CM Operation Flashpoint 3 announced | "Oops, they're doing it again..."

[katipo66 94]

Infact I just said Can we stop this stupid argument between the two..... Incase you didn't realise I play both.

Unfortunately i doubt its going to stop... quite intriguing really, to the point of being humorous :D

[BF2_Trooper 0]

Unfortunately i doubt its going to stop... quite intriguing really, to the point of being humorous :D

I've said this back when OFP DR was released, this is going to be The Biggest Flame War since Battlecruiser 3000 AD :D

[Heatseeker 0]

Haters gonna hate. Especially the hardcore BIS fanbois, because CM stopped publishing BIS games but kept the OFP name. It's not "epic fail" if it's profitable, and obviously it is since they are making a sequel. Even if it's bad in some "combat simulation" nerds' perspective, CM probably doesn't give a fuck as long as it makes money and the players who will like it neither.

I think it sounds okay. It's good that they have a more defined direction. OFP DR felt like they couldn't decide if they were making OFP, Delta Force or COD4. Who knows, maybe they can make a more cohesive and playable game this time.

"A more defined direction"... seriously? Can anyone be naive enough to buy that? Thats just a diferent way of saying "our game will be better this time because you wont fly helicopters and it will only have 4 player coop".

Thats the best they can do?

So why make a large map? You couldnt fly jets, now you wont fly helicopters, the bad netcode didnt even let you use the map.. and your squad is 4 man big??

Thats not war on a scale never before seen, thats a joke compared to OPF CWC..

People naive enough to fall for this after Dragon Rising deserve what they will end up with, some crippled game with no editing tools, no servers, no support and a "comunity" that they are trying to bring back from the graveyard because they have a new game to sell.

[ben_s 11]

Yea, Unless they sort out the 4 man coop thing its really gonna be a joke and a half. They remove PvP to "enhance" the COOP, we still get the old FTE' stuff and the 4 man fireteam junk again.

[PuFu 4600]

Yea, Unless they sort out the 4 man coop thing its really gonna be a joke and a half. They remove PvP to "enhance" the COOP, we still get the old FTE' stuff and the 4 man fireteam junk again.

Do you have a double personality or something?

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/6358476-post21.html

Quoted from the above link:

Yes, all games just go for the money in the craze of online PvP. Personaly, I prefer Coop alot more.

Wasted resources on un-needed things PvP would be.

EDIT:

found another one:

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/6357366-post5.html

Quoted from the above link:

Yes, all these people that go "No PvP = Fail game" are wrong.

I take it Fallout3 failed badly didn't it?

Edited August 9, 2010 by PuFu

[CameronMcDonald 146]

I hope they have a literary competition again. Funnily enough, I really enjoy having a stab at writing a bit o' prose when it refers to games.

[UKWFMental 10]

Do you have a double personality or something?

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/6358476-post21.html

Quoted from the above link:

Yes, all games just go for the money in the craze of online PvP. Personaly, I prefer Coop alot more.

Wasted resources on un-needed things PvP would be.

EDIT:

found another one:

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/6357366-post5.html

Quoted from the above link:

Yes, all these people that go "No PvP = Fail game" are wrong.

I take it Fallout3 failed badly didn't it?

Thats hilarious, good find

[b0b 10]

lol? Im not feeding anyone bullshit. Infact I just said Can we stop this stupid argument between the two..... Incase you didn't realise I play both.

Helios is the Community Manager, Sion is the one in charge of RR, I've never said either of them are good at their jobs. Just stating facts.

I say the same on CM's Forums, Stop this argument, and just be happy playing both. God sakes, its not as if RedRiver is gonna get close to being the realism of ArmA series. Heck, I still play the original ColdWarCrisis because its just that good of a game.

So please, don't say I suck up to Sion and Helios just because I like playing DR as I do ArmA.

ROFL this is coming from a person who stated (cant find the thread atm) over at the CM forums that the EGO engine is potentially better than the real virtuality engine 2... your just as guilty for the flame bait as others Ben_S so dont come that crapola.

[dr_chris 10]

OFP3 is going to suck balls, why does it matter to anyone who isn't going to buy it? I am not going to buy it, thus I really don't care how crap it is.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

This thread is a great read, especially if you've ever read Aesop's fable "The Fox and the Grapes."

I can't have PvP, therefore I don't want it anyway because it ruins games and/or becomes boring. I can't fly helicopters, therefore I don't want them anyway because they ruin the infantry aspect. Holy mass delusion, Batman.

Edited August 9, 2010 by CameronMcDonald

[Baff1 0]

I said no reviewer went so far as to slam UBI for doing it,

They all slammed it.

Every single review I read.

---------- Post added at 12:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:23 PM ----------

Conspiracy:

5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conspiracy

CM agree to give exclusive preview to, say 'XBox Magazine'. Are 'XBox Magazine' going to want to make it sound interesting and exciting? Are 'XBox Magazine' going to jeopardise future exclusives from CM (this includes reviewing it fairly honestly, but on that special scale where 7.5/10 = totally unremarkable and 9/10 = pretty good)?

CM get what they want, 'XBox Magazine' get what they want. Nothing has overtly been said about 'we'll pay you off if you give us at least 8/10'. CM pay for juicy ad campaign in 'XBox Magazine' in the run-up to release. 'XBox Magazine' is going to look unfavourably at a reviewer who gets fed up with what is in the business' interest and decides to give a brutally honest review of one of CM's games.

So... 'conspiracy' as in tacit agreement to mislead people's perceptions to an extent, not conspiracy as in

.

The frustrating and unfair element comes when indies then can't fight on a level playing field. But then they have the advantage of needing to recoup less revenue before they get into profit and can take more risks (only sometimes, though - it's easier to gamble with other people's money).

...and occasionally publishers develop more pronounced megalomaniac tendencies, and do try to manipulate journalists to achieve nefarious results (http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/54122/Aussie-Editor-Canned-Over-Red-Dead-Redemption-Review).

No mate. That's not how it works, because if XBox magasine fans don't think they are getting a fair and honest review they go somewhere else for one.

Then Xbox magasine doesn't make any sales and goes bust. Or doesn't make any advertising revenue and goes bust.

So while CM may negotiate a feature article or a preview out of Xbox magasine in return for it's sponsorship, the reviews are not up for negotiation.

There is no conspiracy.

Previews are soft, reviews are hard.

It might also help you to try and imagine the company profile of a magasine. The guy who writes the review is a journalist. The guy who pays him is an accountant, the guy who places the adverts is a salesman.

The journalist has other things to do in life than find out from the accountant or salesman how much the owner of each game he reviews has paid towards the magasine, in fact he probably doesn't even work in the same building as those people and is a freelance guy writing from home. I doubt he directly connects his paycheck to the company who produces the games he writes about in anyway.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Baff1

[Deadfast 43]

Once again, Jeff_Gerstmann

[Richey79 10]

@Baff, I think it's just that we both have different views of how the business world operates. I'm not a video game journalist, and I presume you're not, either. I think the word 'conspiracy' gets in the way of any kind of rational discussion (yes, my mistake for being anal about the semantics of the word).

I agree with much of what you said, but I prefer to read posts on a forum after release rather than 'professional' reviews, as they're more indicative of whether I'll like a game. Studies have shown that most gamers go on word of mouth and trying games at friends' houses. I would hazard a guess that reviews have most impact on those people who preorder. It's mostly big titles that care about preorders, as games like Bis' have a 'long tail'.

A beautiful 'render'. Don't know why they're even called renders when CM do them, as they're clearly works of art and have nothing to do with even 2D resources that might be used in a game. A 'target painting?'

I would not have been annoyed had this been shown as a target render for Operation Arrowhead: the view distance is representative of what you get in game, those assets are all in game, you can easily place those assets in game in the editor and get 60fps.

For CM's game, on the other hand... . The image suggests this will be a seamless map which you'll be able to traverse without impediment or loading screen (which sounds less and less as though it will be the case). Four helicopters, presumably loaded with at least 6 people in each. Let's presume that CM have done a sterling job and upped the entity-limit to 80. (6x4) + 4 = 28. A full 52 entities for them to fight. Get your monster-closets and de-spawn scripts ready, level designers!

Does this render look like a game in which you will only be in control of a single fireteam of three men that will only have co-op MP (and probably tether)? In fact, this render looks like a game with limitless possibilities.

"You believe that people look at target renders and expect their game experience to be like that?" Take a look at the responses to the images over on the CM forums; the posters who say 'Great in-game shots!'

:386:

Edited August 9, 2010 by Richey79

[Deadfast 43]

[OMG]

http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2010/216/604135_20100805_790screen002.jpg[/OMG]

A beautiful 'render'.

Photo of a river with some Seahawks plastered on it (notice how the furthest looks exactly the same as the middle one scaled down) and loads of Photoshop filters (just look at that lower left part of the river). Nice...

Edited August 9, 2010 by Deadfast

[von_paulus 0]

Once again, Jeff_Gerstmann

Interesting reading.

Thanks.

We all know that the majority of the professional magazine/site reviewers are compromised with the publishers. Only a lunatic will take for granted what this corrupted guys write about.

They are already hyping the people with those renders. The same story.

Oh well....

[Baff1 0]

We all know that children who surf the net find it easier to promote conspiracy theories than to learn how things work.

@Baff, I think it's just that we both have different views of how the business world operates. I'm not a video game journalist, and I presume you're not, either. :[/center]

I've worked in magasine publishing in my time.

Also video game publishing, music publishing, and a whole host of related industries.

I like to read posted reviews on forums too. I think that is a good way of doing it.

This forum however isn't a good place to find a review of Operation Dragon Rising.

Despite both games being targeted at the same audience all you will get here is flames.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Baff1

[bascule42 10]

We all know that children who surf the net find it easier to promote conspiracy theories than to learn how things work.

I've worked in magasine publishing in my time.

Also video game publishing, music publishing, and a whole host of related industries.

I like to read posted reviews on forums too. I think that is a good way of doing it.

This forum however isn't a good place to find a review of Operation Dragon Rising.

Despite both games being targeted at the same audience all you will get here is flames.

...and do you expect to find a reasonable debate about DR or RR here? Of all places? DR was targeted at console kids. The play and forget crowd. The ADHD "meh" generation.

For the love of everything that's holy. You have bought consipracies into this. It was you who first mentioned a "conspiracy. What is it with you and conspiracies? You seem to be seeing them everywhere. Are they out to get you perhaps? No, it's just a piss poor attempt to discredit a point.

Also, we know how children love to argue for a few days then claim they have inside knowledge of the topic. I mean, your imagining of the workings of a magazine a few posts ago made no mention of the Editor. If you really had worked in "magasine publishing, the games and music publishing, oh, and a whole host of related industries", (what a brilliant portfolio that has suddenly surfaced - still I suppose you could have worked on the printing presses, that's a related industry), this would be the first position mentioned.

Theres no point arguing with you any longer.

There's no use knocking when there is no one home.

Muppet.

[Hoaah 10]

It is developed in the same studio, wait did I just hear a reason why I shouldn't buy it?

OFDR doesn't require serial, doesn't have anti-cheat, nor does it have dedicated server. I hope they are doing the right thing. They disappointed me with OFDR. It was really a waste of money. Thank god for giving me ArmA 2. :)

Another reason why I didn't like OFDR was because of the bad cheesy sounds. Even OFP1 guns sound better in their 22.4khz format :D

[ben_s 11]

yea, OFDR was a big disapointment, whether you like it or not, it wasn't what you expected. Yea, the Gun sounds in 1st person were SHOCKING. The only 2 parts of OFDR they got right, are the enemy and friendly AI outside your fireteam and the sounds.... Neither of them you cna see from 1st person very easily.... :(

Stupid codemasters better stop showing us those "target renders", and give us ingame footage. Why can't they be more like BIS and just do things right? ...

---------- Post added at 03:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:36 PM ----------

ROFL this is coming from a person who stated (cant find the thread atm) over at the CM forums that the EGO engine is potentially better than the real virtuality engine 2... your just as guilty for the flame bait as others Ben_S so dont come that crapola.

Potentally, In the hands of CM its got no chance. PvP I do not like in most games, Hence the CoOp.

Please, Ive not said CM are better than BIS. Just that their tools are. They have the POTENTAL to create a good game. Which is why Im sat waiting, to see if they mess it up... again.

But with the same developer team and with Sion in charge again, I doubt it. But time will tell, and before I start trolling and bitching about RedRiver, im going to wait to actually see gameplay, unlike everyone else here.

Obviously, its never gonna beat BIS' works like Operation Arrowhead, and the good old Cold war Crisis. But it will certainly beat things like the HALO market....

[eble 3]

I honestly doubt the EGO engine has the ability to produce anything of merit for a Good FPS.

The entity level was too low, and the tether was a joke, add to that no dedicated servers and your back to DR with some more buff, they are even recycling the PLA to save cash.

Competitor to Arma it's not, exactly what it will compete with I've no idea as most corridor shooters already do it better.

If they insist on the EGO engine then they should have gone down a very tight CQB route, but again I have doubts the EGO engine can cope with more that 3 sheds in views at once, the AI was good close in, but easily beaten.

[Pain0815 10]

I love the fact you are sucking Helios/Sions socks as much as you can on CM forums, rage-posting on each thread about the almightiness that ConsoleMasters is, and Sion's infinite wisdom by dropping the ball, yet again, even before the game has started work on (in fact it did just after DR was released), but then you come here asking for truce, peace of all sorts between communities and whatever else.

At least here, everyone is free to discuss freely about the games we play, and COMPARE the two where it is possible.

So with all due respect, the links that you posted is nothing but a proof of your unborn turd petting hobby, and the love making dreams about Helios.

So please stop feeding some bullshit around here. None is gonna take it.

Best regards

Hes the pro cm forum troll there. He writes shit in near every thread and collected 3250+ post since beginn of the year.

That says all

[PuFu 4600]

http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2010/216/604135_20100805_790screen002.jpg

That is not rendered image, it is a 2d collage that one.

@Ben_S:

what does Halo has to do with the tactical shooter which is what CM is calling their games? More of r6 series, Graw etc...

CM can't show anu ingame footage, since that is not even done. What will most likely follow is some 3d renders (everything they showed so far is NOT a render), then a pre-rendered trailer, using anything BUT the game engine, and after pre-releases are available, maybe some close ups or weird angle screenshot.

I really don't believe anything changed in their marketing scheme...

Edited August 9, 2010 by PuFu

[Richey79 10]

This forum however isn't a good place to find a review of Operation Dragon Rising.

Of course not. When reading on-line reviews of anything, it's good practice to discount the best 10% and worst 10%.

That becomes harder for something like Dragon Rising/ Red River, since a majority of posters seem to either love or hate it.

Personally, I don't think that automatically makes the 'professional' magazine reviews the correct judgement, just because they were generally middle of the road. If the reviewers spent only, say, 10 hours playing Dragon Rising that would explain why they had a very different 'final' printed judgement to paying customers who wanted a bit more mileage out of their game than that.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Richey79

[Ish 11]

Biggest mistake they did was calling it a "military simulation"..

---------- Post added at 05:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:04 PM ----------

I take offence at the bolded part. ArmA 2 is the third part of the series, with ArmA being the second. Why these magazines seem to miss that is a mystery to me.

OPF-->ArmA-->ArmA 2

Dragon Rising-->OPF "3"

They should have just called it Operation Flashpoint 2½...

[von_paulus 0]

CM can't show anu ingame footage, since that is not even done. What will most likely follow is some 3d renders (everything they showed so far is NOT a render), then a pre-rendered trailer, using anything BUT the game engine, and after pre-releases are available, maybe some close ups or weird angle screenshot.

I really don't believe anything changed in their marketing scheme...

QFT.

And near the release you'll begun to suspect that some key aspects will be missing. People will begun to query and have no answers. Only silence.

It will be the same scheme. And why think it could be different. They are the same people, with the same ideas, selling us that the end product will be close to the reality of the modern battlefields.

Bullocks!