Mr. Snrub

OFP1 has bumpy terrain that provides great cover, but you have to turn the graphics settings right up - the same should be true for OFP2.

That's pretty subjective I think they are pretty good, especially some of the recent addons (BAS, Earl/Suchey etc.) As someone said before, AA is based on the Unreal engine, which is entirely different to the OFP engine and will be similarly different to the OFP2 engine. Different engines built for different games - I'd like to see Unreal/AA try and simulate the open expanses possible in OFP! Same goes for Far Cry... I'd assume it will be the same as it is now - you can see as much of your arms/body as your head movement allows. Again depends on the engine (which we can assume will be an improved version of the original OFP one).

OFP2 will use terrain-streaming, which will do away with the limitation of using islands. The playable area will be incredibly big indeed.

I'm really looking forward to these units - they're looking great, and the weapons look top knotch! Keep up the good work jackal

Some good points there, but you might want to have a look at the pinned AI thread, as this sort of thing has been covered already there... It's also a good idea not to write in all caps - it's hard to read and gives the impression you're shouting

Mirrors anyone? I'm having some trouble with the other links...

Aside from the ones mentioned above, the BAS Tonal Pack has a good Hind with a slightly different loadout (4 x FFAR pods) and retractable landing gear.

Indeed, we've got some rather ingenious animations for weapons at the moment (Operation Frenchpoint's FAMAS cocking handle springs to mind), but they still look a bit 'bolted on', if you know what I mean. It doesn't actually look like part of the weapon - I suppose this is because they are either a bit jerky or 2-dimensional. I have to give credit where credit's due though - the improvement from the stock standard weapons to what we have know is amazing. I'm not sure if it's feasible with OFP 2's engine, but something similar to Call of Duty's weapons would be nice. It's not easy to describe, but when you fire your gun in CoD, it has a feeling of realism.

There is a really interesting and in-depth discussion about this sort of thing happening here.

Something I've always wanted to see is increased 'interactivity' of the weapons. As they are at the moment, the weapons ingame are rather static and that detracts from the immersion of the game. More animations (ie. working the bolt, removing magazines, ejection ports) would make the weapons more enjoyable to use, and would add immensely to the realism.

There does indeed have to be a balance between realism and gameplay. BIS does not have the time to implement every single piece of equipment that might appear on any conceivable battlefield - therefore it's necessary to tweak the characteristics of the available units. If the units we have at the moment were 100%, it would undoubtedly throw the whole balance of the game off, making it less fun to play. It seems as though the majority of the complaints about "accuracy" and "military research" are really just dissatisfaction with the AI or game physics rather than BIS' knowledge of warfare (which I hear is quite exemplary). If OFP2 has improved physics/AI (which it will), we should see a proportional increase in the realism of individual units.

I couldn't be happier with the addon and the whole BAS week idea, it's generating quite a bit of excitement! All your effort is much appreciated - thanks guys!

Unfortunately, humans are far from perfect. Therefore, the best political/economic system we can hope to create (barring everyone getting frontal lobotomies) is one that is acceptable to most people. Capitalism (ie. a free market system) with significant government involement in certain areas (welfare, healthcare, defence etc.) is, in my opinion, the best we can hope for at the moment. Still, it's subjective - but its ultimately the type of system that will provide a good living for the majority of people. Eda Mrcoch is right - the problem isn't money, as money is just a human creation. The problem is humans. Whenever you stick a large group of humans together, you inevitably, due to the substantial differences in individual human psyches, get conflict. You can reduce the instances of conflict through eduction, but conflict will most likely always be a part of human society - and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Sure, people get hurt (ie. war), but without certain types of conflict (arguments) there would be no progress in ideas. It seems like the human mind is simultaneously our greatest strength and most dangerous weakness.

Great post there Lt. Damage, you might be right on target. I get the feeling that what we're seeing here with these new screenshots may not pertain to any finished product, whether it be IL or OFP2 or a combination of the two. As Lt. Damage speculated, the units we're seeing may just be interim models created by BIS (perhaps BIA) in preperation for work on the main project/s. It's hard to say at what stage of development OFP/IL is currently at, so it's rather premature to assume that these screenshots are representative of either project. Seeing 'desert/jungle/Russians/current US soldiers' in the shots may be a hint at what will be ultimately included, but then again it may not. Amongst all the confusion, it is probably wise not to treat anything as definitive proof. The screenshots themselves look fantastic, despite the fact that I don't really know what I'm looking at. If these are close to what OFP2/IL will end up as, I'll be one happy camper.

What about Operation Flashpoint Mk.2/II or v2.0... I chose "OFP 2", because it perhaps provides the clearer description of the product.

I think we need to differentiate between "whining" and being genuiniely concerned for the welfare of our countrymen. These days, concern for loss of life in wartime is proportional to the believed necessity of the war. If we stand to lose a lot if we are defeated, then the public will tolerate higher losses. I don't think it has anything to do with the relative abilities of two opposing armies. Oh and BTW, there isn't any such thing as being "too soft" - the ultimate to goal is for everyone to be 100% "soft". That way, no country will risk war for fear of people dying. That's the way it should be.

Just got back from playing with the pack, and I'm really impressed! This pack has been a really pleasant surprise... The units (Chechens/SOBR) are fantastic, and the weapons are great - I'm absolutely wrapped that you included a new PK model...after 3 years, finally a better PK has been delivered The updated vehicles are even better now...

Cheers AKM74, you are an absolute champ! Downloading as we speak

This is just outstanding - just done to perfection! The textures and the model are absolutely first-class, and I love the attention to detail given. How the Milan tube pops off after firing is great! Only suggestion I can come up with is perhaps giving the 20mm a bit of a beefier firing sound - but then again, this might be what it really sounds like. Other than that, absolutely top-knotch... I might have to go and download the rest of the MMP/BWM addons now

Sure, OFP's infantry element is it's strong point (being the most realistic), but why eliminate use of vehicles? Sacrificing one element won't necessarily make the others stronger... Like ag_smith said, the ability to use vehicles isan integral part of OFP's magic - the ability to improvise, to take part in all sorts of situations...

All games are entertainment-oriented simulations. It just happens that OFP is a more realistic simulation of combat than BF1942 or MoH or any other arcadish games. I personally believe there is virtually no chance that OFP2 will be any less realistic than OFP1, let alone another BF-type game. BIS has built up a reputation of realism (despite only 1 and a half releases) and any deviation from this expectation will be to their detriment. Sure, they might pick up fans from of the more arcadish genres, but from what I've heard the guys at BIS pride themselves on their reputation, and I don't think they want to alienate their existing fans/community. All BIS really has to do to improve realism is fix a few key areas (ie. engine limitations, graphics, physics) - if these are improved in OFP2, the game's potential will be exponentially enhanced. If OFP2 is as successful as the original, I don't see why it shouldn't be ported to a console. More money to BIS = better games in the future. OFP2 will be developed first and foremost for the PC, not the X-Box, so a later port to the console will not affect the realism of the PC version.

Decent formation flying for helicopters is a must have. As it is now, you can't group a couple of helicopters together and have them fly anywhere at more than 'Limited' speed without the 'leapfrogging' occurring. I have a feeling that aircraft/helicopters should have an entirely different action menu to ground troops. Different formations, different attack orders - that sort of thing...

Sounds like a pretty decent expansion on OFP's fairly arcadish helicopter simulation.... As you said, the learning curve should be fairly reasonable, so that people who aren't really interested in a complex helo-sim could still jump in and have a bit of fun. For instance, I would like to be able to get around in a helo with my mouse and keyboard as easily as I do now. I don't want to have to buy a joystick just to be able to fly the choppers properly. Now this would be great to see - actual specialised roles. I never play MP myself, but I can see how a team would rather have a 'great' pilot (having trained up on flying) than someone who can fly, but not terribly well. Perhaps the flight dynamics could differ according to what mode you're playing on (Cadet/Veteran) or could be an option in the difficulty menu. I'm not sure, it might be too hard to implement effectively...

That's a great looking Apache! Any chance of some more screenshots or some info on the variations you are making?

Okay, I understand where you are coming from - the only problem I have is with denoting credit. If you use someone's addon (ie. Inquisitor's) with yours, credit should always be given. This is mainly so people don't get confused, thinking you made it. The original author can therefore get praise for their work, and also the flak if people don't like it (which seems like a problem you had - getting criticism for Inq's work). That's my only complaint, and I only intended it to be taken positively... Anyway, good luck with things back there, everything always works out in the end Look forward to seeing some more Russian addons!