Metascore
73

Mixed or average reviews - based on 29 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 14 out of 29
  2. Negative: 1 out of 29
  1. With support from Bohemia Interactive already in full swing, ARMA II Operation Arrow Head even with some of the minor flaws that go along with such a massive undertaking is one of those games that we will be playing years from now and still enjoying it.
  2. This stand-alone expansion improves upon the original in almost every way.
  3. This game is number one when it comes down to military simulations. For shooter fans it can be too complex, but if you're into real missions and realism at its best, be welcome.
  4. The most realistic wargame simulation available today, albeit burdened by poor performance. [Aug 2010, p.100]
  5. New world, new machinery, more interesting missions and fewer bugs – that's the new ArmA II standalone add-on. The best way to start with ArmA franchise. [July 2010]
  6. 80
    It features new campaign missions and a number of new toys to play around with, and is still an incredibly comprehensive war experience, despite its issues with performance and artificial intelligence.
  7. Operation Arrowhead does a fine job of giving the hardcore fans of the series exactly what they want, no more and no less. You'll get a lengthy new campaign, a brand new environment, and the same accurate and realistic combat that you've come to know and love.
  8. Multiplayer boasts some pretty crazy 25 v. 25 matches that can rage on over land, and sea, and air (GI Joooe!). And if all of that still isn't enough, it's definitely worth mentioning that you also get the full campaign and multiplayer sets from the first installment of ARMA 2, making the argument not to pick it up a difficult one.
  9. If you've got a powerful computer, a fair bit of OCD when it comes to military realism, and a lot of time and patience, then Bohemia's ArmA II: Operation Arrowhead will scratch your itch in ways that Modern Warfare or Battlefield: Bad Company can't.
  10. Although it has serious flaws in enemy AI sometimes, and you need a high-end PC to play, this is game is recommended for the original fans, and also for players wanting to try a new experience in war simulation.
  11. It's an improvement to ARMA 2, but it still includes some of the weaknesses. But now the game actually is what it should have been right from the start: a realistic military simulation that works most of the time.
  12. Maybe a great sandbox toy, but selling itself as a named campaign expansion is a work of great fail. [Aug 2010, p.100]
  13. ArmA II: Operation Arrowhead comes with a nice single player campaign, a series of stand-alone missions, a nice online multiplayer mode and lots of weapons and vehicles. Unfortunately the AI doesn't work good, the characters animations are poor and the controls are the antithesis of immediacy.
  14. Bohemia, just for a change, how about giving us a character with a little flesh on his bones.
  15. Fans will love it, but it could have been so much better. [Oct 2010, p.62]
  16. It doesn't address any of the series' shortcomings but this is still the most versatile solider sim around.
  17. When the smoke clears, Operation Arrowhead is a decent addition to ARMA II. It adds more avenues for players to experience military operations, and view them with decidedly different perspectives.
  18. On the one hand it brings more of what we love about Bohemia's games, gritty combat on an immense scale, with an entirely new setting, a decent campaign and some short but sweet single missions. Yet the expansion doesn't improve on the original and doesn't fix any of the problems ArmA 2 had.
  19. I'll end with this, if you're willing to put the effort in, and the realism aspect sounds like it will appeal to you, the $30 price of Arma II: OA is an easy entry into the series.
  20. Despite some annoying bugs, Operation Arrowhead shows a few interesting improvement in the ARMA II formula. And is still the more realistic war simulator available.
  21. Arrowhead paints the most chilling picture of the horrors of war than any game has done yet. [Sept 2010, p.84]
  22. The game that calls itself a military simulation does a lot better than its predecessor Arma 2 (which was crawling with bugs). The missions are varied, the bugs less common and the grafics (having a top notch pc) superb. But it´s still the old Arma, with all the AI failures (never let them drive!), cumbersome controls and flair from the 90s.
  23. Operation Arrowhead is a realistic combat simulation game that still suffers from a variety of technical bugs, just like the original. There is a great amount of fun hiding under the surface, which requires patience and time to find and appreciate.
  24. Operation Arrowhead certainly features a large assortment of content, both offline and online, that rewards its fans, but for those who prefer their shooters to require little thinking and itchy trigger fingers, you may want to pass this one up.
  25. Takistan is still home to an erratic framerate, temperamental engine and the kind of sloppy AI that remains completely oblivious until you start firing.
  26. It's fun but lacks refinement. Bad AI and inconsistent graphical performance really detract from the amazing potential. I recommend it if you know what you are getting into or if Bohemia Interactive can iron out the wrinkles.
  27. Operation Arrorhead is a big disappointment. Not only this expansion is boring, but it failed to realize its potential.
  28. If you weren't convinced by ArmA II, Operation Arrowhead won't help your appreciation of the series. The only difference with the original is the new content additions, with a reasonable price considering it's a standalone. As for the rest, it's more or less the same game, complete with its flaws, thus it deserves the same score.
  29. tbd
    Operation: Arrowhead has improved the original in many key areas – particularly in co-op.
User Score
8.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 164 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 31 out of 38
  2. Negative: 3 out of 38
  1. Jul 29, 2011
    10
    Listen to me now. This game is unbelievably awesome. Most of these reviews - if you take care to read them, are from when the game first came out. It has come a long way - and so has the hardware to support it. Buy the game - even better if you buy combined ops - or buy ArmA II and Operation Arrowhead and combine them. It's not that expensive. Join a clan - a good one - one without ridiculous requirements to maintain membership. Play with the crew. Get to know them. And run some of the most immersive, realistic, expansive, open-ended, tactical, fun, glorious missions you have ever seen. ArmA vets laugh about CoD. We mock CoD. Because CoD doesn't have anything on ArmA. Seriously. Buy it and play it. Learn it. It's tough - we know. But good things come to those who wait - and put in the effort - to learn a real game. And if you can't figure it out - after just a few hours of applied effort - a look or two through the controls menu - and maybe even asking a question or two on multiplayer - then go away - we don't want you here anyway. Go back to your CoD where enemies throw themselves into your bullets and you are virtually invincible. We will be busy fighting serious **** enemies - human or AI - and trying not to get shot even once - because this game does not f*ck around. Full Review »
  2. Aug 27, 2010
    10
    All in all it's still an improvement over default ArmA2. It's a great sand box but it's only really truly worth playing online if you're a part of a proper milsim team like the guys over at ORC (Operation Reality) or something similar although I think they're pretty unique in the field. It's truly a very immersion orientated game and you really need the right guys around you to get that experience, otherwise the game deteriorates real quick and gets boring and unrealistic online. I'd still give it a 7.4/10 and that's pretty high in my books. Full Review »
  3. Feb 28, 2011
    9
    Arma II and its expansion do require a powerful PC, but that's because its high graphical fidelity. Xalex mentioned in their review: "Other sandbox games do not have this issue at all, for example farcry2 and fallout3. Those game I can run on max settings with atleast 40 fps, ArmA i am glad if I get 15 fps"

    The above quote is ridiculous because it's akin to saying "I can run the original DOOM on max and get 400 FPS, but on Far Cry 2 I only get 40 FPS." Obviously, games with lower graphical quality are going to run better. It doesn't mean that a game is horribly unoptimized because it doesn't give you the same FPS that much visually simpler games give you. Xalex' request to "Optimize the game and make it playable on normal computers" suggests they don't understand what optimizing is. Making it playable on "normal" (aka middleware) computers would have nothing to do with optimizing it, it would instead require reducing the graphical quality. Or, they could play the game on low graphics settings and let those with powerful computers enjoy the great graphics that games like Far Cry 2 and Fallout 3 aren't in the realm of providing.
    Full Review »