Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising
Operator's manual.
I once got lectured by a man at a wedding about Operation Flashpoint. I'd made the mistake of mentioning what I do for a living, but instead of smiling, nodding and pretending to listen while I explained just what a burden it is deciding between two numbers all the time, he went a little purple and asked if I'd heard of ArmA. I didn't have time to answer before he launched into a fifteen-minute tirade against Codemasters, accusing them of being traitorous and misleading money-grabbers for making a game under the name Operation Flashpoint while its real creators Bohemia Interactive, supported by a real community of real fans, were making real sequels to the most real war game ever made and didn't I think it would be worth writing an exposé about that?
I smiled, nodded and pretended to listen. But the fact is, this man was and is no kind of lone nutter. Another acquaintance once gave up a lucrative city job so he could sit around in his dressing gown making Flashpoint maps all day, and Bohemia's own reaction to the great pretender Dragon Rising rearing its head was just as vituperative as its fans'. Flashpoint - the real Flashpoint - means an awful lot to an awful lot of people.
So when it arrives in October - eight years after the original, two-and-a-half after Bohemia's ArmA: Armed Assault, and less than six months after the excellent ArmA II - Codemasters' game faces expectations that can't possibly be met and minds that refuse to be changed. Many people who ought to treat it like a second coming - fans of the realistic, military simulation FPS - won't even give it the time of day. Codemasters will have to go back to square one and persuade everyone else, including people with games consoles, that they want to play a game where getting shot actually kills you.
For an overview of how they plan to do that, check out our previous Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising previews. In brief: the setting is contemporary, with the US Marines stepping in to help repel a Chinese invasion of an oil-rich, Russian-owned island in the Pacific. There's one huge, contiguous island map, free-roaming and free-form combat within mission structures, loads of authentic vehicles and equipment to use, tactical command of a four-man squad via a quick-command menu, strategic command of larger forces from the map, and online co-op and multiplayer.

The game's visual signature is these columns of smoke; they're even used as checkpoint markers.
All of which ticks the right boxes, as did the several glimpses we've had of the game running on high-end PCs. But the questions remain: how will Codemasters' in-house team deliver all this grandiose, granular simulation in a playable and - saving the war-is-hell brigade's graces - entertaining form across several formats? How will they differentiate it from its compulsively comprehensive rival, and how, if at all, will they draw more casual shooter fans into the fold?
An Xbox 360 preview version, featuring two single-player campaign missions, gives some idea. The first impression is made by the sort of slick, atmospheric front-end that Codemasters has been gracing its racing games with of late. Layers of grainy, black-and-white photography glide by under minimal fonts and that mournful, ululating ethnic singing that film-makers currently associate with the horrors of war, for some reason. If Modern Warfare is Hollywood's war, then this is Sundance's: hard-hitting, unvarnished, documentary-style.
Good presentation is one thing the original Operation Flashpoint lacked, but in this game, presentation is everything. It's not put in the service of spectacular set-piece but rather of putting your boots on the ground in an actual conflict situation, giving you the sights and sounds of being there as well as the feel and challenge.

It's all very Jarhead, or Generation Kill, but it's nice not to be in the desert for once.
It's graphically subtle - overcast skies, long grasses, copses of trees, broken walls, shabby barns - and on 360, it skimps a little on detail and effects in order to give you the freedom and the breathtaking draw distance. So Dragon Rising doesn't really reveal itself to you until you reach the summit of a hill in the first mission - goal: to disable an early-warning radar on a small outpost island - and use your binoculars to scope out the village in the scooped valley below. This game does naturalistic terrain exceptionally well, especially vegetation and the subtle but vitally useful elevation changes in the rolling landscape. You soon start thinking about cover in terms of the lie of the land rather than the lie of the conveniently placed crates.
It's around this time that the fantastic audio hits you as the bullets don't - just. A realistic soundscape is a very rare thing in games, but Operation Flashpoint has one, and just like the graphics, it's mostly about emphasising one thing - distance. Bullets, after all, travel over long distances, so you're often trading them with men who are very far away, just pixellated specs if you don't equip a scoped weapon.
The tiny, flat crack of their gunfire is drowned out by the frightening zip and thud of their rounds past your ear. Guns sound vastly different from different ranges, and their echo crackles and crunches off hills and buildings. Distant explosions travel to you seconds after you see the bombardment you've ordered strike a village, while your breath and boot-steps are close in the still air. It's very atmospheric.
For fear of breaking that atmosphere, Codemasters hasn't dumbed down the game's stringent rules on any difficulty setting. All enemies are good shots given enough time, a headshot kills you outright, and getting hit anywhere else means you'll bleed to death if you don't bandage it. Lower difficulty settings instead give you UI assistance - red markers for enemies on your compass, clear tracer fire, a target reticule. It doesn't sound much, but finding men wearing camo gear 200 metres away in a copse of trees, and then figuring out if they're friend or foe, is one of the principle challenges in this game, so it helps.
For the most part the UI is good, tidy and helpful, and the controls are sound. Aiming is fast and precise if a little sticky on the pad, and the quick-command system for tactical orders works well - you hold down RB and use the d-pad to make quick stepped selections, or use smart context-sensitive shortcuts. However, equipment selection is awkward and sluggish, and even Assisted difficulty gives you no help actually locating your team-mates - realistic, but often problematic if they're mixing it with the enemy or need to be bandaged. More seriously, they are often unresponsive to orders, which might well be because you're doing it wrong, but some sort of clear feedback would help if that was the case.
At any rate, as you get accustomed to the game, you're probably best leaving them to their own devices, which is when their AI really shines. Without orders, they'll react fluidly and sensibly to the course of action you're taking and provide valuable assistance, flanking, suppressing and perhaps most importantly, spotting threats. Operating with their excellent, autonomous backup gives you confidence in tackling this intimidating game. Whether the tactical system is precise and predictable enough to be a useful tool later on, we won't know until review, but there are some questions at this early stage.

Cover comes in many forms; walls, vegetation, vehicles, dips in the ground, even smoke.
Checkpointing is on the sparse side for such a difficult game with so many instant-death scenarios, and you have to wonder if for once, the old necessary evil of the FPS quick-save might have been usefully brought out of retirement. However, although it can frustrate, Dragon Rising is seldom unfair, and multiple tries at encounters give you a chance to explore the enormous breadth of approach routes, tactics and equipment - rifling enemy caches and bodies for weaponry is always worthwhile - at your disposal. It's not a sandbox game in the free-wheeling playground sense, but the freedom is considerable all the same, and a welcome counterpoint to the tight real-world restrictions of the combat.
How far that freedom extends to the mission design, and chances to explore the landscape, isn't quite clear yet. The introductory mission, on its mini-island, presents you with your main objective early on and rewards you with a big bang as you call in thunderous howitzers on an enemy-held village. You can then pay as much or as little attention as you like to mopping up resistance en route to your helicopter lift out, and there's an optional objective clear over the other side of the island if you want to tally and explore.

Come to Skira, where the skies are sepia and the beaches are tactically important.
The second mission feels more tightly scripted. You assist a beach landing - no D-day this, a modest scramble alongside three amphibian vehicles - by taking out anti-tank gunners, then mortar spotters, then anti-air teams, finally seizing a well-defended village and defending it yourself to hold the beach-head. Guided by the clear waypoints, it flows very well and provides a couple of dramatic moments, but there it doesn't open up in the same way or offers you anything entirely optional to do. Stray far off the beaten track, and you'll find nothing much at all.
Although the mission design is clearly strong, you wonder if Codemasters will have the bravery and the vision to offer you the full scope of this military sandbox. That's what ArmA II does so well, and it's possible that Dragon Rising won't be able to resist the urge to guide you towards its next carefully unstaged, studiedly informal set-piece, like a big-budget effects film shot with a hand-held camcorder. But maybe that's just a matter of taste. And when they've got those atmospherics so right, who can blame them?
You may also like...
-
Digital Foundry: PS3 Skyrim Lag Fixed?
-
Why Devs Owe You Nothing
-
Retrospective: Star Wars Episode I Racer
-
Face-Off: The Darkness 2
-
App of the Day: Ascension: Chronicle of the Godslayer
-
Game of the Week: Catherine
-
Gotham City Impostors Review
-
Who Killed Rare?
-
EA evaluating FIFA Street features for FIFA 13
-
App of the Day: Sir Benfro's Brilliant Balloon
-
Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning Review
-
Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 Vita Review
-
Sony admits "dropping the ball" with Demon's Souls
-
Grand Slam Tennis 2 Review
-
The Darkness 2 Review
-
CD Projekt: Witcher 2 intro cinematic "the most expensive asset we ever created"
-
Skyrim patch 1.4 now live for Xbox 360
-
One Piece: Unlimited Cruise SP Review
-
King Arthur 2 Review
-
Samsung Galaxy Note Review
-
Skyrim patch 1.4 performance tip: make a new manual save
-
Metal Gear Solid: The "Lost" HD Remasters
-
Epic's Sweeney on graphics tech: "the limit really is in sight"
-
App of the Day: Superman
-
Next Xbox has tablet-like touch-screen controller - rumour









Comments (48) Latest comment 3 years ago
Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I'm probably better off saving the money I would have spent on this for a Core2Duo so I can run the game I really want to play.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I have a horrible feeling that this will be far too tightly scripted - with a demand for precisely meeting mission objectives, which is all but impossible in the kind of free-flowing open battlefield this game is supposed to provide. Remember old combat flight sims? You might not destroy everything needed to accomplish your mission, but you could still return to base and carry on to the next mission.
If I find any confirmation that ArmA2 is indeed coming to 360 (nowhere gives me a straight answer) than this can just go and hang with all the other Codebastards crap I won't be buying.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Achievements / trophies (trophys?) could be used to reward those who don't use quick-save, any end of level rewards could be spilt up, with the second award only going to those who haven't quick-saved.
Regardless, BF1943, then Wolfie, then Flashpoint, then COD:Is There Actually Anything New This Time? - whole lot of shooting fun.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
You are playing Arma 2 with an Xbox controller? Bugs are the least of your problems.
edit: OK, if it's for flying choppers then I am being a dick.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
'At this early stage'
isn't this game out in Sep/Oct?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I'd imagine he means "at this early stage in the game" - it's a fair bet that missions later in the game will get larger/harder/more complex and it's too early to tell if the system in question can cope when that happens.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
edit: very well Glaeken, I suppose you're right. It's not like he didn't back it up with some context though.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I don't know how good this game will be but I am certainly willing to give it a chance.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
edit: OK, if it's for flying choppers then I am being a dick."
To be fair you're being a dick anyway. The game demonstrates a high level of support for the xbox pad, even down sticking the proper button graphic images in the menus and so on, but regardless of how I CHOSE to play, the basic implementation of the Y Axis is still broken and that shows a stupid lack of attention, in my eyes, on foot, in chopper or in vehicles.
Call it symptomatic, and shove your perceived "problems".
Comment below viewing threshold Show
/elitist
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
You're absolutely right, because they haven't implemented it correctly! grr
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
"you cannot with all seriousness expect to play a proper hardcore PC FPS like Arma II with two thumbsticks"
Yeah you can, I know peope in ARMA2 that use a ontroller for planes & choppers, and mouse & keyboad for the rest of it. Good thing about the PC is you can have the best of both worlds
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
People have been accepting buggy over-ambitious titles on the PC for way too long now, if a game coming out for consoles too means its more optimised and properly thought through then I'm all for it.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Feck... even reviewers are beginning to whine about checkpoints. Watch a movie instead, then you never have to try again.
I just don't understand the whiney newer generation of gamers (young and old). I remember IO, IK+ etc on my C-64. WHen you completed it, you knew you had done well. Today it's just a matter of F4, F5, F4, F5... and it influences the difficulty. It's better to have checkpoints after all and not too many, so you're rolled though the game wheelchair mode. This is the main reason I can't respect PC single player experiences... the quicksaves. Yes people can decide not to use them, but since their presence influence game design it's bad any way you look at it.
To hell with quick saves. Give players a challenge, from easy to very hard and then let player decide what they can cope with instead of having people play it on very hard and then whining because there is no quicksave.
@Skillian: Dual analogue is hard yes... but you can play a shooter using them, although it's a MUCH harder skill to learn than point and click with a mouse. I can control perfectly with dual analogue on any shooter. I used to be a PC gamer, but mouse aiming just feels way too easy and simple, compared to using two analogue sticks. That's skill. A mouse is for web browsing... playing a shooter with a mouse is just too easy. Gameplay on a console is better, since the aiming is much harder to learn and even a great player can't be 100% accurate 100% of the time, which isn't hard if you're good with a mouse.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Anyway, really looking forward to this. As much as I loved O:FP (and, to a degree, the ArmAs) there's a niche to fill between Call of Duty and Arma, with the tight controls and production values of the former, and (at least partially) the scope of the latter, and I hope O:FP is the game to fill that niche.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Disagree. The nice thing about quicksaving is that you can ramp the difficulty all the way up, to get the most out of the fun parts, without the game becoming too frustrating through sheer repetition. Checkpoints aren't making games "harder" anyway, just tiresome.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
That's actually one of the things I like most about PC gaming - see STALKER, Ultima, Eve, OpFor etc. I know the logic doesn't exactly hold up
And OK, I concede on the analogue stick point, and there is something to be said for a gamepad needing more skill/practice. I would say that Arma 2 isn't like other FPS games, and would be a very different experience to playing CoD on Xbox or something., but if that's how you want to play then more power to you.
edit: Although this seems like it would be hard to replicate on a keyboard: http://i2 77.photobucket.com/albums/kk58/...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
But that's the problem, isn't it. I think we'd agree that the games, while being more polished, often also lose scope and ambition when they are consoles. Of course there's something like too buggy, but personally, I'll take a maybe over-ambitious Stalker over the next Call of Duty (as much as I am looking forward to it) any day of the week, although I understand it if someone sees that differently
. I'd agree with you if the alternative to "very (to avoid "over"
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Yeh I find these PC elitist comments tiring,I'll be playing on 360, I know it will look stunning and lack certain effects of the PC version but I'm not that bothered about slight graphical differences. If I were I wouldn't still play my old PS1.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I'm pretty sure the 360 is getting ArmA2 at some point. I hope so, I'll never tire of military style shooters, especially if they're difficult and attempt realism. And if the game's too hard for your average Halo/Left4Dead gamer, then I'm all for it. I think I have the same attitude as most people around here... Modern Warfare 2 is definately a purchase, but I see it more as a Hollywood action flick, or a pile of doughnuts rather than a three course meal, or a decent involving movie.
I don't think PC gamers are elitist in any way. They have the best graphics, the best control system, and from experience, some of the best gamers... it's difficult not to express that to us console gamers without coming across as a little boastful. But consoles in general are played on larger screens, probably have more comfortable seating arrangement, and perhaps better sound systems. I just wish more games allowed PC and console owners to join up, in co-op games at least.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
It's a "fake" tension, though. Not something that's coming out of the game as such, and is a crutch at best. I am fine with choice, as long as it doesn't mean I have to use a difficulty level where the AI is totally retarded just so that I don't lose that hour of gameplay. For all I care, let people chhose before a game whether they want to use quicksave or not, independently of the difficulty level as such.
If people use quicksave to save every 10 seconds, they're doing it wrong anyhow, but it's their choice, and they only have themselves to blame. In Stalker, for example, I quicksaved before every major fight, and afterwards, but not in between. And the fights were a ton of fun, in particualr at the harder difficulty level, and repeating them, trying different tactics was a big part of the fun. If there would have been checkpoints, hours apart, it would have been terrible.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Arguing over which out of a mouse or a joypad is the more realistic is pretty dumb really. Neither of them are in any way "realiistic" control mechanisms. They both have their strengths and weaknesses and how well they work depends on how well the game is designed around them.
Whilst you might claim that a mouse in unrealistically accurate, I could equally claim that a joypad is unrealistically unweildy. It's possible to code around both issues - take the aiming in Arma2 for instance, I wouldn't exactly class it as "too accurate".
Comment below viewing threshold Show
But I prefer using a controler over a mouse and I couldn't think of a worse thing to use than a mouse and keyboard to 'numb' the experience, I'm just balancing the argument here.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Sound was bugged to hell; hearing an APC about 2 metres to your left and then finding there is nothing there is extremely irritating and destroys immersion (this was never fixed). The campaign was horribly bugged, in both 1 and 2. Sure they're pretty but that does not distract from the fact that gameplay wise it handles like a drunk gorilla on crack cocaine.
I liked OFP though.
And as for OFP 2; it's a great shame we have to play as the Americans..... AGAIN (it is tremendously dull), but who knows... maybe the game will be fun, unlike ARMA.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I guess what I was saying was that without the possibility to continually save a game, dying in the game is far less preferable than it is when dying just means going back to where you were 10 seconds ago. I think if dying means restarting, then it's taken more seriously, given more respect and no doubt better avoided. It's also the reason I prefer the hardest difficulty. Not because I have any more patience than the next gamer, but when it's tough, I play better. And that's more rewarding than just running around like a Terminator, invincible to gunfire. It's right that people can choose to play that way, but it's not for me. I've always noticed the harder a game is, the chances are the better people play. With the theory being, by playing on harder difficulties you'll hopefully end up playing with better gamers. I call it the anti-Halo-effect! For example, play an online adversarial (or co-op) game where you have unlimited lives and everyone's running about like headless chickens, without a care in the world... give everyone only one life, and people play a bit more carefully, because dying in the game actually means something.
While I'm all for choice, and allowing a gamer to pick and choose how they want to play, there are things that I'm happy to have no choice about., when a game's set to it's hardest difficulty, I don't want to see radars, ammo counts, permanent crosshairs, etc. or continual saves. I think if you're into playing as hardcore and as realistic as a game can get, then you're experienced enough to play in a manner that not having a continual save option isn't a problem. I think I play at my absolute best when I know I could potentially have to restart the map/level/mission. But I don't disagree, dying and having to restart is annoying. The question is how do you react to that... I try and learn and improve.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Anyway, I'm looking forward to this, although a bit apprehensive about the game time I'm going to have over the next few months to fully learn(and not die every 2 seconds) the sim games coming up (This and IL 2) with all the other games coming out.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
If you make a stupid mistake you've got to be punished for it.
Put more regular saves in for sure but if you put quick saves in you remove the fear of dying.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Yep, same for me for the singleplayer. The first game's AI were convincing and deadly.
Hopefully we are going to get more of the same of the first game but without the bugs and with some super high production values courtesy of a big publisher like Codemasters, so here's hoping
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Now I'm not sure if my machine has aged badly or that Arma II is an embarrassing mess but my experience was awful. the voice acting is laughable, the characters stand with their hands by their sides motionless and the parachute stuff was just bafflingly bad. The command stuff sounded terrible WITH... BARKING... DISJOINTED..WORDS.... WHICH.. DIDN'T...MATCH. UP.
So maybe I will try this now.