<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Review &#124; ArmA II</title>
	<atom:link href="http://resolution-magazine.co.uk/content/review-arma-ii/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://resolution-magazine.co.uk/content/review-arma-ii/</link>
	<description>Resolution Magazine: Diverse commentary on video games. Previews, reviews, articles and more.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 10:40:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Lewis Denby</title>
		<link>http://resolution-magazine.co.uk/content/review-arma-ii/#comment-20829</link>
		<dc:creator>Lewis Denby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 15:05:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://resolution-magazine.co.uk/content/?p=1760#comment-20829</guid>
		<description>YGS: The score is 70%. It is not, in any universe, a low mark.  That&#039;s a 7 out of 10, a 4 out of 5, a &quot;Buy&quot; rather than a &quot;Don&#039;t buy.&quot;  If you have a look at our mark guidelines, you&#039;ll see that next to 70-79% it says &quot;You’ll enjoy this, so long as you don’t expect perfection.&quot;  I&#039;d say the review makes that pretty clear.

I think you may have misconstrued Greg&#039;s comments a little bit.  While he does point out that the very nature of the game is going to be a hurdle for many, he goes on to mention the cumbersome controls and poor tutorials as barriers to the entertainment.  They&#039;re problems that Greg felt were pretty serious in the face of what is, ultimately, a very solid military sim.  Hope that clarifies things a bit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>YGS: The score is 70%. It is not, in any universe, a low mark.  That&#8217;s a 7 out of 10, a 4 out of 5, a &#8220;Buy&#8221; rather than a &#8220;Don&#8217;t buy.&#8221;  If you have a look at our mark guidelines, you&#8217;ll see that next to 70-79% it says &#8220;You’ll enjoy this, so long as you don’t expect perfection.&#8221;  I&#8217;d say the review makes that pretty clear.</p>
<p>I think you may have misconstrued Greg&#8217;s comments a little bit.  While he does point out that the very nature of the game is going to be a hurdle for many, he goes on to mention the cumbersome controls and poor tutorials as barriers to the entertainment.  They&#8217;re problems that Greg felt were pretty serious in the face of what is, ultimately, a very solid military sim.  Hope that clarifies things a bit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: YGS</title>
		<link>http://resolution-magazine.co.uk/content/review-arma-ii/#comment-20736</link>
		<dc:creator>YGS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 17:15:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://resolution-magazine.co.uk/content/?p=1760#comment-20736</guid>
		<description>What I do not like about this review is that it seems to imply the reason for its low score is that the game cannot appeal to a wide enough audience, that the goal of a game is to be liked by the biggest majority. Its an obviously niche game that sets out to accomplish something, and after reading this review I am still left unsure as to how well it accomplished it. 

All I really got from it in the end was that the voices could be redone... i have no idea how much of a success most of the game mechanics were (except for the ai, which got a positive nod). The reviewer should have admited they were unable to appreciate the game and let someone else do it, or review it in a way that more could be taken from it.

,YGS</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What I do not like about this review is that it seems to imply the reason for its low score is that the game cannot appeal to a wide enough audience, that the goal of a game is to be liked by the biggest majority. Its an obviously niche game that sets out to accomplish something, and after reading this review I am still left unsure as to how well it accomplished it. </p>
<p>All I really got from it in the end was that the voices could be redone&#8230; i have no idea how much of a success most of the game mechanics were (except for the ai, which got a positive nod). The reviewer should have admited they were unable to appreciate the game and let someone else do it, or review it in a way that more could be taken from it.</p>
<p>,YGS</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DrEru</title>
		<link>http://resolution-magazine.co.uk/content/review-arma-ii/#comment-9072</link>
		<dc:creator>DrEru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 09:52:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://resolution-magazine.co.uk/content/?p=1760#comment-9072</guid>
		<description>I must admit I am really looking forward to playing this game.  I still have very positive memories of Operation Flashpoint, despite it&#039;s flaws.  In fact it appears that the chief flaws of that game, the voices and the squad controls, have not really been addressed.

I have heard worrying rumours that this may not make it to the 360, which would be a shame.  The Xbox version of OFP retained many of the good points of the original game, but made it slightly more accessible but refining and simplifying the more clumsy elements.  It&#039;s major weakness was the delay in making the transition, resulting in a game with disappointingly obsolete graphics.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I must admit I am really looking forward to playing this game.  I still have very positive memories of Operation Flashpoint, despite it&#8217;s flaws.  In fact it appears that the chief flaws of that game, the voices and the squad controls, have not really been addressed.</p>
<p>I have heard worrying rumours that this may not make it to the 360, which would be a shame.  The Xbox version of OFP retained many of the good points of the original game, but made it slightly more accessible but refining and simplifying the more clumsy elements.  It&#8217;s major weakness was the delay in making the transition, resulting in a game with disappointingly obsolete graphics.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

