whisper

J'aime! +1 :p

Not played with A2 platoon yet, I usually play with ex-Quakewars people on the OCB-sGs server lately. Not sure about liking playing in HC mode, in an unrealistic game, I don't really see the point of trying to emulate "more realism", I tend to see more drawbacks than benefits of "Hardcore" mode (ie, it stalls the game more).

The Smithing tree looks like a circle, but isn't a circle, it's just that Dragon Armor is the top of both branches. If you want to reach Daedric, you need to unlock all perks on the "right" branch of the perk tree (which is heavy armor oriented, while the left branch is light armor oriented). You can't go "past" Dragon Armor, it's the topmost for both branch

I find dragons annoying, they hover over my head, out of reach, and spam fire breath on me for ages, gets away, come back, hover, spam.... Is archery the only way to take him down? On top of it, when I hit him with arrow, he gets away....

Mmmhhh.... don't play rush on Metro? :)

This guy made what I dreamed of since I got in this city : . Down with annoying people!

Thks, now I see the place, will check this evening! :)

Call me stupid, I've yet to find any magic scholar, reseller, or whatever, and I'm stuck with the basic heal and fire attack thing, and I'd really like to tailor my character differently.

Also changing : * The whole certification system being reworked, with a cert tree (a bit like PS1) and time-based skill advancing on top of it (Ã la EVE Online) * Class system like ... many FPS today, BF coming to mind, with class chosable on spawn or at terms, limiting your possible weapons/equipments, and giving you access to abilities/skill (unlock with cert tree and developed through time-based evolution, see above) * Will very probably have a Free to Play scheme, where free-to-play players will have slower experience/skill increase, longer time for cert availability, etc... with power-ups (ie, faster evolution) being available for a fee. I don't know if there will be something to "get everything for a monthly fee" to get in scheme equivalent to today's monthly fee for PS1 * Pace of combat will be faster than PS1 (not difficult :) ), going toward BFBC2 pace, but not that fast * weapons and vehicles will be customizable, through upgrades you purchase , upgrade being "TF2-like", ie with 1 pro and 1 con (faster, but less armor, etc... ) * They try to spread the fight, with vastly bigger bases than PS1, no more corridor-driven interior CQC, and every bit of land will be worth fighting for because they give resources than can be used to purchase upgrades and such. Unlike PS1 where only bases and immediate surrounding were fighting grounds and everything else was empty, bare a few bridge fights here and there * there is a light soldier class with jetpack * and I'm probably forgetting much :) PS1 has been my second biggest game behind OFP/ArmA serie, my second if not first time sucker, so I'm awaiting this title big time. It's part of the 3 or 4 games I'm awaiting and ready to upgrade for (BF3, Skyrim for the ones already out, and ArmA3 and PS2 for the upcoming) That said, all we see currently is art, art, and more art screenshots, with nothing about gameplay and such, so I'm waiting for solid info. They tell about beta available asap, end of year/beginning 2012. When I see the state of the game in given screenshots, I'm doubtful. Could be a real killer, though

Funnilly enough, I'm not that turned off by the UI. The comments here had led me to believe it was awefull, when in fact... I don't know, I got used to it pretty quick (faster than Morrowind or Oblivion). I didn't know mobs didn't level with you a-la Oblivion, which is a VERY good news! But start of game is so easy I was led to think otherwise.

Actually, the "law" in the theory is that the speed of light is constant, whatever the observation point. The fact that it is the maximum possible speed is a deduction from the law. Made, if CERN results are confirmed, from an incomplete knowledge of the physics, apparently. CERN result and Einstein may well be completely compatible. Ofc, they also may... not be :)

Never ever ever use TCP for anything remotely close to real time & interactive Ever As simple as that. FPS? => UDP You can have side jobs (character general information, config synchronization, connection checkout, etc...) sent over a parallel TCP connection if you want, but any real time data needs to be UDP

Is it me, or isn't grass layer already implemented in A2?

Yes, the AI part at the end was a big letdown

I'm at 2:27 in the video only, and already jaw-dropped. I should check A3 news more often!

Play ID Software games ;)

Hahahaha, that's actually pathetically funny! M$ trying to follow Linux Ubuntu tracks , and in fact, even repeating the same error! Ubuntu has gone this exact same way with it's latest May release (the horrible "Unity" mentioned in the first page of this thread), and even though it also is optionnal, it is messy, not designed for mouse&keyboard.... well, a failure. When you design something for a tablet, it works on tablets. Not on a PC. The usages are not the same. OS makers (see Google OS, typical) are under the delusion that all PC users do is surfing. How wrong. This coming from the Office makers is silly. They should know better how their products are used

Recently, Brink which made me go back to ET:Quake Wars back a bit on Planetside too to see how it fares from times to times, DCS A10 and some BC2

This is true for PvP or Coop, tbh. Since OFP And would need its own thread :)

I'm going to be a little bit blunt, but meh.... Berzerk/Valhalla are popular because they are the most no-brainer out of the latest PvP attempts, and permit easy run & camp. Fortunately the situation evolved from the permanent full hold for 50 minutes we had before, but they are popular because you don't have to think much. Spawn, take your gun, go there, sit down And it's not C&H, sry Walker. The fact you can spawn inside zone just rules out C&H. It's a derivative from Assault mode of Battlefield games (in fact, Berzerk is an adaptation of BattleField 1985 mission in OFP). If you look for C&H, look up the excellent ones you can find on 8BZ server I'd gladly see BI taking steps to ensure we have some solid PvP experience at launch with ArmA3, and letting the community grow on its own after that, like it has been done with Warfare. But I'm not sure Valhalla/whatever would be a step in the right direction to showcase A3 possibilities Well, in fact, BI Sector Control in Zargabad are a very good first step into PvP

Who supports current servers infrastructure? BIS? No, simply servers owner. I really, really, really don't see why all the bitching here. Suppose you have a ArmA3 server. In the config file, you indicate the list of directories containing the mods the server is running, and the -mod parameter list used. modDirs[] = { "@CBA", "@ACE", "@ACEX", "@ACESM"}; modParam = "@CBA,@ACE,@ACEX,@ACESM"; You also indicate an entry pointing to a web server hosting listed mod directories where clients A3 can download the directories modsURL = "http://myclanserver.myhoster.com/armA3ServerMods/"; When a client connects, dependencies are checked, if client doesn't meet them, he has to download what the server runs, a pop-up window in game appears, asking to download server mods, and if client clicks yes, download starts from the web server indicated in A3 server config. Client can abort the download at anytime. Once download is finished, the client game is restarted with the -mod line indicated by server, and connects directly to the server. It's simple for the client, he doesn't have to use a third party tool (meaning he doesn't have to hunt for it, or even has no need to get into "hey, there must be a 3rd party tool to help with this addon/mod thing), he doesn't have to manually hunt for each mods each server is running. It doesn't impact the server itself because the download is hosted somewhere else. In fact, with such a system, server admins can host way more modded servers because they don't have to think about how to handle mods for their players. They can update their mods on server, they don't have to make sure any new player in their group is in the know-how of the tools used by the group. Everything is simpler. Which is apparently an horrible thing for some people here. Who supports the infrastructure? Well, the guy paying for the web server, can be anyone. Exactly like anyone supports the game server infrastructure. This is the first thing I can come up with with 5 minutes thinking, ofc there are tons of optimizations possible for this. there is ZERO need for official BI infrastructure support. Last sunday, I reinstalled Ennemy Territory:Quake Wars for a night of custom maps games. I downloaded and installed the custom maps pack, dating from 2009, and connected on the server. I was missing updated maps, the game proposed an automatic download and installation, restarted, and voila.... It means it checked missing dependencies, even versions, I got the parts I was missing, well..... I just had installed the game, nothing more. Would such a thing hurt?

And FYI in plenty of other games, mods ALSO modify everything.... Your point being? You don't need a central repos for this kind of system. It's sure not needed for IDTech mods, and it works fine, go figure

Seeing the state of completeness, I see no issue in BF3 getting the prizes. A3 will get them next year ;)

Like all mod were updated easily via notepad notes ...... Read 160thSOAR post for explanations. OFP attracted even Quake players who enjoyed the game immensely. I don't know where you get your facts about people playing other kind of games when they try OFP/ArmA/ArmA2, you apparently don't know much of said other genres. Broad statement, easy labelling of people foreign to you.... nice behavior. And finally, the top of it all : So how is easier mod usage, and different people coming to public servers, going to affect your game in any way?? oO You wrote on this post with what purpose exactly? Prevent the development of a functionality that will never change your game, or just generally diss players that dare play ArmA differently than you do?