Originally Posted by cybergenics @Quake1-rules, Arma 2 does need a powerful graphics card, but unfortunately this statement is both fact and theory. Hundreds of users (yes hundreds) have reported vis the BI forums that there is literally no difference between say a 9800gtx+ and a GTX285 in most cases, although quad cores do better in the CPU stakes. There are people who have upgraded from say a GTX260 to a GTX285 and noticed no fps gain, literally scores of people have complained about this. The game doesn't run very well on low and mid range cards but after a certain point, seemingly for a mind boggling reason, completely diminishing returns set in.
As for PR, well I have to disagree that it is better than Arma II. For starters the game is now over-run by the same infants that over-run BF2, spawnkilling, destroying vehicles, camping, not observing team work etc etc. Then you have the pompous lot who are (or claim) they are in the Army and take it so seriously they literally spoil it for everyone else. When I played it last year I remarked to the rest of my squad that a real Vodnik was in fact amphibious, and some cretin calling himself 'Royal Marine Joe' kicked me from the squad and said i should do and play BF2 if I wanted to BS. I'm pretty sure that he was the ideal person though to be enlisted by the armed forces to go and fight imaginary terrorists and protect oil pipelines though.
Yeah good point on the graphics card. Yes A2 seems CPU bound, not GPU.
Regarding the vanilla BF2 infants invading PR, there is some truth to that. I experienced that last night to some degree. That's a matter for server admins and game rules to address and it can and does work, but it can't always. But since you mention team work, I'd say that PR squads cooperate far better than any other online shooter, including ArmA2 (except perhaps private servers). The way PR is designed it greatly rewards squad teamwork, instead of being indifferent like most games, including OF:DR. Most squads use VOIP effectively. I played ArmA2 for the first 30 or so days it was out and didn't experience much squad cooperation at all. It was the opposite really. Squad leader isn't bestowed much responsibility, or at least the user interface (UI) doesn't make it easy.
Royal Marine Joe was a jerk, certainly. Just join another squad. I have bad & good squad days too.
No, sorry, ArmA2 has huge issues. As far as I'm concerned, ArmA2 doesn't approach PR on several important fronts. Neither does OF:DR. But they are different types of games, I think. A2 is more PvE and PR is PvP. But OF:DR is even worse, due to there not being dedicated servers.
Originally Posted by darjin I had to register just to comment on this review. After I read this review I had to go over and read the ARMA2 review. 9 and this a 5? WTF? Why wasn't the ArmA2 review just as detailed and harsh? If this gets a 5 then ArmA2 MAYBE a 6. The AI in ArmA2 is attrocious. Plain and simple. That's the only reason I stopped playing. Add on to that the evil command menu. Yes Op2 is simpler but it makes for funner gameplay in my opinion. I haven't had problems with the AI in this game yet other than they can't drive for ish. It troubles me to see people not buying this game because of this review alone. And over at the codemasters forums, it's a bunch of the same BS. I don't know if it's Arma2 fanboys, or just folks living in those countries and they're scared money will be taken from their mouths. I feel if you're gonna review this harsh then give the same equal review treatment to ArmA2.
Yeh same here, overrating Arma 2 (by a LOT), and underrating OFP2 by a similar stretch. The critisicms in the review did in no way point to dropping 5 points for this game, and most of the comments made were distinctly immature, plus there was a distinct lack of detail regarding MP - which is where the strength of this game is meant to lie, not in it's SP campaigns. I can't help but smell a foul review, and it's disappointing to hear that people are cancelling pre-orders based on this skewed opinion that flies awkwardly into the face of an average press rating in it's 8.0s.
Originally Posted by Wedgiekray Yeh same here, overrating Arma 2 (by a LOT), and underrating OFP2 by a similar stretch. The critisicms in the review did in no way point to dropping 5 points for this game, and most of the comments made were distinctly immature, plus there was a distinct lack of detail regarding MP - which is where the strength of this game is meant to lie, not in it's SP campaigns. I can't help but smell a foul review, and it's disappointing to hear that people are cancelling pre-orders based on this skewed opinion that flies awkwardly into the face of an average press rating in it's 8.0s.
Well the MP is a disaster, for the most part. The coop is the best part and that's limited to four players. The whole MP interface is consolized. That's a bad thing. It isn't designed to be used with a mouse. For example, you can't double click a MP game to join it. You have to click it then click the bottom 'enter game' button which isn't clear at first.
PvP MP is worthless with this game. No dedicated servers. Period, no further discussion needed.
Oh and by the way, since the AI is pretty good in this game (better than ArmA2), coop is indeed the best part of MP but the big problem is that people disconnect during the game. But new people can't join to replace disconnected players. OF:DR does not support joining MP games in-progress. That's a fatal flaw, aside as I've said numerous times already, no dedicated servers.
The one feature that I like in MP is that the game supports spectating. I love that. But there is a problem with it in that you fly as a ghost around the map between players and it is rather slow to get from player to player. And you can't just click a player name and jump to that player to spectate him, no. Remember, the MP interface is entirely designed around a gamepad and it is clunky with a mouse.
Thanks Q1-rules, that's actually more detailed than the review. I'll judge for myself the MP problem tonight, the pvp mp should have been where this game rocked. Hopefully in time a lot of the creases will be ironed out.
Originally Posted by quake1-rules Yeah good point on the graphics card. Yes A2 seems CPU bound, not GPU.
Regarding the vanilla BF2 infants invading PR, there is some truth to that. I experienced that last night to some degree. That's a matter for server admins and game rules to address and it can and does work, but it can't always. But since you mention team work, I'd say that PR squads cooperate far better than any other online shooter, including ArmA2 (except perhaps private servers). The way PR is designed it greatly rewards squad teamwork, instead of being indifferent like most games, including OF:DR. Most squads use VOIP effectively. I played ArmA2 for the first 30 or so days it was out and didn't experience much squad cooperation at all. It was the opposite really. Squad leader isn't bestowed much responsibility, or at least the user interface (UI) doesn't make it easy.
Royal Marine Joe was a jerk, certainly. Just join another squad. I have bad & good squad days too.
No, sorry, ArmA2 has huge issues. As far as I'm concerned, ArmA2 doesn't approach PR on several important fronts. Neither does OF:DR. But they are different types of games, I think. A2 is more PvE and PR is PvP. But OF:DR is even worse, due to there not being dedicated servers.
Agreed I played vBF2 from the day it came out racked up around 200hrs on it, but always felt it lacked something. When I found PR it combined the BF2 smooth game play with the bits which were missing for me. Its true that you get alot of vBF2 players come and play when a new release is out, this is because EA/Dice display it on load up on multi-player in vBF2.
If you find a good and well administrated server its a great, stick to the server rules and use VOIP and join a squad or start one with sole purpose of team work. Personally PR has gave me and extra 250hrs out of BF2 so far, not bad for £35.
I read the review you guys did of this and I have to say i'm a bit dissapointed. I know from a PC point of view this game could of been so much better. With regards to consoles though i have to say i'm very impressed. I bought it on friday for the PS3 and have spent most of the weekend playing it. Half of that time was spent punching anything that i came into contact with due to it being extremely difficult with a joypad. There are alot of annoying niggles and they are going to be patched in the next few weeks. Such as telling one of your guys to man a gun position and then 2 minutes later you see him legging it towards the enemy, he then dies. Eyes roll, and reload from checkpoint :)
I think saying the SP campaign is rubbish is a little harsh too. I'm on mission 5 and so far i've been entertained all the way through. The MP aspects for the PC are dissapointing and so are the numbers for the consoles, but i didnt buy this for big games against loads of other people. I bought this to play with my friend doing a MP campaign.
I would say if you are on the PC stick with Arma II if your a console user like myself then I recommend this to anybody who liked the original. I was worried when I bought it after reading some reviews. But I feel for what i paid for it I got excellent value for money. I can see myself playing this for some time. Once the bugs have been sorted I can see it being even better.
Originally Posted by SchizoFrog The score of 5 is probably very fair and even then could still be generous. This is blatentley another example of ruining games for the cross-platform market. There is no emphasis anymore on genuine quality of gameplay. The reason for this? Easy, there are far too many simple minded idiots now playing games since consoles have gone mainstream and the developers want their money.
Simple Minded idiots???
I actually take offense to this. I used to play PC games, and loved them up big time until i played on the PS3. I couldnt afford an upgrade so spent the money on a console instead. Best investment ever. The PC games market is suffering and developers are focusing on areas where they know they will make money.
The game has not been ruined for the cross platform market at all. It works well for the PS3 and if you don't like that, tough.
No offense, but your a PC snob. I didn't even know these existed until I got a console. Alot of PC users expect everything to be better on PC's than consoles and get annoyed when games get released on consoles and not PC's. Take FIFA10 for example. PS3 version amazing PC version shocking.
Dont presume that because people use consoles there simple minded idiots. As i will just presume your another of the many PC snobs.
Originally Posted by Daggz I couldnt afford an upgrade so spent the money on a console instead.
Um, you could almost build a fairly capable mid range gaming machine for the price of a PS3 (if you bought it when it first came out you could have done so with ease), the argument of "cant afford to upgrade PC" isn't entirely valid if your a PS3 owner...
Originally Posted by Daggz It works well for the PS3 and if you don't like that, tough.
Yeah that's apparently the attitude that many developers have taken towards PC gamers. The PS3 is limited compared to what a modern PC is so that pretty much validates the issues PC gamers have with console ports like DR:OF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daggz Alot of PC users expect everything to be better on PC's than consoles
No but we want FPS games on PC to take advantage of the platform and not treat us like children. 'Better' is the natural result with mouse aiming and a user interface that works well with a mouse. Some games are more naturally suited to consoles, but FPS games like the original Operation Flashpoint are naturally at home on the PC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daggz Dont presume that because people use consoles there simple minded idiots.
Not idiots.. But definitely not hard core. It's the causal and restricted nature of the console platform which encourages games like OF:DR to show the weaknesses of the console for serious FPS gaming. So if a game, such as OF:DR, takes the console as the target market, the game itself lacks essentials like dedicated servers, joining games-in-progress and an efficient mouse+keyboard user interface.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daggz As i will just presume your another of the many PC snobs.
Are you showing the same prejudice against PC gamers as what offends you when they express it against console gamers?
We PC FPS'ers just don't want your console games Its not snobbery, it's a question of not liking dumbed down console games which lack features we consider essential. We don't want games that treat us as if we are using a gamepad. If we want console games we'll buy a console. We game on PC's because we like it more and we like the strengths of the PC as a gaming platform.
Originally Posted by Daggz The game has not been ruined for the cross platform market at all. It works well for the PS3 and if you don't like that, tough.
That makes no sense at all. You haven't even played it on the PC, so how can you make a judgement on how it performs across multiple platforms? The fact it works well on the PS3 proves just that - that it works well on that platform, despite the fact that many people have said the same mechanic doesn't work well on the PC because its clunky interface has been carried straight over from the console to the PC, rather that developed independently to take advantage of the extra functionality the PC platform offers. That's evidence of cross-platform oversimplification if ever I've seen it.
And yeah, enjoy your console which happens to cost more than a high end graphics card, and more expensive games to go with it
So far i actually like it. Ok, there are a few niggles that can be patched out but as a GAME that is supposed to entertain you it does what it says on the tin for me, £17.99 well spent.
I love playing around with the mission editor making up my own scenarios and the fact that you actually have to think about how you will attack the enemy and look for them (they can be bloody hard to spot)
I'd give it a 7 out of 10. With better online support and a few bugs sorted out it could be awesome
I just want to play PC game like OFP1, may be i m too old and nostalgic lol...
More and more, developers just think about console players...
Arma1 was so buggy, arma2 need a high graphic card and also buggy game and OFP2 seems only coop game like arma2
Developers didn't think about main thing, most important, Community, pc players are able to develop their own mod and game still alive throught community like OFP1. ( 5 000 000 gamers)
We will wait about new MW2, may be we will enjoy it ...
Originally Posted by Arnaud31 We will wait about new MW2, may be we will enjoy it ...
MW2 will definitely be a console game but at least there will very likely be dedicated servers and joining games-in-progress. MW2 will also be a very simple shooter compared to BF2 or ArmA2 or any other serious PC FPS. I'd say OF:DR has more depth than MW2, even though OF:DR is a console game. But MW2 will be better polished, probably more fun, and better supported.
I would also say the AI is problematic in this game now I own it and have played it. There are issues with the AI in Arma II, sometimes the opposite of what you would expect like them being able to see through cover and be able to hit you very easily, which I'm not sure has been fixed yet or not in 1.4. The AI in OFDR seems to be an issue, in one of the missions I stumbled upon a Chinese squad who stood still doing nothing till I took a step forward, they could clearly see me, I wasn't hidden. As I opened up on them, a member of my squad casually walked in front of me, and took a round in the sward.
I think a 5 is a generous score for the game, don't get me wrong the graphics are all nice and fluffy and cute, but the game play is very repetitive and soon becomes boring in single player mode, the fact that you cant choose your weapons is very annoying as well.
The Multiplayer side of the game is shocking... no dedicated server support no punkbuter no nothing in fact, you have to join a server they tell you to join... its a justified 5 in my opinion, any one scoring this game any more than 7 / 70% is defiantly on the Codemasters Payroll...
I defiantly wouldn't buy this game if i had played a demo of it... but hey these game companies are not daft are they.. they stopped giving out demo's 18 months ago because of just this, shoddy console ports
Cancel your orders, return it if you have no opened it and don't buy any more PC games until you play a demo troops.. unless you have money to waste.
Originally Posted by Hustler Its when you see 'Brand New' Pc games like this running so well on limited hardware that you realise what an utter waste of money the new generation of graphics cards are...
Hey, some of us can't afford to spunk £300 on a graphics card every month, it's nice to be able to play one or two 'brand new' games.
I have an athlon 64 single core 4000+ and a 4770 (which I bought recently, an upgrade to a 1950) and this runs pretty well.
I also found it pretty fun. I'd describe it as a slightly less exciting but slightly more taxing COD4, which is pretty much the game I've been waiting for. The vehicle physics are, however, shite... an homage to the original Flashpoint, maybe? ;)
I agree with the 5 score based on the whole package.
I thought the campaign captured the atmosphere of the original and is second to none, the game feels incredibly polished compared with the likes of ARMA2 but we PC gamers get our real gametime from multiplayer.
Codemasters is NOT releasing dedicated server files and the game is unplayable in multiplayer (coop aside) as we can't support anywhere near 32 players on domestic connections.
Modern Warfare 2's Infinity Ward have declared up front that they will also not be providing dedicated server files for the PC, prompting outrage from the gaming community.
A petition has been set up which has reached in excess of 70,000 signatures when I last checked and if these people boycott purchasing the game - that's 70,000 x £35 (pre-order from Play.com) in lost revenue.
Is ths an acceptable amount to write off??
Apparently so....
Plus, PCZ is notorious for throwing out 90+ scores to games that are widely regarded as not deserving such praise, they've been doing it for years.
Yes and yes.
I lol'd when I read that you can't shoot out tyres, fuel tanks or engine blocks on cars. Jesus, even Crysis had the tyres, and GTAIV had the fuel tank recognition. That's a shameful oversight.
Comments 51 to 72 of 72
ReplyYeah good point on the graphics card. Yes A2 seems CPU bound, not GPU.
Regarding the vanilla BF2 infants invading PR, there is some truth to that. I experienced that last night to some degree. That's a matter for server admins and game rules to address and it can and does work, but it can't always. But since you mention team work, I'd say that PR squads cooperate far better than any other online shooter, including ArmA2 (except perhaps private servers). The way PR is designed it greatly rewards squad teamwork, instead of being indifferent like most games, including OF:DR. Most squads use VOIP effectively. I played ArmA2 for the first 30 or so days it was out and didn't experience much squad cooperation at all. It was the opposite really. Squad leader isn't bestowed much responsibility, or at least the user interface (UI) doesn't make it easy.
Royal Marine Joe was a jerk, certainly. Just join another squad. I have bad & good squad days too.
No, sorry, ArmA2 has huge issues. As far as I'm concerned, ArmA2 doesn't approach PR on several important fronts. Neither does OF:DR. But they are different types of games, I think. A2 is more PvE and PR is PvP. But OF:DR is even worse, due to there not being dedicated servers.
Yeh same here, overrating Arma 2 (by a LOT), and underrating OFP2 by a similar stretch. The critisicms in the review did in no way point to dropping 5 points for this game, and most of the comments made were distinctly immature, plus there was a distinct lack of detail regarding MP - which is where the strength of this game is meant to lie, not in it's SP campaigns. I can't help but smell a foul review, and it's disappointing to hear that people are cancelling pre-orders based on this skewed opinion that flies awkwardly into the face of an average press rating in it's 8.0s.
Well the MP is a disaster, for the most part. The coop is the best part and that's limited to four players. The whole MP interface is consolized. That's a bad thing. It isn't designed to be used with a mouse. For example, you can't double click a MP game to join it. You have to click it then click the bottom 'enter game' button which isn't clear at first.
PvP MP is worthless with this game. No dedicated servers. Period, no further discussion needed.
The one feature that I like in MP is that the game supports spectating. I love that. But there is a problem with it in that you fly as a ghost around the map between players and it is rather slow to get from player to player. And you can't just click a player name and jump to that player to spectate him, no. Remember, the MP interface is entirely designed around a gamepad and it is clunky with a mouse.
ps. QW rules :)
Was looking forward to giving this a go over the weekend :(
Agreed I played vBF2 from the day it came out racked up around 200hrs on it, but always felt it lacked something. When I found PR it combined the BF2 smooth game play with the bits which were missing for me. Its true that you get alot of vBF2 players come and play when a new release is out, this is because EA/Dice display it on load up on multi-player in vBF2.
If you find a good and well administrated server its a great, stick to the server rules and use VOIP and join a squad or start one with sole purpose of team work. Personally PR has gave me and extra 250hrs out of BF2 so far, not bad for £35.
I read the review you guys did of this and I have to say i'm a bit dissapointed. I know from a PC point of view this game could of been so much better. With regards to consoles though i have to say i'm very impressed. I bought it on friday for the PS3 and have spent most of the weekend playing it. Half of that time was spent punching anything that i came into contact with due to it being extremely difficult with a joypad. There are alot of annoying niggles and they are going to be patched in the next few weeks. Such as telling one of your guys to man a gun position and then 2 minutes later you see him legging it towards the enemy, he then dies. Eyes roll, and reload from checkpoint :)
I think saying the SP campaign is rubbish is a little harsh too. I'm on mission 5 and so far i've been entertained all the way through. The MP aspects for the PC are dissapointing and so are the numbers for the consoles, but i didnt buy this for big games against loads of other people. I bought this to play with my friend doing a MP campaign.
I would say if you are on the PC stick with Arma II if your a console user like myself then I recommend this to anybody who liked the original. I was worried when I bought it after reading some reviews. But I feel for what i paid for it I got excellent value for money. I can see myself playing this for some time. Once the bugs have been sorted I can see it being even better.
Simple Minded idiots???
I actually take offense to this. I used to play PC games, and loved them up big time until i played on the PS3. I couldnt afford an upgrade so spent the money on a console instead. Best investment ever. The PC games market is suffering and developers are focusing on areas where they know they will make money.
The game has not been ruined for the cross platform market at all. It works well for the PS3 and if you don't like that, tough.
No offense, but your a PC snob. I didn't even know these existed until I got a console. Alot of PC users expect everything to be better on PC's than consoles and get annoyed when games get released on consoles and not PC's. Take FIFA10 for example. PS3 version amazing PC version shocking.
Dont presume that because people use consoles there simple minded idiots. As i will just presume your another of the many PC snobs.
Um, you could almost build a fairly capable mid range gaming machine for the price of a PS3 (if you bought it when it first came out you could have done so with ease), the argument of "cant afford to upgrade PC" isn't entirely valid if your a PS3 owner...
Yeah that's apparently the attitude that many developers have taken towards PC gamers. The PS3 is limited compared to what a modern PC is so that pretty much validates the issues PC gamers have with console ports like DR:OF.
No but we want FPS games on PC to take advantage of the platform and not treat us like children. 'Better' is the natural result with mouse aiming and a user interface that works well with a mouse. Some games are more naturally suited to consoles, but FPS games like the original Operation Flashpoint are naturally at home on the PC.
Not idiots.. But definitely not hard core. It's the causal and restricted nature of the console platform which encourages games like OF:DR to show the weaknesses of the console for serious FPS gaming. So if a game, such as OF:DR, takes the console as the target market, the game itself lacks essentials like dedicated servers, joining games-in-progress and an efficient mouse+keyboard user interface.
Are you showing the same prejudice against PC gamers as what offends you when they express it against console gamers?
We PC FPS'ers just don't want your console games Its not snobbery, it's a question of not liking dumbed down console games which lack features we consider essential. We don't want games that treat us as if we are using a gamepad. If we want console games we'll buy a console. We game on PC's because we like it more and we like the strengths of the PC as a gaming platform.
That makes no sense at all. You haven't even played it on the PC, so how can you make a judgement on how it performs across multiple platforms? The fact it works well on the PS3 proves just that - that it works well on that platform, despite the fact that many people have said the same mechanic doesn't work well on the PC because its clunky interface has been carried straight over from the console to the PC, rather that developed independently to take advantage of the extra functionality the PC platform offers. That's evidence of cross-platform oversimplification if ever I've seen it.
And yeah, enjoy your console which happens to cost more than a high end graphics card, and more expensive games to go with it
I love playing around with the mission editor making up my own scenarios and the fact that you actually have to think about how you will attack the enemy and look for them (they can be bloody hard to spot)
I'd give it a 7 out of 10. With better online support and a few bugs sorted out it could be awesome
More and more, developers just think about console players...
Arma1 was so buggy, arma2 need a high graphic card and also buggy game and OFP2 seems only coop game like arma2
Developers didn't think about main thing, most important, Community, pc players are able to develop their own mod and game still alive throught community like OFP1. ( 5 000 000 gamers)
We will wait about new MW2, may be we will enjoy it ...
MW2 will definitely be a console game but at least there will very likely be dedicated servers and joining games-in-progress. MW2 will also be a very simple shooter compared to BF2 or ArmA2 or any other serious PC FPS. I'd say OF:DR has more depth than MW2, even though OF:DR is a console game. But MW2 will be better polished, probably more fun, and better supported.
The Multiplayer side of the game is shocking... no dedicated server support no punkbuter no nothing in fact, you have to join a server they tell you to join... its a justified 5 in my opinion, any one scoring this game any more than 7 / 70% is defiantly on the Codemasters Payroll...
I defiantly wouldn't buy this game if i had played a demo of it... but hey these game companies are not daft are they.. they stopped giving out demo's 18 months ago because of just this, shoddy console ports
Cancel your orders, return it if you have no opened it and don't buy any more PC games until you play a demo troops.. unless you have money to waste.
Hey, some of us can't afford to spunk £300 on a graphics card every month, it's nice to be able to play one or two 'brand new' games.
I have an athlon 64 single core 4000+ and a 4770 (which I bought recently, an upgrade to a 1950) and this runs pretty well.
I also found it pretty fun. I'd describe it as a slightly less exciting but slightly more taxing COD4, which is pretty much the game I've been waiting for. The vehicle physics are, however, shite... an homage to the original Flashpoint, maybe? ;)
I thought the campaign captured the atmosphere of the original and is second to none, the game feels incredibly polished compared with the likes of ARMA2 but we PC gamers get our real gametime from multiplayer.
Codemasters is NOT releasing dedicated server files and the game is unplayable in multiplayer (coop aside) as we can't support anywhere near 32 players on domestic connections.
Modern Warfare 2's Infinity Ward have declared up front that they will also not be providing dedicated server files for the PC, prompting outrage from the gaming community.
A petition has been set up which has reached in excess of 70,000 signatures when I last checked and if these people boycott purchasing the game - that's 70,000 x £35 (pre-order from Play.com) in lost revenue.
Is ths an acceptable amount to write off??
Apparently so....
Yes and yes.
I lol'd when I read that you can't shoot out tyres, fuel tanks or engine blocks on cars. Jesus, even Crysis had the tyres, and GTAIV had the fuel tank recognition. That's a shameful oversight.
-
« Previous
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums