Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Krevsin]

I've been looking for a good military FPS hard on realism. Something similar to the venerable Operation Flashpoint. It'd be nice if it were not too multiplayer-centric.

[Ozyton]

ARMA is Operation Flashpoint made by the guys who actually made Operation Flashpoint after Codemasters legally stole the name from them to make their own game years later.

Other than that, I'm not sure. Most of them are quite multiplayer-centric or only focus on smaller maps or one aspect of simulation, OFP and ARMA are somewhat unique in that they simulate many aspects, if somewhat poorly.

[TheBronzePickle]

ArmA is really more of a semi-simulator. It's focused around high-fidelity troop simulation, with support like vehicles, aircraft, and heavy weapons taking a softer feel so that they can be incorporated more easily for the developers, mission makers, and players.

If you want something extremely high-fidelity, see if you can't get your hands on one of the VBS series. It's made by the same company, it basically takes the ArmA series and makes it into a full-fidelity military simulation. It's got a lot more content that's a lot more comprehensively simulated.

[Ozyton]

It's also hundreds of dollars if I remember correctly.

[Krevsin]

Well, I think I'll skip VBS and go to ArmA, then.

Which installment do you recommend?

[Ozyton]

ARMA 2 is the best in terms of setting. ARMA 3 is the best in terms of engine. I don't like the semi-future stuff from ARMA 3 as much as I like the contemporary setting of ARMA 2 (And even still I prefer the cold-war era setting of OFP:CWC, but alas...)

ARMA 2 has the ACE mod which I highly recommend, while ARMA 3 doesn't (yet). I don't know how well ACE works offline since I usually play multiplayer.

I think ARMA 2 also has a mod that adds a bunch of the OFP:CWC stuff to make it cold war again, but I've never tried it.

Just be aware that while ARMA does large-scale stuff well it loses a lot of focus. Armored vehicles (and vehicles in general) are particularly lacking, and while ACE mitigates it somewhat it still doesn't fix a lot of the issues that vehicles in the Real Virtuality engine have, such as violently exploding when too many health points are lost. If you like infantry combat then this shouldn't be too much of an issue, but if you want tanks you should try Steel Beasts (which is, again, a hundred dollars) or DCS if you want flight.

[Krevsin]

Thanks a lot. I think I may give Arma 2 a whirl. Given that I mostly like infantry combat, bad vehicles shouldn't bother me too much.

[Sergarr]

Be warned that in OFP and Arma games, infantrymen like to go prone in combat, making them nigh-invisible.

This is actually not realistic, as the modern infantrymen do not usually go prone in modern combat.

[Ozyton]

Modern infantrymen also don't typically have to fight in large open fields with little to no cover, most of it is urban these days, unless I'm mistaken.

[Parsely]

Be warned that in OFP and Arma games, infantrymen like to go prone in combat, making them nigh-invisible.

This is actually not realistic, as the modern infantrymen do not usually go prone in modern combat.

..are you joking? Please tell me you're joking.

[Sergarr]

Be warned that in OFP and Arma games, infantrymen like to go prone in combat, making them nigh-invisible.

This is actually not realistic, as the modern infantrymen do not usually go prone in modern combat.

..are you joking? Please tell me you're joking.

Nope. Compare the number of soldiers who fight standing or crouching to the number of soldier who fight prone.

Modern infantry doesn't go prone (unless faced with a complete lack of cover), period.

[Parsely]

Modern infantry doesn't go prone.

This statement is just so ridiculous.

[Sharp]

Be warned that in OFP and Arma games, infantrymen like to go prone in combat, making them nigh-invisible.

This is actually not realistic, as the modern infantrymen do not usually go prone in modern combat.

..are you joking? Please tell me you're joking.

Nope. Compare the number of soldiers who fight standing or crouching to the number of soldier who fight prone.

Modern infantry doesn't go prone (unless faced with a complete lack of cover), period.

Your mistaken. Infantry go prone for more stable firing platform and to reduce their cross-section. The reason to not go prone though is for mobility, if your peeking from cover then it's hard to do while prone but can be done crouching or standing.

ARMA does this fine, you get people going prone in forests and fields and lots in long range fire fights, but in Urban terrain where it is close quarters then typically there is more mobility so people will be moving around a lot more.

Generally when your under fire you hit the deck because your a lot less likely to get shot.

[PanH]

to reduce their cross-section.

That's not the current warfare strategy. Infantry shows their front and not their sides to the enemy. Also, bullpups.
Prone can happen, but it's not the majority of cases.

[Aseaheru]

I would suggest arma(as allready has been done) or Red Orchestra. Its getting sorta old, but when playing on realistic you gotta know what you are doing.