Constructive criticism

[toadeater 0]

Here is one of the major gripes I have about OFP:

AIs frequently don't react to being shot at. I expended an entire clip of M12 ammo shooting at a soldier about 300 meters away, and he didn't even flinch as bullets ricocheted around him. I eventually managed to hit him, but I think things would have been far different if he actually bothered to duck, or maybe raise the alarm. I think this problem has something to do with distance, such as if you are far enough away, they ignore you, no matter what you do. But I think they should react to being shot at even if they can't "see" who's doing it.

[Enigmus 0]

I think some people are too use to playing with Direct play. All the Quake based games use sockets and do quiet well lag wise. You see people flick in and out of exsistance is equal to seeing a person running but them not actually being there. Sure there are some bugs in the new MP but that is to be expected when converting to a new system of play. Direct play is still available if you want to play Resistance with the old netcode. It is not like we've actually lost anything.

[Capt Morgan 0]

Okay Enigmus anyway

Look I was wondering, since BIS is now non direct play, couldn't they put more things from the game server side based.

Such as addons and other little tid bits. Now I know alot of games based on non direct play have custom mods or addons that you do not have to download. They are accesable through the server.

Actually alot of the game is dependent on the server. Is it not possible to now gear OFP now more towards the server and less away from the individual.

Just an Idea

[Capt Morgan 0]

doh wrong area sorry

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

Snipers are completely worthless in multiplayer, why not just give a regular soldier a LAW and an M21? Then you could just shoot infantry that walks by and rpg any armor or jeeps, and now with resistance you can load ammo into vehicles and instead of 4 laws and 2 m21 clips, you have 10 laws and 5 m21 clips.

   Is there a way that only snipers can hold sniper rifles fine, but a regular soldier holds sniper rifles like they were shot in the hand? That would make them at least a little bit more usefull in games.

Oh yea, and the machineguns on the tanks have a spread effect with the bullets...... can this be applied to all rifles except for sniper rifles and certain other ones?

[Nightbaron 0]

Hmm..this is about constructive criticism..well here i go..

First of all...I DO really enjoyed the original OFP,Its been awhile since i played and find a ground combat game that have more "sims" elements than action and also have a reasonable big open terrain to play in and wide variety of vehicles for support(firepower and logistic) and transportation.

The bottom line is..OFP is one of those grand scaled combat games and actually becomes one of my favorite(I'm personally sick of waves after waves of CQB typed combat games no matter how reallistic or good looking it is) and most appreciated games that comeout in this planet, I think (besides that mid 90's EA SEAL TEAM).

Now,for the critics...

About the OFP:R...Yes,I DO believe the AI is somewhat improved and really appreciate the graphic improvement .

(well,its not like im trying to tell you guys how the things should be done),

But..I think you guys could make it more "immersive"

Like....with more "logic" AI (such as ifantry do fire at choppers...or run atleast...basicly it makes more sense than just lying there on prone

while some choppers actually raining them with bullets etc,etc).

And ofcourse we do would really appreciate AI ability to take care of themself (calling in medic,find ammo and shoot enemy).

And also besides the AI..graphic also can be really improved besides just adding HW T&L support....

Like maybe a more reallistic damage model... exp.bullets holes/damage really appeared on place where it hit on body,surfaces and vehicles....and also i think the vehicles must be worked a lil bit....instead of "cradboard crush" effect why dont make it more real with explotion and stuff?.

(I know its not easy...but dev NOT impossible...flight sims usually have a very good damage visual...so its possible).

And the visual effect on the player/unit can and need a lil more tweak..(I'll be frank...the player hand do look like a plastic/doll hand).

OH,and the ability to do sort of things would prove usefull...such as the ability to shoot or duck while sitting in cargo (we all are sitting duck on cargo).

AND the bullets ability to hit is somehow a little buggy...well,it would be nice if you could actually snipe the driver or pilots (yes i know you can do this in the game...but sometimes driver & pilots were actually invicible...even in some vehicles its quite impossible to hit like the pilots in HIND)

(err...yeah maybe this more suited in bug forum).

WELL,...my oppinion is OFPR is actually a great game that might and can need a lil more work...keep up the goodwork...thats one helluva game you guys make there...keep up the goodwork.

Thank you,

[Sith 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And also besides the AI..graphic also can be really improved besides just adding HW T&L support....<span id='postcolor'>

HWT&L has been around since hmm ... version 1.2 or something? Not really one of Resistance's new GFX features

Try "improved texture resolution", "surface materials" (for lighting and reflections) or "enhanced terrain detail" ... those are some of the new GFX features in Resistance

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">AND the bullets ability to hit is somehow a little buggy...well,it would be nice if you could actually snipe the driver or pilots (yes i know you can do this in the game...but sometimes driver & pilots were actually invicible...even in some vehicles its quite impossible to hit like the pilots in HIND)<span id='postcolor'>

Vehicles like the Hind have bullet-proof glass, so it kinda makes sense you cant shoot the crew with small-arms This isnt a bug, just a game feature.

I agree with you on the AI and damage effect issues, but dont forget this is simply an expansion pack, not an entirely new game. Some of the things you mentioned would require a complete work-over of certain core engine parts (like shooting from cargo positions).

[HellToupee 0]

good points, i would like to see ai run and hide from this more instead of going prone, i think if they take fre from sumthing they cant see or attack(hele) they should run for cover, and more automation of ai in yr squad. As for graphics my comp cant take another beating as it is now im ust copeing ive got 850mhz gf4 390 ram etc, gona get better cpu soon but u got to think of the ppl with worse comps who r alot more than the high enders, look at cs crap game but every man and his dogs got a comp that can handle it.

[nyles 11]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HellToupee @ Aug. 11 2002,09:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">good points, i would like to see ai run and hide from this more instead of going prone, i think if they take fre from sumthing they cant see or attack(hele) they should run for cover, and more automation of ai in yr squad. As for graphics my comp cant take another beating as it is now im ust copeing ive got 850mhz gf4 390 ram etc, gona get better cpu soon but u got to think of the ppl with worse comps who r alot more than the high enders, look at cs crap game but every man and his dogs got a comp that can handle it.<span id='postcolor'>

Maybe if you could toggle the Ai behaviour in your own squad between a freestyle mode, where they of course follow your orders and stuff but do more things on their own, and a mode which basically works like the current one where the units strictly obey your orders. Of course this should come with a number of tweaks like that the ai really looks at the direction where you want them to look, etc..

[Hidden 0]

When I or any men in my group have spotted targets (vehicles, aviation, soldiers e.t.c.), the symbols on the map just shows two types of tanks AFAIK. Am playing a mission right now, actually, Alt-Tabbed to desktp to write this (I use Win2k and OFP never crashes when I do this). On the map, I see two types of tank symbols: 1 for BMP´s and the other for some T72 and T80 tanks 600m from our position.´

I don´t see a label saying "T80" or "T72", they look the same on the map, but "everybody knows" they are quite different in the game. So, I would like to see improved map info.

... and let me add to that :

Why the H. are we being blown up by some alien force if we leave the mission area for some time? Was trying to park a BMP in a safe spot outside the T80´s incredible range and accuracy.. was blown up because I went outside the area. Do the campaign makers assume all players are idiots?

[Nightbaron 0]

Yep...that's why i just cant wait for ofp 2

And about the bullet proof glass on HIND...well...actually yes,it do make sense....But,aren't Apache supposed to have bullet proof glass too?

Haha...well,I'm riding HIND from now on for sure...

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

I can only state general comments but I think it reflects the opinion of most of us.

Dont think too much of adding Shooter-features cause you would ruin what all of us love about the game.

Work on that "I am in nature" athmosphere cause this is what made me love the game! E,g weather as storm and snow!

Maybe for OFP2 you can look into the Battlefield1942 engine and boost performance (maintaining big maps).

Implement all you can find about realism, cause with all those "bullshit" games out in the market this is what we need!

Do some goddamn advertising beforehand will ya. It was pure luck that I took that game!

Dont waste time in building indoor battlefields cause this sucks!

get a great physical engine cause this bouncing realy is anoying!

[Sith 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Nightbaron @ Aug. 15 2002,16:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yep...that's why i just cant wait for ofp 2  

And about the bullet proof glass on HIND...well...actually yes,it do make sense....But,aren't Apache supposed to have bullet proof glass too?  

Haha...well,I'm riding HIND from now on for sure...

<span id='postcolor'>

Only the frontal cockpit glass in the AH64 is armoured, so from the sides you are still vulnerable to smallarms fire.

This is also modeled correctly in OFP

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Avoid the BF1942 engine like the plague.

Dont compromise any realism. If anything make it tougher, e.g. simulate tanks & helos more accurately, a la Steel Beasts, Longbow 2, and Commanche Hokum.

Make the environment more flexible- the weather effects need to be more prominent. I can barely see rain as it is. Add snow, and the ability for textures to change during the game- dry ground turning muddy, green ground turning snowy, etc.

Fix the physics, iron out the bugs, get some real netcode, and advertise advertise advertise.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Aug. 16 2002,05:13)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Avoid the BF1942 engine like the plague.

Dont compromise any realism. If anything make it tougher, e.g. simulate tanks & helos more accurately, a la Steel Beasts, Longbow 2, and Commanche Hokum.

Make the environment more flexible- the weather effects need to be more prominent. I can barely see rain as it is. Add snow, and the ability for textures to change during the game- dry ground turning muddy, green ground turning snowy, etc.

Fix the physics, iron out the bugs, get some real netcode, and advertise advertise advertise.<span id='postcolor'>

I now you dont like comparing OFP to other silly games but I would love to see high grass as in SOF2, that would be absolutely terrific (gay expression isnt it?)

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

Less turflike terrain, maybe some grass.

Wind and water that is effected by wind

I hope it looks a lot like this except modern combat instead of WWII

[nyles 11]

bringing this whole thing back on topic...

43. In addition to point 40, I would like to see full auto modes being reworked. Back then, I suggested to have AI shoot more in random full auto bursts (3-5 shots at a time). Currently, there is no real difference for human players wether they fire in full-auto or semi-auto. Players can still place single shots while on full-auto mode. The idea I had, which might work out nicely, is to have full auto fire a minimum, random number of shots, depended on the rate of fire of the real counterpart of that weapon. That way, there would at least be an amount of 3-5 shots, even though I clicked the fire button for a brief moment only. The trick now would be, that after this random amount of initial shots, there would only be single shots following to gurantee that you can immediate stop firing any time. This random amount would indeed only affect the first rounds to leave the weapon.

I think a feature like this would really help to simulate the effect of firing a weapon in full auto. Even though, a very skilled player could indeed manage to fire single shots from a machinegun, the shots mostly will follow in such a rapid succession that you have fired off quiet a number of rounds even with just short squeezing of the trigger. The machinegun atmosphere would be greatly enhanced in OFP that way and would force these weapons more into their respectiv role.

[Nightbaron 0]

I think you guys at BIS should really fix those damage/bullet hits detection system in OFPR or how things work considering units & vehicles...

Well,maybe this more suited in bug forum also, But i think it also suited as a constructive crtics as well.

You see...things actually works pretty well in OFP 1.46, But I don't know why things seems to be a little messed up in OFPR (Uh60 cargo invicible to damage,water vehicles boarding and disembarking probs etc,etc).

Well, Don't you peoples think It would be very wonderful if only things in OFPR could work at least as smooth as in OFP, and combined with all the new features found on OFPR...I'm sure OFPR would be even more impressive than its already is.

And..Yes OFPR actually already quite good compared to other games outthere nowadays,But with a little more tweak...Its gonna be GREAT.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Nyles @ Aug. 17 2002,15:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">bringing this whole thing back on topic...

43. In addition to point 40, I would like to see full auto modes being reworked. Back then, I suggested to have AI shoot more in random full auto bursts (3-5 shots at a time). Currently, there is no real difference for human players wether they fire in full-auto or semi-auto. Players can still place single shots while on full-auto mode. The idea I had, which might work out nicely, is to have full auto fire a minimum, random number of shots, depended on the rate of fire of the real counterpart of that weapon. That way, there would at least be an amount of 3-5 shots, even though I clicked the fire button for a brief moment only. The trick now would be, that after this random amount of initial shots, there would only be single shots following to gurantee that you can immediate stop firing any time. This random amount would indeed only affect the first rounds to leave the weapon.

I think a feature like this would really help to simulate the effect of firing a weapon in full auto. Even though, a very skilled player could indeed manage to fire single shots from a machinegun, the shots mostly will follow in such a rapid succession that you have fired off quiet a number of rounds even with just short squeezing of the trigger. The machinegun atmosphere would be greatly enhanced in OFP that way and would force these weapons more into their respectiv role.<span id='postcolor'>

I think that is a great idea!

One thing I would like to add is about maps. I love the german units such as the HochGebirgsjaeger. Like the swiss those are units operating in the mountains. Using the mountains as retreat and always ready for a quick penetration of the enemy. Somewhat like Partisans. It would be great to have a map with mountains (snowy tops and tons of rocks). This would be a great environment for hit&retreat missions!

[mahuja 12]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Trapper @ July 05 2002,03:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The new clipping creates new problems: i.e. you can't get on the top of the Everon castle tower! Even entering the basement is difficult.

Not good. How to talk to the rebel leader on the top of the tower, in the main campaign?

Correction: Its still possible to get upstairs, but you have to make real crazy moves. <span id='postcolor'>

It is very possible to get up there. I don't have a clue what kind of problems you have there...

oh, wait, don't tell me you are running up there?? If so try walking. (I think 'f' is the standard key for toggling walk/run)

Do you have a habit of running up stairs like that IRL?

[mahuja 12]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Nyles @ July 04 2002,23:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">11. It's somehow possible to damage the landing gears of airplanes so that they look displaced. They still seem to work but not as good as before. Dunno if this is a bug or a feature, but i think that once the gear is damaged you should not be able to land or take-off at all. A thing I could still do, even though it was a bit more risky as you were slower than usual.<span id='postcolor'>

In case you didn't know, landing (and takeoff, though for certain obvious reasons it is not done) is still possible on a RL plane whose landing gear went. Much harder though.

"A thing I could still do, even though it was a bit more risky as you were slower than usual."

I sincerely hope you didn't say that about landing?

This must have been intentional, and so it is a feature. If you don't agree with the design decision, that's your choice. I agree with it.

[mahuja 12]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Hatsumi @ July 09 2002,19:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would like to be able to enter an enemy tank without my cocky AT soldiers shooting the boss

In the mission following Occupation, when the gunships arrive, I noticed there was still a T80 that had only been abandoned by its crew. I got in drivers position, tank jumps about wildly then BOOM dead, camera pulls back to my own soldier putting RPG launcher back on his shoulder. They have even took out the Ural I used to take them to the 2nd base in Occupation, while we were creeping down the hill to the enemy base.

I have found that if you get into the gunners position on that mission, you are ignored by both sides. So I'm taking pot shots at the V80 with T80's main gun for no return fire, managed to kill the Mi17 and Mi24, changed to driver position, tank did not move at all and all of a sudden all hell breaks loose as the V80 starts hammering me with its cannon.

This can't be right, can it?<span id='postcolor'>

It is my belief that the big thing here is "engine on".

If you're in e.g. a helicopter, an enemy vehicle shows as white (as unoccpied) until someone kicks in the engine. Then it shows up as red.

(Hiding from enemies? Always turn off the engine)

I believe the IFF process is somewhat disrupted by an enemy vehicle, making friendlies attack what they believe is an enemy. Problem is, some times they should have known better.

Theoretically this should allow you to sneak by enemies by driving their vehicles, but I cannot say I remember seeing that.

[mahuja 12]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Nyles @ July 14 2002,06:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">30. The vulcan behaves kinda strange while being in water unlike the the other M133 based vehicles. Its mass point seems completly off center so that the vehicle is turned more into the water (tilted) on one side causing a weird look. should be fixed for eyecandy purposes.<span id='postcolor'>

I believe they made it like that for a reason. And that reason may be that the real vulcan is offbalanced, having ammo storage on one side or whatever...

For eyecandy and realism purposes then, it should stay like that...

[mahuja 12]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Nyles @ July 10 2002,21:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Staying with vehicles: One feature I suggested a while back and which I really hoped might find its way into Resistance was the ability for tank commanders to tell their gunners on where to point the turret. You can tell infantry where to look at, while clicking at that direction plus holding ALT key (or whatever key you binded for that). Why not make the same thing be possible for tank commanders. When you designate a position to look up, the AI gunner will rotate the turret to that direction, making the Bradley commander spot useable, at last.<span id='postcolor'>

According to fas.org there is an option for the m1a2 commander to visually cue the gunner to targets without having to say something. And I believe this would also apply to locations/directions, not only targets.

Using some key combo like alt + right click (perhaps even left?) to give such a cue ("look here") wouldn't be so off. Also I hope the command to "target t80, 30" can be removed wholly, as sometimes the radio becomes a tad too busy and as such a cause of death because you couldn't target the enemy in time. This was especially annoying with the fire command, but that could be circumvented by manual fire.

Selecting the gunner (as in squad commanding) and giving a watch command won't help either.

[mahuja 12]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Nyles @ July 01 2002,03:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">9. Weapon damage: I really hoped that Resistance would partly adjust some weapon data, but unfortunatly I was wrong. Still, I want to present my view of the weapon damage on how it should be. The major point for me is scale here. No matter how the damage values are, be it that you need 10 shots to kill a soldier or one single hit, the calibre of any weapon in the game should be taken into account for the calculation of it's damage compared to other weapons. I was really upset that the G3 rifle given such a low damage level. You sometimes need 3 hits to the chest to kill a person. I mean, this weapon has 7.62 calibre ammo, yet it is very weak compared to other 5.56 weapons like the AK74 or the MGs. Regardless of what will be done to weapon data in the future, BIS should always try to maintain scale. All weapons firing the same calibre should do the same damage. Even though it would be a big change in gameplay, this should be considered for any upcomming patch. The basic weapons, the M16 and the AK47, are pretty fair in-game at the moment, but especially new implemented weapons and the PK and M60 machineguns need some tweaking. When playing online only few people actually want to play as machinegunner. It's already hard enough to score some aimed hits with them, but even if you hit, the damage is very low for 7.62 calibre weapons. On the other side, the G36, while using standard 5.56 ammo, is a total overkill, being able to kill with a toe shot. My philosophy is that weapons should be balanced not by damage alone, but also by tweaking accuracy (which would make the G36 perform extremly good already) and other values like rate of fire and reload time. I really hope that if someone of BIS is reading this, they take a minute and think about what I suggest here. In the end it will add to the Flashpoint experience a lot.

Comments are still very welcome...<span id='postcolor'>

I agree more than just fully with this. And while we're still at it there's another issue I have.

Nowadays there is almost as many types of ammo as there are guns, although many real guns use the same ammo.

/7.whatever nato ammo as an example)

I mean, why not create one clip that all the west side,5.56mm (?) weapons could use? Assuming that they don't have special feeding mechanisms that uses a non-standard clip, I guess.

Same goes for the 7.whatever ammo size.

If this is done, I also hope custom weapons are updated to use them.

While at the topic, how about an "extended reload" command that allows you to move bullets from a clip A with 13 bullets over to a clip B with 5 bullets? Compacting them as good as possible? It could be a requirement that you were in safe mode (weapon on back)

I rarely reload before the clip is actually empty because of that.