No...Takistan is a real location in Iran. Except in Iran its called Tākestān. So whatever, if BI thinks they're making it on a fictional country, they're wrong.
Trust me, Just because there's a town in In Iran called Takistan, doesn't mean there're basing it there, if a game came out where the US Army was fighting the Iranians, there would be international outrage, all of BI's previous games has been located somewhere fictional, why won't this one be?
Set into the new, visually attractive environment of hilly central Asia,
Iran is not in Asia, nor is it very hilly, and there is no such thing as the Green Sea.
Well yeah I know they aren't basing it on the real town of Takistan! Im just trying to prove that its a real place since you said it does not exist.:p
But yeah I know the map and conflict is going to be fictional, but there is a real place called Takistan! :D
But for your second statement, Iran is in the Middle East, which is technically part of Asia. But your right on the other 2 parts, Iran is not that hilly and yeah theres no Green Sea. haha
Quote wikipedia (central asia): In modern context, Central Asia consists of the five former Soviet republics of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Other areas are often included such as Mongolia, Afghanistan, most of Pakistan, north-eastern Iran, north-western India, and western parts of the People's Republic of China such as Xinjiang. South-western and middle China such as Tibet, Qinghai, Gansu and Inner Mongolia, and southern parts of Siberia may also be included in Central Asia.
I think it's more based on Afghanistan. Considering modern conflicts that are on-going and with it being described 'hilly'.
In my second guess I'd say Tajikistan. A former soviet republic, which may have something to do with a Russian presence, it's hilly, by the looks of the pictures and also the names are very similar.
Honestly, I think its WAY to early for the expansion, I mean I just finished the first campaign now that its playable and I havent got to go back and play it again a different way. There are still show stopping bugs (like entering any large city just crashed my game). I am glad to see 1.04 concentrating on JUST this issue.
I can see the reasoning behind the expansion. BIS wants to keep everyones eyes down in OCTOBER because of Dragon Rising's release, and I'm sure that a little extra cash is never a bad thing. To me it just shows a bit more good faith to release an expansion at least 6 months later, and to have the main bugs in the first release fixed.
I am not really mad or happy to see this expansion as I cant even really play the first one effectivly with all the Ctd's. Like someone said earlier, I hope it has more than QG did because that [queens gambit] was less than a joke, it was an insult.
Why is everyone hating on this expansion!? All it is...is an expansion that adds more units and maps. Theres no down side in my eyes. Who the hell says that BIS is automatically gonna stop working on ArmA II. Right now Im more excited for this Expansion that I was for ArmA II because it looks great and I love the area its taking place in...Better mission making possibility and better performance. All this sounds really fucking awesome to me.
I really dont see why everyone is bitching and whining about something that will add content, therefor being good for the players....:|
First of all, whom ever said BIS should concentrate on fixing the game.... wait how do you know they aren't, and second of all who says BIS is even working on the expansion all that much. I wouldn't doubt if they've already made most of the stuff and probably could have released it in vanilla A2 but that would be terrible business practice in my opinion. They need to have multiple sources of revenue in order to even survive as a business. Hence expansion packs. Again, I wouldn't doubt if they've already been working on these models, etc for quite some time and thus the "entire" company doesn't have to completely focus on the expansion.
Bottomline, if you think they've stopped working on fixing bugs and such you are nuts.
Ugh... no one said they were, mate. But the fact that they're now pouring their developmental focus into an expansion, pfft, not an expansion but a "standalone" product is nothing new for them. They released QG that touted all the improvements for ArmA for a price. Most of us shelled it out because we wanted said improvements, but we had to pay for it. After sales dwindled for the expansion, they released a patch. Not that it isn't good marketing to make people pay for necessary engine updates, but it's still pretty low, IMHO. Also the entire "company" comment is laughable. All 25+ of them, not counting the various departments i.e. PR, SRS, marketing, etc etc? They're not EA or UbiSoft with unlimited budgets and a massive dev staff. The question posed by a few members here pertaining to the patching process, which ArmA 2 needs much more of, isn't any less pertinent to said discussion.
Also, as a side note, anyone who's been with this series since OFP knows damned well that BIS sucks at making games. It's the community that takes their jumbled mess and makes a coherent product out of it. Without this excellent community this entire series would long be dead.
nobody just sees this as a tactic to sway buyers from DR ? It seems plain as day to me.
Im sure that BIS will continue to patch their game, I think the argument here is that BIS have not made a fully playable game before asking the community to pay up again to get this new content. If you all are like me Im wondering what will be wrong with this new content, because they [BIS] have a solid reputation for releasing utter crap, until the second year of patches.
I think the ONLY reason I am looking forward to this new stuff is that ACE2 now has more content to use for its mod.
Cant work out if ArmA forums survive on the whinning and whingeing or if they are alive because BIS actualy make good games.
Being a cynical critic alone isn't actualy helpfull, not particulary polite, and comes over as being ungratefull.
I for one am looking forward to the expansion, Placebo has already made clear that 1.04 is being worked on, and I'm satisfied that they may be able to include even more/better content again with the expansion.
As for coments like the one above from Micheal "nobody just sees this as a tactic to sway buyers from DR ? It seems plain as day to me". Well this is a free market / capitalist economy working here, you should EXPECT this sort of thing by now. It is more or less BIS's duty to do so until the next worthy milsim arives and they re-asses what they want to do.
Just hope for your sake that your not expecting too much from DR, because at the end of the day its just a game and well... thats it , its just a game.
I'm sure I'm not the only one here who after reading that BIS will soon release this thought of the oxymoron by calling a standalone game title an expansion pack.
Truth be told, a standalone game doesn't require the original game to play. However, an expansion pack does require the installation of the original game, just like Queen's Gambit required ArmA.
So did someone at the press office get it wrong and call OA a standalone title, or will it not require ArmA 2? If it won't require ArmA 2, then it seems practical for BIS to call it ArmA 3. Otherwise, I truly hope OPERATION ARROWHEAD will be an Expansion pack.
Copyright (c) 2006 - 2020 Armaholic.com All Rights Reserved.
Armed Assault, ArmA: Combat Operations, ArmA: Queen's Gambit, Arma 2, Arma 2: Operation Arrowhead, Arma 2: Combined Operations, Arma 2: British Armed Forces, Arma 2: Private Military Company, Arma 2: Army of the Czech Republic, Arma 2: Reinforcements, Arma 2: Firing Range and Arma 3 are trademarks or registered trademarks of Bohemia Interactive a.s.