Ofp2: simulation or arcade [Archive] - Bohemia Interactive Forums

Superskunk

Nov 21 2003, 11:31

To all the creators of Operation Flashpoint 2.

I heared rumars ofp2 won't be released until 2005 cause there also will be a version for the X-Box. When i think of the X-Box i think of acrade like games, not simulations with depth.

The thing i think what made ofp 1 a great game, is the fact that it is a war-simulation. It brought great realizme to the game-world. This realizme is ideal to use in a game...but the basics are realizme.

I think there are lot of examples of movies or games, which the first part are very good and original, and the second parts or made for the great public. With this i mean they're made to sell, not to have a great part 2.

Keep this in mind, cause you might sell a lot in the first months but only a good game will stay longer...

I hope one of the programmers is willing to respond to this question: Is OFP2 gonna be arcade or simulation. And do you feel a this stage ofp2 has the same amount of realizme in it as part 1? Or did the team focus itself on the game-able side of OFP2?

At last i would say: http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/unclesam.gif War is terrible, War-games are great!!

From the Netherlands - Superskunk
Sorrry for my bad english!

Postduifje

Nov 21 2003, 11:46

No need for paranoia over the keeping of the original scheme in the sequal here, the BIS crew are just the 'realism based simulator' freaks we are http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif I'm totally confident BIS won't go pop over OFP2, but keep their 'purity' http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

-Post

FragMASTER

Nov 25 2003, 23:57

No noob simcopter like chopper flying please. I want to do barrel rolls and the like with the choppers.

Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX

Nov 26 2003, 00:24

Hey simcopter had quite good choppers for it's time; there were definitely worse chopper games out there :P

I'm sure the BIS staff have seen the huge support in the community for the current level of realism and even more realism - I'm sure they will realise that there is huge demand for the most realistic war simulation.
(after playing combat mission I'd love the same detailled armour penetration algorithms and damages - 'mobility kills' are a serious issue at least)

RalphWiggum

Nov 26 2003, 04:43

from few interviews that various OFP fan groups held with BIS, BIS noted that they are going to hold realism foremost, but will also address the issue of balance.

I don't think XBOX version will be any arcadish conversion of OFP.

blackdog~

Nov 26 2003, 06:17

I think you are under the impression that OFP2 will be released on X-Box before OFP2 is released for PC - this isn't true, OFP is being released on X-Box before OFP2 - OFP2 will be released on PC first.

Little Blue Assassin

Nov 28 2003, 06:08

When it comes out, I'm going to have a bitter laugh and an "I told you so." I'm currently enjoying this dubious pleasure on another forum, because the much-anticipated sequal of another game which was just released happens to suck just as badly as I said it would.

It, too, was designed for X-box, when it's prequels had been only for personal computer. Oh, I know that old story!

Postduifje

Nov 28 2003, 08:28

Little Blue Assassin, look at what blackdog said. OFP2 is not designed for X-box. There merely making an x-box version of OFP1, and use the oppertunity for testing some improvements in the engine they hope to use in OFP2.

-Post

ACT SMILEY

Dec 7 2003, 16:55

Marek Spanel is not Harvey Smith, therefore I'm still hopeful for OFP2.
If OFP2 is trashy, "streamlined" game where the features have been removed completely to make it more "intuitive" for someone with no brain cells and the slight interface troubles (actually, OFP has one of my favourite interfaces ever, but squad control is a tad clumsy) make the whole interface replaced with something worse etc etc. I'll probably go insane.

Proper console versions can be done (eg, Morrowind), as long as the PC game ain't changed or limited by the console. Its when they pander to the lowest-common-denominator that the trouble comes and well, BIS are people who I trust to get it right.
As to OFP:Xbox... can't say if its gonna be a hit, but if its the same game as on the PC but with a gamepad, those console players ain't gonna know what hit em in terms of quality, style and gameplay.

Garcia

Dec 11 2003, 09:44

Quote[/b] ]I heared rumars ofp2 won't be released until 2005 cause there also will be a version for the X-Box. When i think of the X-Box i think of acrade like games, not simulations with depth.
That it will also be released on X-BOX doesn't mean it will be unrealistic. I think BIS will make OFP2 and OFP almost as realistic as they are on PC. And they will make OFP2 even more realistic than OFP. Though, as said before, they will try to keep the nice balance between realistic and PC game, and i.e keep the way you fly choppers (which Marek Spanel said in an interview) etc. Anyway, with OFP being such a great game I doubt they will go away from the realistic thinking...that's like winning in lotto and then burn it before you get the money... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif

Garcia

colossus

Dec 12 2003, 09:27

No OPF2 on X-BOX. Are you making more money becouse of that? Becouse of all the GOOD addons on PC, why should anybody have it on X-BOX?

Antaris

Dec 12 2003, 09:45

games like OFP dont deserve to be commdemend too consoles.. and, those type of games arent built for consoles ! *hear me roar* http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rock.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

Apollo

Dec 13 2003, 17:56

I to have my doubts on Ofp xbox version's chance of succes.
Xbox has much less possibilety's than a pc version ,you cant add addon's on the xbox version ,multiplayer is probibly also a no go ,same goes for downloading mission's.

Although Xbox pads have less control possibility's i don't doubt that Bis will manage to keep controls good ,so in game i think a xbox version will be ok ,but since it's not upgradable with addon's etc i think it will come repetitive very fast.

I wonder if the mission editor will be included in the xbox version.

RaptorAce

Dec 13 2003, 20:17

XBox has a HD tho, so they'd prolly make it possible to get addons

TheManWithManyIdeas

Dec 13 2003, 22:26

BIS, keep it real!

colossus

Dec 14 2003, 18:24

OPF is made to PC, not to arcade.

FragMASTER

Dec 18 2003, 18:18

I want to be able to do barrel rolls and inverted spins in choppers. Maybe they can put it in the difficulty options whether you want realistic flying or arcade-like flying.

m21man

Dec 19 2003, 00:03

Definitely make that a seperate option. I like keeping my OFP as realistic as possible http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif .

svendejong

Dec 19 2003, 11:01

Quote[/b] ]Maybe they can put it in the difficulty options whether you want realistic flying or arcade-like flying.

agree, but when its not possible to make two options make it seperate options indeed.
Nothing wrong with it if people have to work on their flying skillz before they get into the action.

MSpencer

Dec 19 2003, 13:36

REALISM over arcade. If it becomes another DF: BHD, or BF1942, I'll kill myself.

m21man

Dec 19 2003, 14:22

Quote[/b] ]REALISM over arcade. If it becomes another DF: BHD, or BF1942, I'll kill myself.
Don't do that, be productive http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif . Kill the people who decided to make it like BS1942 http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wow_o.gif .

ozanzac

Dec 19 2003, 14:35

Well, I hope OFP2 keeps most of the balance between realism and arcade as seen in the current game. But I could cope with more realism. Actually alot more realism. Like Falcon 4.0 realism! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif

Nah, then you'd all want to be simpleton soldiers, especially if it it takes me a couple of minutes to start and warm up a Tank or Aircraft, with a fully clickable 3D cockpits and Functional MFD displays. Then I'd be the only one having all the fun. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif

Stif

Dec 23 2003, 10:26

I think that it will be simulation. OFP1 was simulation and OFP2 will simulation http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

Pathy

Dec 23 2003, 18:24

Soon as i hate tanks and choppers anyway (i can use them, i just dont like em), i'd go for a "you can SMELL the cordite" level of realism if i got the choice....perhaps just as well i dont :P

Heatseeker

Dec 23 2003, 18:40

Well i dont think OPF is any kind of simulation... its a game with diferent slower paced gameplay problably because the devs thought it would fit the game and its engine better.
True for the time it was released it was alot more realistic than other games but to call it a sim would be a little too much, one could mention the inacurate modeling of weapons regarding fire rates, sounds and even designations, the weapon and equipment loadouts for soldiers, the A.I. zig zag tactic http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif , manual fire on tanks, helos and jeeps, even the gameplay and interaction with buildings and objects (trees and other objects that we should be able to use for cover) was poorly made. Imo the only think that makes OPF more realistic than say Vietcong is the fact that you cant shoot on the move and the long range firefights, regarding the rest i think VC has much better firefights and more realistic combat.
Point is i hope they make a good balance between sim and gameplay, i want them to get rid of frag grenades and want to roll them on the floor http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif , to use cover of objects and to interact with buildings, and most of all weapons and equipment acurately modeled and based on the real thing ( AK47 with burst http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rock.gif , shouldnt that be on the MP5sd3 or has they call it hk http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif ), reloadable rpg`s?, etc.
I am a big fan of this game, its engine, its huge worlds but i believe there are many flaws in it that should be fixed/improved in OPF2.

Pathy

Dec 23 2003, 19:26

Yeh, agreed.

One thing, its not realistic for the AI to single the player out from his squad to be killed 1st. Even when hiding in a bush not firing, they always go for the player.......get it sorted!

Lupus[WD]

Dec 24 2003, 01:35

No noob simcopter like chopper flying please. I want to do barrel rolls and the like with the choppers.
advanced flight model ? (http://wolfdog.online.fr/ofp/gallery/gazflip1.avi) <- download short 800kb video
;)

Stif

Dec 24 2003, 14:07

VC. What it?

Re: Heatseeker
I think, that in the new engine all this will be corrected.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

Pathy

Dec 25 2003, 07:51

VC= Vietcong....good game, for CQB jungle style, its an excellent game, i have to agree

Stif

Dec 25 2003, 12:20

I saw it on the TV, but to play it was not possible. When on new year will buy a videocard then I shall play.
Re: Pathy
And you played VC?

Heatseeker

Dec 25 2003, 14:15

I saw it on the TV, but to play it was not possible. When on new year will buy a videocard then I shall play.
Re: Pathy
And you played VC?
Its great sp game with great jungle environment, you can see insects, birds, frogs, ducks and chickens http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif , the vegetation is awsome and overall is a great jungle cqb game.
But... it does have engine probs and framerate issues so i wouldnt recomend it if you have a slower pc.

I would really like to be able to use cover like VC in OPF2 and to see the a.i. use it too and to remain in cover when under supressive fire.

Pathy

Dec 25 2003, 18:33

RE: Stif, i wouldnt comment on it if i hadnt http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

Stif

Dec 26 2003, 11:52

Well. I necessarily must play in VC! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

Re: Pathy
Ou. Yes. Its true http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif . Sory.

Re: All
As to we my English?
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif

Stif

Dec 27 2003, 15:13

Hm.. Vc cool game. Textures of the face very good.

In Vc, all game in jungle?

Pathy

Dec 27 2003, 17:17

Yeh pretty much.

Korpisoturi

Jan 3 2004, 08:49

i hope they'll keep Flashpoint 2 as realistic, no Conflict Desert Storm style plz!Also, i think BIS should restrict vehicle driving to NPC only. Infantry parts are OFP at it's best.

colossus

Jan 3 2004, 11:49

Denwad

Jan 4 2004, 09:59

Hm.. Vc cool game. Textures of the face very good.

In Vc, all game in jungle?
Except for a few missions in the VC tunnel network, the camp your base of ops is in and a few villages yes.

Theres 2 non-jungle MP maps, Halong Port and NVA base, both are fun.

ag_smith

Jan 4 2004, 10:42

i hope they'll keep Flashpoint 2 as realistic, no Conflict Desert Storm style plz!Also, i think BIS should restrict vehicle driving to NPC only. Infantry parts are OFP at it's best.
Desert Storm was in 1991 not in the 70's.
So i dont think we have to see a repeatment on this conflict.
Maybe Arab-Israel conflict maybe.
I think he meant Conflict Desert Storm game, which was totally unrealistic arcade type...

Restricting vehicle driving to NPC only? One of the worst idea I've seen here so far! That's what I love about Flashpoint - absolute freedom, you can do what you like! If you like infantry fights only, then simply don't use any vehicles! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

colossus

Jan 4 2004, 10:46

Sry ag_smith. And I totally agree that Conflict Desert Storm
was a real mess. Worst game ever..

SnypaUK

Jan 27 2004, 18:55

perhaps they could have a command that limits infantry to only driving trucks and jeeps. Then on MP or anyone who makes one of these Rambo/James bond/Terminator missions. You can turn off the limiter and get in choppers and tanks etc and run around in them

Mr. Snrub

Feb 6 2004, 08:51

Well i dont think OPF is any kind of simulation... its a game with diferent slower paced gameplay problably because the devs thought it would fit the game and its engine better.
True for the time it was released it was alot more realistic than other games but to call it a sim would be a little too much
All games are entertainment-oriented simulations.

It just happens that OFP is a more realistic simulation of combat than BF1942 or MoH or any other arcadish games.

I personally believe there is virtually no chance that OFP2 will be any less realistic than OFP1, let alone another BF-type game. BIS has built up a reputation of realism (despite only 1 and a half releases) and any deviation from this expectation will be to their detriment. Sure, they might pick up fans from of the more arcadish genres, but from what I've heard the guys at BIS pride themselves on their reputation, and I don't think they want to alienate their existing fans/community.

All BIS really has to do to improve realism is fix a few key areas (ie. engine limitations, graphics, physics) - if these are improved in OFP2, the game's potential will be exponentially enhanced. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

If OFP2 is as successful as the original, I don't see why it shouldn't be ported to a console. More money to BIS = better games in the future. OFP2 will be developed first and foremost for the PC, not the X-Box, so a later port to the console will not affect the realism of the PC version.

Mr. Snrub

Feb 6 2004, 08:57

Also, i think BIS should restrict vehicle driving to NPC only. Infantry parts are OFP at it's best.
Sure, OFP's infantry element is it's strong point (being the most realistic), but why eliminate use of vehicles? Sacrificing one element won't necessarily make the others stronger...

Like ag_smith said, the ability to use vehicles isan integral part of OFP's magic - the ability to improvise, to take part in all sorts of situations...

Leone

Feb 6 2004, 11:16

Sim only!! OFP is the only Sim....everything else is arcade. So why join the crowd, where the market is already flooded?

Gollum1

Feb 7 2004, 09:57

Nah, OFP is the closest thing to a sim, but a sim it ain't IMO.

Spy17

Feb 7 2004, 10:27

The player should be able to steer all vehicles. To avoid that every noob can cause a havoc with every tank , heli or plane he comes across these vehicles should be simulated more realistic. If you train enough you can control all vehicles...
With the AI it should be a different matter. They should be restricted in their ability to steer vehicles. I never liked it that every medic hunter or whatever can perfectly steer a plane or heli....

In easy mode it should still be the way we have it now! So everyone should be happy!

HuNtA

Feb 8 2004, 10:03

hmmmmmm, OFP definitely is NOT a sim. If it is, why didnt they USMC jus get OFP rather than asking them to make VBS1? anyway, I think that the player shouldnt be limited by their skills, and if U limit the Ai, it would make the campaign and such seem ALOT harder

Spy17

Feb 8 2004, 11:34

I guess the term simulation is relative...
It´s about what can be done to make it real live like and what is left out to make it easier to play.

To me it seems BIS did the best it could trying to make the engine real live like. Remember it is the first game featuring controllable air-sea-ground vehicles. They did not have unlimited time and money so they had to dumb down some aspects. There are some minor design decisions made that could have been more realistic but where introduced due to game play reasons for example the very limited grenade load out of the grenadiers.

To me it seems like BIS leaned more towards simulation if you compare it to other games. To make it accessible to more players the easy mode is included.

I hope they continue this way and make the engine as realistic as possible. You can still have a game that is fun to play it just depends on the mission makers! (fun is a relative term too like some people would not mind to play missions where nothing is happening just because it can be realistic others have to confront 100+ enemies to have fun...)
A good realistic engine could still be made more accessible with easy settings.

Concerning VBS1 if you read the VBS1 topic you will find out that it does not differ a lot from OFP. The Marines choose OFP because it can simulate "some" aspects of the real deal.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

ArchangelSKT

Feb 15 2004, 12:17

Well I hope they incoorparate it in settings , as in
having one mode that is like OPF and another one that is class specific...meaning you can only fly if your a pilot and so on .

FragMASTER

Feb 17 2004, 21:44

ArchangelSKT

Feb 18 2004, 16:28

In real life, anyone can use any type of vehicle, it just depends on their knowledge of the controls and how to use them to greatest affect.

I think a pilot would know how to drive a car, dont you?

(calls taxi)
Well if your refering to me then I`m excluding the civilan veichles , I mean a pilot wound`t necesarily know how to operate a tank would he ?

I think it is cool if a pilot lands to to evac some troops then if he gets shot....well among those lines is what I`m talking about .

FragMASTER

Feb 19 2004, 04:30

Spy17

Feb 19 2004, 06:04

Quote[/b] ]Hey, im not a pilot IRL, but if I needed to, I could fly a plane or chopper, just not as good as a qualified pilot.

You would not even know the engine start process not to talk about the modern wepon systems in modern planes and choppers. Maybe if you are lucky you would get a chessna airborn but modern planes and choppers are a different story.

Lumamorod

Feb 19 2004, 10:20

I believe OFP is pretty much perfect in its intentions of balance in playability and reality. If the same philosophy goes into the development of OFP2, one should expect the same sort of immersion without so much of the little technical issues thats here and there distracted you.
If they fix the way buildings are handled, and the way the AI relates to them, making a better CQ environment, work a bit on the graphics front, namely to add more vegetation and properly implemented soft cover, make the command interface more efficient. And with the apropriate amount of eyecandy, and thats it for me.

The single most important thing IMHO is even better mod support and funcional mission editor.
Not that i use them a lot, but i know the wonderous things this tallented community can do with them, and how much that has done for OFP endless replayability.

ArchangelSKT

Feb 19 2004, 11:02

Hey, im not a pilot IRL, but if I needed to, I could fly a plane or chopper, just not as good as a qualified pilot.

And as for tanks, they have simple controls that are easy to figure out. It's like driving a car, but instead of a steering wheel, it's more like bicyle handle bars.
Well for full effect in warfare soldiers have specific training for a purpose , do you at least agree on that ?

I think that should show dependant on the class you chose in OPF 2 .

If a regular soldier picks up a sniper rifle from a dead sniper , would he be able to know how to use it to the full effect as the sniper would regarding ballistics ?

I don`t find it very appealing that any player can just jump into a chopper and fly away , same for tanks .

Lumamorod

Feb 19 2004, 11:20

ArchangelSKT

Feb 19 2004, 11:41

This could be adressed in a RPG sort of way, most people would probably not like them though.
But since in OFP you create a gamer profile it could have some proficiencies attached: flight time, weapon usage etc... this would affect general precision, you would gain better control of vehicles, and better precision, steadyness with sniper rifles and other special weapons.
I agree that this was never the spirit of the game, or of this thread for that matter http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif .

Oh it just ocurred to me. In a way that already happens. The more you fly a chopper in OFP the better you become at it. No real need to code that.
Yes I agree that the learning curve inside the game is a way of handling it , in that respect then I`d hope choppers and tanks in OPF2 would be a little harder to get around with then in OPF .

Probably won`t couse then it would lose players .

That being said OPF is still " King of the hill " in realism in games for me .

SnypaUK

Feb 19 2004, 17:52

I believe this is rather irrelevant as in OFP you had different characters doing different stuff. Anyway i think perhaps you should have an option so soldiers can fly helicopters but if the option is turned off then they cant and only pilots can fly helos only tank drivers can drive tanks etc. This would only be relevant in MP in the campaign BIS will probably have seperate characters anyway

ArchangelSKT

Feb 20 2004, 20:24

Well even in a SP mission it would suck if your pilot got killed and you had to make it through a hotzone on foot cause you couldn`t fly .

I would like it this way..though as a setting in the game .

- easy setting , you fly out yourself
- hard , you have to walk http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif

Baphomet

Feb 21 2004, 23:00

Quote[/b] ]Proper console versions can be done (eg, Morrowind), as long as the PC game ain't changed or limited by the console.

That quote in itself is nothing but a huge oxymoron... Morrowind was a terrible bastarization of Daggerfall and it's precursors. What was a huge world with a wide variety of locales and people to visit became pretty much a technology demo for the Xbox. It -was- limited by the console insofar as they decided to opt for cramped spaces and nicer visuals instead of the quantity of places and variety of locales to visit.

Not to mention the very consolish touches added to the game to mask such descisions, like adding cliff racers everywhere to restrict you from going to certain areas of the island because being able to traverse around like a normal person would be just too boring on such a small island wouldn't it?

I just hope when BIS mentions balance issues that they don't mean lowering the efficacy of bullets against infantry. I do not want to play quake with vehicles.

I don't believe that classes should be mandatory for ofp. I do think that you should be able to define certain roles. Perhaps even a list of qualifications for each individual unit if you want. However I think the standard utility-soldier is best. Being given the option to change something and make it more complicated is always better than forcing you to do things only one way. I'd dislike that.

Fragsta

Mar 2 2004, 20:43

I think he meant Conflict Desert Storm game, which was totally unrealistic arcade type...
It was unrealistic in the way that you cannot hold weapons the way they did, and men do not appear from nowhere. And more than that. But it was a very tactical game. Have you ever played it with three friends for hours on end? Fantastic, it's just like being in a Gulf War movie, it's really dramatic...anyway, this is the OFP forum, so I'll shut up now...

toadeater

Mar 6 2004, 01:51

Quote[/b] ]Proper console versions can be done (eg, Morrowind), as long as the PC game ain't changed or limited by the console.

That quote in itself is nothing but a huge oxymoron... Morrowind was a terrible bastarization of Daggerfall and it's precursors. What was a huge world with a wide variety of locales and people to visit became pretty much a technology demo for the Xbox. It -was- limited by the console insofar as they decided to opt for cramped spaces and nicer visuals instead of the quantity of places and variety of locales to visit.
I didn't mind those things about Morrowind. What I didn't like is that it's combat was so repetitive and entirely devoid of tactics. A thief-like character still had to fight like a fighter, and the "magic" basically was the same as using weapons. If you think about it, Morrowind didn't have any real levels at all, so there was no possibility of tactics.

Anyway this is the OFP2 forum so we can't talk about Morrowind so much. But my point is, I don't think Morrowind suffered because it was ported to consoles, I think they opted for that design for other reasons: no need for level design and a completely mindless AI that basically ran at you in a straight line and attacked and did nothing else.

firedrake

Mar 26 2004, 13:14

What worries me when I bought the original flashpoint game. The great thing about it was the AI. Having played the Delta Force series and Ghost Recon (whose AI are the worse I ever come across). In the original version of OFP AI would throw grenades, fire flares and engage an M2 in a Fortress 2 with a LAW. The enemy AI would even compensate when the original M2 gunner got killed.

After buying Red Hammer and then Resistance does this happen any more? No, the AI have got easier to kill in my opinion, even on Super AI playing the Battlefields Single Mission. I kill 20-30 AI before they even flank me when I'm just left. Your be lucky to even be hit by a grenade fired by a grenade launcher, let alone the AI chucking a grenade at you.

Another example is exiting boats in the original version, you find your feet in the water or just on the beach. In the Resistance version you find yourself magically appearing halfway up the beach. This means you and the AI don't drown anymore, get hit when exiting the boat or when the boat is blown up after exiting it, you don't go up with it . Not exactly Saving Private Ryan is it. This did again, happen in the original version.

Either the programming has alot bugs, which I find difficult to believe. Or they dumbed the game for those who play arcade like Medal of Honour.

I do own Medal of Honour but when a AI sniper can reload and shoot faster than you that it is when the game ends reality for me and the fact it takes 60 rounds to kill one AI Colonel. I like arcade games but I fine them a bit of the same format. Especially when you end up just memorising where the enemy is. Not to say have their value, Bohemia can learn alot from Medal Of Honour especially when it comes to AI in bulidings. Was I surprized when the AI threw my grenade back at me.

When OFP was released alot of people whined about dying to easily and didn't buy the game or returned it. I must admit I didn't like the game at first because of this. However this was due to my mentality of playing too many arcade games and Delta Force. I worried that Bohemia are trying to influence the Arcade players into buying. They may try to develop a hybrid to satsify everybody. They should stick to the original concept otherwise alot fans of the original game will be disappointed. I only play the original version of the game now.

My idea of a combat sim is being hit by RPG fire personally, not wanting to hear the AI soldier farting next to me. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rock.gif

Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX

Mar 28 2004, 17:47

The appearing on the beach thing is to stop the AI drowning. They used to do that, now they don't - improvement.

I think you are having selective memory, because IMO the AI got cleverer as patches went on.

The clincher is that you refer to Medal of Honour as having AI; moreover, GOOD AI!?

Umm. No.
Medal of honour games are 99% scripted. That means that there is VERY little actual AI in the game. I would hate for OFP2 to go down the same route. Medal of honour games are universally crap, IMO - the AI does exactly the same thing every time when you stand in the little trigger zones for them.
BIS have nothing to learn from EA.

I do think that dumbing down the game for arcade players is a very bad idea, but I don't think it has happened and hopefully will not happen (Xbox OFP notwithstanding; it'll have to be dumbed down for a console release)

Friedchiken

Mar 29 2004, 23:02

Even Half-life had 95% scripted ai. For a game like ofp, the worlds are too big to have scripted ai. Maybe have scripts for objects so the ai have an idea how to ustilize that cover but scripted ai isn't exactly a great solution. But who has time to put ai nodes in to the ground of miles of terrein (bleh sp.)

Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX

Mar 30 2004, 14:05

Even Half-life had 95% scripted ai.
No it did not. Don't make silly things like that up. There were some scripted sequences in HL but the AI was not scripted. See the grunts for example.

firedrake

Apr 1 2004, 11:56

There is nothing more boring than someone nickpicking you on your knowledge of programming. Did you actually read the rest of my comments. Is MoH really 99% scripted who cares, likewise I don't rant and rave and tell everybody I hate platform games.

Actually I could argue that EA at last have their weapon specifications historically accurate. I'm sure they would not not allow Ak74 to have the burst facility and not allow an East M2 Machine Gunner and actually use NSV or DSHK. Oops, I must stop showing off my knowledge of weaponary to belittle people. I should only do that if trying to get OFP2 more historically accurate.

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif

Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX

Apr 1 2004, 12:00

There is nothing more boring than someone nickpicking you on your knowledge of programming.
No, theres nothing more annoying that someone speaking nonsense and claiming to know more than they do.

Quote[/b] ]
Actually I could argue that EA at last have their weapon specifications historically accurate.

You *could*, but you'd be completely full of shite.

Friedchiken

Apr 1 2004, 21:58

No it did not. Don't make silly things like that up. There were some scripted sequences in HL but the AI was not scripted. See the grunts for example.
well, probably that was the wrong number figure but I made a few (really crappy) HL maps. I said HL's ai is scripted because the ai grunts ect, need the ai nodes to be programed into the map. If the map does not have ai nodes in the maps, the ai grunts can only shoot and throw grenades. They don't know where to move unless ai nodes are placed on the ground. The ai in Half-life was advanced and never repetitive, but in every decent HL map, you needed to place ai nodes for movement, which I call scripting. The female ninja jump thing is a great example because you had to place "jump nodes" for them to know that it's a good idea to jump to a higher level.

FYI, I count "unscripted ai" as ai where you can place the ai somewhere and it would have all it's features without extra information nodes in the level. Like in Flashpoint, for the end user.

(thinking about it a little more, 1% of the permanent ai is scripted, but that's only for movement, the grunts' knowledge of teamwork is still in action even if they can't move inside a map.)

firedrake

Apr 3 2004, 11:59

You said it! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif

Friedchiken

Apr 3 2004, 23:02

You said it! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif
Though I don't like Call of Duty's AI or the MOH series'. Half-Life's ai was fun but it always seemed that COH or MOH the ai just did the same damn tactics. HL was good because, like in Flashpoint, the ai made its own decisions without the excessive orders of the mission maker. AI is so much more unique and fun to play against when more initiative is given to the ai to make completly random choices.
Look at all the "evil johnny" threads in these Flashpoint Forums! Non-scripted ai isn't easy to get working but the effort was worth it.

I don't think EA has anything on BI. They just bastardize all that perfectly good info they learn from that Marine guy they hire to "immerse" the designers. Maybe BI should take a field trip and sign up for one of that guy's camps. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/unclesam.gif

The Frenchman

Apr 4 2004, 04:39

Look at all the "evil johnny" threads in these Flashpoint Forums!
*Shivers* http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
The memories of evil Johnies still gives me nightmares. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

Friedchiken

Apr 4 2004, 23:45

Yeah, especially when "bastard johnny twins" ran me over with a Jeep while blowing my head off with the machine gun at full speed. Jeeze, they came so suddenly... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

The Retaliation campaign can be so hard at times...

Shataan

Apr 12 2004, 16:13

In this day and age of fast food gamers, it is increasingly getting harder to find even 1 decent onfoot mil combat experience. Alround FP 1 has been the only mil combat game to deliver in most every area. It wasn`t perfect by any means, but it could have been.

We have way too many kiddiefied mil games that basically are combat skinned quakers as it is. It would be a really sad day if FP 2 succombed to the status quo and became an arcade shooter. I think I`d quit gaming altogether if this happened.

As for FP 2, I hope is something MORE than just a part 2.... that it looks way better than the best mods for FP 1, and sounds better than the best sound mods for FP 1 as well.

Spy17

Apr 12 2004, 19:29

Quote[/b] ]As for FP 2, I hope is something MORE than just a part 2.... that it looks way better than the best mods for FP 1, and sounds better than the best sound mods for FP 1 as well.

For me it is not so much the looks or the sounds. I hope they have better features like ari, higher viewdistance, better comand system, multiple guns, improved realism, radar....

I do not mind about the way OFP1 looks - especially if you use the mods!

server1

Apr 15 2004, 09:42

i tell you guys one thing i have bean looking at Soldner secret wars demo and man it sucked it was a complete arcade and because of that they are getting getting grilled
but wat i really like from Soldner forums is that the dev's is the
admin so everything asked gets looked at for-example Soldner was
a pure third person game but after we became cry baby's well
now its a first and third person game http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif

i hope OFP will stay true to its origin