ABsintheminded

Jumping doesn't have to be jumping. It could be a button dedicated to the obvious action of climbing fences, hopping onto short ledges or stone walls, or doing any simple motion that brings you above ground level like that... using your legs. You know. None of this jumping to avoid bullets crap. No rocket-jumping, no platform-jumping, no- well, maybe stepping (while walking) or hopping (while running) over trip wires would be neat. Like in Behind Enemy Lines. Look at AA for a decent example of a way to do jumping without being unrealistic. Jump when you don't absolutely have to, and you get tired and slowed down. It doesn't make you harder to hit, it just lengthens your time in the open. So unless you've come to a barrier that needs a quick hop over, or a muddy ditch to leap across to keep your speed up, jumping will only get you shot up. Swimming shouldn't carry the stigma of being a "quaker" (society of friends? crappy term) feature in a game. Because, well, people can swim. In certain settings it'd be a very reasonable thing to expect in a mission, and with the ability to swim, that's just one more simple thing that can be taken into account when designing them.

Phleep: That's what I'm saying, man. There are very few things that -wouldn't- add to the gameplay, as far as the graphics go. Everything that won't should be spared, in the name of including the little things that do. Even that, though, probably won't be enough, so it's a question of what superslick stuff to exclude to keep the game playable.

Oh... missions. My bad. I'd like to see a mission where you are on the line, but you are not there to fight. Perhaps find a certain sergeant in the fight for some reason. Radio is broken, or something. And through the mission, you have the option of fighting, helping certain units where they might need it, or just running in and out and completing your objectives. If you help, -maybe- things go okay. If you don't, lots of guys die. Who knows, with you there they may just win the skirmish hands-down, but you find your man dead. Win-lose situation, yo.

In addition to the single player story game, single missions, and the online play, a "command" campaign would be nice. Instead of a set of missions all predetermined, it could play out like a responsive mission editor, with you in general command of all the troops. Where they go, what their orders are, and when all is said in done, you could have the option to play an individual part in one of your troop movements. So enemy tanks are gathering and preparing to cross a bridge to attack one of your cities. Place your available units, give their orders on the map, and enter the game as, say, a demolitions expert set to destroy the bridge while your troops hold the tanks back. Or a tank commander fighting from the hill behind the line. Let's say that fails, and certain ai-determined objectives are reached by either side, and it'll return to the map for more orders. Now you've gotta retreat, and get ready to defend the city. Perhaps the command map could be accessed at any time, allowing you to roll with the punches of the war as both commander and soldier at the same time, which could also allow you to take over any position whenever you see fit. This could eliminate the need for "turns" that many large-scale strategy games use. Something like this seems, in my head, no different from the custom mission option in ofp1, with the addition of a responding enemy ai and a continuity that will let you return to the command map. But, with all the cpu power this game might take, running a full army of units in several places around the whole island could get tricky. Especially with no clear way to cut out whole sections of the map to resolve without actually computing every bullet's trajectory. Unless there is. Which would be cool. Just a thought.

Whatever is done to the graphics engine should be done with gameplay in mind, not eye candy. However, considering the nature of the game, this includes just about everything. Sun glare is one of the oldest combat tactics in history, good textures on plants and effective lighting will make camouflage a more important aspect of the game, and changes to the terrain such as flattened grass or craters/shattered trees would help the thoughtful player track troops or determine the way a battle went, which could be amazing additions to OFP gameplay. Even the swaying of plants in the wind would change how people sneak through foliage, and what good is the ground if you can't use bumps and ditches as cover? Almost EVERYTHING about the graphics engine will directly affect gameplay, so playing the "graphics shouldn't come first" card is nothing more than a bluff. But there should be compromises, in my opinion, as to exactly what is included. Water effects, for example, don't have to be spectacular. Though it looks cool, perfectly smooth ripples aren't going to change the way you pilot a boat up a river. Just the basics will do. Now, I understand all these things take processing power, which is a shame. But personally, I'd be willing to deal with release delays if it means getting the right code in there to do the job and do it well. I have great faith in Bohemia and Codemasters, and I'm sure with the classic ofp gameplay intact, even standard updates to the engine will be a blessing. I look forward to seeing how this turns out.