Average User Score: tbdMar 2, 2014An outstanding game, one of the last that featured a planning phase before assaulting an objective with teams of commandos. IncrediblyAn outstanding game, one of the last that featured a planning phase before assaulting an objective with teams of commandos. Incredibly detailed, very realistic- with lean & fluid movement controls way ahead of its time. There are a few bugs, sometimes the AI doesn't like to climb ladders, but overall the AI is excellent inside buildings doing clearing routines, rescuing hostages, etc. Seriously, as old as this game is, it puts unit AI like the modern Arma 3's to shame. Lots of fun to be had with just the right amount of realism.
Some older games that you remember having fun playing, just don't hold up when you look at them with more modern eyes- but this is the exception. It really is still very very good.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.5Mar 2, 2014My rating is for the game- WITHOUT- any mods. WITH mods that fix the game the rating would be a 5.
It's better than Arma 3... But whatMy rating is for the game- WITHOUT- any mods. WITH mods that fix the game the rating would be a 5.
It's better than Arma 3... But what isn't? This is still made by Bohemia Interactive, a studio that is either profoundly lazy or terminally incompetent - pick one. Consequently, BIS produces software that can't ever be called "finished" and depends on legions of modders - not just to add content - but to actually FIX the game into a playable state. Arma 2 has a massive community which, over the years has turned Arma 2 into a unique and almost functional experience that, when it works, can be really fun.
BUT to get that good experience you will have to install a LOT of mods that (mostly) fix the AI and realism problems. Then you'll have to add any game expanding mods on top of the fixes and you'll end up with a massive directory set - all of which is going to have to work together with the native, bug-cursed half-as*ed crap code that Bohemia barfed onto the game disk. You will be spending HOURS just trying to troubleshoot an outdated poorly implemented code on an unoptimized game engine that was out of date the day this was released.
This is a game that, if undertaken by a half-competent studio, would have been revolutionary and amazing. After years of being worked on by modders this game really does have some brilliant and incredible moments, but those are fleeting when compared to the fixes/bugs/crashes you will spend more time sorting out. BIS and the Arma series is so enraging because they are SO close to something that works and that would be totally revolutionary, but instead of finishing the job they did it half-way and left players to fix their work. And as talented as the modders are- there is just only so much you can do with mods laid on top of the core code and using the horrible markup language.
If you are willing to put up with the constant troubleshooting between game errors, glitches and mod conflicts just to get this thing to run and work halfway decently. And if you can tolerate the numerous bugs, glitches and occasionally game-killing design flaws, then you WILL have some amazing experiences.
Honestly, even though I've put literally thousands of hours into this series, I can't really say that I recommend it. Especially since I'm older now, and just don't want to spend the few weekend hours I've got free to fix Bohemia's mistakes. If you've got the hours to sink into it, or you're satisfied with building really simple missions then give it a shot- it's FAR better than Arma 3 (but that's not hard) and really cheap.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.4Feb 25, 2014TL;DR: This is alpha quality work at a final version price. BIS maintains that this game is like "fine wine" that "ages well" when actuallyTL;DR: This is alpha quality work at a final version price. BIS maintains that this game is like "fine wine" that "ages well" when actually it's more like cheap wine that you need to take home and mix with fruit juice and a pound of sugar to be in any way drinkable. Arma 3 is yet another great concept that in practice is totally undermined and destroyed by what is either laziness or incompetence from the developers. Wait a year from now. Maybe the modders will fix this lazy incompetent mess and Arma 3 will be a playable game like Arma 2. Until then, just play Arma 2
A lot of people lead reviews by saying this game "has potential"... which is a really polite way of admitting that, right now, it absolutely sucks. It also does not reflect well on the game or on segments of its fanbase that well-deserved criticism is met with accusations of being a "Call of Duty" fan or a console kiddy or other supposed slurs on the critic's intelligence. I've been playing this series since Flashpoint and y'know, it's always been bug-ridden, poorly implemented, and heavily dependent on its modders to even be playable- BUT the series has been just good enough to be worth the aggravation and massive time-sink necessary to make it work... until now.
The AI is horrible. For a game that involves realism in combat, where damage is more realistic and is dependent on squad tactics, the AI NEEDS to be competent if not excellent. Instead, the AI is incapable of navigating the terrain without getting stuck, incapable of responding effectively to fire and totally lost inside of buildings - no, literally, lost inside. God help you if your AI decides to use a grenade because he'll just kill himself.
The "Action menu" is STILL in the game and has been combined with environmental add actions that are even worse than in previous games. Face a door and click the action menu key... now watch as you transition to your handgun instead of opening the door because the action triggers are inconsistently placed by an incompetent dev team. This has been a major problem since OFP and it's actually worse now.
You will lose many many many games, not because you made a mistake or were unlucky, or for legit gameplay reasons, but because the AI is totally- and I mean totally- incapable of doing what the game *depends* on it to do.
The devs have taken to claiming ARMA 3 is a "toolbox" (when they're not insisting it's a game not a simulation- or conversely, that it's actually a simulation not a game- what they call their game depends on which set of their errors you're pointing out) in defense of it lacking a campaign. Fine. But what you get for "tools" is laughable- there's a handful of armor, vehicles and equipment, but it's basically just re-skinned copy-and-pastes between factions. Basically everyone shares assets with superficial cammo differences.
Did you think ARMA 2 had bad optimization? Well, the dev team topped itself with ARMA 3 being even clunkier, slower and more bloated. Seriously, everything about this game/simulation when it comes to optimization looks like a rough draft of code rather than a finished product. It will slam even high-end machines to a halt because of poor usage routines, bad scripting, and other lazy shortcuts.
What about mods? Well the modding community is a brilliant one, we've got some really really good people who really should get credit for making ARMA remotely popular (or playable). But BIS is depending on modders, not to expand the game, but basically to make the game WORK. No matter how good the mod team is, it's still less efficient and effective to try to fix a broken AI with an addon as opposed to fixing the core code. BIS is content to be lazy and coast on its unpaid modders, but there's only a handful of people who work on AI/game core issues (a lot work on maps and missions, but core realism/errors are another matter) and they seem pretty tired of doing this stuff. It's also a pretty sh*t thing for BIS to do, to release a full priced game with barely any content, crappy optimization, an outdated engine and terrible AI- but then expect the modders to bail them out of trouble. Well... maybe it ain't gonna happen this time. Hell, maybe they can't pull it off this time, even if they want to.… Expand