ArmA-Killer?

[Preacher74]

Having tried out a little bit of CA (and having played ArmA for several years), I can definitely see the potential for it to be an ArmA-killer (or at least a strong competitor!) if ED decide to develop the infantry aspect. ArmA is great for infantry combat, but the relatively small map sizes and dumbed-down aircraft flight dynamics and controls make aircraft (especially fast aircraft) somewhat useless. Combining the goodness of DCS aircraft fidelity with infantry capability would be amazing so I *strongly* implore ED to pursue this. There are many in the ArmA community looking for the next level of fidelity. The serious combined arms game market is ripe for some competition (given that there is pretty much only ArmA out there) and it would seem to make commercial sense for ED to tap into this established market that is eager for alternatives.

 

If ED can work on increasing ground-level detail (using procedural methods), I can really see CA shining in this space.

Edited August 6, 2012 by [ZSU]Preacher

[JABO2009]

100% agree with the above.... Armas weakness is the small maps and the aircraft simplicty ...

 

please ED go for infantry features and the MOST important thing:

 

game stability on MP gameplay ! the game should run smooth on crowded 30 to 40 player servers....that would be the biggest kick

[Cali]

Arma isn't a flight sim, it's a FPS. Yes the flight models suck, the view distance when flying high sucks and the controls are very basic. DCS doesn't have the low down good look that Arma. The cities, forest and surrounding area in Arma can't be touched by DCS. CA is not a Arma killer, not even close. Lets see what happens in the next few years.

[Kenan]

The cities, forest and surrounding area in Arma can't be touched by DCS. CA is not a Arma killer, not even close.

 

+1

[secret1962]

­

Edited March 12, 2018 by secret1962

[3instein]

+1 to that. :(

[Daimaju]

DCS a ArmA killer, seriously!? I play the series since OFP and can not see how this could "kill" ArmA.

 

Must have been a very quick idea of yours... If you think that through... oh boy.

[Bucic]

What I don't like is that we have to wait until ArmA 3 to see even the basic infantry simulation fixed, e.g. poor animations, poor physics.

 

Does ArmA 2 still lag as much as I remember? At one point I quit MP completely on my 50 ms latency connection because of too much units warping.

[tintifaxl]

What I don't like is that we have to wait until ArmA 3 to see even the basic infantry simulation fixed, e.g. poor animations, poor physics.

 

Does ArmA 2 still lag as much as I remember? At one point I quit MP completely on my 50 ms latency connection because of too much units warping.

 

Lag was fixed in 1.60.

[Hellfire257]

Arma killed itself by nerfing the weapons damage. Damn Dayz arcade players :bomb: and Bohemia who listened to them.

 

Erm, what?

 

If you think CA can match ARMA, I'm afraid you're seriously delusional and/or an ED fanboy. The reality is that CA cannot match ARMA toe to toe, and it never will simply because their purpose is entirely different.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Hellfire257

[Ali Fish]

graphically speaking if you would shrink DCS terrain down to arma size terrain. i can guarantee you an equally visual experience is possible.

[Bucic]

Lag was fixed in 1.60.

Really? Could you post a link to change log or something?

[winz]

graphically speaking if you would shrink DCS terrain down to arma size terrain. i can guarantee you an equally visual experience is possible.

Even if, what about the rest?

ED added a very simplistic control of few ground units, which is great, but it's far from beeing an Arma killer from a gameplay standpoint.

Hell, by that logic I can call CA a Company of Heroes killer.

[Bucic]

Silly question by the OP at best...

[Pyroflash]

Yeah, it isn't a Klingon so much as it is a Borg. And by that I mean it assimilates the most important aspects of each of these instead of trying to match them outright.

[mmaruda]

I just can't see DCS as an infantry sim. It would take years to develop and I don't just mean the graphics (collide-able trees anyone?, ability to enter buildings, CQB, animations, object interaction... maybe in 10 years with a new engine).

 

However, I think it would be possible to make a DCS armor module, but that would also require a serious engine overhaul (trees, various ground surface simulation like mud, gravel and many more). IMHO ED should keep focused on what was already announced - finish the Mustang, finish Nevada, DCS Jet and FC3. After that... maybe.

 

Also, for all those who still think DCS could go up against Arma... have you tried comparing the performance of both lately?

[Hellfire257]

Really? Could you post a link to change log or something?

 

http://www.bistudio.com/english/company/developers-blog/230-experimental-betas-interpolating-the-future

 

That was ages ago, back when they were first experimenting with it, but you should get the idea. Basically, they added in interpolation. This fixed the warping in MP and SP.

[Bucic]

http://www.bistudio.com/english/company/developers-blog/230-experimental-betas-interpolating-the-future

 

That was ages ago, back when they were first experimenting with it, but you should get the idea. Basically, they added in interpolation. This fixed the warping in MP and SP.

Ah, interpolation... The simple math forgotten by many game developers :music_whistling:

[joey45]

Ah, interpolation... The simple math forgotten by many game developers :music_whistling:

 

 

I would say 'overlooked'.

[Bucic]

I would say 'overlooked'.

OK, since you've ruined my sugar coating I may well rephrase that as intended - they do piss poor job utilizing it :P

 

Regarding the MP warping fix for ArmA 2 - I was playing the latest version in July 2011, well after the alleged fix has been released, so I'm afraid they just moved from having it very poor to moderately poor. I can't say how it looks in other FPS games. The only MP games I played was Lockon, DCS and ArmA 2.

[Krebs20]

1.60 came out in the last year Bucic. It really did a good job with units warping in MP. 1.62 is out now and its gotten better. 1.6 was the patch that got me back into ARMA. I recommend anyone who hasn't played in a few years to jump back in and give it a try.

[Bucic]

Rgr that.

[Grizzly1606688174]

You need to be aware that MP lag in arma now depends on how the mission is build. Not the game itself. If its a bad mission with a bad server and alot of scripts running with invisible script errors all the time, the server can lag alot, but it has decreased dramaticly over the years. (Domination or MSO as the most common ones and also that retarded gamemode "dayz") These missions really stretch and pushes the old arma 2 engine to its limits now. Hope arma 3 gets a touch better on that.

 

Anyhow, I think ED needs to keep focusing on the flight and strategy part of DCS and the CA module and continously improve them instead. (Nevada map, future maps, future airplanes and so on). I would rather have a JTAC/FLIGHT/STRATEGY game that is super realistic and high functioning in those parts with alot of gameplay than a game that does it all in a "semi-blah" way like arma and most other games does today. If their resources goes to making infantry parts and what not like suggested here in this thread, they simply wouldnt have as much time/money/manpower to put into the detail DCS is know for right now.

 

Detail equals time.

 

 

//Mug. - Arma and DCS player.

Edited August 6, 2012 by <Grizzly>

[asparagin]

Ah, interpolation... The simple math forgotten by many game developers :music_whistling:

 

Interpolation is the mother of all f***ups.

[Bucic]

Interpolation is the mother of all f***ups.

Most probably by devs that have f&^ many other things up in their usual routine. I know there are some advanced programming aspects to this, but noone will ever convince me that a warp is better than even mediocre interpolation.