It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
jreaganmorgan: To be fair, most of the mechanics in Riddick (Hold up, which movie game were you just talking about? You were a bit ambigiuous.) were exceeded by Dishonored and Dark Messiah: Might and Magic. I guess that proves that Arkane is possibly superior to Starbreeze Studios. But that's neither here nor there.

As for Arma 2, my sympathy for you is damaged somewhat by the fact that most of your problems could have been discovered by trying the demo. You are well within your right to hate a game for being poorly optimized, but not when you could have figured that out ahead of time.

And I respect Bohemia if only for their business model. To them, DLC means an entirely new campaign rather than cutting out original game content to get extra dollars. They have milked Arma 2 heavily, but they sell expansion packs as expansion packs, in contrast with Call of Duty hyping up the same game over and over and asking for $60 each time. (And while I'm on this hate train, a 4 hour campaign?!? Thank you for lowering the bar Call of Duty 4.)
Do you at least hope that Arma 3 will be there most polished game?
We should hope that every game we see is as polished as possible. I can forgive a lot in a game, but I always want to see good products.
JCD-Bionicman still has posting privileges? Neato. Just goes to show, you learn something new every day.
low rated
avatar
jreaganmorgan: To be fair, most of the mechanics in Riddick (Hold up, which movie game were you just talking about? You were a bit ambigiuous.) were exceeded by Dishonored and Dark Messiah: Might and Magic. I guess that proves that Arkane is possibly superior to Starbreeze Studios. But that's neither here nor there.

As for Arma 2, my sympathy for you is damaged somewhat by the fact that most of your problems could have been discovered by trying the demo. You are well within your right to hate a game for being poorly optimized, but not when you could have figured that out ahead of time.

And I respect Bohemia if only for their business model. To them, DLC means an entirely new campaign rather than cutting out original game content to get extra dollars. They have milked Arma 2 heavily, but they sell expansion packs as expansion packs, in contrast with Call of Duty hyping up the same game over and over and asking for $60 each time. (And while I'm on this hate train, a 4 hour campaign?!? Thank you for lowering the bar Call of Duty 4.)
Okay, but vanilla COD is at least a basically playable polished product, overratedness and unoriginality aside. To be clear, COD sucks, but it is a finished and very playable product. ArmA 2 feels like a game that's yet to come out of beta, and even with all those patches. They want to release new content when the campaign is barely playable? These wanna be programmers can't even handle basic scripts.

ArmA 2 is that bad. I might even go as far as calling them the "EA of indie games." How do they fit the bill? Well if the forums are any indication, and make no mistake they are absolutely horrible and I know because I spent an extensive amount of time on there, they don't care very much for the voice of their community, pretty ironic for such a mod heavy game. They seem to cater to those wanna be soldiers, the ones who sheepishly join "realism servers" so they can be bossed around by similarly wanna-be-officers-and-instructors bossy egotistical asshats. I've watched the youtube videos, every realism unit has this problem what with people taking things waaaaay too fucking seriously for how low their IQs are.

Yes, perhaps I was a bit foolish to buy the game after playing it's demo, but then I made myself believe that if I bought it all the bad things would just... go away with the fully patched version.

Just a fun fact: The game is advertised as having hundreds of vehicles and weapons, when the bulk of that is multiple reskins of military and civilian vehicles. Because, you know, a red volkswagon is a different type of car from it's blue counterpart.
Post edited February 23, 2013 by JCD-Bionicman
"EA of indie gaming"?

...
...
...

...that's uh...

wow. Comparing Bohemia to a company that homogenizes all of its franchises, has day one DLC, bad DRM practices, buys and destroys popular developers-

-just wow. I- I- I- ... I'm not even coherent. Do you realize how outrageous your claim is? Do you?

EDIT: The Konami (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/5524-Konami) of indie gaming, maybe, but not EA.
Post edited February 23, 2013 by jreaganmorgan
avatar
jreaganmorgan: "EA of indie gaming"?

...
...
...

...that's uh...

wow. Comparing Bohemia to a company that homogenizes all of its franchises, has day one DLC, bad DRM practices, buys and destroys popular developers-

-just wow. I- I- I- ... I'm not even coherent. Do you realize how outrageous your claim is? Do you?

EDIT: The Konami ([url= of indie gaming, maybe, but not EA.
I thought about it for a bit for posting, but I think I'm correct all things considered. They are absolutely shameless and irresponsible developers.

They might not release day 1 dlc but what they do by milking the game instead of patching it is just as worse. One must consider also that vanilla multiplayer and singleplayer are barely playable to this day, and that's even with Operation Arrowhead and fully patched. It's not like they're hurting for money, the CEO has a majority investment in that VBS2 company. That should be further proof, a long with everything else mentioned.

And some admittedly stupid business decisions make Konami the "EA" of gaming? Sure the mentioned things are bad, but there's not enough there to bury the entire company's reputation so as to make them an "EA."
Bohemia has a history of bad games.
Post edited February 23, 2013 by JCD-Bionicman
I was saying that Bohemia was like Konami, not that Konami was like EA. (Bohemia's problem's arise from stupidity and irresponsibility rather than greed and anti-consumer policies.)

Okay, you made a bad buying decision that you actually had the information to avoid thanks to the demo. If you get served monkey feces as appetizer, you don't stay for the main meal.

Anyway, the secret to happiness is to learn from your mistakes and move on. If you think this forum thread will convince somebody not to buy Arma 2, well good luck with that.
avatar
JCD-Bionicman: They might not release day 1 dlc but what they do by milking the game instead of patching it is just as worse
Please stop, you have no idea of what you are talking about.
As someone who loves the game to death, I feel an urge to defend it, all the while recognising its multitude of failings.

Jedi Outcast, that is :P

First off, it was a crappy shooter, no question. Also, I don't recall it being especially pampered by critics, for the above reason, and others. But the lightsaber fighting was the best I'd seen before or since. The `since' part I explain with the prevalence of controllers these days - you can't get this kind of free-flowing movement without a mouse. I always found it intuitive and delightfully elegant in its simplicity - what I've always imagined actual lightsaber fighting to be, without the improbable contortions and acrobatics of the prequels. Of course, once you get to actual competitive (not Jedi role-playing) multiplayer, there are some engine abuses that result in killer one-shot moves; robs all the elegance out of the game, if you ask me. But that's the good old Q3 engine for you - never works quite as intended (and we love it for it).

You mentioned snipers, but those worked exactly as intended. If your defences were up (you weren't running or attacking), you would force-dodge the shot. It nicked your shield but not your health (I believe force sense allowed you to do that in MP). For a hit-scan weapon, this is the most a Jedi could actually hope for. It's a balance issue really, the game was already too easy against normal blasters and snipers provided a pace change and forced you into cover and planning ahead.

As for difficulty in the late game, I guess you had a problem with the three shadow troopers in the swamps. You're not alone. Curiously, I never noticed the encounter at the time, playing on an easier difficulty, but I remember how much bloody trouble it gave me some years later when I played through the game on hardest. Still, they were beatable and I was never the best at the game, not even remotely. Also, if you think those three are bad, the final Desann fight is literally game-breaking: he tends to grab you in a choke and won't let go, pushing or no pushing; on highest difficulty, you don't have enough health to live through one round of this. Yeah, that's annoying. But hey, isn't this why we play and revere older games, why this very site exists? They didn't coddle you, never pulling any punches. Hell, you often didn't/couldn't even finish them. And that was OK. It was a challenge and when you beat it, left you satisfied.

Oh, yeah, Arma. Heh.

I tried the first one once, but it never really appealed to me. It's a military simulator, and I've never been good or particularly fond of any simulators. Again, however, that's just fine. It offers its own unique brand of gameplay, and some will like it, and some won't. Don't bash the game, any game, for being too hard or different from what you're used to. Some years might pass, and you might realise you wouldn't have it any other way (Europa Universalis 2, I'm sorry I ever doubted you).
avatar
stefanm_k: As for difficulty in the late game, I guess you had a problem with the three shadow troopers in the swamps. You're not alone. Curiously, I never noticed the encounter at the time, playing on an easier difficulty, but I remember how much bloody trouble it gave me some years later when I played through the game on hardest. Still, they were beatable and I was never the best at the game, not even remotely. Also, if you think those three are bad, the final Desann fight is literally game-breaking: he tends to grab you in a choke and won't let go, pushing or no pushing; on highest difficulty, you don't have enough health to live through one round of this. Yeah, that's annoying. But hey, isn't this why we play and revere older games, why this very site exists? They didn't coddle you, never pulling any punches. Hell, you often didn't/couldn't even finish them. And that was OK. It was a challenge and when you beat it, left you satisfied.
I found Desann fight to actually be the easiest fight in the game. Whereas I had a lot of trouble fighting Tavion.
Post edited February 24, 2013 by Emualynk
avatar
Emualynk: I found Desann fight to actually be the easiest fight in the game. Whereas I had a lot of trouble fighting Tavion.
As I said, it was that single quirk that broke the game, it was probably not tested thoroughly. Otherwise, it was a pretty easy fight.
avatar
stefanm_k: I tried the first one once, but it never really appealed to me. It's a military simulator, and I've never been good or particularly fond of any simulators. Again, however, that's just fine. It offers its own unique brand of gameplay, and some will like it, and some won't. Don't bash the game, any game, for being too hard or different from what you're used to.
I know how to appreciate things that are different. That's not the problem.
Post edited February 24, 2013 by JCD-Bionicman