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

[bascule42 10]

Yeah..if you hadn't put VBS in the title there. I would have said that it was Arma.

Found this interview from way back...interesting read.

Bohemia Interactive was formed in 1999, residing in Prague, Czech Republic. From the beginning our goal was to develop state of the art 3D computer games, and to this end we’ve developed our own game engine known as ‘Real Virtuality’. The Real Virtuality Engine powered the virtual environment behind our first release, Operation Flashpoint, which offered gamers an open-ended experience with large playboxes and dynamic gameplay.

Operation Flashpoint was highly successful and appealed to the serious games market from an early stage, and for this reason we released Virtual Battlespace 1 (VBS1) in 2002. VBS1 added functionality such as after-action review, to provide a more useful tool for training or experimentation. We now have studios in both the Czech Republic and Australia, and both Operation Flashpoint (also known as Ambush! In the US Army) and VBS1 is employed by a wide range of organizations.

Interesting to see that the US Army and other were actually using Operation Flashpoint as well as VBS1. Though hats, (sans cork), off to the Aussies for being the first.

...reading this it makes my blood boil a few degrees more, (don't start on at me about physics please), about what those leeches at CM have done to OFP, and are still doing. May they spend eternity in developers hell ironing out the bugs in FPDR along with copies of the handful of fans who constantly complain at thier desk side. No protective forums. Face to face moaning.

Edited October 1, 2010 by Bascule42

[ben_s 11]

Neither VBS nor ArmA are "spinoffs" of each other. Merely 2 companies making similar games with same engine. one more focused on realism/simulation, one more focused on gameplay/fun.

Will that do?

[Zipper5 74]

Well, you weren't the one claiming otherwise. ;)

[andersson 285]

I do think that VBS can be defined as a "spin off" of OFP. If I'm not wrong it was OFP that made BIS and the military aware of a possible market, and VBS was created by BIA.

An interview with snYpir: http://www.ofpec.com/intel_depot/index.php?action=read_on&id=510

You were also involved in the Enhanced Configuration Project (ECP) mod which was created by OFPEC regulars, and hosted by OFPEC. What was that all about?

I was beginning to see the potential of OFP for military use. In 2001, I wrote a paper (which I will email you when I find it, it's very retro) for one of my university assignments. I also first met David Lagettie of Seventh that year, who had created some ADF models that I wanted to use for a demonstration to the Chief of the Army, who was visiting my university for some reason. I learnt then about David’s plans for VBS1. Adam Easton (now the Managing Director of SimCentric Technologies) and I demonstrated Operation Axe-Point - my first and only publically released scenario - to the Chief of the Army, and it was on this day that I realised OFP could become a great military training tool, with the right modifications.

From there, my Army career came second to various OFP developments, mainly the Support Pack and ECP. ECP was a funny mod, built around my original idea for a beefed-up ‘in-game observer’ system. It included a bunch of features that didn’t really go together – such as new blood particles – but it was still fun to build. I demonstrated ECP to both Seventh and Marek Spanel sometime in 2004 I think, and this helped convince them that VBS1 needed similar functionality if it were to be accepted by the military. It is safe to say that if it weren’t for ECP, there would be no VBS1 (at least, it wouldn’t have been successful) and definitely there would be no VBS2.

[bascule42 10]

I do think that VBS can be defined as a "spin off" of OFP.

That's how it looks to me...lol, imagine if todays armies were training using a spin off from the "new" OFP. It's be like fucking Dad's Army, only not funny.

[Perforator 10]

Please correct me if I'm wrong here but if the development of VBS1 was started prior to the development of ArmA then wouldn't it be a logical conclusion that ArmA is indeed a spin-off of VBS1?

For example Wario Land is a spin-off of Super Mario Land which is a spinoff of Super Mario Bros which is a spin-off from Donkey Kong.

Maybe one of the BI devs could shed some light on this topic.

[andersson 285]

OFP came first.

VBS1 was built on the OFP engine.

OFP elite used a more polished version of the OFP engine.

OFP2-game2-ARMA2 developement started after OFP.

As BIS realised that the work on OFP2-game2-ARMA2 was taking longer than planned they started to work on OFP1.5 in parallell, the plan was to use the new features and fixes in OFP-elite to give us a better game while we were waiting for OFP2-game2-ARMA2 and give BIS more money during the development of it. Then OFP1.5 got bigger than first planned and became a new game of itself: Armed Assault.

VBS2 was buildt on the Armed Assault engine.

ARMA2 was released.

[Perforator 10]

OFP came first.

VBS1 was built on the OFP engine.

OFP elite used a more polished version of the OFP engine.

OFP2-game2-ARMA2 developement started after OFP.

As BIS realised that the work on OFP2-game2-ARMA2 was taking longer than planned they started to work on OFP1.5 in parallell, the plan was to use the new features and fixes in OFP-elite to give us a better game while we were waiting for OFP2-game2-ARMA2 and give BIS more money during the development of it. Then OFP1.5 got bigger than first planned and became a new game of itself: Armed Assault.

VBS2 was buildt on the Armed Assault engine.

ARMA2 was released.

Where does VBS1 fall into the timeline, before or after development started on ArmA?

[andersson 285]

Development on Armed Assault started 2005, VBS1 was released 2004.

[4 IN 1 0]

Where does VBS1 fall into the timeline, before or after development started on ArmA?

If i remember correctly it should be before ArmA

[Perforator 10]

If i remember correctly it should be before ArmA

So would it be safe to assume that BIS incorporated the software technology developed by BIA for the development of ArmA?

[andersson 285]

Not safe at all. If you look at VBS1 it looks like OFP1. Armed Assault was based on OFP-elite but got developed much further than planned.

edit: Apart from googling it and read everything about this you can also take a look at this video showing off VBS1. There you can see that its not much that Armed Assault could take from that software that they couldnt take from OFP.

OFP-elite looks better than VBS1 and use a better engine so it makes sense that they used that as a basis.

Edited October 2, 2010 by andersson

[Perforator 10]

Not safe at all. If you look at VBS1 it looks like OFP1. Armed Assault was based on OFP-elite but got developed much further than planned.

Yes I think you are right. I just watched some VBS1 video footage on Youtube and it does look more like OFP than ArmA. Thanks for your replies andersson.

[andersson 285]

My pleasure :)

The timeline and different names of this BIS/BIA/CM/OFP/GAME2/VBS/ARMA and so on can be quite confusing... I'm not sure I got it 100% either, but I'm quite certain I got the overall picture right.

[ben_s 11]

Thanks for clearing that up andersson. :)

[jblackrupert 14]

And and on the 8th day god created Bohemia

Thats all that matters ;)

[Pain0815 10]

Wow funny to see how 2 specific ppl speak about and compare games which they never really touched... (i mean the 14 year old kid with a computer which cant handle arma and a guy of another forum wich isnt able to let his AI get in and out vehicles in arma.)

This both numnuts try to explain ppl vbs and opf-arma here and in another place.... thats a joke right?

I mean does anyone take them serious?

[ProfTournesol 956]

This both numnuts try to explain ppl vbs and opf-arma here and in another place.... thats a joke right?

I mean does anyone take them serious?

Nope.

[Banderas 0]

Sorry for being off in offtopic :D

It's not Red River, but I found this comment for a Arma II-DR comparison video, which I just...well I just can't find the adequate words....

I think OFP:DR is more of the realistic tactical shooter, because ArmA2 seems more of a crazy sandbox type game.. I mean, the potential of 1000 AI infantry all equipped with million dollar Javelin's and tons of M1A1 abrams firing thousands of HEAT shells at other infantry... doesn't seem realistic to me.

FPDR

I think we should re-think our conceptions concerning the realism level of Arma II

video's link

[ben_s 11]

Wow funny to see how 2 specific ppl speak about and compare games which they never really touched... (i mean the 14 year old kid with a computer which cant handle arma and a guy of another forum wich isnt able to let his AI get in and out vehicles in arma.)

This both numnuts try to explain ppl vbs and opf-arma here and in another place.... thats a joke right?

I mean does anyone take them serious?

I can run ArmA 2 moderatly so long as I don't go nuts. (low graphics, not too many AI.... etc etc)

And i've played the VBS Lite versions.

Which is about as much as most people has done in this arguement as well. (minus the not being able to play ArmA at full potential bit)

[andersson 285]

But as you only have a single core you wont see much good AI in arma2. Thats a shame and the reason you think that DR AI is better. It might be true on your computer, but its equivalent as taking a look at DR on a computer that really cant handle it.

I guess you get some understanding of it, but believe me you havent seen the truth.

edit: To be on topic. Noone (except VanHa ;) ) have replied to my earlier questions of why and how CM can use OFP 3 as they werent allowed to use OFP 2 for DR. Afterall it was some heat about it before between CM and BIS as in the end they werent allowed to sell it as a sequel.

So why can they use 3 now?

Edited October 2, 2010 by andersson
On topic...

[bascule42 10]

So why can they use 3 now?

Have CM officially mentioned 3? IF not it's probably just, unfortunately, a loose description made by shoddy journalists and semi ignorant players. I think BI's lawyers were adamant that it not be sold as a sequel to Cold War Crisis...yeah, I know "The true successor..." an all that. But I think the distinction came about where CM didn't call OFP "2", and went with OFP:DR or as we know it FPDR. I would assume the same applies with this one. As far as Im aware it's call Operation Flashpoint: Red River, as opposed to OFP 3 RR.

I could be wrong though...it does happen now and then :D

Edited October 2, 2010 by Bascule42

[Inkompetent 0]

I think Bascule is right. I can't recall anyone on Codemasters calling it OFP 3. Only players and journalists.

[andersson 285]

I stand corrected!

I had a look at Cm's forum and I could see no 3 there.

I'm so sure it was "Operation Flashpoint 3" there before... I must remember wrong or they changed it.

Maybe I'm confused due to this thread title? Should be changed imho ;)

[ben_s 11]

Well, its not going to be a new OFP. the title should be called.

CM OFP RED RIVER announced

or something.