deathknight

Sweet we get to be zombies!!!!

Dslyecxi

Take that with a grain of salt. I seriously doubt you will see a full Game2 featureset considering the timeframe this is being developed in.

__________________

boudreux

That's why I commented that we probably won't see the advanced role-playing aspects of the original featureset, including the advanced NPC's to interact with.

We can all wish though!

__________________

Switch

So arma two will most likely be a fully functional version of arma one?

__________________
|TG|Switch

Better known as:
That noob who crashed the chopper.
That noob who ran over the mine.
That noob who TK'd me with a sniper rifle.
That noob who hit that APC at 300m with light AT! Our APC...

Magnum50

I wondering how many times your going to say the same thing over and over... OK, we get your point.

Moving on...

I for one do wish this was more of an add-on then full game... but money talks people... what I believe we will see (and this is all IMO and unconfirmed)... the new easy mission editor will be like the real time editor in VBS2... which would be great for a group like this because one person could be like a Dungeon Master (DM), (I like to call this persons a Combat Coordinator (CC) in VBS2), he can add, move, delete, and control everything on the virtual battlefield... if a squad leader request an artillery barrage at said coordinates, the CC can be the rear support and call that in, or he could simple say it's unavailable.... think about it, a squad is assault part of an objective, enemy armor arrives, they call in an A10 or Apache air strike... the CC can simply add in the A10, give it a couple of waypoints and a seek and destroy command and there you go... with the right tools, methods, and CC... ArmA 2 with it's 3D Real Time Editor can add major to the "simulation".

I really hope to see a similar After Action Review tool, I know this is stretching but being about to save the mission (like BF2's BattleRecorder), and then getting vital info during the replay would, again, be great for a group like ours...

but the most important thing that needs to be addressed IMO, is not the eye candy or sounds, it's the friendly and enemy AI... I would ask that BI Studios spend 50% of there time upgrading and correct AI issues, that always seems to be the torn in every tactical game.

again JMO.

__________________
Magnum
www.gettacticaldammit.com

Barnaby

Mmmnnnnnn

If they [BIS] are going to make a special announcement today surely it will be more than just a patch/add-on/update ect for ArmA as it is.

I think this will be a future intention, the next generation of ArmA which as they still have a lot to resolve with the existing ArmA would seem a bit poo r.

I think this is more about their competition than about their existing customers.

I await todays delivery with interest.

__________________
"I like a man who grins when he fights"
Sir Winston Churchill

NoDebate

Perhaps BIS has realized how big of a doo doo it was to release something that wasn't NATO vs: Ruskies and now they're releasing what they should've given to us instead!

This'll also give me plenty of time to upgrade my rig.

Screenies look juicy as well, Hinds! Finally! All I need now are my Chinooks! And I'm with Gogeta, smoldering ruins and thick dense forests is where I strive. No more open areas and sandy boots for me!

__________________
"Courage is being scared to death but saddlin' up anyways." ~John Wayne

GinSoakedBoy

ArmA does already have Hind and Chinook addons, although not perfect, they are there.

tHa_KhAn

ArmA works for me. When ATI makes changes I get issues, but other than that and VOIP I have no problems. I think you are forgetting ArmA would never be a finished game. It's not meant to be a finished game. It's a framework for a community to create enjoyable sim like experiences. Nothing more. I don't know many "finished" games by your standards, so I don't know what the surprise is here. The individual mission makers are more at fault than BIS for creating a buggy experience. I'm not trying to defend the developers, I just find it odd you seem to be expecting something that was never promised.

__________________

SixWingedFreak

While "ArmA II" does indeed look interesting, I firmly believe as Switch does -- it is far too soon for BIS to start working on not only an expansion, but also an entirely "new" game. ArmA itself is unpolished as it is.

Three of the biggest things that stand out the most:
No official Vista support (Especially if one wants 4GB+ of RAM, and DirectX10 for future games)
No multi-core support (We're on dual/quad core processors as a mainstream choice now, with AMD's 8-core solution nearing closer)
Poor performance (Dual 7900GTX's should not be defeated by ArmA. Period. Dual 7900GTX's are slightly faster than one 8800GTX)

And the smaller issues, including but not limited to:
Texture/memory errors
Frequent crashes
Aspect ratio issues
Odd physics issues (ie. Flying/surfing tanks)
Helicopter handling is mediocre, at best
Mouse5 is not bindable
The offroad pickup can't even drive through grass
Alt-tabbing is a hit or miss crash
AI can see through sprites (flora for example), and shoot through certain parts of buildings and walls, even if you cannot see them
Looking through two parallel vehicle windows will yield in x-ray vision
VOIP sounds as if it were put through a blender, at the bottom of the Grand Canyon, and underwater
And more annoyances and shortcomings I can't quite think of at the moment

These have nothing to do with the fault of user-made missions. These are problems within the engine itself.
It was never meant to be a finished game? Then why is it on the shelves of retail stores across the country?

When a company releases a game, they are not obligated to give the end user support and patches. But it is good business practice to do so until the game is without flaw.

This is why most people dislike EA and Ubisoft.

I don't know how many of you are familiar with Ubisoft. They own the Splinter Cell and Rainbow Six franchise. Their business practices are similar to EA's. They take your money, seldom release patches (often not at all), and move onto another project. Splinter Cell Double Agent, for example, had two patches released since the game was released in December last year. The game is completely unplayable for many, including myself. Check out their official forums, where many demand refunds (which they don't receive) for this said game. Yet, Ubisoft is already working on a new Splinter Cell game, without fixing the last one. Tom Clancy has stopped working closely with Ubisoft, as they don't listen to the advice he gives (which is the reason why the R6 series has been junk since Raven Shield).

In conclusion... it looks like they're gonna pull an Ubi on us. Sure, I'll most likely buy ArmA II, but the fact of the matter is that ArmA I isn't quite done yet to begin with. Perhaps they think no more can be done to repair it, but in reality this is hardly the truth. And if they don't release any end-all patch by the time ArmA II is released (I have some confidence that they won't screw us), I'll be the first to say "Told ya so!" ;D

Dslyecxi

SixWingedFreak, you need to remember that BIS is an independent developer that does not have the kind of budgets that the big-name studios have. For them to sit around and patch ArmA for years is a sure-fire way for them to run out of money, flounder, and die. They need new products to maintain a flow of money and allow them to continue to create new games in the genre.

At the end of the day we're talking about a $40-50 sequel to a $40 game. I have full confidence that they will do enough in ArmA2 to make it worth the price. I can think of plenty of changes that would be impossible to do in a patch, yet relatively straightforward to do in a new product, that would dramatically change things. Also, you complain about a lack of DirectX10 support/Vista support, what do you think ArmA2 will be focused towards? They're talking "Next-gen consoles", do you realize that they almost certainly mean the XBox360? I mean, it's not a stretch to guess that this is probably going to support DirectX10.

As to Magnum's comments about VBS2 features, let me squash that right here. The odds of seeing an AAR or RTE function in ArmA2 are slim to none, and getting your hopes up about that is bound to lead to disappointment.

__________________

SixWingedFreak

Considering it's geared towards next-gen consoles, I do realize the possibility for ArmA II to utilize DX10, which in turn will obviously force it to be compatible with Vista.

But here's the thing... OFP had two expansions and was patched up sporadically. The last patch came out on in April of 2004. The game was released in June & August of 2001.

Three years (give or take a little) to get it "just right." Then three more years to rework the OFP engine to create ArmA. What I'm expecting is no less than the same situation... a long, bumpy ride where the community has to fill in the content and work around what the developers have overlooked.

Given that VBS1 and VBS2 are primarily geared towards military applications and [possibly, who knows] defense contractors, I'm sure they have enough money to sit on and fix things, while working on another project at the same time. They proved they could do this with the time between the last patch for OFP, and the release of ArmA. Neither of these games, had a very large player base.

Don't get me wrong, I can see myself buying ArmA II, but it could have been just as easy to patch up ArmA I over a period of time. Call of Juarez and Company of Heroes, for example, are able to use DirectX10 features via a patch. EVE Online will not only be adding DX10 in the future, but eventually, you will be able to get out of your spaceship and walk around in stations. If they can add DX10 support, and an entirely new aspect of gameplay through a mere patch, I'm sure they can fix the other things I was able to list off the top of my head in a patch as well. I'm sure changing the way vehicles handle, for example, is no more than changing a few values somewhere. Unless their method of coding is extremely crappy, I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to fix most, if not all of the things I cited.

I'm simply saying I hope they patch the current game, as they certainly have the ability to. To end up neglecting the customers who already purchased it, would make them like Ubi and EA.

Taxi

I agree with most of your post, but not with this bit. I think BIS, should focus on a good TvT experience in stead of AI. Only in TvT the size of the map, the tactical options and the realism really start to pay off. I was quite surprised a realistic game like ArmA had so little good TvT content.

Shiner

I have no issues with ArmA II next year or the current pace of development for ArmA I. I'm very realistic with what it takes an independent developer releasing a $40 game in less lucrative distribution contracts. I would rather they release something as necessary to sustain their development efforts then them hold ArmA II and risk going bankrupt and depriving us all of a product at all.

I also agree that they need to get better command and control management into the game.

__________________

jex

I couldn't care less about the graphics and agree that there are multiple issues with arma that needs addressing, Not withstanding the AI (walking through objects, tracking players they cannot see - to name but a few), but character movement (Can't sidestep through a door for crying out loud because my weapon gets in the way - Vietcong anyone??!), Lag issues (From OFP days, the AI still do their little lag-dance at distance), Vehicle positions (Am I that tall that I have trouble looking out of windows??). Arma should have been called OFP - Graphics Upgrade v1 as I can hardly find any differences between the two games other than the look.

Personally I would like to see more attention to detail as well (restrictions on movement due to weight, a back pack that we can put stuff in (and drop on the ground), Better use of buildings that the AI cannot see through, increase the CQB element and have more open buildings and the ability to lean your weapon on objects as in Red Orchestra.

LOL the list could just go on and on couldn't it but don't these developers ever play games? Don't they look at what works well in games and then implement that? It almost seems as though their brains get wiped at the start of each new project - FPS have been around for over a decade - why aren't they learning anything when it comes to playability?

__________________
Jex