With a focus on being the most realistic military shooter on the market, Operation Flashpoint: Red River offers fans a far more strategic alternative to their typical Call of Duty. With its modern-day setting and team-based gameplay, the game aims to make you feel like a marine.
The Pros
- Excellent cooperative play
- Huge missions with scoping vistas
- Plenty of scaling options to make the game as blisteringly realistic (or not) as you want
The Cons
- Graphic glitches and low-res textures
- Frequently buggy and terrible AI
- Absurdly clichéd dialogue and overlong between-mission sequences
- Poor checkpoint layouts
Operation Flashpoint: Red River Review:
Operation Flashpoint has always had its eye set on being as realistic a portrayal of war as a video game can be, and that focus definitely hasn’t changed in Red River. Whether that’s a good thing is up to personal preference, but if nothing else, it’s easy to respect the level of effort that went into creating a virtual battlefield that feels even somewhat realistic. Granted, what that really means is damn hard.

The Current Events Battleground
Operation Flashpoint: Red River doesn’t break any new ground with its setting or storyline. You take the role of the leader of the four-man Fireteam Bravo. Sent into Tajikistan to join the marine squad already entrenched there, your squad’s mission is to hunt down insurgents fleeing Afghanistan. As the story moves along, however, things get a lot more complicated when the Chinese army moves in to hunt down the insurgents who have been attacking their border.
The game’s cinematic sequences are a nice mix of game engine sequences and actual news footage, and provide some interesting history lessons about US and World operations in the Middle East. Unfortunately, once in the game, the pacing is frequently impeded by ponderous interludes where your sergeant blathers on in inane, profanity-ridden movie speech. There’s little value in these sequences except to apparently point out that any attempts at characterization end in blatant cliché and stereotypes.
Tactical Gameplay… Blithering AI
The core of the game is the team-based play. Much like SOCOM, you’ll be tasked with issuing on-the-fly commands to the other three soldiers in your squad. Indeed, proper usage of tactics is imperative to survival in Red River. Flanking enemies, taking tactically superior positions, creating choke points, and other strategies are absolute necessities when one bullet can kill you. Codemasters clearly went out of their way to make the gameplay more tactical and less shooter, but in the single-player game, this sort of gameplay is only as good as your team’s AI.
It’s here that Red River falters the most. The allied AI is borderline broken. It frequently takes several attempts to get them to follow orders, they don’t stay put or find cover like any reasonable soldier should, and end up just running into the line of fire way too much. Even their attack instincts are flawed, as they don’t always respond to enemies. This means you’ll have to spend far too much time babysitting them and healing their wounds—which is more time consuming and complex than other shooters—and end up getting killed as a result.
The level of frustration the bad AI adds to the game is almost enough to write off the single-player campaign entirely. Ironically, the enemy AI is, on the whole, smarter and meaner. They’re also deadly accurate. Other flaws abound as well. The graphics are a mixed bag. The huge, open vistas of the maps are impressive and character models are well done, but individual landscape textures look low res. There’s also some graphic clipping and other visual glitches.

Quick, Soldier, Get Some Friends!
The difficulty level is jacked up further thanks to incredible stingy check points. This means dying well into a huge battle forces you to start the whole sequence over again. On the plus side, Red River offers an impressive array of options for jacking the overall difficulty and realism level up or down. Game assists like radar, objective icons, path routes, and other features can be turned off to make the game more challenging. Also, your character progression occurs across the board, so you can gain XP, weapons, upgrades, and other perk-style enhancements whether playing single or multiplayer.
Multiplayer is the great save for Operation Flashpoint. The main campaign can be played entirely online with three other players, and its here that the game shines. With the AI out of the way, players are free to enjoy the truly tactical nature of the game. For fans of SOCOM and Rainbow Six, Red River offers a first-person alternative that is more difficult and realistic. In addition to the campaign missions, there are a series of standalone Fireteam Engagement missions that offer story-free objectives for quicker rounds.

Take the Hill
Even with its frustrating issues, Red River’s tactical gameplay is interesting enough to be worth a look for single-player gamers who need a military shooter fix. Just the same, the game is definitely far more worthwhile as a cooperative endeavor. Stripping out the terrible AI puts the focus on the challenging tactical gameplay. Unfortunately, the overall lack of polish still keeps Operation Flashpoint: Red River from being a contender for the military shooter crown.



























Comments
Displaying 1–12 of 12
WolfkillShepard
Red River was an OK game but I completely agree with the review. This game is really reserved for those into hardcore realism and enjoy a challenge. But on another note Xfire has this video capturing contest going on and first prize gets a full gaming rig, so I went on to look at the competition and it turns out that there is only 21 people who posted in the contest and not only that but also all of their videos are simply poor. If you own Red River I recommend entering this, chances are that with that few of videos and no good ones place in there if not first.
mcc0rmick14
If you only have a console and you want to play a realistic shooter, this game is just what you want. Yes, it is far from perfect but, I thought it was fun and they made many improvements from dragon rising. Also the co-op was exceptionally executed.
inukedogs2
id have to say that brothers in arms earned in blood is still pretty realistic and is up there with operation flashpoint.
TheFlash2009Tech
Okay guys, here is the deal. Arma 2 Arrowhead definately beeats out Red River on realism in the Afghani and Iraqi terrain and desert combat. However, OFP makes more money because they had the smarts to put their titles on all three platforms. If Bohemia wants Arma 2 to be more popular they need to put it on the PS3 and Xbox 360. Another thing though is the voices and storyline are horrible in Arma and that can kill it severely.
HunterStrike
Awww, I was hoping this was a Oklahoma vs Texas FPS. Son I am disappointed.
EasternEuropean
Hadnt read this puny review.. but headline cought my eye
"With a focus on being the most realistic military shooter on the market"
Made me laugh.. console shooter with in-game enemy radar and built-in autoaim, is called realistic
RPG-fan
Oops, when I typed "do yourself Hellfire87", I meant to typed "Do yourself a favor, Hellfire87". I hope you don't take that the wrong way. Next time, I shouldn't reply when I'm in a hurry to go somewhere.
RPG-fan
@Hellfire87: we seem to forget the reply function. Anyway, you don't have to believe me but the fact that the creative director of the game wanted to take the series into new direction aka streamlining the series that started with Dragon Rising (game before Red River), which is something not so far fetch (they aren't promising outrageous things like Peter Molyneux) if you look at today's gaming industry. While there are some aspects that remains intact from previous iterations like you're with your squad and you can issue commands, even the likes of Rainbow Six Vegas has those and it was around that point when the series diverted from previous iterations. But if you actually played the original OPF and ArmA series (developed by Bohemia Interactive) which are more military shooter sims, you'll see how different Dragon Rising and Red River (both developed by Codemasters themselves) are, as those games are classified more as tactical squad based shooters like your SOCOM, Rainbow Six and GRAW. The likes of those games doesn't factor gravity, wind and stamina of your character and how they affect your shoots when shooting at a long distance like you do in ArmA Hell, some of those games you can healing just be waiting a few secs. If you read the right forums, you'll see people calling out that DR and RR have nothing to do with the Operation Flashpoint series, except the name.
Those console-centric websites you named (Gamespot is the only one who reviewed ArmA II), I wouldn't be surprised if they just looked back at Dragon Rising and not the original OFP and ArmA series., still waiting for the ArmA II, G4. Of course, if one mostly plays Call of Duty games and its many clones, then can I see how some reviewers would dubbed the likes of Red River a "realistic military shooter". Do yourself Hellfire87, instead of being the white knight defending G4 reviews like you have done a few times already, buy or borrow ArmA II (if your PC can run) then play DR and RR, you'll notice the difference. I rather someone experience it first hand instead of following what other people had said, as I played all OFP games and the ArmA series.
Hellfire87
@RPG-fan
I would be more inclined to agree with if I actually believed everything that is said in developer interviews. Unfortunately, I have had several experiences in which I had become very excited about a game based on what a developer had said about the experience that ended up being very different in the finished game or in some cases were even left out of the game completely.
So I've had to learn that what is said in developer interviews do not always reflect what they have done with the game.
Secondly, I have read several reviews (G4TV, GamePro, Game Informer, Gamespot) and although each seems to have a slightly different perspective on the game, they all mention the same things:
1. Tactics are extremely important if you want beat the game.
2. Horrible squad AI that completely ruins the single player campaign but can be fixed by just playing with friends in online co-op.
3. Several options that can be used to increase or decrease realism of the game (game radar, objective indicators, path routes and so on).
4. The game is basically the same (gameplay wise) as its previous iterations.
Basically, they all seem to agree that the game is a realistic shooter that hasn't really changed from previous iterations.
RPG-fan
@Hellfire87: where I'm from the game was out before the review. It's no secret that Codemasters are clearing away from the military FPS sim from the original, just read the interviews they did for PC Gamer or play the original OFP and ArmA series and compare it with Red River you'll see the difference. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out.
Hellfire87
@RPG-fan
Exactly how can you disagree with a reviewer on how a game feels compared to its prior iterations when you haven't even played the game yourself because it hasn't even been released yet.
RPG-fan
Prior to Red River's release, the developer been talking how they have been steering away from creating a realistic shooter, if you read their interviews in PC Gamer, so I don't know how their "focus definitely hasn t changed". If you look at the original OFP game compared to Red River and the game before it, Dragon Rising, you'll see how different they are, seeing as the original was made by a different developer. Those looking for military FPS sim, look for original OFP and ArmA series.
Displaying 1–12 of 12
Add a Comment