Talk:Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis

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

Untitled[edit]

While it's true that the original OFP game, as it ships, is set in an "alternate history", the mods community is very active and runs the gamut from obsessive attention to historical accuracy to somewhat sci-fi scenarios and add-on units. What appeals to modders is the ability to create almost any kind of object in the game, including soldiers, the weapons they use, the vehicles they crew, even objects such as bushes, tables or radios, and maps with buildings, various terrain, rivers, mountains, and bridges. It's also said that the developers have done contract work with United States military forces, developing training simulations, and that this game grew out of a product line that was developed for tactical training for the military. Few first-person shooters offer the range of experiences that OFP offers, and this is probably

due to that rumored association with actual military simulation and training technology.


-- reply --

"it's said" ? "rumored association" ? please check VBS1 page here at Wikipedia! before writing such "uninformed" statements again (and don't take it in ungood it just sounds bit strange) ... ~Dwarden~

Soundtrack[edit]

The music made for OFP should be worth mention, I think.

"the military community"[edit]

I think this is the second time I removed the line Much of this reputation is perhaps caused by the fact that there is a large number of players from the military community. from the fan-base section. I believe that the military people involved in Flashpoint has no relevance to it's maturity. Why would a soldier be more mature than, for example, an accountant?--dmakatra 11:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who knows if they would be more mature than say an accountant, they're still both knowledgeable members of their respective occupations. Forgive me if I'm missing your point, but if you want a realistic simulation about accounting, then you might want to hire some consultants in tha area, IE accountants. Same way with the military. Shadowrun 17:52, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, it means most players aren't adolescents. Second, people from military tend to have better teamwork and discipline skills. Third, it's a military sim, after all. Pretty much the same happens to communities of some cult games popular only among people with close interest in their theme. Some advanced and unpopular aircraft sims, starting from Flanker or IL-2, submarine sims like Silent Hunter; to a lessen extent, to some civilian sims like OpenTTD and derivatives. In general, also to some obsolete games, but here the difficulty and realism quickly made OFP a cult game. And it really is much due to military background. Even most of the mods tend to be closely realistic, unlike with other games. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 18:29, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If the majority of players aren't adolscents, it should say so instead of that a large number of players are from the military community. There's a difference between knowledge/interest in specific theme and maturity. While the military community has contributed a lot to the game, like making highly accurate addons and supporting the realistic/MilSim approach to the game it has nothing to do with the maturity of the community itself.--dmakatra 15:17, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Aren't. However, I can't completely agree. It's one thing to play a game about something abstract for you, and another to play a game about a part of your (theoretical) job. In the second case, you can really view the game from in-simulation point of view, consequently taking more serious approach. It is just completely another attitude. And, with a lot of players from military community, other players somewhat adopt to the standarts they set. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 16:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for the typo. I've edited it so that no-one else is confused if they'll read the discussion afterwards. While I agree with you that the military community has much formed the backbone on how the game is viewed by the rest of the community, it is an attitude - not a question of maturity. The sentence that was in the text (Much of this reputation is perhaps caused by the fact that there is a large number of players from the military community.) causes the reader to think that people in the military are more mature than people in other occupations. This is not the case. They've contributed with their viewpoint of the game - not their maturity.--dmakatra 17:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links[edit]

I think this article has way to many external links. Except for official links and maybe one or two notable fansites they should be culled in my opinion. Wikipedia is not a linkdirectory to advertise your websites. --Fogeltje 19:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded, I say all but one or two should be removed. Pro crast in a tor 11:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. I see you have made the changes already. Thanks. --Fogeltje 22:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I got caffeinated this morning and just made the changes, as well as a few other things that had bugged me about the article. I expect some resistance on the removal of the weapons list, but I know that the Counter-Strike Source weapons list was removed, put in a separate article, and was deleted via AfD twice, so I'm positive that a weapons list shouldn't be here, either.
Also, you had recommended a notable fan site or two, I don't know which are notable but figured the official wiki would have links to all fansites, so a user could "get there from here" if they so desired. Pro crast in a tor 23:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't know what makes a fansite exceptionally notable to be honest. I think it's better this way actually, because otherwise there will just be debate over why one site is notable enough and another isn't. I say let's keep it this way. --Fogeltje 01:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

if i may add some words to discussion about removed links and weapons info, why not add just link to correct BIKI area (like list of featured weapons, list of community homepages, list of mods etc.). I'm aware link to BIKI is not included so it may be considered as overlinking :) but worth to check if possible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dwarden (talk • contribs) 13:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

gastovski ha a grudge[edit]

when this article introduces the characters in the game (armstrong, nicolls, hammer and gastovski) is says that gastovski was "pulled out of retirement to carry out sabotage missions and settle a score with an old enemy" gastovski "old score" is personnal and i think someone should edit that part a bit to make that point clear

82.47.137.100 04:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resistance[edit]

"Another add-on, Resistance, is set three years before the events of the two preceding games". I'm not entirely sure because its been a few years since I've played this game but wasn't resistance set in the late 1970's? if Cold War Crisis was 1985 then it would be set at least 6 years before preceding two. I know it seems insignificant but if information like that is going to be in there it might as well be right. Haven't changed this myself because I wasn't sure and couldn't find any info on the web, If I am wrong then I apologise. Lynch2007 00:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Resistance is set in 1982, you may be thinking of BI's initial plans for OFP2/ArmA which had it set in the late 70s. --72.70.152.122 (talk) 21:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Screen shots[edit]

I suggest that more proffesional, high quality screenshots be available. For example, shots of aircraft in flight.Delta Five (talk) 21:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

High quality can not pass as fair use since we still talking about copyrighter material. Same goes for excessive use of screenshots.I agree that one small size screenshot about flying an aircraft or helicopter might be inserted to illustrate the fact that a player can assume roles of infantry, tank commander and pilot, but a high quality image will never pass a fair use license and will be deleted.--Fogeltje (talk) 11:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weapons Section and Vehicles Section[edit]

I have recently added a weapons and vehicles section to the Operation Flashpoint page. In reference to my previous suggestion of more dynamic screen shots, I think that a few pictures of the Weapons and Vehicles (Available on the Flashpoint website) would fill in the gaps around the text and give a good comparison of the real weapons and vehicles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Delta Five (talk • contribs) 11:41, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I have great reservations about these lists. They have no encyclopedic value. In fact, if my memory serves me right, these lists existed at one point and where deleted. This is more gameguide material, which Wikipedia is not, neither is it an indiscriminate collection of information. Screenshots of the weapons certainly will have no value to the article what so ever. Also take care and don't copy images from the Flashpoint site as those images are probably copyrighted.--Fogeltje (talk) 17:41, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
These lists were based on a similar list featured in the Delta Force: Black Hawk Down page. I have linked the weapons and vehicles to the actual weapons and vehicles, as is demonstrated in the Delta Force: Black Hawk Down page. Also, I feel that, as Operation Flashpoint is a tactical shooter, the weapons and vehicles available deserve a mention. Delta Five (talk) 18:12, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've tagged both sections. The lists are total cruft in my eyes. The sections would be far better off with a piece of prose, some notable examples can be mentioned. But mentioning every single weapon and vehicle is just too excessive.--Fogeltje (talk) 13:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, the list's were way too long. Thanks for changing them to a more suitable format.Delta Five (talk) 10:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I replaced the weapons and vehicles lists with brief summaries and a few notable examples. I'm all for detail, but a full list of the weapons and vehicles in the game is inappropriate in this article. --MattyDienhoff 04:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

sequel release date[edit]

On this page it says its sequel will be released in 2009, but it links to the sequels page and says 2008, which is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.246.208.69 (talk) 15:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody knows... ;) --Frescard (talk) 03:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Servers Missing[edit]

As of September 2008, almost all available Operation Flashpoint servers have disappeared from the in-game server list. Any information related to this should be posted here. As of yet, it is unknown what the cause has been.

The cause could have been Armed Assault since it is newer and has pretty much the same mods.99.141.72.62 (talk) 19:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Development section[edit]

Just a heads up to anyone looking to expand the "development" section of this article - http://www.armedassault.eu/Articles/Misc.-Articles/postmortem-bis-operation-flashpoint/menu-id-20.html may contain some useful insights on the game's development. --72.177.61.88 (talk) 05:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copy protection[edit]

Article should probably mention the unusual copy protection system used by this game, which instead of causing the game to refuse to run, caused gameplay to progressively deteriorate during runtime. 2fort5r (talk) 01:50, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rearmed vs. Assault[edit]

Cold War Assault is the re-name of Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis. Cold War Rearmed is some sort of fan mod thing http://www.armedassault.info/index.php?cat=addons&id=293 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.54.13.217 (talk) 14:56, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Community[edit]

The Community support and the release of numerous player-created addons would definately worth to be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimitrilukin (talk • contribs) 20:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clear distinction[edit]

A more clear distinction must be made among Operation Flashpoint so called packs or add-ons. The Cold War Crisis was the first one, the original release. The rest of add-ons are real crap. The Codemasters and Bohemia splitted and the result was crap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.114.15.109 (talk) 21:28, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis. 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) 13:25, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source[edit]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:22, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Operation_Flashpoint:_Cold_War_Crisis&oldid=1204785095"