FP : DR - News & Discussion

[jakerod 254]

some advisors do have military experience and STILL don't know jack.

Like stores-men who talk as if they are tried veterans but who have only used a weapon on the ranges. I may know nothing of the matters that they tackle but it would be nice to understand why there are errors.

CM have already had a problem like this before with the Blackhawk, they remodelled parts to make it a Seahawk. As was claimed by Clive Lindop after it was brought up on their forums.

It is nice to see the devs interact in such a way.

Are we sure it wasn't a Knighthawk. Its listed on that page somewhere. It looks more like a blackhawk than a seahawk at least to me.

[xnodunitx 0]

Yeah they did change it but texture only, in term of the model changes from blackhawk to seahawk they didn't do anything.

Though that I could forgive if the vehicles weren't so damned shiny, again we come to the gloss painted military vehicles, how can you begin to claim have realism when the vehicles are painted in gloss.

I just wish they'd stop touting it as "Flashpoint" as if it is "THE" flashpoint, kind of an insult to the original and BIS. I'll be curious to see wether or not they go to court.

EDIT: Woops I was editing my post to be nicer, did'n't realise you quoted me on it DM.

[dm 9]

Yeah they did rather fork that one up royally.  The tailwheel is still in the place of the blackhawk (and single tire), doors still the same as a blackhawk, engine covers are still on to make it look like a blackhawk, no extra equipment on the body and nose and I imagine the gear isn't "pushed out" like the seahawks.

In all fairness, the new MH-60S looks pretty much like a regular blackhawk. It has the regular undercarriage config, the regular doors, the regular esss "wings", and all the ir suppresors on the engines:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/MH-60S_Sea_Hawk.jpg

http://aycu21.webshots.com/image/42100/2001780432252582155_rs.jpg

the only major external visual difference from a regular UH-60L, aside from the fact its grey and has "NAVY" plastered down the side, is the little fairing on the nose for mounting a FLIR turret.

[BLSmith2112 0]

yeah, lots of confusion with both these games now.

hehe, remember this?

Talk about confusion.

[Second 0]

Ohh yeah. Had forgot that. Russian publisher playing by his own rules wasnt' it?

Btw what happened to this? As if i recall game already was on the shelves of stores when this was noticed.

[ricbar89 0]

About the PLA "police men", CM have changed it now.

http://community.codemasters.com/forum....ount=51

Good to see they're making the effort to fix mistakes.

[Baff1 0]

Though that I could forgive if the vehicles weren't so damned shiny, again we come to the gloss painted military vehicles, how can you begin to claim have realism when the vehicles are painted in gloss.

They get dirty.

You just have to drive them through the mud first.

This game is on the same engine as Dirt. Made by the same people.

I'm looking forward to the vehicles.

[Deadfast 43]

This game is on the same engine as Dirt. Made by the same people.

Sony?

Actually I agree - if there's one part DR will excel at it will be vehicles

[Lepardi 0]

This game is on the same engine as Dirt. Made by the same people.

It's not the same exact engine made by codemasters&sony. It's an engine made based on that engine.

[xnodunitx 0]

Though that I could forgive if the vehicles weren't so damned shiny, again we come to the gloss painted military vehicles, how can you begin to claim have realism when the vehicles are painted in gloss.

They get dirty.

You just have to drive them through the mud first.

This game is on the same engine as Dirt. Made by the same people.

I'm looking forward to the vehicles.

Not quite what I meant, compare. http://www.flickr.com/photos/sir_polaris/3292802187/sizes/o/

to

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped....005.jpg

If they do get dirty then that is great to hear, but if the vehicles specular remains default such as shown in that first picture its going to look very strange.

Picky I know but I just would like to have seen the military vehicles painted in dull, unshiny, ugly flat paint like the real thing.

[Lepardi 0]

Though that I could forgive if the vehicles weren't so damned shiny, again we come to the gloss painted military vehicles, how can you begin to claim have realism when the vehicles are painted in gloss.

They get dirty.

You just have to drive them through the mud first.

This game is on the same engine as Dirt. Made by the same people.

I'm looking forward to the vehicles.

Not quite what I meant, compare. http://www.flickr.com/photos/sir_polaris/3292802187/sizes/o/

to

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped....005.jpg

If they do get dirty then that is great to hear, but if the vehicles specular remains default such as shown in that first picture its going to look very strange.

Picky I know but I just wish someone would make a game with military vehicles painted in dull, unshiny, ugly flat paint like the real thing. Well there is DCS: Black Shark I suppose.

It looks like that beacause it's WIP.

[xnodunitx 0]

I do hope so.

[SaBrE_UK 0]

Codemasters is having some problems:

Quote[/b] ]

Codemasters COO departs unexpectedly

Codemasters' Chief Operating Officer Tony Williams...left the company late last week, though Codemasters has made no announcement regarding this.

...Multiple calls to Codemasters were left unanswered.

Source

[SWAT_BigBear 0]

Codemasters is having some problems:

Quote[/b] ]

Codemasters COO departs unexpectedly

Codemasters' Chief Operating Officer Tony Williams...left the company late last week, though Codemasters has made no announcement regarding this.

...Multiple calls to Codemasters were left unanswered.

Source

I wanted to quote with humor, but instead I'm wondering how much he had to do with the actual development of DR?

[SaBrE_UK 0]

I'm just trying to make a fuss out of nothing

[Lepardi 0]

I do hope so.

And all the ingame footage are from the console versions so that's another reason why it looks crappy. But that also means console is their primary platform so it will be a crappy console-to-PC-port with additional resolution for textures.

[ManDay 0]

Don't you think this thread could serve a better purpose than bashing OFP.DR and defaming Codemaster? You may want to look at

ArmA2-Thread at OFP: DR-Forums and then this thread

and you may come to notice, why by now, so many of our fellow forum-members have decided to refrain from joining this discussion. Not saying that the ArmA2 thread is any better - you may conclude this on yourself - but I think we can definitely turn this into something more positive. Just my 2 cents.

Oh yes, luckily I have the option to inform you about this right here: Feel free to ignore Leopardi, his never ending mud-slinging and happily made-up "facts". What he says is, as so often, not true: OFP2 is not a console-to PC port. There are certain reasons why early versions of the engine are best presented on consoles.

[Grimnirsson 0]

Just ignore the bashing trolls here, stupidity doesn't deserve any response.

Grim

[Baff1 0]

It's a console port.

It's designed to have all the same features on each platform.

Consoles are the lowest common denominator. So those are the limitations they are programming for.

Fallout 3 is a console port too. So is Bioshock.

So being a console port doesn't make it a total write off for PC gamers. It can still be an excellent game worth playing.

But it's all platform. The thrill of experiencing the latest boundaries of computer science that technology has to offer is utterly removed from the equation.

They won't have the biggest battles EVAR! They won't have the most incredible scenary EVAR! They won't have the most multiplayers EVAR!

It won't be taking gaming one little evolutionary step closer to the HoloDeck.

It won't be "all it can be". It will be middle of the road. A compromise game.

It will hopefully be a damned good little game and in it's own way bring gameplay innovation to the genre I hope.

But in the end, as fun as Halo is, I have Crysis.

I enjoy both, but only one excites me.

[Grimnirsson 0]

Quote[/b] ]The thrill of experiencing the latest boundaries of computer science that technology has to offer is utterly removed from the equation.

You know what? More and more people play on a console because they are not interested in this 'thrill' at all. All they are interested in is playing games on a BIG HDTV often in a room with friends playing the same game on the same console and the same TV while downing a few beers. If not they like to play online without much problems and generelly they like to play their games without much problems. That's why the money is made now with games published for consoles. And that's why FP:DR is published for all platforms. If this means the PC boys don't get their usual 'thrill' then this is a small sacrifice for the publishers who want to make money and many players who want to play games in a comfortable manner.

Quote[/b] ]It will hopefully be a damned good little game and in it's own way advance gameplay standards I hope.

That's what we all hope, mate.

Grim

[Baff1 0]

That's cool.

Each to his own.

If you are just looking for a game to sit on the sofa and eat crisps in front of and to make games publishers rich.

I have no problem with that.

I'm into the art and the science more myself. Nothing wrong with you if you aren't.

I don't just welcome technical challenge, I seek it out.

I want to learn more about computers and programming; gaming is my prefered tool towards that end.

Different people are looking for different things in life.

[ManDay 0]

Despite all you say, it is no console port. Making up your own definition of a "port" doesn't make the above statement be more right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porting

Period.

[Baff1 0]

From your link.

Quote[/b] ]In computer science, porting is the process of adapting software so that an executable program can be created for a computing environment that is different from the one for which it was originally designed (e.g. different CPU, operating system, or third party library).

Software is portable when the cost of porting it to a new platform is less than the cost of writing it from scratch. The lower the cost of porting software, relative to its implementation cost, the more portable it is said to be.

It's all platfom mate. It's not just ported to PC, it's ported to PS3.

Giving it the big sales speil doesn't change how it is being made.

They aren't making 3 completely different softwares. They are making just one and adapting it to work on 3 different platforms.

Ask yourself, which platform do you think is their primary focus going to be on?

PC? PS3?

I personally consider it a no brainer that they are focusing on the Xbox 360. That's where they forsee the most sales.

[Balschoiw 0]

Seriously guys, I guess i´m not the only one who reads this thread to get new info on OFP DR as I´m not visiting the Codies forums that often. Lately all I can read is bashing and useless discussions.

Do we need that ?

At least the thread is named "FP: Latest news..."

Ok...just visited their forums. Nothing new. Speculations about something happening end of march and a thread for questions about the landscape.

Carry on guys

[Viiiper 0]

It's a console port.

It's designed to have all the same features on each platform.

Consoles are the lowest common denominator. So those are the limitations they are programming for.

Fallout 3 is a console port too. So is Bioshock.

So being a console port doesn't make it a total write off for PC gamers. It can still be an excellent game worth playing.

But it's all platform. The thrill of experiencing the latest boundaries of computer science that technology has to offer is utterly removed from the equation.

They won't have the biggest battles EVAR! They won't have the most incredible scenary EVAR! They won't have the most multiplayers EVAR!

It won't be taking gaming one little evolutionary step closer to the HoloDeck.

It won't be "all it can be". It will be middle of the road. A compromise game.

It will hopefully be a damned good little game and in it's own way bring gameplay innovation to the genre I hope.

But in the end, as fun as Halo is, I have Crysis.

I enjoy both, but only one excites me.

This post made me smile, someone has supposed inside info?

A game not so far away from this thread is being developed for cross platform release..... and I didn't need insider info for that statement.  

So your making a personal statement that OFP-DR will have the same feature on consoles as with the PC platform? well you did.

Let me enlighten you: it does not ..... FACT

Your