I'll say it again: not in this engine. For the moment, play Raven Shield's hostage rescue gametype.
Adding CIVILIANS to the mod as a mutator...
- Thread starter Kyle Kellahshehskee
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
From when I played it, the TO hostages were crap, and there weren't a load of civilians wandering about for no reason.
There's no way in hell I'm going to lose a damn life because some idiot AI civilian runs into my line of fire. I like the idea of civilians but make a civilian death count as a TK, not a respawn loss. Besides, respawns come in waves so by taking away a respawn your whole team loses one. You don't see people losing respawns for TKs, so why are civilians so special?
This would rapidly separate the misanthropes from the team you're on.
"You shot that old man!"
"He was in the way of my bullet."
"You shot that old man!"
"He was in the way of my bullet."
I think civilians should just be just that - civilians. No losing lives over collateral damage because, you know, soldiers accidentally killing a non-combatant in a warzone don't magically lose reinforcements either. Additionally, as I understand it, Infiltration models forces from all over the world and I'm pretty sure there are quite a lot that don't give a flying fuck whether civilians are hurt or not. They could be the occasionaly mission goal [either execution or evacuation], but for the most part they should crouch behind cover and run away from the combatants.
Purpose and functionality...
Again, the purpose of adding civilians to this mod, and especially in the numbers I'm suggesting here, is to add a more realistic atmosphere to the game, elevate the performance demands of the combatants, either to avoid harming civilians, or to (distastefully) exploit them.
To imply that civilians "all" take cover is a gross and misleading picture of what a combat zone, especially set in an urban setting, is like. The latest documentary I watched on PBS regarding our most recent invasion of Iraq is proof positive of what I'm talking about here. Did most Iraqis remain where they were, thinking (more likely, hoping) that they found sound cover? Yes. Were said Iraqis most likely inside buildings? Yes. Were such civilians killed anyway? Yes. Were there Iraqis seeking cover? Yes. Were such civilians killed anyway? Yes. Were there Iraqis roaming about, terrified out of their senses and wits? Yes. Were such civilians killed anyway? Yes.
My father was in the military for 25 years. At the bar of the armory, I sat on MANY a knee growing up, silently listening to stories of war. Whether the teller was a veteran of WW II, Korea, Vietnam, Panama (with VERY high civilian deaths) or both Iraqi invasions, (my high school friends served abroad), I've yet to hear a story about a "clean" war. To pretend otherwise is fooling ourselves beyond the pale. To pretend that civilians aren't present, doing sensible and insensible things, and/or slain (with or without intention) is such a vital aspect of any "real" combat experience, that it does GRATE me to have seen SO many games released, and yet finding that they don't address this matter adequately, if at all. In a way, the absence of civilians is awfully convenient for the game developers, and I'm NOT talking about generating the mechanics of the game. It certainly avoids having to address a very ugly, and yet very REAL aspect of the horror one's engaged in.
And besides, if this was made into a mutator, it's not going to be a feature that's forced down anyone's throat. If one doesn't want to use this mutator, then DON'T turn it on. If this mutator has too severe an impact on your game's performance, then lower the numbers of civilians present on the map, or, again, DON'T turn it on. Indeed, there are even circumstances where it wouldn't be totally sensible to see civilians running around, such as when a military base is being assaulted in the midst of a war. Nope, I wouldn't imagine too many civilians being there, so, AGAIN, don't turn it on.
But I suspect, that there are many Infiltration devotees who would appreciate having such a mutator being crafted for their gaming experience, as, frankly, since it could be completely turned off, there'd be no drawbacks to its creation and availability to the community. I'm not going to rehash all of the exciting events that this mutator could create, all I will say is that it would certainly separate the men from the boys.
Now, in regards to making this mod a reality, I believe that this mod can work. REALLY. Again, I've played with the Zombie mut, and it spawns ONE HUNDRED zombies on the screen, ALL seeking out their nearest target, ALL seeking out to MAUL their targets to death, and ALL the while, bots and players are opening their weapons up on the zombies, most of the time doing PARTIAL damage, and then ALL of said wounded zombies are having their health levels being tallied. Said mut does all the above, and its effect on my game? At TIMES, SOME choppiness in frame rate and performance, but STILL doable.
Compare all of the features that the Zombie mut has, and compare them to what I've suggested. Did I suggest enough civilians so that there could be something that looked like a column of refugees? No. I suggested that the max number of civilians be limited to 25. Since this WHOLE thread is all conjecture, guess what, that maximum number could be lowered to 20, or even 15. Also keep in mind a feature that would be MOST desirable with such a mut, the ability to SPECIFY how many civilians one wants in his/her game. You want control? Well, you could have it.
Are these civilians seeking out soldiers to attack them? Nope. Do they have a health high enough that the computer's got to crunch all those numbers when bullets do only partial damage? Nope. I suggested that pretty much one hit equals one kill when it comes to the health of these civilians, and besides, there wouldn't be anywhere near as many in the game as the Zombie mut creates.
On pretty much every level, the mut I suggested is LESS demanding than the Zombie mut, and the ability to adjust numbers makes it all the more likely that it would run smoothly in the game.
In regards to assessing penalties for killing civilians, I'm being swayed more and more to move away from denying the killing player a respawn. I've certainly grown more warm to the idea of "staining" the reputation of the player by indicating a friendly kill, but maybe this could be pushed just a little further, by having civilians registered as white skulls, instead of red. That way, we know for sure who killed what, and thus there wouldn’t be an opportunity for making false accusations.
Again, I feel that this mut offers too much not to be seen in a positive light.
Yours,
Kyle
March 16, 2004
Again, the purpose of adding civilians to this mod, and especially in the numbers I'm suggesting here, is to add a more realistic atmosphere to the game, elevate the performance demands of the combatants, either to avoid harming civilians, or to (distastefully) exploit them.
To imply that civilians "all" take cover is a gross and misleading picture of what a combat zone, especially set in an urban setting, is like. The latest documentary I watched on PBS regarding our most recent invasion of Iraq is proof positive of what I'm talking about here. Did most Iraqis remain where they were, thinking (more likely, hoping) that they found sound cover? Yes. Were said Iraqis most likely inside buildings? Yes. Were such civilians killed anyway? Yes. Were there Iraqis seeking cover? Yes. Were such civilians killed anyway? Yes. Were there Iraqis roaming about, terrified out of their senses and wits? Yes. Were such civilians killed anyway? Yes.
My father was in the military for 25 years. At the bar of the armory, I sat on MANY a knee growing up, silently listening to stories of war. Whether the teller was a veteran of WW II, Korea, Vietnam, Panama (with VERY high civilian deaths) or both Iraqi invasions, (my high school friends served abroad), I've yet to hear a story about a "clean" war. To pretend otherwise is fooling ourselves beyond the pale. To pretend that civilians aren't present, doing sensible and insensible things, and/or slain (with or without intention) is such a vital aspect of any "real" combat experience, that it does GRATE me to have seen SO many games released, and yet finding that they don't address this matter adequately, if at all. In a way, the absence of civilians is awfully convenient for the game developers, and I'm NOT talking about generating the mechanics of the game. It certainly avoids having to address a very ugly, and yet very REAL aspect of the horror one's engaged in.
And besides, if this was made into a mutator, it's not going to be a feature that's forced down anyone's throat. If one doesn't want to use this mutator, then DON'T turn it on. If this mutator has too severe an impact on your game's performance, then lower the numbers of civilians present on the map, or, again, DON'T turn it on. Indeed, there are even circumstances where it wouldn't be totally sensible to see civilians running around, such as when a military base is being assaulted in the midst of a war. Nope, I wouldn't imagine too many civilians being there, so, AGAIN, don't turn it on.
But I suspect, that there are many Infiltration devotees who would appreciate having such a mutator being crafted for their gaming experience, as, frankly, since it could be completely turned off, there'd be no drawbacks to its creation and availability to the community. I'm not going to rehash all of the exciting events that this mutator could create, all I will say is that it would certainly separate the men from the boys.
Now, in regards to making this mod a reality, I believe that this mod can work. REALLY. Again, I've played with the Zombie mut, and it spawns ONE HUNDRED zombies on the screen, ALL seeking out their nearest target, ALL seeking out to MAUL their targets to death, and ALL the while, bots and players are opening their weapons up on the zombies, most of the time doing PARTIAL damage, and then ALL of said wounded zombies are having their health levels being tallied. Said mut does all the above, and its effect on my game? At TIMES, SOME choppiness in frame rate and performance, but STILL doable.
Compare all of the features that the Zombie mut has, and compare them to what I've suggested. Did I suggest enough civilians so that there could be something that looked like a column of refugees? No. I suggested that the max number of civilians be limited to 25. Since this WHOLE thread is all conjecture, guess what, that maximum number could be lowered to 20, or even 15. Also keep in mind a feature that would be MOST desirable with such a mut, the ability to SPECIFY how many civilians one wants in his/her game. You want control? Well, you could have it.
Are these civilians seeking out soldiers to attack them? Nope. Do they have a health high enough that the computer's got to crunch all those numbers when bullets do only partial damage? Nope. I suggested that pretty much one hit equals one kill when it comes to the health of these civilians, and besides, there wouldn't be anywhere near as many in the game as the Zombie mut creates.
On pretty much every level, the mut I suggested is LESS demanding than the Zombie mut, and the ability to adjust numbers makes it all the more likely that it would run smoothly in the game.
In regards to assessing penalties for killing civilians, I'm being swayed more and more to move away from denying the killing player a respawn. I've certainly grown more warm to the idea of "staining" the reputation of the player by indicating a friendly kill, but maybe this could be pushed just a little further, by having civilians registered as white skulls, instead of red. That way, we know for sure who killed what, and thus there wouldn’t be an opportunity for making false accusations.
Again, I feel that this mut offers too much not to be seen in a positive light.
Yours,
Kyle
March 16, 2004
You still don't see, do you? THe zombie models and AI are so simplified that it's possible to have so many of them. The way damage and health is handled can't really be changed - and it's hardly CPU-intensive anyway. The AI in the UT engine is very restrictive, and unless the whole thing is written from scratch (I hate to think how long that would take) then civilians would try to go around, pick up weapons, and circlestrafe enemies. Also, an extra 25 or so actors would mean another 25 things to replicate over the network, and given that 2.9 already pushes some servers to the limit (and some clients), it would make things even laggier.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea a lot, and I can see for the new inf more single-team type gametypes like having to escort a VIP through unknown territory, where enemies can hide in the civilian population and attack at any time and place. I just don't think it's a feasible project for the current inf.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea a lot, and I can see for the new inf more single-team type gametypes like having to escort a VIP through unknown territory, where enemies can hide in the civilian population and attack at any time and place. I just don't think it's a feasible project for the current inf.
How much CPU power does the original Unreal AI take? i mean the semi-scripted Nali from the original game and the animated scenes in ONP/Xidia.
As i never played Co-op mode i can't say anything about the network load...
For the processor load...
If the actor models are rendered outside the zone, then you will have a problem with framerate on the UT(436) engine. If the actors outside the active zone are not rendered, then the maps just need better zoning to implement this.
The only problem i see is that the maps become even larger (as a download) as the need for map-specific civvies (with their models and textures) rises.
As i never played Co-op mode i can't say anything about the network load...
For the processor load...
If the actor models are rendered outside the zone, then you will have a problem with framerate on the UT(436) engine. If the actors outside the active zone are not rendered, then the maps just need better zoning to implement this.
The only problem i see is that the maps become even larger (as a download) as the need for map-specific civvies (with their models and textures) rises.
Beppo
Infiltration Lead-Programmer
Even if this thread is already 'some' days old I guess i should reply...
Adding civilians to the type of missions that the current INF maps offer is not really something that would fit. Most maps feature a small area with two opposing forces pretty near to each other. In RL every civilian would have fled the area already if not days or weeks then hours ago.
Sure civilians would be cool in more or less single-player mission offsets where ie one team sneaks into a village that has a military base of some sort next to it. But that would not really fit for MP. In MP the different players know that another force is actually there and so they are waiting for them. Noone would leave civilians running around in the area then cause the risk of getting them captured or killed is simply too high. So the civilians would be taken to 'secured' buildings or would lock themselves into their homes.
Again, in some sort of SP environment civilians would fit perfectly... but not really for standard MP going on out there.
In addition the 'hordes' of civilians running around would need some performance of course. Even if they are more or less AI-less and their 3D model is very low poly only. In the end they would only be stupid things that 'disturb' your view somehow.
With AI they would need to run away screaming from enemy forces and would ignore the local guys. At the time a firefight begins, no single civ should stay in the area. So they would be only some sort of extra alarm that reacts purely on the attacking crew until they hear the first shot fired or encounter one or more of the attackers.
Adding civilians to the type of missions that the current INF maps offer is not really something that would fit. Most maps feature a small area with two opposing forces pretty near to each other. In RL every civilian would have fled the area already if not days or weeks then hours ago.
Sure civilians would be cool in more or less single-player mission offsets where ie one team sneaks into a village that has a military base of some sort next to it. But that would not really fit for MP. In MP the different players know that another force is actually there and so they are waiting for them. Noone would leave civilians running around in the area then cause the risk of getting them captured or killed is simply too high. So the civilians would be taken to 'secured' buildings or would lock themselves into their homes.
Again, in some sort of SP environment civilians would fit perfectly... but not really for standard MP going on out there.
In addition the 'hordes' of civilians running around would need some performance of course. Even if they are more or less AI-less and their 3D model is very low poly only. In the end they would only be stupid things that 'disturb' your view somehow.
With AI they would need to run away screaming from enemy forces and would ignore the local guys. At the time a firefight begins, no single civ should stay in the area. So they would be only some sort of extra alarm that reacts purely on the attacking crew until they hear the first shot fired or encounter one or more of the attackers.
Last edited: