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

[PuFu 4600]

It's review scores were equal with ArmA 2's.

It wasn't widely panned as tripe any more than ArmA 2's was.

The games had drawbacks and the reviewers mentioned them.

There is of course a certain kind of person, who only looks for the negative. A kind of person who has already decided before reading and is only looking for those parts of any review which reinforce or validate his position.

There is always those kind of people.

You do know most reviews are written by people who are either superficial or they solely play BF2/COD - mainstream games. Which is all fine, but NOT for this sort of a sandbox.

There are very few people who write proper reviews, and the biggest review websites are not amongst those.

[Zipper5 74]

There is of course a certain kind of person, who only looks for the negative. A kind of person who has already decided before reading and is only looking for those parts of any review which reinforce or validate his position.

There is always those kind of people.

Aren't you doing the same thing? You're trying to prove legitimacy of your claims by citing publication reviews, and those are widely-known, even by yourself I hope, to be very bias. In this case you've decided before reading that DR wasn't as bad as people make it out to be and you are looking for any review which reinforces or validates your position. I gave some of my own of Arma 2 and OA because that seems to be the only thing you accept. User opinion means a lot more, and user opinion of DR is that it was a massive disappointment, and use opinion of Arma 2 is, I'll admit, mixed. User opinion of Arma 2 is dependent on what the user wants to do with it.

Most publication reviews of BlOps were glowing, most user reviews of BlOps were the opposite, if you need an example. Though, in that case, it doesn't really matter what we thought because the game made over $1 billion...

[Baff1 0]

This is where you are completely wrong Baff, and that is exactly why you continue to find yourself swimming against the tide here.

Codemasters are targeting the console market, ArmA fans are predominantly a PC community.

That's all it really boils down to.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. OpF DR is a big nerfy console port.

But I don't actually know of any console gamers personally who don't own a PC also.

I know people with gaming PC's that bought COD for their console not their PC. Equally they by flight sims and RTS for their PC and not their console.

But they are the same person. The target audience a bloke who wants to buy a war game.

It's not a mutually exclusive audience.

[froggyluv 2135]

There is of course a certain kind of person, who only looks for the negative. A kind of person who has already decided before reading and is only looking for those parts of any review which reinforce or validate his position.

You wanted it to get panned. But it didn't. The reviewers liked it just as much as ArmA 2.

Is this similar to the type of person that takes one aspect (better bug hunting) and frames that as the end all be all above the artistic accomplishment of another?

As far as me wanting it to get panned....rubbish. I bought the game, saw what an utterly ridiculous attempt at a mil-sim/tac it was and agreed with those who had experienced the same. FYI, I play neither games these days and if I felt Arma series was bollocks, I'd state it plain as day.

[Baff1 0]

Aren't you doing the same thing? You're trying to prove legitimacy of your claims by citing publication reviews, and those are widely-known, even by yourself I hope, to be very bias. In this case you've decided before reading that DR wasn't as bad as people make it out to be and you are looking for any review which reinforces or validates your position. I gave some of my own of Arma 2 and OA because that seems to be the only thing you accept. User opinion means a lot more, and user opinion of DR is that it was a massive disappointment, and use opinion of Arma 2 is, I'll admit, mixed. User opinion of Arma 2 is dependent on what the user wants to do with it.

Most publication reviews of BlOps were glowing, most user reviews of BlOps were the opposite, if you need an example. Though, in that case, it doesn't really matter what we thought because the game made over $1 billion...

Meta critic mate.

It's a score compiled by averaging the review scores of many reviews

All I am saying is that the game wasn't panned by the reviews.

You don't have to personally agree with any those reviews, but it doesn't change that they were broadly positive and comparably as well recieved as ArmA 2's were.

I don't personally need any reviews to make my own judgement, I own them both.

But there are people here who actively want the game to be a failure. And that is the key reason I am going against the flow in this discussion. Not because the game is so suckworthy or because it was panned by the reviewers, but because a lot of people here wanted it to be.

They want it to fail and it is their aim to help it along the path to failure in some small way if they can.

On paper it was game you should have enjoyed. A sandbox with a mission editor.

Just what you said intrests you.

But you hate it. Out of misplaced loyalty to BIS alone in my opinion.

On the otherhand i can see why people who allowed themselves to get over hyped might be disappointed by it. But really no one on this forum did get overhyped for it. They all panned it from the first they heard of it.

Attempted to kill it before it was even born.

How dare they call it OpF. Heresy!

Hahahaha.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Baff1

[4 IN 1 0]

Really? A campaign? Most of the BIS customers are paying for the sandbox, not for some campaign. If you buy A2/OA for the campaign (i give you, OFP one was great), then you are in the wrong product

I, myself dont only pay for a sandbox, I want a decent campaign as well, but even with seemly short/bugged/ruined HR/OA campaign, A2 and OA are still better then FPDR in both storytelling part and actural mission part, needless to say, BAF and PMC campaign is even better

[PuFu 4600]

But I don't actually know of any console gamers personally who don't own a PC also.

Yes, they all have a PC in one forum or the other: laptop, netbook etc. That doesn't mean they can play a game properly on it (besides solitaire or minesweeper)

I know people with gaming PC's that bought COD for their console not their PC. Equally they by flight sims and RTS for their PC and not their console.

But they are the same person. The target audience a bloke who wants to buy a war game.

That is because there is not ONE flight sim on consoles. Plus, RTS are easier played on a PC with a mouse rather than a joypad.

It's not a mutually exclusive audience.

well, it is

[froggyluv 2135]

Meta critic mate.

It's a score compiled by averaging the review scores of many reviews

.

MetaCritic eh? And what are the comparable User critic scores -you know the men that like to play with Guns and Army just like us?

Arma2: 7.8 Generally favorable

DR: 4.8 Generally unfavorable :(

Sounds like a jury of our peers aren't quite so impressed by the expertly bug-hunted game.

Edit: Oh, and here comes the part where reason departs and conspiracy theories erupt "Those votes were all BIS dittoheads!!!"

:p

Edited December 31, 2010 by froggyluv

[Baff1 0]

Yes, they all have a PC in one forum or the other: laptop, netbook etc. That doesn't mean they can play a game properly on it (besides solitaire or minesweeper)

That is because there is not ONE flight sim on consoles. Plus, RTS are easier played on a PC with a mouse rather than a joypad.

well, it is

All of the people I know with Consoles do have PC's capable of running ArmA 2.

Actually there are some flight sims on consoles. Wings of Prey on the Sturmovik engine springs to mind.

And RTS is definetely most suited to a PC although again there are some consolised RTS, which in my opinion don't cut it. It's not just the interface which is the problem but also the computational power.

[PuFu 4600]

All of the people I know with Consoles do have PC's capable of running ArmA 2.

On the contrary, everyone i know playing regularly on consoles has a computer that can hardly handle M$ Office

[Baff1 0]

MetaCritic eh? And what are the comparable User critic scores -you know the men that like to play with Guns and Army just like us?

Arma2: 7.8 Generally favorable

DR: 4.8 Generally unfavorable :(

Sounds like a jury of our peers aren't quite so impressed by the expertly bug-hunted game.

:p

Sounds more like someone is clutching at straws.

You've found another jury of your own peers. Nothing more.

But that's all you've been looking for.

I don't frequent Meta Critic's website. The posters there aren't my peers at all.

You talked about the reviews being bad. They weren't. Face up to it.

---------- Post added at 05:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:51 PM ----------

I, myself dont only pay for a sandbox, I want a decent campaign as well, but even with seemly short/bugged/ruined HR/OA campaign, A2 and OA are still better then FPDR in both storytelling part and actural mission part, needless to say, BAF and PMC campaign is even better

I feel the same, although I don't own PMC yet and am still looking forward to it.

Personally I object to paying for a sandbox in some way. In my opinion if you don't do the work and put the content into the game, you don't deserve to be paid the same money as those who do.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Baff1

[froggyluv 2135]

You've found another jury of your own peers. Nothing more.

But that's all you've been looking for.

But...but... you said that we are all the same, men who like to play with Army and Guns...:eek: They're the buyers like you and me mate -and they've spoken. Spin however you want, people didn't like the game. Where are their fanbase now? The've got 9 diehard fans still posting on that tomb of a forum. CM execs have got to be shaking their heads in smirking disbelief at those still asking questions about that corpse. Ever wonder why your talking about that game here...because no one is left there to talk to.

[PuFu 4600]

Personally I object to paying for a sandbox in some way. In my opinion if you don't do the work and put the content into the game, you don't deserve to be paid the same money as those who do.

Oh, but they had tons more content (all usable) than anyone else ever tried to.

Plus i will remind you that the price for A2 or OA for that matter was never above 30-35 EUs, opposed to the 50-60 price tag the beloved mainstream games do these days.

[ben_s 11]

The AI had to be scripted to use roads, otherwise they don't even recognize that they're there. :p

And you think ArmA II's AI "magicly" knows where roads are without road pathfinding scripts being somewhere in the background for it. ;)

[Baff1 0]

But...but... you said that we are all the same, men who like to play with Army and Guns...:eek: They're the buyers like you and me mate -and they've spoken. Spin however you want, people didn't like the game. Where are their fanbase now? The've got 9 diehard fans still posting on that tomb of a forum. CM execs have got to be shaking their heads in smirking disbelief at those still asking questions about that corpse. Ever wonder why your talking about that game here...because no one is left there to talk to.

LMAO but but but...

Hahahaha.

It's like evidence of the moon landings being fake mate. If you want to believe it, you can find people onthe internet who agree with you.

The reviews were good. You said they weren't. Now let me hear you admit that I wasn't being disengenious and that you were wrong.

And that rather than admit to being wrong, you yourself have chosen to be disengenious instead.

but but but

Hahahaha.

I frequent both forums.

Normally when I discuss ArmA 2 on their forum, the OpF DR fanboys come out with the same sort of crap you do only about ArmA 2 instead of OpF DR.

Who would have figured!

---------- Post added at 06:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:12 PM ----------

Oh, but they had tons more content (all usable) than anyone else ever tried to.

Plus i will remind you that the price for A2 or OA for that matter was never above 30-35 EUs, opposed to the 50-60 price tag the beloved mainstream games do these days.

Actually, the content for ArmA 2 was broken on launch. Which I think is a big part of why it got good reviews rather than very good reviews.

And yes there is certainly more content in ArmA 2's campaign (once it was eventaully fixed), although OA's was shorter than typical COD campaign which was disappointing (I didn't feel that it wasn't so expensive as to annoy).

R.R.P. for both ArmA 2 and OpF DR were both £35 in my country. OA was £25.

Nither were AAA titles so all were easily found for half that on release day.

OpF DR cost £17.99 on launch, and for that £18 I get 4 way co-op and a single player campaign.

To get a 4 way co-op with ArmA2, I have to buy 4 copies.

So for me, it worked out as significantly more expensive, in fact it works out as prohibitively too expensive.

And so I play OpF DR co-op instead of ArmA 2.

I still get plenty of mileage out of ArmA 2 with the SP campaigns. I still think it's good value.

But for MP it's no use.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Baff1

[Zipper5 74]

But you hate it. Out of misplaced loyalty to BIS alone in my opinion.

Heh, great to see you know more about me than I do. The fact it's called OFP takes a backseat to the business practices of CM. Even if RR turned out to be the best game of the decade I wouldn't buy it because I don't support frauds.

Man, I was supposed to drop the issue of CM's business practices, but as I said before, the subject of the game and the subject of its developer really do go hand-in-hand...

Oh, and Arma 2's campaign wasn't broken on launch. As I've said many times before I have no idea what strange contorted methods of playing you people were using but I did everything I was told to do in the missions and played it error-free from start to finish in v1.01 beta, even the Warfare missions. Search on YouTube and you'll find another guy who recorded it, if you need more proof.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Zipper5

[froggyluv 2135]

Fine if it makes you so happy the general consensus review scores are comparable. That said, I remember when Helios announced a major mag review on their forums the day before the game was released and surprise -it was like a 97%. if you believe that and want to factor in such scores...well then i've got a bridge to sell ya.

I read almost all of the major reviews for both games, and their content and criticism were vastly different. The point is (and you know it) is that the consumers widely panned DR and even their diehard Legends and advocates deserted it after seeing it was not the game that had been advertised especially before the desertion of their lead programmar. Read between the lines mate -you seem to have a need for either pedantical "I told you so nah nah nah" discussion or your just trying to be provocative to pass your days.

You know as well as i do (being a long time CM forum member myself) the game failed and all have left.

[PuFu 4600]

OpF DR cost £17.99 on launch, and for that £18 I get 4 way co-op and a single player campaign.

My brother got it right after release, and payed around 50EUs for it.

Last time i bought a COD or BF title, the price was similar

But for MP it's no use.

Why?

[KEVINMGXP 20]

the game failed and all have left.

nah CM failed the game, i was drawn to it from what was said and tbh the tittle of cource, they just did not deliverd what was prommised.

Quote: But for MP it's no use.

Why?

funny i wanted to ask that :D

Edited December 31, 2010 by KBourne

[Perforator 10]

Where are their fanbase now? The've got 9 diehard fans still posting on that tomb of a forum. CM execs have got to be shaking their heads in smirking disbelief at those still asking questions about that corpse. Ever wonder why your talking about that game here...because no one is left there to talk to.

Yeah it's a ghost town over there, a few tumblweeds blowing past and a lonely bartender (Helios) quietly wiping dust off tables.

The silence speaks volumes.

[ben_s 11]

Well, The F1 & DiRT3 forums are mostly, active. OFP was killed off last time. Those forums will probably remain dead, indefinantly, or, get better as it gets closer to release. One or the other.

[Perforator 10]

OFP was killed off last time.

This is the reason why I can't understand why you continue posting over at that morgue Ben, you come across as a bright young chap yet you keep company with a handful of Codemasters fanboys that are, how can I put this nicely, that are less smart than the average person.

[jblackrupert 14]

- DR MP was a ghost town within 2 months.

- DR was in the bargain bins with 1.5 months.

- Stores are accepting returns on opened copies of DR.

- DR Fansites shut down within 2 months, some with front page messages saying the game essentially sucked.

- 90% or more of the DR forum members ditched (Or were banned) before the final patch was released.

- DR Youtube videos are overflowing with negative comments about the game.

Posting all the reviews in the world won't change the facts... DR SUCKED

[Perforator 10]

Posting all the reviews in the world won't change the facts... DR SUCKED

Very eloquently put.:clap:

[ben_s 11]

This is the reason why I can't understand why you continue posting over at that morgue Ben, you come across as a bright young chap yet you keep company with a handful of Codemasters fanboys that are, how can I put this nicely, that are less smart than the average person.

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/operation-flashpoint-dragon-rising-mission-editing-modding-chat-zone-123

Thats what I stay for. The RR forums I just like to watch and mostly, If you read my posts, take the piss out of CM for what they've done. Though, sometimes its very subtle so as the mods don't pick it up. :p