Ofp is dead?

[HellToupee 0]

Well with the amount of players round about 15-18 we have and its a pretty heavy mission we cant, in NZ we dont got fast conenctions we have to use a ded too laggy otherwise, and also i dont see the point of being in a squad for this game, theres just not enough players or squads to be worthwile. Im in a rtcw squad there real nice guys im second youngest at 17 well in aus/nz alone we've got 40 clans regestered in the ladder, so far we're the top NZ clan, but i see none of that in ofp with roughly zero nz squads and about 3 aus ones.

[toadeater 0]

Once again...the one and only major problem with OFP's multiplayer is the whole lobby thing, waiting for games to start. People don't have the time to wait 1/2 hour for a game to start, it's a preposterous, self-destructive concept for BIS to have settled for.

Another thing that can be done is for Codmasters to run a few (few? even one) dedicated public servers with a good lag-free connection so that newbies don't show up and get turned off by the lack of servers.

BIS is making a fatal mistake in ignoring the importance of multiplayer and community-building. Look at Counterstrike, it has kept Half-Life #1 for how many years now?

[Placebo 28]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (toadeater @ Oct. 01 2002,10:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BIS is making a fatal mistake in ignoring the importance of multiplayer and community-building. Look at Counterstrike, it has kept Half-Life #1 for how many years now?<span id='postcolor'>

Perhaps it would help if people could simply connect to games, and just jump right in then? Let's call it "join in and play" or maybe JIP for short?

[Mr_X 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kegetys @ Sep. 29 2002,20:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Desloc @ Sep. 29 2002,21:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So what do we play and love? What game offers everything I wanted in OFP as far as online gaming goes?

BF 1942... finally there is a game.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, if BF1942 is what you wanted, then OFP certainly was the wrong game for you. For me, its the other way around, there is no game out there with multiplayer that would compare to OFP, we have games every day with our squad and its great fun.

The main "problem" is that the majority of people just want fast action, not strategic combat which is what OFP is. But there are people who play OFP (like us), you just dont see us playing because we play on our own private server, which is how OFP is the best to be played imo.<span id='postcolor'>

I wouldn't say BF1942 doesn't have tactical or even strategic elements...

I think the hardcore OFP fans are writing bf1942 off a bit too quick because previous fans (and sites) are turning to it.

The nature of warfare did also change significantly between 1942 and 1985.....so it CAN be slightly difficult to compare the realism of the two games in question.

The tactics you can employ in BF1942 reflect classic WWII warfare. Not in a naval or perhaps even air power sense, but with armoured support and artillery (ok so its not that realistic but it emphasises the importance of non-frontline support units). The flight models and tank representation aren't terrible either ('sides the aircraft having around 15 times the ordanance that they should have).

BF1942 does what it wanted to do VERY well. It's realism isn't perhaps what OFP's is HOWEVER it's MULITPLAYER GAMEPLAY gives it the ability to really go the distance. OFP's questionable AI has been replaced by a human player on the main front, as that what BF1942 is, a multiplayer game. Simply, it's what OFP isn't.....and vice versa.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

BF1942 has simplified itself so much that it has lost any depth that might have caused me to buy the game. The fixed wing flight model is really bad (as is OFP's, but planes play a larger role in BF1942), The large cannon and their odd Worms style projectiles (you're telling me that I have to crank the barrel of my 88 up for a ballistic arc shot just to hit a target 50 yards away?), it's complete disregard for historical accuracy (too many things to mention), and despite the promise of it's large-environment engine, they decided to make the maps small, too small imo. Also, the worst part is, mapmakers are limited in creating new maps for the game. They can't create any new game types, plus, unlike OFP, there is no mission editor that puts everything in the user's reach. Basically, you paid full retail for a game that isnt going to be expanded until you pay full retail again for an expansion.

These are just a few of the many reasons why I don't like BF1942, and why EA won't be getting any money from me to play it EVEN if the entire OFP community moves over to BF1942 lock stock & barrel (which they wont   )

[Placebo 28]

EA's MO isn't to release games with any kind of longjevity, they release new slightly updated versions each year ala Fifa, Nascar, NHL, Madden, NBA, Knockout Kings etc. Or they pump out addon after addon after addon, ala The sims.

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Sep. 30 2002,21:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">(you're telling me that I have to crank the barrel of my 88 up for a ballistic arc shot just to hit a target 50 yards away?), it's complete disregard for historical accuracy (too many things to mention), and despite the promise of it's large-environment engine, they decided to make the maps small, too small imo.

These are just a few of the many reasons why I don't like BF1942, and why EA won't be getting any money from me to play it EVEN if the entire OFP community moves over to BF1942 lock stock & barrel (which they wont   )<span id='postcolor'>

First of all, i like BF1942, imo it's a good game... Or at least good enough.

Don't you think weapons like bazookas, tanks, etc would rule this game if you didn't have to aim above the target for targets that are relatively close?

Because these weapons, vehicles, etc are so hard to hit stuff with this game won't become one of those bazooka only games. The fact that your rocket drops really fast is pretty good actually... It encourages ppl to fight with guns instead of rockets.

Historical accuracy? Hmmm, i can't remember the developers saying that this game has to be historically accurate.... Oh well....

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Basically, you paid full retail for a game that isnt going to be expanded until you pay full retail again for an expansion.

<span id='postcolor'>

Well, for some games this might be true, but there also are games where you can download the expansions for ('course that also includes new maps). BF1942 has a rather large amount of maps, i think there are about 20 maps....

The maps aren't really big but making them bigger will probable make it sooo damn boring because you never see an enemy....

So if you ask men, BF isn't as bad as everyone claims...

[ebud 18]

What keeps me going back to OFP time and time again is the ability to create, with some accuracy, any conflict you can think of. Every time I finish a new book, I make some missions to re-create the exact scenarios depicted in the books. To be able to actually put yourself into computer generated battlefield and re-create actual moments in history is amazing to me. I use OFP as a tool to get a better understanding of why certain battles were won or lost. You can read and read and read about battles and skirmishes, but with OFP you can really get a sense (even if it is limited) of what it was like.

[Vicente_cgn 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Don't you think weapons like bazookas, tanks, etc would rule this game if you didn't have to aim above the target for targets that are relatively close?

Because these weapons, vehicles, etc are so hard to hit stuff with this game won't become one of those bazooka only games.  The fact that your rocket drops really fast is pretty good actually...   It encourages ppl to fight with guns instead of rockets.  

<span id='postcolor'>

Hehe, that's a funny argument - but you're not serious with this, are you?  

I mean - Bazookas shouldn't be the non-plus-ultra weapon - otherwise they're completely wrong modelled! For example you can't carry lot's of rockets with you, right? Three shoots and you're out of ammo! Reloading them takes some time, too! Further, you have to get into a good, stable position to aim and fire! You can't just fire them while running, you have to kneel down! This makes you an easy target because you can't just hit-and-run with a bazooka, right?

All this things you have to calculate before you use a bazooka in OFP and because of that it really depends on the kind of mission which weapon you use! You would never shoot with a rocket at people as long as you still have a alternative! That's why I like OFP and why I don't like BF1942!

Bye,

-Vic-

[Kermit 0]

The RPGs are fine in Operation Flashpoint. Real life RPGs arc like they do in Operation Flashpoint and look like they do in Operation Flashpoint. However, the LAWs need help. Real life LAWs do not arc like they do in Operation Flashpoint, nor do they look like they do in Operation Flashpoint. In fact, the Operation Flashpoint LAW is just a copy of the RPG.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ Oct. 01 2002,21:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Don't you think weapons like bazookas, tanks, etc would rule this game if you didn't have to aim above the target for targets that are relatively close?

Because these weapons, vehicles, etc are so hard to hit stuff with this game won't become one of those bazooka only games.  The fact that your rocket drops really fast is pretty good actually...   It encourages ppl to fight with guns instead of rockets.  

Historical accuracy?  Hmmm, i can't remember the developers saying that this game has to be historically accurate.... Oh well....<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, tanks would rule BF1942 if they were modelled correctly, because tanks ruled most of the major battlefields of WW2, especially many of the ones BF1942 has. If you want to make a WW2 game, you cant just go and fuck around with core aspects of the conflict, otherwise it just aint a WW2 game anymore.

Bazookas, if modelled correctly, would be almost completely useless in a 1st person shooter. Why?

A: It's cumbersome. The fucker is big, and so is it's ammo.  It weighs almost 16 pounds empty, and is 61 inches long! Each rocket weighed 3.5 pounds, so even with a 2 man crew, there isn't a whole lot of ammo to go around.

B: It's a bitch to reload. Every time I see the reload animation in BF1942 I want to laugh.  A trained two man team is required to load the thing in anything approaching a reasonable timeframe, and you can bet they arent jumping up and down or running while they are doing it. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It was a two man weapon which was fired from over the shoulder and loaded from the rear. It was the loaders job to load the projectile and plug an electrical contact on the end of a trailing lead from the projectile to the rear of the launcher. Then the weapon was cocked by a lever which was often mistaken for the trigger which magnetized a rod as it was drawn through a coil. This produced the electrical current which fired the projectile. <span id='postcolor'> The average firing rate of an M9 is approximately 10 rounds a minute, when a trained 2 man crew is working.

C: The Bazooka's anti-tank ammunition is NOT an explosive charge adequate for anti-personnel operations. It is basically a 2.36 inch shaped charge that is propelled at 265 feet per second to penetrate armor. If you shot a standard Bazooka round at a cluster of infantry, you will only kill one of them, and that is if he gets hit with the actual projectile. Now, yes, there were instances of anti-personnel Bazooka rounds being used, but these were late in the war, and very uncommon.

D: The Bazooka had an effective range against armored targets up to about 100 yards, and I can guarantee you that a projectile travelling at 265 feet/second is not going to have a ballistic arc like the M9 in BF1942 travelling out to 500 yards (which is, by the way, the M9's maximum range), let alone 100.

So really, BF1942 could easily have solved the "uber-Bazooka" problem by actually modelling it correctly, instead of making it a single-shot version of the Quake rocket launcher.

As far as historical accuracy- if you can't tell, I take great stock in a game's ability to recreate realistic details. It is a measure of the developer's dedication and skill, and it also brings the game closer to realising it's goal to be as great a game as possible. Another thing is, if you are going to market your game as a WORLD WAR II GAME, you should at least show proper respect for historical details, locales, and the like. I have no problem if you want to make a game that cuts the corners, but if you do, you had better not call it a "historically based game".

My core point (if you made it this far lol) is that the standard World War II battlefield (aside from the roving bazooka soldiers- lol) was incredibly deadly. Machine guns, tanks, artillery, mines, more tanks, etc would all end your life in a second, and every single one got deadlier and more accurate as the war advanced. BF1942 hamstrings itself by artificially toning weapons and vehicles down, essentially making itself the cutest and cuddliest of the WW2 combat games.

[Guest]

Tex, did you perhaps notice the title of this topic and noticed perhaps the name of this board?

I'll give you a hint: It does not include "1942"

[Balschoiw 0]

I still love OFP. Got the game 1st day in stores here in germany and since then a lot happened. I never played MP much before. Some HL and EAW but that´s it. With OFP I met a bunch of guys on GS that were addicted to Coop games. I will never forget my "Tryout" for the CiA Clan. This was no CTF or DM, but a Coop that lastet over 2 hours. Damn this was so intense. Freedom of movement and tactics is the kick in OFP. I started mission editing to get us new Coop missions and was happy as a kid, when my first paratroopers were deployed from the Helo. I am still working with the 1.46 version cause my computer sucks with Resistance . I have 850 Duron here with a Gf2Mx64MB and that is simply not enough for Resistance. I am used to good gfx in 1.46 and when I make missions I want to have same performance as I am used to. In Res the performance goes down a lot and I have to set resolution to 800 to get it fluent running. This doesnt satisfy me, so I am still doing my missions in 1.46.

OFP has given me a lot of fun , I met people that I now can call friends and I still get "sucked in" whenever I get lost in the Editor. You certainly know that: "I am only trying this one out..." Often enough I shut down my OFP hours later and my gf has already went to bed.

What is bad about OFP ?

I have no chance to get DSL where I live, so I have to go online with ISDN or double channel ISDN. The lag issues are the most disturbing thing with OFP. We had some players quit cause of the lag. They simply were so frustrated...

I know that OFP cant be compared to any other game at the moment, but I lack a bit of assistance from BIS to burning issues like the netcode or overall speed. Res play via sockets is actually faster than 1.46 but due to my comp´s weakness I loose a lot of performance. Nethertheless I will upgrade my comp soon and see how it works then.

I hope BIS does not only concentrate on the sequel to OFP but also does not forget the addicted players like me. Where are new units ? Where are patches for Res that are badly needed ? The nearest object thing almost made me crazy...

I see that the community gets smaller every day, but I hope OFP won´t end up unsupported. This would be definately the end in my opinion.

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Oct. 01 2002,11:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ Oct. 01 2002,21:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Don't you think weapons like bazookas, tanks, etc would rule this game if you didn't have to aim above the target for targets that are relatively close?

Because these weapons, vehicles, etc are so hard to hit stuff with this game won't become one of those bazooka only games.  The fact that your rocket drops really fast is pretty good actually...   It encourages ppl to fight with guns instead of rockets.  

Historical accuracy?  Hmmm, i can't remember the developers saying that this game has to be historically accurate.... Oh well....<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, tanks would rule BF1942 if they were modelled correctly, because tanks ruled most of the major battlefields of WW2, especially many of the ones BF1942 has. If you want to make a WW2 game, you cant just go and fuck around with core aspects of the conflict, otherwise it just aint a WW2 game anymore.<span id='postcolor'>

What's most important? Historical accuracy or having fun? If you want a game full of tanks you can buy a tank simulation... The developers have done a good job, now lets go back on topic....

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Oct. 02 2002,13:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Where are patches for Res that are badly needed ? The nearest object thing almost made me crazy...<span id='postcolor'>

The patch is coming. Let's just say that you won't be disappointed

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Where are new units ?<span id='postcolor'>

I really fail to see the reason why BIS should spend their time making new units when we have so many talented members that are producing new units every day.

[JAP 2]

Denoir,

Still would be cool if they put some new units in since there are loads of people that refuse to play anything with an unofficial addon in it.

Or like i said long time ago, why don t they select the best non-official addons and put them in the next patch so they become official ( with the owners consent ofcourse)

What we urgently need is some official badguys ! Terrorists, mafia dudes, bikers etc etc just more variaty in badguys ( like HKpack ) but then official !

[Balschoiw 0]

the problem with custom made Addons is , that they are not spread that much. In MP Addons can be a pain in the *** when missing. I support Jap´s solution although I think BIS will not implement User made Addons into a patch.

Get my point : If BIS should distribute addons with a patch almost everyone in OFP community will have them installed and the mission editors like me can make missions without having to worry about missing addons.

I personally dont like to install addons and make missions with them. It has shown that most people out there prefer missions without unofficial addons. The Addons like M2A2 Ah64, BRDM or others were great stuff and are heavily used by me.

For the upcoming patch. Any news on V1.82 ?

[JAP 2]

They should ofcourse select only top quality stuff !

Like the new ship that s coming or hkpack - top addons like that -. Things that are an addition to OFP military wise.

I m actualy getting a bit tired of always making East vs West missions.

Also editing missions is heavily depended on present date conflicts. Like Afghanistan, Irak, etc etc.

It s not East vs West anymore lately

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Oct. 02 2002,15:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the problem with custom made Addons is , that they are not spread that much.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, I understand what you are saying however I personally think that BIS should spend their time and money to make things that only they can do (i.e extend the script language, improve the engine etc), and not the things that the community can produce. For the addons I think it would be very good if the community could agree on a standard set of addons to be used. This is in progress and hopefully it will produce results.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For the upcoming patch. Any news on V1.82 ?<span id='postcolor'>

V1.85

[jollyreaper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Oct. 02 2002,14:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Oct. 02 2002,15:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the problem with custom made Addons is , that they are not spread that much.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, I understand what you are saying however I personally think that BIS should spend their time and money to make things that only they can do (i.e extend the script language, improve the engine etc), and not the things that the community can produce. For the addons I think it would be very good if the community could agree on a standard set of addons to be used. This is in progress and hopefully it will produce results.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For the upcoming patch. Any news on V1.82 ?<span id='postcolor'>

V1.85 <span id='postcolor'>

Still, it wouldn't be all that much effort for BIS to cull the best of the best from the unofficial add-ons. I'm sure that the authors would be tickled pink to see their names in the official credits list of OFP. Throw those add-ons into the next patch, there ya go.

[ale2999 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Oct. 02 2002,20:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Oct. 02 2002,15:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the problem with custom made Addons is , that they are not spread that much.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, I understand what you are saying however I personally think that BIS should spend their time and money to make things that only they can do (i.e extend the script language, improve the engine etc), and not the things that the community can produce. For the addons I think it would be very good if the community could agree on a standard set of addons to be used. This is in progress and hopefully it will produce results.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For the upcoming patch. Any news on V1.82 ?<span id='postcolor'>

V1.85 <span id='postcolor'>

Denoir, u know that GOTY ofp is coming out, do u know if it is already patched or not? cuz if it is the patch should be ready already (lol a rime) and they should put it out 4 us

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ale2999 @ Oct. 03 2002,05:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Denoir, u know that GOTY ofp is coming out, do u know if it is already patched or not? cuz if it is the patch should be ready already (lol a rime) and they should put it out 4 us <span id='postcolor'>

Nope, sorry, don't know anything about that.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Oct. 02 2002,11:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Tex, did you perhaps notice the title of this topic and noticed perhaps the name of this board?

I'll give you a hint: It does not include "1942" <span id='postcolor'>

sorry, but you know I can't resist a good argument

[HellToupee 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Oct. 03 2002,20:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">6--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Oct. 02 2002,116)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Tex, did you perhaps notice the title of this topic and noticed perhaps the name of this board?

I'll give you a hint: It does not include "1942" <span id='postcolor'>

sorry, but you know I can't resist a good argument <span id='postcolor'>

JIPs a good one isnt it.

[john_mcclane 0]

I think it's going to be a long time before OFP is dead.

There is currently no other game on the market that has everything Flashpoint has. And I haven't heard of anything in the works that has everything it has. Show me another game that has realistic/realtime change of day/night conditions. Or one that has nearly as large of maps with as many trees and objects. You can fly over most maps in BF1942 in a matter of seconds.

OFP also has a fantastic mod community with a lot of great folks cranking out high quality addons of all sorts.

I consider the built-in mission editor to be second to none. Even novices can create enjoyable missions in a matter of minutes.

I was reading a recent review of OFP: Resistance and they were saying the graphics engine was dated. Please, spare me. First of all, maybe they should have cranked the textures all the way up, and set the terrain detail to high. Also, this is a military simulation that takes place in a realistic environment, not a shiny, ridiculously colored, confined Quake 3 world.

I have a mission we play over the LAN. It's a massive air/ground assault mission with 7 helicopters, 2 aircraft (Broncos), & 2 APC infantry groups attacking 8 enemy tanks, a boat, and 15 enemy squads. We usually play it with just 2 people and have the AI taking care of everything else. I don't see any other games that can handle anywhere near that large of battle without massive slowdowns. BF1942 starts to crawl with just 2 human players and a handful of bots.

I purchased BF1942 with hopes of it being a fun game to play over the LAN with a limited number of people, and use bots to fill out the teams. Thanks to the worlds worst bots, it seems like it could only be enjoyable with all human players over broadband or LAN. Not everyone has access to broadband or 20 people to play with over a LAN. And it shouldn't be a requirement to enjoy a game. And for being newer than OFP, I can't say much for the graphics. Trees with tops that look like balls of cotton candy, and a static bitmap sky, etc.

So no, I personally don't think OFP is anywhere near dead or dying. I think it's going to be a long time before another game comes along that has all the features & realism that OFP has... Maybe OFP 2?