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

[Zipper5 74]

1) Yes, if they took off the Operation Flashpoint name, I probably never would have given a shit about the failure of a game DR turned out to be.

2) Right now I'm more angry at how big of frauds Codemasters are after watching how they dealt with DR. Trick people into thinking it's an OFP game, claim to support dedicated servers on the box, release a few shitty DLCs and two patches (one of which then caused hardware issues that were never fixed, and blocked out modifications to the game entirely), then cut off support after a few months of it being out. They are and will always be frauds, and I will no longer buy a CM product, no matter if they developed it or simply published it.

[RaZoR1472 10]

1) Yes, if they took off the Operation Flashpoint name, I probably never would have given a shit about the failure of a game DR turned out to be.

2) Right now I'm more angry at how big of frauds Codemasters are after watching how they dealt with DR. Trick people into thinking it's an OFP game, claim to support dedicated servers on the box, release a few shitty DLCs and two patches (one of which then caused hardware issues that were never fixed, and blocked out modifications to the game entirely), then cut off support after a few months of it being out. They are and will always be frauds, and I will no longer buy a CM product, no matter if they developed it or simply published it.

Fair enough:scratchchin:

[ck-claw 1]

The feeling I'm getting from here is that if Dragon Rising had been called something like "Operation Dragon Rising" and the next game were to be called "Operation Red River", most people would not mind as much because it would not be "harming" the OpF reputation.

Pretty much yeah! :)

[Zipper5 74]

DR was a very good game. Sure it was no real sequal to the original, but constantly acting like spoiled children that dropped your dummy makes only you look stupid in the long run. Those games from the past are not coming back how you want them. Move on, or stay in the minority.

It's just as bad ignoring the extremely poor ethics and business practices CM employed when developing and "supporting" DR, and suggesting you may continue to buy from them, which simply propels them to think "Hey, we can continue doing this bullshit and still make money! They majority won't care!"

Thus supporting the horrible direction the gaming industry is already going in.

For the record, ignoring the fact that CM did all that crap and misused the OFP name, I didn't find DR that good even as a game. In fact, it was horrible. The MP didn't work, the SP was boring, the physics were all shot to hell (hit a rock at full speed and watch what happens), the driving was terrible despite being on a racing engine, the AI was horrible, and some of the mechanics (radial wheel for commands) were simply broken. There was also no anti-piracy measures in the PC version (says a lot) so anyone could get it, thus there were tons of hackers. Then if you tack on the fact that the game was eventually broken and locked by an official patch, there's simply no redeeming factor about the game.

Edited August 21, 2010 by Zipper5

[bascule42 10]

DR was a very good game. Sure it was no real sequal to the original, but constantly acting like spoiled children that dropped your dummy makes only you look stupid in the long run. Those games from the past are not coming back how you want them. Move on, or stay in the minority.

"Was" being the operative word here. If it was any good, you would be saying DR "is" a good game. Because it would still be being played by the great many people who made the mistake of buying. DR's current fan base makes BI's niche demograph look like the popuation of China.

DR "was".

...A very good game? No, it wasn't. If you like it, fair enough. I have no problem there. Some people watch daytime TV or the Xfactor. Fair do's to 'em. But neither DR, daytime TV, or the Xfactor can be classed as "very good".

Spoiled children? Hah! Angry adults maybe, and if you can't see why, /shrug, I don't really care. But make no mistake about it, being a current fan of DR and singing it's praises, it is you who is in the minority, and not just on these forums either.

Wanting the old game back? I think Vladimir Putin once said something like, "Anyone who doesn't regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart. Anyone who wants it restored has no brains". No, if CM had done a good job, and produced a game worthy of the title, there wouldn't have been as much of this. If they'd have called it something else, no one would have given two shits.

If you are happy with your CoDs and dumbed down classic titles, again, I don't really give a fuck. But some of us want a challenge, whats a game without a challenge? An interactive TV show. 'Kin 'ell mate you may as well vegitate in front of the box every night.

It's really getting boring explaining stuff like this to you guys from DR forums. Or maybe, I've just given the troll a snack. Maybe not.

[MrBump 10]

As an old time R6 / OFP and GR fan, I to am not happy with the new direction of any of these titles. But nothing any of us are going to change the way things are.

Now we can except this and simple buy them, play them for what they are and have fun, or live in the past and not be apart of the present gaming world anymore. Hanging on to those old time memories, slagging other companys off just because...

Mainstream gamers want quick and fast action. Does not mean run and gun. Just games that are simple to set up, minimum patches and issues. Call of duty, I just played through several of the titles in SP again. Not 1 of those games did I even have to apply a patch to complete any of the campaigns straight from the box! Same goes for DR, this sort of thing leads me to already pre-purchase from them again. Regardless.

I own Arma / Arma2 / OA. Respect the devs for there continued support. But the current state of any of there titles on release, leaves them only desirable to that tiny niche crowd that simple accepts this. Now I have no issue with it, happy to run all the latest betas, but I know many that just cant be arsed with all the hassle.

DR was a very good game. Sure it was no real sequal to the original, but constantly acting like spoiled children that dropped your dummy makes only you look stupid in the long run. Those games from the past are not coming back how you want them. Move on, or stay in the minority.

Well, when you pre-order you get the game that you deserve. I'm sure for you though, the new game will be very good too, after all we can't let nostalgia, what others call experience and expectation, rule our decisions. Personally I don't like poor imitations of originals, but that's just silly ol' me. :)

Edited August 21, 2010 by MrBump

[ben_s 11]

To be totaly honest here, I think both ArmA II and OFDR are both as far away from CWC as each other, ArmA II lacks the feeling CWC had, and OFDR lacks the actual gameplay it had.

Neither companies can live up to what both can do together, and we all have to face that fact.

[PuFu 4600]

To be totaly honest here, I think both ArmA II and OFDR are both as far away from CWC as each other, ArmA II lacks the feeling CWC had, and OFDR lacks the actual gameplay it had.

Neither companies can live up to what both can do together, and we all have to face that fact.

You still don't get it do you...

CM was BIS publisher for OFP. Nothing more nothing less.

CM was NOT involved in OFP development whatsoever.

No one has to face anything. Yes OFP was a really good game (still is), but that is mainly because of its openness in a world where no one else tried something similar. And so far, no one else but BIS has ever released a game with the same amount of content, and with the same scope...

While i have previously said that i do agree with the fact that while CM owns OFP brand name, and nothing can be done about it, i have also stated that the main reason for FPDR being such a HOT subject on those forums is that very same name, as well as all the drama, and the bullshit that goes around this title, and the upcoming one.

So please stop talking in the name of others.

[ben_s 11]

Jesus, What I was saying is that neither game lives up to what the first OFP's were.

and they never will. And I do, still play CWC, regually. Its the game that I have sat on my desk, 24/7.

[bascule42 10]

He has a point though, you're implying that CWC was something that CM & BI did together. No. BI needed a publisher. Nothing else. No help with development of CWC, no tools from a major developer, no programming know how, nothing else. Just a hand with publishing & marketing. So saying niether companies can live upto what both can do together is totally off the mark. As pufu mentioned, CWC was something completely new and out of the blue. This is the only reason Arma/2 doesnt seem to live up to CWC. We've seen it before. But it's still pretty much the same game. With the same high level of playability and depth. BI were doing it on thier own then, and they are doing it thier own now.

Edited August 21, 2010 by Bascule42

[Zipper5 74]

Well... That's not entirely true. The original OFP voice work is copyrighted by Codemasters and isn't allowed to be used in modifications like CWR, or even new games like with OFP:E (despite it still being published by Codemasters, which is ironic). I believe that's because CM helped with the voice acting. Some of the faces in OFP were also of Codemasters employees at the time. Of course, you also then have Red Hammer, which I believe was developed solely by Codemasters.

[jakerod 254]

Well... That's not entirely true. The original OFP voice work is copyrighted by Codemasters and isn't allowed to be used in modifications like CWR, or even new games like with OFP:E (despite it still being published by Codemasters, which is ironic). I believe that's because CM helped with the voice acting. Some of the faces in OFP were also of Codemasters employees at the time. Of course, you also then have Red Hammer, which I believe was developed solely by Codemasters.

That's the way I remember it. I actually thought that Guba's face was a CM guy's but I might be wrong.

[Zipper5 74]

Yup. ;)

[ben_s 11]

Not that ArmA II isn't a good game, or anything, its brilliant. But it doesn't feel like playing CWC, its just, not the same.

And the feeling of playing the game is the biggest thing I miss in ArmA . :(

[4 IN 1 0]

Not that ArmA II isn't a good game, or anything, its brilliant. But it doesn't feel like playing CWC, its just, not the same.

And the feeling of playing the game is the biggest thing I miss in ArmA . :(

Well the only thing ARMA2 missing then is a nice long campaign, notthing more notthing less.

p.s. If there is anything that CM have anything to do with the CWC developement is the voice acting, this is the only reason we cant use CWC voice instead of the crapy crapy elite voice acting for CWR mod

[ben_s 11]

No, ArmA lacks most of the whole feeling that CWC had and does have. And that is meant by gameplay itself, which was complimented by its campaign. They just seem to have been removed from the game as it became more and more a "simulator" than a shooter.

[max power 21]

It does lack a certain simplicity. In OFP, I did like the fact that I could pretty much hop into any vehicle or use any weapon- no skills required. Although, the fact that skills are required is why I like the ArmA series, as well. I think the fact that the helicopters don't fly auto-NOA makes flying more interesting in the long run.

[myshaak 0]

No, ArmA lacks most of the whole feeling that CWC had and does have. And that is meant by gameplay itself, which was complimented by its campaign. They just seem to have been removed from the game as it became more and more a "simulator" than a shooter.

What do you mean by different gameplay? Different gameplay mechanics, diferent UI, different mission design, different era setting? I played OFP:CWC just yesterday and I can't say I noticed something great in there that wasn't in ArmA2.

The fact that you can see soldiers easily over short distances because there is no grass and over long distances because the terrain textures are so low-res? The fact that you can run it with all settings up to "Very High" and still get 60 FPS? The fact that you could operate the whole tank by yourself by selecting manual fire from the driver's position? A favourite MP one - the fact that when you were driving a tank with the hatch open the gunner had his turret locked in one place? Sure you could find more..

The only things I miss from OFP:CWC are probably interiors for every vehicle and more responsive AI... and by that I mean an AI that doesn't tend to keep screwing around a get-away vehicle they were ordered in when under fire.

[SASrecon 0]

The only things I miss from OFP:CWC are probably interiors for every vehicle and more responsive AI... and by that I mean an AI that doesn't tend to keep screwing around a get-away vehicle they were ordered in when under fire.

Same, I really wish the tank-driving etc. in ARMA was re-modeled back to how it was in ofp, ARMA1 was just about bearable but arma2 removed the feeling completely for most tanks example:

http://a.imageshack.us/img511/294/blurrywindows2.jpg

It does lack a certain simplicity. In OFP, I did like the fact that I could pretty much hop into any vehicle or use any weapon- no skills required. Although, the fact that skills are required is why I like the ArmA series, as well. I think the fact that the helicopters don't fly auto-NOA makes flying more interesting in the long run.

That reshapes huge public games;

a while ago back in ARMA2 this feature was tested in Ber[Z]erk, only pilots could fly choppers etc. I really loved this because it kept the chopper-hogging soldiers out of the pilot seat and let someone more dedicated take the role. Ferrying soldiers in and out was a game in itself :p

Back ontopic, is it confirmed that players won't be able to fly the choppers in RR or is that only in the campaign?

Edited August 22, 2010 by SASrecon

[ben_s 11]

I know that everything that was in CWC is basicly in ArmA II, theres just this feeling its missing. It just doesn't feel the same whilst playing it... its almost as if something is missing out of the game, even if thats a metaphorical rather than physical thing.#

ArmA just isn't the same as what OFP was. :(

[Archamedes 10]

The only thing I loved in OFP that isn't part of Arma 2 is the fact you were part of an armed force. In ofp there were much more missions in the campaign, and you followed the story of a new recruit right up to his promotion to team leader. that coupled with the odd side missions where you would play a tank commander, pilot or small special ops squad. you could pretty much sacrifice your whole squad of 10 soldiers in order to complete the mission. Arma 2 follows a team of special ops who must all survive each mission. True you had the entire USMC behind you but you never got to play it from other peoples perspective.

[nodunit 397]

It's probably moreso the campaign carried over in essence to the rest of the game..I mean lets face it, OFP was at times very dark, depressing and uncertain, with the suprises that popped up, the betrayals and panic unfolding and watching the characters react to them as normal humans would IE not some hollywood 'badass' characters, had jokes better than 'your sister/your mom' and were smarter than a brick IE Herrera who couldn't understand the Takistani's even when they spoke plain english..

tl;dr OFP felt more realistic in that the people involved in the scenerio went through it as normal people would. A2 and OA are..lets face it, more mainstream hollywood esq. As "badass" as these guys think they are, they pale in comparison to someone we could relate to such as James Gastovski

The long campaign was also greately paced and felt like an actual WAR..it wasn't just the joint ops thing..OA has this and it's great but you feel a bit rushed..one moment you're in a tank the next a heli and suddenly recon whereas OFP you had several missions to do this and slowly worked you way up, in comparison the rest feel like quick proxy battles than wars.

Edited August 22, 2010 by NodUnit

[ben_s 11]

Yea, but the feeling was more than just the campaign, the music, the missions, the setting, the sounds everything.

[4 IN 1 0]

Yet still those aint core gameplay problems, I can tell you one thing that OFP have and ARMA 2 dont: smooth animation, and that only because back then we dont need as much as we need today

[nodunit 397]

Yet still those aint core gameplay problems, I can tell you one thing that OFP have and ARMA 2 dont: smooth animation, and that only because back then we dont need as much as we need today

And yet, if there was a mod out that removed/simplified normal/specular maps from ground textures and some other things, and it gave better perormance

would you use it?