ArmA II Comments by Tim Stone
Tanker, sailor, soldier, fly.
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Poster
|
PearOfAnguish
17/06/09 @ 14:14
0
Meanwhile the rest of us will be having a blast online...
It's really not that bad, if this was an average FPS then it would be poor but ArmA has a truly impressive living world with unscripted battles so some bugs are inevitable. I'm quite happy to live with that while it's being patched. |
|
0
@UncleLou
While the scripting is shonky, that's most probably not a bug. The AI is active all the time, and if a patrol came to the crash site before you do... I actually like that, as long as you can't fail a mission that is essential for progress. I quite like it too, I mean once you accept that you can't win 'em all: if the guys are twenty miles away and under heavy fire then they can be wiped out long before you even get close to them. The one where you were sent to arrest the guy who had been topped but the game still expected you to arrest him was more worrying though, but again, so long as it doesn't cause a game over it's fine. |
|
0
I'd like to know how much sandbox gaming is in there? I love the idea of roaming around the countryside with my squad and looking for trouble. Is this always available or only at selected points in the campaign? I know you can always set up engagements in the editor, but then you already know what you're up against...
|
|
0
karstux: You can set up a map with the "ambient combat module" and "SecOps module". This will pretty much spawn enemies on the map, and small pretty dynamic missions for you to carry out. Every 5 minutes or so you will get a mission offer from "HQ" if you have the SecOps module on. The ambient combat module just spawns enemies and friendlies on the map that battle it out. You can help them out if you want to.
|
|
PearOfAnguish
17/06/09 @ 15:12
0
You can also go into the 'Armoury' where you choose a vehicle or weapon loadout and the game then chucks tasks at you. This can be stuff like kill a target, run to a particular spot, hunt some animals, hide from pursuing enemies and so on.
|
|
+1
@ Placebo, yes I understand that the publisher could force a game out unoptimised, however you would think that since its the same (I believe) one they might have given BI a bit more time to make it play properly. A quick scan around the official forums takes me to people saying they cannot get through the campaign due to bugs, and also that the AI is suspect with regards to unnerving accuracy when you are hidden. Someone advised turning off the grass because the AI still acts like it doesn't exist?
The thing is, I won't buy a game as an investment in the presumption BI will patch it properly in the future,when I buy a game I want to enjoy it immediately and not doss around in multiplayer for 6 months waiting for fixes (not all of us want to play socially, no matter what Microsoft think). While I appreciate small bugs and optimisations can be released post-launch, game breaking problems should never be allowed out the door in 2009, whether thats through a publisher that has a half decent QA team or through a developer releasing a public beta. I hate to speak negatively about this game because its precisely this kind of ambition and depth that makes me want to play PC games over Consoles, and it should be rewarded with good sales...if it works. So in summary I would love to play this game but I will wait, and I advise others to do the same. |
|
0
I think people are more tolerant to bugs on the PC not only because they are very easily patched and usually very quickly but because there is so many billions of combinations of hardware out there that its impossible to guarantee any game will be issue free for everyone. Sandbox games are especially hard to bug-test so I think we can forgive BIS for ArmA 2 so long as they continue to support and patch the game until it's almost perfect.
Support for PC games tends to far better than they are on the consoles which have rigorous testing procedures in place that frequently delay patches and stuff plus there's restrictions on how can be changed because the core data is stored on a disc. It amazes me that old games like Company of Heroes and especially Warcraft III still receive regular patches. |
|
TSYNDMonkfish
17/06/09 @ 16:07
+1
I still get a bit dreamy when I think about OFP, possibly the best game ive ever played
Im in total agreement with mkreku - i gave up on ARMA after finding it a buggy mess. (although from what I hear ARMA has been patched & modded into a great game & I regret not giving it more of a chance) But now ive seen the ARMA2 night battles on youtube im so getting this as soon as its out (friday in the UK I think) and ive promised myself I'll be more patient with it this time. I just hope the multiplayer is good. Id love to play it all in co-op. What I like best about games like ARMA, STALKER, etc are that they set their sights alot higher then your 'play it safe' shooters like COD or Halo or whatever, and even if they dont quite reach those hights without bugs and the odd random crash, the fact that they are willing to try and make a game like ARMA should be applauded |
|
Grumpycrab
17/06/09 @ 17:26
0
"This seems like one of those glorious examples of why PC gaming isnt dead yet, then again when you look at the specs you need to get everything out of the game you are also reminded of why its waining."
If you consider action games only on the PC, then this is probably one of only a handful of games out this year. Is it worth keeping a gaming PC running for this low number of quality games? |
|
0
Turrican yep you're right it's the same publisher for the much earlier German version (Morphicon), rightly or wrongly I'm sure they realise that if they get the game out there 1 month before anyone else there's crazy, loyal fans around the world who will happily get the German digital download version directly from them and thus they gain a few hundred extra sales of the low overhead digital version, which is exactly what happened.
You're right in the bugs you mention, campaign issues, AI a bit too good, AI eyesight not being affected sufficiently by clutter, and of course they're all important, but the game breaking bugs you mention regarding the campaign seems to be 1. reduced following 1.01 (which we released at midnight on the day of the official German release) and 2. thankfully not suffered by everyone, many are working their way through the campaign and praising it massively. And as mentioned 1.02 should be released on the day of the official 505 release as well which will bring further campaign fixes, further AI fixes, further performance fixes etc. etc. None of us at BIS are happy that anyone is struggling though, or pissed off by bugs/performance issues in the game but from the feedback we're seeing the vast majority of people who already have ArmA2 are seriously getting their rocks off in it and we will be addressing as many issues as possibly can in 1.02 and in future patches. Maybe it's a naive thing to say, but I honestly don't think it's possible for games with the scope of ArmA2 or the already mentioned Stalker, and another I'll add to the mix, Boiling Point, to be released bug free, uber performance optimised, they're just too ambitious and open for the development cycles and the publishers shareholders to allow to be developed to a serious level of maturity but speaking personally as a gamer of 25 years and counting, the experiences from games like Stalker, Boiling Point, Flashpoint 1 (when it was ours!), ArmA, ArmA2 significantly outweigh the experiences of the increasingly sterile shooters such as the COD and MOH series, sure these types of games are sweet,visceral experiences but they're so short lived, COD/MOH is like a sly one with the underwear section of your Mum's catalogue when you're 13, ArmA2/Stalker/Boiling Point is like making love to your wife over many years, err or something :) |
|
+1
I think people are more tolerant to bugs on the PC not only because they are very easily patched and usually very quickly but
It is mostly a question of scope for me. I can much more easily tolerate a bug in a game like ArmA or Total War than understand why my DS freezes when I play fuckin' Theme Park Manager. |
|
Grogmonkey
17/06/09 @ 17:54
0
"ArmA2/Stalker/Boiling Point is like making love to your wife over many years, err or something :) "
Endurance that would make even Sting proud... I really wished Boiling Point was a lot less broken, actually. That game was fun. Although, admittedly, some of the bugs were worth a giggle. Especially the old ladies packing hand grenades. But I never regret buying even the most crash-riddled bugmess if the idea and the ambition were there. On the one hand, it could encourage other developers to release buggy messes because 'they're going to get bought anyway', but on the other hand it keeps a market alive for the ambitious stuff. If it's a choice between buggy Armas and bug-free CoD clones, I'll live with the bugs. |
|
0
" The campaign - absolutely incredible!"
I purchased this game around 2 weeks ago ( german version , online purchase ) & whilst the game has all of those gritty realistic fantastic moments I associate with OFP , given around 2 to 3 months to be patched this game will be glorious . But frankly statments like " The campaign - absolutely incredible!" is completly misleading and untrue , unless you mean absolutely incredible that it got through any kind of QA , as many of The campaign missions have complete game breaking bugs ,I have experianced several , go to the ARMA2 official forums and look for yourself. The astonishing thing isreally that even with the game breaking bugs , you will still find yourself going back , enduring hours of wasted effort, replays and prayers to the gods of battle sims to not let a specific bug trigger this time, simply because underneath it , is a breathtaking , challanging complex game , but come on Tim , your point about the campaign can only lead me to think you didnt actually play it through mate , as its pretty much impossible to do so at present.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 17/06/09 @ 20:09
|
|
0
Looks like a must have for TacSim lovers. Waiting for "zombies & UFO" invasion mods! -good ones for ArmA (07)-.
"Colonel, we got 300 zombies at 12, another 300 at 3; and the same number, at 6 & 9....may I think we are totally f*ck*d or is it just low moral ? " This game with Stalker Call of Pripyat, Operation Flashpoint Dragon Rising and Dragon Age O., my most expected ones for this year. So finally, patient has its reward. :) Good review and thanks to B.I., you did it again! If you focus this game mainly on multiplayer -I never tried Battlefield 2 neither 2142 in 1player: mainly bought for its multi mode-, this could be a nice year for fps 1player and/or multiplayer games to enjoy with!
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 18/06/09 @ 01:30
|
|
+2
@Tim_Stone
Great review, thanks. It's really stoked me up to buy the game tomorrow. I have Flashpoint 1, all of the expansions, Arma, as well as Queen's Gambit - and I have absolutely no doubt that Arma 2 is going to be great. If there's one thing I've learnt, it's that sometimes you have to be forgiving of rough edges when the scope is just so damned impressive.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/06/09 @ 17:00
|
|
dominicwhite
18/06/09 @ 20:10
0
Jools: "You can shoot a tank to death with a machinegun? :/ "
Nope - real small arms fire plinks harmlessly off armor, but enough grenades can destroy a tank. It takes a LOT though, so you'd probably need a mounted rapid-fire grenade launcher. |
|
0
@dominicwhite. ArmA 2 tanks do appear to be vulnerable to small arms fire. If you spend a few minutes peppering a T-72 with an LMG it will eventually burst into flames. Silly, but no sillier than the situation with wheeled AFVs. As in ArmA they can still be killed with a few well-aimed tyre shots.
|
|
byron_hinson
19/06/09 @ 19:35
0
Picked it up today - runs fine here (well training so far) but what the heck is with all the blur everywhere! It's like Depth of field is across the entire game!
|
|
0
Where to begin whit this one? You might have all kind of expectation of this game if you yet hadn't played it so let me uncover the reality of this one. The Personal Computers has had over the years hundreds of pseudo and semi simulation about the warfare and thousands of FPS shooter but none of them have really tried to put it all together. It sure isn't easy to give rightful number ratio due subjective view of fan boyish but some objective view point will be needed.
The story of development of ArmA2 begin in 1998 when BIS founders got idea to realize the vast open world with infantry and vehicle elements of other games into one single game. It was short miracle that OFP got so many things right whit so few resources they got back in days and they went making game enough open it to fully every single armchair enthusiastic make their own modification to it which is still one of the franchises most notable element to separate it other products. Community grow up to numbers challenge any other ones especially the amount of content made to it, you still might to find almost every single gun and military vehicle of some army of the world in addons or mods that is some kind of record in any games yet. Some of the community members took their ambitions to sell code to real world armies that which will later to became serving all anglospeaking countries military training simulator as VBS, the fact which really again make this product more feel like counterpart more suited version to gamers needs and demand. After separation whit original publisher they got need to keep flow of fund which was called ArmA to keep them able to stay on business which taught fortunately a lot lessons to coding team harsh reality of difficulties to ensure game able to work every machine correctly. So how the latest version of ArmA II release has now come of from all this work over the years? The game obviously in this size of the caliber will be vastly complex. The amazing ambition to push development of the genre has it troubles. When there hardly is any other game of this class its easy to forgive a lot of undone features, coding bugs & elements due there aren't any better product to choice against it. It would not be fair to too much concentrate to things which obviously lack of work which are easy to put to table. The development team weren't over 100 what it come to BIS coders which means a lot of trivial/simulation features are not coded what a pity! -Expectations and premises of game Ultimate Military Simulation is quite a immersing and blatant claim to game so how it can come up? -Physics the thing what have take grand step over last years .It is still basically the same Poseidon engine from decades ago and some part of isn't got updated. There isn't any ragdoll calculations to human bodies and therefore dead soldiers will stick to animations which might sometimes looks very unnatural. Vehicles and other objects have their share of problems when collision model doesn't work correctly. Damage model is simplified in the vehicles there hitpoint of some part that will determine when . There isn't yet possibility to correctly calculate the destruction of world in this size due limitation of current technology and CPU/GPU power. New GFX cards and collaboration work of manufacturers drivers and programs push certainly something new but is not yet enough easy to implement and therefore such features like DX10 new possibilities aren't used. So no digging inside ground make potholes or trenches and no . The building have more destruction zones and part can coded to fall apart before the whole block will demolish down to earth. Next instalment might then come whit full support to destructive environment. -Player movement have been tweaked and make it more appealing regular and casual players in general. It certainly feel less clumsy this time around thought there in time come moment you wish that it would have even more improved in specific situations what confront at times. You can climb over small walls and fences and lean over corners. There isn't shamely that much of options to different height positions especially when shooting behind walls or holes you neither can have a variety of speed on running or other animation. -AI they have they own ability to work in teams and individually. Player teams can fight on they own and like to keep their asses alive so they wont just look stupidly over their shoulders under fire. In longer rangesunscripted AI can keep their positions without searching any cover or too much bothering get killed what really isn't intuitive. In CQB they doesn't shoot back immediately in all the moment and can be found stuck of some objects. They currently still sometimes keep walking through objects without affect of real force preventing it. It is important have a lot of variety and randomness on their behavior some should be fearless machines and some life fearing campers. In A2 they not have that much of difference between units ranks or nations but generally all behave more or less similar way. AI have nasty habit to be known player position without directly seeing them. Sometimes it is rightful from information of other teams or hearing but spotting player when you are far away them on night can still cause bit nerve racking on some. AI is able on their own search their best calculated route from A to B and leaning over corners and keeping distance to other team members. The teamwork where MG support fire during movement under combat is well done team leader give commands and hand marks. Grass and vegetation have different view block meaning AI can see through grass but not trees or bushes can which make it unfair to player to shooting back invisible target. The inconsistency of their reaction and play thought is unacceptable stage so far. -Missions and Campaign are well more got work over them this time. I would go to much of speak of them but quickly reviewing that they have the feel and continuity on them. The plot of marine force invasion is seen but seems work well. Civilian life during mission is great feature over other games empty population. There is a lot different way to approach of objectives meaning you have much choice how and when to do something. Story have its twists and stand up to its peers. Warning word, many missions scripts are broken causing mission not trigger some important objectives and preventing advancing on campaign which should be possible skip using "endmission" command cheat. -Weapons are well presented to game theme there is NATO s and marines M4 family most prominent but others are still in. Russians have too a lot AKs. There is pistols, missiles, and such but the few concerns is that lack of customization part such of scopes change during gameplay aren't in, hand grenades throwing isn't that well done there isn't way put them correct places you would like them to go. No hand combat in general. Artillery modules is fine upgrade thought doesn't have easy implementation to custom missions. Reloading during moving is new feature. Lack of animation to see correctly reload magazines and hand in gun might disappoint some. Shooting feel as it should sharp and accurate when mount and prone although there isn't way to stabilize them against objects. Recoil is done right player hands move whit gun not rest is affected. No stacking of ammo or those are in game. Ballistic, penetration and few muzzle parameters are all what you could expect. The lack of variety of muzzle fire effects doesn't look too fine. -Sounds in general are gorgeous there is great variety to noises in ambiance and when it comes to firefight the intensity of all the sounds are spectacular. Radio commands have their problems there is kind of not yet finished system of giving away information about enemies locations and need further work to more specifically give player to know where to look. Voices of actor aren't the most top heap but do it work. Guns sound varies over some does sound like IRL counterpart and some not there is difference between where they are shot and making more feeling . Vehicles does sound right and can give away they types even when not visible to player. There is Doppler effect and speed of sounds in game so explosion in 2 miles will take over 10 s to hear. -Cars doesn't stay on road that easily that you could do IRL due lacking of further development of controlling methods and mechanics that mean that drunken driving in bikes and unarmored vehicles will have lethal consequences in high speed. Destruction models need more stages and individual parts of vehicles should be possible to separated apart each other. Tires loses their air and can be removed and the glass be shoot off entirely. Penetration values of different ammunition isn't yet that well implemented and will cause many situation where IRL counterpart doesn't work in game . The passengers still might all get fully killed when the damage of vehicle is full up. There isn't way to passengers shoot out of vehicle without scripting and no free movement when moving is possible. AI have hard time to keep their speed on road and will slow down in some situation in moment least needed. There aren't animation out of open doors or in and transition remain same as in predecessor. -Tanks they are easy to control as a driver but as a commander you ll get unresponsive AI crew making your life harder. No implemented laser range finder or more complicated tech to shooting but should do general what player would expect them to do giving armor against infantry treat. AI tanks without player control aren't capable to maneuver using real life tactics meaning tanks keep wouldn't expose to enemy their sides or back or using right ammunition to different treat. Enough amount of variety and firepower, suspension also bounces over small rocks and blocks over ground. Tank enthusiastics will stay on Steel Beast Pro. -Choppers are user-friendly in general flight physics certainly isn't match to DCS BS but still much better than other ones non specific simulator have. Have firepower to keep tank crew on aware their mortality. Joystick user will have more space to multi amount of support. The most annoying is particularly the auto trust which either is full or non there should be in air vehicles implement more sophisticated way trust have elevation between ratios. -Airplanes does have more controllable turning rate against A1 and generally are more useful the size of map is that small that there isn't realistically too many uses over CAS support and such. Shooting is simple pressing key when aimed. Bomb dropping isn't that hard either in some planes dive bombing if not assisted with laser targeting from other ones. Pilot have vision to keep track of world but spotting of targets is almost entirely to left to radar which will show enemies from allies. Would like to get more slower older types and transport to Russian side. Lack of counter measures yet will not get any hurray reaction to LOMAC and such fans. -Chernarus and Utes are done from real world data and make the believable there is enough variety over landscape thought addons to desert climate will soon complete other needs. Buildings, forest & ambiance looks very eastern European. It maybe doesn't have biggest cities and towns but give enough variety of country and urban. -GFX is wonderful to this type of game. Huge vast world filled of life is important element to get player immersion being in real breathing world. The engine can push a lot shaders, polygons on screen and still stay playable in current generation computers. The vegetation of game is one of landmark of company and definitely the best one of any games released. Units and peoples have now much more polygons on them but still lack of variety of animations and extra behaviors make them somehow lifeless in some situation if left without any further control. Faces hasn't got that much mimics than some other can allow and will bit make close confrontation of interaction whit NPC characters not that much -Multiplayer is again one half of the whole game, there is massive amount of player controllable things get done. Mission designer can do what ever situation on fly and there is abundance of different game types in general compared to any other games on market. In small mission in general well doing server game doesn't lag which is the most important things. However when you increase the amount of scripts and units on mission the calculation will in some point have its bottle necks. The maximum amount player spot is determined more about the server. CTI will be certainly be the most prominent mp mod due massive landmass and towns and will get all friend of it play this games surely. You can see too some specific type of minor things like RPG of socialization of some nerds who enjoy spending whole day looking after each other in Chernarusville type missions. Game seems thought all the openness able to prevent hacking and cheating so far using different techniques. There certainly isn't ranking up officially or something other prices to evaluate gameplay but it will promote more team work and VOIP works fine. Cooperation against massive AI companies should be base setting there also will be whole campaign able to be playable by any amount of players. -Modification is always been there from beginning if the editor doesn't make something mission editor wish then some extra scripting out of game surely will make it work. The mods will easily be ported over A1 and there is ability on moment when officially game got tools or released be so much new content that for years to come there is always something new to come out. Game engine almost allow any WW2 modification made much more better than any full priced game could ever deliver. New maps new SP,MP missions, and so much more. Community over forums and worldwide is making sure that this game will not be anytime soon to be forgotten. The developers should more focus of community cooperation getting talented people work for modules/addons/game engine changes which will later implemented officially and in bug fixing have more working relationship to have official tools and website to bug reports and voting of features. To produce more end-user marketing more contest of multigaming, website have all the people there to show the progress and quality control. Ability adjust new technological products making sure the game will be as well able to fully utilise all power any system will let them and more customize the game to different audiences such the simulation freaks of vehicles get their own options have everything as close of reality as possible and arcade/RPG/adventure who doesn't care that aspect would have options to close such of options off. Distinguishing everything to making them able customize their own gameplay as they want it to be "you dint necessarily shouldn't be forced to restrained to on pre-made animation, which play on everyone exactly same". PROs + +feature-rich war game sandbox +ambition to working livable work is right there +for 50$ product excellent purchasing value +graphical design is very great considering how much it have to work to drawing long view distances and same time to keep the micro details +focus on so many game types is making it playable to many people +multiplayer people will have great time fun what ever is gametype from DM/CTI to RPG or RTS +Mission editor is enough easy to beginners yet complicated to more complex mission making +more fluid gameplay and controllable characters +There is more gametypes out of box than in general such of SP campaign/single missions/tutorials/skirmishes/editing/simple Armory/encyclopedia,MP +Open non-linear campaign is still not yet overdone in gaming and surely have so many interesting moments +Step ahead from A1 in sense of optimized engine to able pull +An Animals and massive amount of plants/trees/landscape objects make authentic atmosphere +the AI have it strengths , in some way is new evolution of FPS genre and they make you on hard setting afraid of your life any moment. +future of community developing extra content things will certainly keep interest many years, +there is so much of potential for further development which will mean that the life curve will be much longer than in any other games +BIS will deliver patches and even new content for long time to come +The real successor to 2001 OFP is certainly got the feeling in general as it should have CONS- -Need much more quality control which means more employees to code and test game before release version to get better ratings and peoples reception -customization to different gameplay aren't supported out of box -restricting animation still in making some quick gameplay impossible -lack emphasis to deeper hardcore simulation of warfare all the tech advantage in past 50 year have missed example FLIRS,laser meter,electrical computing etc -not modification tools yet out meaning the content will be follow much later period of games life when they will be released -inconsistency in scripts working due complex nonlinear design -bugs are very trivial ones and can be annoy a lot of the people different ways -people doesn't have enough much time to learn and find many things in game and will never understand them and therefore ignoring some of the very important things that rise the game overall value -game engine is in the pieces which means some things have got much more focus than other ones and game isn't so called "balanced" which actually is good thing -AI has many moment of freezing,super ability to spot anybody without notable reason , working different situation such of driving of vehicles and not able to work independently without mission designer assign -will again be bashed by so many other peoples who prefer CQB in tunnels and not appreciated of the so many more of content over minor ones Overall it is a big stack of masterpiece which will set limits & standarts to come and no PC gamer should in any case miss it! P.S I ve read & study english just one year now so that's why whole grammar is what is it (started in summer 2008). |
|
-2
Too simmy for me, not enough of an actual game.
Seemed like too much work to rebind all the millions of keys, so played it for 5 minutes and turned it off. Graphics seemed basic and rubbish, movement didn't feel natural or accurate, and I didn't really know what the hell I was doing. Sounded like a good game in theory, but in execution it just seems poorly done. I didn't like OpFlash either so I'm not quite sure what I was expecting with this, but I'm really glad I tried it before I bought it. Oh well. Back to L4D. |
|
+2
Well, I think everyone has stopped reading this now, but just in case...
To those worried about whether their PC will run it, my C2D E6550, 8800 GTS and 2gb ram system, 2 years old this September, runs this with no problems whatsoever on default settings, with a few things on high. It looks pretty amazing. Seems performance worries have been exaggerated, then. Or i'm lucky. |
|
+1
what u mean? Is there no console version? If not im not interested in this game
A 360 version has been mentioned, but hasn't been heard of for ages. Besides, the problems of ArmA aren't your "typical" PC problems like crashes, but more gameplay/design bugs and inconsistencies - if they fix them in the next months, fine. If not, then I wouldn't expect the console version to be any different in that regard (if it ever turns up). Seems performance worries have been exaggerated, then. Or i'm lucky. I seem to be CPU-limited. If I make a quick test with something in the editor, it's mostly fine - so is the armoury, for example. In the bigger campaign missions, though, the performance suffers quite a bit. (C2D 3GHz, 260 GTX) - even in the same areas that are fine in the editor. Looks like it's all the AI processing in the background that's dragging it down. |
|
George Roper
23/06/09 @ 11:12
+1
@Placebo
None of us at BIS are happy that anyone is struggling though, or pissed off by bugs/performance issues in the game but from the feedback we're seeing the vast majority of people who already have ArmA2 are seriously getting their rocks off in it and we will be addressing as many issues as possibly can in 1.02 and in future patches. Maybe it's a naive thing to say, but I honestly don't think it's possible for games with the scope of ArmA2 or the already mentioned Stalker, and another I'll add to the mix, Boiling Point, to be released bug free, uber performance optimised, they're just too ambitious and open for the development cycles and the publishers shareholders to allow to be developed to a serious level of maturity but speaking personally as a gamer of 25 years and counting, the experiences from games like Stalker, Boiling Point, Flashpoint 1 (when it was ours!), ArmA, ArmA2 significantly outweigh the experiences of the increasingly sterile shooters such as the COD and MOH series, sure these types of games are sweet,visceral experiences but they're so short lived, COD/MOH is like a sly one with the underwear section of your Mum's catalogue when you're 13, ArmA2/Stalker/Boiling Point is like making love to your wife over many years, err or something :) The major issue here is that problems which plagued Armed Assault are clear and evident in Armed Assault 2. That's less to do with rushing a product out and more to do with not learning from previous mistakes or, worse, not listening to the community. I promised myself that I wouldn't buy ArmA2 until it had been patched a few times. Well 1.02 is here, so I bought it, and lo and behold, enemy soliders still have pinpoint accuracy even when i'm laying under the cover of grass. Exactly like they did in ArmA1. Sorry, but for all your blather your company has fundamentally failed to deliver, for a second time. What's worse, this time, are fundamental bugs that detrimentally and directly affect the gameplay in a way that makes the player feel completely helpless. Squad members that don't follow orders, for example, is so fundamental to the gameplay in ArmA2 that it makes one wonder exactly how your time was being prioritized. That, combined with the rule that if a squad member is killed, the game is over. How am I supposed to play the game, in this way? |
|
hollowroom
24/06/09 @ 14:14
+2
Sorry, but for all your blather your company has fundamentally failed to deliver, for a second time. What's worse, this time, are fundamental bugs that detrimentally and directly affect the gameplay in a way that makes the player feel completely helpless. Squad members that don't follow orders, for example, is so fundamental to the gameplay in ArmA2 that it makes one wonder exactly how your time was being prioritized. That, combined with the rule that if a squad member is killed, the game is over. How am I supposed to play the game, in this way?
My feelings exactly. The game is currently unplayable in single player. |
|
Naboomagnoli
25/06/09 @ 16:34
0
My playthrough on my Dad's rig (a BF2 hardcore player at 53!) showed so much promise, but was fatally impeded by bugs. I was ready to forsake the whole notion of carrying on with the game until I found the ideal graphics setup (fillrate has to be at least 100% if you don't want to have the long-distance vision of Mr Magoo, and for some reason I got much the same 20-odd fps on Very High settings as on Low settings!) and switched the grass off so I was on a level playing field with the AI. I really enjoyed the anticipation of contact with the grass on, but as soon as the enemy was met and you started getting shot through one hundred metres of dense and visually impenetrable overgrowth, the whole magic was stolen from me. Similarly the AI is too unreliable; the Huey kept killing itself rather than doing something as simple as saying "I can't land anywhere safe here", and there's no option for the chopper to hover rather than land immediately if you were, say, looking for an escaping red hatchback (one of the mission objectives). The directions given by your team when identifying enemies are useless too; compass directions would have made so much more sense. I read that the directions were meant to be relative to the last few steps you've travelled or something but there seemed to be no pattern to it whatsoever.
I also had to attack an insurgent base during the infamously bugged Manhattan campaign level, but my artillery barrage option disappeared without being used and call sign Boomerang never appeared in my menus. Prior to this I'd assaulted one of the satellite camps only to find that the shite collision detection meant that my surprise headshot on their officer was stopped by the base of the radio mast 1 metre to the right. I appreciate the idea that some bugs might slip through, Placebo; however the point is that there's no real sense that bugs had anything through which they had to slip. It is a real shame because during those short spells when nothing goes wrong this is a genuinely awesome game. As the review says, the sense of achievement when you survive a significant skirmish is incredible, and I felt immensely chuffed when I saw the puff of red from the chest of an insurgent 200m away as he ran sideways for cover. I can see how good this game wants to be, but I resent that for all of BIS's games the public have been relied on to be your QA department without early adopters at least getting some sort of discount by way of gratitude for doing so much work for you. Bugs like compatibility issues or the odd dodgy AI moment can be accepted as something limited to certain users; surely though everyone at your end could tell for a long time that the AI can see through grass. |
|
+1
Face it - this game has more bugs and issues than any other I have ever played. Worse still you go to the BIS forums and get treated like crap by the mods 99% of the time. Sorry BIS, this game should have never gone gold. I'm sure you know that deep inside.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 02/07/09 @ 00:30
|
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Advertisement
