HL2 progress posted

[Psychomorph]

I think the level designer can make a map and preset the armies he has in mind, but the admin, or user should be able to choose what he want for this map, other armies, and so on.

I also wouldn't mind having a free weapon selection and a fictional infantry force, but as explained in my other thread (Infantry vs. CQB) the infantry should stay infantry, means this fictional infantry should use only weapons and tools that real infantry uses, not sume CQB Special Forces SWAT modded weapons.
If the admin decided to make the game SF vs. SF (Or SF vs. Infantry), than weapon mods are allowed that real SF uses. No totally mixed up things.

 

[(SDS)benmcl]

Totaly disagree that there should not be any mixing. It should be up to the admin. No one else should be allowed to tell an admin how to set up his server.

If an admin wants true infantry on infantry tatics that is his choice. Lobby the admins to set the server up this way or get your own.

Restricting people's choice is not a good idea.

 

[Psychomorph]

So the total mixing up of weapons, forces and tools should remain as it is now? So INF should stay as it is now?
If yes you won't see anything else than that, except few near empty servers. Not because most players want stuff mixed up, but because they don't care.

I´m not sure if this is a good idea. That will remain the single point other mods can bring against INF.

 

[(SDS)benmcl]

Leave it to the admins. People think the problem is the game. It is not. It is how the admins set the servers. What you ask about weapon restrictions can be done now. I believe there is a mutator out there that will allow it. If not I know it has been talked about.

If it can be done now then why is it not? Ask the admins to rpovide such restrictions.

Edit: I thought I was right. the mutator WeaponSetup does exactly what you want right now. Lobby a few admins and have them use it as you suggest. As I said I would rather have the option to use unrestricted mixing of weapons and have the admin do the setup with suggestions from the map makers then to have a hard coded restriction.

Edit again: Just read your post in another thread and that is a good idea. Have presets for the the restrictins to make it easier for players to turn on and off weapons based on military. Just to be sure to have an unrestricted option.

 

[Psychomorph]

I hope you mean post #14 in the other thread. Because I think this allows you to mostly choose what you want, but the 'small' server restriction would create a game type (infantry, or SF, or CQB, or what ever), which would create a more beliveable game at all.

I think that is something that can be done even now with INF2.9. The problem could be maps and leak of missions, but we can start with infantry for now.

 

[Psychomorph]

INF:Source will be a scaled down project as the SentryStudios tell. But what does it mean? Is it only about the map size?
How large can maps be in HL2? EAS-INF-DS-Arid is a large map, should maps be any larger?
Sure, if you want to drive vehicles a whole minute on max speed, but is it possible with other engines?

I heared about a feature for UT2007 on the Unreal Tournament 2007 forums, for the game mod Unreal Warfare (AKA Conquest).
The map is huge, but is made of smaller blocks, so not the whole huge map is loaded and used, but only the block you are in is palyed and the blocks surrounded around the one you are in, are preloaded.

Example:
OOOOOOO
OOOOOOO
OOOOOOO
OOOOOOO
OOOOOOO

O = The block you are in is actively used
O = Blocks that are loaded but not used and can be played instantly once you enter them.
O = Other map related blocks, that are not loaded, but will be loaded once you are near them.

Thats how it was explained to me. I´m not sure if thsi is 100% correct and I have no clue how this is possible.


If that works, that can create nice wood/jungle/city missions, but I doubt it can be used for open desert maps, especially sniping kilometers away.

 

[Crowze]

Firstly, there seems to be some confusion on 'Warfare'. Warfare is the codename for Unreal Engine 2(.5/.X), and frankly I don't see how it is at all relevant to anything any more.

Psycho it's not quite like that. If you've ever played Dungeon Siege (for example) it is completely seamless as it loads the required area in advance. However, when the area we are talking is really big as you said, it gets more difficult in terms of performance. There's also the issue of servers - there was some mention of Conquest being able to span servers, but what is the chance of a single person hiring 4+ servers for one game?

 

[Keganator]

You are a hero, fighting against a well funded enemy organization called Cobra. Your team is equally elite with no ceiling on what arms and equipment are available to you. The battlefields change, but the war is always the same war against the forces of Evil.

Good enough?

I agree.

 

[Arethusa]

Yes, the soldiers were named in some maps but the names given during EAS had no bearing on the actual fight. US troops running around without insignia on their uniforms, no rank/squad structure, a hodge-podge weapon armament, etc.

Also Iraqi insurgent fighters with kevlar and M16s...

I'd like to know who I am, who I am fighting against, where I am fighting, and why --- then, once these are chosen, all the uniforms, weapons, etc. should match with the identities of the fighters.

While I realize your point, I would remind you that Somali fighters in '93 had M16s and plenty of people had body armor during the bit of trouble with Aristide only a little while back.

 

[Psychomorph]

@Crowze:
I heared the codename was 'Conquest', but the game mode will be called 'Unreal Warfare' since it will be more like a strategic warfare.

You still didn't answered the question (if unintentional), what is the cause and problem with HL2, that it is just a scaled down project? Just the maps?
When yes, how huge can maps be in HL2 at most and still be played well?

I just want to understand it a bit better.

 

[yurch]

HL2 maps (without scaling) can probably reach the same size as UT ones can. While RTK is a perfectly fine size for infantry engagements, Sentry at the time was probably considering a vehicular factor in the scale.

 

[Psychomorph]

Well that is what I thought exactly. To small for driving vehicles miles long, but probably still enough for foot-infantry.
So I don't see it as a real scaled-down project.

I think to use really a vehice angine you need something like Project IGI, you can dive around for hours on max speed, but the game was very empty on objects.

When I´m home I have to check out the fear demo (still didn't), but what makes engines like CryTec and BF2 so special to have large scaled maps? Or do they just have plain simply huge maps, like every other engine potentionally could?

 

[keihaswarrior]

While I realize your point, I would remind you that Somali fighters in '93 had M16s and plenty of people had body armor during the bit of trouble with Aristide only a little while back.

Although that doesn't sound unreasonable, I am sure there are a few M16s thrown into the mix of weapons that insurgents and guerrilla fighers use. I didn't see any mention of it in the book BHD.

But, the vast majority are going to be old cheaply made weapons like the AK. Most of the fighers are responsible for procuring their own weapons in whatever way possible, so cheap weapons are more common.
----------------------

Server settings can't do the job of framing the entire conflict. Server admins can't be burdened with the hassle of setting up different conflicts from a hundred different settings. 95% of the servers are going to be default plain and simple.

The Insurgency Mod for HL2 seems to be doing a great job at framing the conflicts.

Establishing the soldier's identity goes WAAAAY beyond a simple camo and weapon selection. There are ranks, squad structure, fighting tactics, radio procedure, available heavy support, reloading and stoppage drills, etc.

 

[yurch]

When I´m home I have to check out the fear demo (still didn't), but what makes engines like CryTec and BF2 so special to have large scaled maps?

Aggressive Level Of Detail (LOD) reductions.

The engines make every attempt possible to remove actors/objects/scenery that are deemed unnecesary, usually because of sight or distance. BF2 will not draw distant enemies it thinks you cannot see (because of the lack of a scope, ect), CryTec is similar and will simply not draw any players outside your view setting ranges. You'll note they both rapidly reduce polies on or remove completely many objects. Grass is a big one, it's hardly worth hiding in on some engines because many players won't see any of it. In general, these large scale games are full of cut & paste objects or very little small-scale artwork. Most BF2 bunkers/buildings are the same, farcry has many of the same trees, ect. The player control and movement is very simple for the most part.

All decent engines perform this detail hiding to a degree, but the 'large' scale engines absolutely depend on it. In short, these engines are built from the ground up for play on a large scale, and the tradeoffs needed for this are already made.

 

[cracwhore]

And, of course - you need 2GB of DDR to play them.

Ah well - the times is changin'...

 

[Psychomorph]

When I´m home I have to check out the fear demo (still didn't).

Crap, I meant farcry, not fear.


@Yurch:
So those engines aren't really suited for sniping, just to give space to move around with limitted view, that isn't good either.

How many kilometers a HL2 map can ~have? I think RTK reaches a kilometer mark, doesn't it?

 

[Nukeproof]

In FarCry (single player campaign) you can definitely do long distance sniping.

 

[jayhova]

The distance detail limiting is based on whether you can see that far or not. The use of Binoculars or a scope completely change this. Since the engine only has to render objects in your field of view it realitivly easy to do scopes binocs etc.

 

[tomcat ha]

So infiltration is becoming the next ttr? I hope that infiltration will make the same comeback as ttr did.

Aggressive Level Of Detail (LOD) reductions.

The engines make every attempt possible to remove actors/objects/scenery that are deemed unnecesary, usually because of sight or distance. BF2 will not draw distant enemies it thinks you cannot see (because of the lack of a scope, ect), CryTec is similar and will simply not draw any players outside your view setting ranges. You'll note they both rapidly reduce polies on or remove completely many objects. Grass is a big one, it's hardly worth hiding in on some engines because many players won't see any of it. In general, these large scale games are full of cut & paste objects or very little small-scale artwork. Most BF2 bunkers/buildings are the same, farcry has many of the same trees, ect. The player control and movement is very simple for the most part.

All decent engines perform this detail hiding to a degree, but the 'large' scale engines absolutely depend on it. In short, these engines are built from the ground up for play on a large scale, and the tradeoffs needed for this are already made.

I think ofp didnt have it that much but i may be wrong.
Havent played it in a while because i lost my cd key which i found out after trying to reinstall it because i had problem

 

[yurch]

Like I said, ALL engines have to hide things that aren't relevant or suffer. HL2 may in fact have an end range for drawing players too, it's just that maps are small enough that I haven't seen it happen.

This is more of fact and less of drawback of engines.