By Kieron Gillen on February 27th, 2009 at 5:52 pm.
And it’s ArmA2. This is fascinating. The situation where a developer keeps the technology and the publisher gets the name is common enough. There’s always obvious competition between the keeper of the flame and the keeper of the name (e.g. Football Manager versus Championship Manager, Far Cry 2 versus Crysis, etc). But Bohemia, in a recent press-release, have made that incredibly explicit. To quote the opening: “Is the upcoming Codemasters game really ‘the much anticipated return of the genre-defining military conflict simulator’ Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis? Is it really ‘the official sequel to the multi-award winning Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis’? Bohemia Interactive says: ‘No! What matters is the game, not the name.’” Seeing Bohemia’s fury at Flashpoint 2 being described by Codemasters as the “return of” or “official sequel to” is without precedent in recent gaming history. Read the whole thing for more. Crikey.
We took the opportunity to chat to Bohemia CEO Marek Spanel about the whole situation…
RPS: While the name-goes-one-way-dev-goes-another happens, it’s a rare thing where we see a developer explicitly making a press release to state that? What made you decide it was time for open confrontation?
Marek Spanel: Quite likely, without knowing the full details of each situation, it’s almost certainly different in every case, as the nature of each publishing relationship is different. One recent example that may come to mind for many is with Crysis and Far Cry 2 – but even that comparison doesn’t fit as UbiSoft simply acquired the entire Far Cry IP, which completely avoided such an unfortunate situation. In our case, the name stayed with the publisher, but all of the other rights of the game have remained in our hands, so the technology, the story, the design and gameplay of the original Operation Flashpoint Cold War Crisis (and Resistance and Elite) are all 100% owned by Bohemia Interactive.
As to the confrontation and timing… well, recently Codemasters have started to promote their new Operation Flashpoint (2) Dragon Rising heavily in way that we believe misleadingly publicize their game as the “official sequel” to our Operation Flashpoint Cold War Crisis so we simply expressed our view on the entire situation.
RPS: Reading the press-release you seem surprised that Codemasters chose to develop a sequel to Flashpoint. Is this correct? Is it more that they’re doing it at all, or is it the deliberate claiming they are the “official” sequel. As in, if they’re being deliberately aggressive so you have to respond?
Marek Spanel: Codemasters own the rights to the name Operation Flashpoint, which we’re fully aware of and we’re not claiming anything different. We’re also not surprised that they are developing a new game under the name Operation Flashpoint. In fact, for us it is additional motivation to work harder and develop a better game. But what we protest are the marketing attempts to create a strong connection between the original Operation Flashpoint Cold War Crisis and this new game of theirs, when there is no connection other than the name and similarities in the overall concept. We insist that all credit and recognition received by Operation Flashpoint Cold War Crisis really belongs to the game and not the name, thus we feel it’s inappropriate for such a legacy to be attached or implied to new unrelated game under circumstances of this particular situation, especially when it seems that Codemasters are not giving Bohemia Interactive credit it rightfully deserves.
One old Czech proverb says “a lie repeated a hundred times becomes the truth” and there is some point in it that could be applied to the gaming industry and media these days. Maybe from Codemasters it was just a series of unfortunate misunderstandings, but something is seriously wrong when in a preview on a major gaming site, one of the developers of the new game, who was never even remotely involved in the development of the original, is credited as a “veteran of the original Flashpoint team”. If you add up all such little misunderstandings, like Codemasters reps saying what “we did when we made the original Operation Flashpoint” etc. you may end up with seriously distracted image of the entire situation created in minds of journalists and gamers.
I also feel this case is somewhat interesting in more general way than only this particular situation between two particular companies. Not so much for gamers, they simply will play games they like and enjoy, but more for the gaming industry. I think it raises some interesting questions with the main one being: Is it really enough for this industry just to stick a name on a box to claim it’s “the official sequel”? Are games really just “franchises” or is there something more in them, something that could be considered an art form?
RPS: Did you attempt to talk to Codemasters before releasing the press release?
Marek Spanel: No we didn’t, usually we would prefer to resolve problems in private, but after some of the recent “behind the scenes” movements there wasn’t really much space left to talk… The press release covers the situation only partially and is focused only on matters we feel really need to be said publicly.
RPS: As an example of a developer in a similar situation and choosing to take an alternative direction, Monolith ran a competition for the readers to choose the name to their “real” sequel to FEAR. As well as playing to the fanbase, it introduce the idea to a lot of gamers that the “real” sequel of FEAR wasn’t actually what their publisher was making. Of course, in the end, they managed to get their name back, but it’s an interesting tactic to take. Did you consider something less confrontational?
Marek Spanel: As mentioned before, I don’t believe that it’s really possible to draw parallels from the past situations of other developer facing a similar situation, all developer/publisher relationships are unique and what may seem on paper to be similar from an external perspective is rarely similar in its actual nature. Of course we considered other options, and I believe some of them were fairly smart, but the surprising turn of events, just a few days after we’d already started preparations for that plan, meant we had to completely re-think our strategy in order to avoid some serious threats to our company. However, some of our plans that are more creative still may happen in future.
RPS: It’s an interesting thing – if you follow the situation where a game’s name went one way and the actual developers (and often their engine) went another… well, the developer almost always wins. The only even *draw* I can think of is Far Cry 2 and Crysis. What do you think of that? History seems to be on your side.
Marek Spanel: Well, perhaps Crytek were a little smarter or a little luckier than us in this case as they had benefits from both titles due to way how it was handled. Also, in contrary to what you say I would estimate that Far Cry 2 sold substantially more copies, at least because of the platforms it was published for. And if you compare the marketing and PR support that Crysis received, with what we have for ARMA II, you would see another significant difference.
That said, it will be very interesting to see the final round of the duel between our game and Codemasters’ new game, as both try to build upon the original Operation Flashpoint in one way or another. We are putting as much effort and passion into ARMA II as we did for the original game, and I am sure our competition at Codemasters is also trying hard to come up with a remarkable experience, which is a win-win situation for everyone, especially for gamers. Despite our company’s track record, in terms of sales of the original Operation Flashpoint Cold War Crisis, as well as awards and recognition both in the press and from the gaming community, we really are back to being the underdogs again, so we’re in the position where we can only surprise the gaming audience, but we shall see where everyone stands when the dust settles, as the rhapsody goes: “I am just a poor boy, I need no sympathy, because I am easy come, easy go, a little high, little low, anyway the wind blows, doesn’t really matter to me…”, to end on classic Queen quote. After all, it doesn’t matter if history or anything else will be on our side, unless gamers are. That simply depends on how good game we will manage to create and there also goes most of our efforts. This public statement is very insignificant to the final quality of our next game anyway.
RPS: Thanks for your time.
27/02/2009 at 18:03 Dominic White says:
Really, this is all you need to know:
OFP, ARMA and ARMA 2 are the civillian adaptations of real military training sims – the Virtual Battlespace system.
OFP2 is developed purely as a game.
27/02/2009 at 18:05 Heliocentric says:
Codemasters have issued a rebuttal.
27/02/2009 at 18:10 Zaphid says:
Dominic: OFP was also the first game that showed that there is a large number of people who like to be virtual soldiers in a simulation as close to reality as possible, don’t underestimate that. And i though that VBS was developed after the publishing of OFP? Maybe it was the other way around with Arma.
OFP2 will probably sell more initially and arma 2 will have stronger community which in the end will also mean more sales…
27/02/2009 at 18:18 rob says:
“OFP2 will probably sell more initially and arma 2 will have stronger community which in the end will also mean more sales…”
Given the strength of the Operation Flashpoint and Armed Assault communities I sincerely doubt this will be the case. Those people are scarily dedicated.
27/02/2009 at 18:21 Gap Gen says:
“Let’s start a war! Start a nuclear war!
At the gay bar, gay bar, gay bar…”
Anyway, I will definitely buy ArmAII and probably buy OpF2, depending on reception. I haven’t got a definite sense of the gameplay in OpF2 yet, but for ArmA I assume there will be some continuity of the feel, although hopefully a bit less clunky.
I think the modability and sandbox nature of ArmA lend to its charm. There are a number of comedy moments we’ve had when things have gone horribly wrong, such as blowing up the ladder we needed to climb to rescue our friend, or stealing a motorbike only to fall off and break my legs. It’s a shame the campaign for ArmA wasn’t so good, but the build-up for ArmA2 does look promising.
It’s a shame that the split has been so acrimonious, but hopefully it means that we get two great realistic military sims rather than just one.
27/02/2009 at 18:47 Turin Turambar says:
The most interesting little fact is that it seems Bohemia not only have the rights of the first Opf and the technology, but they also have the exclusive rights to make new sequels of the first game, they only don’t have the trademark name. So, technically Codemasters shouldn’t go saying “Opf2: the sequel to Operation Flashpoint, the return!”, the rights to make sequels are from Bohemia.
27/02/2009 at 18:59 The_B says:
But still, the important question hasn’t been asked.
What is it good for?
27/02/2009 at 19:11 Zaphid says:
The greater good.
j/k
Probably to give a shout to “mainstream” gamers through the media about the fact that OFP2 is in fact not really sequel? I mean the OFP/Arma community knows so who else could be their target for this PR ?
27/02/2009 at 19:18 teo says:
Is this PC exclusive? It needs to be for the gameplay to stay intact
27/02/2009 at 19:27 Tworak says:
Whichever game runs worse is the true heir to the Flashpoint name. FACT!
27/02/2009 at 19:29 JonFitt says:
@Heliocentric: Excellent!
I will be looking to buy the one which most accurately improves on what made OpF good for me.
ARMA was not it. The cludgy interface, buggy engine, and ropey missions were not what made OpF great for me!
As far as I’m concerned both teams are have the same chance to produce the spiritual successor to OpF. Let the games begin!
27/02/2009 at 19:33 dsmart says:
To be fair, they do have a point and a valid claim. Codemasters marketing are, IMO, appeat to be deliberately attempting to capitalize on the popularity of the original game in an attempt to obfuscate the facts.
Ask yourself this: Why wouldn’t they? After all, as the original publishers, they no doubt contributed a great deal to the success of the original by way of marketing and such. If they didn’t have a vested interest in the IP, they’d have have agreed to keep the name. In an industry where new IPs with multi-million budgets are crapping (see Dead Space, Mirrors Edge and every other new IP launched in 2008 by a major publisher) out at retail, publishers know that what works is familiarity.
…but only if you were under a toadstool since you crash landed on Earth – and haven’t been playing fps games since you crawled out of your diapers – would you not know the difference between the original OPF game and whatever “sequel” these two parties are cooking up.
As for gamers, I wouldn’t be too concerned if I were them. ArmA was a rushed release and a sordid mess of bugs – most of which remain unfixed – and totally for the hardcore no-life-having military game bot. From what we’ve seen – and heard – of ArmAII, its shaping up to be more of the same. So I don’t think Codemasters is even remotely worried about who is going to prevail at retail. My money on is OFP2 trashing ArmaII at retail. Which, in itself, is really inconsequential since whatever Codemasters is spending on OFP2 will typically eclipse whatever Bohemia could possibly hope to pull out of a stocking on Christmas day. What matters is: who gets to turn a profit.
The point about the media quoting rubbish and attributing stuff to people who probably never even laid eyes on the original, let alone play it, speaks to the sorry ass state of the gaming media as a whole. Most of these tools don’t even bother checking sources, doing fact checks or anything like that anymore. In an era when every tit is a typist, its easy to just put up a bunch of crap into circulation regardless of whether or not it is newsworthy, let along accurate and/or factual.
…another day in the life of the gaming industry.
27/02/2009 at 19:40 M_the_C says:
I think that this competition is going to be good.
Yes OFP2 is going to be less of a simulator, but if they go too far way then they’ll just alienate people. Having two companies scrapping for first place could make being a gamer very interesting when they’re released.
On the news announcement, I agree with the general view so far, Codemasters should tone down the ‘We’re the true sequel’ message.
27/02/2009 at 19:48 Tei says:
I don’t know, I don’t care. I don’t even want to make some sense of all of this. Or what is the moral right option. I am coward and amoral. I just want to play again something as fun as the original Operation Flashpoint. Feel again that.
ArmA.. good game, I dont like it. Who make’s me another OFP will get my money.
27/02/2009 at 19:50 Senethro says:
“ArmA was a rushed release and a sordid mess of bugs – most of which remain unfixed – and totally for the hardcore no-life-having military game bot.”
Irony detected!
27/02/2009 at 19:54 dsmart says:
I wonder how Far Cry 2 fared against Crysis at retail. Need to check up on that. Both were good games but with totally different directions and game play. Both borne of the same franchise. It would have been fun to watch an EA vs Ubisoft marketing fiasco from the sidelines and along the sames lines as what is happening now. But no, that would be too easy. Instead those sensible bastards decided to just throw it all out there and let the gamers make the call.
It think the whole OFP2 vs ArmaII rhetoric is also heating up because both games are launching this year I believe.
Oh man, I sure hope Bohemia isn’t even considering putting ArmaII on any console. That would be one train wreck I’d buy tickets to watch.
27/02/2009 at 19:54 Xercies says:
Hmm I’m split on what to get, i’ll look at the reviews to see which one is the best at being a good sequel to OP flashpoint. If it has a mission maker(which I will make lots of sniper missions like I did in the first one) and its so realistc that your scared of a couple of soldiers then I will buy that one.
27/02/2009 at 19:56 dsmart says:
Not sure what you’re going on about there. Especially since one can probably give a list of games that fall into that category. No, I don’t have any games in that category – but the otherwise un-informative jab is noted.
27/02/2009 at 19:57 dsmart says:
@ Xercies
I guess you’ll be buying ArmaII then. :D
27/02/2009 at 19:58 Dominic White says:
dsmart: Actually, Operation Flashpoint 1 got an Xbox port, and it was VERY good. Nothing sacrificed in the campaign itself, and the realism was untouched. It actually ran on a later version of the engine, too, so looked better than the PC version in some places.
Only real downside was that the mission editor, while included, was pretty bare-bones and the multiplayer wasn’t much cop. Still, it proved that you can take complex PC sims to consoles without dumbing them down at all.
27/02/2009 at 20:04 Senethro says:
dsmart: Its no fun if I have to explain it! My point was that some of your games have been… difficult to play to the extent that deriding a communitys dedication as being “hardcore no-life-having military game bots” is a bit rich.
27/02/2009 at 20:09 Turin Turambar says:
BTW, the expansion addon of ArmA had a much better campaign. Pity that most people couldn’t try it, as the original ArmA campaign was so underwhelming.
Still, all seems to indicate that Bohemia has learned their lesson with the first ArmA.
27/02/2009 at 20:09 Tei says:
There can be made a simple (ridiculous) list, with description of how the games feel:
FarCry was engineered + crafted
FarCry 2 is half-crafted + half-engineered + half-painted
Crysis is engineered + crafted
Operation Flashpoint was painted + engineered
ArmA is engineered
leyend:
engineered: tecnical merits
crafted: obvious production merits
painted: genius artistic merits
The future games:
ArmA2 engineered
OFP2 crafted + half-engineered
27/02/2009 at 20:10 drewski says:
Maybe if big publishers tried releasing a good game in a new IP, instead of generic space action games and nonsensically linear, horribly written “free running” games, the new IPs would have a chance.
27/02/2009 at 20:11 teo says:
Who cares about Flashpoint 2
No publisher in today’s world would put out a worthy sequel to Flashpoint with such a huge budget. It’s a console game FFS
Just forget about it
27/02/2009 at 20:13 Heliocentric says:
I just made a toasty, it had intense conflict between the cheese and ham. And accurately simulated the cold war. By being mostly in the fridge pre toasting, the fear and tension of ofp have carried over as one mistake and it’ll be all over.
I should get a plate.
27/02/2009 at 20:14 DeuceMojo says:
Let’s start a war, we need the space. It can start in New Jersey.
I must thank RPS for even clueing me in to the existence of Arma2. Yea! Can’t wait.
27/02/2009 at 20:14 Heliocentric says:
Oh, also.
Terrain
27/02/2009 at 20:17 DeuceMojo says:
@Tei: Thanks for half-clearing that up.
27/02/2009 at 20:20 Tei says:
Making a ambush for 3 tank in OFP was like hunting a leopard with the bare hands. The hunter become hunted If can’t control the uncontrollable with a terrible beast that can finish the game in a blink.
27/02/2009 at 20:21 dsmart says:
Yes, thats the point that I was trying to make actually. You see, since XBox1, the bar for console shooters has been raised so high (OK, Halo not included) that if they were to even dream of porting ArmaII in today’s market, right after the publisher – and probably MS – stopped laughing, they’d all just take the Red pill and call it a day.
Today’s console shooters are brain dead affairs. A category in which the likes of Arma or ArmaII for that matter, have no place. They’d just tank. Spectacularly. Its bad enough getting mainstream games to turn a profit on the console.
Its not even about the budget, but more about gamers. When you’re targeting the console demographic, all bets are off and the prudent thing to do is to play it safe: play dumb, then go clean, clear and naked.
uhm, er, wot?! I wasn’t deriding anyone. I made a spot on target assessment I thought. So what? I can’t liken dedicated balls-to-wall hardcore fps gamers to military game bots anymore? Are you trying to pick a fight or just start one? Or maybe you’re just being a smart ass and I needn’t have bothered to respond.
27/02/2009 at 20:36 PHeMoX says:
Quoted:”Really, this is all you need to know:
OFP, ARMA and ARMA 2 are the civillian adaptations of real military training sims – the Virtual Battlespace system.
OFP2 is developed purely as a game.”
Actually that’s not entirely true. Operation Flashpoint was made entirely with gamers in mind, in fact, with mostly multiplayer-only in mind. There have been other games made by Bohemia that served as simulations for the military, sure, but they were of a totally different kind.
Quoted:”As to the confrontation and timing… well, recently Codemasters have started to promote their new Operation Flashpoint (2) Dragon Rising heavily in way that we believe misleadingly publicize their game as the “official sequel” to our Operation Flashpoint Cold War Crisis so we simply expressed our view on the entire situation.”
And still they shouldn’t have sold the name. Especially after ARMA 1 which did not really do anything spectacularly impressive, except for the fact of being a better looking remake of the first Operation Flashpoint.
ARMA II is going to be underestimated at best by the majority of people, perhaps even totally ignored in the worst case scenario. This is assuming ARMA II will be an excellent game and greater true sequel to Operation Flashpoint than OF2 is going to be.
In my humble opinion, Bohemia shouldn’t have made ARMA 1, but should have gone straight for gold instead making a true Operation Flashpoint sequel. This would have made the ARMA franchise a lot stronger than it currently is. It has a bad taste even though I like the game, because it has ‘easy money’ and ‘remake’ written all over it.
27/02/2009 at 20:45 Pags says:
Just a continuation of Phemox’s thoughts: if Bohemia were that concerned with having an established name to build upon, then they really should’ve put out ArmA in a much more stable state than how it first came out – of course, I could also go into how really the game needed to be more than just a prettier version of OPF but that really isn’t fair on them, so I won’t go there.
27/02/2009 at 20:47 Ginger Yellow says:
Czech’s must be more resistant to bullshit. Over here it’s just three times.
27/02/2009 at 20:47 Pags says:
That said, I do think they’re rather justified in their concern that Codemasters are selling their product as the “real sequel to OPF”.
27/02/2009 at 20:52 Gap Gen says:
Marek should get on this comments thread. Hell, I’d pay to see a developer fight. Either over the honour of the game, or over the rights to names ending in “rek”.
27/02/2009 at 20:54 Gap Gen says:
And yeah, ArmA is *really* not a console shooter. For a game where you need to be able to accurately fire at something over a kilometre away, I don’t think a controller is that good an idea.
27/02/2009 at 21:02 Senethro says:
Can’t see myself buying a console until one of them caves in and starts offering mouse support.
Low mouse sensitivity for long range, precise tracking aim.
High sensitivity for rapid response flickshots.
27/02/2009 at 21:38 DigitalSignalX says:
Both games have their merits, I think Tei illustrated it perfectly, and both have their attraction. An inch-by-inch fear of a single bullet clinical vs. a more visually and story driven shooter; both can be improved upon greatly with a solid sequel.
This debate hopefully will motivate the sides to make BOTH sequels even better, a win-win situation for us.
27/02/2009 at 21:42 psyk says:
Which is hopefully why they wont support mice, my ms laser mouse 6000 is rubbish compared to my steel series ikari it makes it a non equal playing field which is one of the nice things about playing on console everyone is using the same input device (maybe you can get a controller that is better than the ones you get when you buy the console if so that argument is moot.)
27/02/2009 at 21:44 dsmart says:
True. But when you don’t have a publisher, but have a studio to run, families to feed and BILLS TO PAY, that source sitting around doing nothing is as good a meal ticket as any. Sure, the short term game – of quick money – is not the optimal solution when you’re thinking long term; but my guess is that there are LOT of dead or dying studios out there who wished they actually owned their own stuff so they get to make the call.
The math is simple. Spend a year and make a game based on legacy code and hope it sells, or go bust doing nothing.
The result of the genius decision above was ArmAII; and I can’t see anything wrong with that. Sure it could’ve been better polished and such, but again, you live by the bug, you die by the bug. ArmAII is going to die by the bug for same reason that the previous people stated: gamers are already burned by ArmaAI and at best are either going to pirate it or take a wait and see approach.
27/02/2009 at 21:45 Deuteronomy says:
dsmart
Are you even a PC Gamer? As a “military game-bot” I can assure you I have a girlfriend, friends, job, and life. Can you imagine how much poorer the gaming world would be without simulation-style games like OpFlash? Probably not.
Out of respect for this site I haven’t truly expressed my opinion about your opinion.
27/02/2009 at 21:50 Gap Gen says:
Deuteronomy: Wikipedia says this. And indeed this.
27/02/2009 at 21:53 dsmart says:
Does this answer your question?
…and thats just what I have in my game room at home.
Gaming library size to date? Almost 10K games and climbing. I have a $175 a month air conditioned storage unit that helps to also answer your question.
..and who doesn’t have any of those things?
The term “no life having” doesn’t even equate to what you are alluding to.
Instead of being trigger happy, you might want to stop, listen and THINK before engaging your fingers. Wars have been started, fought and lost for less.
Irrelevant and inconsequential argument. And considering the state of “simulation” gaming, what you just said is, well, rubbish.
aaaaww. He’s cute, ain’t he? Can we keep him?
27/02/2009 at 21:53 Deuteronomy says:
Ahhhh.
27/02/2009 at 21:54 dsmart says:
Oh look, here come the attacks. I better go get a fresh pais of Depends. When idiots can’t hold an argument, the first thing they do is whip out the race or controversy card. Yah, like that has had ANY effect on me whatsoever. So uhm, yeah, go ahead, derail the thread.
27/02/2009 at 21:55 Deuteronomy says:
I have fed the proverbial ultra-troll.
27/02/2009 at 21:56 Frankie The Patrician[PF] says:
*waves at Derek Smart* o/
Anyhow, where’s the popcorn and soda? It’s fun to watch them fight, even thou I should support BI as I am Czech, but well…I will never forget the StarForce dagger in the back and us Czechs being free testers for them..
27/02/2009 at 21:59 dsmart says:
Exactly. Hence the reason I was drawing up the Crysis vs Far Cry 2 comparison. At the end of the day, gamers will either vote with their dollars or get blinded by the usually marketing bullshit and up with the wrong product.
27/02/2009 at 22:05 EBass says:
As a Flashpoint veteran I’m putting my vote behind Codemaster’s game being superior. Why? For a number of reasons.
These Eastern European developers have a habit of making great games, then simply adding more of the same in the sequals without fixing all the massive of flaws in the game which led the community to class it as a “rough gem”. Stalker, Soldiers Hereos of WW2, H&D, IL-2 etc etc.
This pattern continued with Armed Assault. Flashpoint was (and is) one of my favorite games ever, but no one could deny it was very “rough”. Dodgy animations, bad individual AI, very clunky control method. When we got Armed Assault it had errrr Dodgy animations (most were exactly the same as OFP), bad individual AI (after a month of solid experimenting I could barely see a difference between its and flashpoints AI), the same control method.
All the gameplay vids I’ve seen of Arma2 and most of the press release seems to tell me that BiS aren’t particularly interested in fixing the glaring flaws in their game and instead seem to be focusing on how much content they can put in.
Granted Codemasters haven’t come out with a wealth of information, but I’m getting a good vibe from the game. Not to sound arrogant, but I can’t really remember many times when my vibeometer has been significantly off.
I was a BiS fan, but the totally uninspired Armed Assault killed that. Its up to BiS to convince me their game is fixed, not the other way round.
27/02/2009 at 22:08 psyk says:
Wow nice room dsmart.
27/02/2009 at 22:15 utzelgrutzel says:
Phemox said:
“In my humble opinion, Bohemia shouldn’t have made ARMA 1, but should have gone straight for gold instead making a true Operation Flashpoint sequel. This would have made the ARMA franchise a lot stronger than it currently is. It has a bad taste even though I like the game, because it has ‘easy money’ and ‘remake’ written all over it.”
The problem was the money, BIS ran out. They stated they had to release early to get in some revenue.
Dominic White said:
“dsmart: Actually, Operation Flashpoint 1 got an Xbox port, and it was VERY good. Nothing sacrificed in the campaign itself, and the realism was untouched. It actually ran on a later version of the engine, too, so looked better than the PC version in some places.
Only real downside was that the mission editor, while included, was pretty bare-bones and the multiplayer wasn’t much cop. Still, it proved that you can take complex PC sims to consoles without dumbing them down at all.”
They had to cripple the view distance and number of units significantly though to deal with the hardware. Thats the reason for the (still nice but) hampered editor.
The campaign suffered from limited units, too. The famous “After Montignac” now played at daylight, you had a compass and only ~1km and 10 enemies between yourself and the extraction.
Still it was way harder for me because I can’t hit anything with a controller.
ArmA 2 is planned to get a console release sometime after the PC version is finished. Hopefully it will not take as long as Elite and it will be interesting to see how it sells there.
The new generation is more powerful and might get away with less crippled view distance and maybe full unit count, and I can’t see BIS removing anything else if not for the hardware specs. Of course mods and addons will be missing, but it would still be one of a kind and I think there are quite a bunch of people that like that regardles of platform. There isn’t so big a difference between consoles and PC, mainly the controller and that only still exists because most developers think the players were different.
27/02/2009 at 22:26 Pags says:
So you guys know, Derek Smart does not ‘piss around’ when it comes to ‘IP properties’ [sic]. Which might go some way to explaining his stance on this matter.
27/02/2009 at 22:36 Dinger says:
Woah. Hold on here.
Yes, ArmA has a lot of nasty legacy bits, like the animations. And I’m sure ArmA II will have some old stuff as well.
And yes, Codemasters is very fond of the OFP title. Why shouldn’t they be? Operation Flashpoint came along at a bleak moment and sold over a million copies, probably saving Codemasters at the time (at least from what I read on RPS).
My real problem with ArmA was that the game seemed to have been made without love. Yeah, it had all the technical bits, but there was no fire — it did feel like the half-stage incremental release to keep things afloat.
But it’s not so simple. No, OFP was not the “civilian version” of VBS. VBS1 was the “military version” of the OFP code. VBS2 and ArmA development have mutually reinforced each other.
Now we have an announcement that the USArmy has awarded BIA a $50M development contract. I’m pretty sure the UK MoD has already signed something big as well. Then there’s the rest of NATO.
BIS may be the underdogs in the gaming sphere, but their engine is starting to gain some serious traction on the military side, so expect some sweet technical improvements. If a public squabble with the codies gets both sides motivated to deliver something sweet, then maybe both games will not just have the technical competence, but the passion that puts them over the top.
An old-school western shootout. I know the Spanel boys have an appreciation for such things. Let’s see Codemasters step up to the plate.
27/02/2009 at 22:50 ImpossiblyDaft says:
I hope the vehicles are nice.
I adored Flashpoint, but always felt the vehicle handling and controls didn’t really have the same detail as crawling around through a hedge and the first ARMA didn’t do much on that front.
27/02/2009 at 22:59 KP says:
So you post this DRAMA BOMB and not all the amazing trailers they’ve been releasing over the last month? For shame, RPS. :(
But yeah, I think they’re totaly in the right. Also how is ANYBODY making judgements about OFP2? They’ve released nothing substantial. The shakeycam gameplay that is out there looks like a CoD4 clone with a wierd FoV and a rifle bolted to your sternum. I can see why BI would be frustrated that Codemasters is getting all the media attention for riding on the coat tails of a game they never touched.
27/02/2009 at 23:23 JonFitt says:
The problem of ARMA was not that it wasn’t a completely new game, it was that it was hideously buggy and showed very little recognition of what had made OpF a “you’ll like it if you can look past this” game.
Good simulation is more than accurately modelling lots of variants of tanks and guns. If the soldiers run around like Noddy on meth repeating seemingly irrelevant text-to-speech phrases it’s nigh impossible to feel immersed.
27/02/2009 at 23:48 shadess says:
I loved ofp and BI, absolutely hated arma. I know they had to push it out but it was such a pile of crap it was unbelievable.
Lately everything coming from BI: statements, forum comments…it’s like they are little kids the way they act. Codemasters marketing vs BI marketing will be like watching a murder happening live. Bohemia is just trying to get the free publicity with statements like this.
27/02/2009 at 23:54 KP says:
shadess: sadly, OFP2 has been getting more publicity for shitty renders. this has been the most publicity I’ve seen for ArmA2, despite all the videos on ArmA2.com over the last month. BIS’s marketing sucks, but they are absolutely in the right in their complaint. Codemasters doesn’t own anything but the name.
But srsly, RPS.
http://www.arma2.com/chernarussian-defence-forces_en.html
How can you NOT link this stuff. :(
28/02/2009 at 00:42 EBass says:
And another thing………….
BIS had to push ArmA out the door to get some money into the company. Ok fine, I can accept that. I can also accept that for these reasons the campaign was shit and the engine was totally unoptimised to hell.
What I can’t believe is they spend, what 4 years since the original Flashpoint and using all the money from VBS and OFP doing…….. well nothing, to get to where Armed Assault is (same terrible AI, which is my main bugbear, same crap interface, same clunkly controls, same animation bugs, same voice acting ffs OH NO 1 IS DOWN) and then suddently in 2 years they completely redevelop everything to be worth it.
Arma2 looks like being from the same breed as ArmA. (watch the gameplay videos on youtube, we’ve still got OH NO SIX IS DOWN, and still got horrible clunky animations)
28/02/2009 at 00:49 Messiah Complex says:
Doesn’t anyone else see this as a fairly lame attempt to generate interest in ArmA2? Maybe it’s just me, but I can’t imagine why anyone would give a damn about the “official sequel” semantics.
As for the gratuitous insertion of mewling song lyrics at the end: was that supposed to make me all squishy and sympathetic?
28/02/2009 at 01:14 Gnarl says:
Have Derek Smart and Rev Stu Campbell ever had a heated online discussion? That’s something I would love to see. If not, can one be manufactured?
But seriously, I always have the feeling that the guys that take the name have to really try to attract my attention rather than the opposite. But since I never got into Operation Flashpoint (and ignored AmrA), in this case I’ll have to be persuaded of either. But hey, always good see a lil’ studio leeching, parasite like, off of big companies. Seriously, it’s a good thing.
28/02/2009 at 01:20 Techwarriorz says:
if they (Bohemia) were so worried about image they shoulda made a better sequel to OFP and all this crap would be nil. But no we got ArmA which NOW they say was “just a setting stone” for ArmA 2. Oh does that mean all that hard earned money we spent on your stepping stone was for development of another “true sequel to OFP”?Are you gonna give a discount to those who funded your “real” game by buying your crap fund raiser? Bohemia had 1 chance to make the sequel to OFP with ArmA and they FAILED MISERABLY. So now that CM is making a game they cry foul. I’m sorry I don’t feel bad for you Bohemia. I hope CM makes a game that sends ArmA 2 to the toilet. It would be your just desserts.
28/02/2009 at 01:52 Gap Gen says:
I liked ArmA, even though the campaign is pretty weak. Co-op missions with friends are what ArmA is about.
And you really can’t be surprised at what ArmA was, given the reviews at the time that mentioned the bugginess. Like Derek says, without ArmA there would be no ArmA 2 – it’s not like they are Valve, sitting on a huge pile of independent developer money.
28/02/2009 at 02:11 Alex says:
So much anger in here. Leads to the dark side, y’know.
Anyway, I enjoyed ArmA in spite of its faults (having one of the most dedicated/borderline-obsessive mod communities I’ve ever seen didn’t hurt either), so I’m looking forward to ArmA 2 and not particularly bothered about OFP2. If that makes me a no-life-having, sim-playing grognard, then fair enough, but at least I’m having fun.
28/02/2009 at 02:46 MetalCircus says:
It’s a shame OFP and ArmA are both buggy, unpolished messes of pixels really.
And it’s also a shame ArmAII will be the same! Ho ho!
28/02/2009 at 02:48 Jim says:
In my oppinion Bohemia had their chance with me in Armed Assault, they released an unbelievably buggy game, even by OpFlash standards. I’m going to be buying Operation Flashpoint 2 before I even think about getting Arma2. I really think it’s time for a new engine in this series, from the ground up and that’s what OFP2 is offering. I suspect ArmA2 will feel exactly like ArmA with a new campaign and new vehicles. I’ll end up sticking with the game which has the best AI and the best atmosphere.
28/02/2009 at 02:50 Rasdenfasden says:
Okay, I think I should toss in my opinion here.
ArmA 1 is a great game. In fact, I’ll dare to say right now that ArmA is the best FPS game that you can currently get. When it first came out it was horribly unfinished and didn’t feel like they put much love into it, yes, but if you people were to reinstall it now you’ll notice a lot has changed. It feels very different (better) compared to flashpoint and it’s clean, polished and very stable (at least on my rig).
Now, install a mod for it (like ACE for instance) and you have ArmA’s biggest strength. Like OFP1, it’s heavily moddable and with the improved graphics it really will give you the best milsim experience you can get for less than a thousand bucks.
ArmA 2 may be very different from number 1, or it may be more of the same. Either way, this is good for me as ArmA 1 is already my kind of game as Flashpoint was before. If it’s different, we already know that it will remain realistic thanks to the large amount of footage and information available so it will be different in a good way.
Flashpoint 2 on the other hand looks like a load of bull. Simplified gameplay (according to the “actual ingame footage”), generic graphics (film grain? Oh please.) and overall LACK of detail (they made a video to show off how true to life it apparently is, but it has an abrams tank that fires 2 shots in less than 3 seconds with a MANUALLY LOADED CANNON. By the way, it was pre-rendered as always) just made me lose my faith in codemasters.
BIS are going good on the other hand. They’re showing much more love with this new title than with ArmA 1, giving it a good storyline that actually is plausible (hell, they practically predicted the Georgian conflict, minus US intervention), far more attention to details and an overall more polished look to it. According to people who tested the early alpha they showed off in GC the game was very playable and smooth, and that will even continue to improve now during the development, and knowing BIS it will be patched with both fixes and new content (that other developers would sell in a paid download) after the release.
28/02/2009 at 03:17 MetalCircus says:
Having now read the comments here, I still think OFP and ArmA are pretty poorly made video games. I’m not really a stickler for sims, mind you, but OFP took the piss a bit with how glaringly glitchy and buggy it was. Even as a sim I can’t believe it garners the respect it does with all the OBVIOUSLY piss poor development of the thing, weather you regard it a video game or a sim or not is irrelevent. It was rough as fuck.
I hope ArmA 2 is better. And I hope they find a way of accurately simulating the army complete with dehumanizing training techniques and 4 hour long mountain trecks AND! a “coping with suicide inducing PTSD” minigame where you mash buttons guitar hero style to match up with horrific war images/sounds of dying screaming children on the battlefield!
Aw hell. I’m probably just not into sims. Infact, screw it, that’s it, I don’t like simulation games. But still. I’m astounded this game has reached the classic/cult status it has despite being one of the most shockingly bugged/glitchy games of it’s time.
28/02/2009 at 03:19 Scrub says:
How interesting this all is. From the thoughtless and self-centered “Just give me a game, I don’t care”, to the mis-informed “BIS is feeding off the big company” (when it’s CM raking it in from BIS’s initial work. Oh, the irony), to – wait. I think I just sat in another category that many of ourselves will fall into from our own perspectives.. ‘I’m the only one who has it all understood, and I’m right’. Hmmmm.. Opinions aren’t bad. Demanding others agree they are is. CM and BIS please play nice, and do your best. Thanks
28/02/2009 at 06:07 Jones says:
OFP2 = Mainstream BF2/COD4 but bigger sandbox crap clone.
ARMA2 = Best entertainment of 2009.
This is the truth. If you like BF2 and its likes then its not your truth. Im happy im not on your side though – kids.
Out.
28/02/2009 at 06:29 Zub says:
You who criticize that BIS made a press release about this – did you even read what its about? I mean REALLY what its about. Not only that CM rides on a succesful title, but that people at CM also claim they were part of the original dev team – wich is not even true.
Sleazy business tactics. And a low blow from a big company as CM. Its fun though that they couldnt come up with a strong title themselves so they had to play the safe sleazy card.
My view on CM is way down there. Money horny people reducing games to console style levels. Yuck.
28/02/2009 at 08:17 Al3xand3r says:
Umm, Codies just want to take what they deserve. Why would they have kept the name with whatever deal was struck when they split, if they didn’t intend to develop a spiritual sequel to it?
If the name was going to be so devalued (as these guys attempt with the press release) then of course Codies would have made a different deal in the first place.
After accepting the deal, which was likely very favorable to these guys as Codies merely kept the name, I think it’s a little mean to then try and deny them the ability to market their game as a sequel.
But I don’t know the details as others don’t here I guess, just saying it’s not necessarily the small guys that are right in this case.
Also, ArmA2 is the real sequel to Op Flash? What about ArmA1, did things go wrong with that?
28/02/2009 at 08:43 Stromko says:
I didn’t like Operation Flashpoint when it came out, and never tried it again. I just remember getting shot through opaque bushes no matter what I did.
I actually rather enjoyed ARMA. The bushes were high-res enough that I could see who was shooting at me, and the AI seems to have much more respect for having real line-of-sight.
It will shoot you in the head at 500 yards with an AK-74 and iron sights if it’s on Expert mode — it’s not kidding, on that mode you’re fighting veteran master snipers apparently. It’s probably a big reason why co-op is still popular, the enemy is really quite strong. That the communist conscript army is fielding nothing but crack snipers on high alert is why you don’t just sit go it alone, sitting outside of their range and plinking off enemies. That would get boring much faster.
I would’ve been mad if I’d paid full price, and with my one or to crashes a day while playing it I must be relatively lucky, but for my money (it was half price), I enjoyed it. It takes a substantial commitment to time to start enjoying it to the utmost, but I found it worthwhile for the weeks where I was playing it nonstop.
28/02/2009 at 08:49 Al3xand3r says:
When the first was out I tried it and quit with similar reasons to you, I was enjoying the original Ghost Recon much more at the time, despite the lack of insanely huge maps and vehicles and whatever lack Op Flash had, great game that. Shame Ubisoft have turned all those great classic franchises (GR, RS) to Counter-Strike spin offs for consoles.
28/02/2009 at 08:55 Kadayi says:
I think Marek makes a strong argument. Codemasters are deliberately trading off the reputation of the original game, although the reality is there is no legacy between the teams who made the original and the sequel. Codemasters might well make a genius game at the end of the day, but it’s wrong to deceive the general public in this manner, and at odds with how a lot of other developers/publishers are now operating.
28/02/2009 at 09:07 Al3xand3r says:
But it’s what the splitting deal was about in the first place, that they get to keep the name, the fame, and Bohemia get everything else. They agreed. Now they want to make Codies look bad simply for cashing in on their end of the bargain. Not good.
28/02/2009 at 09:17 Digit says:
As much as I like OFP, ARMA was a disaster. I am more interested currently in OFP2 by Codemasters simply because it will contain at least some, gameplay. Whilst I hope and pray that ARMA2 turns out awesome, I was burnt pretty badly with ARMA and don’t intend to make the same mistake again.
28/02/2009 at 09:47 Larington says:
This all seems a bit daft to me, I don’t doubt that words have power, but a name is just a name. Make the game good and make sure people know its good (Its called marketing) and everything else tends to fall into place.
If its buggy, that means its not good.
The one thing that has impressed me as far as Codemasters project is concerned, is that they built a studio to make the game. Not the other way around.
So I’m interested to see how that affects the end-product.
28/02/2009 at 10:38 Kadayi says:
@Al3xand3r
Ubisoft owned the name ‘Farcry’ but they didn’t try claim the legacy of that game when it came to the development of ‘Farcry 2′. Eidos are making ‘Deus Ex 3′ but again they make no bones about it being a new team developing it. Likewise with Betheseda and ‘fallout 3′ .
It’s one thing to use the name, it’s entirely another to disingenuously imply a working legacy between the games development. They should at the very least be upfront about the situation and allow people to judge their product on it’s own terms.
28/02/2009 at 10:50 Gap Gen says:
Actually, has anyone played OpFap2 here or seen an extended gameplay video? Like I said, I haven’t got a sense of what the gameplay is. If it is good, then there’s no harm in having two realistic military sims (for us, anyway).
28/02/2009 at 11:00 AdrianWerner says:
Jones: I’m not on a side of kids and while I am waiting for Arma2 I don’t think it will be the best entertainment of 2009 :) Let’s not go overboard and all elite-like. Especially considering that there will be a lot of arcade gameplay even in ArmA2
28/02/2009 at 11:07 Lh'owon says:
I’d like to reiterate what Rasdenfasden said – ArmA today is downright excellent game, not in the least “broken”, and with some outstanding mods (ACE primarily) is simply incomparable. It has a very strong community of people who play regularly – the server I usually go on draws upwards of 20-30 people at a time for multiplayer coop missions.
People who are saying ArmA was somehow a failure cannot have played it at all recently. We all have fond feelings for OFP but ArmA in its current state is clearly the better game.
28/02/2009 at 11:49 AdrianWerner says:
Lh’owon: ArmA is better in MP, but it’s campaign even with mods and fan SP missions is still lacking compared to original
28/02/2009 at 12:04 Chaz says:
OFP was an amazing game when it came out, despite all it’s bugs, simply because nothing else like had ever been released before. I was able to look past all the bugs because it offered such an incredibly atmospheric unique gaming experience. It’s the game that brought me and most of my current online gaming buddies together, and half of us are still now some 8 years later playing various games together.
And yet despite all that, I’ve got to be honest and say that my money is on the Codies game being the better of the two. We all tried Arma when it came out, and I think we all felt it was as if Bohemia had improved nothing. The netcode was still rubbish, it had the same old clunky interface, terrible animation, super humanly accurate AI, it was as if they had learnt nothing since making OFP. The only obvious improvement was that the hands didn’t look like packets of sausages anymore.
Unfortunately everything I’ve seen of Arma2 just leads me to believe it will be yet more of the same. Even that terrible control interface still looks the same, although reskinned. The Codies game on the other hand looks like it will be a completely fresh approach to the game, and in my opinion is looking all the better for it. There’s a little bit of footage of it here, http://www.joystiq.com/2009/02/20/operation-flashpoint-dragon-rising-coming-to-360-ps3-pc-this-summer/ , from listening to the developer guff I certainly think they named their engine appropriately.
Of course what I’d really like to see is both games turning out well, and unique enough from each other to both warrant a purchase. And of course it’d be great if Bohemia could recapture some of that magic that made OFP such compulsive gaming, despite all it’s flaws.
28/02/2009 at 12:14 Gap Gen says:
Chaz: Yeah, that video makes it look like an open-world CoD4. That might be no bad thing, but part of the unique tension of OpFap was your vulnerability. I accept that OpFap2 is looking slightly nicer graphically (hell, it’d better be given the amount of money available to them) but that’s not my main concern.
I’d like to see an extended gameplay video. Normally I find those sorts of things dull, but it would be useful to be able to work out what sort of game OpFap 2 is. Like you say, if they’re unique, then I’d happily buy both of them.
28/02/2009 at 12:35 Larington says:
What makes me laugh is that the game footage looks perfectly fine to my (Admittedly untrained) eyes, but they’ve had to put a little notice in the bottom corner saying “Work in Progress”.
28/02/2009 at 12:39 gamer says:
OFP 2 has beautiful effects but nothing else. ArmA 2 has gameplay and normal effects. people scream “realism realism’ but they dont understand what is realism. effects arent realism.
28/02/2009 at 13:13 Al3xand3r says:
So you’ve played both? Lucky you.
Fun>Realism
Which is why back in the day I was playing Ghost Recon and not OFP :)
28/02/2009 at 13:20 Al3xand3r says:
Also, OFP2 looks nothing like COD4 going by the footage linked here… What, people say it looks like that because of 1.5 seconds that show a guy run up to another guy while they shoot? It doesn’t mean that was a good choice of action or that it’s the more effective way of playing, does it?
That said, I’m sure it’ll be more arcady than ArmA2, but it’s likely that’s the better choice for the vast majority of gamers interested in this type of thing, but who are less sadomasochistic than to be hardcore OFP fans. And no, that doesn’t make them Counter-Strike whores :)
28/02/2009 at 13:20 Larington says:
@Gamer: Even if you have actually played OFP2, you haven’t been playing a finished product, remember that before getting all judgemental. That is unless you have a time machine thats allowed you to go into the future and compare both games, in which case… Can I borrow it?
28/02/2009 at 13:36 Gap Gen says:
Al3xand3r: Sure, it’s only 1.5 seconds – my comment was more of a statement that the video doesn’t tell you much, although like I said, the look and feel of those 1.5 seconds is more action-based. Yeah, that might be a good thing. I guess we’ll just have to wait until both games ship to find out.
28/02/2009 at 13:36 DigitalSignalX says:
Holy Crap KP, nice link. Hope the game plays as good as it looks. Betting it will be time to upgrade the system again when that comes out.
28/02/2009 at 14:32 Pundabaya says:
Look at it from Codemasters point of view, they needed to keep the name.. as they’re rubbish at making them. without it the name would either be GUNS or Advanced Soldier Simulator (with back of box quote from Richard Darling ‘ABSOLUTELY AMAZING!’ and Real PC Screenshots!)
28/02/2009 at 15:09 Don says:
What I loved about OFP was that it managed to do – without scripting the scenario – the confusion and arbitrariness of combat. You’d pile out of a truck, the Lt. says go that way, off you trot. Lose sight of the squad as you cut through some bushes, out the other side and suddenly you’re on your own, not a soul in sight. Then one shot rings out and you slump down dead, never having had a clue what the hell was going on.
It could be frustrating but gave a challenge that other FPS games that signpost the player through the game don’t provide. So as to the current spat I don’t really care as long as at least one of them produces the same kind of experience, just with kick ass graphics and AI. And if both do then I’ll probably buy both.
28/02/2009 at 15:37 gamer says:
why ofp2 fans so hate arma2? and arma
28/02/2009 at 16:07 tikey says:
Completely off-topic, but I’m going to go to Derek Smart’s house and steal all his game collection.
I mean, he has both Crusader games boxed, BOTH!
28/02/2009 at 16:26 Larington says:
Wouldn’t call myself a fan of a game I haven’t played, it could turn out to be utter crap, waiting on more solid information before trying to make any judgement calls.
As for Arma1, I was put off by the broken state of the single player campaign and some of the obtuseness of the interface, never did work out how to order a medic to heal me – Something which should be very easy to do. Its quite possible that Arm2 will kick OpFor2′ ass, but most people seem to be defaulting to the view that if they’ve released a flawed game before, they’ll do it again.
Such is the Internet.
Personally, I really hope both games are brilliant and do really well, I’ve never taken any satisfaction from seeing a game fail, especially when the concept seems promising or ambitious.
28/02/2009 at 17:09 Pavel says:
ArmA 1 is an amazing game.
With all the patches and ACE mode.It is too bad they had to release it unfinished, but at least it GOT FINISHED and is now amazing.I have no doubt they learned their lesson and ArmA 2 will be finished on release, wiping the floor with OPF2 (which might still be a good game, although the ingame video looked absolutely disgusting).
28/02/2009 at 17:13 Jaffo says:
I’ll buy either of them if they are good. If not, I’ll stick with OFP.
28/02/2009 at 17:46 ImpossiblyDaft says:
“Even that terrible control interface still looks the same”
Am I the only person who liked the controls? I found the action-menu much handier than trying to remember loads of different buttons. For me the key is improving the rubbish vehicle physics.
28/02/2009 at 19:26 paddytehpyro says:
Both will have demos so just give it a go. Strong words from them folks though, I would laugh if it was crap…
28/02/2009 at 19:59 gamer says:
I’m waiting for both games
28/02/2009 at 20:15 Lh'owon says:
@AdrianWerner: Yes you’re quite right, sorry. I only play multiplayer in ArmA as the campaign is indeed a bit rubbish so I wasn’t thinking of it. However I do think multiplayer (co-op that is, I don’t think PVP is quite as good) is where ArmA really shines.
It does look like BI are putting more effort into the campaign this time round though, so quite probably ArmA2 will have something for both single and multi-players.
28/02/2009 at 20:25 Dozer says:
ArmA – have the mods changed the cumbersome way animations were implemented? I stopped playing once I realised that if you shoot someone in the head, he’ll die, but he’ll keep running forwards until he’s finished his ‘run two steps forward’ animation, then switch to the ‘fall over dead’ animation…
Codemasters own the OFP trademark. What on earth did BI think they’d do with it, except develop an ‘OFP sequel’?
Operation Flashpoint Rally, perhaps?
Operation Flashpoint Logistics Tycoon?
28/02/2009 at 20:40 Anon says:
I’m looking forward to both.
Ofp2 for a more arcade feel, and ArmA2 for the realism based battlefield experience.
To me, ArmA didn’t live up to it’s ofp predecessor in terms of singleplayer experience. The varied missions were at times a real challenge. Arma just lacked that character and the background story. I hope bohemia will make up for it and add a smoother interface/animation system. And by jove, replace those incessant firing pops and missile launcher sounds. They get old fast.
Codemasters will no doubt supply with something fun to play with and lots of toys to blow up.
28/02/2009 at 21:20 dsmart says:
LOL!! Ah yes, now those were the days.
You should see./i> some of the stuff I have in storage. Including every.single.console.ever.made (Jaguar anyone?) – including their games.
28/02/2009 at 21:56 Lh'owon says:
@Dozer: What the hell man? Did you even read the article? BI in no way denies Codemasters the right to make a game with Operation Flashpoint in the title, what they object to is Codemasters implying through their marketing that OFP2 is the “return of” and “official sequel to” OFP, when it has nothing to do with it other than name.
Which seems reasonable to me.
28/02/2009 at 22:18 Gap Gen says:
Anon: I love the fact that the last mission in Op Fap was getting to the pub for a reunion.
28/02/2009 at 22:59 whitebrice says:
@Tikey
Hell yeah! And all those Infocom games, too.
01/03/2009 at 03:29 EBass says:
Talking about bad animations Dozer, that is nothing.
OFP – A guy shoots a RPG and reloads it, during the reload he gets hit by 50 bullets. He calmly finishes the reload and then falls over dead.
ArmA – Luckily we’re half a decade later so things have changed a lot. When someone gets hit by 50 bullets while reloading he er……….. calmly finishes the reloading animation and then drops over dead.
For those who say ArmA is a great game. Well it is, why? Because Operation Flashpoint was a great game and its THE SAME. They honestly changed nothing whatsoever in 5 years.
Here are the things I can think that ArmA added.
3d Iron Sights
Swimming
To give another example. In OFP you place some AI behind a wall of sandbags. Their AI routine tells them they are under fire and they lie down. They will never move to take a decent firing position so they can see the enemy, they will just stay prone behind the sandbags with their face in it. In ArmA its exactly the same.
01/03/2009 at 09:56 kafka7 says:
You’re judged on the game, not the name. Arma was a mess, whereas OF2 looks very promising. Isn’t this the real reason for all of Bohemia’s insecurity?
01/03/2009 at 10:50 harvb says:
As a gamer who was a huge fan of Operation Flashpoint I naturally tried Armed Assault. I was more than a little disappointed in it’s “consoley” nature, but my OpFlash group played it to death anyway. I still feel it missed the mark in some ways – a seemingly smaller community than OpFlash, less polish on the interface, cumbersome controls, a horribly buggy launch – but as far as we were concerned, it was a part of the OpFlash IP so we bought it and played it.
I dare say exactly the same will be true for us for both OpFlash 2 and ArmA 2; we’ll buy them both and end up playing the better one to death. I suspect there will be others out there that feel the same. Ultimately, despite the strangely barking message from Spanel above, I feel he’s right; the gamer can only win at the end of the day.
01/03/2009 at 10:52 harvb says:
Okay, I didn’t do anything remotely mad there, but my comment has come through in an utter shite format. Odd.
01/03/2009 at 16:06 Panzeh says:
Arma/OFP were at their best when they were doing something other than normal FPS type missions, like ‘clear the town’ type coop or deathmatch or BF-style missions. For example CTI/Warfare game modes really showcased the game better than just slogging through urban environments. I would consider the games to do fps/rts games far better than any mod or professional offering present.
It’s a shame single player scenario makers didn’t use the command engine mod features more, instead opting for rather typical fare.
01/03/2009 at 16:10 Turin Turambar says:
I have one question How the hell Ofp2 looks promising? We only had some not-so-good screentshots without gameplay, it comes from a studio without previous experience in these type of games, unlike Bohemia. It’s being done by a big publisher instead of a normal developer, usually the type of games a bug publisher makes is for the mainstream. It’s also coming for consoles simultaneasly, it’s going to be dumbed down.
01/03/2009 at 19:26 dsmart says:
Yep. Thats what I want to know too actually. Which is why most will posit that its going to be JAFS (Just Another Fucking Shooter).
Heck, even the trailer weren’t in-game shots IIRC.
01/03/2009 at 19:29 Sabre says:
Some FP:DR gameplay: Start watching [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsOHJy-R2HA&feature=channel]this[/url] at 2:11.
Invisible gun attack!
01/03/2009 at 20:36 gamer says:
working in progress…
02/03/2009 at 00:48 Gap Gen says:
harvb: How was ArmA consoley? Granted, I’d agree that it was disappointing, even if we had a lot of fun in the multiplayer, but it’s about as far from a console title as you can get, I’d say.
02/03/2009 at 00:58 redviper says:
@Turin Turambar, definitely get what your saying. At this point I’m really not convinced by ofp2 with what little they’ve actually shown so far. What makes this all a bit strange (and depressing actually) is how much blind faith a lot of people are putting into the codie’s game. To me it makes no sense, and I can see why BI are a little frustrated. To me it seems people are putting a little too much faith in a dev which has had zero involvement with the first game to pull ahead and somehow release the better ‘sequel’.
Was Arma 1 really that bad? To the point where people are completely turning away from Arma 2 (which is looking promising, and which had a whole lot more shown). I don’t know, its kinda sad that some people actually want the underdog to lose in this case, especially considering how forthcoming BI have been. Arma 1 may not have been the best title but I’m still giving BI a chance here.
02/03/2009 at 11:06 Dinger says:
How is ArmA “consolely”?
By heritage. ArmA incorporates many of the improvements that went into the XboX version, like the icons instead of a text action menu.
What makes it different from other FPSs? It has no hard limits on things that should be limited. How many other FPSs can you play where you could walk for four hours, not see a soul, and then stumble across a mechanized company? When shooters talk about “Advanced AI”, they usually mean “Three or Four guys who use cover when attacking you from ten feet away”. The Scale of ArmA is far beyond what it should be. I suppose only Far Cry 2 comes close, and even there, their map is a fraction the size of the original OFP map.
Why don’t more people use stuff like the Command Engine? It’s a mod, that’s why. As cool as the OFP/ArmA mod community is and has been, it’s still a mod community, and that requires A. people to get interested enough to explore mods, and B. people with the competence to use them.
Most mission makers do what they do for people to play the game. Using mods limits the audience.
Then, when you have a scripting-intensive mod like the command engine, every step you require for the use of the mod reduces the potential audience by a huge factor. So, downloading it and installing it already kills off 90% of the players.
When I first saw the OFP command engine, I looked at the requirements (a series of densely-packed arrays), and ran screaming the other way. There were very few nutcases who played CE missions, and even fewer who designed them.
Now the ArmA CEX is much better, but it takes some setup.
We saw the same thing with Unified Artillery. We had it set up so that the mission maker had to do one extra task to enable artillery: place an armed Obelisk on the map, side Game Logic. (It was necessary to for MP synchronisation and all kinds of effects). Still, a huge number of mission makers failed at that point.
Now, ArmA includes many outstanding improvements from OFP in the scripting field, such that, were someone to do artillery, it could be done far more efficiently than how we did it in the OFP days. And a system could be devised so that other mod teams could make compatible hardware without needing to contact an external scripting specialist.
But it would still be limited in its application, because it is a mod, and it involves playing the game in a way different from what BI has it set up for.
There was a time when player-generated content was billed as the salvation of gaming, and BI’s products have shown how far collaboration between a development house and unpaid enthusiasts can go. From the OFP demo onwards, modders have been finding ways to push the engine even farther. BI has picked up on that, and consistently worked to make the game more accessible in those directions.
So, you talk about ACE and the CEX and all those good things. You’re still dependent on a community to develop them and to support them, and all this for free. Will the ACE group have an internal struggle and kick out the members who contribute the most? Will CEX languish as the dead wait of previously contributing mod-team members spend all their time pontificating on blogs instead of making things work?
Maybe it’s time to incorporate some of those community advances and set the table for the next round?
And for God’s sake, do something about the AI and animations.
02/03/2009 at 13:15 H says:
Gap Gen: Dinger basically said it better than me. I felt it was holding my hand too much rather than just dropping me in there like OpFlash did. An icon over a body when you’re near it? I’m sure I can see, thankyou very much. It just felt… To me it felt like the difference between Morrowind and Oblivion; the first one was free, a breath of fresh air, you could do what you wanted. The second one guided me everywhere and was clunky. Just my opinion naturally but that’s how it felt to me and the group I played with.
02/03/2009 at 14:50 Gap Gen says:
Hmm, I never noticed the icon over a body. And I use the text menu as well as the icons. Sure, the campaign was a mess in ArmA, and yes, the AI is rudimentary and the animation stilted, but that’s a separate issue.
02/03/2009 at 15:09 Unreleased says:
“Clive Lindop, the game’s senior designer, AI specialist and a veteran of the original Flashpoint community”
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/operation-flashpoint-2-preview
Lindop work for CM last 4 years. For Bis never work.
Marek say true story.
Add FarCry2 – ubisoft buy first version cryengine.
02/03/2009 at 18:33 PHeMoX says:
@dsmart: Yeah, you’re right, it has been better than doing nothing when it comes to feeding families and so on. Impressive collection of games by the way, I used to own many of those classics as well. Seems you’ve got a good taste.
03/03/2009 at 12:14 kororas says:
I know for a fact I am gonna buy both however, but my expectations are;
OPF2 is gonna be a glossed up COD4 albeit with a little more attention to detail. I would like to see myself proven wrong however.
Arma 2 is going to attempt to achieve what Armed Assault should have been + a little bit more (and from what i can see from the previews, at least gfx wise, looks like its on the road to achieving this).
03/03/2009 at 14:35 Larington says:
“How the hell Ofp2 looks promising?”
Hope.
We know from past experience that BI have released what some might call, umm, a flawed experience.
We don’t have experience of a previous release from the studio working on the codemasters game and from that point an element emerges of wanting to believe that maybe, just once, an ambitious game won’t be deeply flawed somehow.
03/03/2009 at 16:22 KP says:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYvJh9PrOl0&fmt=22
All we are sayyyyying… is give ArmA a chaaaance! I’ve gotten more milage out of this game than any other. :)
-and don’t go thinking ArmA players in general want OFP2 to fail. On the contrary, a strong OFP2 can only strengthen ArmA 2 – and it could be fun in its own right.
03/03/2009 at 17:55 Sabre says:
Another good example of the ACE mod for ArmA 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WWby7IrvSM
04/03/2009 at 07:46 EBass says:
“Clive Lindop, the game’s senior designer, AI specialist and a veteran of the original Flashpoint community”
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/operation-flashpoint-2-preview
Lindop work for CM last 4 years. For Bis never work.
Marek say true story.
Actually it says that Clive is a veteran of the Flashpoint COMMUNITY, not the dev team. So its probably true.
04/03/2009 at 17:45 Sabre says:
It has been corrected- it did say Clive worked as a developer on the original OFP. When BIS contacted Eurogamer to correct them, Dan from Eurogamer said “that’s what Clive said!”, although they believed BIS and took down the information.
He also stated explicitly he was a developer for the original OFP in an online CV of his, which has been taken down after BIS threatened legal action. It seems he has been going around taking credit for BIS’ work, although many who aren’t versed in this story seem to think he’s innocent regardless of the evidence and full information.
This doesn’t mean FP:DR will be a bad game, I hope it’ll be great, actually. I’ll just never believe any of Lindop’s PR bullshit about FP:DR again :)
06/03/2009 at 18:55 KP says:
http://www.arma2.com/russian-armed-forces_en.html
this week’s trailer is up!
13/03/2009 at 21:05 KP says:
http://www.arma2.com/national-party_en.html
and another weekly trailer!
13/03/2009 at 23:32 SlipperyJim says:
Damn I was so wrong. I think this game looks great.
14/03/2009 at 20:55 Still playing ofp1 says:
i have watched both games ofp2/dr and arma2/sequel
I think anybody with any history with this game and an ounce of common sense can see what will happen.
Codemasters will try to attract the masses by producing some of the things mainstreamers like in a less corridor and claustrophobic game.
Bis will continue to develop the massive open game that tries to be as realistic as possible ,but they will only achieve 80% of there goals as usual and leave the last 30 % for there community to finish .
for me the winners will be everyone , codies will rake in there money from the masses on initial sales, the gamers will get a liking for this new found open landscape/arena and move onto arma2, bis will make there money too from that and gamers will get there enjoyment.
The biggest problem is that it was proven with arma1 that when you make a game more mainstream you get some tension between old school ultra realists and new people that are starting out. however it will all simmer eventually :).
in essence i think it will be a win all round, especially if codemasters use the profits to continue to support there version .
ofp maniac
15/03/2009 at 14:19 Me says:
Seems however ARMA2 is getting more complete core game than ARMA1. So many addons were needed in ARMA1 to fulfill realsim and fixes. BIS already stated many things that are in ARMA2 and it seems most addons we use today are already in. Sure there will be things for modders to do probably. But then again – there isnt one single game where i like every bit of it. And here we can do something about it. As long as ArmA2 is a good solid core game – im happy.