DrBobcat
-
Content Count
267 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
-
Medals
-
Posts posted by DrBobcat
-
-
Is it me or did BIS retexture the South Sahrani soldiers?http://games.tiscali.cz/clanek....fg3.jpg
Seems like the body armor, and possibly the uniforms are different.
That's the crew model. I imagine the footsoldier model for south sahrani is the same.
- dRb
-
Why are y'all arguing about this junk when it's already been stated that fully dynamic destructible WILL not be in ArmA due to performance issues? I don't think there is much point in comparing ArmA to other games. Those games are themselves and ArmA is itself. Comparing apples to oranges is silly.... (especially when definites have been stated)
- dRb
-
- dRbEdit: proof about the rifle...
Edit 2: while the picture is <100kb, it is quite large, so I am going to direct link....
Thats not an SR-25, its an SPR
More pics:
The SPR retains the same reciver design as the M16/M4/AR-15, while the SR-25 has a straight-sided top reciever.
Well look at that.... indeed you are right. I never really saw those other screens. *grumble* Good call. Regardless, it is nice to see a greater selection of rifles than OFP's one per side.
- dRB
-
I agree with meyamoti about the ghille suit issue and I don't see much point in implementing into the game given the campaign's setting. However, I can defintely bet that modders will implement them quite quickly. Also, we have seen a third sniper rifle; the SR-25. I absolutely love this rifle so I am quite happy it has been put in. I just hope the scope is modeled correctly and it hits hard. Â
- dRb
Edit: proof about the rifle...
Edit 2: while the picture is <100kb, it is quite large, so I am going to direct link....
-
Two things regarding this Screenshot, Â a typo (countour => contour; probably placebo can do some cross-reading ) and the notepad replacement looks pretty dark and hard to read; in older screenshots (e.g.this one) it wasn't that dark.
You can tell by the reflection and the rippled affect on the screen that this was taken with a external camera. This can have nasty affects on contrast and I honestly doubt it is truly that dark...
- dRb
-
Is this big honkin' thing on the guys back a designator?Indeed, it seems to be the same laser designator that was released with OFP 1.46
- dRb
-
Quote[/b] ](Placebo)Two small points before I remind people that flaming/flamebaiting aren't tolerated on these forums.
1. The release date announced by 505 today relates solely to the countries that they will be publishing in, the previously announced release dates are unchanged.
2. Publishers decide release dates, we have no input at all in such decisions, we're the developer, our job is simply to make the best damn game we can, that's what we're doing.
Now please, I understand how frustrating life can be at times, but remember these forums are here to serve everyone, impassioned arguing even if good intentioned is still arguing, it will still result in a ban from the forums, I really don't want that to have to become necessary for anyone.
This is aimed at everyone. If BIS just signed a deal with 505, then there has to be time set aside for advertisement and actual production. Thousands of boxes with manuals and such do NOT just appear overnight, unlike most of you brats ache for. All these silly arguements would never occur if some folks could just try to be realistic and look beyond the scope of what they can see with only their eyes. Â This isn't meant to be a flame, but a slap in the friggen face so maybe some of y'all can wake up out of this "me me me" stupor.
Lastly, do NOT bitch at BIS for something that isn't their fault, ESPECIALLY when you don't understand the entire situation. Â A lot of people were screaming as if the sky was falling until placebo said something. "Daddy" shouldn't have to come along and tell us how bad children we can be.
Think before you post, please...
- dRb
-
Two comments on the topic -
1) Shooting while sprinting in OFP was..... a bad idea, to put it simply. I believe that out of 5 years of playing the game, I _maybe_ got two kills while sprinting. It is however a great supression tactic in certain situations, such as when running across a street in an urban environment. Either way, it won't affect me much whether it is in or not, which comes to my second point.....
2) The animation system is mod-able just like every aspect of the game. If you can't get it the first time around, just wait for someone like sanctuary to pimp-ify it.
*Shrug* Another case of nit-picking on the 1985 forums... *gasp!*
- dRB
-
Quote[/b] ]Can you explain why you need a Hind for multiplayer?Roles need filled, the Hind fills the Attack and Transport roles for the other side.
Erm...... the Mi17 easily fills the roll of transport and the Ka-50 is a much better anti-tank attack heli. Besides, I see little point in having more than one attack chopper. One can completely suffice.
- dRb
-
I've learned that 5.1 simply isn't supported in OFP. The centre speaker doesn't work while in Hardware Acceleration mode. It is incredibly frustrating because when you aren't in HWA mode, you cannot get true surround sound.... Bah. Stereo it is!
- dRb
-
Given that the "plot" size can be much smaller when creating an island, as well as the issues eliminated with improved collision detection, we should have no issues creating trenches and ditches now. This is excellent news for WW1 and WW2 mods and hopefully will improve the experience accordingly.
Here's to hoping!
- dRB
-
Thats CRAP news Â
This is virtual suicide for Armed Assault, extremely inconvienient. Not everyone has Broadband and i'm certainly not buying 6 copies of it via steam just to play Lan.
A really stupid move by Bohemia Interactive.
How the hell could it possibly be a negative? They never said it would be their sole solution for release in those other regions... If anything, I percieve it as a temporary (an effective) solution to what could be even worse had they not done it. To each their own, I guess...
I will be downloading ArmA the millisecond it is avaliable,
- dRb
P.S. Who actually said anything about steam? WTF!? Why does everyone automatically associate digital distribution with steam!?
-
But now you are crossing over the line from "realistic fun" to "realistic frustration." Any game with permanent penalties from sprinting needs to be toned down. Do I think that the penalties need to be higher? Yes. Do I think they need to not end until you "sleep?" Hells no. And aside from all of this, it has been proven that the shakiness could be modded (ala FDF). This isn't something we really need to cry over.
Besides, PlaceBo already said they're still tweaking it. Don't start crying before you have proof of this so called "travesty."
- dRb
-
Two other videos on noFrag, released today....
Shooting range - Great music and good coordination. These guys have obviously played OFP before, or at least play tactical games often.
http://www.nofrag.com/fichiers/armedassault/videos/1258/
Gameplay video - I couldn't get it to work. I think it has been compressed incorrectly, but I will try some more.
http://www.nofrag.com/fichiers/armedassault/videos/1260/
About the music in the other videos. The only song I could recognize from the Saving Mr. Banana video was 'Barra Barra' from the BHD soundtrack. I don't know what songs were used in the editor video but there is the same song from the E3 trailer in the 'Shooting Range' vid.
*Shrug* - dRb
-
I think about it a third way... ArmA is a non-numerical sequal while Game2 is the true "OFP2."
I know, wierd thinking, but I agree with deadMeat. ArmA, in terms of technological development, is defintely miles ahead in comparison to OFP. In terms of gameplay addition, I wouldn't consider ArmA much more than a OFP 1.5. This is not at all a complaint as I saw OFP's weaknesses solely being in the presentation department (graphics, audio, ui). All of those things have been drastically improved upon, making a "measly" 1.5 instill a feeling well above a 2.This, of course, is only my opinion,
- dRb
-
Wow, that is great news and not something I was expecting. Regardless, excellent stuff! Your examples are exactly what I think the system was designed for. I can see the door for cheaters slowly begin to close....
- dRb
-
ArmA is said to simulate a recoil more precisely but I couldn't find a difference between ArmA and OFP in the recent videos: A sniper lays a sight on his target and fires. After a while, the sight gets back to the VERY initial point automatically. Is this a realistic recoil simulation?That is very sad.
Two comments.....
The most recent video with a sniper (aside from the GC, which had a sniper scope for only 2-3 seconds, too short to see the recoil) was from E3. That build is largely out of date in comparison to the one presently in use/the one for release.
If OFP were to use a free recoil system (no automatic re-adjustment), automatic rifles and machine guns would be useless due to their insane recoil being impossible to compensate for. Of course people are going to argue just to use short bursts, but that still wouldn't solve the problem entirely. Anyone holding onto their gun while firing will be exerting downward force, causing the gun to drop after the shots are complete. How much force the shooter applies determines the amount of climb in gun experiences during firing.
Anyway, long story short, I would prefer OFP's automatic drop system than a free-recoil system. However, if it isn't too much trouble, they could make it a difficulty option.
- dRB
-
While the equipment choice may leave some disappointed, it's not really all that bad. I think the reason a lot of people feel this way is down to how far ofp has come since it's release. It's like a totally different game. BIS deserves a bit more respect than this, not many developers make a game so open. First of all wait and see what ArmA is like when it's released. Second, give it a year or so and think how far it will have advanced.Not to mention quite a lot of the units in OFP now were added after initial release, such as the apache, the M2A2....etc.
I am perfectly happy with what we have right now and can easily expect more official addons to be released later on the same way...
dRB
-
its just ripped from VBS:*sigh*
I'll keep what i think about it to myself... Â
To put my message across and not come across as a personal attack I will just use a well known saying to be direct and to the point:
"Why re-invent the wheel?"
'Nough said,
-dRb
-
I think the best way to enforce some sort of standard would be to have a few sites (such as OFPEC) be designated as certified addon distributers who only host approved addons. Of course this wouldn't solve all the issues and if too stringent, it could completely backfire and lead to less addons being hosted on the site than if they hadn't begun to enforce such a rule.It's just a thought,
dRb
All I see from this type of idea is a group of jaded individuals attacking each other when someone's addon isn't "approved".
I like the idea of a simple "best practice".
Although I like the idea of more people working together in groups more than on their own... perhaps even going commercial with BI's support, but that is my own personal dream I guess. Â
I guess I should have been more specific. We need to come up with a set of basic guidelines for all addon makers to follow. A site would host addons meeting these guidelines - no questions asked. They would not act as a middle man. If someone sends in their addons and their addons meet the criteria established by us (not the site), their addon would be posted as news and hosted for download.
Not too complicated in my mind but we have to make sure these guidelines are not too crazy. Hell even the naming process, such as OFPEC's is a great step foward. I just really, REALLY do not want to see addons that are missing LODs, use JPEG texture, etc.
But this is all very much in the air and perhaps we could just get a lot of consistent, high quality addons by the use of a common communication portal (like even this site! ). Luckily we will all know a lot more about modding with this game than what we did know with OFP. We were starting from square-one at that point and ArmA modding will be virtually the same.
I can't wait to see what all you gurus will create! Let's just try to have SOME kind of consistency this time around, ok? Especially when it comes to ballistics and armor values...
- dRb
-
The nice thing about ArmA is that all the collision detection problems are (supposedly) fixed and non-moving carriers will be no issue at all (again supposedly). While I could see the important of moving carriers in BF1942 or BF2, I see very little use for them as most of OFP/ArmA's combat takes place on land. Of course carriers would be quite useful as many islands simply do not have large airfields or any at all. They defintely serve a tactical position on the battlefield but anti-ship combat is much different than in WW2 so perhaps we should just worry about we do get and what we don't?
My 2 centiunits of sahrani currency,
dRb
-
I think the best way to enforce some sort of standard would be to have a few sites (such as OFPEC) be designated as certified addon distributers who only host approved addons. Of course this wouldn't solve all the issues and if too stringent, it could completely backfire and lead to less addons being hosted on the site than if they hadn't begun to enforce such a rule.
It's just a thought,
dRb
-
Because having a gunsight or periscope view makes more sense in the interior of a tank... which has periscopes and gunsights to see out... whereas a car has windows.Also, you must consider the cost vs. reward factor. Â Driving a truck with a blanked out periscope type view would suck. Â This is not how people drive. Â Riding around in a tank's gunner position with a gunsight periscope view makes sense because this is how the tank's gunner station is operated. Â Restricting the player to a periscope view where applicable limits the amount of work the artists have to do, speeding up the process and limiting the cost of development, and impacts gameplay minimally. Â It is true that tank crews don't have their faces glued to their scopes, but in terms of the game, there is more reason to staple their faces to the viewer than not at this point in time.
I completely agree and is what I was getting at with my earlier posts. While I wouldn't complain if they were in, I WOULD complain if they put back the release date just to add interiors. When I am in a tank, regardless of position, I am in 'V' view 95% of the time. I really just cannot understand the crying and hysteria over this topic
dRb
P.S. If you can have APCs with interiors, guess what, you can mod tanks to have them too! If people are so desperate for interiors, then just put im in when the game comes out.
-
If it is easily to implement and won't set the game back from its release date, then sure, go ahead and put them in. While I can see why some may want them (the most practical being that slight increase to visual scope when using them while driving), it is such a minor thing to really worry about in my opinion.
Besides, has this been confirmed by a developer that the interiors were taken out? Or maybe the new interiors have just have not been put in game yet?
Hmm...
- dRb
Confirmed release dates and countries.
in ARMA - GENERAL
Posted
Because the amount of the push-back in the Polish release was so little, I doubt there will be any future ones unless there is some sort of mass logisitical failure. You can have faith in the dates that are in place right now until they are announced to change by the publishers themselves.
- dRb