FP : DR - News & Discussion

[IronPyramid 0]

I wish that with all these previews, there was more gameplay footage. I guess I'm spoiled with all the many video's of ArmA 2 gameplay, and I'm not even talking about the faction vids, but the old 08 GDC presentations.

Codemasters have some big shoes to fill under the name of Operation Flashpoint, so it is probably risky for them to release too much for the chance that fans will be disappointed. I know I sure was with the train wreck of a trailer that showed less than a minute of gameplay.

[mr.g-c 6]

Quote[/b] ] I can see all your after is a flame debate but like a wise soldier, you will have to look elsewhere.

Hmm no, all i'm after is laughing about OFP DR most likely failure at us simulation freaks (no doubt shooter kiddies will love it).

Also in the Preview you posted, i can see nothing else different besides a totally biased preview by that magazine, hailing FP DR at every point possible.

Please don't sell that to us as "I hope you get a clearer picture".

[Viiiper 0]

Quote[/b] ] I can see all your after is a flame debate but like a wise soldier, you will have to look elsewhere.

Hmm no, all i'm after is laughing about OFP DR most likely failure at us simulation freaks (no doubt shooter kiddies will love it).

Also in the Preview you posted, i can see nothing else different besides a totally biased preview by that magazine, hailing FP DR at every point possible.

Please don't sell that to us as "I hope you get a clearer picture".

Firstly your talking to a sim freak currently playing ED Black Shark & Arma1.

Secondly tell me what mag/ preview review is not bias... my cynical view is they all are only the real community hard core says a dog is a dog (as long as you say it with respect). Your calling time on a title not even released, I could do alot worse with ARMA2, but I don't because I think BIS are doing a great job, I think the sequel (Arma2) will be much more than Arma1 fixed and lastly I personally prefer 2 games/ sims/ titles to play this year and for the next 4-5 rather than one.

It amazes me every time (general comment) how so many (BIS & CM members) rant on and on (I'm not ref. to you or your post). It's as if there were two goals, one fail one succeed....

/rant over

p.s. I hope the new forums get the old smilies...

[max power 21]

I'm not sure that a couple of weeks makes the preview outdated. If they were playing it at codemasters, likely they were playing the latest stable version. It's new to these forums as far as I know at any rate. I'm sure the game hasn't gone from ugly terrain streaming, lemmings AI, sub alpha to gold in 2 weeks.

[Viiiper 0]

I'm not sure that a couple of weeks makes the preview outdated.  If they were playing it at codemasters, likely they were playing the latest stable version.  It's new to these forums as far as I know at any rate.  I'm sure the game hasn't gone from ugly terrain streaming, lemmings AI, sub alpha to gold in 2 weeks.

Sorry I'm totally lost in your post...

The first preview Mr.C posted on I commented on was more than a few weeks ago.

The preview I posted was more recent.

Where the 'Gold' comes from is beyond me? The game OFP-DR is not 'GOLD' if your referring to that.

I'm not playing timeline gods here, the German preview is older than the recent one I posted, when the German mag. preview wants to publish is up to them, the week they get it or serveral weeks after as they put their articles together, I don't know, I don't care...

And to be honest it does not interest me... How old was the latest Arma2 video release before BIS published it? (I don't know I don't care) all I know is it is a honest representation of it's state today. The same with OFP-DR.

[walker 0]

Hi all

From seeing the latest videos and hearing the previews by the media; I get the feeling of a rush job because the publisher is running out of cash.

I also heard that the maximum number of entities is less than 100. That is barely a platoon per side. And only two sides.

That is way too low; you will get no complex interactions or emergent behaviours at those levels.

Even BIS's OFP1 could run 700 entities per side.

ArmA1 can run to 2000 entities plus per side.

Even in ArmA1 MP it is not unusual to run in exess of 1000 AI entitities.

Lack of complexity is the deal breaker.

Kind regards walker

[IronPyramid 0]

More and more I am becoming convinced that CM bit off so much more than they could chew, that they're rushing to get this game out before suffocation concludes their business. A lame metaphor, but I just cannot see the resemblance between what little gameplay has been shown (which could be why), and the previews toting all its amazing features being arrayed perfectly each time the game is played. And the number of players, and ai available just makes the whole thing worse. Why oh why, did the name of OFP have to be jeopardized thus?!

[bravo 6 0]

like it was said before.. the name is nothing..

We must get this into our head. Its just a name! What matters is the people that created our dream land.

I say: ArmA2 for life!

<s>Operation Dragon Rice. It will fit like a glove in 2009.</s>

edit: respecting Maddmatt comment.

[IronPyramid 0]

I suppose you're right, but now I know where BIS was coming from to dispute the claims being made by CM about their game as a result from the original. But that is between them, so I guess I'll just have to block those first two words out whenever I read about DR.

[Maddmatt 1]

Sounds like Codemasters needs to take some extra time on this game.

Well the only thing that's going to make me buy it is a damn good singleplayer campaign with a decent storyline that I can enjoy. That's all I'm interested in here. For the rest I'm sticking to BIS games because I don't see anything beating the mod community or the MP.

It's clearly far behind in graphics but at least that means it should run well on weaker PC's. No excuse for performance problems there!

Even if it's no competition for BIS games it could still be fun for some people.

Let's not go down to the level of the CM forums with all the bashing

[danowen 0]

as ive said before it looks more and more like SOLDNER.

[SWAT_BigBear 0]

Sounds like Codemasters needs to take some extra time on this game.

How about a 3rd restart with it's own name? yea, I agree

[Maddmatt 1]

Sounds like Codemasters needs to take some extra time on this game.

How about a 3rd restart with it's own name? yea, I agree

I agree on using their own name. It's no Operation Flashpoint! But still, could be a decent fun game. Maybe better than the usual 6 hour shooter crap that we get charged the same damn price for...

[max power 21]

I'm not sure that a couple of weeks makes the preview outdated.  If they were playing it at codemasters, likely they were playing the latest stable version.  It's new to these forums as far as I know at any rate.  I'm sure the game hasn't gone from ugly terrain streaming, lemmings AI, sub alpha to gold in 2 weeks.

Sorry I'm totally lost in your post...

The first preview Mr.C posted on I commented on was more than a few weeks ago.

The preview I posted was more recent.

Where the 'Gold' comes from is beyond me? The game OFP-DR is not 'GOLD' if your referring to that.

I'm not playing timeline gods here, the German preview is older than the recent one I posted, when the German mag. preview wants to publish is up to them, the week they get it or serveral weeks after as they put their articles together, I don't know, I don't care...

And to be honest it does not interest me... How old was the latest Arma2 video release before BIS published it? (I don't know I don't care) all I know is it is a honest representation of it's state today. The same with OFP-DR.

Oh, I wasn't implying that you were saying it has gone gold or anything like that. That 'gold' thing was just hyperbole to say that I don't think that a couple of weeks was outdated. I did misread your post and thought that you were saying that the preview christian posted was only a couple of weeks old.

[SaBrE_UK 0]

I've barely seen a negative preview for any game. The similarity of the DR previews obviously means CM are only showing certain parts of the game off, which is understandable. I personally would not make a conclusion of the game from a mere glimpse of gameplay, though. I'm sure reviews will offer information on some of the lacking areas of DR, but a demo is confirmed and we can make a judgement of sorts based on that.

In the last few months (although I thought to notice it for years), there has been a change in power from the previewer/reviewer to the publisher. Read more here.

Quote[/b] ]From the article:

"In games media there has been a swing in power from the editorial to the advertiser. Media advertising has definitely suffered in the economic downturn and with game publishers nervous they are thinking harder about their advertising spend and want more bang for their buck. Even though unethical, major coverage is expected in return for advertising dollars and fear of a low review score is almost palpable. Anything less that a 9/10 is now considered a failure by some publishers – if game critics agree that a game sucks, sales can suffer, share prices can drop and heads can roll.

Hence, I will no longer totally trust a preview or review apart from some select amateur ones. Seriously, I found Oblivion, Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, Crysis and many more top-rated games severely lacking. I might be asking for too much, but I did not think any of those games deserved the high scores they got. Maybe OFP's replayability and customisability spoiled me, I don't know.

EDIT: I lie, I do listen to previews but try to separate hype and opinion from fact. If they say "DR's realism is unparalleled", I don't blindly believe it. If they say "The javelin has to be set up and configured before firing" I believe it, since it's more objective.

[Baff1 0]

I can't think of a time in my life when this was different.

I've ceretainly never placed a magasine advert without getting a feature.

Reviews are different however. A large porprotion of a magasines income comes from the asking price on the cover.

They have to offer fidelity to their subscribers too, or go out of business.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Should we bet that CM is going to milk their customers via DLC?

Maybe players will get an usefull editor after they've downloaded+payed for five "boosterpacks"?

[KorpeN 0]

Should we bet that CM is going to milk their customers via DLC?  

Maybe players will get an usefull editor after they've downloaded+payed for five "boosterpacks"?

Yeah I think they gonna milk them like BIS did with the useless queen's gambit which included some reskined units.I bought two copies of ArmA and two of the expansion so we have 120euros.So all companies make what they can to make money.Whats your point blaming CM?

[Deadfast 43]

Actually Queens Gambit had a pretty decent campaign...

And on top of that I'm willing to bet DR is gonna cost the price of ArmA + QG.

[walker 0]

Hi all

In reply to SaBrE_UK.

What you say about advertisers controling the content of some media is true.

It is also the reason that user reviews in New Media are increasingly replacing the older journalistic reviews and in particular print media is suffering as a result. The first to suffer this were the travel writers; now only the likes of Lonely Plannet, Rough Guide and a few others survive. Most of us use the internet to decide where to go. It has also taken over in the Car and White goods markets.

Only journalists and media who can maintain the respect of users can compete in the age of blogs and public forums.

In the Media it is those that realise that their reputation is their brand that have a future.

Rep is the key word now among media journalists hoping to maintain a job within media; as well as those media outlets seeking to maintain and create a brand. Your Journalistic Reputation is the same as any brand name.

Whore your brand and you will only catch an STD (Sales Tumble Disease).

Kind Regards walker

[Mafia101 0]

So, in this dutch video. At 08.00 guy show some posters on wall, and there are some vehicles :P although you can only see clearly USMC vehicles: http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/6453/ofp2vehicles.jpg

Have fun hehe..

[MehMan 0]

That's old.

[Maddmatt 1]

Hence, I will no longer totally trust a preview or review apart from some select amateur ones. Seriously, I found Oblivion, Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, Crysis and many more top-rated games severely lacking. I might be asking for too much, but I did not think any of those games deserved the high scores they got. Maybe OFP's replayability and customisability spoiled me, I don't know.

EDIT: I lie, I do listen to previews but try to separate hype and opinion from fact. If they say "DR's realism is unparalleled", I don't blindly believe it. If they say "The javelin has to be set up and configured before firing" I believe it, since it's more objective.

Yea I agree with that. Reviews are not trustworthy. Games from big publishers clearly get put in a better light by journalists, especially in previews.

I've seen one or two 'bad' previews, but they were games where it seemed like the developers had organised the preview. When it's from a big publisher, suddenly it's an awesome game

Not always the case though. If you look at a good variety of reviews you tend to see some honesty creep in.

Always good to see some player comments, watch some gameplay footage and try to judge it yourself before you buy it.

Game review scores are a joke though. How can so many games get 80s or 90s? That should be reserved for the best. 50% should be considered average, yet it seems like a game scores 60% when it is crap

[SaBrE_UK 0]

Game review scores are a joke though. How can so many games get 80s or 90s? That should be reserved for the best. 50% should be considered average, yet it seems like a game scores 60% when it is crap  

I agree, although I do tend to take more heed of the text rather than the score at the end; something the reviewer says is a minor niggle, I may believe is a fundamental flaw. That's why I think a star-system might be advantageous to those that don't mind thinking a little more before buying. I think getting even a single star should be a feat and still signify a good game, and getting three or more should signal a truly excellent game. Perhaps with a maximum of five stars that are reserved for true classics, not just the latest pretty graphics. Just some whimsical thoughts.

We'll have to see what FP:DR gets compared to ARMA2 in reviews (although it means little to me). I know all the reviewers of the main magazines/websites won't be looking into the game's strengths and limitations like one of us lot, so I expect the things we see as a step back in DR, such as low unit amounts, won't concern the reviewers. Hence DR will be seen as a revolutionary game in some respects at least, and ARMA2 might be seen as too "hardcore" and less immediately accessible. This might reflect the truth to an extent (we'll see when the games are released), but reviewers are paid to give hundreds of games a quick play through and not find the depths the games actually have.

I remember the reviews for ARMA1- I saw little mention of the mission editor, which reflects the reviewers' lack of interest in persevering with the game after review, even if they gave it a good score. I type too much.

[Deadfast 43]

Stars instead of numeric points wouldn't make a difference.

In the end you'd end up with 95% of games getting 5 stars anyway...