Sentry Studios please oh please

[FieldMedic]

Same for snipers... I kill snipers with a standard AR way easier than they tend to kill me. A sniper rifle that needs three hits to kill... a bit useless.

Strangely remind me of the stupid Delta Force 3, when everyone using FNMAG were able to kill snipers from near to 800/900m and sometime while jumping everywhere with an incredible ease (and even the very bad myself could do that).

But it was not the damage system actually that was doing this, just the fact DF3 machinegun had mostly no recoil on full auto , even while jumping, and the "great" DF3 engine was just displaying a very noticable black pixel for soldier at a distance.

Sniper ballistics were nice though (even if not as nice as its good predecessor, DF2) , it was just every other sectors of this DF3 that were totally ridiculous in every ways.

 

[Beppo]

Oh, I forgot to mention 'bunny hopping' soldiers with a shotgun in hands that fire several shots in a row while circle jumping towards/around ya and you can almost emtpy a full clip on them while standing still... and again, who's dead after this encounter?!
I hate such crap even if the spread of the shotgun pellets is giving you a small advantage on close distances but I want to see someone jumping around in circles while firing a shotgun... this baby - as every other weapon that has weight and recoil - should wobble around like crazy ... and in addition the soldier performing such movements has to be born yet or is an acrobat hired right out of a circus. This will never change in the commercial action/arcade fps sector I guess.

@Psychomorph
We need momentum in weapon and body movement that feels and looks realistic. This will result in the weapon not being 100% aligned all the time and will limit the conefiring to its real values to almost zero. We will see how flexible the bone movement controls will be within UT2007, but I'm sure that this can be archived, maybe even by using the physics system for controlling the arm movement based on the actual momentum.

 

[Derelan]

realism is for real soldiers in real war. i'm just playing pretend.

 

[Derelan]

the "great" DF3 engine was just displaying a very noticable black pixel for soldier at a distance.

The engine could give you the visual precision of grains of sand on a beach, I'd still stare at the screen for long enough to train my eyes to it, waiting to notice something that isn't nature.

 

[yurch]

This will never change in the commercial action/arcade fps sector I guess.

Oddly enough, the next patch by DICE for BF2 supposedly will disable jumping and shooting, among some other things they consider 'exploits'. This is delightfully heavy handed for a game that's been out several months already, I'm waiting to see how this turns out both in gameplay and all out flamewar...

 

[AlmostAlive]

I've already caused some ..uhm.. disturbance on Battlefield.no about the bunnyhopping and "dolphin diving" in BF2 (yes, they have a name for that too). The so called dolphin diving is achieved by rapidly pressing the prone and jump in sequence, firing the weapon all the time and having "normal" accuracy, of course. 3 days after I had made my post and gotten flamed for wanting more realism in the game and the idiots to stop exploiting an obvious flaw in the game, the patch that's supposed to fix the issues was announced. Game, set, match. Hopefully.

There are however many other aspects of the game that I do like. The squad system is probably a blast for clan matches. I'm more of a spec ops lonewolf when I play though, sneaking around behind enemy lines and shooting people in the back

 

[Psychomorph]

The so called dolphin diving is achieved by rapidly pressing the prone and jump in sequence, firing the weapon all the time and having "normal" accuracy, of course.

Oh Noah, why did you convince God not to kill humankind?

 

[zeep]

I'm emotionally hurt that so many of you have actually bought BF2 and shamelessly installed it with intention to play. The fact that some have then actually played it more than once toggles my heartstrings even more.

Infiltration has single handed ruined my average FPS enjoyment for God know how many years to come well passed the point of even considering another game purchase lest it has a possiblity of being modded for the next Inf.

 

[Nukeproof]

Hey Beppo, good to see you still hunger for a new INF!

I can just agree with the point that INF "spoiled" the gaming experience of many FPS for me - though I partly enjoyed CoD2 offline campaign with switched off crosshair.

 

[ravens_hawk]

CoD2 is nice if not for the infinte respawns (of both parties) limiting tactics. It doesn't matter how many times I kill that guy on the MG, if I'm not near him (or otherwise trigger an event, usually distance related or objective based) someone will take his place.

Edit, Yeah the INF has spoiled me. Unless the game has some inovative feature (hitman was fun) or cool story line (HL, HL2) it appeals less and less to me.

 

[Derelan]

Yeah the INF has spoiled me. Unless the game has some inovative feature (hitman was fun) or cool story line (HL, HL2) it appeals less and less to me.

So instead of appreciating the less-involved games, you wait until someone puts a virtual reality machine on your head?

 

[Beppo]

What's your problem Derelan?

@zeep ... well I have an excuse for buying, installing and playtesting stuff like BF2 ... I searched for a new engine to mod on

@Almost ... the squad and commander setup and communication system in BF2 is quite nice. I like the command structure and stuff alike. Only problem... you need players that want to follow these structures, else you end up with no commander at all or you being the commander giving orders that noone follows and then they complain how bad you are as a commander most times too hehe. Many even do not care about the warning messages they get when entering the artillery strike area... was kicked a while back cause one guy drove directly into the center of the strike zone with a fully mounted vehicle
But when players start to work with you, giving valid requests aso, then this system can end up pretty neat. I wonder why there isn't an option to allow bots to play within online games or to let an invisible bot take over the role of the commander within online matches (or have they added something like this?). This way you would be able to play as a squad leader giving requests for UAVs aso to someone that actually listens to you and is able to handle the stuff. A commander able to provide good UAV support is priceless... only bad if you are forced to be this commander all the time cause noone else wants to take the role.... that's why a bot-commander would really be a very cool thing in this game.

@yurch ... nice surprise... I guess that will make me check out the next patch after all. Maybe it will then provide a better SF feeling with more people sneaking around instead of running around like crazy.

@Nukeproof ... am still around, have a bunch of ideas in my head - old and new - and am still eager to get this stuff on a modern engine.

 

[Derelan]

What's your problem Derelan?

Someone's gotta have a problem with everyone...

 

[mbs357]

Both the large scale battle, which I am not interested in, and the smaller infantry comabt, which I am, can be done in a single game structure and done well. There is no reason to cheat either vision or to water down both.

Provide the game. Let the mappers deal with the rest and have the admins set it the way they want.

As for those who say that will once again fracture a small community I say "Who ****ing cares." I will not play the large scale vehicle, airplane flying thingy bob. If that is all the next version of INF has then I won't even bother downloading it. Therefore I, and some like me won't be part of the community and therefore it will not be fractured. Just smaller.

HL2 is simply not an option. It can not even come close to doing what Sentry wants. I am a big UT in all its versions fan but fully understand even that versitile game engine limits. UT 2007 is showing a lot of promise but as a big fan as I am I'm still not conviced.

I like the idea of making the game support small infantry and large armor battles and letting the mapper/server admins choose what will happen.
Gives greater flexibility.

 

[{GD}Ghost]

I like the idea of making the game support small infantry and large armor battles and letting the mapper/server admins choose what will happen.
Gives greater flexibility.

Who are you?

Anyway. I definately think SOMETHING can be done with BF2. Its not horrible in its current state, but with some modding, iit can be quite good.

It is actually the only FPS that I still play on a regular basis. When its bad, its bad, but if you have a good squad, it can be great.

The bottom line is that you can code in all the "reality" that is conceivably possible into the software, but if you don't have a team of people that play in a "tactically correct" manner, the game will still suck ass....and you must admit that INF was like that.

CS can be played tactically correct, if you have the right team.

I'd like to see what can be done to make BF2 similar to INF.

 

[Psychomorph]

am still around, have a bunch of ideas in my head - old and new - and am still eager to get this stuff on a modern engine.

Nice to hear. And I'm on it too .

I like the idea of making the game support small infantry and large armor battles and letting the mapper/server admins choose what will happen.
Gives greater flexibility.

When I think about it, for example the UT2007 engine allows having nice vehicles in a larger map.

And what I think about is, having a squad based tank game against A.I. enemy tanks, sort of co-op, can be also a TM (Tank Match) I love tank sims.

That would be a real team based thing. You, the player, are the commander of the tank and bots are the driver, canonier and loader. As a commander you can communicate with other tank commanders and coordinate tactical maneuvers.
Maybe, if you want make the driver beeing a player and the commander the player who leads him and operates the cannon (via the loader and canonier bot).

The advantage of a tank game is simply, that it is slow paced and you can use a smaller map better, than a helicopter could.


I mean generally it would be Infiltration (indeed, the tank squad infiltrates the enemies), just replace an infantry squad with a "tank squad", include another maps style (with a large variety of buildings, trees and stuff) and have your tactical game as real as it gets.


1st person realism can be that you have the monitor/hatch look from the commaners point of view with the ability to open the hatch and stick your head out to have a total view.
You would drive the chassy via keys and order the cannonier to turn the turret into directions (and fire there) by a cursor, because you have independant view turning from the commanders hatch view (where you just can mark the targets).

Or when you have a player driver, the driver has his driver view and the commander his commander view with the ability to switch into the cannoniers view.