|
|
 |
| [Oct 06, 2009, 09:53 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
Codemasters announces
Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising is now shipping to North American
stores, with the open world military shooter due in PAL territories Thursday
and the UK on Friday. Here are
some screenshots, there's a cinematic launch trailer on the
YouTube, and here's a
bit: Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising is modern combat in stunning
detail. The game authentically recreates conflict in a 360-degree theatre of
war, which enables players to approach objectives from any direction. On this
realistic battlefield, where one bullet can kill, players face the fear and
mortality felt by soldiers as they are challenged to survive the rapidly
evolving situations of battle throughout the game's single and 4-player co-op
campaign.
Whether assaulting, flanking or suppressing the enemy, or calling on fire
support to rain down from the skies, Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising demands
players think on their feet, reacting quickly to any situation the game's
advanced AI throws at them. In this theatre, every decision counts, every action
has a consequence and every bullet can kill.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 88. |
Re: OFP Dragon Rising Out |
Oct 10, 2009, 18:05 |
Jerykk |
|
|
I do not need to have played every game ever made to draw basic conclusions about them.
You need to have at least played many games with leaning and used it on a regular basis. Your current assumptions are obviously flawed so it doesn't seem like you've done this.
It's been your assertion for this entire argument.
Please reread my argument. Once again, for the 50th time, a game doesn't need to be 100% realistic to be immersive. However, if something is more realistic, it is also more immersive because it meets players' expectations.
This is proven by the fact that the hacking in Bloodlines can be more immersive without being DOS itself.
Once again, for the 51st time... a game doesn't need to be 100% realistic in order to be immersive. I don't know how many times I can say this. You keep ignoring my actual argument. My argument is that games are more immersive when they are more realistic. The hacking in Bloodlines is more immersive than the hacking in Mass Effect because it is more realistic. You haven't actually provided any rebuttal to this point. Instead, you keep ranting on about how it isn't actually DOS. Please read my actual claims. It doesn't need to be DOS in order to be immersive. It just needs to be more like DOS in order to be more immersive.
Notice how small the market for the simulation genre is? Know why? Because while a certain amount of people will always be predisposed to enjoy work the same way most people enjoy non-productive hobbies, and some of those people do things (fly planes, race cars, etc) that have representations in the simulation genre, the vast majority of people do not have by doing things that closely, moderately or even come more than just a little close to work while they're trying to have fun.
Like I said before, this isn't an argument about realism vs fun. Totally separate things. To some people, the more realistic something is, the more fun it is. To other people, this isn't the case. People have different tastes. However, in all cases, something that's more realistic is also more immersive. This doesn't necessarily mean it will be "fun" to everyone but it will be immersive. Take Operation Flashpoint. You got one save per mission, which meant that dying was a much more significant event, just like in reality. Many players didn't especially like this feature because they don't like investing that much time into each mission. However, this didn't change the fact that they were more immersed when actually playing the game.
Leaning does not offer enough of an advantage over moving partially around a corner to be worth the effort extra keystrokes for the same effect.
I and many others would disagree. I listed four tangible benefits I've experienced when using lean in pretty much any game that offers it (except for CoJ: BiB).
While we're on the subject, we might as well cover the fact that the implemention of leaning is, near universally, very poor and unrealistic in itself. You can't switch what shoulder you're pressing the stock of your gun to in nearly every game ever, which is something real soldiers do when they lean from one direction to another.
Yes, it's not 100% realistic and being able to switch shoulders would improve it. However, being able to lean at all is still an improvement over not being able to. FYI, Splinter Cell lets you switch shoulders, though it's not an FPS.
The fact that hitscan attacks don't usually come from where it looks like the barrel of the gun is from the first-person perspective should make this irrelevant, but all it does is add an extra psychological factor.
Go ahead and play NOLF2. Or Rainbow Six (the originals, not Vegas). Or even Crysis. Try leaning around a corner and then try standing next to the corner. See which one gets you noticed more quickly and which one gets you hit more quickly. Hitscan attacks rely on your hitbox's visibility. The more your hitbox is exposed, the more likely you are to get hit. Pretty simple stuff here.
At no point did I say this is true of every game.
Here's what you actually said:
"Especially in single-player games where the enemy has unrealistic accuracy at ludicrous distances and leaning doesn't even help anyway."
That statement encompasses all single-player games. In truth, the vast majority of games do not have enemies with ridiculously high accuracy. The only one I can think of right now is CoJ: BiB on the highest difficulty setting. If you can list more, feel free. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Twitter 
