GRiN_Bumbi

Well. That's not what I said. I said that it wont be a OGR2, but GRAW2. That means it will be based on GRAW, if it then moves towards or from [GR] I haven't said anything about. And if you think we don't listen or care about you, then I suggest you read the GRAW forums again. If you do, you can make a short guess in what direction we are trying to move . You might also notice that you are quite a divided crowd, the improvements you would want for a OGR2 (as well as GRAW2) is very different from person to person, so making GRAW2 isn't really that straightforward. With that said, we still do

Joseph. I have not promised you anything, and as you might have noticed we are not allowed to discuss exactly what will be in the game so I can't give you that either. I just think the expansion pack/sequel debate is a bit useless. It says 2 on the box, and if you don't want to buy it you really don't have to. I would not for a second think those who do buy it will feel cheated of some extra 25$ for it, but then again some of you felt robbed for buying GRAW. I say to these people again: It's not going to be a OGR2. It's GRAW-2, not GR3 or GR4 - (yes the project was initially labeled GR3

Just curious. Exactly where does the line between a sequel, a expansion pack, and a whole new game go?

Careful there, I said that you probably should not need to upgrade, but also that I could not promise anything in that ares, and we haven't promised anything yet. And I also meant that 1 gb of ram should probably be minimum specs and not just in recommended so not an additional, just my broken english. I meant 1 gb minimum, 1 gb reommended. But of course the more the better. But the wizards over at programming might have some tricks up their sleeves so you have to wait for when the specs release until we fully know what will be needed to run GRAW2. Actaully the specs from GRAW could just as

Well, I'm kinda busy so I'll just help out on this one: "I just alerted the whole ######ing camp. That was not my intention" This means that he did not want to alert a camp.

Those look like 360 to me, at least some of them All five on both links are for the PC-version.

The graphics and AI ar both LODed, the ghost shrinks from 8000 to 1000 triangles in 150 m, and the AI also gets less smart over distance. Don't ask me about specifics there because honestly I don't know exactly what happens, but I think I've heard that they both stop to check for certain things and the checks occur less often, as maybe each second instead of every frame. Still each AI soldier is the most demanding task for the enigne so adding tons of characters are really not a option even how much both you and we would have liked it. As for upgrading, I can't promise anything since I don

I hope I didn't sound aggressive but more informative, not meaning to shut anyone up Its just that we've heard quite a bit that we should have spent more time on making levels, gamemodes or other stuff than adding coins that drop out of the parking meters. We can't just move people around like that, I could for instance not program the AI, but I don't ask them to help out on creating graphical content either. Also, this is all true for the GRAW 1 AI, the boys at the AI programming have not been on vacation for all these months either so stuff might have changed...

Not to thrash your thought, but those bricks and cans and other stuff that is "stealing the fps" is nothing compared to the huge amount of program routines that is involved in the AI. I have no figures but a object is mainly just a position and rotation vector feeded to your graphics card which handes the rest, also a body if it's a dynamic object which is handled by the physics enigine but most of the time even those dynamic objects are static and unchanging. Constant data = almost no workload on the CPU more than feeding the data, something that can't be said about the AI. It needs to co

Who knows?

So, yellow still here! No vegetation? Did I see a comma between rural and desert? ... oh well nevermind, I'm just hyping

An my tummy feels funny.... Seriously, it's the same drill as last time: All information about the game will be announced officially by Ubisoft - the keepers of the good stuff. But please keep discussions going, and post feedback when you do get info since as some of you noticed, we do lurk here. And Wille, I hope you have fun over there, make BF a bit more realistic will you?

I always say forgive and forget, hope to see you on a server soon

No, I had to go and work a bit on another game Anyways, now I know exactly where to look next time I'm in Shanty town. Good games.

First a short one on the Diesel engine: I'm quite sure it has been completely rewritten at least once since Bandits, and you could say that there is a Ballistics, Bandits and GRAW version of the Diesel engine. But it's a good name, why ruin it with version numbers About the development of GRAW: I and GRIN knows how many of you feel about GRAW, there was high hopes and lots of different oppinions on what GRAW should have been. Some wanted more or less just a graphical update while others wanted elements that are in other newer games. It became something in between, and it has turned out tha

1. Diesel is old, but is constantly built upon and changed down to core mechanics when needed. Old doesn't always mean outdated. 2. Grin has made Bandits and Ballistics before GRAW which are both PC games. Now the rest and the long versions of these answers are nested in questions about time, money, game design and buisness relationships which I will not talk about for a lot of good reasons.

Uh ... LOL I guess someone at Ubi was a little over-optimistic ... For us Europeans that would be a launch title

Indeed, you lean and then you want to be able to look even further so you tilt your own head, and then look around you hoping noone saw you

Some zen moments for me... Sniping the pilot of one helicopter on Ready for Bear so that it went into a spin and crashed right into the other one which was right above me. Havok parts just raining all around me. I've never been able to redo that one. Managing to place a headshot with the bullet in the chamber while making a tactical reload. Unfortunately I got killed before I could finish the full reload, but I got one kill more Also, finishing mission03 in COOP on hard setting with a fellow animator, it was a epic battle outside that embassy and the adrenaline rush after getting int

Finally! *explodes*

Hi Skanner, I understand what you're talking about 'cause I notice the same thing. For me too this is a bug. Sometime, to avoid this, I use to aim without zoom, so you can see "more" than zoomed. I hope someone, other than us, will notice that and report it. Ok. As I understand it form watching that youtube video you are annoyed that when zooming in with the wall in the middle of the screen you see more if the wall is to your left. The reason is simple. I don't kow about you but when I'm aiming down my sight, I tilt my head slightly towards the right. Now this will shift the position

Np. There are much worse cases of pain Yes, you must decompile it.

They are all over the place in data/objects/ try changing plants/street_tree_01-04/street_tree_01-04.xml >covers unit_name="street_tree_01"> <cover name="alpha" type="static"> <cp_group angle="10.0" corner="double" height="stand_high" name="a" number="4" width="500.0"/> </cover> </covers>

Hard to know what might be wrong... it looks correct You get the unit in the editor - but it crashes on spawn? Is the name of the object inside max "lookout"? These might cause trouble, but should no crash it really... Is everything linked to the root point in the max file? Have you placed 155 ambient points? Are materials assigned correctly?

It's quite simple really. Find the xml for the unit you want to edit and replace inside the cover tag all "stand" and "stand_high" with "crouch" I understand that this will be quite impossible to do with the houses since you have no reference to what it is you are changing, but on most props it will be relatively simple.