From: Cologne, Germany
ORIGINAL: Shaun Wallace
..........USMC schools on using CCM and cognitive training, memory based choices etc etc.... The range of the USMC is VBS2 (just released as Armed Assault) thru to Tacops, with CCM somehwere in bewteen.
Erm... just for the record: Bohemia Interactive (the company that developed Armed Assault) considers ArmAssault to be what they call a 1.5-Version of Operation Flashpoint, which means that it's basically the old OFP-engine, with the same old faulty AI, just with improved/recent graphics (textures with higher resolution, a bit more detailed buildings...doh) and a new theater, plus new vehicles/objects. That's why the game got mediocre reviews in most game mags (I think around 70-75%, way less in some mags).
Besides Bohemia argueing with Codemasters about the rights regarding the brand/name OFP (that's one reason for Bohemia not naming it Operation Flashpoint 2), Bohemia figured that they were too busy with working on the VBS2 (military version of the simulation) to dedicate more time for the development of a real OFP 2.0, so they "just" overhauled the OFP-engine, in order to keep the die-hard fans of the game interested and to avoid that OFP will be forgotten.
Afaik, the first version of the military version (VBS) required massive computing power, and was not like a sim you could run on a small workstation, since it featured lots of updates and adjustable environments, where u could recreate combat situations including civilians, riots, raids, a huge range of vehicles, etc.
So, you shouldn't confuse VBS2 with Armed Assault from the same company. The basic concepts of VBS2 might go back to OFP 1.0, but VBS2 evolved into a fully fledged military sim, with lotsa goodies, these days.
Back to topic: I used to be a big fan of the CC series. I even kept playing it although the command interface was cumbersome: it wasn't a contemporary interface anymore at the time the game had been released, when compared to interfaces of RTS that were on the market since 1995. Given, the series featured a realism (in real time) that was unmatched back then, which surely displayed a detail that kept players hooked, I guess, including me. I used to play the unmodded games only, though.
I see where Oleg's coming from, though, and I have to admit that I share some concerns there, although I wouldn't express them that harsh. I believe you if you say that there'll be a new game, and I hope you've got the ressources to make it happen....
Question is, though, will it be like a "1.5" game, or like a "2.0" one (all new engine, brandnew AI, new theater, etc.)?
Imho, CoI is like 1.3 or 1.4-ish.
If there'd be something like 2.0, I'd buy it, definetly.
ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
Having said that I do expect TOW to be miles above generic WW2-flavored garbage like CoH, ....
Technically, CoH is a milestone, regarding technical innovation and presentation. Also, the devs don't claim that the game features uber-realism or anything, afaik. It's a game designed to attract the masses.
< Message edited by GoodGuy -- 3/10/2007 4:01:36 AM >
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
8th of August, 2006