HL2 progress posted

[yurch]

That's one of the HL2MP default models and hitbox set, in a leaning pose. No adjustments have been made other than the animation.

Compared to UT's massive single hitcylinder, what you see there is fantastic.

 

[Mercie]

null

 

[Psychomorph]

So what does all this mean?

 

[AlmostAlive]

It means work is being done on a scaled down version of a First person shooter which may see light of day on public servers sometime in the future.

 

[CalicoJack]

when can we see ingame pictures from HL2-INF ??

 

[cracwhore]

Refer to my first post.

 

[Psychomorph]

Who is Olethros?

 

[cracwhore]

Ancient BUF lore refers to him as an under-appreciated coder of great talents.

Modern translators of the sacred scrolls refer to him as a savior of sorts - a defender of truth - against the false prophets of the BUF community.

Many have heard of him, but few have ever seen him.

His mystery is exceeded only by his majesty.

If you'd like to find out more, please donate $30 to the Church of Olethros. We'll send you an interactive CD-ROM and a pamphlet.

 

[geogob]

under-appreciated

I wouldn't say that. Everyone runs his mutators all the time. His code is one of the cleanest and easiest to read IMO. that speaks a lot

 

[jaymian]

Did I hear correctly that HL2 source engine is too limiting for the "new INF" maps?
I remember pretty large open areas in the game. Especially when driving. If you guys are moving towards vehicular combat, then maybe the Battlefield engine is best for INF. The gametype is already to go. Just add more realism. For instance, not needing to literally fill a man full of lead to kill him

 

[cracwhore]

Battlefield 2 is an extremely buggy and shitty game.

I would really prefer that we don't do that.

Afterall - UT2k7 is right around the corner...

 

[Crowze]

I wouldn't call Q4 2006 'right around the corner'. Have to agree on BF2, at least in its current state. Good to see they are actually releasing patches though, and not re-releasing it as Battlefield 2006 or whatever.

Jay, if you pay close attention you'll notice that all the vehicle 'missions' are divided up into smaller sections, and even then they either have to cunningly design the map so it fits into as small a square as possible or put stupid puzzles in to occupy your time, so you think it's bigger.

Besides, there's already a mod that gives it 'more realism'.

 

[cracwhore]

It's about as 'around the corner' as the next version of INF.

 

[geogob]

I wouldn't call battlefield buggy... I mean most of the bugs look like intentional balance features. Lets call them features, yes.

 

[Cunubelin]

Well, the BF2 engine IS lacking. One example is that it's next to impossible to get different recoil for different stances...
Meaning you would have the same recoil wether you stand up or go prone.
I said "next to" but you can probably skip that part...

 

[Blandest Vertigo]

Battlefield 2 seems like the best engine for INF. Nearly any problems you have and will come up with for it are overcomeable. It simply amounts to less development time due to many of the currently planned features already being implemented. This means time can be spent on real features and not stupid things that people already expect from a game nowadays out of box. Not to mention added kicks with things like inborn X-Fi support mmm.
Futhermore, the argument that there are already modifications that add realism to the game is useless. It's like saying Microsoft already makes and publishes software, so no one else has a chance. Actually no, it's not even that drastic. Substitute Microsoft with some corner computer shop.
And somebody said something about it being buggy. I haven't run into a real bug yet if you discount map/weapon exploits. You want to talk about buggy, dust off HL2 again...

 

[Derelan]

Battlefield 2 seems like the best engine for INF. Nearly any problems you have and will come up with for it are overcomeable. It simply amounts to less development time due to many of the currently planned features already being implemented. This means time can be spent on real features and not stupid things that people already expect from a game nowadays out of box. Not to mention added kicks with things like inborn X-Fi support mmm.
Futhermore, the argument that there are already modifications that add realism to the game is useless. It's like saying Microsoft already makes and publishes software, so no one else has a chance. Actually no, it's not even that drastic. Substitute Microsoft with some corner computer shop.
And somebody said something about it being buggy. I haven't run into a real bug yet if you discount map/weapon exploits. You want to talk about buggy, dust off HL2 again...

Except for the fact that on my computer, BF2 looks worse than BF1. Honestly, why didnt they just implement BF1's water system into BF2, if not for just the 'low detail' setting? It was beautiful.

HL2 on the otherhand, works just fine.

 

[Psychomorph]

I am too able to play BF2 only on the lowest settings, I play HL2 on the highest and everything else.

 

[Harrm]

The HL2 engine is vastly superior engine to BF2. If you guys decided to go to BF2, I would be sorely disappointed.

--Harrm

 

[Vega-don]

The HL2 engine is vastly superior engine to BF2. If you guys decided to go to BF2, I would be sorely disappointed.

--Harrm

and i would have to buy a new computer! so please HL 2