Dragon Rising has been released

[King Haggis 0]

Excellent analogy. Some people just want something that works and is of high quality. Other people will say, "hey its got a 5 year warranty so if its broken it'll get fixed" weird :)

Hey, aren't you that guy who's on everybody's ignore list? :p

[highfly 10]

well, i tried it a bit more, very nice looking, but not what I was waiting for.

Nice game, but far from Arma2.

IMHO neither Arma2 nor OFPDR could reach the height of first Operation Flashpoint, but the one coming the closest to it is Arma2, no doubt.

Great atmosphere in OFPDR, great sounds, there does not seem to be graphical flickering we find in arma, maybe less stupid IA (which sometimes is Arma fun killer), well it's certainly a good game, but it does not deserve the "Operation Flashpoint 2" name.

[Zipper5 74]

...

I can't believe that... They honestly thought that the game as it is in it's current state would be successful enough to create FIVE DLC packs? I don't think I've known any company that has done that, and even if they would, there's a lot greater possibility for them to do it as their game formulas are generally proven to sell.

But just... Wow... CM are quickly becoming my most hated game developer AND publisher...

[space 10]

Thats a bit unfair Luhgnut. BIS sucked alot of us in with amazing screenshots of ARMA2, but failed to point out that the game was unplayable on those settings.

CM did produce CGI trailers early on, but all their recent releases, Ive been able reproduce the graphics, even on my very average PC. Having said that is I had an unlimited budget for a PC, then ARMA2 would undoubtdly have better graphics than OFP.

OFP : DR is definitely going after a more mainstream market than ARMA2, and anyone who denies that is a fool.

[king homer 1]

OFP : DR is definitely going after a more mainstream market than ARMA2, and anyone who denies that is a fool.

I second that for sure, you can go a step further and say it wasn't even created for the casual PC gamer, no it feels more to be created as console game only.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Thats a bit unfair Luhgnut. BIS sucked alot of us in with amazing screenshots of ARMA2, but failed to point out that the game was unplayable on those settings.

My game isnt, it runs pretty much at the same 20something FPS no matter what settings i use because i am too cheap to buy a decent CPU for now. :p

The GPUside of things is no problem for my 4870.

But hey, OFPDR could never achieve the scale of ArmA2, and thus it is rather obvious that it runs better. ;)

[Zipper5 74]

I second that for sure, you can go a step further and say it wasn't even created for the casual PC gamer, no it feels more to be created as console game only.

And even then, people aren't liking it. The PC version of DR is hard to come by where I live, but the console versions are out in force. A number of people I know have the Xbox 360 or PS3 versions of DR, and all but 1 dislike it.

[highfly 10]

I second that for sure, you can go a step further and say it wasn't even created for the casual PC gamer, no it feels more to be created as console game only.

very sure, you can see it in the preferences, it lists an xbox controller, and in the fact that it does not seem to support TrackIR if I'm right.

The complete menu construction reflects a console state of mind

[MehMan 0]

Thats a bit unfair Luhgnut. BIS sucked alot of us in with amazing screenshots of ARMA2, but failed to point out that the game was unplayable on those settings.

Not really, I can get the same screenshots with my rig and it's not really top end. And I have good FPS. There have been screenshots to show the difference between all the different settings and the visual difference was minimal between normal and high. The differences started showing at normal to low, to very low.

[maturin 12]

Thats a bit unfair Luhgnut. BIS sucked alot of us in with amazing screenshots of ARMA2, but failed to point out that the game was unplayable on those settings.

What are you talking about? Besides view distance there is little difference between different Arma settings. Post processing is shit and you're better off without it. The sliders aren't even the primary factors behind framerate- AI and scripting does that. My laptop just tops minimum requirements and the game runs fine on Normal settings with the view distance at 6000 on a good day and 3000 for cluttered missions.

The basic quality of the graphics changes very little between settings. It's just about how much you can see. So both the strengths and weaknesses (crappy foliage and LoD engine, uninspired lighting and effects) are pretty much universal.

I understand that accurate critiques will provoke responses different from the ones you are looking for, but it's good practice.

[bangtail 0]

What are you talking about? Besides view distance there is little difference between different Arma settings. Post processing is shit and you're better off without it. The sliders aren't even the primary factors behind framerate- AI and scripting does that. My laptop just tops minimum requirements and the game runs fine on Normal settings with the view distance at 6000 on a good day and 3000 for cluttered missions.

The basic quality of the graphics changes very little between settings. It's just about how much you can see. So both the strengths and weaknesses (crappy foliage and LoD engine, uninspired lighting and effects) are pretty much universal.

I understand that accurate critiques will provoke responses different from the ones you are looking for, but it's good practice.

The guy is just trying to derail the thread. It's a mystery to me why he is even here if DR is so amazing.

Eth

[PuFu 4600]

Sorry for the delay with the review, had been caught in a number of stuff these days to at least play through the campaign, and mess with the editor before posting. But here we go:

I had very little expectations from the game really. I have been reading trough the lines of the CM forums before the release, and knew a lot of things will not be as advertised earlier on the development stage. Hell, i knew before A2 was released that this is not gonna be a military simulator.

I was thinking about dividing the review in SP and MP parts, but since the MP is just not there (lack of dedi servers, lack of JIP, lack of missions, i will just dedicate a paragraph to it.

Long Story Short

CM advertised this game in late 2007 as the true successor for OFP (which was also released to xbox as OFP: Elite in 2005). During the development process, financial gain, as well as some problems with a multi-platform build, as well as the engine picked for it (EGO - Dirt and Grid - racegame engine), they said it will end up being in another category altogether, as a tactical military shooter (hmm, that was suppose to be R6, GRAW, SWAT etc), and not competing directly with BIS games(and my review will not be a comparison of the 2 games), but featuring a number of realistic elements. Did it?

Story - 2/10

China attacks Skira Island, for petrol, which belongs to Russia. USMC are called to intervene (weird from Russia's part)....That is all what you will get during the game as well.

The lack of a proper story, featuring immersive dialogs, cut-scenes, or any other additional information makes the whole game experience dull and repetitive...All you do, for 11 missions which the campaign lasts, is to go and clear some areas, kill some PLA etc, but for no good reason..Yes, there is a war going on, and yes you are suppose to be just a grunt, but this is fucking retarded in the end. It stands no comparison to COD4 SP campaign, not even ArmA's campaign, that was suppose to be the weakest in the series (or was that QG expansion?).

Gameplay - 4/10

Repetitive, Dull....Repetitive, Dull....am i repeating myself now? Well, this is how it is.

Yes, this is a FPS game, the whole point is to shoot the enemy. But due to how the whole scenario is set, the fact that you got a vast environment to work with means little, since you are somewhat forced to follow a certain flag (i guess those are waypoints), to take advantage of the checkpoint system (you need to, since the game cheats on you so many times...). This is a 2 sided coin though. Let me explain:

1. the enemy is pre-placed or spawned in the same precise locations - you will find everyone in the same location after dieing, and loading the checkpoint. Replayability = 0.

2. there are several missions and or part of missions where AI is spawned in such a way that you will most likely be killed - behind you, in an area that you have just cleared and you are positive that there are no more enemies around. (POW escort mission - you are suppose to go around some enemy spec-op units, and even if you do, they will spawn behind you, several times, or in fact, over and over again, until you are not longer in the specific trigger).

You will learn to use certain exploits to play the game though, and stay alive and keep the squad you have with you standing as well - shooting from a distance, outside 200-300m means more or less you are not gonna get hit by the enemy AT ALL, not even by snipers.

Also, there is this sensation of being rushed from behind (most missions if not all, need to be completed in xx minutes). That leaves you no time to go around the map exploring, or taking the time to prepare an assault (not that the scenario requires or allows it). And i have tested it, the pace you need to move and kill on is pretty high, so it won't allow you to take a break and think about it..BTW, if you go around (there are few occasions where is possible, the behind enemy lines sensation is just not there, or at least the fact that the area is occupied by enemy units. It will be just empty, with no activity).

Also, i wanna talk a bit about the wounding system - it has been advertised that it is suppose to not be based on HP...well, it is. Yes, you bleed to death if you are hit. But you can patch yourself up, by looking at what appears to be a medical box of some sort. Still, the medics (you will always have one in your squad) can fully heal, ANY TYPE of wound by pointing some sort of magical syringe at you...Odd

I finished the game opening the MAP only ONCE, just too see how it looks...I haven't needed it otherwise

Controls - 5/10

in a very short and direct way to put it - BAD

Yes, you have an instantaneous reply there, but it's hardly plausible in most of the cases.

From not being able to hump over a small fence via action/interact key (well, you can, but only in certain places), to the fact that issuing orders or changing the ammo type stops your movement (in fact any sort of interaction that is happening on the HUD - changing weapons for instance via scroll), to the fact that you have no lean or roll options, no way to WALK instead of RUNNING all the time (self-kick in the ballz for stealthy missions and immersion)....

More about the command interface

- i found it to be very simplistic, not covering all my needs

- it is persistent - does not disappear after issuing an order - same for arty, which i used only when i was required by the mission to move on to next phase

- finished the campaign and never got around to how to assign specific orders to individual players...

Graphics 5/10

First, i don't really like those very weird post-precess effects added as a layer on top of what is rendered as a general rule...

DR uses those in numbers, (changing the weather conditions will use a different pp effect). The result is a brownish or greenish effect, that resembles with nothing i have seen with my own 2 eyes iRL.

It is an over-tinted, over-exposed picture in most of the cases, that gives a very sci-fi feeling to it (at least this is my POV).

The models, textures, etc, are sub-average. They are probably around 5.000 polys each (at most), and features such as parallax effects, bump/normal maps etc are not present, (specular is there in some strange sort of way), giving all the environment and units a very dusty feeling and look, missing a lot of details due to this...

LOD switching is also very obvious, and kicks back the level detail even back a few years back

Shading is weird and almost non-existent in terms of soft shadows, detail etc

Also the tree variation is not there, and the ground texture is just sooo ugly. Grass is rendered @ max 100-200m, but it is rendered when scope is on though).

The view distance advertised as 35km is bollocks, it is around 4km at most...

Also the HUD elements are a a piss. This also affected my Gameplay score - playing on hardcore removes the compass, as well as all other HUD elements. Playing on either normal or easy, gives you a very sort of radar that shows all the enemy position, and makes your life so much easier (tooo easy in fact).

The so advertised FLIR is pathetically implemented, and things like heat radiations, or buildings hear signature is not there. The only affected things are vehicles and units, but in such a way that it makes your life SOO easy, and has no relation to how a real FLIR system works...

The only thing good about this is the lighting of the streetlamps are buildings, as well as the particle effects (which are really really soft with the GPU/CPU)

Sounds 8/10

Besides the fact that environment sounds such as birds, tree leaves, crickets, and so forth (that would be adding to the environment) are missing, all the weapons and units sounds are crisp and accurate represented. Big plus here for proper recordings

The voice of your team-members are not robotic, they fit and merge better than i have expected.

I can't put here that the coms (scripted) between yourself and other squads/commander/hq are getting frustrating after a certain point ("How copy", "Solid copy" was pissing me so bad at the end of the game, mainly because it happens every 3 minuets during a ~5h SP gameplay....)

Also, no soundtrack, or environment music

AI 6/10

They have some smart moments. But those are rare.

Most of the time are pretty dumb and repetitive (seen no flanking, or suppressing so far, or fleeing scared to take defensive positions). But they do the job - they don't stay in the open if they got something to hide behind, the engagement radius is a bit small though, especially if they know where you are shooting from (outside the 300m ) but they are not reacting WHATSOEVER.

The Squad AI is obedient, but not really effective. They do what they are told, they don't really get stuck, and you can leave them to do what they want, on their own, without them loosing your formation.

Physics - 2/10

A very big and epic FAIL. All vehicles feel really strange to play with, funky response, from A to Z.

The most obvious problem is with the air vehicles, where you can rotate around the rotor axis 360 degrees and going 200 mph(?).

Flipping when hitting the trees and other indestructible objects etc...

Being able to jump out from speeding vehicles without problems, etc

Not fun

Editor - 8/10

The Best thing of the whole game would be the editor.

If it would be an internal one, would be even better, after a while it's getting tiresome to have the game start each time you want to preview it

But it features a script editor (LUA), and a lot of options for each entity created. I didn't get to play a lot with it myself, but fact is, it is user-friendly, it has great potential to be a great tool for user created missions/campaigns.

Pity about all the limitations that would require a whole set of workarounds and hacks to have the simplest mission.

Other

Things that have affected the scores of the above, but either fit in different categories, or multiple.

* FOV and first person view - wrong, just wrong. No peripheral view, the weapons is too big and static, and when it moves it seems to be a bit spasmodic

* the head-blob does not deny the feeling that you are actually sliding on a surface

* non-destructible environment (trees, bushes, fences etc)

* recoil animation is a big laugh. While it kicks back (by no means as real as they should, a lot less), in kicks in very jerky way..

* no free-look (added on top of the stupid FOV and size of things) give you head-aches trying to get your situation environment going. I know a lot of other games don't have it either, but at least they have a proper FOV for it.

* animations - all the animations are weird, and the transition between one and another is really bad. Moving, shooting and stances are uhuuuhu (if you know what i mean). The sole exception is reload animations and AT weapons assembly (to be picky, the only one where is an assembly and a disassemble as well is the Javelin..)

* all sights are 2d - no movement or motion sensation on those no matter what...HOLO sight is oval etc etc. ACOG elevation numbers cannot be read

* optimization - big plus. I know it is not the size you would be expecting. I know there are no more than 63 entities at the same time on the map at the same time at any given time etc...i know all that. But still, it works as intended, out of the box

* MP is crap. Nuff said (no MP missions out of the box -and little to no documentation from CM-, no dedi servers, no JIP).

* very little probability of modding tools

To Conclude:

This is not a bad game if you take it on parts. But the funny thing is i don't know where to place it. It has nothing on the scripted COD series Campaign story, it doesn't have the BF2 MP environment, it is not even close to ArmA2 complexity and immersion. It's sub-average though, couldn't really get the FUN out of it somehow.

Does it worth the 48,99€ (Steam version), or the 40€ (Retail -found it in a local gamestore). NO. You will get a short campaign (5h.20m for me to finish it, and completed all secondary objectives plus played is safe and as tactical as it allowed me to), no MP support, limitation towards making your own missions etc.

Wait for it to hit the bargain bin. It will soon enough

FINAL MARK:5

Edited October 8, 2009 by PuFu

[dmarkwick 261]

OFP : DR is definitely going after a more mainstream market than ARMA2, and anyone who denies that is a fool.

I think that's the gist of everyone's comments here.

But, it's not how the DR devs were bigging it up. I learned a long time ago not to get suckered by dev diaries and promo vids. (*cof* Oblivion *cof*)

I have to chuckle at all the posters who have been for months now bemoaning ArmA2's performance and abilities with the (now ludicrous) statements that OFP : DR will blow everyone away with its awesomeness and fidelity.

[Clavicula_nox4817 0]

Thats a bit unfair Luhgnut. BIS sucked alot of us in with amazing screenshots of ARMA2, but failed to point out that the game was unplayable on those settings.

CM did produce CGI trailers early on, but all their recent releases, Ive been able reproduce the graphics, even on my very average PC. Having said that is I had an unlimited budget for a PC, then ARMA2 would undoubtdly have better graphics than OFP.

OFP : DR is definitely going after a more mainstream market than ARMA2, and anyone who denies that is a fool.

I play Arma 2 just fine with all settings maxed. I get between 20-30 fps and routinely play with far more than 63 entities.

[space 10]

My laptop just tops minimum requirements and the game runs fine on Normal settings with the view distance at 6000 on a good day and 3000 for cluttered missions.

Im just talking from personal experince, and also after spending dozens and dozens of hours trying to get ARMA2 to run acceptably.

Maybe this is this problem with some of you guys. I certainly see the potential of ARMA2, but I personally just cant get it to run well. If I could then I'm sure I'd actually enjoy ARMA2 more than OFP2. If you guys are all experiencing ARMA2 how I believe it should be, then I can understand you being so defensive.

I pretty sure that Im not the only person that has problems in this area with ARMA2, but the fact is that I dont seem to be getting the same problems with OFP : DR ( or any other game I own )

[PuFu 4600]

Im just talking from personal experince, and also after spending dozens and dozens of hours trying to get ARMA2 to run acceptably.

Maybe this is this problem with some of you guys. I certainly see the potential of ARMA2, but I personally just cant get it to run well. If I could then I'm sure I'd actually enjoy ARMA2 more than OFP2. If you guys are all experiencing ARMA2 how I believe it should be, then I can understand you being so defensive.

I pretty sure that Im not the only person that has problems in this area with ARMA2, but the fact is that I dont seem to be getting the same problems with OFP : DR ( or any other game I own )

What i don't get is WHY you are still on those forums?

Obviously, you can't or don't want to play ArmA2. Not sure about ArmA1 or OFP...Why aren't you posting on the Developer's Forums then?

What is your scope? To get some of us to like DR as a game?

I really don't get it...

Read my review, it is subjective (as any other review), but there is no comparison to BIS games...

Please keep on topic, which is DR, and not A2...

[Defunkt 431]

Arma2 is like a wine i take some time to mellow, in one or two years most of you will have core i7 or i9, there will be tons of mods and faster GC and it will show potential that is not visible now for first look.

God love you for it. PC developers should be stretching today's hardware, especially for a title like ArmA which boasts massive replay value.

[-RIP- Luhgnut 10]

Thats a bit unfair Luhgnut. BIS sucked alot of us in with amazing screenshots of ARMA2, but failed to point out that the game was unplayable on those settings.

CM did produce CGI trailers early on, but all their recent releases, Ive been able reproduce the graphics, even on my very average PC. Having said that is I had an unlimited budget for a PC, then ARMA2 would undoubtdly have better graphics than OFP.

OFP : DR is definitely going after a more mainstream market than ARMA2, and anyone who denies that is a fool.

Of course every game company is going to show you the very best graphics it can. And you can play the game on those settings... I have, although the frame rate is sorta slow. The difference is, that OFPDR, only showed Pre-rendered scenes. Not actual game play. HUGE difference there. Even up until two months ago, they were releasing pre-rendered stuff. The actual in game footage of Arma2 up until launch was the same. I didn't see any pre-rendered "in game" footage from BIS.

[space 10]

What i don't get is WHY you are still on those forums?

Obviously, you can't or don't want to play ArmA2.

I can assure you that I want to play ARMA2, and I also have faith that one day Ill be able to do so.

The fact is that I cant atm, so i eagerly await the next patch ( or my next upgrade :D )

Until I can play ARMA2 acceptably, Ill have to put up with the compromises of OFP : DR.

[sparks50 0]

Does it worth the 48,99€ (Steam version), or the 40€ (Retail -found it in a local gamestore). NO.

If you are interested though, Play.com at 20€ is definetly the place to get it if you are in Europe. Feels like a more sensible price.

Great review Pufu, Finished the first mission in the campaign and I find myself agreeing to most of your points.

I actually got myself into a MP TDM game with almost 25 players(!). Was smooth the first two minutes and then progressed to a slide show of lag.

This game really needs dedicated servers.

[Heatseeker 0]

Thats a good review Pufu, thanks.

Its a shame though, i hoped this game would be good enough to atleast keep me busy till the end of the year.

[MaxxyB 10]

Allow me to remind you of this 'in game footage' which was released six months ago:

I mean, how on earth did they have the front to pass that off as anything other than a pre-render?

To be fair to CM, they didn't pass it off as ingame - that video was leaked out and of course many people thought it was actually ingame footage, but it's 2d animation. It was entirely meant for internal use only, so I could demonstrate my ideas for command UI etc - in fact I did it in my own time after work to show my vision of how the game should be like. Since it's been leaked out for ages and the game is now released, I didn't see any harm in allowing people to see it in proper HD)...

I want to also point out that I never fully finished this but not long after I started making it, I resigned from CM for personal reasons :) So that was the end of that.

[Commando84 0]

Luhgnut;1458331']Of course every game company is going to show you the very best graphics it can.

Not all companies are out to shock and awe the potential customers, some companies are sometimes really just showing they wanna scam some customers on their hard earned money with the lowest and easiest to make graphics that some interns could have made better sometimes...

Im really happy Bis at least tries to work for their money and not just throw togheter the graphics as quickly and as ugly as possible ( lowpoly , low res )

[Herbal Influence 10]

To be fair to CM, they didn't pass it off as ingame - that video was leaked out and of course many people thought it was actually ingame footage, but it's 2d animation. It was entirely meant for internal use only, so I could demonstrate my ideas for command UI etc - in fact I did it in my own time after work to show my vision of how the game should be like. Since it's been leaked out for ages and the game is now released, I didn't see any harm in allowing people to see it in proper HD)...

I want to also point out that I never fully finished this but not long after I started making it, I resigned from CM for personal reasons :) So that was the end of that.

Wow - thanx for your openess.

Hope you won't regret it for there may be many who have been mislead by it - which is not your fault, as it seems.

[space 10]

Hehe - MaxxyB if only thy had let you design the interface.

There are aspects of your video that are apparent in the final game. One thing that strikes me in the final game is the fast moving low cloud ( obviously not apparent in screen shots ), but that is in your production.

The thing is that with minor patches the game could almost be like your footage. Even better, if they allow modding then we will do it for them!

Edited October 8, 2009 by space