Jump to content

FA sear

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by FA sear

  1. (none of this post is said in regards to BFS's project, just speaking in general. I really think the mix of people working at blackfoot have a good shot at developing a great game. :))

    I find this baffling. How many times did I say that I was referring specifically to the BFS project, and Hatchet was also referring to the BFS project. If you are speaking in general terms why would you respond to posts that are specific to the BFS project.

    I am beginning to see why Hatchet has you on ignore.

  2. I wonder how long it takes this man to do a typical drawing.

    More sidewalk drawings from Julian Beever. Scroll down slowly and stop at each new frame. Incredible! Julian Beever is an English artist who's famous for his art on the pavement of England, France, Germany, USA, Australia andBelgium. Beever gives to his drawings an amazing 3D illusion.

    Don't miss seeing Julian Beever on the Top of the Bottle












  3. @ICK

    Yeah, I believe this will be a game just like that. You talk about the infamous jump button like it has already broken down this not yet in existence title. You are assuming here. If you don't like the idea, then go run GRAW or GRAW2 when it comes out. There are plently of other titles that you can run that do not allow you to jump.

    I did not like the direction that the GR series took, so I voiced my opinion, and then moved on to OFP. I don't hang around the GR forums anymore. GRIN made the decision they made and for better or for worse the game is what it is today.

    Leave this title to the audience that it will cater to. If it fails, then it fails, but if it manages to please those who like it, then it is a huge success regardless of how small or large that audience is. What is it about this title that seems to concern people? Who cares what direction it takes? As long as it pleases those who it is catering to, those in the periphery should not care.

    It is one thing when a title that is already in existence takes a turn in a new direction and the fans do not like it, but this is a title that has not even been released. The powers at BFS have expressed what direction they want to take this in, so if there are people who do not like it, then so what? It is not a franchise that people have already invested their money in, so why complain?

    This really is one of those scenarios where if you don't like it then leave, because there is no existing fan base to please. Jonesdecker and Hatchet have announced what direction this title is going in, and I have a lot of questions I would like to see answered, so I don't want to see them grilled and dragged over the coals about things that really don't concern this title.

    Actually Jonesdecker already addressed the issue of jumping, but you are now bringing it up again as a concern when he already said the issues you brought up would be addressed. You don't trust him? Is he lying? Does he not know what he is talking about? Come out and say what you mean or take his answer and let it be.

    Let BFS prove itself in its product, but constant badgering is not going to change there mind.

  4. Very true Prozac, and don't forget the 2+ million times that guns are drawn in self defense, with some 300,000 discharges in self defense.


    My friends that have guns also have kids, but the thing is that all their kids have shot all the guns, so "novelty" has worn off and they now could not care less about the guns. The attitude is that it is just a gun, and "I really don't have any interest in it outside of the gun range". Some of the kids are even a bit bored of it, so there is no danger to the children. If the kids friends are over and they want to see it, then they just invite them to come over another time when dad or mom is home, and they can all go to the gun range and not only see the gun, but actually shoot it.

    When handled properly guns are NOT dangerous around children. None of my friends have ever had an accident with their children.

    On the topic of shoot now and ask questions later, I would always shoot first. Calling out to a potential criminal is not a smart move. You give your position away. How do you know he is the only one in your house? When you have your attention on him, there may be another person in the room next to you that can take you out when you call out to them.

    Sorry, but I'm taking my NV and when I see that he is not someone I know and he does not appear to have any valid reason to be there, I'm taking a headshot. I'm not taking any chance of there being another person, or an entire gang I am not aware of being nearby.

  5. Those are both symptoms of a cumbersome menu system more than the core ideal. I'm proposing something more akin to the automatic head duck, or grabbing of a climable surface when you jump near it. A natural action that happens free of the player's input, completely abstracted in gameplay but present to give the player a deeper feeling of immersion.

    Alternatively (or, actually, alongside such a system) slightly context sensitive button presses (akin to a single enter/leave cover key, like Gears and Kill.switch had, although perhaps not to the same level) for similar actions could be designed in a way that is very comfortable to the player.

    I disagree. Imagine while trying to run for cover you jump near a wall and your character grabs on instead? Not too intuitive. Regardless, THAT is not even the issue. What you fail to realise is that what you call instinctive, is not so instinctive in real life. You want a head duck? then it should be programmed into the game. I have longed for more than three modes of stances. There should be four: upright, slight duck, crouch, and prone. Then a separate button for dive, or if standing still you just hit the deck.

    Context sensitive kills a simulation, but that is just the problem, you are talking about gaming in general, and some of us are talking about a specific title that is not "just a game" and we have tried to communicate that to you.

    I look at what the devs did with GRAW PC and they decided not to allow shooting while running on account of realism, and yet you just run over a dead body and you hear a "clack" and you now have a full load of ammo? I will tell you what that is a load of. OFP did it right by LETTING you shoot while in full sprint. You may not hit the target, but you have the freedom to do it, and if you want ammo off of a dead body? You have to go check to see what he has, and DECIDE to pick something up, not run over it.

    SUP you think like a gamer and that is the problem here, you just don't get it. The point of a SIM is to SIMULATE real life, not what YOUR perception of real life is.

    I look at your comments about how GR did not need a weapon recovery/swap mode, prevention of jumping in the game, etc... and I see a kid that wants to create a game, not simulate real life. This is why I asked you if you have ever jumped with 70lbs of gear on. I have, I may not have served, but I have tried on a vest with level 4 plates and linked two twenty pound leg weights around my waist. My vertical was quickly reduced to barely 20 inches, and I have been out hiking with 60lbs of gear on and I can tell you it is not the same thing. With hiking, you walk a few miles, take a break, have some trail mix, drink some water, sit around and talk, and relax. In combat you really can't take this stuff off, and you can't really imagine what it is REALLY like, because in some way YOUR perception WILL be wrong.

    I know I can't really imagine what REAL combat would be like. All my hunting, Hogan's alley, and shooting only gives me a fraction of what combat MAY be like, NOT what it IS.

    This is where we need to put things in the hands of a professional, not a gamer. What makes a good game is a subjective matter, but what makes a good simulation is NOT subjective. You can say that you like Halo better than OFP, and you are entitled to that opinion, but what you cannot say is that Halo is a better representation of real life than OFP is.

    If you don't like certain features in a title, then don't run it. I just know that with my limited knowledge of combat, I would trust people like Hatchet, Marcinko, Rabbi, Eric, etc... (sorry if I missed anyone) long before I trust some green horn dev that has abosolutely no experience, and worse yet has barely fired a gun. Again, a SIM represents elements in real life, it is not about how YOU think something should be represented. A SIM recreates real experiences and that is something that neither you or I have.

    Sometimes it is good to listen and try to learn something, because if you are always talking, then you just may end up eating crow. Trust me, I have been out crow hunting more times that you have days in you life, and I know I wouldn't want to eat those things.

  6. Like I said, common sense.

    Exactly. I just got the sense that somehow you were looking at the people in this forum as being too "trigger happy".

    This is where NV comes in VERY handy. You see them, but they don't see you. :yes::ph34r:

    You know how sometimes you think your dog is over by the food dish and you go into, say, the laundry room and there the dog is...surprising you?

    Every time that happens to me I get surprised and my first recation is to fire off a round from my 380 handgun.

    She has no business scaring me like that.

    Good thing I am a poor shot.

    Imagine the mess.

    LOL, careful there Ick, your dog may develop a "bladder problem"

  7. What happens if following a car accident someone is looking for a phone with which to call an ambulance, they try several houses but there's no answer at the door but one door is ajar or clearly unlocked, so they go in and look for a phone there. You've been working in your garage (or whatever) and come in from the back just in time to see someone frantically searching your house - so you shoot them simply for entering your house?

    I have no problem with someone defending themselves and their home against burglars and the like, but an 'always assume the worst so shoot first and ask questions later' policy worries me.

    There is a new invention called the doorbell that would wake up the homeowner first, and for those who have not invested in said invention, there were door knockers which preceeded the doorbells, and even before that some guy named God created something called a hand so that you could roll it up into a fist and try banging on the door. I heard God even created something called a voicebox that would allow you to call out for help.

    The "anti" establishment will come up with the craziest of scenarios to try and prove you wrong. Sorry, but even the one scenario will not justify the STATISTICAL FACT that in America guns that are discharged in self defense save well over 100,000 lives every year.

    Why is it that people are willing to say that they will sacrifice one life to save thousands, but when it comes to guns, one "innocent" life if too much of a price to pay. GIVE ME A BREAK. Hypocrites, plain and simple, use an argument only when it suits you.

    Innocent until proven guilty ring any bells? You're right, generalisations never help along with the fact that assumptions are the mother of all ****ups - that's the point I'm trying to make. There is a difference between finding someone wearing a balaclava who is picking up your TV to simply finding an unknown person in your hallway or coming through your front-door who is dressed normally (as a random comparisson). You need to judge every situation as it comes using some intelligence and common sense in order to decide on the correct response. Basically, 'shoot first and ask questions later' should never happen.

    It's simple, obvious things you should be asking yourself. Take your example, if you hear glass breaking and find someone going through a cupboard then it's logic (and reasonable) to assume they're not up to anything helpful. You've asked a question and engaged your brain before taking action, which is the responsible thing to do.

    Quite simply if you are incapable of following such a simple train of logic, you should on no account be in possession of anything more dangerous than a potato peeler in the first place.

    That is pretty much where people here stand, nobody said anything about going hog wild and shooting anything they see in the house. Gun ownership means being responsible, and guess what? If you are irresponsible with it, a little orgainization called the ATF will not approve your paperwork to own one. People simply said they would err on the side of caution on account of the fact that many here have families to protect. Would you risk the life of your wife (if you are married) for the possibility that the said intruder is innocent? Imagine what the guy will do to her if you hesitated and he took you out.

    Dickie, quite simply, if anyone wants to kill for the sake of it, they probably are some thug and they are probably the one breaking into your home. Opps, yes, that sounds like a guy I would shoot.

  8. JChung, let it go. Thank goodness you and most others get it.

    I'll take your advice on that one.


    context sensitive

    I would have to say I am absolutely against this idea. OFP did implement some things that were context sensitive, and they did a good job with it, but for things that are quick action moves, this would be a major error.

    Any time I read the words context sensitive for "quick action" motions, it reminds me of how when I run Splinter Cell, and just as I move Sam in to grab a guy, suddenly he turns wino on me and decides to take a swig from a bottle off of the floor.

  9. I have to say that im really excited about this game. And I feel that it has some real potential, so keep it up BFS-Team, provide some more teasers (the ones you posted looked really good - they have a certain [GR] feeling, thats good). Ill be following this thread with great interest.

    One qestion for john; is it the teams ambition to make the bullet balastics realistic, in terms of bullet drop, wind, speed, weight, penetration and so on ([GR] really failed in that department).

    I have to agree. [GR] was far too simplistic in this way. I thought OFP did a decent job of this, and even Sniper Elite managed to do a decent job in this respect.

    Of course there are limitations in regard to realism even in this department. As long as there damage based on caliber, bullet drop, and time to target requiring leading for moving objects, I would be plenty happy.

    Things like drift on account of rifling, wind, etc... are ancillary in my humble opinion.

  10. But only in the context of a realistic game, obviously. It would be at best idiotic and at worst sacrilegious to remove Rocket Jumping from quake, despite it being pretty much physically impossible.

    A lot of people here are speaking in generalities of how all games should be made, when everything discussed so far applies exclusively to the realistic subgenre of the tactical shooter subgenre.

    Good point Sup.

    Tactical Shooter = No jump for realistic AND ani-glitcher effect

    Non-tactical Shooter = Case by case basis

    That is how I see it.

    Sure, perhaps some kind of "jump over a small rock"...but VERY limited please.

    @SUP & ICK

    Sorry, but you guys have it all wrong on this one. Have you ever tried jumping with 70lbs of gear on?

    As Hatchet already stated, the jumping that would occur in this title would be realistic, not like Halo. Oh, and yes, in the panic of combat if you come up to a two foot high platform/porch/deck etc... I would most definitely jump and not spend the time to climb up. That could easily make the difference from making a clean getaway into a brick building, and taking one in the back of the head.

    Also, the small rock example needs to go as one would not jump over a small rock. Walk around it.

    On an additional note, read the previous posts if you want to address something. Hatchet is specifically responding to questions regarding the title BFS is working on. He is not speaking about all games in a general sense, so let's try to keep things more focused OT here, or at least address the right people in regard to the comments we make.

  11. I have to agree that any limitation that is placed upon a player that is not there on account of technical reasons simply should not be there. Period.

    This was the great thing about OFP. There were some squad commands that I literally only used a couple times throughout the entire game (almost 60 missions), and when I needed it, I was sure glad it was there. Of course even OFP has some issues with realism, but overall it was the most satisfying gaming experience I have ever had.

    This was a MAJOR issue I had with [GR]/GRIT/DS. At the very least one should be able to pick up ammo or weapons from fallen friendlies, but the limitations of the game were far to severe. The person with the AT round dies and the mission ends? The person with the demo charges dies and the mission ends? Quite simply the less limitations a game has the better it is. One of my major peeves about GR.

  12. I seem to recall that the "standard" Hydra Shok is 230 grain. I have no idea if other bullet weights are/have been availible.

    This whole 9mm vs. .45 ACP has me somewhat puzzled (I don't shoot guns myself, at least not since leaving the army): The SAS use the SIG Sauer P226, so does SEAL's. Are you seriously telling me that these operators have been carrying grossly underpowered handguns around for years?

    Bear in mind I'm not questioning your gun knowledge/experience (as I have no personal experience with these weapons whatsoever). I'm just puzzled that if the 9mm was so seriously underpowered as Col. Hackworth suggests, why would such elite units carry them?


    krise madsen

    Agencies use (or used in some cases) the +P 165gr rounds. Agencies do not use the same Hydrashocks that you buy off the shelf in most gun shops.

    As far as the 9mm rounds go, there is the issue of the fact that we are a part of NATO, and "standardization" is a factor. It may not be the main factor in regard to what ammo we use, but it does bear some weight. The adaptation of the philosophy of more rounds.

    Personally I will stick with my 175gr Blackhills .308s and 200gr +P Speer .45s.

  13. People need to realise that just because the round is bigger doesnt mean that its better, more.. "stopping power"

    I was told about a incident from a very reliable source that in a shoot out, his partner fired two shot in one perps face, and 3 in the other, only one died.

    All 5 shots were .45 acp, hydra-shock. Fact of the mattere is, the human body is amazing in the things you can put it through, i learned that through the various courses i have been through, done ###### i never knew was possible.

    Any clue what grain bullet the .45 ACP Federal Hydra Shock was?

    For a personal protection .45 ACP round I would not want less than 200 grain and would prefer a .45 ACP round with a 230 grain bullet. I would not buy any .40 S&W round with a less than a 180 grain bullet. Since pistol rounds have such a low velocity compared to rifle rounds you need all the heaviest bullet you can get to make up for lack of velocity.

    All the agency personel I knew carried the 165 grain rounds. I personally use 200 grain Speers.

    Yeah, and at first I identified a jerk down and left with the trigger pull, which led me to change up the grip. Got that to go away, and my patterns tightened up noticeably. But still low-left. Sight picture problem, perhaps?

    Have you tried shooting the thing off of a bench or rest of some sort? I would try shooting it that way, and if it is still off, then I would probably start adjusting the sights.

    From what I understand about the XD, it is unlikely that the sight is off. Quality control with the gun has been pretty good from what I have heard, and the samples that I have shot seem to live up to that image.

  14. People need to realise that just because the round is bigger doesnt mean that its better, more.. "stopping power"

    I was told about a incident from a very reliable source that in a shoot out, his partner fired two shot in one perps face, and 3 in the other, only one died.

    All 5 shots were .45 acp, hyrda-shock. Fact of the mattere is, the human body is amazing in the things you can put it through, i learned that through the various courses i have been through, done ###### i never knew was possible.

    You get soo high up in pistol and rifle rounds you are obviously going to drop your target on site.

    Personally, i will be buying a glock 21 here in the next couple months.

    and as Eric stated, i have NEVER had issues with my primary weapon, ever, its all about education and weapons maintenence.

    But if it were possible i would get a 7.62 rifle, 417, something along those lines.

    That is very true that larger calibers are not a guarantee of better "stopping power", but from the "general" principle of hunting, I know that larger calibers on average will kill your prey more effectively.

    Again, this is a general principle, and the cartridges I use when hunting are pretty potent stuff, so I am not making any 100% absolute statments here. I just know what is more effective in killing animals, so I personally prefer to stick with the larger calibers.

    Again Marcinko, don't take this as a I'm right and your wrong view that I am making, I am following general principles that affect killing prey, and my posts are more about getting your views and not about proving a point or proving you to be wrong. I present different views because I often run into people that serve in different agencies, branches of the military, etc..., so I like to compare the different views and get the opinions of people like yourself, Hatchet, Eric, etc...

    Like I said before, I see that you and Eric agree that the current issue weapons systems is not a big problem, but your opinions on the ammo differ. I just like the feedback I get on this forum because with people like ZJJ on staff, I know that the "posers" are not present here, or if they are, they are generally "put out" fairly quickly.


    Have you shot the HK? I have not come accross anyone that owns one yet, so I'm still waiting. However, I doubt that I would get one anyway as I am partial to all metal guns. Just a preference I have.

  15. Good grief, I can't even stand the fact that there are "security" cameras everywhere in increasing numbers. I understand that in certain areas there may be use for security cams, but in most public areas I would rather rely on the simple "old school" method of having more police presence. Better yet, let any citizen that can pass a rigorous background check carry a piece of their own.

  16. get back on topic.

    Now that all of that is cleared up, this sounds like a good idea. Yes, as Marcinko guessed Jordan is a pretty young kid. I don't remember exactly how young, but at this point my co-worker and I have both left the company, and he was not someone I really kept in contact outside of work, so I really could not find out at this time.

    Regardless, opinions on the beretta and M4 as weapons systems are somewhat varied. They seem to be neither universally liked, or hated. Now as far as the caliber of the round goes, there seems to be a bit more consensus that a change in caliber would not be a bad idea.

    I only agree with the caliber change as I can only apply what I know from hunting. The .223 is a round that is banned from being used against deer as it is considered inhumane to simply inflict pain with a round that cannot kill even small deer (unless you hit it directly in the heart or head). This is the main issue that has always kept me second guessing the use of the .223. The .223 is pretty much only used against varmit, and even many smaller animals that weigh even as little as 100lbs are considered too large to be shot with it.

    Same thing goes for the sidearm that hunters carry in the event of an emergency when hunting dangerous game. The only automatic pistol rounds that people carry are 10mm and .45ACP, and in some cases .40S&W. 9mm and anything smaller is simply out of the question.

    This is an age old debate and there are both supporter and critics on both sides of the issue. Anyway, it is good to get feedback from people with experience and from what I see here Marcinko does not mind the use of the current systems and the ammo, and EricJ seems to not mind the systems, but finds the ammo crappy.

    With the all seeing investigative eye of ZJJ it is nice to know that at least I can trust the identities of the people on this forum.

  17. It's "The Unit" from the hit CBS TV show... :P

    Sorry, this is a bit OT. I don't watch much TV so I have only seen the show a couple times, this is the one with the guy Jonas leading the team right? I thought I heard that they were supposed to be Delta. Again, I have only seen the show a couple times so I don't really know for sure. It actually is a pretty decent show. That was the first time I had seen a show where they took a pro-gun stance, and they were even supportive of the war in Iraq.

    Anyway, I don't want to go too far OT, but I do think I heard that they were supposed to be Delta.

  18. There are some really good points being made in this thread.

    I would like to add a few in regard to SP. Squad commands are one of the elements that can make or break a game to me.

    I don't game as regularly as most people here, so joining a squad and playing competitively would probably frustrate a lot of my team members as I sometimes leave my Xbox in its box (no, I don't leave it out set up all the time) for a week or two, sometimes three. I usually game when plans for something else are cancelled etc..., so most of my gaming is not planned or scheduled in any way. I had Xbox Live once but I literally logged on about two or three times a month, so I cancelled it. On account of this the SP portion, and split-screen coop have the most value to me.

    The lack of squad commands are what killed the GR2 experience for me. This along with linear maps (but I won't get into that as this is the AI thread). To me the best squad commands I have seen on a console is OFP by a WIDE margin. I liked the ability to structure a squad any way you want to, the ability to give all sorts of specific commands, the ability to communicate with them, the ability to designate a point on the map for them to go to, and the ability to give a "point and move" command a la Rainbow Six style.

    I just want the ability to properly direct and control the how and what my AI do on a mission.

    Of course I also want to see much of what has been discussed here about enemy AI. In regard to that, I would like to see the enemy use some strategies that live people use. I hated how in GRIT on Polling Center the enemy would just keep walking into the Polling Center and you would just sit there with a SAW and mow them down. In a situation like that, after seeing a couple of their fellow men mowed down, I would like to see the AI first toss in a grenade, and then move in.

    Anyway, again, there are a lot of good points being made in this thread. :thumbsup:

  19. This DoD game may have been overdone (again, I have never run it), but I would bet that virtually every average person out there has a grave misperception as to what would work as cover. I know I definitely was surprised with some of what would and what would not work as cover in real life.

    I'm talking about a chunk of stone rubble a little larger than a man. :rofl:

    Yeah, that is pretty bad.

  20. @Ick, LOL, don't forget that you are also wearing clothing.

    Not played much dods, but in DoD1 it was implemented to a point of hilarity. Me and a few friends realized we almost always died the moment we actually entered cover, due to the absurd effectiveness of penetration. Normally sprinting down an open street was far safer than going prone behind a concrete barrier.

    A perfect example of why one should be careful with cover penetration as a gameplay element. :rofl:

    I have never run DoD, but understand too that most of what your average person would consider cover does not work well as cover in real life. Ever shot a .308 at a brick wall or a tree? A friend of mine used to take some people out to a private range where we would shoot a lot of different objects to see how they would stand up to gunfire. We have shot BP glass, chopped down trees (the entire area was surrounded with dense woods), shot apart cinderblock walls, brick walls (we would go out and lay down brick and cinderblocks and by the next time we went out shooting the cement was dried), varying amounts of layers of plywood, steel plates of varying thickness, Kevlar vests (some with plates), etc...

    Stronger rounds like 7.62X51mm and 7.62X54R, will chew up brick and concrete structures. Most average trees were also not worth much as cover either. A tree that is about 3 feet in diameter? Sure, but most trees were easily penetrated, and if not in the first shot, a few rounds pretty much did the trick. The thing I was most shocked at was how much plywood standard 2 3/4" buckshot could blast through. Forget rounds like .338 Lapuas and .50BMGs, and I wouldn't want to even see what a .408 Cheytac could do.

    This DoD game may have been overdone (again, I have never run it), but I would bet that virtually every average person out there has a grave misperception as to what would work as cover. I know I definitely was surprised with some of what would and what would not work as cover in real life.

  • Create New...