Operation Flashpoint 2 - Games

[QUOTE=SFArial;17754658]The engine seems a lot more polished than arma2 engine.[/QUOTE] When will people stop saying that? The only thing that engine does is limit things like fuck, if it was anywhere close to the scale of arma 2 it wouldn't run half as good.

[QUOTE=JeRK;17754723]When will people stop saying that? The only thing that engine does is limit things like fuck, if it was anywhere close to the scale of arma 2 it wouldn't run half as good.[/QUOTE] For example buildings fail in arma, so does HDR. [editline]01:49PM[/editline] Okay, here's an example: I was on a roof with a teammate, he got shot and I had to give him first aid. Just when I started it, the guy dissappeared and teleported down, inside the building (what you can't enter). Stupid collision (and physics) system is stupid.

Am i the only one having trouble finding games online? I tried finding a server yesterday on ranked and unranked, there was only 1 game which had 3 people in it. Hopefully more people will get on soon.

I'm loving this. It's actual working co-op, rather than the broken ArmA one. Also, looks nice. [editline]01:07PM[/editline] [QUOTE=JeRK;17754723]When will people stop saying that? The only thing that engine does is limit things like fuck, if it was anywhere close to the scale of arma 2 it wouldn't run half as good.[/QUOTE] No, because it's true. I couldn't give a shit, if it can run 16v16 multiplayer each with an AI squad of 8, then it's doing fine. [editline]01:08PM[/editline] [QUOTE=professional;17753646]In the dev videos on youtube "showing off" the engine and island. It's funny how at the start of this thread, people were raging at me when I said this was gonna a be a piece of shit that failed to deliver on it's promises and how I was full of shit because I couldn't possibly know anything about a game thats not yet out. Now that's it released, I'm right yet again...[/QUOTE] Well no, you're not. Because it's not a piece of shit, it's actually quite a good game. Note game, rather than what ArmA2 was. Calling ArmA2 a game is too much a compliment. Also, functional AI!

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17755021]I'm loving this. It's actual working co-op, rather than the broken ArmA one. Also, looks nice. [editline]01:07PM[/editline] No, because it's true. I couldn't give a shit, if it can run 16v16 multiplayer each with an AI squad of 8, then it's doing fine. [editline]01:08PM[/editline] Well no, you're not. Because it's not a piece of shit, it's actually quite a good game. Note game, rather than what ArmA2 was. Calling ArmA2 a game is too much a compliment. Also, functional AI![/QUOTE] Broken Arma co-op? The only thing broken in Arma co-op is what the person who made the mission breaks.

I hate it when people with no knowledge of a game say untrue things about it, especially when they know they're wrong. I hate fanboys. But I also hate sequels that aren't sequels. So I'm just going to hate everybody and be done with it.

I find it really unrealistic how no house got furniture inside.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17755021] Well no, you're not. Because it's not a piece of shit, it's actually quite a good game. Note game, rather than what ArmA2 was. Calling ArmA2 a game is too much a compliment. Also, functional AI![/QUOTE] It's fucking terrible. The only merit the game holds in on console. Functional AI my ass, I had to fucking babysit the AI through a number of situations. The engine is shithouse, nothing like what they promised, it looks like shit, and has a fucking entity limit of 64. Not that you have any idea how small that is, as you've obviously never seen the sheer scale and depth that can be pulled off on a better engine (cough ArmA 2). If you're fine with just chucking down two AI squads on a shitty, dull, boring and uninspired map, that's fine, but it's [B]NOT[/B] what Operation Flashpoint is meant to be. Don't take my word for it, almost the entire tactical gaming/FPS community has nothing but contempt for OFP2DR, and even a good portion of them dislike ArmA II, so don't pass it off as fanboyism, it's anything but.

[QUOTE=Roly poly;17755235]Broken Arma co-op? The only thing broken in Arma co-op is what the person who made the mission breaks.[/QUOTE] What. One of the missions in ArmA2 was actually unfinishable, they had to patch it. And in the bit where [sp]you join the guerilla[/sp], unless you have four people the AI doesn't move. [editline]02:25PM[/editline] [QUOTE=professional;17755430]It's fucking terrible. The only merit the game holds in on console. Functional AI my ass, I had to fucking babysit the AI through a number of situations. The engine is shithouse, nothing like what they promised, it looks like shit, and has a fucking entity limit of 64. Not that you have any idea how small that is, as you've obviously never seen the sheer scale and depth that can be pulled off on a better engine (cough ArmA 2). If you're fine with just chucking down two AI squads on a shitty, dull, boring and uninspired map, that's fine, but it's [B]NOT[/B] what Operation Flashpoint is meant to be. Don't take my word for it, almost the entire tactical gaming/FPS community has nothing but contempt for OFP2DR, and even a good portion of them dislike ArmA II, so don't pass it off as fanboyism, it's anything but.[/QUOTE] Who gives a flying FUCK what the entire tactical gaming community gives a shit about? This is a GOOD GAME. I couldn't give a toss if someone is telling me it's unrealistic, it's FUN. The game holds merit on the fact that I have had an absolute ton of fun playing co-op with friends, doing shit how we wanted. In ArmA, we couldn't do that. Also, yeah the AI is better because it actually takes cover, rather than in ArmA where it just sort of goes HURF DURF HIP FIRE

This game is absoilutely dire. I'm taking it straight back to the shop today. .........

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17755653]What. One of the missions in ArmA2 was actually unfinishable, they had to patch it. And in the bit where [sp]you join the guerilla[/sp], unless you have four people the AI doesn't move. [editline]02:25PM[/editline] Who gives a flying FUCK what the entire tactical gaming community gives a shit about? This is a GOOD GAME. I couldn't give a toss if someone is telling me it's unrealistic, it's FUN. The game holds merit on the fact that I have had an absolute ton of fun playing co-op with friends, doing shit how we wanted. In ArmA, we couldn't do that. Also, yeah the AI is better because it actually takes cover, rather than in ArmA where it just sort of goes HURF DURF HIP FIRE[/QUOTE] So... you're talking about the campaign? disregarding what the game is really about with user created co-op missions?

[QUOTE=Roly poly;17755803]So... you're talking about the campaign? disregarding the ACTUAL coop found in other peoples missions?[/QUOTE] Are you trying to tell me that the missions made by other people are better than the ones that Bohemia made for the entire campaign. If so, what does that say about ArmA2.

Wow I jsut played the multiplayer. That elevated it to a new level of complete shitness. We're in the middle of some misty field with a personnel carrier. We hop int he front, some guy drives for about 5 minutes without seeing a thing. He gets out, stands at the side of the road. [b]END OF ROUND[/b]

And yet the original OFP still remains the best one.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17755829]Are you trying to tell me that the missions made by other people are better than the ones that Bohemia made for the entire campaign. If so, what does that say about ArmA2.[/QUOTE] It says nothing. They created a great game with an awesome editor. The campaign is just a single player/small co-op bonus that comes with it. The only thing you seemed concerned about is the campaign which in both games is mediocre at best.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17755829]Are you trying to tell me that the missions made by other people are better than the ones that Bohemia made for the entire campaign. If so, what does that say about ArmA2.[/QUOTE] It doesn't say shit you dropkick. 90% custom content created for any game is as good or better than the oringinal product. The modelling and skinning community for CSS shits all over Valve's crappy default models, are you saying that says something? :downs: Sorry that bohemia interactive spends more time on giving the game the tools for a dedicated community and a great lifespan, rather than wasting time on a hollywood epic campaign.

[QUOTE=professional;17756143]It doesn't say shit you dropkick. 90% custom content created for any game is as good or better than the oringinal product. The modelling and skinning community for CSS shits all over Valve's crappy default models, are you saying that says something? :downs: Sorry that bohemia interactive spends more time on giving the game the tools for a dedicated community and a great lifespan, rather than wasting time on a hollywood epic campaign.[/QUOTE] Well yeah I am saying that says something. Look at Crysis. Hollywood campaign, AND a brilliant editor. Looking at the editor currently, easy as hell to use, and according to a friend who made missions for ArmA, also good due to the lua it uses. Also, I can make up statistics too, entirely wrong ones at that. [editline]03:11PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Roly poly;17756060]It says nothing. They created a great game with an awesome editor. The campaign is just a single player/small co-op bonus that comes with it. The only thing you seemed concerned about is the campaign which in both games is mediocre at best.[/QUOTE] No. I'm concerned about the game I'm paying money for. Not "OH IT MIGHT BE GOOD IN A WHILE WHEN SOMEONE CAN BE BOTHERED TO MAKE GOOD SHIT FOR IT". This seems to be the entire thing behind ArmA. Both ArmA1 and 2 were totally broken on release, and they got mediocre scores for it. Now they've patched it, they're just about playable. ArmA1 multiplayer is better than 2 because shit was made for it. OPFlash2 works, without patching or custom content.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17756192]Well yeah I am saying that says something. Look at Crysis. Hollywood campaign, AND a brilliant editor. Looking at the editor currently, easy as hell to use, and according to a friend who made missions for ArmA, also good due to the lua it uses. Also, I can make up statistics too, entirely wrong ones at that.[/QUOTE] Hahah oh wow. You're going to use crysis as an example? Looool. Crysis was yet another shit game, with failed promises. It was like an expensive tech demo, looked pretty, severely lacking in any gameplay with substance. Brilliant editor? My ass, it's mediocre at best. It's great for creating new maps, that's about it. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17756192] OPFlash2 works, without patching or custom content.[/QUOTE] Hahaha.

[QUOTE=professional;17756243]Hahah oh wow. You're going to use crysis as an example? Looool. Crysis was yet another shit game, with failed promises. It was like an expensive tech demo, looked pretty, severely lacking in any gameplay with substance. Brilliant editor? My ass, it's mediocre at best. It's great for creating new maps, that's about it. Hahaha.[/QUOTE] Hahahaha. Did you just try to insult a map editor by saying that "it's great for creating new maps, that's about it". I'll assume you haven't even used it. No. Crysis wasn't another shit game. It wasn't an expensive tech demo. Have you actually played it? No it didn't do anything out of the ordinary, but it was FUN.

[QUOTE=professional;17756243]Hahah oh wow. You're going to use crysis as an example? Looool. Crysis was yet another shit game, with failed promises. It was like an expensive tech demo, looked pretty, severely lacking in any gameplay with substance. Brilliant editor? My ass, it's mediocre at best. It's great for creating new maps, that's about it. Hahaha.[/QUOTE] Crysis was good. The editor is really good.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17756328]Hahahaha. Did you just try to insult a map editor by saying that "it's great for creating new maps, that's about it". I'll assume you haven't even used it. No. Crysis wasn't another shit game. It wasn't an expensive tech demo. Have you actually played it? No it didn't do anything out of the ordinary, but it was FUN.[/QUOTE] Only thing fun about crysis was to let off some steam to run 'n gun, in which it has little to no depth of gameplay and a horrid storyline.

It's coming Tuesday, is it optimized?

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17756328] No. Crysis wasn't another shit game. It wasn't an expensive tech demo. Have you actually played it? No it didn't do anything out of the ordinary, but it was FUN.[/QUOTE] Yeah I've fucking played it, I've reinstalled it about 10 times hoping in some vain attempt that each time I might get some fucking FUN out of it, to no avail. Crysis was intensely fascinating for the first 5 minutes, after which you realize just how dull and fucking boring the game actually is. [QUOTE=Peavy262;17756427]It's coming Tuesday, is it optimized?[/QUOTE] Depends on your sense of optimization. It's BF2 level graphics with slightly superior lighting system. In that sense, it runs extremely well. On the other hand, it looks like a fried dog turd with distance rendering problems. Pick your poison.

The editor in Arma is good. The editor in OFP is good. But I prefer OFP any day because when I play MP or custom missions in Arma, no matter how many people there are in the server, or if it's just me, I always get severe lag no matter what. I don't give a shit if it's making the AI great, the game should never ever lag. "But!" You might say, "Your computer obviously sucks!" My computer can run every game on high (including crysis and OFP2) without so much as a hiccup. OFP may have an entity limit, but that's because they want to make sure everyone can play every scenario. This is a great design decision, because it puts all computers that can run the game on the same playing field. 64 is quite is an impressive amount of enitities, cod4 used about 10 max at a time, and even in the arma 2 campaign they only used about 10 -15 at a time (they had them all spawned on the map at one time sure, but that's due to a shit engine that requires that). Also, crysis == all in all great and fun.

[QUOTE=professional;17756496]Yeah I've fucking played it, I've reinstalled it about 10 times hoping in some vain attempt that each time I might get some fucking FUN out of it, to no avail. Crysis was intensely fascinating for the first 5 minutes, after which you realize just how dull and fucking boring the game actually is. Depends on your sense of optimization. It's BF2 level graphics with slightly superior lighting system. In that sense, it runs extremely well. On the other hand, it looks like a fried dog turd with distance rendering problems. Pick your poison.[/QUOTE] So what you're saying is. Opinion. Also, it's not BF2 level graphics by any stretch of the imagination. You've tried to say repeatedly that you are not an ArmA fanboy, but the bullshit you are saying like "Crysis didn't have a good editor" etc suggests otherwise.

[QUOTE=professional;17756496]Arma2 was intensely fascinating for the first 5 minutes, after which you realize just how dull and fucking boring the game actually is.[/QUOTE] Fixed.

[QUOTE=ambushsabre;17756532]The editor in Arma is good. The editor in OFP is good. But I prefer OFP any day because when I play MP or custom missions in Arma, no matter how many people there are in the server, or if it's just me, I always get severe lag no matter what. I don't give a shit if it's making the AI great, the game should never ever lag. "But!" You might say, "Your computer obviously sucks!" [/QUOTE] I wouldn't say any such thing. One of ArmA's failures that wasn't corrected until the very late 1.14+ patches was netcode was that iffy at the best of times. It was prone to a number of issues. On the other hand, with a powerful server and ideal conditions, I participated in a huge 128 players + AI event with minimal lag, albeit one that crashed about 2 and half hours into the event. But that's nothing to sneeze at. All this being said, I can't say I had severe lag all that often, infact, the only time I ever had really severe lag on ArmA 1 was back in patch 1.04 or something and I was playing on a foreign server. Problem is somehow these early netcode problems carried over to ArmA 2 somehow. I'm not going to make excuses for it, I have no idea how it happened, was another team handling ArmA bugwork while the others were developing ArmAII? I have no idea. But it will be fixed, just as it was in ArmA and just as it was in OFP before that. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17756540]So what you're saying is. Opinion. Also, it's not BF2 level graphics by any stretch of the imagination. You've tried to say repeatedly that you are not an ArmA fanboy, but the bullshit you are saying like "Crysis didn't have a good editor" etc suggests otherwise.[/QUOTE] No. Crysis sucked balls. You can go search the dregs of the FP threads to see the many large crysis threads in which more people disliked the game than those who loved it. I [B]never[/B] said I wasn't a ArmA fanboy. Reading comprehension fail.[B]I said I could judge the game from a standpoint without any fanboyism whatsoever[/B].

[QUOTE=ambushsabre;17756546]Fixed.[/QUOTE] Oh wow you obviously completely missed the entire point of Arma. It's okay if Arma isn't your type of game but it's far from boring and dull.

I would be a happy camper if the 360 had Backwards compatibility for OFP Elite on the Xbox. Loved that shit.

[QUOTE=Roly poly;17756642]Oh wow you obviously completely missed the entire point of Arma. It's okay if Arma isn't your type of game but it's far from boring and dull.[/QUOTE] I had fun last night playing with SA goons on their server and TS, but we only ever played one real tactical round that lasted an hour and a half. The rest was funny as fuck helicopter crashing (unintentional), which was funny, but all around pretty boring. Every time I open up OFP2 I have a blast no matter what I'm doing, it always feels very intense. And it's possible to have those tactical moments too, if the mission is set up correctly.