Jump to content

RSColonel_131st

Members
  • Posts

    660
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Converted

  • Location
    Vienna

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

RSColonel_131st's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (3/3)

0

Reputation

  1. In my opinion as an "frequent, but not fanatical" gamer, i7 is top performance, but not very good at price/performance comparisons. And I don't know any normal app (besides video encoding, heavy photo editing or such) that currently needs more than 4GB ram. Tom's Hardware did a good article on gaming CPU for money. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-cpu,2359-5.html For me, next buy is going to be a Phenom II X4 995. If it has to be an intel for you, look at the C2Q9950, forget the "Extreme Editions" too. I wouldn't go Dual Core today (except if you can get really a lot more clockspeed for same price) since even a dual-core enabled game might be happy if windows runs on the third core.
  2. Affentitten, maybe in this case it had something to do with being the first aircraft lost in the war (not many followed, IIRC) so finding him alive would have removed that "spot" from the US Military Air Campaign.
  3. Could the word "stock" have been derived from that tally stick? Most interesting discussion here.
  4. I could create a mission for you, but I have no clue what works with the demo. Simple USMC Squad maybe? For the talk on R6 Vegas - I stopped playing with the first Ghost Recon, but as far as I can tell it the biggest difference between these games and Arma is that the maps are "pathed" for the bots. There are door points, cover points, stairs and so on all connected by a path node network which the AI uses to figure out what it's doing in the gameworld. With Arma2, the AI is directly "reading" their environment. If you play "Trial by Fire" you might see a few of the enemy guys I mentioned peeking over a wall by moving up a slope. Which to me seems to indicate the cover-seeking is LOS based, definitley not of the simple "move to an object and crouch" idea.
  5. Adam, again I can only restate that what you are seeing is not what I'm and many others seeing. Just last weekend I got nailed two times more by soldiers I never saw. I also noticed one group standing in the open - because I had not given them "COMBAT" behaviour in the editor. As soon as I did they were hidden. I've played A1 to hell and back, so I'd definitely recognize if the AI is the same. It clearly isn't.
  6. I like the effects (blur when turning) since they reduce situational awareness which IMHO is a realistic try to simulate that you can't observe enemy at distance when running. But I shut them down for framerate reasons. Performance is really weak, I have an AMD 5000+ Dualcore which will bottleneck at 15FPS in some of the included missions due to AI calculations, and the 9600GT - which runs other games like STALKER or FALLOUT3 pretty nicely, also goes below 20 FPS sometimes even with everthing on low. Adam, I don't have the demo, no clue what scenarios they included. But in the retail, there's at least one mission ("Trial by Fire") which has you assaulting a village with 6 squadmates (AI Group Commander) and they will all nicely take cover and move in leaps & overwatch. I've been killed by enemy AI laying prone next to a fence and bending their upper body around the fence post so only their head is visible. They even seem to use cover not immediatly in their front, for example a wall blocking LOS 6 meter in front of them, they will move up a slope just far enough to peek over that wall. The system is not restricted to hugging corners or trees. I don't know why you are not seeing this. One thing I noticed however is that you as commander should not try to micromanage them as in A1. For example, trying to send them into individual positions on corners makes them stupid. Best I found was to leave them in formation and just move ahead myself, or to use the "Advance" command so they can pick their own paths. The biggest notable difference for me is that enemy AI is not standing in the open anymore. I created a few quick editor missions with an enemy squad given a "Combat" behaviour waypoint in a village, and whenever I assault that village, I have to look hard for them. In A1, they would be standing in perfect wedge formation exactly on top of the waypoint, in A2 the AI scatters and hides, with just enough head showing to nail you. That improvement alone makes a massive difference for the way you as commander have to plan your assaults.
  7. Oh, forgot to add (and can't edit anymore): I remember for A1 the same kind of hostility towards the game from the members here. I'm really not clear where that comes from.
  8. Guys, I'm more than surprised at the reactions here. I've been playing A2 since about three weeks (German release) and the second evening I uninstalled A1 since no way I'm going back. The new AI in Arma2 is so good at using cover and concealment that I spent the first week getting killed by soldiers I never saw. Together with the new effects when running, it really cuts down (in a realistic way) on your situational awareness. The new editor modules allow for easy application of advanced scripting items, like Air Strikes, Artillery and random enemy patrols. You can also command platoons and even companies now with a "High Command" module that allows you to place waypoints and set behaviour for multiple squads. Yes, many buildings can't be entered, and the ground is non-deformable, so no foxholes. But that seems rather minor when you are fighting for a village or town against a platoon of AI which uses every bit of cover. Oh, and smoke now works against the AI. I've used it quite a bit was my squad was getting hacked to pieces trying to assault an outnumbered enemy AI team. Adam, you seem to expecting CMSF AI type behaviour in Arma. Forget it. CMSF doesn't allow you to drive vehicles or shoot a gun firsthand, neither does it allow you to send individual soldiers around, so obviously it does a few things better with the stuff you can do. This is the closest to a first-person warfare simulator we can currently get on the computer. There's a reason the USMC uses the same engine for training, so if you are willing to let go of the idea that it has to be a first-person CMSF, A2 might be the best military game released this year. OFP:DR will be OFP in name only, and likely fall on the arcade side of things.
  9. I think without a few dedicated CPU Benchmarks, we're really out of luck trying to compare 3 year or older CPUs with today. Here's a benchmark for Arma2, maybe others know about different CPU-related benchmarks to post here? http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,687620/ArmA-2-tested-Benchmarks-with-18-CPUs/Practice/
  10. I'm seriously confused these days as far as CPUs are concerned. The list of Quad- and Dual Cores is longer than my elbow, and I have no clue how to compare that power with my current 5000+ AMD X2. Otherwise the prices look pretty good, but for all I know I picked the worst CPU ever.
  11. I already skipped two 50$ games this year for their copy protection scheme, Steel Beasts with the (IMHO very sensible) Dongle will be mine when I skip a third game.
  12. IMHO this is exactly caused by the movie being "too tight", no time for character development. You may like it as a fast action movie, but CR did with - what you call "slowing down" - IMHO the right thing to flesh out people more.
  13. Casino was IMHO a perfectly fresh take on Bond, and as brilliant as "Batman Begins" in it's redefinition. Then they screwed up QoS royally with the fast cuts, laughable villain, bad plot and just generally not enough Bond. Small example: Instead of Bond flying into Bregenz (which doesn't in fact have an airport) I'd have invested additional 30 seconds or 60 to have him drive into town, with a nice wide-angle shot of the Austrian landscape. That would be bond-ish IMHO - they always brought out visually interesting famous places. But no, QoS is almost 30 mins. shorter than Casino, and it really feels rushed.
  14. The insanity continues: http://wwiaircombat.com/articles/rise-of-flight-interview-demo-confirmed Rise of Flight, which looks to be the best WW1 Aircombat Simulation ever, will require an internet connection even for offline play, EVERY TIME you want to play. If your ISP is giving you troubles, or their servers are down due to technical problems, you won't even be able to launch a single player mission. So much for "buying" a game - we are soon going to be "renting".
×
×
  • Create New...