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

[-GR-Operative 10]

What is this even? Name one! Or thou shalt burn in the eternal fires of doom!

It's a matter of opinion dude. This is what I've been talking sometime. There are (fact) people that like DR and/or RR. There's people that like COD (the most hated game in this community), there's people that like Tibia, there's people that like Minesweeper (my favourite, of course), and there's people that hate them all. Now, how can someone tell anyone that the game that he like/love/dislike/hate is good/bad/horrible/perfect?

It's all a matter of opinion.

What I'm talking about is that people hate OFP2/3 because of the developer, not because of the game. A lot of people here that hate them didn't even bother to play it. How is that?

People complain about bugs, but people have been playing ARMA2 since day one, and they love it! Sometimes, it's forgiveable, as not everyone is so minimalistic and sensitive about these kinds of things.

You may say it's broken or unfinished, but, afterall, if someone finds fun playing it, what's it worth for him?

[froggyluv 2136]

:rolleyes:

I bought DR -why would I do that if I hated the Dev? Game's fun factor was over in less then a day or so. This is a gaming forum -why would I not announce my displeasure here?

If CM's attempt at tac-sims/twitch shooter were really that good, many here would just say it.

But they ain't -they're average at best and this is reflected even in their own forums. Why would you expect better reception here?

Stating that 90% of whats stated here by community is either fanboyish or elitism strays far from reality as of course regulars are going to see Arma as a standard for their enjoyment. Now if CM's games had set the genre aflame with "Brilliant!", "Outstanding achievement!" by the PC world and their fanbase, I'd say maybe you had a point.

But it didnt so you don't.

Edit: Don't have to take my fanboy word for it -here is a poll I just found on their front page asking the community how they rate RR overall:

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/general-discussion-1335/469216-communitys-final-thoughts-rr-11.html

11 people. 11 people from their community said they liked it. Nuff said.

Edited August 22, 2011 by froggyluv

[jw custom 56]

Operative;2008887']

What I'm talking about is that people hate OFP2/3 because of the developer' date=' not because of the game. A lot of people here that hate them didn't even bother to play it. How is that?[/quote']

BS, i bought DR and it sucked tremendously... that CM is abusing the Operation Flashpoint name is another story which surely ain't gonna help them.

[NielsS 10]

Operative;2008887']It's a matter of opinion dude. This is what I've been talking sometime. There are (fact) people that like DR and/or RR. There's people that like COD (the most hated game in this community)' date=' there's people that like Tibia, there's people that like Minesweeper (my favourite, of course), and there's people that hate them all. Now, how can someone tell anyone that the game that he like/love/dislike/hate is good/bad/horrible/perfect?

It's all a matter of opinion.

What I'm talking about is that people hate OFP2/3 because of the developer, not because of the game. A lot of people here that hate them didn't even bother to play it. How is that?

People complain about bugs, but people have been playing ARMA2 since day one, and they love it! Sometimes, it's forgiveable, as not everyone is so minimalistic and sensitive about these kinds of things.

You may say it's broken or unfinished, but, afterall, if someone finds fun playing it, what's it worth for him?[/quote']

First of all people jumped on him not for liking the game but saying that DR/RR were very polished games, wich they were not. How polished a game is is a fact, not an opinion.

FYI this forum does not hate CODMW2 but rather the people saying that it is very realistic. Now granted CODMW2 might be an unimaginative,simplistic,low quality,arcade shooter, it does not mean people can't enjoy it. I also don't judge people as being unimaginative and simplistic just because they play MW2. To each it's own i say.;)

[Flash Thunder 10]

Is Red River even worth 5 dollars?

Seriously...

I actually need to check Minecraft out Its all around me and I remain ignorant. :p

[max power 21]

Operative;2008887']COD (the most hated game in this community)

I don't know if it's fair to say that. I think that DR and RR might be fighting for the top spot. I think that a lot of people in the community play COD, but it does represent what they think the market is flooded with. Something that the OFP franchise did not need to be converged with. I think that there would be a lot less hate for FPDR and sundry in this community if they made actual competition for ArmA.

[Innomadic 10]

I am about to rant. Some parts may seem disconnected.

Operative;2008774']No' date=' that's because 90% of the time the community speaks with fanboyism and elitism :eek:

It may surprise some people, but there are other good games out there.[/quote']

Whats your point? I'm not sure that we're all so blind as to think that Arma is the only game that should exist ever. Indeed there are other good games out there, a couple that come to mind are Vanquish, Acecombat, Gran Turismo, Metal Gear Solid, Forza 3...

Operative;2008887']It's a matter of opinion dude. This is what I've been talking sometime. There are (fact) people that like DR and/or RR. There's people that like COD (the most hated game in this community)' date=' there's people that like Tibia, there's people that like Minesweeper (my favourite, of course), and there's people that hate them all. Now, how can someone tell anyone that the game that he like/love/dislike/hate is good/bad/horrible/perfect?

It's all a matter of opinion.

What I'm talking about is that people hate [b']OFPDR/RR (not sequels)[/b] because of the developer, not because of the game. A lot of people here that hate them didn't even bother to play it. How is that?

People complain about bugs, but people have been playing ARMA2 since day one, and they love it! Sometimes, it's forgiveable, as not everyone is so minimalistic and sensitive about these kinds of things.

You may say it's broken or unfinished, but, afterall, if someone finds fun playing it, what's it worth for him?

Now, here i would post a couple of pics, but im afraid AusArma is having some issues and my images seem to have gone...somewhere.

Regardless if you had been paying attention i have, several times, applauded the terrain design, it was very very VERY good indeed. However thats where the praise ends.

Poor shooting mechanics, poor animations, poor textures, poor AI (friendly and hostile) who never seem to hit anything/anyone. I've played it, it was legitimately terrible, and i didn't even bother finishing the game because the story was quite simply boring, much in the same way i gave up on Blops. I simply could not be bothered. Now the only thing in that paragraph that was opinion was the story. It is fact that it has poor textures. It is fact that the AI was gobsmackingly poor. It is a fact that they dropped support straight away, and it is also a fact that the DLC's offered were quite frankly a quick grab for cash. You cannot legitimately tell me that allowing free roaming without any mission capability, which was a pre-launch promise, is either good game design and good marketing.

HOWEVER, and this is a big however, i have not played the Templar mods, and i've been informed that these do indeed expand the game that somewhat resembles a tac shooter. From this it is not hard to see that DR was still a step in the right direction, you could still use the Mission Editor to do what you wanted. It had potential. However that was never enacted upon.

Then Red River came along, so importance is placed upon the actions of the developer considering the beating taken after DR. If RR was not an expansion upon DR and did not fix the issues in DR, then people would complain. And what happened? Oh, the AI wasn't broken, just needed improving on (like "improving" needed a new game? BIS improves the AI all the time, its called a patch). We removed the mission editor and modding but its got loads of replayability because you can level up classes. Its a great online game, but only 4 player co-op because we removed PvP because it wasn't popular (because the net code was positively atrocious, this is also fact).

They removed more than they put in, they lied again, they claimed they made a sequel (which to me implies a bigger game than the last), delivered less, and charged the same price and claimed they are quality developers, so perhaps it is true in the case of RR, hating the devs instead, but that doesn't mean its completely irrelevant. The only way we can stop this trend is by simply demanding that devs improve their game. I'm sorry but i will not settle for sub-par quality as industry standard.

I don't know if it's fair to say that. I think that DR and RR might be fighting for the top spot. I think that a lot of people in the community play COD, but it does represent what they think the market is flooded with. Something that the OFP franchise did not need to be converged with. I think that there would be a lot less hate for FPDR and sundry in this community if they made actual competition for ArmA.

I completely agree, if they made a game that actually lived up to the OFP name, had enough freedom and was developed with PC in mind so that it could possibly compete with Arma, yes, i would probably buy it, much like i want RTI to be released commercially.

However they haven't, and it is indeed rather painful when you hear a friend say to your face that "OFP: DR is the most realistic FPS ever made". That is not only blatantly untrue it is completely the result of CM's milking of the OFP name.

Its been said before and i'll say it again. If a game is worth it, i'll buy it. If its not, i won't.

BS, i bought DR and it sucked tremendously... that CM is abusing the Operation Flashpoint name is another story which surely ain't gonna help them.

From the very beginning it never helped, because they never made a game that lived up to the name. Its not rocket science to understand. Would you be so forgiving if, say, Ford USA started importing cars from China and called them their own (if you're passionate about home grown cars like i am)? I can tell you that the response was similar when Holden started re-badging Daewoos here...doesn't matter the medium. If a name stands for certain qualities, and those qualities are dumped in favour of the $$$, then people will be upset.

Illogical? Perhaps. Meaningless? To some. Irrelevant? Definately not.

/rant...

Edited August 23, 2011 by Innomadic

[jw custom 56]

From the very beginning it never helped, because they never made a game that lived up to the name. Its not rocket science to understand. Would you be so forgiving if, say, Ford USA started importing cars from China and called them their own (if you're passionate about home grown cars like i am)? I can tell you that the response was similar when Holden started re-badging Daewoos here...doesn't matter the medium. If a name stands for certain qualities, and those qualities are dumped in favour of the $$$, then people will be upset.

Illogical? Perhaps. Meaningless? To some. Irrelevant? Definately not.

From the very beginning they showed a lot of promising videos which made people believe that it actually could be a pretty decent game, that combined with the Operation Flashpoint name and no demo near release date made a lot of people burn their fingers buying utter crap.

Nevertheless i bought DR hoping it was as good as the hype made it to be, but i was VERY VERY disappointed by seeing a game that was nothing like the propaganda videos cm released.

[dm 9]

How is this thread still going, longer than the game lasted, longer than the CM forums lasted AND here, of all places?

[jw custom 56]

How is this thread still going, longer than the game lasted, longer than the CM forums lasted AND here, of all places?

Probably because theres still people defending it as being a very polished and intelligent game filled with joy and intertainment.... dunno :p

[PuFu 4600]

pity either way...

[[frl]myke 14]

I just guess this thread is still going on because of the people coming in asking why it is still going on...perpetuum mobile. ;)

[JdB 151]

How is this thread still going, longer than the game lasted, longer than the CM forums lasted AND here, of all places?

Well for starters there are more trolls fans of the game here than there are on the CM forums (and have been for some time). Perhaps the CM forum' RR section is accidentally forwarding people to this place. CM wants to buy success, so maybe they'll be interested in having these fans transferred to their forum for a modest fee :bounce3:

Either that, or it's because in here we don't know what shadow-banning is :D

[jw custom 56]

my 3 friends bought the game cheap on ebay (after I nagged and nagged them to) and played most of it with me.... it was embarassing the amount of times they ripped it to bits...and I mean 'RIPPED IT TO BITS'... I felt so guilty for talking them into buying it that I offered to refund them their money........I don't think it is something we will keep playing!

LOL

[-GR-Operative 10]

You people are really missing my point. I'm saying something so obvious that you refuse to see. I've been saying the last posts that what is "fun" is a personal opinion, and that someone may find OFP2/3 "fun", period.

You can't deny it. Some people may like it. Also, you've been judging it biased by ARMA experiences. It's not Arma, it's not OFP either, it's an individual game (well, two) that don't lose their individual quality just because they share the name with a previous game.

[theblessedpig 10]

What quality? I think you fail to see our point. Those games lack quality. They are just really bad.

[JdB 151]

Operative;2009580']You people are really missing my point. I'm saying something so obvious that you refuse to see. I've been saying the last posts that what is "fun" is a personal opinion' date=' and that someone may find OFP2/3 "fun", period.

You can't deny it. Some people may like it.[/quote']

What most people here have a problem with is Baff1 presenting opinions as facts, and those opinions being completely contrary to what at the very least 90% of the people that bought RR have experienced. Especially the comments about RR being a well designed game with hardly any bugs or badly implemented features while bashing BIS for buggy games with bad gameplay. The distortion of the reality experienced by most of the RR customers is what makes him a troll. The classic behaviour of a troll is to call all others that come up with arguments based on many people's experiences "trolls", "fanboys" and "elitists" while not adding any arguments supported by facts to support his own opinion. Such a person blames others for the things only he himself is doing. Brushing aside widely recognized experiences and facts because he knows he'll never be able to come up with an argument that is widely recognized for it's accurate representation of the real state that the game is in. You exhibited the same behaviour on the previous page by saying that at least 90% of the community members are elitists and fanboys.

Operative;2009580']Also' date=' you've been judging it biased by ARMA experiences. It's not Arma, it's not OFP either, it's an individual game (well, two) that don't lose their individual quality just because they share the name with a previous game.[/quote']

Not a single person on this forum plays just one game, so we're perfectly capable of appreciating a game based on it's own merits. That most of us have concluded that RR has no merits compared to the games that it actually is supposed to be compared with (CoD mainly) is due to the content (or lack of) and the way it's implemented in the game, not our prejudice.

And well, CM brought those comparisons to ArmA and CoD on themselves by claiming to be developing a hardcore military simulator (DR) and a tactical game (RR), both of which at least 90% of the people here agree are questionable at best.

Edited August 23, 2011 by JdB

[froggyluv 2136]

^^^^ nailed it.

[jw custom 56]

Operative;2009580']that don't lose their individual quality just because they share the name with a previous game.

True, they don't lose their quality, they never had it!

[-GR-Operative 10]

Not a single person on this forum plays just one game, so we're perfectly capable of appreciating a game based on it's own merits. That most of us have concluded that RR has no merits compared to the games that it actually is supposed to be compared with (CoD mainly) is due to the content (or lack of) and the way it's implemented in the game, not our prejudice.

You are still comparing it lol

I didn't say that 90% of the members are elitists and fanboys (@JdB). You'd better learn to read.

How can you deny that some people like it? It's their opinion. You act as I was bashing BIS or praising CM, but I'm not doing either. I'm simply defending the right to think whatever you want want to. Also, you may think whatever you want.

---------- Post added at 09:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:34 PM ----------

What quality? I think you fail to see our point. Those games lack quality. They are just really bad.

This is your opinion. While many share it, people still have the right to play and like the game.

Edited August 23, 2011 by [GR]Operative

[dm 9]

Operative;2009629']You are still comparing it lol

And the only reason most of us do that is because it bears the name "Operation Flashpoint" and is marketed as a sequel. Which means you must compare it to is predecessor' date=' since it is apparently a [b']sequel[/b].

My only beef with both games is that they called them OFP. (When by all accounts they did not have the right to. They owned the name, not the sequel rights)

If they had just been called Dwagon Wising and Wed Wivver, then there would never have been such nerdrage, nor the comparisons.

[froggyluv 2136]

Operative;2008774']No' date=' that's because 90% of the time the community speaks with fanboyism and elitism :eek:

[/quote']

:rolleyes:

I'm simply defending the right to think whatever you want want to. Also, you may think whatever you want

People can think whatever the hell they want and nothing on a video game forum is gonna change that. Posting on a forum is another matter all together and if you can't take critique then you got no business here in the first place.

[JdB 151]

If they had just been called Dwagon Wising and Wed Wivver, then there would never have been such nerdrage, nor the comparisons.

I didn't know Elmer Fudd is a member of these forums, why have you been in disguise for all these years? :D

Still, even if they had been called "Dragon Rising" and "Dragon Rising: Red River" (perfectly good titles), they would still have been rated by many as being very poorly made games, and the end result would have been virtually identical. Pissed off customers, sales of RR dropping even harder compared to DR than the support by CM.

[-GR-Operative 10]

:rolleyes:

90% of the time the community speaks with fanboyism and elitism.

Does that say that 90% of the members are fanboys and elitists? Do each member have a equal share of the posts? Oh no? Ok so...

[rangerpl 13]

RR sucked hard but I could see why some people liked DR. It wasn't bad, it was just poorly supported and stale. For elitists like us, that makes the game bad but I can understand why some people would have enjoyed it. Not everyone thinks the way we do.

RR was shit though.

As I said before, if they didn't have the OFP name, we wouldn't be paying attention to them. Notice how nobody on these forums makes fun of Homefront or Medal of Honor. They're just games that we don't care about.