Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,876
Mixed. Looks like this might have a strong campaign given the trailer or it could just be editing. But if the mission editor has the same shortcomings as ArmA 3 it will be disappointing. You can't set up basic things without having to do an obscene amount of scripts. DCS and Jane's USAF (from 1999) have more intuitive and quicker ways to spawn/despawn NPCs in their mission editors. AI has problems landing helis and departing infantry. I tried it again two weeks ago and half the time it worked, the other half the times it didn't. People would either get out of the helis at 100 feet above ground and fall to their death, or the heli would abort its landing. The engine/AI is just too incomplete.

And this is releasing in Early Access while we wait for ArmA 4? And how long will that take? Will this be another 1-2 years for a complete game like it was for ArmA 3? Will this even have all of the features of ArmA 3? I'm doubting it will, as it is intended to be an in between while we wait for ArmA 4. Which makes the Early Access part more questionable.

Will it still be missing the following?

- Proper weapon animations
- A sensible AI command issuing interface
- More realistic movement, less likely to get snagged on things, etc.
- Better vehicle handling and reactions to damage
- Vehicles that can follow way points reasonably accurately
- Vehicles that can follow a way point across a bridge? Because in Arma 3, they just drive around it and into the water
- More dynamic weapon loadouts like being able to carry both a precision rifle and a carbine just like real snipers
- Ability to command AI to clear buildings
- More dynamic commands like tossing a grenade over a fence, direct positioning, etc.
- NPCs that don't walk through buildings
- Better weapon recoil system, because ArmA 3 is very dated and unrealistic

Those are some of the issues that plagued ArmA 1, 2 and 3. Unless those are fixed I'll probably not be interested in this. If they cut more features it will even more be lame. As it is, ArmA 3 does have some mil sim aspects. But to play a large scale battle your NPCs are really just respawn points considering how dumb they are and how you can't sensibly issue commands to them. So it is essentially you playing rambo ironically.

But I do like these types of tactical shooters, so I may get it anyways... but ArmA is always so frustratingly lacking. And I'm not sure if an Early Access cut down game will do it for me. About a decade post release for ArmA 3 and seeing a heli touch the ground, the fly back up and watching 14 men jump to their death from a helicopter is just so game breaking and you have to keep missions very simple.
 
Last edited:

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,876
That video looks like a game from 15 years ago

Graphically it is actually a big improvement. Still doesn't look as good as other modern games. But considering the art style (realistic) naturally it won't look as eye catching as games with a less realistic artistic perspective.

And apparently performance is a lot better. ArmA 3 cannot handle many units without frame rates dropping, no matter what GPU you have. Going from a GTX 1070 to a GTX 2070 was practically zero difference and going to a 3070 was also practically zero difference. This seems to have higher frame rates with moderate amounts of units from the sound of things.

Makes me wounder if UE5 would have been better. I am not sure if UE5 can handle the map sizes expected from ArmA as well as the high amounts of units. But it would have been amazing for increasing terrian detail, especially considering the scale/size of the map. As this apparently doesn't have a real mission editor I will pass for now. Looks so bare bones, like a basic little tech demo without much content.
 

MavericK

Zero Cool
Joined
Sep 2, 2004
Messages
31,519
This video actually got me pretty hyped for it. I might end up picking it up. Bohemia is one of those companies that I'll pretty much support regardless.

 
Top