Zipper5

The only way the campaign is even remotely bearable is if you play it in coop with friends. I've played a few missions with Rellikki and it's been much more fun than it is playing alone. In SP, there's almost 0 fun to be had. No story, no characters, no involvement, just... Bad. All in all the negative reviews of the game have mostly been completely accurate. The game is pretty damn bad. And that's not just because it's not OFP. It's just a bad game itself. If you've been lucky enough to have not purchased it yet - don't. At least try the demo, if there ever is one. If there isn't, don't gamble on liking it. I would say you probably won't.

Well, I got my friend's copy of DR today. Installed it and have started playing the campaign on Hardcore... ... And, I can't even complete the first mission. Not because it's hard or anything, but because the way that you get information of what to do is absolutely terrible. You have an objectives screen but in none of the hints does it tell you that the objectives are marked as numbers on the map. I've got one objective - "Clear the LZ", that won't complete. I'm thinking it's the famous last loon problem, just in DR. But seriously, what exactly is the RADIUS of the LZ? It seems like it's from the west of the island to the east. All that distance and there are no enemy contacts that I can find. First part of the mission was far too easy. They seem to have tried to increase the difficulty by making you go from one end of the island to the other. It only increases the frustration levels, especially when you get into a car to do so. Hit any object other than a tree and you are going to be sent flying high if you're going fast enough. It was hillarious when I rammed the lead car of the convoy when they surprised me as they appeared out of no where as I was driving while Sabre radioed me about them. When I hit it, it sent both me and it flying backwards by at least 500m. Was the most fun I'd had in the mission so far... These aren't my only criticisms of the game so far. I won't list all of them here until I play a bit further. But so far, my opinion is that the game isn't even a good "game", let alone a military simulator. It's so damn broken due to terrible design decisions. Speaking of which, that radial command menu is really bugging me...

That's just... wrong... I have never seen a game do that before... :confused:

And that, my friend, is ingoring the rules. ;) Edit: Well, that, and Rule §18.

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.

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...

Apparently that issue is common. The game just doesn't like Fraps. No one can figure out what's wrong with it though. It just seems to be an issue with DR that can probably only be fixed by CM.

Why do you constantly ignore my posts? You've called me a troll twice, and I contradicted your accusations both times. Neither times did you acknowledge what I've said. Now, the same thing has happened again. On-topic: I'm going to be getting DR from a friend for free (yes, he dislikes it that much. He paid full price for it). PC version, of course. When I get it, I'm going to test it out and put together a DR vs ArmA II comparison video, which I will upload when finished. I just figure that the game could use a review from someone who played the original OFP since it's demo release, and continues to play it's sequels today.

As far as I can tell, the majority are actually severely disappointed with the game. Are you basing this statement off of the poll results on the DR forums asking if you like the game? Personally I think those will be heavily inaccurate as many of the people who were disappointed with the game just upped and left, never to return to that forum. So obviously, they wouldn't have voted "No". Mostly everyone I've talked to who's played it dislikes it, and that's a mix between ArmA II players and CoD/BF/L4D/etc. players. You get the same answers. On the contrary, the game seems incredibly broken. The positive reviews are becoming increasingly evident to have sugar-coated the game, for what reason is unknown. The sounds just randomly cut out, the stringtable references are sometimes appearing rather than what should be there, the AI can't hit the blind side of a barn, the driving mechanics are terrible, the helicopter flight models are terrible and the helicopters loadouts are ridiculous, third person vehicle view is locked, the game relies heavily on spawning of enemies (which is stupid for a game where you can see your enemies from miles away), the editor seems to not work at all in the Steam version and once you reach the 63 entity limit in the normal version, there is no warning, just a gray screen that forces you to manually end the game. I could go on, but it'd take up much more space. And that's not mentioning the lack of dedicated servers and no CD keys. The audio and stringtable issues are probably able to be fixed with patches. The flight models and driving mechanics might be too. But core gameplay decisions such as the terribly ported radial menu, the 63 entity limit, spawning of enemies, terrible AI, etc. Plus, the no CD keys issue will be incredibly difficult tasks for them to fix, if they even bother. I doubt these will be able to be fixed with great ease. At which point, the game is practically broken beyond repair.

I believe it's Jar Jar, but oh well. That's the best summary of the game I've heard to date. :D

Because it's a bad console port. On the console versions, you would have to press the Start button. They just changed it to Enter. Edit: Deadfast was, well, faster.

Agreed. If I find myself liking the game based on the demo, which is highly unlikely at this point, then I will buy it. Otherwise, they ain't getting any support from me to continue down this path. ;)

I was watching one of the 5 or so live streams of people playing DR and one had him driving around in a LAV. He got hit from an enemy rocket and was killed instantly, and the destroyed model literally looked the same as the normal one. Didn't notice any significant differences apart from a slight texture change to make it look slightly damaged. But it definitely blew up. Rather unimpressed with it, especially after the hoopla they made about their damage system.

A new review was released recently. It too gave it a lower score, 5/10, but this one is in English. bit-tech.net | Review - Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising Review

It will be the one that's reviewed, more than likely. What Deadfast means is that when a game goes Gold, they don't touch it until after release. Usually.

Second thing I'm going to do when I get my hands on the demo (first will actually be playing it, of course) is do one of those longingly asked-for comparison videos between DR and ArmA II. At least, as much as I could do it based on the demo, which will be limited, of course. I'll conclude it by saying if, based on the demo, I'm going to buy the game.

Well, so far he's made two known-to-be false statements: No "patronizing" movement hints. "These checkpoints actually work. They don't always work..." - 'Nuff said.

He also said that there are no "patronizing" hints telling you how to move, but you can clearly see one at 0:38 in this video. :rolleyes:

What, you honestly think that DR will sell as much as MW2? I simply said the truth in that regard. And I was merely questioning the reaction that people will have to the game and the effect it would have on sales, depending on what it actually turns out to be. I clearly said that if it turns out to be not all that different from CoD, then I see sales falling rapidly. If it turns out to actually warrent a purchase because it's one of it's better than that, then I can see it holding strong for a while after it's release. Sales don't make a game good, however. But one thing that does make a good game is advertising. MW2 doesn't pretend to be anything it's not, it's a flat-out arcade shooter. And it looks to be significantly better than it's predecessor, or at least equal in greatness. But DR has publicized itself to be a military simulator, and with the recent releases of information pointing to it not being a military simulator, makes me think people will realize this and not buy the game over MW2. Which could, or could not happen, depending on what happens after the game is released. Stop with the troll branding already. Jesus. Do I have to explain each of my posts in this fashion just to stop you guys from having any excuse at all to call me a troll? :butbut:

Looks awesome, Rellikki! Love the rolled up sleeves and new helmets. Significant improvement over the previous version. I also really like the new crewmen. All-in-all, excellent job! Looking forward to seeing what you produce in the future.

Well, it might be close on the pre-order chart, but once the game is released, I see DR's sales falling and MW2's growing rapidly.

I'm questioning how well DR will sell too, when people find out that the realism isn't really all that... realistic, in the game. And that it may turn out to simply be a more open CoD game, which may be a definite sale for some people, won't attract that many people. Or, perhaps it won't be this way. But if it is, then DR has no chance .

Well, I have yet to see an AI in ArmA or ArmA II shoot at me from unrealistic distances with a pistol unless that's the only gun they have. In that circumstance, it might actually be worse. But we don't know if that's common, or just a once in a while issue.

Ok, where to begin. Some reviews have been reporting bugs. With both the AI and the physics, much like ArmA II. Also, that latest 7 minute video of it had missing audio in it, and that was the first mission of the campaign. So it won't necessarily be less buggy than ArmA II. Coming out on consoles I can understand if your PC doesn't run it well. However, you then go to say "it's not simplified in any way" and then say "it actually remembers it's supposed to be a game and not a simulation." Wow. Ok, so OFP was a simulation. DR is not supposed to be a simulation then? Even though it's being called OFP's sequel? Also, how can it not be simplified if it's now a game and not a simulation? You just contradicted yourself. So a sequel to a simulation, being called a simulation, is good because it's not a simulation, but a game? I miss the logic in that. But hey, you came on to this forum just to advertise DR. Couldn't have expected too much from such a post. Edit: Just saw W0lle's post, but since it was made while I was posting this, I'll leave this here. As it still stands.

Ah, so not really that detailed of a playthrough, but overall impressions are "ok" for him. And yes, he did teamkill an AI that was in a HMMWV, lol.