• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

As "hardcore" as ARMA2?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
S

Sodemo

Active member
Aug 29, 2010
26
5
#1
Hi guys,

I was (still am in a way) a big fan of the first COD PC titles, and have also put hours in on BF2. Not really been a fan of the COD series since they went all MTV on us since COD4. However I took the plunge and bought ARMA2, and whilst I like the game and what its trying to do, I found the game quite buggy and a bit clunky in its movement and general control method. It seemed unnessesarily obtuse at certain times, other times I couldn't work out if certain things were just "hard" or if it was a bug. The game (even in the latest patch stage) is still very buggy.

I guess my question really is where do people think RO2 will lie between past FPS shooters, is it more COD1 or more ARMA2?

Thanks,

Ben.
 
#5
Arma 2 is a very realistic combat sim, even tho it dosn't simulate its vehicles depth or anything particulalry such as flying a heli och driving a tank etc(like DCS or IL2 sims) , but the over all soldier experience is very deep and complex.

RO2 as mentioned above will be a game with high realism but still more of a jump in and play, a lot more easier to get used to than Arma 2 and its clunkyness, also a lot less buggy.
 
Upvote 0
#6
ArmA 2 is a pretty hardcore infantry simulation, and is basically the civilian sister of VBS2 (Virtual Battle Space 2) which is in use by several militaries throughout the world to train their soldiers.
Having played VBS2 recently myself, i'd say ArmA 2 does some stuff even better than VBS2, but ofcourse lacks all of the After Action Report functionality that makes VBS2 so great for soldiers to train with.
Believe it or not, the controls in ArmA 2 are much more fluid and nice than they are in VBS2, which still has the clunky ArmA 1 controls.

RO is much more slowpaced than COD, but is not entirely on sim-level (at least RO:OST is not, though RO:HOS with all its new and increased functionality moves a lot closer towards the sim-level imho).
That said, RO is also much faster paced than ArmA 2 is, though not unrealistically paced at all.
It does have a big learning curve to be effective at it, but imo Red Orchestra is the best fit between realism and playability, while discarding all gamey tactics thanks to the greatly designed weapons.
A bullet is a bullet, and it only takes one to kill you, depending on the hitzone ofcourse. No silly 'i got killed by a tomahawk to the calve' stuff :)

EDIT:
Having said this about the infantry part, RO:HOS's tanks sound like they will be on a much more sim-level than ArmA 2's, which rely on an old hitpoint system, though it does level several parts being allowed to get damaged like the tank barrel, left or right tracks, chassis etc. But in principle, you would be able to destroy a tank if you shoot with your weapon at it long enough (but which nobody has the ammo for, lol).
This isnt possible in RO, and i highly doubt itll be possible in RO:HOS :p
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#7
SiC-Disaster said:
ArmA 2 is a pretty hardcore infantry simulation, and is basically the civilian sister of VBS2 (Virtual Battle Space 2) which is in use by several militaries throughout the world to train their soldiers.
Having played VBS2 recently myself, i'd say ArmA 2 does some stuff even better than VBS2, but ofcourse lacks all of the After Action Report functionality that makes VBS2 so great for soldiers to train with.
Believe it or not, the controls in ArmA 2 are much more fluid and nice than they are in VBS2, which still has the clunky ArmA 1 controls.

RO is much more slowpaced than COD, but is not entirely on sim-level (at least RO:OST is not, though RO:HOS with all its new and increased functionality moves a lot closer towards the sim-level imho).
That said, RO is also much faster paced than ArmA 2 is, though not unrealistically paced at all.
It does have a big learning curve to be effective at it, but imo Red Orchestra is the best fit between realism and playability, while discarding all gamey tactics thanks to the greatly designed weapons.
A bullet is a bullet, and it only takes one to kill you, depending on the hitzone ofcourse. No silly 'i got killed by a tomahawk to the calve' stuff :)

EDIT:
Having said this about the infantry part, RO:HOS's tanks sound like they will be on a much more sim-level than ArmA 2's, which rely on an old hitpoint system, though it does level several parts being allowed to get damaged like the tank barrel, left or right tracks, chassis etc. But in principle, you would be able to destroy a tank if you shoot with your weapon at it long enough (but which nobody has the ammo for, lol).
This isnt possible in RO, and i highly doubt itll be possible in RO:HOS :p
Click to expand...
You can make it fast paced like cod, if you're a very good player.
 
Upvote 0
#9
I was a huge fan of Operation Flashpoint and ArmA (and also Battlefield 1942) back in the day but then I started playing Red Orchestra and it is so much better. (More polished, fun, detailed etc.)

And I am sure it will be the same with RO2:HoS, my copy of ArmA 2 is collecting dust on my shelf. I just couldn't take it anymore.

Simply put Tripwire knows what they are doing and I am sure Battlefield fans will like Heroes of Stalingrad too.
 
Upvote 0
#13
Fedorov said:
Forget about ARMA, because RO2 will be far far far more streamlined and playable.
Click to expand...

But it also will be far far far less realistic, and the biggest part of realism is the core gameplay.
The moment when RO makes the use of RL military tactics feasible is the moment when it gets realistic enough to even be considered a competition to ArmA.

RO's weapon handling is probably more realistic than ArmA's, but as I already said, the core gameplay is not.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#14
probably not. arma 2 comes from a true military simulator tradition. their developers have contracts with armies around the world(western ones, of course)

and i'll bet any perceived error in their game is probably due to ignorance on the player's part rather than them getting something wrong. although there are always exceptions.
 
Upvote 0
#15
LemoN said:
But it also will be far far far less realistic, and the biggest part of realism is the core gameplay.
The moment when RO makes the use of RL military tactics feasible is the moment when it gets realistic enough to even be considered a competition to ArmA.

RO's weapon handling is probably more realistic than ArmA's, but as I already said, the core gameplay is not.
Click to expand...

I personally don't consider ArmA realistic at all... as reality does not make me feel like a robot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MEGADETHTHRETH
Upvote 0
#16
213 said:
and i'll bet any perceived error in their game is probably due to ignorance on the player's part rather than them getting something wrong. although there are always exceptions.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say so. ArmAII definately has a lot of bugs, problems and quirks, and saying that it's down to the player's ignorance is simply wrong.

ArmA's strong side is that it does well in the grand picture. THIS is what makes it realistic.

While small scale stuff like feeling of the controls, clunky interface, bouncy stones&stairs of death and the way obstacles are handled are unrealistic or bad, the grand picture of movement is absolutely realistic. Squads move and behave like real squads instead of 8 quake players rocket jumping about. Same goes for shooting, tanks, aeroplanes and basically any aspect of ArmA.

While ArmA may fail at a lot of details, it's the only game that manages to be truly realistic on a scale other than weapon damage.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#17
213 said:
probably not. arma 2 comes from a true military simulator tradition. their developers have contracts with armies around the world(western ones, of course)

and i'll bet any perceived error in their game is probably due to ignorance on the player's part rather than them getting something wrong. although there are always exceptions.
Click to expand...

haha no.

ACE MOD. Sometimes the BI guys just cant completely make their game as interactive and badass as they want. Thats what the mod community is for.

Because healing at a medic is either:
A: crouching and waving your hands around infront of a medic.
B: you on the ground screaming like a sailor while the medic gives you any of the following treatments(epi, morphine, bandages, large bandages, Blood plasma, splints, ETC)

A-> bohemia interactives way of "healing"
B-> ACE medic system
B>>>>>>A


That large nitpick aside, ARMA 2 is like a great foundation for the community to make into a great game. Played by itself most people are turned off, played with mods is a recipe for an addiction.

IMO I could see some of TWI's future games expanding into the field of ARMA. However given TWI's current attention to detail making vehicles and animations, the experience would be MUCH different then ARMA and would probably induce a completely different and much more adrenaline induced experience. ( That is after you wait 10 years for them to properly animate and model each vehicle in eye popping detail...)
 
Upvote 0
#19
LemoN said:
See this.
Click to expand...

I understand your point, but I just can't get into the big picture if the small picture is not done right.

Is like showing me a video of real soldiers at war... yes, is real as it gets, but if you can't get me to feel like I'm there, for me all the realism in the world is irrelevant.

I'm all for as much realism as you can throw in without throwing me out in the process... which is what RO2 is trying to accomplish.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu