FP : DR - News & Discussion

[Viiiper 0]

Just to help out FYI ;)

@ Scruffy

Enemy 1

Enemy 2

Enemy 3 - kills MARSOC player ;)

You never see him and neither did the player ;)

image sub 100kb

and I agree, flying dead cams & seagulls ;)

[ricbar89 0]

Its quite impractical of clicking around in menus and such with a hand controll. :j: ;)

Was just fine in OFP:Elite. ;)

[Guest]

I must admit, with those latest videos the game looks very fun and immersive. In fact, so much that i am not going to compare it to Arma 2 anymore. It's obviously a completely different style of game, and you know what?

I like it.

[scruffy 21]

Just to help out FYI ;)

@ Scruffy

Enemy 1

Enemy 2

Enemy 3 - kills MARSOC player ;)

You never see him and neither did the player ;)

So why did the deathcam follow Nr.2 then?

[froggyluv 2130]

The island looks bland and sparse, its seems to be populated with small huts and clumps of trees no diversity ..will their be any large towns or villages?..the one thing i do look the like of is the command interface, specially where you can have your squad assault and clear out a building.should have something like that implemented in arma2.

Have to agree here. It's easy and quite popular to mock BI for their shiny cows, Sims 1 like civies, butterflys, birds etc... but as a whole these things add a feeling of 'life' to the land and add some spice to the mission makers arsenal. Here, although certain aspects of the firefights look fun, it just feels like a lifeless Island. Take said hut area, rinse, repeat will get old after a while...

Overall it looks like they have done some nice things and until I get my hands on a demo and get the 'feel' of the game I'll reserve judgement.

[Colossus 2]

It's far from a OFP game, but it looks ok. I'm not going to buy it, however, it's a principle matter. Yes, this may sound a bit fanatical but it's just rude to call this OFP. It wouldn't matter who had the rights to the name, not in this condition.

[von_paulus 0]

It's far from a OFP game, but it looks ok. I'm not going to buy it, however, it's a principle matter. Yes, this may sound a bit fanatical but it's just rude to call this OFP. It wouldn't matter who had the rights to the name, not in this condition.

Couldn't agree more. I was just thinking that.

Currently, I'm leaning towards this position, and I'm not a fanatical person. It's a small principle matter. I've to think really even if I like the demo.

Like I've already stated in DR's forum, it's the name... the name... the name... [to sound like Kurtz in Apocalypse Now]

[TeRp 1]

I like the thermal imaging, absolutely great.

Something I missed in both ArmA and ArmA 2, and will most likely be missing for a long time when staying with ArmA ;)

[Grimnirsson 0]

Your point is that since no one here has played the game, we can't pass judgement on it. If that argument was taken to its logical conclusion, no one would be allowed to say anything, either good or bad about it. But you seem to think that the only valid opinion to have of the game is a positive one, because the publisher thinks it's a good game!

Well no shit, what did you expect them to say?

I do agree that some people around here take the OFPDR hating to irrational extremes, but all you're doing is making yourself look like a very gullible hypocrite by treating marketing spin as gospel.

What you try to build here is far from a logical conclusion. If there's a company out there that has produced only shit so far gamewise, then it might be reasonable to assume their next game will be shit, too. Afaik CM has done many very good games, they have the knowledge, the people and the money to produce a worthy Flashpoint sequel. So the only logical conclusion actually is that one has more reasons to think the game will be good than to guess it will be a big fail. Marketing spin as gospel...read around this forum and you'll certainly find examples of that, plenty...

It's far from a OFP game, but it looks ok. I'm not going to buy it, however, it's a principle matter. Yes, this may sound a bit fanatical but it's just rude to call this OFP.

No, it doesn't sound fanatical, it sounds downright stupid. In my world there's room for two true sequels.

Grim

[Viiiper 0]

So why did the deathcam follow Nr.2 then?

When you die the cam does not point to the person laying down the final blow, it cam pans your body, if an enemy was there it was coincidence.

Hope it helps...

[echo1 0]

Afaik CM has done many very good games, they have the knowledge, the people and the money to produce a worthy Flashpoint sequel. So the only logical conclusion actually is that one has more reasons to think the game will be good than to guess it will be a big fail.

Apples and oranges... Making computer software is not like making cars - just because you're good at making one type doesn't mean that you are good at making them all. CM may have made a load of racing games, and the occasional FPS (like the thoroughly mediocre IGI2) but here they are in uncharted territory. Bare in mind that it took BIS something like 5-10 years to develop the original OFP despite the fact that they had already made some games before. It's not a straightforward process, there's a lot that could go wrong.

Even if they had made a Milsim before, your argument would still be invalid. Just because something before was good doesn't mean that the next one is automatically going to be good. Ever notice how most film sequels are shit? Same principle applies. Just look at ArmA I...

Marketing spin as gospel...read around this forum and you'll certainly find examples of that, plenty...

Tarring everyone with the same brush really doesn't affect the validity of what I'm saying. As I've said, some people around here may be idiots, but not everyone is, thank you very much :)

Edited August 11, 2009 by echo1

[Guest]

Apples and oranges... Making computer software is not like making cars - just because you're good at making one type doesn't mean that you are good at making them all. CM may have made a load of racing games, and the occasional FPS (like the thoroughly mediocre IGI2) but here they are in uncharted territory. Bare in mind that it took BIS something like 5-10 years to develop the original OFP despite the fact that they had already made some games before. It's not a straightforward process, there's a lot that could go wrong.

Even if they had made a Milsim before, your argument would still be invalid. Just because something before was good doesn't mean that the next one is automatically going to be good. Ever notice how most film sequels are shit? Same principle applies. Just look at ArmA I...

Tarring everyone with the same brush really doesn't affect the validity of what I'm saying. As I've said, some people around here may be idiots, but not everyone is, thank you very much :)

Also take into acount CM's attempt at racing games fail epicly too. I am a fellow racing simulation fan, and if their idea of combat simulation is the same as their idea of racing simulation..

YOU ARE ALL SCREWED

[Grimnirsson 0]

thank you very much

You're welcome :D

I don't think we will change each others opinion on that, so let's agree to disagree. I'm rather tired of the ArmA vs FDR debates since it makes no sense, really. I'll wait and play and see and then form my opinion on the CM game. Since BIS is not really eager to convince us that we'll also get an ArmA2 for the 360 the whole point is moot anyway. There's only the Codies game on my 360 and I hope it will be good. That's all.

Enjoy your games, whatever you play.

Grim

[Maddmatt 1]

Who says it will be 'simpler'? And how do you define 'simple' here? Where do you think is ArmA2 more 'difficult'? And is more difficult the same as more realistic? To pepper any debate here with such assumptions and guessing doesn't make sense at all. When we are able to play and judge the game after its release then we can draw real comparisons, then it will be possible to say which game is 'simpler' (in the sense of less 'realistic', or even in the sense of 'it plays smoother and better'...). Even those here who are open to a second milsim always seem to have this little bias and I don't know why this is so. There's no reason to think that CM will trifle with the name 'Flashpoint' and rushing out an arcade shooter. I will believe them, that they want to create the most tense milsim ever and then see if the game is actually what they say it is - the tree is known by its fruit...

Oh FFS we know it's going to be simpler, all you need to do it watch the gameplay videos and read/watch the interviews. I wasn't bashing the game, just posting my judgement from the videos. And yes we are perfectly allowed to judge a game we haven't played, who cares if the judgement isn't 100% correct if we are aware of that.

You probably haven't even played ArmA 2. From those OFP2 gameplay videos it is very obvious that it is simpler.

It is simpler because it's not going for the exact same people as ArmA 2.

Also, simpler does not necessarily mean less realistic. Although in some ways it will be (shot in the legs = no sprinting, lol). And possibly more realistic in other ways, like the Javelin.

Anyway I don't really care for the OPF2 vs ArmA 2 fan fight that's going on all over the internet. As I said, I'll happily play both.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Maddmatt

[scruffy 21]

When you die the cam does not point to the person laying down the final blow, it cam pans your body, if an enemy was there it was coincidence.

Hope it helps...

I'm still not conviced as the camera exactly follows the small sidestep he does in the last second ;)

But even if I'm wrong, the flying camera is a fact :(

[Leopardi 0]

LOL at the dumbest AI ever. You can just stroll around the room, take your time and shoot the AI that's watching the door, then the other one just starts shooting the door when you are standing next to him. It was looking promising but the AI is such a letdown I don't think I'm gonna buy the game. Rather save my money for BF:BC2.

[Praelium 0]

The game has a certain charm to it, but that's because of it's faults. The animations are strange, running looks very slow, sounds aren't so good, ect. While these don't detract from the gameplay, they definitely give me the nostalgic feeling of 007: Goldeneye.

Anyways, I'll try the demo and decided if it's worth buying for myself.

By the way, has anybody noticed that Codemasters has a way of hyping things that aren't that great? I mean, they'll be talking about how the whole map is playable within a mission, but Arma has that and BIS never advertised it like it was a big deal. It bothers me because people who have never played Arma or even the original OFP will assume that this is new when it's not, and Codemasters should get they're audience hyped by the gameplay rather than depending on their ignorance of other games.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Praelium

[bonchie 39]

Graphically, those latest play through videos have given me a better impression. The smoke and atmospheric effects seem great. I agree the island doesn't look near as well done as ArmA II but it seems to serve it's purpose and the draw distance appears to be pretty good.

The fighting left something to be desired to me. It seemed like playing COD/BIA in an open world. That could be good or bad since I've never played COD or BIA in an open world setting. The AI seem to have plenty of quirks, but I'll have to play it myself to know for sure how they react. They take cover well and surpress so that's a start.

The problem I see is that it seems to be the same thing over and over. Small squad of 3 enemies that you must take out here, then another 3 guys 100 meters over here, 100 meters over here, so on and so forth. I didn't see any real purpose to how they were positioned except to funnel the player in a certain direction.

I think that is, for all it's problems, where OFP and ArmA II set themselves apart. It just feels different when you come across a patrolling squad or a platoon of men in ArmA, like nothing you'd feel in any other game. It never feels like they are carefully placed and you also get a random sensation to enemy units, like they could be anywhere and move anywhere, despite there downfalls with taking cover. It's an aquired taste I guess but I like it. Here it appears, like most FPS games, that enemy squads are tethered to a certain area of cover and will remain there until you eliminate them. Move up 100 meters, rinse, and repeat. Leaves alot to be desired.

I thought the beach assault mission was silly. If you have choppers and you know there are AT weapons ahead, then why the hell would you send the APC's in right away? Obviously it was a ploy to keep the player moving fast through the mission guidelines, i.e. if you don't move up now and kill these set groups of soldiers your tanks will die, but I didn't really like it. Seemed to almost force a rambo style of gameplay. As fast and unrealistic as the narrator was fighting he still only managed to keep a single APC alive. If the mission would of been played right, in a slow and realistic manner, I don't see how you could accomplish the task.

But I'm nitpicking. Overall the game seems fun. Doesn't seem much like ArmA II at all to me. Totally different feel and style.

---------- Post added at 05:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:31 PM ----------

I just don't understand the hatred between Flashpoint2 & Arma2 and please don't tell me it does not exist, this thread is some 200+ pages of it.

I take both games and go from there. I rarely post as the flak is intense and who needs it with RL taking primary point in life. Games are supposed to be R&R.

It was bad @ Cm forums I had to move the Arma2 from the OFP2 forum to the main gamers offtopic, ridiculous... life goes on. ;)

anyway looking forward to more BIS improvements. :bounce3:

I read the Codies forum and you never waste an oppurtunity to bash ArmA II, to the point where you go way overboard also.

You are as biased as many here are, just on the side of DR.

Edited August 11, 2009 by bonchie

[von_paulus 0]

No, it doesn't sound fanatical, it sounds downright stupid. In my world there's room for two true sequels.

Grim

You call stupidity to a principle matter?

I'll never understand why some people are always so aggressive towards others ideas and ethics. Doesn't it also sound stupid?

[Heatseeker 0]

The one thing i honestly dont like is because 1st person is like this...

-jBKKV2V8eU

Its much worse than even the traditional first person shooter.

Its a shame they didnt make it like flashpoint, with free aim .

Its the one thing that should have been done much better, the rest of it looks alright.

[Sennacherib 0]

Originally Posted by daithi View Post

My 2c....

The CM OFP II hardcore demo looks OK to me.... I'm a huge OFP fan that was seriously let down by ARMA. I played,I waited for the patch, I patched, I played, I waited and patched.... and so on.... in the end I just lost the will to continue so gave up. I didn't buy ARMA II because of my experience of Arma I(although have played it), I do think that I will buy DR my thinking is that "it HAS to be better than ARMA v1.0" - if it isn't well then I'm gonna be down €30, paid a heck of a lot more for the Arma SE.

I do think that CM have made the Hardcore video to appeal to fans of OFP, probably not to the guys that will stick to Arma I & II no matter what.

BIS have had 2 bites at the cherry and have failed to deliver

exactly my thought + i hate the lighting which is really awfull (shining cows, roofs and metal surfaces). In rl, i have never seen shiny metals like that.

btw, i hate also the robotic voices, they break all the pleasure to play at arma 1,2

[Viiiper 0]

I read the Codies forum and you never waste an oppurtunity to bash ArmA II, to the point where you go way overboard also.

You are as biased as many here are, just on the side of DR.

I played A1 & A2, I own 2 copies (real bought disks) of A2 I support and host 2x dedicated boxes running 4 games of A2 24/7..... I don't bash A2 any more than anyone else that has issues with it.

OFP2 uses similar techniques as A2 for spawning in the enemy, there's no magic super force roaming the lands of A2, it's all trigger events same as OFP2.... For a first attempt by Cm I'm impressed.

You want to point fingers, go read 200+ pages of constructive opinions before you (this thread).

:p

[bonchie 39]

OFP2 uses similar techniques as A2 for spawning in the enemy, there's no magic super force roaming the lands of A2, it's all trigger events same as OFP2.... For a first attempt by Cm I'm impressed.

You say that but where is the proof? Every game video I've seen so far is the same thing. Small squads by a certain piece of cover that you kill, then you move up and take out another small squad sitting by this piece of cover, etc. Seems very static. I haven't witnessed anyone attempting to flank and their aim is horrid. No patrolling squads have been seen.

Contrast to ArmA II, which yes has it's problems, but also has some very impressive use of AI at times. It's very engrossing to approach a field only to see a group of 10+ soldiers walking across it in formation with a group of cows spread around. Or to approach an enemy camp only to have one group take off flanking you while the others attempt to pin you down. The other day I was playing a campaign mission, walking through the woods approaching an objective, and came across an enemy fireteam stalking around the other side of a large lake. They never saw me until we opened up. Then there are the large set piece battles.

How they got there (spawning or whatever) doesn't really matter to me. They get there convincingly and the island feels like it's full of random enemy presence doing random things, at least during the campaign missions. You also constantly come across random friendly squads patrolling and engaging enemies they come across. I was playing Manhattan today and heard AK fire. About 500 meters to the west I came across a friendly squad engaging an enemy squad in the middle of the woods. Both were patrolling and ran into each other.

I'm not saying DR doesn't have these kinds of things. I'm just saying I've yet to see it in the gameplay videos released so far. I certainly hope it isn't an open world version of most corridor shooters, in terms of AI and their placement/behavior. At this point that is all I've seen though.

Edited August 12, 2009 by bonchie

[Guest]

My version of the new take the beach video:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6_RRG4r-g0&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6_RRG4r-g0&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

New DR Video showing Hardcore Mode:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKAcjwln7Wk&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKAcjwln7Wk&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

"Hardcore mode strips everything. No HUD, No Compass..."

What soldier has no compass? It's a basic survival tool you planks!

Edited August 12, 2009 by Guest

[kavoven 4]

My version of the new take the beach video:

Looks way better than the OFP 2 version. :)