Comments on: More War: Operation Flashpoint 2

By: PHeMoX

PHeMoX — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 23:00:39 +0000

I wouldn’t care much if OFP2 is very much like Armed Assault, but with a graphical overhaul, increased realism and a lot more gameplay chaos with less empty space. I like vast maps and so on, but Armed Assault was a bit too empty making it boring.

By: The Shed

The Shed — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 15:17:51 +0000

Good call, web.

Actually wait, screw that, it should be like OpFlash but much more epic and detailed. What GRAW should’ve been if it weren’t to damn linear and solo.

By: Web

Web — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:01:37 +0000

I dont care if OFP 2 will be more COD 4, as long it plays like COD 4 on a “hardcore”- server, on a gigantic map, with vehicles and a demanding AI.

By: Deuteronomy

Deuteronomy — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 05:24:01 +0000

Well after having watched the trailer, I get the feeling this is going to be more CoD4 than Arma2. But hey I’m sure they’ll sell a lot more (not that selling more is a bad thing at all, I’m just sayin’)

By: pirate0r

pirate0r — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 04:09:58 +0000

FYI the video is up on IGN

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/901/901430/vids_1.html

By: JDM

JDM — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 03:20:25 +0000

I always considered the first Operation Flashpoint to be, more or less, an “anti-war war-game”… people would look at me all skew-eyed and I’d say, “Well, do you believe there is such a thing as an anti-war war-movie?” … “sure…” (they see the trap closing around them now). “So why is it so far fetched to have an anti-war war-game?” Supporting evidence: 1) How brutally realistic the game was (modulo the limited graphics at the time) – I definitely remember flinching when I watched one of my co-op friends get shot and crumple to the street. Also, hitting a car with anything explosive usually left a charred body draped out the shattered windshield; pretty gruesome. 2) The anti-war quotes the game would display whenever you died and 3) The fact that you got re-incarnated as a seagull when you died – I dunno why that supports my theory, but it does. :)

By: RichPowers

RichPowers — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 03:01:28 +0000

Off-map artillery — progress or regression? Battlefield ’42 has self-propelled arty; Battlefield 2 has off-map. World in Conflict allows the support class to deploy artillery units to the field, but the off-map artillery is arguably more destructive and useful. Company of Heroes relied heavily on off-map artillery and fixed wing aircraft. For what it’s worth, off-map artillery is preferred in almost every game I’ve played.

By: Dinger

Dinger — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:03:54 +0000

Artillery is off-map (unlike some OFP mods), because it’s much siimpler, not just to implement, but for players to think about.

and the WGL mod had mortars and proper grenades for OFP

By: KC

KC — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 01:01:28 +0000

People say that after the graphics arm race that AI will be the next big push. I doubt it, I think physics are going to be, with what is already happening.

Realize that the target renders are using the engine, art assets, models etc that are going to be in OFP2, its just not playable

Also a note on the violence, they want to push the violence so that it shows realistic consequences to war. It will push away the idea that games are glorifying war, by showing the damage that it does not just to people, but to entire cities. He points out how it effects the setting in the campaign.

By: Tak

Tak — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 18:21:27 +0000

*backs away from mujadaddy slowly*

*quickly*

By: mujadaddy

mujadaddy — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 16:36:26 +0000

Just for my peoples ;)

By: Jim Rossignol

Jim Rossignol — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 16:32:15 +0000

Haha!