Ivan Torres said:
Ironman126 said:
Sixcess said:
Meh. FPS is my favourite genre by far, but 'realistic' military shooters bore me. I'll take escapism (Wolfenstein) or serious realism (ARMA II) but life's too short to waste time in the middle of the road.
snip
Its an opinion, I am actually better at flying air vehicles in Arma 2 than in BF2. I'm assuming you've never seen richie speeds videos?
Sure, my statement about the vehicle physics is an opinion, but i've seen better AI and weapon ballistics in games for 2004. AI that know EXACTLY where you are, regardless of the fact you are in a Gillie suit, motionless in bushes, over 300 meters away? No, real people would never know that. And bullet physics. What a joke! A .308 (7.62 NATO) round does not drop out of the air after 200 meters when fired at a 30 degree angle to the ground! It drops at closer to 5 klicks. I suppose also that a main battle tank (M1A2 Abrams) cannot survive 4 or 5 HEAT RPG rounds, despite the fact that there have been cases in the Middle East where they have survived more than 15 direct hits? That's my issue with the so-call "military simulator" that Arma 2 claimed to be. From a purely fun standpoint, Arma 2 leaves a lot to be desired. Poor UI, bad AI, a hilariously bad voice "acting" system, it's just not a well thought out game. But, i'm done with my rant. If you like it, more power to you. I'll stick with less ambitious games until i know someone gets it right.