Re: Armed Assault comparison

**Skud** · 06-25-2007, 07:52 PM

It's not really an either or thing....

Both games are for generally alot of us here. It's a niche game, verrrry niche. PR, not so much because its a mod...

Try the demo to get a taste. If you dont like it, dont buy it. Nobody can really make up your mind.

**Donagel** · 06-25-2007, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by TheSkudDestroyer

Nobody can really make up your mind.

I'm am a American, I'm thought I was supposed to let the media, polls and talking heads decide for me..........

**Betterdeadthanred** · 06-25-2007, 10:39 PM

I detect sarcasm, we arn't supposed to do that?

**boudreux** · 06-25-2007, 10:48 PM

Armed Assault is the name of the game outside North America. In NA, published by Atari, the game is known as Combat Operations. Owners of both games can play together, and enjoy the same features with the recent 1.8 patch.

**UnDeaD** · 06-25-2007, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by boudreux

Armed Assault is the name of the game outside North America. In NA, published by Atari, the game is known as Combat Operations. Owners of both games can play together, and enjoy the same features with the recent 1.8 patch.

Thought it was just Armed Assault: Combat Operations?

I hate calling it ArmA for short. Sounds like your saying ARMAY! Like a retarded person would say it lol. Or a hillbilly.

**BeerHunter** · 06-26-2007, 12:28 AM

I bought the game on impulse and though it looks like it might be fun and challenging to play , is barely hanging on by it's fingernails even though my system exceeds the minimum specs as detailed on the box.

I'd have to upgrade my video card apparently (nVidia 7600 GT right now) and I'm hesitant to drop yet another $400 into this box just to play a game.

Might have to hang on a bit and see what happens with it.

**Betterdeadthanred** · 06-26-2007, 01:02 AM

I have an x600 pro and the demo runs fine for the most part, it did crash on load a few times but ingame it was fine. Something about V-ram being exceeded.

My comp has a 3.2Ghz P4 with 1GB of RAM and X600 pro as stated above so will this run the evolution game spoken of earlier?

**Switch** · 06-26-2007, 04:11 AM

If the game were bug free and ran smoothly it would be the best thing out there. It has the potential to be many many things, from close combat squad sized battles, 40 man assaults, single man infiltration, demo duty, recovery ops, etc etc. This game could be great.

There are many many performance issues though. With the recommended system set up (slightly better) my performance blows. I can't get any real combat out of the game. If I'm in a live fire fight im dead. Too slow to keep up with targets that pop in and out. The choppyness makes it very hard aim quickly. Frames go from 30's to single digits depending on where i am.

The game crashes to a full reboot on me at least once a day.

I'm currently in a love hate with the game. I'd love to be able to play it, but i hate how poorly it performs even with 2 gigs of ram and an x1950 512

**Gahlas** · 06-26-2007, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by Switch

If the game were bug free and ran smoothly it would be the best thing out there. It has the potential to be many many things, from close combat squad sized battles, 40 man assaults, single man infiltration, demo duty, recovery ops, etc etc. This game could be great.

There are many many performance issues though. With the recommended system set up (slightly better) my performance blows. I can't get any real combat out of the game. If I'm in a live fire fight im dead. Too slow to keep up with targets that pop in and out. The choppyness makes it very hard aim quickly. Frames go from 30's to single digits depending on where i am.

The game crashes to a full reboot on me at least once a day.

I'm currently in a love hate with the game. I'd love to be able to play it, but i hate how poorly it performs even with 2 gigs of ram and an x1950 512

I know exactly how you feel. I run ARMA on 640 by 480 resolution. It is really getting to the point where it hurts my performance. It is hard to hit targets, I get really low FPS and things don't show up unless I am 10 feet away. It is still a great game though. I have not played with TG yet but I played on a lot of other servers.

The action is good (comes quick on other servers because there isn't much planning but I don't ever have problems winning missions, I even squad lead sometimes!) and there is a lot of immersion with the slow paced action. Depending on your system and whether or not low performance bothers you, I'd say pick it up.

**EBODude** · 06-26-2007, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by Betterdeadthanred

I have an x600 pro and the demo runs fine for the most part, it did crash on load a few times but ingame it was fine. Something about V-ram being exceeded.

My comp has a 3.2Ghz P4 with 1GB of RAM and X600 pro as stated above so will this run the evolution game spoken of earlier?

VRAM is Video RAM. Aside from System RAM, the graphics card usually has its own RAM called Video RAM.

**Red** · 06-26-2007, 01:01 PM

I think its worth getting if you are a little tired of the BF2 and the EA franchise as this is very diffrent. Arma is all about scale and realism, the scale is enormous we have whole islands with cities its just looks awesome.

Its very diffrent than PR, I got it because I was tired of PR 0.509 but now it seems like we will replace the server with the Beta so I might switch back and forth between PR and ARMA. PR is good for short sessions around 1 hour , Arma is so immersive that 1 hour just gets you started. But you can play coop missions that lasts around 1 hour.

Some cool features:

*Think of any military weapon or hardware the game has it
*Squads can be bigger than 6
*You can recruit AI soldiers to help you and you can order them around.
*Weather and time is relevant. (Mission going from a day missions to a night missions with NV googles) Rain, clouds change the battle fields.
*Scope of maps is huge, a lot of way to approach a mission.
*Many Coop missions, rescue down pilot, destroy armor, capture officer to mention a few.
*Maps and more Maps not sure I even how many there are.

I have my doubts that its a great team vs team multiplayer game but I havent tried it yet. The scale and setup time might not be optimal for jump in team vs team play.

BF2 just executes team vs team so smoothly.

And as mentioned above the scale come with a performance hit.
I get pretty good performance. I got an Opteron 170 clocked to 2.5 Ghz and a 1900XTX and I get pretty good performance at 1920*1200 as long as I set everything to Normal or lower and only use 2x AA. But this game makes me want to buy a new Card. I will most likely pick up a G92 when they come out in november.

I personally hope we can keep both PR and ArmA alive and vibrant at TG as they are very diffrent games.

**Skud** · 06-26-2007, 01:03 PM

Give it a year, and it will be very popular. By then, bugs and performance issues will hopefully be smoothed out, and most people will have upgraded.

**Donagel** · 06-26-2007, 01:26 PM

Okay, message recieved. Its downloading (18 hours?) Will give it a whirl..

**GangreneDST** · 06-26-2007, 02:49 PM

I tried the demo. On single player, it was choppy on my amd 3500, 3 gig ram, ati x800 box. I liked what I saw and would buy it if it ran smoothly. I'll have to wait for the next time I upgrade I guess.

**Gogeta** · 06-27-2007, 12:24 AM

Originally Posted by Betterdeadthanred

My comp has a 3.2Ghz P4 with 1GB of RAM and X600 pro as stated above so will this run the evolution game spoken of earlier?

I used to have an x700pro , 1gig RAM , amd 64 3000+.... and it ran so-so on everything low.

Now I have the same cpu, x1950pro, 2gig RAM, and it runs beautifully

the RAM upgrade REALLY helped.

Thread Tools

Display