User Reviews (1 - 3 of 3)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Game is ported to PC from XBox

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 6 / 8
Date: February 22, 2008
Author: Amazon User

If I had known this game was ported from a console, I would not have bought it. It even has XBox controls in the game manual for Windows. Games ported over to PC are never as good because there are so many more options in a PC game then in a console game.

There is no kneeling and no jumping. To climb over obstacles or open doors, you have to approach the object and then press space when you see the icon on the screen.

Graphics are good, but they are not up to par for a first person shooter on a PC. This could have been a good game, but the developers chose to port the game to PC instead of developing it for the PC.

The disappointments just keep coming

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 5 / 6
Date: February 27, 2008
Author: Amazon User

My first problem was when I tried to load this game on Vista . . . no deal. But that's OK, I'm running the 64 bit version of Vista and I kinda expect an occasional bug, that's why I keep a version of Windows XP on my system. So I loaded the game onto (into?) XP, no problem, and started to set it up . . . strange, it doesn't go up to 1920x1080 resolution? Pretty weird in this day and age. No matter, I hook my PC up to an old 1600x1200 monitor and . . Wow! The graphics are bad, I mean like REALLY BAD. This game looks outdated, more like old XBox than XBox 360. I kept thinking that there had to be some switch I had missed in the configuration menu, something set to "low" that could be set to "high" or "ultra." But all the settings were turned to "high" or "on" as the case may be, so this was as good as it gets.
I suppose, too, that I should admit that I Pre-ordered the game, which may add a little bit to the bias of my opinion. It wasn't like I really wanted this game in particular but there are so few FPS's out there right now, and the whole pre-order thing just seems to appeals to some sense of immediate gratification, like by clicking on that button you're one step closer to getting something you want. Strangely enough, out of the three games I have pre-ordered from Amazon over the last year, two of them have taken an especially long time to be delivered ("Conflict" being one of those games). . . which kind of defeats the whole compulsive nature of the pre-order in the first place. I realize that this isn't a criticism of the game but I don't know where else to complain about slow "pre-order" deliveries.
So when you put all of these disappointments together: No Vista, the bad graphics, the inability to play on my flat screen TV, and my humiliation at pre-ordering this piece of garbage then having to wait for it on top of that . . . Oh, and then there's the creeping sense of despair that washes over me when I start to think that all of the money I've poured into my Hot Rod gaming PC are waisted as the gaming industry seems intent upon releasing one bad port after another . . . anyway, I'm not feeling too generous right now. One Star!

Conflict Denied Ops...a SHORT, different type of FPS that has both flaws and some potential

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 7 / 11
Date: February 15, 2008
Author: Amazon User

An interesting variation on the traditional FPS.

In this game you can alternate between being one of two different operatives (done with the use of the 'tab' key); one (Graves) is a demolition/sniper type and the other (Lang) is a heavy weapons/rocket launcher guy. The game play is set up so that you must co-operate with your partner; one person covers the other or mans a machine gun, etc. while the other person moves up or goes to do a particular task.

You get to use night vision, sniper rifles, rocket launcher, grenades and drive vehicles and use their weapons. Upgrades become available to weapons as the missions progress.

It took some time to adapt to a two person FPS; initially I'd forget about my partner and leave him behind only to remember him when I was caught up in some predicament. However, after dying for the umpteenth time, I finally got into the gist of playing the game as it was meant (cooperation between both main individuals).

This game appeared to have both flaws and some potential, and there were some likes and dislikes...I'll comment on a few.

1.)Initially the general movement/action of this game seemed confusing and difficult to understand UNTIL you get the hang of how and when to switch between your players. Once this 'co-op' concept was grasped and utilized the game seem to have a more spontaneous flow to it.

2A.)In this game the mission only fails if both heroes die. If one is seriously wounded (near death) then the other player can revive him and then both player continue on with their mission; this sounds quite interesting, however 'revival' seemed to take a lot of time (way too long) to occur.
2B.)And there is another concern...I happened to 'die' in an open area in the middle of an ongoing firefight. I was 'eventually' revived by my partner, however, because you have no 'immunity' time (where you cannot be killed for a short time and thus make it to some cover) I was immediately killed again and again and again, before the enemy was finally eliminated, allowing me enough time for me to 'be revived' and to get out of harms way. And this happened many times through the course of this game; in a word...frustrating.

3A.)You can save the game at anytime, BUT, you must exit the game and go to 'MENU' to save it; no quick save/load with the traditional F5/F9 keys. I found that coming to an abrupt stop in the middle of a firefight to save games became very disruptive; the smoothness of play and the excitement surrounding a good battle seemed to be lost. Of all my concerns surrounding the playing of this game, I found 'game saves' the most inconvenient and annoying problem.
3B.)There are some spread-out game-generated checkpoint saves as well.

4.)You can use either one or two heroes to operate a vehicle. If you use both, one drives while the other operates the weapons; this is the preferred method as it allows a 1st person perspective. If you use one guy in a vehicle then the view is from the 3rd person (above and behind) and it changes to 1st person when the guns are used.

5.)No map, just a waypoint arrow to guide you in the 'general' direction of your objective; but going up or down ladders, stairways or choosing between multiple doorways can still be confusing to get headed in the proper direction.

6.)Aiming is somewhat difficult, individual enemies seemed to take a multitude of shots to bring down (unless you play as the sniper and get a clear head shot).

7.)I found it was almost impossible to hit a moving, airborne target with the rocket launcher. If you have trouble doing so you might want to play as Graves (sniper) and order Lang (rocket launcher) to shoot down an attack helicopter; the reverse worked well for getting the sniper guy to take someone out. I found this aspect of game play (giving your partner to do something) was really different for a FPS; and took a little getting used to.

8.)The game is fairly short; I finished it in over a weekend of intermittent play; maybe 6-7 hours.

Conclusions:
1.)I found that there was a steep learning curve to get this game to play with a feeling of real spontaneity, however once mastered, it was very compelling to play; the more I played the more I liked the concept of this game.

2.)HOWEVER, although I liked this game, the delays associated with 'Game saves' and player 'revivals' were a REAL annoyance! And as you get deeper into the game (and it gets tougher) you will want to 'save' more often (and you get killed more often too); so the frustration from these perceived flaws got worse, not better.

3.)This might be a game where 2 people, each playing one of the operatives might really work well.

4.)$40.00 is a lot for such a short game!

Based on single player experience...3 1/2 Stars rounded up to 4.

Review Page: 1 

Actions