conservative and small in number to really show what ArmA can be, or why you should play it. But ArmA III is also a new start for a game that has always, through its community, delivered in the end. There is no doubt in my mind I’ll spend an awful lot of hours with ArmA III over its lifespan and have some fantastic times, because I have absolute faith in what people will make of it. I’m utterly certain that the credit for that time spent will lie, in no small part, with people who aren’t actually paid to make it. It’s a brave way of developing something, but it seems to work.

Only one game has tributes to Hideo Kojima shoulder-to-shoulder with the War on Terror, then backs it up with tank wars and super-serious assassination missions. That’s the thing about ArmA III. You’ll sit down for a session and four hours later come up, wondering what happened. Did I just stare at my buddy’s ass for half an hour, then watch him get sucked into a cliff face? Did I just take out an officer with the perfect sniper shot then escape on a quad bike to a chopper? Was that total bollocks or was it the dog’s bollocks?

ArmA III is great. Arma II aside, there’s nothing else like it. As time goes on will only get better – but, at launch, it feels a little like moving sideways rather than forwards.

Arma III is available now.

Editor’s note:


  1. Christo4 says:

    I just have to say, that drone thing is so cool. A mod for Arma 3 allowing you to ride it would be so awesome. A team of 20 people flying in the air on drones.

    • Horg says:

      This needs to happen, even if all people do with personal drones is endlessly re-create the opening sequence of Apocalypse Now.

      • Lord Byte says:

        The moment he said “20 people on drones” I instantly heard the Apocalypse Now music in my head as I imagined the scene, same thing must’ve happened to you :P

        • TimePointFive says:

          You mean Wagner’s Flight of the Valkyrie, you uncultured peasant?

          • Lord Hawk says:

            But it’s ‘Ride of the Valkyries.’

          • misterT0AST says:

            Only one is a Valkyrie, the others are drones.

          • arccos says:

            If they’re all on drones, it really should be Flight of the Bumblebee(s).

          • Lord Hawk says:

            Flight of the bumble-drone? Can we get yellow and black versions of those things?

          • Sedghammer says:

            Yes, I think that’s what he meant. Have fun playing the harp in your elitist dungeon.

        • InnerPartisan says:

          But… what do drones have to do with Martin Sheen tripping his balls off in a seedy Saigon hotel room? :-/

      • Neosubu says:

        I totally had that same thought when he went off the ground and flew away! :D

    • Drake Sigar says:

      I am reminded of those black uniformed soldiers from the He-man movie when I should probably be thinking of Back to the Future.

    • Mctittles says:

      A “mod” probably won’t be necessary if just want a drone you can ride. You could just add something like this in the drone’s init:

      _this addAction [“Get on!”, “getOnScript.sqf”];

      And then in a file named getOnScript.sqf in your mission directory:

      (_this select 1) attachTo [(_this select 0),[0,0,.1]];

      Something like like that. The .1 part above is how high above the object to attach the person. That’s how easy modding Arma is :)

  2. slerbal says:

    I think that is a very fair review.

    Arma3 is a rough diamond that will get better as it goes on. With over 150+ hours in it already I’ve definitely had a great time. I hope they can sort out the MP lag issues though as it is really frustrating.

    • Masterpwny says:

      Agreed. Sums the game up well.

    • Mctittles says:

      Yes in my opinion this was one of the best reviews I’ve seen. Sums up what a lot of people think of Arma III by explaining both sides clearly and was entertaining as well.

      I was wondering the other day how the Arma series can so consistently do awesome stuff and be so terrible in other ways at the same time and I came up with an idea. What it seems is the devs are good at copying stuff and having copies of real world things can be fun on it’s own. If you model a tank or a gun like it’s real world counterpart and then let people play with it, well it’s fun. Also if you try and copy real world locations then no matter how bad you are as a designer it’s hard to mess up the end result when using real locations as your guide.
      The problem they seem to run into is when they need to move away from trying to copy something real in the game and have to come up with ideas on their own. Say working on dynamic AI or a user interface or a mission with an imaginative script. It all falls apart once they are left to their own devices.
      I believe the Arma series would fair much better if they split their team into people who can model real world things and then hire much more creative (i.e. non-military) people to do the other aspects of the game. You have to branch out from Sim community a bit to get all the parts right.

      • Chaz says:

        Yep, my biggest gripe is that I wish they’d just make the interface a lot cleaner and more intuitive. Back when OpFlash first came out way back in 2001 or there about, it felt awkward and crude, but at the time it was something you could easily learn to live with because the game was like nothing else out there. However by the time it gets to Arma 2 and it is still the same old mess, it’s just not something I have the patience for anymore.

        So when they were touting Arma 3 as having a new refined interface and smoother player movement etc I had high hopes. But a few plays of the Arma 3 free alpha pretty much confirmed it was business as usual in the world of Arma. The interface is still a clusterf**k and instead of feeling like you’re playing as a super fit highly trained soldier with quick reflexes, you instead still feel like you’re trying to pilot a sluggish man sized mech robot around. It’s been over 10 years since OpFlash, and yet possibly the biggest single issue with the game has still not been resolved. Why?

        • Deadly Habit says:

          Maybe it’s just me but after playing games like Dwarf Fortress and typical roguelikes ArmA’s UI seems like a bit of polished genius (that and it takes no time to get used to).

        • Derppy says:

          How exactly could you make the interface more intuitive?

          Pieces of gear like vests, bags and jackets, as well as vehicles all have their own inventory and capacity. Gear and even other containers need to be transferred between them.

          Compared to your average shooter, it’s a pretty deep and complex system. Running over things to pick them, while intuitive, doesn’t quite cut it for a game like this.

          The paper doll / drag & drop system in ARMA 3 is about as intuitive as it gets. The interface could look a little better, but I don’t really see a silver bullet to make it any more simple while keeping all the functionality.

          The systems in the game leave so many options to the player that “Press E to use” simply isn’t enough, having to use the scroll wheel feels dumb at first, but you quickly realize what pain it would be to have a separate hotkey for every possible action.

    • MellowKrogoth says:

      Disappointed. I was hoping that ARMA3 would have all the positive aspects of ARMA2 while being more polished in other areas and more approachable. As it is, I’ll probably skip. I don’t like games that feel clunky.

  3. GamesInquirer says:

    I get your point but did his ass have to become the emblem of the WIT as well, 3x :P

    I’ll definitely wait for the full campaign and assorted fixes before trying this out, cheaper.

    I also wonder if I’m the only one to roll his eyes when the showcases are pimped as content.

    • Dances to Podcasts says:

      What he’s saying is, it’s ass, but nice ass.

  4. Snow Mandalorian says:

    So it’s a giant island.

    Is there anything to actually *do* in it though? Does it suffer from GTA IV’s “so much space, so little to do” syndrome?

    I mean, giant hangars housing nothing at all kinda defeats the purpose of creating such a huge environment no?

    • DXN says:

      Yes, it’s a pretty much just a giant island, and no, there’s nothing to do on it, by itself. That is, until a mission maker puts stuff there to do. And the variety of things to do they can make is extremely wide. GTA wasn’t a sandbox, it was an open-world game. Arma actually is a sandbox.

      On one hand, that leaves the default content pretty useless, as in this review. On the other hand, it means all the tools that the community has put together to make ShackTac or RPS’s own FA happen, will be shinier and more advanced. When you have the right content and the right people in one place, it’s a ton of fun, and there’s a reason it’s one of those games that people put hundreds or thousands of hours into.

    • rockman29 says:

      I think Arma III and Arma II as well… they both get past this problem with GTA IV, because the game is so moddable. I guess it’s arguable GTA IV on PC is just as good, but I think the ability to use Arma III as a platform rather than simply a game let’s Arma get away on things that GTA IV can’t as much.

      I like this Wot I think, I think it presents a good point. Arma is what it is, and most of what it is comes from the community and the player.

    • Ansob says:

      Did you skip the entire WiT?

      The gist of it is no, there isn’t. This isn’t an open world game; in fact it’s not really a game at all. There’s no campaign and the missions included to showcase basic gameplay (they’re really more there as example missions for the editor) are pretty basic.

      ArmA is a platform. It’s a giant map that is just waiting for you or other people to open up the editor and script some super cool PvP missions. It’s not an FPS that you just boot up and play a bit of, or an open world game that you go around doing missions in. It’s there so you can join an organised community who script their own mission and do 16v16 night firefights with no NVGs and no rifle optics, because flares are cool. It’s there so you can make a mission where a squad of 10 has to assault an enemy airstrip, and one player gets an attack chopper but they’re only allowed to use it to spot enemy infantry and engage heavy armour because the person running the session says so. It’s there so you can play a mission the purpose of which is to patrol the whole map in a weaponless APC, disembarking every 10km to use your action menu on one NPC in a village, only there’s no telling if there’s going to be a randomly triggered ambush or IED when you do so, so you spend an hour driving around and being paranoid that every car carcass or bush could be concealing a game over.

      If you’re not going to join a community and play it online with other people, it’s not really worth getting (unless the eventual campaign ends up being mind-blowingly good, but if the previous two ArmAs are anything to judge by it will probably be janky and sort of rubbish). If, on the other hand, you want one of the most amazing multiplayer experiences around (there is literally nothing like it in terms of teamwork and co-operation), you should grab ArmA 3 and then find yourself a good group to play with – you know, like Folk/ArmA RPS.

      • Synesthesia says:

        *Salutes, a tear in his eye.*

      • MellowKrogoth says:

        Too bad, I tend to enjoy solo play more. Why couldn’t they make a good dynamic campaign like some other military simulations out there.

      • DXN says:

        Um, just to be clear, Arma supports SP and Coop, including dynamic missions, just as much as PvP. Dynamic campaigns are also possible AFAIK. But likewise, these things have to be made by mission and addon makers, rather than being (meaningfully) a core part of the existing, ‘default’ game.

  5. Paul says:

    That drone thing is one of those hilarious bugs that you just want to leave in.

    • DXN says:

      It’s not a bug! it’s a side-effect of the engine being so completely and easily open to modders/mission-makers. They’re using attachTo, which has long been used in Arma for goofy shit like that as well as the custom asset-building it was ‘meant’ for.

      Arma is sort of like a military Garry’s mod. The campaign is more or less irrelevant, the community mission-makers are everything.

    • Masterpwny says:

      Dxn is right, I have used that command to make a pick up truck with a mortar in the back, but people have also used it to create enormous mechs out of tanks!

  6. Gap Gen says:

    I suppose at this point they’re going the way of Minecraft and making “release” completely arbitrary, except as a price point. Which is a good thing, if it’s still glitchy, and I suppose we get new content.

  7. DXN says:

    The AI are often boneheaded and frustrating up close — way beyond what you’d see in almost any other modern game. But to be fair to them, the amount that they’re actually doing is pretty astounding compared to almost any other modern game, and may not be obvious until you’ve spent some time with them and pushed them into some more challeging situations. Each one is constantly tracking everything they can see, sharing and analyzing information, and reacting at small, medium and large scales with a great variety of tactics and behaviours, all on the fly and in a way that adapts to whatever the mission-makers throw at them. When you watch and understand what they’re doing on a broader scale, it’s really pretty astounding, and a testament to Arma 2’s unique, real-world big-boy history of military use as a training tool.

    Learning how to handle them to get around their occasional bouts of idiocy is an arcane art but can alleviate many of their problems. This guy is especially good at it (and has loads of other great Arma vids on his channel).

  8. NailBombed says:

    ASSFACE! …… Oh, wait….. :s

    • HadToLogin says:


      Time to read Preacher again.

      • NailBombed says:

        Best lines of that series came from Cassidy – best vampire/bastard ever…

        Cassidy: “Oh jaysis… you’re a wanker, aren’t you?”
        Eccarius: “‘Wanker’… is that one of the more western-European
        Cassidy: “Translation?”
        Eccarius: “Of Whampyre.”
        Cassidy: “Are you takin’ the fuckin’ piss? It means you spend too much
        time playin’ wi’ yerself. Yeh’ve got yer head stuck up yer
        own arsehole. Wanker: noun. One who wanks.”

  9. TehK says:

    I’m missing the bee shadows :(

  10. PopeRatzo says:

    this is really about the board and pieces rather than any one game you can play with them.

    This is what happens when you’ve been a game journalist for a long time.

    There is no doubt in my mind I’ll spend an awful lot of hours with ArmA III over its lifespan and have some fantastic times, because I have absolute faith in what people will make of it.

    There’s a problem with a model where the people who make a game great are not the people who are getting paid to make the game, but rather people who have paid for the game and then are expected to make it great. But I guess that’s the model for most of our economy nowadays.

    • Jupiah says:

      There’s nothing wrong with that business model as long as the developers are honest and upfront about their product being almost nothing but a sandbox. It’s the digital equivalent of selling a box of legos. Unless you also think the Lego Group is exploitative because their customers are forced to build their own toys and make their own fun with the lego pieces?

      • Bull0 says:

        Aah it’s a box of lego the plural of lego is lego

        • Deadly Habit says:

          I can confirm this as after a heated real life argument with friends customer support was emailed. Lives were saved with this information.

          • trjp says:

            Did they also cover that the plural of octopus is octopuses/platypus is platypuses (octopii/platypii is an error in how people understand Greek, apparently)…

            More lives could be saved…

          • EOT says:

            I thought the plural if Octopus was Octopodes but apparently I’m wrong in that. Even my auto-correct says it’s Octopuses.

          • Llewyn says:

            @trjp: Blame Linnaeus, basically. Octopus is a modern* Latin derivation of the Greek octopod, so I suppose that octopi might technically be a correct pluralization, while octopodes would be a correct plural for octopod (as, presumably, would octopods be for the English form). Octopuses is the logical plural if octopus is treated as an English root.

            Happily the OED lists octopuses, octopi and octopodes all as valid plural forms, so everyone can be right.

            *18th century, in this case.

    • jplayer01 says:

      Let me guess, you missed the late 90s and early 2000s? That was the hayday of gaming. Game developers can only do so much. The real fun and creative stuff comes from people who make the mods, people who aren’t limited by what their publishers or managers think will hit it big in the gaming market, people who don’t have a deadline to crunch for … Garry’s Mod, Counter-Strike, Project Reality, DotA … yes, DotA was a mod for WC3 and now it and its derivatives are huge. So many games were propelled forward by what individuals could do with the games given the right tools. Just look at the X series … they would be nothing without the countless people making mods and improving the game and giving their own take on what the game should be like. Look at World of Warcraft, where mods can change everything from how you interact with the game to how information is represented. Starcraft became hugely popular because of the custom maps (and there were *so fucking many* of them that you could spend days, weeks and months playing through them). Once Counter-Strike became a standalone game, even that was modded to hell and back … and it was insanely awesome. WC3-style abilities in an FPS shooter with a leveling system and XP? Yes, fucking please.

      The only problem is people like you who think modding is just the developer being lazy. No, it’s allowing people to take part in what is an incredibly creative and exciting endeavour – adding to and changing a game however you would like, to change it according to your own vision without having to write an entire game yourself. Mods are what gave games replayability. Mods let individuals express themselves and make the games their own.

      edit: To clarify, I think it’s a travesty that ArmA3 is still such a buggy mess after the paid alpha/beta and years of development as well as their extended experience with developing ArmA1/2/OPF (which were buggy messes too). But this is a COMPLETELY different issue from giving players the tools to make their own content and improve the game as they see fit.

      • MellowKrogoth says:

        – Most mods are half-assed, and I’ve tried them all (Oblivion, X#: Subtitle, STALKER and so on). Never found one that matches the quality of the game it’s made for once you dig deep enough, despite all the claims to greatness of the author or the “community”.

        – Some military simulations manage to pack a lot of detail AND have good solo play and a dynamic campaign, so on its third iteration ARMA has no excuse. I guess they decided that their only audience was the MP community, well that’s their loss.

        • wengart says:

          Which milsim has the scope of Arma?

        • Jerkzilla says:

          As already inquired, I’d also like to know what other military sim does what Arma does with good singleplayer on top?

    • Mctittles says:

      On the one hand I agree with you as I’d like to have more content come with the base game. On the other hand, it’s not that much different than say; facebook, youtube, twitter, RPS comments, and loads of other technologies made only to use the users as the workers for the content to bring in more users.

  11. JakeDust says:

    Fights on flying skateboards (ok, drones). Why didn’t nobody make it before?

  12. strangeloup says:

    I bought the ArmA X collection quite some time back when it was heavily discounted, and I am yet to try a single part of it.

    I might be a bad person.

    • Mctittles says:

      Do yourself a favor. Load up Arma II; go into the editor; Double click on the map to create yourself, then create loads of enemies, allies, and (empty) vehicles. Hit preview and you’ll be glad you did :)

  13. Stardog says:

    I’m not paying £40 for this until they make a decent GUI. From the beta I played, it seems like they’ve made barely any changes.

    The development process for this reminds me of the X space series. They just can’t seem to get it right.

  14. wodin says:

    I was gifted the game so it doesn’t bother me it feels like half a game..however anyone paying full price may be in for a shock. very little for single mode players to get into..Not bothered about no campaign but some well made scenarios would have be great.

  15. Freud says:

    I’m glad there is a market for games like this and I’m glad I’m not part of it.

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      Anything that keeps the armchair jarheads out of my “lesser” military sim games is a good thing.

  16. Chiron says:

    While I love the game and it looks horrifically pretty I am slightly disappointed by the lack of vehicles, feels like there could and should be a lot more.

    Hopefully when the campaign is out they’ll start pumping out tanks and choppers.

    • Napoleon15 says:

      Yeah, I never played the alpha or beta, so this release is my first experience, but I’m really underwhelmed by the amount of content in the game. Maybe I’ve just been spoilt by the sheer amount of content you got in ARMA 2 and OA, but I still can’t help but feel a little disappointed. Those combined just felt like a much more comprehensive package, where as ARMA 3 feels very light all around. The new maps are really nice, though.

  17. obd2 says:

    Is there anything to actually *do* in it though? Does it suffer from GTA IV’s “so much space, so little to do” syndrome?

  18. tehsorrow says:

    Is there any benchmarking tool for this game? I really loved Arma 2 but when I first bought the game it really gave my PC a rough time. Arma 3 looks 10 times as pretty so I can only assume it’s just as punishing…unless they optimised it.

    I’d like see how it runs on my PC before throwing down cash. (my PC is a GTX 580, i5 2500k and 8 gigs ram)

    • DXN says:

      Last I checked, Arma 3 runs as fast if not faster than Arma 2 — with the caveat in the WiT, i.e. currently larger multiplayer games can get choppy. That’ll probably be improved at some point, though. Anyway, it sounds like your rig should be able to play it fine.

    • Bodge says:

      That is pretty much my rig (i have a 570) and it runs absolutely fine. I have also managed to avoid much of the FPS issues people have been getting on large scale (script heavy) missions.

  19. racccoon says:

    lolz, the straddle screenshot is a cracker! love the game.

  20. 3havoc says:

    There is a semi-fix for the FPS issue for MP edit the Arma3.cfg in the Documents/Arma3 folder find the parametre GPU_MaxFramesAhead generally it has a value of 1000 and change it to 1. It has improved frame rates for me, it might not work for everyone.

  21. Alien426 says:

    @Rich: The title of the game should not be written “ArmA” as per the developers:

    Popular belief is that ArmA is simply an acronym of Armed Assault. It’s in fact true as that is how the name really started with the release of Arma: Armed Assault in Europe. However, it picked up its own independent life already with the release of Arma: Combat Operations in North America. In fact, even before the European release of Armed Assault I heavily promoted Arma as a single word name to all partners but it was too much and nobody was very keen to abandon the naming cliché of the gaming industry based around “cool” combinations of English words.

    Arma 2 – The Name Tale

    • demicanadian says:

      They also want Operation Flashpoint to be Arma X and Operation Flashpoint Elite to disappear, but even if they are developers, they cannot change the history.

      • Gap Gen says:

        Aye, the man may sing of ArmA, but he’s still fated to be an exile.

  22. kobadow says:

    It’s just lacking something at the moment. I’m not interested in beating up a flawed AI. I want to beat up humans with brain-boxes.

    Project Reality is a prime example of a realism based game that is still fun. Most of the time, the community was like minded and it was a blast. I was hoping for something similar with the vanilla Arma 3.

    I can I’ll have to wait a while for the gameplay to mature and the mods to appear.

  23. bretlee996 says:

    I am surprised that any one able to make $5942 in 1 month on the computer. you can check here webpage ——–> http://www.jobs47.com

  24. sulman says:

    Arma 3 is a step back to take two forward. Since alpha (and a baby coming along) I’ve been playing ArmA 2 and this when I can, because I found that Arma 3 woke up my love of Bohemia’s titles and ArmA 2 sated the appetite for a little more than Stratis and a handful of infantry missions.

    That being said, there’s no comparison. The movement and engine refinements in ArmA 3 alone are vastly superior; there are a lot of small changes that add up.

    I think BI made a rod for their own back with the future setting, as they not only have to model the toys, but design them too, and that must not have helped with content.

    On the positive side, for good mission, you don’t need a huge amount of assets, and there are enough vehicles to do just about any scenario you want.

    I think a lot of the objections will die off when ArmA 2’s content starts creeping into the game.

  25. FacundoJose says:

    well for me Arma 3 is really good and on my top ten list of war themed games. im saving up some bucks toBuy Battlefield 4 ahaha! its just one month away from now until its release!