Ballistic
-
Content Count
102 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Calendar
Posts posted by Ballistic
-
-
If I came to you and said, "We have room to make one and only one more change. What should it be?", what would your answer be?
Pretty simple really. Removal of the lameness that has festered in this series since Ghost Recon 2. The cross over to the console destroyed this series. Drop the sci-fi rubbish and get back to reality.
Oh and removal of your god awful DRM would also be a help. Screwing over the PC community is just another fine example of Ubisofts backwards mentality towards the PC platform. Why not just drop it completely.
-
Hi all.
So I got myself a new PC not long ago, everything else runs like a dream, Far Cry 2, Crysis/Warhead, R6 Vegas/Vegas 2 etc all run smoothly, but GRAW 2 runs like a pig. I'm talking 20FPS maximum, it won't go any higher.
My system is:
Core i7 920 2.66Ghz @ 3.4Ghz
6Gb Tri Channel GSkill RAM
Geforce GTX280 1Gb
Geforce 8800GT 512Mb (As dedicated Physics card)
Audigy 2 ZS soundcard
Vista 64bit
All the latest drivers, including the PhysX ones. That's another thing, I can't select any higher physx setting in Options even with the new Nvidia drivers and the PhysX drivers...is this normal ?
It doesn't matter what settings I use, or what resolution I use, I can not get over 20'ish FPS.
Ideas anyone ?
*UPDATE*
Well, it's always the way isn't it. As soon as I posted this, I went back in to check the settings I was using. I went into the Video Options, and checked the Physics level selector, I could get the highest option. Then I set everything to their highest levels and 1920x1200 and bang, smooth as silk.
I hate computers.
Sorry for the post, the only thing I can put it to was the physx drivers as they were the ONLY drivers I installed after my last play attempt. But I tried running after those drivers were installed and still ran terribly...
Ohwell, I'm happy now.
-
I don't know even if he could raise the reticle he should. If you've ever looked through any of the Holosights or red dot sights, the dot is going to be on zero whether its centered or not (assuming it had been properly zeroed prior to that, of course). From my experience, if the optic mounts high, in relation to one's line of sight through the tube or frame of whatever optic is being used, the reticle is going to sit low in the frame or tube. It won't affect impact or zero. It'll just look as it does in the above picture. The HWS's frame sits higher than the Aimpoint does, generally making the reticle appear low, most notably on weapons that use elevated receiver rails like the Vltor and the SIR. In this case I don't know if it's apt, but there's a reason the reticle looks as it does if the Masada has a taller upper.
That's the brilliance of them isn't it. I don't really mind where it sits as I know how they work, I was just thinking that it might better off positioned centre in the display like the MRC if it was possible (clearly it's not
). Anyway, again, awesome work Snow, really looking forward to this.
-
How about this one:
AN/PSQ-18A
Honestly though, there is no point. The attempt at a leaf sight for GRAW2 is good enough, and as SnowFella said, the trajectory of the grenades is so flat it's almost pointless in implementing something that is made redundant by the ability to simply 'guesstimate' and shoot.
-
Looks really good mate. Just a question about the positioning of the reticle.
Is this the same issue found on the early GRAW1 mod where you could place all sights/scopes on every weapon in game, but some (EOTech especially) had issues being placed on the Mk.46 ?
Not that I have much of an issue with it, but can the reticle be raised, or is it's placement dependant on the animation of the rifle?
Awesome work anyway mate. Really looking forward to this.
-
I'm not sure how it works, but just email them and tell them to take it down. If they didn't ask your permission then surely you can request them to remove it.
Seems awfully rude on their part.
-
Previous post was quite redundant after thread merge. Edited so I don't look like a numpty.
-
So what you're saying is having unrealistic weaponry (ie M8 and SCAR), unrealistic handling of weaponry (almost 100% accuracy with a M99 while strafing), unrealistic reaction to events in SP (a 4 man squad defending the US with the occasional mule and marine), and the ability to run after having 2 5.56mm rounds put in your leg is better than having females in a game?
What's so great about having females in game ? If people want women so much go out...???? They do not fit into anything this game has to offer.
M8 is unrealistic sure, but it is still floating around (but will never see service).
SCAR is well into trials with SF is it not ? Why is it unrealistic ?
M99 is stupid I'll give you that.
Yep, the story is FUBAR, but eh.
Insurgents in Iraq jumped up with junk can take a few rounds and keep going, why not the Ghosts ?
-
if any one of you has played GR2 on the xbox you MAY have noticed there were women in it (alicia diaz and jennifer burk(i think)) and was wondering why not have women in graw2 just to make it a more diverse game
Simple.
Because it's a load of crap.
No women will serve in frontline combat roles (especially SF) until the military and politicians (and the public) can stomach seeing dead female soldiers on the battlefield. So it will never happen.
Sure, women serve in MP units and have done so with distinction in Iraq, but SF...never.
I think Iraq and A-stan bring an interesting element to this though because of cultural differences, the type of terrain, no defined "front line" per se. Women serving in Iraq esp. will certainly be put into situations and need to be prepared and equipped accordingly to deal with them.
The pictured female soldier (PFC Janelle Zalkovsky) is in a civil affairs unit attached to 1st Battalion, 320th Field Artillery Regiment, 101st Airborne Division.
I am not against women serving in the military, I'm just personally not prepared to see them serve in front line combat units, and as such, seeing this game is trying to, in a roundabout way depict some semblance of realism (certainly much better than the 360 version) they should not be depicted as being involved in combat situations with a Special Forces unit, it's just not going to happen.
-
That would be nice if possible. The Merc models are certainly very nice and not as sci-fi as the Ghost models.
-
personally i dont think we need doors, heres the dilemma, what if a you are tryin to get into a room and a guy inside keeps closing it, then we'd get a doors awareness week
Ummm, you put a breaching charge on it and destroy it permanently, or destroy it with a grenade?
Doors, like in Ravenshield, would create more strategy, and make CQC in GRAW even better (not that there is currently much in the way of CQC in the GRAW series).
-
Oh definitely, I think ideas and pointers should be given out (in the right places). I'm really only directing my comments to R.TAPIA who has only just signed up and is already dishing out his wishes...
Brett: add the sig 226R to next GRAW2 update mod
No 'please', seems very rude. Maybe I am looking into this too much though.
Yes we all have our wants for the game, I think I've made fair share of requests to GRIN (but they get PAID for their work !!).
Brett and Snow do this for fun, I think people continuously asking for things from them, while obviously showing them that people enjoy their work and that people have great respect for them, will eventually lead to problems.
But as I said, I'm probably looking into this too much.
-
Hell I suck too, I just tire of seeing all these requests thrown at SnowFella and Brettzies, expecting the world. It must get really old for them.
-
Nice awesome work man!!
I have A classic weapon... SIG 226
http://www.special-warfare.net/data_base/2...g_p226_r_01.jpg
Brett: add the sig 226R to next GRAW2 update mod
Why don't you help out by making it yourself ?
Besides, we already have a fantastic pistol from Brett'.
-
I put ideas up for the support class in the beta forums because I shared the very same issue with the support weapons aswell.
They are pretty much useless until something is done to balance them.
-
Brettzies, respect mate, you freakin rock !!
I take it the EOTech has the same issue as GRAW1 ? Not seeing it get any use outside of the MRC.
Keep up the awesome work man, pure brilliance !
-
Well I'm 27 this year, and I thought why not a career change ?
I've always wanted to join the Army, just had some great luck with jobs in the civilian sector and good pay so stuck with it. But it's time for a change, I really hope I make the cut.
-
I've always wanted to ask someone from australia, is the military their really kick ass>? my dad told me that australia has got a serious military
Well ofcourse. With our legions of drop bears and cyborg kangaroos we are quite unstoppable.
We have a smaller military, but extremely well trained and equipped. I hope to join the ranks later this year.
-
I would like the scope, but the ACOG in Brettzies mod is good enough for me.
The Aimpoint/EOTech on the 'M249' would be better for balance I think.
Infact i was talking about the optic, because is the most common to be seen on M249 instead of Aimpoint/EOTech...
And what you mean by "balance" ???No worries then
, not that I wouldn't mind an Elcan sight!By balance, I mean having a high powered optic on a light machine gun somewhat over powers that weapon in a gameplay sense for multiplayer alone, but for SP bring it on!
But apart from that, I'd love to see an Elcan/ACOG etc, etc, on all the LMG's.
-
Snowfella, are you thinking about adding in some new sight for the Masada ?
Maybe THIS ONE could be a good suggestion...
Also because i'd like to see it on the M249. I've seen many soldiers in action with this sight on their MGs and i was a little disappointed when it wasn't present in GRAW2.
What's the point ? It's basically the M4 with an AG36/XM320 GL attachment... I would like the scope, but the ACOG in Brettzies mod is good enough for me.
The Aimpoint/EOTech on the 'M249' would be better for balance I think.
Looking good SnowFella, looking forward to this !
-
Love your work Brett', just out'freakin'standing !!
Can't wait to try this out !!
-
I agree with you gents, we need;
-custom heads, four or five bodies would be cool too
-camo choices: Let's see some black, OD, MARPAT, ACU as well as Multicam.
-custom patches for our teams or clans
If Grin is really serious about making this game a winner online, there has to be something that makes teams feel unique and builds cred on the battlefield. I love putting a kill on somebody, standing over their corpse and knowing who it was by their face, insignias or uniform.. then peeing on all three!
Wait, I don't do that but you catch my drift, lets see some of this, Grin.. PLEASE!
The Ghosts are US Army, why would they wear MARPAT ?
Not interested in camo choices, I am more interested in having a small selection of different load bearing equipment, helmets, kneepads, eye protection, ear protection/comms head gear so on.
But it isn't going to happen.
That is the point, what if I don't want to be a "Ghost" when I play multilayer or when I run through the campaign on a second go. If these things aren't important to you, that's cool but many games have this as an option so it stands to reason that this is a factor for a lot of players.
Wait out for the skin mods then.
Nice work Bangurdead, maybe something can be done with these assets.
-
Then you best do some study on the Mexican Army bud.
I did. and though the government is STARTING to use the G3 and phase out the Mexican made weapons, it is a long way off from providing G36 or XM8 weapons as standard issue.
The Mexican Army has been using the G3 as it's standard issue for ages.
They are slowly phasing in the FX-05 Assault Rifle and phasing out the G3 as they go.
The FX-05 is cosmetically similar to the G-36.
-
I agree with you gents, we need;
-custom heads, four or five bodies would be cool too
-camo choices: Let's see some black, OD, MARPAT, ACU as well as Multicam.
-custom patches for our teams or clans
If Grin is really serious about making this game a winner online, there has to be something that makes teams feel unique and builds cred on the battlefield. I love putting a kill on somebody, standing over their corpse and knowing who it was by their face, insignias or uniform.. then peeing on all three!
Wait, I don't do that but you catch my drift, lets see some of this, Grin.. PLEASE!
The Ghosts are US Army, why would they wear MARPAT ?
Not interested in camo choices, I am more interested in having a small selection of different load bearing equipment, helmets, kneepads, eye protection, ear protection/comms head gear so on.
But it isn't going to happen.
Cloak and HULC - Likely [Real world] kit by 2020?
in GR:FS (PC) - General Discussion
Posted · Edited by Ballistic
Real cloaking devices are still only in their infancy.
Yes cloaking devices do exist, they however can only cloak objects on a 2Dimensional plane and the objects are very small.
If a person were to change their perspective the object would be visible.
Just recently however a German science team was able to successfully "cloak" an object in 3D for the first time. It does not use cameras filming what is around the cloak, it bends light or misdirects it through the use of photonic crystals.
The issue here is that it only "cloaks" in certain wavelenghts in the infared spectrum. Cloaking an entire human being is still a very very very long way off.