OFP:DR Is confusing me !!!!!!!!!!!!

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Dark_prince123
Dark_prince123

1149

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#1 Dark_prince123
Member since 2008 • 1149 Posts

I saw the Reviews most of them praised the game but the users reviews are too bad everyone is saying that the game is designed for Consoles not for PC and its bad, it also has there is only matchmaking and no Dedicated servers soI want your opinions does it worth the 40 $ or should I save my money.

Avatar image for L1D3N
L1D3N

717

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 L1D3N
Member since 2009 • 717 Posts

So far I'm loving the game, is it a MP game? IMO not yet, that might change with patches etc. SP is spectacular and very addicting, it looks awesome and plays smooth, depending on your PC. I have compared it to BF2, Rainbow 6 vegas and Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter. I think it will be on my HDD for sometime to come.

Avatar image for djmillard2
djmillard2

1372

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 djmillard2
Member since 2005 • 1372 Posts
I love the game. the Co-op and single player are amazing. as far as dedicated servers go, codemasters has already announced a patch and we are hoping that dedicated servers will be included in the patch
Avatar image for hamelkarl
hamelkarl

207

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#4 hamelkarl
Member since 2009 • 207 Posts

Depends for everyone what you are looking for. Some will love it and some won't. I prefer ArmA2 but this kind of game could be for someone that doesn't care about realism and multiplayer. The game don't have as much features as ArmA2 either. It's all come to preference.

Let's come back to the question, shall we. Is it worth 40$ I guess without the multiplayer option... no. This kind of game is way better playing online. The single player is maybe good, but 40$ for a pc games that features is missing and probably the most important of them is not worth I guess. Still the price is not that overpriced either. Depends if you can wait or want it now. I would myself wait a couples of months. You won't miss much of the multiplayer either since there's no dedicated server. So waiting is probably the best choice!

Avatar image for Kaeladar
Kaeladar

377

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Kaeladar
Member since 2006 • 377 Posts
the keyboard controls to give orders and some stuff are annoying i plugged my xbox 360 controller on my PC to play it and then it was a lot better except for changing weapons controls feel like they were designed for consoles, but its still playable with keyboard/mouse after a little training and maybe remapping. but whatever control i used the game felt a little annoying to play for me. i spent my time struggling to do all the buttons combination as fast as possible to give orders, get to cover, shoot, drive, apply bandage, whatever all at the same time. it was too complicated for me but maybe i just suck
Avatar image for L1D3N
L1D3N

717

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 L1D3N
Member since 2009 • 717 Posts

The PC controls are fine excpet I would like to be able to use a flightstick instead of the keyboard to fly but I got used to it quickly. As far as the controls for giving commands/orders it works perfectly.

Avatar image for IMaBIOHAZARD
IMaBIOHAZARD

1464

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#7 IMaBIOHAZARD
Member since 2008 • 1464 Posts
If you compare it to a game like ARMA II (which is superior IMO), it's just the console version of that game. It seems like it's pretty good, probably even worth a $40 purchase, but the AI and combat overall (not to mention the lack of guns/vehicles) are inferior compared to ARMA II, but much more accessible and simplified. The Multiplayer is different; far smaller, but I got the impression it was still pretty good. Not a great game, but not a terrible one. If you want a realistic war game, ARMA II will last you YEARS with all the mods that are coming out for it and the content that's consistently being released...but keep in mind it's not the most accessible game. Go for OpFlash2 is you want a more accessible experience. You're not going to be getting the same kind of experience at all, but it's probably worth that $40.
Avatar image for KHAndAnime
KHAndAnime

17565

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#8 KHAndAnime
Member since 2009 • 17565 Posts
I got a kick out of this. Apparently the game has absolutely ZERO authorization for online. So if you bought the game and you're playing online, you're playing alongside pirates. :lol:
Avatar image for longello
longello

155

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 longello
Member since 2009 • 155 Posts

If you like Operation Flashpoint type games then you will like this.

If you prefer run and gun, Rambo type games then this is not for you.

If you like CoD : MW then this is not for you.

Avatar image for hamelkarl
hamelkarl

207

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#10 hamelkarl
Member since 2009 • 207 Posts

I think the first Operation Flashpoint looks more like ArmA2 than OFP:DR. I compare more this game to GRAW than anything else. Kind of GRAW mixed with OFP. It's not bad or good. It is a really middle game in my opinion.

Avatar image for F1_2004
F1_2004

8009

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 F1_2004
Member since 2003 • 8009 Posts
I got a kick out of this. Apparently the game has absolutely ZERO authorization for online. So if you bought the game and you're playing online, you're playing alongside pirates. :lol:KHAndAnime
Uh oh, I better wear protection cause I might catch the Pirate disease.
Avatar image for KHAndAnime
KHAndAnime

17565

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#12 KHAndAnime
Member since 2009 • 17565 Posts
[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]I got a kick out of this. Apparently the game has absolutely ZERO authorization for online. So if you bought the game and you're playing online, you're playing alongside pirates. :lol:F1_2004
Uh oh, I better wear protection cause I might catch the Pirate disease.

I think it's just a sign of how much of a console port this could be. They didn't even go into the effort of putting bare minimum authorization.
Avatar image for MrUnSavory1
MrUnSavory1

777

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 MrUnSavory1
Member since 2005 • 777 Posts

I think the first Operation Flashpoint looks more like ArmA2 than OFP:DR. I compare more this game to GRAW than anything else. Kind of GRAW mixed with OFP. It's not bad or good. It is a really middle game in my opinion.

hamelkarl

Gee, I wonder if this could be because the first OFP was made by Bohemia who makes ArmA and ArmA 2 and OFPDR is made by the Bunny Hopping/Spray and Pray champions at Codemasters.......Sheesh....... Comapring ArmA with OFPDR is like comparing real war to the COD series of games. Not even close to the same thing.

Avatar image for hamelkarl
hamelkarl

207

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#14 hamelkarl
Member since 2009 • 207 Posts

You just repeated my point of view somehow. It's really normal that the old fan of OFP do prefer ArmA 2. It's also why most people that prefer games like COD or maybe even Battlefield 2 would prefer OFP2 over ArmA2. It's a freaking hard game to enjoy, but when you do... it's hard to play other games. I didn't play really OFP, but I do play ArmA since the first one is out. The more you play it, the more you will love it.

One thing I wish I could have in ArmA is a better close combat sim feel. I think it's not yet good enough. They tried hard, but didn't really succeed yet.

I also think too much games are called simulator even they are not one at all. ''A computer simulation (or "sim") is an attempt to model a real-life or hypothetical situation on a computer so that it can be studied to see how the system works. By changing variables,predictionsmay be made about the behaviour of the system.[1]'' Wikipedia

From that point of view I think OFP2 does not provide enough to be called a simulation. FPS War Simulator should provide much more things close to real life to be in that category and being able to compare it to ArmA2 in any way possible.

Here's some stuffs I think a war sim need or must try to have much of them to be seen like a FPS war sim.

Scroll down to Table of Contents

Some other stuffs not in the links that I think that should be included as well.

- Winds drift

-Ballistic Coefficient *how it moves differently in water or air mostly. Everything that can be a coefficient on the ballistic!

- Back Blast *It's not enough to have only the flash!

- G Force *This should be in a game if it have flight transport (it's a most!)

- Crew Damage *Being in a vehicle should damage me even if the vehicle doesn't explode.

- More realisticCover vs Concealment : It need more Building in cities and maybe give us more climate change. Being able to build my own cover could be nice as well. I should be able to build cover with the environment, and not only takes what the game already provide as safe spot.

- Last but the most important A.I improved. Damn those A.I. sucks or are minds reader. Really need some fix

Note that most of this stuffs is already in the game or will be implemented in the near features with mods (mostly ACE2). List of the Features that ACE2 will have or focus to have.

For Conclusion, I think that ArmA2 and OFP2 are too different to be ****d in the same category of games. I agree that both games are good, but they don't focus on the same goal and should not be seen that way. For a point of view of a real sim fan, OFP2 will suck. For a point of view of someone that prefer something close to Sim but with an Arcade feel, ArmA will suck. It's kind of comparing Live for Speed or rFactor to Need For Speed Shift. It is way too different. I don't care to see people comparing both, but stop calling those poor games for what it does not even try to be. When someone ask for recommendation, I think it will be more wise to provide features each games does includes and maybe add why you think the guy would like it or not. I also think that some question asked on here are not enough detailed and too open to really discuss. A good example of a good thread question and answers should be somewhat like this one : ThreadSee how the questions are closed and easy to answers. Also looks at the answers that people did provides. It's easier to answer and probably way more right than lot's of stuffs I did read some for in most threads.

I'm done for this post, I think it's long enough now. :P