agreed this game was horrible >:(

This game isn’t for morons… to enjoy it you have to be able to think deeply and you also need a system that will run it. The reviewer obviously has a shit system because he says the graphics aren’t good. I have never seen graphics as kick ass as in this game. They are amazing. The game is definitely unpolished and can be frustrating sometimes, but if you have the patience to understand it, you will realize that the infinite freedom given to the player combined with the absolutely incredible scenarios that can possibly arise, the game has moments that leave you saying “my god this is awesome”. The reviewer is obviously used to xbox 360 games .. has no patience and is too stupid to appreciate such an amazing accomplishment. go back to call of duty, retard.

Arma 2 in it’s present state is a right mess.

My main gripes are these;

The op4 a.i are superhuman ninja snipers with x-ray vision.
Own character keeps calling out the location of enemy on the other side of a mountain 500m away, taking away much of the suspense.
Your squad members get themselves killed while dismounting choppers or even cars for no apparent reason, failing the mission.

Also the lag is terrible. I have a e6850 3.0 with a 8600gts and even at the lowest setting it’s nearly unplayable.

Butt me 400 Butts and I’ll Butt it. I don’t Butt a Butt how it Butts on what it Butt Butt to Butt Butt on, not everyButt has a Butt of the Butt system. Mine is pretty Butt and I couldn’t Butt it well. That’s how Butt this game is.

butt

It has the potential to be an awesome game, maybe if they had finished it and optimized the code before releasing it, I think it could have been a classic
instead of the buggy slow piece of crap it actually is.

Chances are all the people saying “OOh YOU NUB U DUN HAVE GUD ENUFF COMPOOTER 2 RUN IT!” don’t have a good enough computer to run Half-Life 2.

You need a $4,000 computer to run a game that should require at most a $1000 computer. They rushed this game.

I bought this piece of trash a while ago in steam. I read at several places that this game is better then OFP : DR. It was a huge disappointment and I can’t agree more with Ted. I have a really strong spec (x4 955be, ati hd4890, 4gb ram) and it didn’t run well with high settings. I REALLY can’t understand ppl like this game. I mean THE DUDE RAN INTO THE CHOPPER’S ROTOR BEFORE WE COULD START THE MISSION.

I agree with the technical criticism, this game needs an i7 @ 3,5 GHz to get an average of just 20 FPS at high – very high specs, so it hasn’t got optimization at all.

Anyway the Q and E for leaning are fundamental for a decent first person shooter since you can lean, thus you spot just a minimum area of your body, when covering behind a wall and firing.

oh, here’s my specs for all you top notch pc owners who supposedly can’t play this game……

3.1 dual core phenom II 950
9800gt 512mb gpu
550w heavy load gaming psu
4gb ddr2 800mhz
500gb WD hard drive
lightscribe dvd drive
gigabyte US2H mobo

I don’t get how you people with 200-300 dollar cpus and 4870s can’t play….makes me almost laugh, but then I realize how sad it is……..

go back to your cod4 games (and LOL for you saying you played CSS). this isn’t your type of game. its not bad, but you prefer faster paced more actiony games. Leave the real life simulation stuff to the rest who enjoy it

edit: 600w rosewill performance series psu

ROTFL! This crappy “uber-realistic mil-sim” has childish hit-point damage model which means you can destroy tank using machine gun! Look here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIyh0WlTvWw&feature=related

How can you call this thing realistic? This is trash made by BIS to increase income from the naive kids market maybe because military market was downed during crisis.

Also ted, great point for someone trying to review a game. “This game sucks”. I imagine you’re not known for your game reviews, as a seasoned critic would actually be able to acknowledge and just say the games is not for you. Leaving your credibility questionable. If the game sucked, it wouldn’t have the following it has since OPF. It also wouldn’t have the thousands of created missions made by users. It wouldn’t have 100 man servers that are full almost every night. If it’s not your type of game that’s cool, but you can’t reasonably argue that the game sucks when it has the fanbase that it does. It can’t be done logically.

ArmA II, since its release, has undergone 4 patches if I’m not mistaken. The demo which is a horrific, jumbled, mess is the most inaccurate portrayal of a game I have ever seen. There were 8GB RAM issues, machine gun/tank issues, and voice acting has been an issue since OFP1. Having said all that no other game has ever offered so much customization, modification, or imagination. Everything from Star Wars to the civil war can be recreated using this games engine. With all of the hard work and creativity that goes into mastering this game there is a little piece of you that will be lost in the process. You will forget that a good game doesn’t have Ray Liota and Sandra Bullock doing voice overs, or super fast-paced run and gun action, or very cool cut scenes drawing out the story for you. You soon realize that a good game is sumed up by the challenge. Mastering it, as I have said previously. Bullet-drop, attacking away from the sun, moving your fire team in contour with the land as to meet the enemy evenly and maximize your teams potential. You know, strategizing. Things that the military do. The game was marketed as a military simulator, it says so right on the box. “ARMA II: The Ultimate Military Simulator.” I guess you over-looked that. Listen, you sound like a junior critic trying to get his foot in the door. You are elementary at best. “Angry” and “Sucked” are great ways to represent your country since a 30 man European development team created this game. Games like COD4 had significantly more devs working on it and it couldn’t even keep my attention past the Airport Massacre mission. I mean, it has been done over and over since the first COD and they marketed 4 as the “Greatest media release of all time.” If you haven’t played the game since the demo you should give it another shot. Patch 1.05 has fixed every gripe I had with the game with the exception of the voice acting but that doesn’t bother me so much anymore. I’m guessing you haven’t served in the military since, judging by your mannerisms and vocabulary, your probably either in high school or freshmen year at college. It’s besides the point. If you have you would know that the attention to detail that was put into this game is like no other. The Marine Corps lingo to the accuracy of the vehicles and gear is spot on. The amount of scripting and coding that went into this game is phenominal. I ask you, when you have had a problem with a game how many of the devs would get on forums and respond you your grievences personally? I’m guessing you have never done that since your initial reaction is to get on-line and shoot out hate-mail to all your friends on campus about how this game and that game “Make me angry they suck so bad.” You posted your specs and the games recommended specs. Are you stupid? The answer is, Yes! you are. Obviously you spent money on your computer, I’ll agree. What makes you think a 2009 game that processes as much infor as this game does will run on 4GB of DDR2 800? Your computer is as fast as its slowest component, and your slowest component hit the market in 2003. Since you are judging the outcome of this game solely on graphics you know, or at least you should, that RAM, Video, and Processing all go hand-in-hand so now I present my next argument. Draw distance. This is where the side-by-side comparison of COD and Arma 2 separate. Looking at 2 pictures of these games side by side will tell you that CODMW2 looks amazingly better than Arma 2. What you failed to see was the 225km2 being processed, fully populated with trees, civilians, other troops conducting operations all the way on the other side,scripts, animals, vehicles, insects, weather, tides, wind, and of course battles. The entire map, all 225km2 of it, are being processed the entire time you are playing. That’s roughly 87 miles squared. I can’t think of any game off the top of my head that is able to calculate that much data. STALKER? Seriously? Those two games are different genres all together. You would compare STALKER with Oblivion or FALLOUT 3 not Arma II. You would compare ArmA II to, I don’t know, OFP:DR. Yeah, and those two games, there is no comparison. OFP:DR videos looked amazing as well. So did their screenshots and their conceptual designs and features. But execution? They marketed based upon the legacy of the original OFP and thst it was the sequel to the greatest mlitary simulator of all time. Well, they conned me becasue I own a Steam copy that I cannot sell. That is niether here nor there. The point is you made ridiculous comments about a game with the most loyal fanbase of all time based upon an unpatched demo on a computer that couldn’t quite cut the mustard. Now because in todays society it is engraved in peoples minds that you can’t let anything go you will undoubtedly respond and all I have to say to you is think about what you say before you say it lest you take the risk of further embarassment. In conclusion, your opinion is yours but it is foolish to draw conclusions based on inconclusive evidence. By inconclusive I mean, with each game that is released there are certain prerequsites to owning and operating that software normally. Now, just becasue you meet the minimum or recommended for that matter doesnt mean your in the clear. Lets put this into terms you can understand becasue computers are not your thing obviously. You buy the newest Ford Ranger on the market. Just becasue it is the newest pick-up doesn’t mean you are pulling the heaviest load possible, it is just a Ford Ranger. So now I have said my piece and before you respond I task you with this: Upgrade your hardware, Buy the full game and patch it, educated yourself on the history of the greatest games created and you will find that mutual agreement will determine what games are the greatest.

The game’s patched and a lot of nuisances are gone, though I still see people moaning about the AI. I nearly bought this game recently. I have a penchant for hating SecuROM so I put off buying the first Armed Assault, and then this one, however after finding out about the first games patch 1.14 that “removed SecuROM”

I figured I’d just wait for the same to happen to ArmA 2. Which with patch 1.05 it has, supposedly (though as of yet I’ve seen no definitive answers regarding the question “Has SecuROM been totally removed?” as most people seemingly only look about as far as their nose will take them and comment that the DVD is no longer required to play.

Even so, I was suspicious of this game. I played the demo of the first ArmA and thought it was a buggy mess, with a clunky inventory. Then they released a newer version of the demo that coincided with the upcoming release of the American version of the game, so i tried it again. Bugs were mostly gone and ironed out so that was the first positive. At that point I realised BIS (the developer) obviously have a habit of releasing their games during the beta phase, but then again that seems to be the case for most developers these days.

So I was somewhat interested in ArmA 2; the DRM was apparently gone after patch 1.05, the bugs had been ironed out nicely, even if there were still a few crashes in there and a bit of wobbly AI, and I could accept having to play the game on lowered settings due to my system not being up to scratch.

Then the same old things started to crop up. The physics are shit, there’s still no ragdoll emulation and building destruction is pathetic. The AI, while apparently more realistic in its approach to being able to see you, certainly isn’t realistic enough in that it can still see you infinitely better than you can see anything at the same distance which often results in instadeath. The aircraft are apparently nothing fancy to fly, and I remember this from the first game. Movement is still clunky, the inventory is still a mess, there is still little to no in-door based combat because all the buildings are mostly just square boxes with textures painted over them that disappear when destroyed.

The voice acting is atrocious, the character banter is as often mentioned utterly pathetic and unrealistic (ironic seeing as they obviously were trying to go for realism), there’s more controls to get used to in order to play it properly than a 747 jet pilot has at his fingertips, and worst of all the game’s marketed as a game when it is a military simulator and its only a good one in some aspects, not all.

I’d have still bought it you know, if I didn’t find out that not long after it was released, they started working on a “Standalone Expansion pack” (i.e. another game, the only reason they bother saying its an expansion pack is make people who already just forked out a large sum of dosh for the game they literally just released wouldn’t feel shafted). This new game, Operation Arrowhead, is basically ArmA 2 with a huge number of improvements. Things that quite clearly should have been in ArmA 2.