Any plans of making opf more friendly to mp?

[instanto 0]

I got tired of Flashpoint a long time ago, but recently installed it again and have started a lot of multiplayer games.

(http://ecstatica.mine.nu/flashpoint/images).

BUT:

Some seriously Irritating feature of Operation Flashpoint, and I am sure that this contributes atleast somewhat to the lack of online servers and players are:

1. You cant join a game that is running.

2. You can only see a few lines of text when you join a server

a) And if you get kicked you get no explanation usually

B) For instance when you are missing one or several add-ons

c) That wont be downloaded automatically

d) Nor will you (in most cases) be told where you can get them

e) And if you do get them, many of them are very hard to install.

3. You also have a game with many # commands that are 'hidden' to the normal user, no user listing gui with the option to vote for maps/kick players.

4. Games taking FOREVER to start because people are not 'ready' and there is no administrator (or he does'nt know how to launch a game).

I am sure you are busy working on the XBOX and future versions of Flashpoint, but could you before you release a "red baron" or similar add-on to flashpoint consider doing some work with the MULTIPLAYER part of the game.

Thats where the continued longevity of the game lies, not in retail add-ons.

Refreshing in All-Seeing-Eye I can see 172 OPF:R servers,

152 OPF servers, and 35.000 Counterstrike servers.

Sure, they are different games, and OPF has a lot harder learning curve, but CS/HL is also a _LOT_ more Multiplayer Friendly.

OPF:R has 172 servers allowing a total of 6007 players, but only 464 are playing right now.

Unlike Americas Army: Operations - Also more multiplayer friendly, with 550 Servers, 4935/9805 players.

I want more people playing MP Flashpoint, but I can understand why there are so few playing it online when its so damn hard to get a game running, (or get in to a server).

[Placebo 28]

A vast proportion of Opf MP players play on private servers with friends or are in squads and play with fellow squad members, the reason is so that they're not bothered by the immature kids that can sometimes plague public servers, for the best MP experiences with Opf you want to be playing with the people you know, if you don't know any then join a squad or hang out in one of the IRC channels.

The reason games like CS and AA are so visibly popular is because these games appeal to the "no-brainer", A.D.D. type percentile, both in means and operation

[Skunk Monkey 0]

Sounds like you need to find some better servers to play on.

SHoP is a good one in US.

You have to put quite a lot of effort and time to get good MP games in OFP, but hey its a sim, I dont want it "Dumbing down" even if it means more people would play it. Quantity has nothing to do with QUALITY.

[instanto 0]

Its not a question about dumbing down the game by allowing people to join while a game is already running.

Games such as Capture The Island and Battlefield 1985, which can last for 1 hour or more tend to get very booring if half the players quit after 20-40 minutes, and then there is no way to get new players playing, since nobody can join.

Playing public games is fun, if there are many players. And most OPF players I have seen (except for the idiots who kick when you ask for the game to start soon) seem like an ok bunch, i.e. not like counterstrike idiots. There are maybe some tks around, but they can be kicked and should pose no problem.

YOu dont DUMB down the game by making it more accessible for multiplayer games.

There are WAY to few people playing OpF online, no matter how 'advanced/simulation' it may be. And I am sure that the main reason for this is NOT that the game is difficult, but because it takes forever to get a good game running, and in most cases the server will be full, or the game is already running, even though the 40 players will probably be only 30-25 after 30 minutes (in a 1 hour mission).

But, hopefully SOLDNER will be out soon and I wont have to bother with the nonplayability of Multiplayer Flashpoint.

[kegetys 2]

Well, you really cant judge the size of the ofp mp community since most of the servers are propably private. The onjoin thing has been discussed a thousand times before, and its not coming, ever, and I dont think there is that much need for it anyway.

[petrel 0]

Another reason is that OpF is probably not very appealing to commercial hosting operations and the server-rent crowd. It's too demanding of hardware and bandwidth, and the OpF dedicated servers are not the most reliable or flexible so far as I can tell (the Linux one is certainly a wobbler). A commercial host can get X iterations of another popular game on his server or one iteration, maybe two, of OpF. It's a no-brainer if you are trying to maximize your rental income per machine. Nor is there a core of public in-house servers of the kind that might be offered by EA Games or NovaLogic, say, and which is run primarily as a marketing operation. Above all, though, OpF is intellectually demanding and that's always going to limit its appeal (which some people might be quite thankful for as it keeps the muppets away).

[Harnu 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">1. You cant join a game that is running.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes this does suck in some instances.  And we all know it.  There's really no point in pointing it out anymore

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">2. You can only see a few lines of text when you join a server

a) And if you get kicked you get no explanation usually

B) For instance when you are missing one or several add-ons

c) That wont be downloaded automatically

d) Nor will you (in most cases) be told where you can get them

e) And if you do get them, many of them are very hard to install.<span id='postcolor'>

2.  Press / to type then press Page Up to see anything you missed.  Even counterstrike only lets you see a few lines before you have to go into the console and read

a.  If you're kicked you proabably either know what you did wrong, or you can reconnect and see.  That's not an OFP problem, thats an admin problem.

b.  If you're missing addons, you are usually told before hand that you will need them.

c. They aren't downloaded automatically because they are relatively easy to find.  Plus it wont cause you to bog down the server as you download.

d.You actually ususally are told.  And if you play OFP for a few months, you know that you cna find most every addon for ofp at operationflashpoint.org, ofp.info, or @war.

e.  So hard to unzip and place them in your addons folder

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">3. You also have a game with many # commands that are 'hidden' to the normal user, no user listing gui with the option to vote for maps/kick players.<span id='postcolor'>

Ya it does suck having to explain to new people about those commands.  And how are they "hidden"?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">4. Games taking FOREVER to start because people are not 'ready' and there is no administrator (or he does'nt know how to launch a game).<span id='postcolor'>

Again that's more of an admin/player problem.

[HellToupee 0]

i fail to see how most servers r private, most are public, the majority dont hide away they play on public servers. What hes saying is ofp needs to have more acessable mp, ofp has a very small online community because mainly of the huge task of getting into a game, long waits etc, sum people just dont have a time, if u have a hour of time to spare you dont want to spend 30mins of it waiting. The jip is the biggest set back limiting length and size of games and turning huge numbers away considering ofp sold 1 million, including these features he lists wont make ofp CS, thats a stupid argument, just as stupid as it will bring hoards of CS players, CS players are the least likly people to come any way. InNZ we had 1 server, one aus server poped up recently and the NZ server has not been used since, basically ofp just died in NZ online.

[whisperFFW06 0]

JIP issue has been discussed 100ed times here, as Kegetys pointed. The point is : it is not (or "extremely hard", to say the least) feasible, due to OFP architecture (ie. state of every object/script/variable is passed across network, making synchronization impossible to achieve when joining), it is a choice between JIP and editor/scripting/behaviour flexibility of OFP. BIS choosed the lattest, I won't blame them on this, I'll THANK them. There is no JIP because OFP is the way you love it. Period.

This is a TECHNICAL issue, I don't understand why pple keep repeating the same request when there is no point doing so. Unless BIS do find the holy grail solution and entirely rebuild netcode, AI code and scripting (by "scripting" I mean scripts and editors possibilities) code (which is, apart from graphics and physics, what makes OFP what it is now), as it has been repeated numerous times, JIP is not feasible and won't be made. This is a choice, and who would blame?

[HellToupee 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (whisperFFW06 @ Mar. 16 2003,13:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">JIP issue has been discussed 100ed times here, as Kegetys pointed. The point is : it is not (or "extremely hard", to say the least) feasible, due to OFP architecture (ie. state of every object/script/variable is passed across network, making synchronization impossible to achieve when joining), it is a choice between JIP and editor/scripting/behaviour flexibility of OFP. BIS choosed the lattest, I won't blame them on this, I'll THANK them. There is no JIP because OFP is the way you love it. Period.

This is a TECHNICAL issue, I don't understand why pple keep repeating the same request when there is no point doing so. Unless BIS do find the holy grail solution and entirely rebuild netcode, AI code and scripting (by "scripting" I mean scripts and editors possibilities) code (which is, apart from graphics and physics, what makes OFP what it is now), as it has been repeated numerous times, JIP is not feasible and won't be made. This is a choice, and who would blame?<span id='postcolor'>

nothing is impossible, there are games that do far more than ofp and yet have JIP, scripting timing might be a factor but who knows, BIS have just said back way before resistance JIP not possible with current net code. Thing is for online it should have been an option, ofp never did get far online when it could have beaten all others.

[kegetys 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HellToupee @ Mar. 16 2003,05:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ofp never did get far online when it could have beaten all others.<span id='postcolor'>

How can you beat others where there is no competition?

[Placebo 28]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HellToupee @ Mar. 16 2003,03:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">there are games that do far more than ofp<span id='postcolor'>

Such as?

[MP Studio 0]

Counterstrike *joke*

I really dont know any game which is so much fun in MP. I played AAO and CS for a while, but after two weeks

[HellToupee 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (placebo @ Mar. 17 2003,01:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HellToupee @ Mar. 16 2003,03:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">there are games that do far more than ofp<span id='postcolor'>

Such as?<span id='postcolor'>

mmorgs, this planetside etc allgence freelancer.........

[HellToupee 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kegetys @ Mar. 16 2003,22:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HellToupee @ Mar. 16 2003,05:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ofp never did get far online when it could have beaten all others.<span id='postcolor'>

How can you beat others where there is no competition? <span id='postcolor'>

well bf42 is a close one, i hate it but i bet many ofpers probly went to this as it has popular mp, i know a few who did they were nice guys, fact is ofp is a great game but its mp dosnt go beyond coops and CnH really, no JIP is a limit on time and numbers.

Also from the mp annoyances thread, two of the top annoyances is quitters and waiting for the game to start, those two problems would be eliminated, side switching and auto balance also would be good.

[whisperFFW06 0]

Seems you don't read replies and dismiss them by "nothing it impossible".

As I said, it was a choice by BIS not to build bf1942, but OFP, and you'll agree that there is a huge difference in many fields between them : AI, physics (mainly damage model, and environnement like trees and bushes), editor and scripting, etc...

What technical argument can you give to show that it IS possible to implement JIP?

And, second though, why, ooh why, if JIP is such a boost in MP game and fun, so such a boost in sellings, why didn't BIS implement it, as it is so possible to do? Why?

- They are lazy? Seeing the works done since the JIP issue has been brought up, I don't think so.

- They are "stupid", and can't have a clue how to do it? Look back, see what OFP offers, and dare say so.

I hope they'll find a solution to implement it, but seeing the replies, I'm afraid it is impossible, and won't insult them saying they are wrong.

Whis'

[nicebag 0]

Compare BF and OFP? Impossible. I play BF during the week when I want to relax and don't think at all. If I want to have more challenge from the game I meet with my clan mates and play OFP where strategy and skills are more noticable part of the game.

Best way for every player is to join clan, and start practice with them. That will remove all anoyance which you can experience on public servers with unorganized crowd on it (especially on huge maps such as River- or BattleField).

[Guest]

It is a shame the whole "onjoin" thing doesn't work..script synchronisation problems etc. One thing I would like to see is the ability for the user to custom make chat binds (unless I'm being a total n00b here and you already can??). Going onto a public server, with no RogerWilko/teamspeak means you are basically playing by yourself anyway...chatbinds might help with that. In Quake3 I can join a CTF server with people I've never played with before, and know exactly what things like "Incoming Enemy" and "Flag Low" are all about. These would be handy in OFP...

[HellToupee 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (whisperFFW06 @ Mar. 18 2003,10:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Seems you don't read replies and dismiss them by "nothing it impossible".

As I said, it was a choice by BIS not to build bf1942, but OFP, and you'll agree that there is a huge difference in many fields between them : AI, physics (mainly damage model, and environnement like trees and bushes), editor and scripting, etc...

What technical argument can you give to show that it IS possible to implement JIP?

And, second though, why, ooh why, if JIP is such a boost in MP game and fun, so such a boost in sellings, why didn't BIS implement it, as it is so possible to do? Why?

- They are lazy? Seeing the works done since the JIP issue has been brought up, I don't think so.

- They are "stupid", and can't have a clue how to do it? Look back, see what OFP offers, and dare say so.

I hope they'll find a solution to implement it, but seeing the replies, I'm afraid it is impossible, and won't insult them saying they are wrong.

Whis'<span id='postcolor'>

mainly because ofp is a single palyer game, its mp only with resistance a year later did it get its own net code, thing is mp was hardly a selling point of ofp, says it sold 1 million yet online players is in the hundreds or a thousand or two and that is next to nothing, thats not even an income, so you can see why ofp hasnt become very multiplayer focused, they have improved it but its still pretty much just sp.

[Starr-QSF- 0]

The only real improvement I'd like to see is the ability to actually watch the game while you wait to join, but I guess with all those problems stated with JIP, that wouldn't work... even being able to watch people move around on the map would be an improvment to just sittin' on your bum.

OFP is basically a SP game. Some of my best memories of OFP are from playing offline. But I've had some great moments playing MP though. Online I try to only play with my squad so that I know some little twerp isn't gonna run around screamin' "1 0wn3rz z00!" I also play a lot of LAN games too, since that gets rid off the lag and inconsitancies of playing online.

To have a lot of fun with OFP MP, ya need a couple of things:

1. Patience!

2. Group of friends

3. Good server

4. Up to date computer

5. An average IQ

6. uhh.. did I mention patience already?

Just my two cents fellas

[AngusHeaf 0]

I always laugh when I see people griping about OFP multiplayer and how they just can't get into it because of all the impatient nattering noobs on public servers. Yet then they want to rejoice at how the game excels if you have patience and a head for strategy and so on. Somehow the fact that you need to have patience with any online community of gamers is lost of these folks. Heh.

So which came first... did the lack of interest of BIS to make MP all it could be stop any interest by players in their tracks, or did the lack of interest in MP by people who bought OFP:CWC cause BIS to think there was no interest in MP in the first place? It's like each side (players and company) point the finger and say "you cared less about multiplayer!!" Bizarre. Heh.

Either way aversarial multiplayer could be a lot better. Co-op in my mind is just an extension of single player (and I don't care about coop). Adversarily multiplayer could be many MANY times better in a lot of respects, and many of the ways are not directly fixed by BIS...

1) Mission editting is too difficult (BIS's fault). The biggest obsticle standing between more MP 2-team play is a lack of quality missions. I also think people WANT to make more interesting missions but quite frankly, it's too damn hard. Editors have the damnest time creating all but C&H and CTF missions. And even then those most basic missions are buggy half the time. Too much scripting, too little support (none) for multiplayer specific things, unbalanced weapons.

2) Computer requirements too high (BIS). This game has been out for how long? Almost 2 years I guess? Either way it's amazing how just NOW computers and framerates are catching up to acceptable levels. Server performance is horrible and it's no wonder no one hosts OFP servers. Server can't just be fast and get away with slower connections, or be hosted on fast connections and get away with slower servers... no, they need fast servers AND fast connections. I feel sorry for those soldiers I see playing OFP over at VBS1 website. Those notebooks can't possibly be any good for OFP.

3) Not enough teams compete (our fault). Tournament play brings up the skill of any squad, even if you're in last place. Tournament play keeps people interested in the game and keeps them playing weekly (if not daily). Lack of tournament/inter-squad play is made worse by the fact that the best teams in north america can't really play the best from europe and elsewhere because of lag (see #2). BIS could do a lot to support those teams that DO compete like online ranking, host a tournament or two, care about weapon balance instead of things like bicycles and biplanes, throw a bone to those who are spending their money to host tournaments and keep the community alive, etc. Those are just ideas off the top my head of course...

A side note: A lot of the "regulars" and "heavy hitters" on this actual forum aren't the guys in the trenches keeping this community alive by hosting servers and tournaments, yet they're the most vocal about how things effect the community. Stop rambling about OFP and come to games online. I've seen maybe 10% of you guys playing in the last year, and I play almost every night for a couple hours.

4) The community would be wise to stop shutting their eyes and pretending everything is ok. Everyone who rambles about how great OFP is because we only have 1000 players and fewer noobs/wankers is just keeping the community from growing because of their elitism. Gaming communities only have two modes... growing or shrinking. If people aren't coming into the community and being welcomed then those who get bored with OFP and leave (in part because of lack of community) and are not replaced. It's a downward spiral from there.

EDIT: I'm not directing my more pointed criticism at any of you guys in this thread in particular. So don't go jumping into my sh!t when I'm not here calling anyone out in particular.

[Itchy 0]

Interesting discussion here, I thought I'd add my experiences (you got me thinking, AngusHeaf).

I'm currently in charge of two public servers running on GAME.net, and bookable servers too. The game had always had a lack of public servers in the UK, and I was very pleased when Barrysworld (as GAME.net was known at the time) put these up. I've had a few problems along the way.

There is a huge range of unofficial addons available, and they add a lot to the game, certainly in terms of keeping my interest. Kegety's Winter maps have always been favourites of mine. But getting addons onto a public server has always been tricky, and I was worried I would end up with a busy server for regulars, and a quieter server for newer players.

Being able to download the addons on the fly, as is done with missions, would have been a very nice touch. What I do is make up a bi-monthly pack of addons for that time, which has worked well. The fact that the servers are pay-to-play has helped, as people get directed to our IRC channel and the website before they venture onto the servers.

Pay-to-play has been a little weird (I know, this is a little off-topic, but I have a point), but Operation Flashpoint has been a far greater success than more traditional multiplayer games such as Counterstrike. I think the lack of public servers in the UK (more have appeared in the last few months, I admit), and the lower number of players required for a good coop game, do help a lot with that.

So Operation Flashpoint is very much alive, or at least, it is for me.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

There is no game online right now as complicated (in a good way) as OFP.

None. And I'm in the planetside beta test, so don't bring that up- its nice, but its soooooo simplified its not worth it most of the time. And the quality of players... yech.

@ 'nothing is impossible'

- Put your left hand on your left elbow.

[Jinef 2]

I find MP a bit boring really,when i play on those battlefield maps everyone just runs around with no teamwork. I try to play coop and i was showing someone OFP when these guys were running around shooting the sky, jumping in trucks, swerving down the runway, and crashing into things. People say that if you want good realistic combat you should join a clan but i can't dedicate too much time due to my job. As it is i nip in when there isn't anything to do and talk on the forums and then play to ridiculous hours in the morning where you tolerance for stupid people really lacks and it puts you off MP altogether. OFP is a game where you need to be fresh and ready for, it's not something you can do properly when you're drunk or just for fun when you're tired.

[N.o.R.S.u 0]

Well by joining clan it doesn't mean that the clan becomes your life. I joined clan because I wanted to have good multiplayer experience. It doesn't meant you have to play OFP mp every day if you join a clan.

One thing I hate in OFPs mp is the de_dust phenomenon . This means that the same mission is played all over again, again, again... *cough* Battlefield1985 *cough*. Luckily there are some servers that run coops only.

I haven't seen true teamwork very much in CTFs, CTIs, C&Hs etc. This is probably because the most popular maps are filled with respawning vehicles, G36s and other tools of deathmatch. CTFs with limited amount of vehicles are good, you have to be more careful because they aren't going to respawn from nowhere. Deathmatch maps are the reason why I love coops, somehow in coops players automatically work as a team (as long as there is good leader).

A good example how coop makes the squad work together is when I was playing in LAN with my friends. My friends always liked mindless deathmatch games like SoF, Unreal Tournament etc. (though nothing beats pawnshop map in SoF with 10 players ) but when I showed them OFP things changed. At first they didn't like the game much but when we played nice coop mission, everybody just wanted more and more. Then we tried basic CTF, but only for few minutes because they found it boring and lacking the athmosphere that coop had.