Operation Flashpoint 2 officially announced

Hi all

In reply to pulverizer and his point about money making a project better. Sorry but you are wrong and I can point to a list of government and big business projects that have failed miserably to prove it.

Talent trumps money every time.

Yes money can help with things like 3D model making as you can employ lots of people to make 3d models but unless they are talented the models will not be efficient.

You can employ thousands of texture artists but unless they are talented, the textures will look wrong.

You can employ expensive qualified programmers but unless they have talent there will be no magic.

BIS have talent that is proven, they produced OFP on a shoestring, and VBS which has become NATO's default simulation. And now BIS have money. Enough to employ multiple teams on multiple projects.

Codemasters have got money. The question here is whether Codemasters has got the talent?

Talent is a rare thing.

Kind Regards wallker

With enough money you can just hire the most talented people you can find, if the money is good enough people will come.

Its basicly what the guys signature says above me.

ArmA is not that good its simply that the rest sucks.

Flashpoint is a good concept. And the game itself was not dissapointing. The armour ratings were good.

The ballance between AA and air was good. Realism was good and you could join clans that were either pvp or coop based. So the basic engine without addons was good.

Then with addons you could increase the game experience.

In arma the concept was worked out completely wrong.

Ballance between air and ground was not there. Ballance between tanks and infantry was not there. This last part is double dissapointing because its not ballanced nor realistic.

Anyway to make the game a bit enjoyable u had to modify it.

So what is coming now. Is arma2 which is gonna be something you can create yourself with the proper mods of arma.

And ofp2 which will use a new vision on the flashpoint concept.

So I think ofp2 has a better chance at this moment ( it only needs to surpass a piece of crap ) to become the winner between these 2 games.

ArmA went backwards on almost everything but graphics. If it's continuing with the same tradition, OFP 2 will be a definite winner.

Hi all

In reply to pulverizer and his point about money making a project better. Sorry but you are wrong and I can point to a list of government and big business projects that have failed miserably to prove it.

Talent trumps money every time.

Yes money can help with things like 3D model making as you can employ lots of people to make 3d models but unless they are talented the models will not be efficient.

You can employ thousands of texture artists but unless they are talented, the textures will look wrong.

You can employ expensive qualified programmers but unless they have talent there will be no magic.

BIS have talent that is proven, they produced OFP on a shoestring, and VBS which has become NATO's default simulation. And now BIS have money. Enough to employ multiple teams on multiple projects.

Codemasters have got money. The question here is whether Codemasters has got the talent?

Talent is a rare thing.

Kind Regards wallker

With enough money you can just hire the most talented people you can find, if the money is good enough people will come.

And microsoft has all the money in the world, years of experience, and is quite a generous employer, IIRC.  That should make it highly attractive to at least some talent. And yet, vista missed a lot of important marks.

Hi all

In reply to pulverizer and his point about money making a project better. Sorry but you are wrong and I can point to a list of government and big business projects that have failed miserably to prove it.

Talent trumps money every time.

Yes money can help with things like 3D model making as you can employ lots of people to make 3d models but unless they are talented the models will not be efficient.

You can employ thousands of texture artists but unless they are talented, the textures will look wrong.

You can employ expensive qualified programmers but unless they have talent there will be no magic.

BIS have talent that is proven, they produced OFP on a shoestring, and VBS which has become NATO's default simulation. And now BIS have money. Enough to employ multiple teams on multiple projects.

Codemasters have got money. The question here is whether Codemasters has got the talent?

Talent is a rare thing.

Kind Regards wallker

With enough money you can just hire the most talented people you can find, if the money is good enough people will come.

And microsoft has all the money in the world, years of experience, and is quite a generous employer, IIRC.  That should make it highly attractive to at least some talent.  And yet, vista missed a lot of important marks.

Vista didn't miss any Important marks? I'm more satisfied with Vista Business than I was with XP pro when it first came out.

Not only have Microsoft made it easier to use, But it's compatible with XP files! and is a lot more sleeker and smoother than XP which was a Bore to look at .

Well thats partly a matter of subjectivity, and Offtopic too. Heres some sources for you:

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/25/microsofts-vista-problem/

http://startupmeme.com/vista-r....d-to-xp

http://www.thetechherald.com/article....g-to-XP

Might as well lock this thread until more OFP2 info/screens appear.

Codemasters have got money. The question here is whether Codemasters has got the talent?

Talent is a rare thing.

Having 20 million quid in the bank is rarer.

Codemasters have got money. The question here is whether Codemasters has got the talent?

Talent is a rare thing.

Having 20 million quid in the bank is rarer.

Yea. Look at how awesome Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six turned out when they made use of Ubisoft's big budget

Bye bye realism

Well hopefully Codemasters doesn't do the same, but be prepared...

But even if it does suck, we'll still have ArmA 2

But even if it does suck, we'll still have ArmA 2

I suppose that is comforting if you just want another update for OFP.

I don't. I want OFP2.

i would be more then happy to have an updated/ enhanced OFP where every single little bit is better

who would like their Nissan GT-R turns into Mitsubishi Evo anyway

Quote[/b] ]I suppose that is comforting if you just want another update for OFP. I don't. I want OFP2.

That's a very paradoxical statement... don't want another update of OFP, yet want OFP2... which is a sequel... hence an update of the first one...

What you want is probably a MAJOR update, but OFP2 may or may not be the one you expect, and the same goes with Arma 2, because obviously if you don't like modern virtual battlefields in open worlds (aka "OFP updates"), then you're screwed...

Being built on totally different technology with different art direction and game design in mind, I agree OFP2 will probably look and feel more different at first... But will it be any better ?

On the other hand BIS wil not change their game radically for various reasons : first because they can't afford it (budget reasons), then for legacy reasons (they would lose all the work and knowledge of their community acumulated over OFP, VBS and Arma 1), and at last : Why change everything if it ain't broken ? They know what works and what doesn't whithout having to track bugs from scratch.

I'm sure OFP2 will not hit it's targeted release, because at the moment it's way behind Arma 2 in most areas (see Leipzig build of both) and Codemaster cannont really afford being the second one.

To not make a fool of themselves, they will need to postpone the release (and polish the game so much that it shines in the dark, but at a cost) or change their target and ambitions altogether (CoD4, BF2). Unless they hire even more staff to make double shifts... but would it be strategically more sound to release it at the same time as Arma2 ?

So in my book, it will not be : Arma2 or OFP2, as there will probably be a 3 to 6 months gap between both, but rather : first Arma2 then OFP2 or not OFP2...

I was referring to how ArmA and ArmA 2 improve very little on OFP's level of realism (in answer to Matt's comment "bye bye realism"). New games, same gameplay.

OFP2 will be a whole new game on a different engine, so here's hoping it will take the genre from 2001 to present day. ArmA 2 looks quite pretty and modern too but I'm afraid it's not gonna be that impressive to anyone who already played OFP.

IMO I will wait for OFP2 first before getting ArmA2, like I did wait 2 years for ArmA to mature.

OFP2 sounds like a "major update" rather than "more of the same, like an expansion" which ArmA2 sounds like. We're doing the same thing with the same system over and over again with slight updates for 10 years after all.

On the contrary, OFP2 promises "the best of the best" in regards of realism, and they have the time and money to do that. Whereas BIS don't, and relies on modding community in this area.

Also who can say ArmA's system is perfect? Right now, except some parts of infantry, I don't think it's even close to the "The Ultimate Simulation" that it promises of.

Codemasters have got money. The question here is whether Codemasters has got the talent?

Talent is a rare thing.

Having 20 million quid in the bank is rarer.

Yea. Look at how awesome Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six turned out when they made use of Ubisoft's big budget

By bye realism

Well hopefully Codemasters doesn't do the same, but be prepared...

But even if it does suck, we'll still have ArmA 2

Look at how BI ruined ArmA - even though they DO have the talent.

I`ll probably get OFP2 before ARMA2 as well, though for me it also has to do with the fact that I need a new PC which I intend to build around the specs for OFP2.

I had much higher hopes for OFP2 vs ARMA2 initially but what I saw during the GC managed to close the gap somehow.

Not completely though I still have more faith in OFP2 from a technical point of view, but as for gameplay I don`t know.

Both games seems filled with atmosphere though from the screens so from a position as a gamer I can`t really complain.

Codemasters have got money. The question here is whether Codemasters has got the talent?

Talent is a rare thing.

Having 20 million quid in the bank is rarer.

Yea. Look at how awesome Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six turned out when they made use of Ubisoft's big budget

By bye realism

Well hopefully Codemasters doesn't do the same, but be prepared...

But even if it does suck, we'll still have ArmA 2

Look at how BI ruined ArmA - even though they DO have the talent.

They didn't ruin anything. ArmA is still fun as hell and I would play it over any other 1st person shooter, tactical game or simulation anyday.

Codemasters have got money. The question here is whether Codemasters has got the talent?

Talent is a rare thing.

Having 20 million quid in the bank is rarer.

Yea. Look at how awesome Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six turned out when they made use of Ubisoft's big budget

By bye realism

Ubisoft never gave them a big budget.

At least, the only one it gave a big budget was Ghost Recon.

Which was fucking awesome.

The low budget titles like Ravenshield, Advanced Warfighter etc, weren't very good.

Talent is easy to find, everyone and his dog is a dev or a wannabe dev these days.

Games companies like Illusionsoft and Kuju London who have track records of making very high quality realism shooters can't find the sponsors.

Look at what the people who made Red Orchestra were able to do with half a million. Imagine if they had the same budget as COD!

There is no shortage of talent about, just the money to make it all happen.

Codemasters have got money. The question here is whether Codemasters has got the talent?

Talent is a rare thing.

Having 20 million quid in the bank is rarer.

Yea. Look at how awesome Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six turned out when they made use of Ubisoft's big budget

By bye realism

Well hopefully Codemasters doesn't do the same, but be prepared...

But even if it does suck, we'll still have ArmA 2

Look at how BI ruined ArmA - even though they DO have the talent.

They didn't ruin anything. ArmA is still fun as hell and I would play it over any other 1st person shooter, tactical game or simulation anyday.

Sales, and the fact that it was impossibly hard to find the title in many parts of the world, including the US paint a different picture, buddy.

Even user activity online says something else. So nice try.

If they didn't sell any Armas then there wouldn't be a Arma 2 would there?

And I found Arma in plenty of stores in my hometown after release.

I still find Arma at the local Wal-Mart and Best Buy, I think Atari did alright getting the game out there. Not to mention 6 months of full-page advertising in PC Gamer.

And as far as online activity, you can't compare it to something like Battlefield, where you can get the game for 10 USD.

It's still got about as many online players as Crysis has, and it's got many more than UT3. If Arma was 10 dollars, you would probably see more people online for it, too.

Sales, and the fact that it was impossibly hard to find the title in many parts of the world, including the US paint a different picture, buddy.  

Even user activity online says something else.  So nice try.

But they kept supporting it, and they're making an ArmA 2, and they're still alive, so nice try

Talking about the US doesn't mean much here, ArmA and OFP did better in Europe.

Even in South Africa I had no trouble finding ArmA and Queens Gambit.

Online activity is higher than the recent race sims, so it's good by 'realistic games' standards.

OFP did better in Europe because Codemasters had abysmal U.S. distribution. The game just never penetrated the U.S. market. It had been on the shelves here for a full year before any of my American friends had ever heard of it, let alone been able to find it. GOTY in Europe, not on sale in the U.S.

Atari has done much better for BIS on that front.

If they didn't sell any Armas then there wouldn't be a Arma 2 would there?

And I found Arma in plenty of stores in my hometown after release.

I think if the game had sold as well as OPF, then they would have just sat on their arses drinking cocktails all day, reading about how fabulous they all are on the internet for another 5 years until they ran out of money and had to go back to work again.

Well I don't think businesses work quite like that Baff1. Charming theory anyway.

porting OFP into the old XBOX is a hell of a work, dont make it sounds so easy m8

Like Baff1 said, that is the way it works. ArmA 2 is comming fast because BIS is getting low of funds. Sure it could be worse, however it could be much better.

And look at what gaming press had to say about ArmA: Barely in good game genre, i'd guess... Definedly not bad for small company, but not very pleasing picture if we compare it to OFP. Against that background it's easy to say that if BIS didn't ruin ArmA, they atleast did it worse than OFP.

And other thing: ArmA walked on fame of OFP, ArmA 2 walks on fame of ArmA. This time BIS has to succeed better with gaming press. This is the way i see it.

Yes. It always pours down into OFP, which i think is bit unfair for ArmA. If we compare gaming industry of nowdays and OFP's days we see that shooters in general have advanced alot. I dont' know in what plastic bag you guys keep your heads, but when i made holes for my eyes into my plastic bag i saw whole different world. Nowdays shooters are great, there is quite big variety, their gameplay is polished, they are immersive and even realistic. ArmA can offer just two things much better than current shooter: easy-to-handle Mission editor (+scripting) and big scale. Alot of things and features is dragging behind today's standarts.

If we compare this to times of OFP, i think OFP was pretty much superioir or atleast upto-date in every aspect when comparing into general level of shooters. And back then, if my memory serves me right, realism was just working it way into genre. Forexample it showed realism that you had iron sights and 1-3 hits are enough for game over.