Operation Flashpoint 2-Dragon Rising.

valve games....are not on the same scale. Name a game with the same scale worlds which has better gfx.....I can think of only Arma 2 and people constantly moaned and sulked about the performance. When game studios release these games with the option of having incredible graphic settings (eg. Crysis), as well as the option of scaling down, gamers still moan because they can't get that higher setting.

If you have to be angry...maybe Nvidia or ATI should be the recipients. Or maybe just don't be angry.
 
just had a quick bash, the single player is a bit fiddly
the issuing of commands needs some improvement,

i tried to go online, waited in a lobby for 10 minutes then gave up

feeling a little let down so far :(
 
I'm getting tired of waiting for games for them to only let me down in some way, seriously when will we get one of those games that just wows the crowd.
 
As there are no dedi servers I am thinking of getting OFP DR on the 360, but still keeping my pre-order for the PC.

I know this is a PC thread but I am sure there are people here that have or are thinking of getting this game on the console.

If there are, whats the comparison like?
 
Mission editor with the PC version only. That has to be the biggest pull for purchasing the PC version, surely?

As for myself, I'm not too disapointed about the MP. With the first game, I never even played it online, i had too much fun rocket launching tractors off cliffs with the mission editor! :D
 
If a lot of people are feeling somewhat disappointed with the release, why did all those review sites give it 80+ percent? That doesn't seem right to me.
I am never surprised if a game does not meet my expectations but I am dumbfounded by some of the high scores -90% PC Zone UK :eek:

Makes me think that they were playing that very different pre-release version that CM were showing off in their marketing videos.
 
Getting dodgy flashing and my driver just reset my video card, presume it's the early drivers with the 5800 causing this :(. Looks like I may have to wait until Cat 9.10 WHQL
 
Game studios are damned if they do use amazing gfx that our rigs struggle with, and damned if they don't.

People seem to get outraged whatever the outcome.

The level of anger in this thread is fascinating.

Couldn't agree more. This game could tick all the boxes twice and people would still find something to complain about. Then again, this is the Internet.
 
Getting dodgy flashing and my driver just reset my video card, presume it's the early drivers with the 5800 causing this :(. Looks like I may have to wait until Cat 9.10 WHQL

Should have stuck with old gen hardware, although playing actual games isn't as fun as epeen obviously :p

adrianr said:
Couldn't agree more.

I disagree, although my complaints are the whole dedicated server thing.
 
haha yaeh well played for about 4 minutes and it just made me want to play arma2 more :/ i get similar frame rates, 24-30 fps ? seems lame to me
 
valve games....are not on the same scale. Name a game with the same scale worlds which has better gfx.....I can think of only Arma 2 and people constantly moaned and sulked about the performance. When game studios release these games with the option of having incredible graphic settings (eg. Crysis), as well as the option of scaling down, gamers still moan because they can't get that higher setting.

If you have to be angry...maybe Nvidia or ATI should be the recipients. Or maybe just don't be angry.

I for one found COD 4 single player to be great. Not normally a FPS person but I thought the graphics were great and the immersion factor was great too. They weren't top end graphics like Crysis, but the way it all moved made up for that. It ran really well on my older rig too so some game companies can get it right.

People complaining about Arma 2 are generally complaining because even at the lowest graphics setting things don't always run well and the graphics are shocking on lowest levels so they can't understand why it still runs badly.

OFP 2 looks acceptable to me and if it was a great game the extra bells and whistles graphics wise wouldnt bother me, but from what people are saying I'm going to be dissapointed tomorrow when it arrives but I'll still give it a go.
 
Had a bash last night, it's ok but certainly made for the console market.

The command system is VERY annoying and obviously designed for a control pad. Chaging weapons / ammo takes forever and the AI are thick.

Good things to note are it looks pretty good and is less buggy than Arma2 was at release.

Tried to play online but after waiting for 15mins to get a game it was just a lag fest.

Overall a big meh from me.
 
I purchased ARMA 1 on the day of release and couldnt play it for 6 weeks, the game would crash on intro everytime, after 2 patches 6 weeks later the game would load but was useless/unplayable, I further 6 weeks and 4 patches later I finally got my first go on the game I was so angry with bohemia.
I again bought ARMA2 on the day of release thinking nah they wont do that again, and they didnt I could load the game I could play the game, but oh my god what a load of pap, the FPS where slow on my I7 and GTX295, the controls where clunky, and gameplay was horrible, the graphics where poor the story line was poorly put together and other than that this all made the online experience terrible in return, again ARMA 2.....another game sat on my shelf I shouldnt have wasted time or money on and pirated it.

Dont get me wrong I havent played OF2 yet, but come-on it cant be any worse!! Infact I'm pritty confident from what I've read and seen it will be a cracking game SP wise and quite fun MP wise, and lets not forget it'll be patched shortly and all you 32 player fanboys will no doubt comming running back. As for cancelling pre-orders the SP alone will be worth £17 you will have paid more for worse, idiots!
 
Last edited:
I may be being thick but how do you go back 'up' the command system radial? I go in and drill down a level or two but can't go back up a level so have to quit out of the radial and start again.
 
If a lot of people are feeling somewhat disappointed with the release, why did all those review sites give it 80+ percent? That doesn't seem right to me.

They where all done on previews, where they believed there would be dedicated servers for multi player.

And any co op they did play was played on a LAN so they wouldn't notice the lag etc.

If they where told what we knew now they'd all follow the "No working MP" headline and criticise a 4-5 hour single player campaign being the main focus rather than seeing it as an addon.
 
Back
Top Bottom