Talk:Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mission Codes[edit]

There is evidence that on 3rd party sites that the extra mission codes for Pre-Order Customers appeared on Cheat Code Sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonanza123d (talk • contribs) 20:15, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Developer[edit]

OFP2 is not being developed by Bohemia Interactive Studios.

"As you’re probably aware, we currently do not have a publisher for our upcoming games and also, the Operation Flashpoint trade mark name is an intellectual property of Codemasters and thus we cannot use the name or directly control what the name will be used for. It means that unless Codemasters were to publish any of our upcoming games (which is still a possible scenario) it definitely wouldn’t be named Operation Flashpoint." [1] - WEKS 09:57, 14 July 2005 (CET)

NAME CHANGE[edit]

We are very aware of it but there was confusion on what it was gone be called and later on it was changed to "Game 2"/"Next Gen. Game" on the offical websites, but the name kinda stuck. If you look at most of game magazines on the web you'll see they use the name Operation Flashpoint 2 more then "Next Gen. Game" or "Game 2" as Bohemia Interactive wants us to use. But when the time comes to release new data about "Game 2" I'm sure Bohemia Interactive will say that Operation Flashpoint 2 has been given a new name (just an example on how they can solve this problem) or urge websites to use the name "Game 2"/Next Gen. Game (bad name but ok)

Sorry if it's a bit confusing.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.202.41.77 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 9 January 2006 (CET)

I think OFP 2 Is dead its owned by Codemaster not Bohemia Interactive. I think OFP 2 was going to be the next OFP although Codemaster only owning a name no engin to build the game on abandoned the project. Armed Assault is the unofficially OFP 2 so Game 2 i guess will be OFP 3 if u want to call it that. Not much is known about it yet look at this website Game 2. Wonx2150 09:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs cleanup[edit]

When I manage to find some spare time, I will revise much of the poor writing in this article. For now, I have marked it with a cleanup dialog.Gordonf238 23:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the article is in need of "checking for proper spelling, grammar, usage, tone, style, and voice" (although I did make a couple of corrections). It is a stub and not a great article. I suggest that stub is put at the top of the article and the article is simply expanded.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardmilgate (talk • contribs) 09:54, 12 May 2006 (GMT)
We can't really expand the article... When you consider the game is unlikely to be out for atleast a year, and there is almost no details about the game.--Peidu 20:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Work had begun[edit]

We are getting underway, thanks for the head start previous page workers :D --99.246.119.39 (talk) 23:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A sound crew contracted by Codemasters spent the week of 6-10 October 2008 at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms, Calif., recording sounds from an M1A1 Abrahms tank, an Amphibious Assault Vehicle; a Light Armored Vehicle; a HMMWV; a Medium Tactical Replacement Vehicle (i.e., a 7-ton truck); a Logistics Vehicle System; and a 5-ton military tow truck. Not all of these vehicles may be in the game, but the sounds you will hear during game play are real sounds recorded from real Marine Corps vehicles by active duty Marines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.162.140.53 (talk) 20:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup[edit]

I'm glad to see someone is making an effort to contribute about OFP2. The information needs to reformatted though as the current form does not adhere the manual of style. Right now it reads as a list of facts instead of a prose story. Also inline citations should be looked for and entered.--Fogeltje (talk) 14:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone feel that this article is more of an advertisement that would be on the publishers website than an article explaining what the game is.--Djpenman (talk) 02:19, 26 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djpenman (talk • contribs) 02:17, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People come to Wikipedia for information and facts. The publishers haven't released much to any information on this game, other then what can be pulled from videos. This page was created to help summarize what is know and give the best possible information about this game, for historical, research and factual purposes. Or at least that was the aim when the page was first made. --99.246.119.39 (talk) 04:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright Infringement[edit]

http://operationflashpoint2.org/what-we-know-so-far/ has been updated noting the usage of it's content on Wikipeidia. --99.246.119.39 (talk) 04:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Operation flashpoint 2 ![edit]

Operation flashpoint 2 is in competition with ARMA 2 from bohemia. Arma 2 is very similiar in style and feel of OFP2DR, however the game arma 2 has a more simulated look to it and seems to be less "arcady". Both games are popular with military enthusiasts, and offer a more complete feeling miliary style FPS experience. Both games are sure to be a hit with the genre populists. "Fish" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Afishegg (talk • contribs) 03:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaned up / citation[edit]

I have gotten much of this article cleaned up and have removed the needs cleanup and confusing tags.

As soon as possible I will be able to get a large portion of this cited. 24.34.57.62 (talk) 21:27, 5 April 2009 (UTC) Copper[reply]


Clean Up[edit]

I removed the release date from the box. It has yet to be announced by Codies, and any date posted on other sites is speculation.Also, I have added more confirmed features, as well as rewording the first bullet under "Misc", it was worded terribly, and focused on BI and their titles, instead of this title and CM. THX1386 (talk) 18:37, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Release Date[edit]

Besides vandalism the biggest bugaboo seems to be the release date. Allow me to clarify my position and see if there are other standards. The release dates given by sales-houses (like Gamestop) is a wild guess for the purpose of pre-orders. The official line is still Summer 2009 (as per their front page) and is still otherwise unconfirmed as of this post (http://community.codemasters.com/forum/showthread.php?t=345973). Michael F (talk) 17:45, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GAME UK just emailed me about my preorder for this, stating the release date as 25th Sept. Should I change it to this or not? Ahluka (talk) 13:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah nevermind, they emailed me a couple of days ago stating 9th Oct. Ahluka (talk) 10:00, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


If it has been listed that the release date in a magazine is May 26th, 2009, then they got that from somewhere. That is a legitimate source that should be referenced within the wikipedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.175.43 (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I'd like to agree that it's a legitimate source, that doesn't make it factually correct. The fact remains, as of 2 May 2009 1:06 A.M. CST, the official line is still that the date is still to be determined. I'd also appreciate knowing which magazine it was. At the end of the day, they may have gotten the information from the same sources we have (or this article itself!) and thus without official confirmation the date is still Summer 2009. If the date was in 24 days, we most likely would have heard of it going gold or that they had a confirmed release date.Michael F (talk) 06:09, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At the end of the latest trailer it shows the realese date as 'Autumn 2009'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.110.175 (talk) 18:13, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism[edit]

I'm afraid I'm not very experienced with the way Wikipedia works, but is this amount of vandalism (for a major release) normal? How do we get the IP-only edits locked? Of course, I want to point out that we do get some good edits from IP users, but we get a tremendous amount of vandalism per good edit. Michael F (talk) 05:52, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The power to block user and/or IPs are specifically held by Administrators of Wikipedia. Non-admins like you and I, have the power to warn users/IPs at the given moment of vandalism. I highly agree that this page gets vandalised repeatedly, but how other users change the release date bothers me the most. --Playjex (talk) 19:59, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The source has been listed several times, Game Informer Magazine, May 2009 issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.175.43 (talk) 16:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First, see above about unofficial sources trumping official sources. Second, as a logistical issue, 20 days seems like such a short timeframe to go from un-announced, possibly pre-gold status to on store shelves and sold (Gamestop receives the games at least a week in advance, and you have to factor in manufacturing times, shipping times, etc). Third, Gamestop (to take an example) is listing September 1st or 2nd. Which of the above is correct? Quite possibly neither, ergo neither shall be listed. Finally, your IP was the originator of the "Bigfoot is ingame" edit, so I'm going to take your statements with a grain of salt. Michael F (talk) 02:22, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Project reality relationship to OFP2?[edit]

I saw there is a link to "Project Reality" a mod for BF2- what relevance (if any) dose it have to OFP2 in order to belong to this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.179.163.66 (talk) 12:10, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know, that's a very good question. My thought is that it's in the same vein, what with being a "realistic" combat simulation. Michael F (talk) 23:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really feel that PR has any bearing to OPFLASH:DR. To be honest, it was a mod that somewhat simulated combat, and was sort of realistic, but not nearly to the scale of games like ArmA and OPFLASH. Also, PR is a mod, not a full game, and I think the only mods that should possibly be referenced to OPFLASH are the mods to the original, and possible mods to DR.THX1386 (talk) 18:39, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is a lot of crossover on the fans between PR/ARMA/OFP, but there's no reason PR should be linked in this article WastelandSoldier (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC).[reply]

List Order[edit]

Question regarding a recent edit. Are list orders alphabetic by design, or was the edit simply bias between platforms? Michael F (talk) 18:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Island size[edit]

Is the island 107 miles from furthest point to opposite point. If so the helicopter would have to be travelling at 351mph; which is the exact speed of the V-22 Ospreys maximum speed. but the Osprey is a tiltrotor, not a helicopter; helis can nly roughly manage about 150-180 at top speed. So this does not seem right, and there is no reference to say this is true (unless the reference at the end of the section covers all of it). Can someone please confirm this though. Sorry about the really rubbishy wording. 'The Ninjalemming' 12:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstand the area of the island. It's 106 square miles, and based on the map on the page, it appears the island, extreme to extreme, is around 25 miles. 20 minutes in a heli would bring the speed to 75 miles an hour, 12.5 miles an hour in a Jeep (assuming no intervening terrain, which there is), and 5 and a half miles an hour on foot (which is a pretty good clip!). Michael F (talk) 03:15, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, cheers; just wanted to be sure. Other wise they would be running pretty damn fast, around 24mph. 'The Ninjalemming' 11:24, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Release Date Complaints / Delay Speculation[edit]

Release dates are a fluid thing, and unlike what posters may be implying, Flashpoint is not the only game to ever have a release date rolled back. The alternative, at best, is a half-complete and buggy game. People complain about not having a release date, then they complain it's so far off, then they complain when it gets moved back. The alternative is not getting a release date until final production, and simply having NO information for six months. Official word is unnecessary, as they told you when to expect it. You can have a team member to babysit your every insecurity and apologize for their release date, or lack of screen shots, or how your favorite widget never made it into the game . . . or that person can be making the game come out faster.

And as a guess to the cause of much of this vitriol, taking sides in a "battle" of video games is like trying to teach a pig to whistle. To spare you analogy and just jump right into it, it doesn't make either game look better, it makes it look like both games are played by self-centered children. 76.230.8.136 (talk) 15:46, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I'm incredibly sorry, I didn't notice I wasn't logged in for the above comment. Michael F (talk) 15:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suspect Writing Style[edit]

Perhaps I am just being paranoid, but this page reads like an actual endorsement of the game. Has anyone else noticed this and would it be contravening any wiki guidelines by doing so? 195.166.150.195 (talk) 22:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The AI and the weapon section may be a little pro-game, but with a pre-release writeup like this, it's almost impossible to not base your information on press-releases and other marketing information. Honestly, though, I don't see much of a problem. If there's something specific that strikes you, maybe that'd help me get a foothold into what seems like advertising. Honestly, I think this provides people with the information they'd be looking for, but I'm not sure if that's advertising. Michael F (talk) 19:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

System requirements[edit]

I deleted the system requirements, because on the official OF:DR forums it has been stated several times that the the sytem requirements aren't final yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.197.128.26 (talk) 00:19, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Flashpoint 2 is not Dragon Rising[edit]

Bohemia Interactive Systems still have the contractual rights to develop any official SEQUEL to Operation Flashpoint, this has been confirmed by both BIS and Codemasters, including in a lawsuit from this year, thus, Operation Flashpoint 2 should not redirect here, since this title isn't Operation Flashpoint 2, it's Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising.

That doesn't make Dragon Rising not a sequel though - it's still the second Operation Flashpoint game created. Therefor it's hardly unfair for OFP2 to lead here until there actually IS an "official" sequel - which there isn't.--86.27.73.205 (talk) 20:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Citation is indeed needed.[edit]

How is it enraging or misleading that they (I will make this clear) RECOMMEND something? Also, the page is too informal, I've noticed several grammar errors, and citation is needed in a lot of places. 92.39.189.2 (talk) 19:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question on adding Japan date[edit]

No need to do so if there is information available? Ominae (talk) 00:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Codemasters ends support six months after launch date[edit]

Confirmation of no further patches or additional DLC

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/operation-flashpoint-dragon-rising-game-pc-113/407318-16-02-confirmation-no-further-patches-additional-dlc.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.2.92.122 (talk) 22:01, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unofficial sequel?[edit]

How is Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising not an official sequel to Cold War Crisis? It's the same publisher and the same title. To my understanding that is a typical example of an "official" sequel that is not considered an actual sequel by fans of the original. The ARMA series on the other hand can be considered unofficial sequels to the original Operation Flashpoints (although their articles call them "spiritual successors" which is also correct). Anyhow, I think the word "unofficial" should be removed (or even replaced by the word "official" to underline the difference to the ARMA series). --F4LL0UT (talk) 02:11, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to BIS Press Release “In the license agreement, Bohemia Interactive expressly reserved the exclusive right to develop sequels to the original OFP game”. At the same time Codemasters dropped the number 2 from the game title. --Hamarainen (talk) 18:55, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:40, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Operation_Flashpoint:_Dragon_Rising&oldid=1202297993"