Dragon Rising has been released

[Herbal Influence 10]

(...)

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!

LOL

[-BBE- Soul Assassin 0]

Just played a first quick game (first campaign mission).

DR gives me the same feeling as a Big Mac...it's food, but not good food. Very greasy, lacking real taste and hardly nice to look at. The menu is also as bad as a MacDonalds one. Can you say port?

I wonder if the CM people ever even go out of their dungeons to see the sky. Because the sky in DR is yellow blinding stuff, it's just all effects and no real skybox. The same mostly applies to the terrain. It doesn't look that good on its self, so they add a bunch of effects in an effort to spice things up. All it does for me is make me wonder where the button is to turn off the blur.

Did the dev's ever look through a real reddot sight? It's usually round, not star-shaped. These things don't look like that, unless you have an eye almost closed, which is exactly what a reddot is used against....

AI got itself killed quickly, but then again maybe I need to get the hang of it better. Either way it doesn't seem to do a lot. Doesn't get in the way but doesn't really help out a lot either.

But, we can not only complain. The game DOES run flawlessly. Haven't experienced a single hick-up with everything on max, unlike 1 other game I play...you guess which. ;)

Best 50 euro I have not spent recently!

[cjsoques 0]

I got to play on a friend's PC who had an xbox 360 controller and played the first two campaign missions. I thought the graphics were decent, the game ran smoothe as could be as opposed to Arma where graphics are beautiful but it doesn't run that great and choppy at important points in the game, just to compare.

With the PC controls the game is just horrid. It is just pointless. With the xbox 360 controller it works great. So you get the fun controls of a console but the much better graphics from the PC, it was much better playing with the controller.

I liked the command control system, it was easy to maneuver units just using the controller, you can see the game was optimized for consoles from the way they did the interface and controls.

I liked the level of fun to realism. It wasn't COD and it wasn't Arma but somewhere between. I enjoyed the first two minutes quite a bit. The FLIR was way overrated. The shooting is nothing compared to Arma but the game is still fun and that's what is important to me.

The worst part of this game is the multiplayer...no dedicated, no join in progress, and lacking the scale that Battlefield or even COD have. It was just pathetic and that is a major deal breaker.

In summary, the game is fun, has amazing performance (albeit the missions seem very scripted and triggered...not dynamic), and great single player missions. The game is lacking many features expected in games made since 2001 (Join-in-Progress, and dedicated server). The features the game has are way overrated. I will NOT be buying this game and am pretty dissapointed with this. This game is lacking basic multiplayer features that are key to replayability. I'll finish the campaign at my friend's but I won't be playing it or buying it beyond that...but the game is fun, just not buyable

[maturin 12]

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

I had every grotesque problem imaginable with my desktop and couldn't resolve any of them. When I moved and got a spotless, weaker laptop the improvement was immense.

Sometimes Arma just loathes your computer, and no amount 'get new drivers, check your pagefile' is going to fix it.

[MaxxyB 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!

I was the HUD/OSD UI artist from very early on - so a lot of the stuff in game is the stuff I designed, however in many cases the functionality that ended up in the game is not quite how I would have liked it to work. The keyboard controlled radial is not my cup of tea really, for example.

As a HUGE OFP fan, I wanted a very hardcore and realistic PC centric game (I was worried about how the PC version would suffer otherwise). I would have preferred an interface tailored for PC and then a console one afterwards, but I guess that would cost more dev time :(

I was looking into real AH1-Z helmet mounted topowl interface's and MFD's - basically I wanted to completely simulate stuff like that. But that wasn't really what they wanted and that's fair enough - it's their money and game I guess :) And I was just a grunt!

I'm not ranting or anything, I enjoyed my years at CM and left on good terms - it's just not the game I would have wanted to make but like I said it's their money. Being diplomatic, I guess for the type of game they wanted to make, they have done a good enough job.

I hope I'm not sounding like a disgruntled & jaded game dev! Not my intent, but I'm talking as an OFP and mil-sim fan and not a developer or corporate foot soldier. And I did jump in and defend CM about the 'trick video' allegation after all, so it's not all bad ;)

Edited October 9, 2009 by MaxxyB

[Danoi 10]

I just played ofp2 for 2h. that´s not really much but I got a first impression. and it was disappointing. ´cause, I like sims but I also play "real" games and I loved COD4. actually, I was always looking forward to an ofp with nicer graphics and smarter controls. ofp2 just can´t do the job. controls are ok and the character responds immediately, but that´s pretty much it. after driving around with a jeep, I´d say the physics of this vehicle are close to ridiculous. weapons usage feels like your ordinary shooter, take them out on 350 yards with your m16 with a few rounds - sometimes standing on normal difficulty if you want, because the reds aren´t really gonna hurt you. graphics are like...you know from screens anyway. the devs forgot about the other 2,5 million colours that today´s rigs can display and just used 2: grey and green. at least it runs very well on my q9550+gtx260.

on the other hand the AI seems to be quite smart. Enemies are trying to hide, flank, supress etc. Teammates respond to commands, at least during this 2h. SFX like explosions and fire are nice to watch and imho quite better than arma2. sounds are impressive, perhaps the second best thing for me here - but I made a mistake and installed it in German, so voices don´t really fit the setting. Best thing is the locating of enemies: comrades shout 200m east and the bastard really hides out there. and I did not run into any bugs in 2h. I heard of problems with clipping or so, did not see them but that´s minor for me anyways.

it´s a nice game but it totally lacks realism. there´s practically no feeling when playing it. at least until now. perhaps it gets a bit better when operating heavy machinery but I doubt.

seems like not a bad game. but it is just a game, no sim in no way. I´ll do a few more hours. since I gotta use my spare time efficiently, I gotta choose between 2 pieces of open world military software. I guess, I gotta stick to the bugged one^^.

danoi, not a native speaker.

[-RIP- Luhgnut 10]

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 )

Exactly my point. Not all of them do.... What I find is that the companies that DO try and shock and awe are going for "hail Mary's." They are going for the attention at the shows.

One of the guys said the video was leaked out. Maybe one was, but to wrap it all around the Title, the Music, the closing teasers. All along they were showing this stuff on their website, with little snippits of their developers showing how they can do just about anything with the engine and they put all that into OFPDR.

Still, go to their website and look at the "Intel from the front" section or whatever they call it. Play the IN GAME footage they are so blatant to have up there. None of the footage on their website looks anything like what came out.

Showing video's of how they can alter lighting, how you can destroy everything, the outstanding particle system (which we all can see is just animated graphics, not real particles.) on and on, they kept cutting to the developers then back to the IN GAME. Do you see ANYTHING on their website even after the game is released that looks like what was released?

Smoke and mirrors and hype. That's what they did. Also, I've seen pictures of the Xbox 360 graphics compared to the PC's. And believe it or not, the Xbox graphics are even worse.

Codemasters should just have their cumulative pee-pee slapped.

[W0lle 1052]

OK I now finally have enough of this crap. I tried hard to see atleast something positive here but now it's enough. :mad:

Just played the first SP mission again, and while attacking the village I lost #3 and #4. And while on the hill I shot at some of the guys down there - they completely ignored me. But that's not the point - as said 2 of my boys were dead and I took the rifle from #3.

So I went up the road with my #2 and cleared the extraction point. And now it comes - shortly before the extraction chopper landed 2 other guys were standing beside me and I thought by myself "who are these guys?". It was my Morales and Winters, my 'downed' #3 and #4 who were back on planet earth all of the sudden.

This utter crap is an insult to everyone who believed in the name.

Speaking about it, where are all those clowns who recently claimed that 'soon when DR is out, ArmA2 quickly goes down the drain and no one cares about it anymore'?

And yeah, the whole crap is scripted. It's always the same amount of enemy units all over the place, at exactly the same location.

Edited October 9, 2009 by W0lle

[PuFu 4600]

OK I now finally have enough of this crap. I tried hard to see atleast something positive here but now it's enough. :mad:

This utter crap is an insult to everyone who believed in the name.

Speaking about it, where are all those clowns who recently claimed that 'soon when DR is out, ArmA2 quickly goes down the drain and no one cares about it anymore'?

Playing the greatness of its MP...wait...oh well

[GRS 10]

My real complaint is that there is no fear. You can easily frontal assault a position in DR and be ok even in hardcore. In OFP you wouldn't make it 10 feet. That really defeats the purpose of having an open world.

So now both games I upgraded computers for are worthless to me (hopefully only for the time being). Back to OFP/ArmA1...

Edited October 9, 2009 by GRS

[Prydain 1]

I am sorry for ever trying to keep my input in this thread as constructive and as balanced as possible, even defending OFP2 from what I saw as Arma fanboi attacks.

OFP2, after all, doesn't deserve any balanced discussion, it is utter shit.

[Rg 0]

What is shame, that most of you saying that game is bad, but still you bought or preordered game. In fact you say to publishers let do that again, again promise things that are not technically possible, lay and steal ideas, make renders and photoshoped sshots. If players ask why games look today as they look, its because that. Because lot of people are able to buy, preorder just because PR and previews at magazines that are dependend on advertising sales. Its sad, where game industry going :(

The sad reality.

It's kinda sad for the people that put their faith in the PR and felt gyped later on, but it's really sad for those that knew this wouldn't be a smart buy (for themselves) and justify the purchase since it's only a measly $50. Well, they still got your money. They end up winning and we end up loosing. It proves that you can achieve a level of success by hyping up and promising anything only to later back step on those promises (hm, sounds an awful lot like the tried and true politician's formula). If significant profit can be made from misleading info and mediocrity, why push innovation and try to deliver excellence?

Why do we have the same fps formula used over and over again?

Why do we have the same racing formula used over and over again?

Why do we have the same sports games every year only with updated rosters?

Why are most games today made for the lowest common denominator?

..because you still buy them. You kill innovation by settling for mediocrity.

Hell, I don't know why I'm even posting this, because this will always be the case for every industry (music/movies/games). Most people are optimistic suckers.

The End.

[Sertorius21 10]

You know, I think this was from Calvin and Hobbes: "A good compromise will leave everybody mad."

[Rista 0]

Here's a couple of screenshots to illustrate the issue with draw distance of bushes that I mentioned:

http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/9094/ofdr2009060302543281.jpg

A few meters further away:

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/5619/ofdr2009060302541582.jpg

Notice how the guy in the middle becomes totally visible as if there was no bush in front of him at all. Shouldn't there at least be some low poly bush models at distance? Isn't that a bit of a problem in multiplayer?

[space 10]

You should play on hardcore mode. It certainly isn't easy. I played a bit of co-op with friends and it was cool, but very hard :)

Online is a bit of a cluster**** atm, but the games just been released, so noone knows what they're doing, and its basically the blind leading the blind. :D

Im sure it will all settle down in a week or two.

[Sniperdoc 0]

Idiotic comment concerning CM and BIS parting company.

BIS do not need CM, the only thing that DR has is better performance and that's because it is so limited in scope and implementation compared to A2. If A2 was as simplistic as DR, it would run at 100 FPS as well.

The only reason we have A1/A2 is BECAUSE they parted company.

If BIS had acquiesced, we would have seen DR type FPS arcadishness long before now in the OFP/ArmA series.

This reviewer doesn't have a clue about what makes A2 great.

Eth

I would have to say if BIS was PROUD of Arma 1 I'd be highly disappointed in them. That game is still plagued with LOD and texture loading issues to this day, the sound is antiquated and broken (i.e. 5.1 surround works like arse), the speech engine sucks, etc... pretty much all the same things that have carried over to Arma 2, all of which appear to never have been fixed.

The only reason why I'm still continually drawn to Arma 2, is that its BETTER, than Arma 1. Arma 2 by no means is a blockbuster, breakthrough, whatever you want to call it. Arma 2 pretty much hasn't advanced anywhere since OFP except graphically. It's the same concept... and hell, the same antiquated engine. I have to PUSH myself to play Arma 2.

The comment that was made about BIS and Codemasters is 100% spot on. Neither company has done anything great since the split and both have managed to half-ass stuff. If you combined all the good parts of both Arma 2 and DR, then you'd have yourself one shit-hot game.

But as it stands, both are mediocre:

Arma 2 because of the huge multitude of bugs.

DR because of all it's gameplay shortcomings.

[W0lle 1052]

space do us all a favor and stop defending this crappy game, it's pointless. At latest now no one here won't buy it anymore.

And screw that hardcore mode, besides all HUD elements removed it's still the same bullsh*t. Enemy still pops up at exactly the same point and numbers, ignoring you when you're out of a trigger area.

Really, head over to the CM forums and continue to hype the game there. I'm sure there are more people who believe you than here. It's sad enough that a lot of people are cought by the hype CM and it's community created and now are just disappointed because of the wasted money.

The only reason why I'm still continually drawn to Arma 2, is that its BETTER, than Arma 1. Arma 2 by no means is a blockbuster, breakthrough, whatever you want to call it. Arma 2 pretty much hasn't advanced anywhere since OFP except graphically. It's the same concept... and hell, the same antiquated engine. I have to PUSH myself to play Arma 2.

I rather prefer not to have a blockbuster with an 'antiquated' engine over that utter crap called Dragon Rising, anytime. Obviously that 'antiquated' engine does a hundred times better than what CM produced here.

Edited October 9, 2009 by W0lle

[Sniperdoc 0]

Hell, I don't know why I'm even posting this, because this will always be the case for every industry (music/movies/games). Most people are optimistic suckers.

I think the reason you post this is because you're fed up with game developers taking advantage of paying customers which have no recourse to complain if a product sucks.

Personally, if there was precedent out there to allow for it, I'd have sued BIS into the dirt if they didn't give me a refund. It's the same with Creative Assembly and their P.O.S. game Empire: Total War... same deal. Half-arsed product released and patching for a half a year to even get a semblance of playability. I'll just start making products and sell them half-done... but can't do that... software is allowed to be half-assed.

Trust me... I get it. If there's ever a bandwagon to create legal precedent to turn the software development world on its back, I'll be right at the signup desk...

[bangtail 0]

The comment that was made about BIS and Codemasters is 100% spot on. Neither company has done anything great since the split and both have managed to half-ass stuff. If you combined all the good parts of both Arma 2 and DR, then you'd have yourself one shit-hot game.

No it isn't spot on for the reasons I've already highlighted. If BIS had stayed with CM, you would never have had A1 or A2, just DR a lot sooner.

I don't have problems with A2 tbh (some very minor complaints).

Maybe YOU have to push yourself to play it, but that is certainly not the case for everyone else.

As I've remarked about 100x, alot (and I'm guessing over 50%) of the technical problems are down to the user. It can't be "just the game" because not everyone experiences them.

Does A2 have issues that are purely the fault of A2, most assuredly it does, but DR is not even in the same technical ballpark as A2 so comparing them is downright foolish.

It IS in the same ballpark as GRAW, BF2 et al.

Edited October 9, 2009 by BangTail

[Chunk3ym4n 10]

I got the game. It's ok, but it's not Flashpoint.

[Maddmatt 1]

So the game is crap, and many of you guys still bought it. So why do some developers bother putting effort into their games again? :(

This is why I (almost) never pre-order games.

It's hilarious that BIS's "dated" engine does more (and mostly better) than this "next gen" engine by Codemasters that had a huge budget.

This goes to show the huge amount of work that is required to create a convincing open world game.

Oh well, it looks like hardly anyone likes it besides some console gamers and a few popular review sites (proof you can't trust them).

It IS in the same ballpark as GRAW, BF2 et al.

Difference is those games were actually good at what they tried to do ;)

[bangtail 0]

So the game is crap, and many of you guys still bought it. So why do some developers bother putting effort into their games again? :(

This is why I (almost) never pre-order games.

It's hilarious that BIS's "dated" engine does more (and mostly better) than this "next gen" engine by Codemasters that had a huge budget.

This goes to show the huge amount of work that is required to create a convincing open world game.

Oh well, it looks like hardly anyone likes it besides some console gamers and a few popular review sites (proof you can't trust them).

Difference is those games were actually good at what they tried to do ;)

I was actually only talking from a "genre" point of view. I got way more enjoyment out of them than I ever will from DR.

Eth

[SD_BOB 10]

Been testing OFP DR all day and have come to a conclusion...

THIS IS A CONSOLE GAME, RELEASED UNDER FALSE PRETENSES TO A COMPLETELY DUPED FANBASE.

Plain and simple, not fit to bear the name Operation Flashpoint.

All my hopes are now with ACE2 and ArmA 2 updates (although its running sweetly for me as it is, we all now how much ACE brings to ArmA).

Edited October 9, 2009 by Shadow.D. ^BOB^

[malkuth 0]

Ok guys Im going to give you a good comparison of games. I'm not a fanboy of either of these games. I like them both, they both have problems. But Im just glad we still get these games on PC at this time. So I enjoy them for what they are. If you wanna be a fanboy of 1 game go ahead. But both games have strong points, and bad ones. Get over that ok? Ok now with the comparisons.

Arma graphics are better. But OFP are not really that bad. But OFP actually runs on your computer. And most of us dumb down ARMA II to OFP standards to actually play it anyway.

Arma Vehicles are 100 times better to control. No head movement in OFP. The vehicle system control is really sad.

When you fire in Arma you have to control the gun, in OFP2 its auto level.

OFP AI is better, for instance the AI in OFP wont kill you from 2 miles away. And if you make a noise 5 miles away they won't know where you are instantly. the battles are actually fun in OFP, while in ARMA II against the AI its usually instant death for the player.

Close quarter battles are possible in OFP not in Arma II. For instance can you tell your guys to clear a house in ARMAII.. NO well you can in OFP.

The command system in ARMA II is so much better. maybe its just because Im so use to it, but I really dislike the OFP version.. Its hard to get use too really.

OFP and ARMA editor are about the same really. Even though OFP is a little more complex in some areas, OFP has a 60 unit limit. While Arma HAS NONE. OFP editor is outside the game, but you can still test misisons like in ArmaII it just takes about 20 seconds to load the game with the In mission launcher.

OFP wound system is better, and the immersion of inf battle is a lot better. Again this is because the AI is not Super Human and can hit you in 1 shot. But the effects of gun bullets near misses is far better in OFP.

OFP has a gore system that surpases ARMAII if thats your thing. Hit someone in the head and they might fall to the ground with half a head missing and brain coming out. Or you might just blow it totally off. (its random) Limbs can fly off. And if you get hit with a massive strike you can basically be turned into gibs. Its pretty intense in OFP when your soldier next too you gets shot in the head and his blood spatters into your screen

I have seen the AI In OFP fall to the ground and cry. Put thier hands over thier head and rock back and forth and start mumbling things like this can't be happning. I have seen this in both USMC and Chinese. Don't see this in ARMAII.

When soldiers get wounded in ARMA II they get back up and its nothing after a few seconds. If your wounded in OFP or an AI is they fall to the ground and move around and wiggle. Then die if you don't fix them up soon enough. I know ARMA II has a simular system but OFP is much better really.

OFP campaign though shorter actually works and you do not pull your hair out like the thing in ARMA II.

Multi Player on both is about the same really. Both have issues. If they both worked right all the time then ARMA would beat it with the Huge world you can play in. In OFP you are confined to a box within the island for multilayer.

Gun selection in ARMA II is way better. In the effect that you can choose your weapon in ARMA II and in OFP you can't.

OFP has thermal imaging in tanks and guns which is tons better the ARMAII.

OFP has actual balistic and vulnerability on vehicles while ARMA II still uses a Hit point system. (we are talking vanalla here clowns)

Arma II is more realistic in its inf modes with a compass and everything. While OFP has a hud system and waypoint markers. The hardcore mode deletes this in OFP and gets rid of the save system also. Which truely makes it HARDCORE.

Hope that helps. You should push aside the bullcrap and just understand OFP is not ARMA II. ARMA II is unique and only Behomia can make the true OFP sequel which you are all playing now.

OFP2 is an attempt at something a little different. And yes it was DUMBED down for the consoles. Prey that ARMA never goes this route! PREY!

[froggyluv 2136]

OFP AI is better, for instance the AI in OFP wont kill you from 2 miles away. And if you make a noise 5 miles away they won't know where you are instantly. the battles are actually fun in OFP, while in ARMA II against the AI its usually instant death for the player

I keep hearing this but haven't found it to be the case at all. Usually Ai doesn't engage me from 1000m or whatever and when they do, I usually see the ground being hit next to me or some sort of debris from the shot telling me to get cover quick. In MP, Im sniped far more often so I'd rather have the AI be on the harder side of thing then total impotent shooters.

For instance can you tell your guys to clear a house in ARMAII.. NO well you can in OFP

.

Yep, I wish Arma2 had some semblance of this but it must be hard as hell to code into open world shooters. Kudos to DR if they pulled it off but does this include multi-level buildings and whatnot or simple cabin structures?

OFP has a gore system that surpases ARMAII if thats your thing. Hit someone in the head and they might fall to the ground with half a head missing and brain coming out. Or you might just blow it totally off. (its random) Limbs can fly off. And if you get hit with a massive strike you can basically be turned into gibs. Its pretty intense in OFP when your soldier next too you gets shot in the head and his blood spatters into your screen

I would certainly like more gore and more varied death animations as that is my kinda thing but not absolutely essential.