Part IIIPerformace. Bugs. AI. Gameplay. Fun.
As I've briefly mentioned somewhere above, my initial impression of ArmA was thoroughly underwhelming. The main reason for this was the
very bad performance of the game on my system. At (recommended by the game) medium settings the very 1st campaign mission crawled and jerked around at 10-15 FPS while driving into a large city. The patch did improve performance quite a bit, so that I can now play at least around small towns with about (20-30) FPS. Still, large cities and forests bog my system down even at "low" settings and with much reduced viewing range.
To compare: my fully-pimped OFP (with post-processing enabled through Kegety's DXDLL)doesn't look that much worse than ArmA on low settings with 1000m viewing distance, but runs at 30-40 FPS with 2500m viewing range.
If your system is in the "minimim system requirements" range, don't bother with ArmA
at the moment.
The next problematic point is BUGS. Quite obviously these little creatures find a perfect habitat on the island of Sahrani, which explains their abundance in the world of ArmA. I've seen soldiers run through walls, myself "sliding" over a rooftop as if on ice, then falling through a building, only to get stuck in a wall. I've seen trucks fall of a bridge, bouncing back doing a salto. The bugs and the AI complement each other for some rather interesting gameplay. Quite often during missions I was wondering if I was actually seeing a scripted event or simply witnessing yet another AI breakdown.
A little example:
During one of the campaign mission we're tasked with holding our positions during an enemy attack. After a while we're told to fall back, board some jeeps and get the hell out of there. So, you fall back while enemy infantry and tanks are advancing, constantly under fire. You reach the jeeps, board one, and...wait. Somehow some of the other soldiers got stuck somewhere. So, I kept sitting in the backseat of a jeep, waiting minute after minute for the rest of my squad to arrive.
When they finally arrived we raced off, into and through the city. Well, at least until my driver missed a bend in the road and smacked into a building. We got stuck and it took him another couple of minutes to get the jeep back on the road again.
Outside the city the other jeep had a (this time scripted by the mission designer, at least I believe so, but you can never be sure of these things in ArmA)accident and the survivors were ordered to board my jeep, too. It took them about 5 minutes to walk the 10m from their wrecked jeep to our vehicle... while I happily waited yet again. After this incident we drove about 100m, only to disembark and continue on foot.
The whole situation didn't really convey the atmosphere of "pulling back at the last second with an enemy army on your heels"...
There's also some strange stuff about the M1A1's ammo. While 120mm HEAT rounds won't even scratch a small house you can bring down a four-storey building with three rounds of APFSDS ammo.
There's also a distinct lack of visual feedback regarding the weapons. You can fire a salvo into the large windows of that hotel, but they won't break. A tank round tearing into a building won't even produce a scratch on the wall. If you're used to the carnage in modern shooters then the firefights in ArmA will definitely seem a bit sterile in comparison.
Another point that needs to be covered is the AI. The little soldiers in ArmA often only seem to come in two different flavours: stupid and blind as a rock, or deadly snipers that kill you with assistance of
the force the moment they sense your presence.
Sometimes, especially in cities, you'll see enemy soldiers running past you, happily ignoring you and you squad. At other times they kill you from 200m with the first shot while you're hiding behind some bushes.
One of the "side" campaign missions involves you blowing up a couple of enemy tanks during a night mission. I actually gave up after repeatedly getting killed within seconds after firing a single round, while lying prone in total darkness in good cover.
Sounds pretty bad, eh?
It does. But, OTOH ArmA is fun. Great fun, actually. The game really captures the atmosphere of infantry/combined arms fighting. If you're not plagued by performance issues and AI breakdowns then ArmA offers a fantastic experience of being on a battlefield. You got tanks advancing in the distance, jets and helicopters buzzing over your head, explosions all around you while you try to maneuver your squad around the battlefield. All this while you know that in ArmA a single bullet CAN kill you.
You send the MG gunner to that corner of the street, order the soldier with the M203 to take out that sniper on the roof top, send two men to advance down the street while the rest engages in a vicious firefight with the enemy reinforcements. Then suddenly, a BMP comes rolling around the corner! Fall back! Take up new positions and set up an ambush.
This is where ArmA really shines. My problem is that this really doesn't differ much from the original Operation Flashpoint. In fact, it's not really different from OFP at all. You get nicer grafics and a slightly modified campaign, but in the end ArmA is practically OFP 1.5.
If you liked OPF you'll like ArmaA. As OFP, ArmA can be a very difficult game. A single enemy soldier you didn't spot in time can (and will) kill you. The pacing is much slower than any other tactical shooter I know. You spend much time observing the environment, crawling cautiously forward, or dashing from cover to cover. Ah, and don't even
think of firing your gun while running around...
To be continued... (for multiplayer)