This game is filled to the brim with good design choices that make it a very enjoyable experience. When I started the game I honestly was not impressed. The speed at which the character moves in this game is something else, combine that with the small space the game starts you off with, coupled with the cheap physics and appearance of the game and you will see why. Once turning off auto-run however, the masterful design started showing itself around every corner. The little things like being able to dodge any enemy attack, so you're never really helpless. The lack of ammo in places mean you have to use more than just one weapon. There's well placed interactivity with the environent and the map design is a work of art, the maps themselves never feel copy-pasted or too plain, there's always something new to see. The enemies are easily distinguishable between eachother by graphics and sound. The sound design in general is fantastic, coupled with the soundtrack it conjures up an atmosphere despite the lack of any given true storyline, etc. Basically the game manages to be varied and exciting all throughout, despite it being just a throwback to "simpler" times of FPS games.
This game is a product of years of evolution starting from Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis. However, evolution is exactly what it is and not a revolution. While CWC brought the revolution with unparalelled freedom of movement, great atmosphere, never before seen realism in equipement usage and details, it did have some flaws, like questionable physics and some realism issues (like reusable LAWs, guided AT4rockets and the ubiquitous fake AKSU, laser accurate weapons, and so on). Bohemia then went on to improve on this basis in ArmA 1 (then called Armed Assault). They improved many facets of the game, like ballistics, which made shooting even more realistic (but it also alienated some fans), improved the graphics, improved the multiplayer (with the join in progress feature which was lacking in CWC). But the atmosphere took a hit with the half-hearted singleplayer experience which tried to be sarcastic of modern warfare and politics, but came off as silly and not befitting a serious game like this. Which brings us to ArmA2. Those of you who played ArmA1 will feel right at home, as it plays essentially the same, with some new peculiarities like flares, lasers, flashlights, thermal sights on some weapons and the high-command feature. Otherwise it's ArmA1 on steroids with more gear/units/vehicles than ever. Although some unreasonable decisions still stand, like the Russian army happily fielding the old T-72, but no T-80, while having access to the T-90 and AK-107(!), and no AK-74M. Also there could always be more gear, if for nothing else, just to complete the experience. The physics are a bit goofy as always, but most of the time that does not really detract from the gameplay. What does detract is the AI though. Nothing bad can be said about the AI path plotting in a game this complex, but the laser accuracy of the AI is pretty annoying (which is why I would suggest playing against players). The interface is excellent and does the job very well, the AIs can be ordered to do almost anything possible in the game through the command menu, the functionality of the vehicles and weapons is bound to enough keys to not make it overly complex, but this is all a leftover from the previous titles as are the little details like easy importing of custom faces/sounds and mods/units. The added peculiarities mentioned earlier are enough to make it a justifiable upgrade on the first ArmA without feeling screwed if you bought it (except if you bought ArmA2 when it came out, without the Operation Arrowhead addon, as most of those things came with the addon). Those of you looking for a solid singleplayer experience will again be disappointed as the campaigns are clunky, buggy and themed so that every American would feel proud of himself and his country. The original ArmA2 campaign is very akin to the 08 Ossetia conflict, except here you get to beat the Russians (YAY USA!). Combined Operations is about ousting a Saddam-like leader from an Afghanistan-like region (GO USA! + Britain in this case). At least the PMC campaign has some heart to it by presenting a good vs. evil theme, but the overall singleplayer impression is bad, since it feels like we're considered idiots gobbling up the Western propaganda machine like it's the truth. Why the 5 star rating then? Despite the steady decline in singleplayer since Operation Flashpoint, multiplayer has gotten better., to the point I would almost consider it a primarily multiplayer oriented game. I saw somewhere written "military sandbox game" and I would agree with that description, since it's all about playing around with various weapons systems. The aformentioned realism in ballistics makes online shootouts very intense and the tradition of the modding community means you have a number of great missions to play online, not to mention creating your own missions is also traditionally easy. The only drawback (or not, however you want to look at it) is that the really good immersive online missions take hours upon hours of time. Not to mention the infamous DayZ mod which is almost like an MMO in it's own right. Having such a long pedigree, this series has got some very talented people working on missions/mods/addons, although the pace and intensity at which they are released has declined, you can still have loads of fun with those as well. It's not perfect, not by far, but it's the pinnacle of evolution (for now) of the realistic military game.
