Dai-San
-
Content Count
494 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Calendar
Posts posted by Dai-San
-
-
Basically I'm doing a mission on the Docks map, It's a night mission, everything is working right except for the two pickups i'm using have no Headlights working. they both have the _lights suffix from MP1 and MP2 (tried both).
Any ideas why they have no lights on?
-
A Bot Hunt mode would be great, a load of us were playing it last night in GR1.
For those that don't know the mod basically it's like defend except that rather than the AI attacking a defined area they hunt for YOU.
If the new AI is half as good as it's supposed to be then this would be a fantastic mode, being hunted all over the map by intelligent enemies trying to fence you in, herd you into an ambush etc.
Now That's Replayability in either SP or Co-Op
-
This is the trouble with Polls really they make things too black and white.
As people have said, they want graphics on a par with the latest releases but scalable so lower end systems can still play and as others have said they want the improved AI and well crafted gameplay over graphical splendor.
Basically what we all want I think is for Grin to try their hardest to get the balance right and not to give us a Doom3 no brainer but neither should we be playing something way below the industry standard of eyecandy.
-
God forbid GRIN would do this to GR:AW
Let the Tank/Jet/Helo whores stay in BF2, as WK said the maps are to small and the game style doesn't warrant vehicles.
-
Please stand corrected for you are indeed wrong i'm afraid m8.
Gameplay is in no way processor dependant or any other hardware dependant. As someone stated earlier in this thread look at classics like Tetris, Donkey Kong etc etc. The graphics were limited by the hardware of the time but the gameplay was pure genius, gameplay is entirely down to design and implementation of the idea and not hardware requirements.
My friend, the day of tetris is long gone. We are talking about a realistic tactical sim here. There would be very complex AI routines, both for the enemies and friendlies. That would be one very important aspect of gameplay though not the only. Complex AI definitely depends on the processor.
There are some other gameplay aspects, like the type of gameplay - tactical as opposed to run and gun, covert as opposed to out and out action etc., which are a matter of intent. I had raised the hardware issue because from the customers' point of view that is the limiting factor. If gameplay/graphics do not use the same resources, there is no reason to compare the two.
I understand that the days of Tetris etc are gone my friend but my premise still stands that 'Gameplay' per se is in no way hardware dependant. Enemy AI does indeed rely heavily on processor cycles but then so does sound as well as graphics because as you probably well know neither are entirely handed off to the GPU or sound processor and still require system resources.
Unfortunately it was you that seperated the two by stating that one was processor and the other graphics card dependant and asked to be corrected if you were wrong which you still are if we make it so black and white as that.
I really don't want this to be taken as argumentative as I'm just stating my opinion as someone that has been in IT for over 20 years and an avid gamer for even longer
-
Well spotted, yeah it's a character from a BattleTech book
Well more of a title really, means Warlord. -
Personally I think there is a very good reason why they have steered clear of a Jungle based theme which a lot of people seem to gloss over.
People say they want realism and would like a jungle theme, let me ask you a question.
Do you really want to spend ages edging through foliage and trees only to be gunned down by an unknown and unseen enemy or to blindly stumble head on into a patroll that wipes you out immediately because to be honest that's what a 'Realistic' jungle environment would entail.
FarCry had some of the densest forests yet seen in a game and as patchy as that was it still got visually restrictive sometimes.
I think the reason game developers shy away from the 'Heavy' Jungle theme is the fact that as exciting and tense a concept as it sound, the reality when it comes to gameplay is that it's frustrating as hell and better off left alone.
-
Correct me if I am wrong but as far as I know, graphics depends mainly on the graphics card and gameplay is mainly processor dependent.
Please stand corrected for you are indeed wrong i'm afraid m8.
Gameplay is in no way processor dependant or any other hardware dependant. As someone stated earlier in this thread look at classics like Tetris, Donkey Kong etc etc. The graphics were limited by the hardware of the time but the gameplay was pure genius, gameplay is entirely down to design and implementation of the idea and not hardware requirements.
I voted for Gameplay in the poll, I would be disappointed if the graphics were not up to par but if the 'Core' playability of GR1 was present and the ability to mod was present then I would be all over the game like a rash even if it wasn't a great leap up from GR1.
That said the graphics could spoil the feeling of immersion if they were too 'Cartooney' or just plain badly implemented but I could live with that if the Gameplay was good (but it would have to be GOOD bordering on the frikkin awsome
) -
Here's a question thats just occured to me that I would love to get answered (Mainly for reassurance).
As has been stated there are many movement options over and above the lean around corners that we have in GR1 such as sliding/diving etc.
What worries me is the possible exploiting of this as in BF2 and the phenomenon of what they call 'Dolphin diving' where a character is running and jumps and hits prone or CS style Bunny Hopping.
Someone please tell me that these movements will be energy dependant or at least time restricted so you can't just jump around like a demented puppet.
-
Good point about the demo. No need to guess that we all would prefer an MP 'AND' an SP demo. But if we had to choose which would we prefer???
I vote for an MP demo.
Depends really, If it's a MP demo thats just DM then personally i'd prefer a SP demo to have a look at the AI etc.
BTW, I was in a GAME store this lunchtime and they had an XBox 360 video running of up and coming games and they had a very long trailer for GR:AW was good watching
-
I've also mentioned to them that they should play the single player to get used to the game but they complain they walk for 2 minutes then get picked out. Considering the last game we all played like this was N64 Goldeneye, they probably dont quite understand the basics! I say very useful replies to a post from another new guy a few posts down from mine, so I'm going to email that to them.. Again, thanks for all the input!
Your in an ideal situation to help your bud's out my friend.
Get a few of you together, select Multiplayer, click Create Game and give them your IP address.
Edit your server so that it is in Co-op mode and Mission is selected as the gametype. You can then play any of the Single Player Missions through and seeing as you have played through the SP many times you can give them tips as you go to stop them getting Picked off within minutes.
-
Count me in
-
I think I'm reading a few things different to you guy's.
Dev was asked how many opfor we would be fighting. I'm assuming his answer of 20 means SIMULTANEOUSLY not 20 for the whole map, I think this is just a balance/rendering choice. You may have been able to have 75 opfor on a map in a firefight in GR but I never saw 75 attack simultaneously. Given the size of the maps I would assume opfor are added as you approach an area or as you kill previous they spawn new further out.
As to the HUD issue tbh I think the question was answered.
<Prozac> Will the HUD be customisable and to what degree? Colours, position, size, on/off...
[ +Ulf ] Depending on what happens in-game, the HUD adapts and changes, to give you more intel if that's what you need, and more view, if that's what you need.*
The GAME will scale the hud depending on the situation and info IT feels you need. I'm reading this as a NO we will not have an editable HUD (Unless of course our talented mod'ers com up with something). This was a polite and political NO
***Lol, great minds think alike Poita
*** -
Bet on Soldier uses Starforce and it has a demo.
I can't see that being the issue, I just hope that Starforce doesn't cause people the problems it has with other games.
Btw, where does it say that GR:AW will include Starforce protection?
-
It amazes me that this is still an issue nowadays. The original TRIBES game had a totally configurable hud and that was released in 1998.
When will developers learn
-
I find that new IE extension handy for sites like this, it means i only have to use IE when i want to .....
https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/morei...ication=firefox
Yeah, would be nice if developers realised and made sites cross platform though wouldn't it
-
Not Firefox friendly though is it
-
Also, how will Co-op tournaments work? Will GRNET field several squads in the same competition, if so how will the organisers stop Teammates sharing information once they have played their slot.
Well, how can you ever guarantee that doesn't happen - even between teams? People in one team can be friends with people from other teams, you know. The world is not black and white. What I want to say is, if it's a problem you think originates from the four man team, it is more likely a problem that you just weren't aware of before.
Also, are co-op tournaments arranged with clans vs AI? You guys do know that there is no four member limit in team vs team games? It is only the single player campaign that has a four member limit, because it is balanced for four player teams.
If six or more were allowed that balance would be ruined - the game would become too easy. "Well then throw in more enemies, more enemies the more members there are in the team" you might say.
Well, a decision is made - never mind where in the chain of command - to write a single player campaign story line that features a four man team. Subsequently, the right amount of enemies that would present a fair challange for those four people are spread across the campaign's maps. Then, the level of graphic detail is tailored so that the engine can make that amount of characters - ghost team members as well as enemies - look as good as possible when all on screen. Succeeding in this - difficulty level and graphic level - makes quite a solid game, within the limits that were set - and solid things don't change so easily.
You can't just "throw in more enemies" to make the campaign more challenging for a 12 man squad - it's not that simple. These are just a few of the many problems I see in this issue.
Of course the possibilities of people from different Teams sharing info is there but the very fact of it being a competition Between teams makes it more likely that info Won't be shared where as if a team enters more than one squad because it's restricted to 4 man teams then they are More likely to share info between themselves so that their team as a whole places well.
And tbh I think you may be a little confused, by definition Co-op is a group of players on one team playing agains the AI so this discussion really doesn't care how many players can play in adversarial mode only how restrictive limiting Co-op to 4 players might be. You have obviously never played GR in Co-op mode otherwise you would understand that the server and missions can be adjusted as to how many enemy AI there are, what difficulty they will play at and also the fact that there are a Huge number of missions written by the modding community specifically for Co-op mode. Your 'Fair Challenge' statement just doesn't hold water against what is fact from the GR evidence.
-
Let's keep it on the subject of Co-op please guy's and not degenerate into a Love/Hate GR:AW war.
-
What no one has mentioned is the detrimental effect 4 man Co-op could have on Teams.
In Tactical Elite or GRNET as we play GR under we regularly have upwards of 6 people on our server playing all forms of Co-op games be it Firefight, Mission, Preachers run, Defend etc. In practices we can have 10 or more.
This 4 man Co-op will fragment a group of gamers that have stuck with GR solely because of the fact that you can play against the missions with your friends not just a select few.
We will now have to split our roster down, work out who is going to play with who and hope this doesn't fragment the team as a whole.
Also, how will Co-op tournaments work? Will GRNET field several squads in the same competition, if so how will the organisers stop Teammates sharing information once they have played their slot.
I Really hope the community is able to 'Mod' the number up from 4 or else I can really see this having a huge (and frankly undesirable) effect on the way we look at this franchise.
-
I think Thor has hit the nail on the head tbh.
Your average joe is walking down the street and is hit by a bullet/shrapnel/whatever.
Does he have fellow squadmates onhand immediately to at least staunch the wound and apply basic first aid? Not likely, and it's those first few minutes before the medical services arrive that can often be the most critical.
-
I never said it was good for nothing
GFX are spot on.
Weapons need a bit of balancing but aren't too bad.
The Browser and front end need sorting bigtime.
The TK system is a joke atm.
The Blackhawk is getting nerf'd (Much needed).
But overall the game is ok for what it is I just don't feel excited about playing it. Once you've done everything once I just find it the same over and over again.
-
I must admit I gotta agree with you here, I'm probably just not into the Rank stuff and finding all the little nooks and crannies as most of you seem to be, but just from a playing viewpoint there is nothing that 'URGES' me to double click that BF2 icon.
I find it all a bit....repetative.
-
Back on topic of in-game browsers, Tribes and Tribes 2 had pretty good browsers built in, you could sort by all fields, mark servers as favourites by simly clicking a field next to them. You had custom filters to filter by ping, location, favourites etc. Had a built in Squad system which let you manage your squad/clan, send out invitations to players etc. A built in email system. A built in IRC system.
All in all everything I could think of from a browser apart from it being standalone, i.e you had to boot the game to get to it.
And now, 4 years down the line we get the abortion BF2 force on us. YES there are alternatives but they should be a CHOICE not a NECESSITY.
Quick headlight question
in GR - Vehicle Modding
Posted
Thanks mate, spot on, I just edited then saved the Docks .env in the Env editor ticked the 'Night' box, saved as another name then simple renamed the original and named the edited one as the original. Viola, working headlights
Thanks for the prompt fix