DrBobcat
-
Content Count
267 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
-
Medals
-
Posts posted by DrBobcat
-
-
I find it pretty odd that NS has as pointed out above interceptors and Ka-52 helicopters. But the best tank they have is the t-72...You know what? I really have no "defence" to that and I totally agree with you. The Ka-52 is much more modern helicopter than the T-72 is for a tank. But I would be more than happy to just get the game as is and obtain T-80 (or better) addons later, official or not.
This way BIS can still obtain a sooner profit yet still be able to update and balance out the game later if they need to.
-dRb
-
I haven't a clue how the armor system will be in ArmA but I have no doubt that when going against _AI_, more armor is actually worse than powerful armor. Unless I am playing with a player driver, taking down three T72s with my m1a1 is almost next to impossible unless I play cheaply and unrealistically (hiding behind a building and waiting in a corner, shooting their turrets before they get the chance to fire - for example).
In this game, I would much rather there be no artificial balancing and just pure realism. Since this is an small, communist, island nation, their army size would already be quite small in comparison to those of China, Russia, or even Korea and their technology would be quite low. Also, the Americans are coming from where....? Err - the United States. Their resource capabilities are much, much greater than that of NS so their tech, in comparison, would be much higher as well. We have to take that into consideration.
However, in multiplayer this _can_ be a problem but it comes down more to player skill than technology. A well positioned, hidden and well trained T72 could in fact defeat a M1 in an one on one match. Also, we have to remember that there are mines and anti-tank weaponry. Nothing is impossible if you think critically before acting.
- dRb
P.S. Think of how awesome it would be to get a kill on a M1 anyway. Â
-
The way the camera system works in OFP is that the camera is literally placed inside the head of the soldier model. So you are getting the exact same texture quality in both 1st and 3rd person. I doubt this has changed at all in ArmA. While I agree it isn't as gorgeous as the weapon, I would much rather have a solid FPS rate than ultra-high-zomg textures on a fricken soldier's arm.Get me?
- dRb
This is in fact wrong, while the entire body (minus the head) is seen in first person, it has it's own LOD, so the 1st person view CAN be more detailed than 3rd person. You can also get rid of any unneeded polys from objects that you wouldn't see from first person.
I was referring to OFP and the default models. In those cases the texture resolution was the same no matter what camera angle you were in. I already know it is level-of-detail based but I just meant that it is completely different than other games where the 1st person model and 3rd person model are COMPLETELY different renders. Also, yes, less polys are being rendered which means less lag.
Who knows, maybe they may implement the LODs correct this time and we may indeed get a higher resolution first person texture. However, if it comes at the cost of performance, no thank you.
- dRb
-
The way the camera system works in OFP is that the camera is literally placed inside the head of the soldier model. So you are getting the exact same texture quality in both 1st and 3rd person. I doubt this has changed at all in ArmA. While I agree it isn't as gorgeous as the weapon, I would much rather have a solid FPS rate than ultra-high-zomg textures on a fricken soldier's arm.
Get me?
- dRb
-
Both my posts will have no effect then, as we know the answer.Hope they change their mind about them..
Will we be able to communicate with hand signals?There are no hand signals implemented in ArmA.Will there be a possibility of adding attachments to the weapons in the gear selection menu or ingame, or will the community still have to make weapons with attachments already in place.Removable weapon attachments are not a feature planned for ArmA.Is the walking-in-vehicles even a planned feature? Will we be able to shoot from them even if we are fixed in them? (I.E. Drive-by shooting, using your weapon to shoot out of the vehicle, etc.)These are not planned features for ArmA.EDIT: Â
Please make it happen. We aLL want them for sure.I will gladly live without those features if it means I can get the game sooner. All only moderately useful in my opinion. I mean, I sure as hell wouldn't complain if they WERE in, I just don't see them as absolutely dire to my enjoyment of the game.
dRb
-
Aside from the sound issue (which is not game related at all). and those minor animation quibles, I absolutely loved the trailer. BIS has defintely raised the bar up from OFP's production value levels with excellent music and even better graphics. Probably will be having (another) dream about ArmA tonight.
- dRb
P.S. Extremely happy to see some fixed wing aircraft (especially a harrier, as it is the most practical plane for small ground-attack role) as well as the amazingly sexy 3d ironsights. We asked and you delivered BIS!
-
There is a command in ofp that is used to remove items from the map....
deleteVehicle unit
Where unit is the unit you want to delete.
Good luck!
dRb
-
I will continue to look for a link to a HTML animation list, but at this moment I cannot find one. Until then, use the downloadable command reference. In there is an animation list...
Good luck. Will check back here if you have any more questions.
dRb
-
The best way to make sure a unit is standing and is not invincible (I.E. using the switchMove command) is to use the setUnitPos command.
unit setUnitPos "Up" (forces them to stand. Will fire regularly and is not invulnerable)
unit setUnitPos "Down" (forces them to be prone. Will fire and can be killed normally)
Your other question can be answered with a animation reference list. I recommend you download the command reference executable which includes a list of all the animations in the game. Will defintely suit your needs
Good luck and happy scripting,
dRb
-
I am having a serious problem getting this script to work in multiplayer. What is supposed to happen is that someone "purchases" a vehicle and then a script is executed on the vehicle that loops, constantly looking for someone who is carrying a car bomb to enter the driver seat. Then, it will add an action to the vehicle (because you cannot add actions to a unit inside of a vehicle) which allows you to rig the bomb to the vehicle. After that, once the engine is turned on, the vehicle explodes.
What isn't working is the detection script. I think this is because the action for buying the vehicle is local to the person who activates that action. All consecutive scripts associated with the detection script become local to that person from then on. This prevents from anyone rigging a car bomb in that person's car aside from that person himself. This completely is against the point of the script.
Now how do I make the detection script global to everyone? I tried using triggers to create the vehicle and execute this script but that just did not work. Still was local to the person who purchased the vehicle. Help me please!
The detection script
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">
_unit = _this select 0
#LOOP
? !(alive _unit) : Exit
_unit removeAction _actionId
? (driver _unit == p1) && (p1HasCarBomb) && (speed _unit < 1) && !(isEngineOn _unit) : _actionId = _unit addAction  ["SPECIAL - RIG CAR BOMB","scripts\misc\CarBomb.sqs"]
? (driver _unit == p2) && (p2HasCarBomb) && (speed _unit < 1) && !(isEngineOn _unit) : _actionId = _unit addAction  ["SPECIAL - RIG CAR BOMB","scripts\misc\CarBomb.sqs"]
? (driver _unit == p3) && (p3HasCarBomb) && (speed _unit < 1) && !(isEngineOn _unit) : _actionId = _unit addAction  ["SPECIAL - RIG CAR BOMB","scripts\misc\CarBomb.sqs"]
? (driver _unit == p4) && (p4HasCarBomb) && (speed _unit < 1) && !(isEngineOn _unit) : _actionId = _unit addAction  ["SPECIAL - RIG CAR BOMB","scripts\misc\CarBomb.sqs"]
? (driver _unit == p5) && (p5HasCarBomb) && (speed _unit < 1) && !(isEngineOn _unit) : _actionId = _unit addAction  ["SPECIAL - RIG CAR BOMB","scripts\misc\CarBomb.sqs"]
? (driver _unit == p6) && (p6HasCarBomb) && (speed _unit < 1) && !(isEngineOn _unit) : _actionId = _unit addAction  ["SPECIAL - RIG CAR BOMB","scripts\misc\CarBomb.sqs"]
? (driver _unit == p7) && (p7HasCarBomb) && (speed _unit < 1) && !(isEngineOn _unit) : _actionId = _unit addAction  ["SPECIAL - RIG CAR BOMB","scripts\misc\CarBomb.sqs"]
? (driver _unit == p8) && (p9HasCarBomb) && (speed _unit < 1) && !(isEngineOn _unit) : _actionId = _unit addAction  ["SPECIAL - RIG CAR BOMB","scripts\misc\CarBomb.sqs"]
? (driver _unit == p9) && (p9HasCarBomb) && (speed _unit < 1) && !(isEngineOn _unit) : _actionId = _unit addAction  ["SPECIAL - RIG CAR BOMB","scripts\misc\CarBomb.sqs"]
? (driver _unit == p10) && (p10HasCarBomb) && (speed _unit < 1) && !(isEngineOn _unit) : _actionId = _unit addAction  ["SPECIAL - RIG CAR BOMB","scripts\misc\CarBomb.sqs"]
~0.5
goto "LOOP"
EDIT: Some additional information. The purchasing script is attached to a flag pole via an action. You hit the action which creates the vehicle and then executes this script. I already know scripts executed by actions are local to the player who activates them, but I used triggers to try to "globalize" the detection script and again, it still didn't work.
- dRb
-
But they've already confirmed we get MUCH smaller grid sizes when creating "islands" in ArmA. Perhaps they are giving the idea of trenches and ditches up to modders to decide? Maybe they are focussing more on the medium/long range combat of OFP for the new island and handing over the World War 1/2 style combat to mod groups??
These are all just ideas but I really do think that with extremely small grid sizes (again, this was confirmed in one of the press releases, or maybe the mapfact interview. I think it was about 3-5m minimum) we would easily be able to create small depressions in the earth.
Speculation, I know, but what else can I say?
dRb
-
Akira, many more people should have your viewpoints.I agree, put it in the history books as a tragedy, educate people as to why it happened and look to the future.
Instead they are putting it in the history books as a political ace card, brainwashing people into thinking that terrorists are simply 'evil' and making blockbusters to pull on emotional strings and make some profit.
I don't really bother watching movies unless to spend social time with friends. Very rarely am I actually suprised or interested by a mainstream film.
I agree.... while the whole entire experience of 9/11 was saddening, making a movie about it is just a _very_ bad idea. seems like a lazy way to pull some bucks by trying to stir the emotions of the American people. Propoganda, plain and simple.
And yes, not all terrorists are evil (violent even). Then again, we should, of course, remember the 2000+ people who died that day.... But damn!, remembering them in this light is more of a disgrace than an acknowledgement. Â I do love my country but the United States should, under NO circumstances, tell me what to believe. It should just STFU and get work done, instead of trying to twist and manipulate its people.
Grr....,
Caz
EDIT: Grammatical errors
-
Quote[/b] ]we have no another new better shit you knowDid you even read the press release??? Jeeze...
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">
-Dynamic Range rendering
-Reworked lifelike animations
-Fully streaming game engine allowing extremely large environments loaded with various special effects
-New huge sized battlefield (landmass exceeds that of all islands from
Flashpoint & Resistance combined)
-Dynamic weather and daytime simulation (including tides and star constellations) Ambient wildlife
-60+ player multiplayer (plus additional AI), players can join at any time
.....
Those are just some things. But I doubt you even read that. You just wanted to nitpick and bitch. And btw, don't preach to others because "you care about us." We are all capable of taking care of ourselvse. If you do not wish to purchase this game, then don't. Plain and simple.
The game is still many months away from release,
Caz
-
Well there are different tests. In my opinion, Tickle seems to be quite a universal test (a lot of numerical questions,and puzzles, and only a few vocabulary questions). However, I was really speaking of previous tests, such as the ones that you had to take for getting a job. Those were immensely biased and were really instated to keep immigrants, especially African Amerians, out of the work force.
Oh, and good job. 131 is excellent
Caz
-
The funny thing about these questions is that they are quite typical for an IQ test in an English speaking country. Those who cannot speak english well will have a VERY hard time doing the test (well). In the old days, they would call foreigners stupid when really they just couldn't understand the questions given. Ironic, ain't it?
Sorry, just a sociology plug....
Caz
-
I believe the game does the streaming so essentially it is the same amount of work per-km as it was in CWC/Res. If you wanna make a huge land-mass, you will need more time, durh. I say this is an EXCELLENT thing because now we could make dynamic parts of countries instead of just islands.... Great stuff!
-
It is because suggestions are not allowed to be made for ArmA due to the fact it is (probably) already complete. But there is a lot of time until NGenG so it is possible to include this in that game instead.
Caz
-
Quote[/b] ]- The fact that AA is just a remake of the same game we've been playing for years, with one new Island. So it has about 20-25% new content. If you were a publisher, and somebody came to you with a game released in 2001, and said they wanted you to publish the same game with and updated engine, would you sign them up, or say next please?- The window for release is quickly narrowing on AA. If this out at least a few months before Operation Flashpoint 2 is released, there's no point in releasing it at all. OPFP 2 will have the same or better engine, and all new campaigns. Personally, I've waited this long, so frankly, its getting to the point where I'm either going to shell out for BF2 or wait for Flashpoint 2. If its not out by Xmas, I probably won't be buying.
1) Impossible to really judge with the amount of information that has been released.... I would doubt BIS would expect a lot of money for something "so little." But I would pay $30 dollars for another copy of ofp cwc, let alone an updated one with bumpmapping, dx9 support, and JIP.
2) Again, BIS ain't retarted. they will no doubt push OFP2 back if ArAs is as well. DURH!!!!
Caz
-
Quote[/b] ]Marshal - I think a few of the guys here would be quite surprised at what Ghost Recon 3 has to offer. Ubisoft are not rushing out the game either, it has been put back to March 2006 to get everything right.The whole of Mexico City has been mapped and will be playable in the game. As a player you can watch what your squad mates are doing with the aid of small screen cameras (A special feature for the XBox 360 version), you can call in helicopters to strike tanks. Troops cower from explosions and the screen blurs and shakes as missiles land near you. The game is based on the latest military technology that should surface in 2013 so to say that the game is not realistic is wrong in my opinion.
I dont know why people here keep believing that you can have a realistic game without good graphics? Surely realism means that its as close to real life as possible? The better the graphics the more realistic it will look. Its no good having good physics in a game engine if the characters look like cardboard cutouts now is it?
I will still keep an eye on these forums, but lets just say that there are plenty of other games that will be taking up my interest until ArmA appears.
I dont know why so many people hang out here when you could all be saving your time and go and do something more constructive. No matter how many times the same old questions are asked it doesnt seem that BIS are listening anyway.
Well I agree with you on that front, man. UBI has been taking a hellava lot more time with this title, which is reassuring, but I won't be holding my breath out of blind faith. I won't necessarily say "EWW! UBI! RUN!" but on the other hand I won't be saying "WOOT! UBI! SALIVATE!"
And woah! I didn't say games with good graphics can't be realistic. Of course they can.... But I am saying the majority of the companies would much rather have good graphics in their games, and forget about the gameplay. You have to have balance, you know? I aint' saying its impossible, I am just saying that more often than not, that is the case...
Lastly I agree with your point that there are a bunch of other games that will hold me off until ArAs... Such as Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Gun, Civ IV, and even Operation Flashpoint still, lol.
Quote[/b] ]bigsouth1981- Well said Marshall, I loved OPF with all my heart and Its my fav game of all time, but in all honesty the more I think about it (and I know this will upset people) but Armed Assault is a waste of time. BI should sack the idea and put their effort into the next generation game. Lets face it, OPF didnt have the best graphics when it was released, and i cant help feeling that 4 years down the line, the little changes that will be made to AA wont hold any weight at all. They should concentrate on the next gen game and be able to release it earlier. BI is self admittedly only a small developer, it should put its time and effort making OPF2 the best military simulator of all time. If anyone can do it, these guys can.I don't think its a waste of time at all... I _need_ military Simulation to hold me off till OFP2 (next gen). That is kind of the point. Think of it like Counter Strike: Source for Operation Flashpoint - Updating a game into a more modern engine. Only this time its actually a good game
Late,
Caz
-
Quote[/b] ]Perhaps BIS have had to go back to the drawing board after seeing the latest movies of Ghost Recon 3? The movement of the soldiers in that game and the feeling that everything is really happening looks phenomenal.......
(Before going off on this tangent, please note I own Splinter cell: Chaos theory, Prince of persia, Rainbow Six 3: raven shield, and had Ghost Recon 2. I also have played Splinter cell 1 & 2)
If you like Ghost Recon games.... Â
Dude. UBI has become so damn shallow with there games and slowly, but surely, is becoming just anothe mediocre 'graphics mean EVERYTHING' developer. It started with Raven Shield, and has slowly begun to corrupt all of their games... they claim realism but fall short on it in many fronts - centre cam aiming, poor ai (look! on easy I am completed retarted! on hard, I get instant kills, can hear a pin drop from 100 ft, turn around at just the opportune moment), ballistic f-ups, poor hit-detection, etc. Chaos Theory was good single player, I guess.... I mean they just did the exact same damn thing they did in the previous two, only with slightly improved graphics. The coop mode was ok as well, but it, too, was very repetitve and seemed to be rushed. I beat all the coop missions with a buddy of mine and on the most difficult settings, in just a few hours.....
ANYWAY! My point - the consistent thing in all of those games is pretty well done graphics and completey rehashed, overdone gameplay. I think a large amount of people on here will agree how half assed of a game GR2 was... I have seen the screens and trailers for 3, but I just don't have much faith in UBI after seeing their tranquil, rushed development habits. But hey, they aren't the first in the scheme of things.... *cough* EAandVivendi*cough*
Tying this into a discussion related to Operation Flashpoint, I just don't really think they compare. I do enjoy my "arcade", "fast-paced", games from time to time, but more often than not,they last only a few weeks at best on my hard drive. OFP is the ONLY game that has remained installed on my computer for 4 (going on 5) years. And while yes, BIS sure has some strange "tactics," I highly doubt they are intimidated by other game companies. And I for one appreciate a small, personal company than a impersonal, monopoly running, monstrosity *cough* *cough*.
Now you will probably argue that the "bigger" companies would have given us a hellava lot more information by now, which I don't argue with you that they would have. But in the case of BIS, take note on the circumstances that apply here...
A) BIS is a super small company in comparison
B) BIS is much more selective in its market
C) Publisher woes are currently plaguing the ability to share information
And if you want to know my honest opinion on the situation -
1) They have chosen a publisher but are still getting everything in order.
2) The publisher has said "STFU!" and told BIS not to say anything until things are in order.
3) BIS can't give any information about the game without the threat of jepordizing the game's publicity. They could make the company look weak or incapable if people would think things were "leaked."
And a sidenote....
4) Publishers tend to do a damn better job at advertising than Devs do, as it is their job Â
......Anyway. Long story short (jeeze. Alcohol + forums do not mix), I agree with you on many fronts Marshal. We've known each other for like ever. We were both in ICM. We flew together and all that. I too wish they would release more info about the game, and I too am growing a tincy bit impatient. But their isn't really ANYTHING we can do about it. Whining does not make the world spin faster, bro.
Lets all just cross our fingers, and continue to stop by in hope of getting some information. And please do not take any of my comments as personal attacks. Night
Caz Â
EDIT: Grammar and spelling errors up the yin-yang...
-
What I interpreted from all this is...
1) BIS give lisence to BBN to use OFP in their endeavors
2) BBN (not BIS) searches the internet for addons (the way we all do)
-Up to this point, we are perfectly legal!-
3) BBN sells the missions to the military, but this also includes the addons that were in those missions.
Now if we can't sell our addons for profit, but they can because they have a "license", then I will surely join the lot of you, pitchfork in hand. But if BIS knows nothing about this, and BBN are just retarted, then our hate should be directed that way, as I highly doubt BIS would knowingly allow such things. There would be EULA contradictions, etc. all over the place....
I am anxious for an official response on all of this,
Caz
EDIT: Another thought of mine just came to me. What if they sell these things like foodstuffs, or weapons? I mean, lets say they already had a contract with the military(ies) and then they aqquired an ofp license from bis. Now all they do is make missions (we are assuming they do these themselves) and then give those to the soldiers, which then they make the military themselves download the addons.... It would be exactly the same as we use OFP.
-
@ LTHunter
Don't get me wrong, I am a little frustrated too (actually, quite frustrated). It is also QUITE obvious that the game is not being released this year (statistically unlikely as hell.) I sure as hell wish it was, but yeh.... and I think a lot of people are just getting frustrated at this lack of facts.
All I am getting at, is what the hell can we do? Nothing, really. They are the ones responsible for their game. I just wish they would toss us a bone here... Gah!
I will continue to be patient
,Caz
-
@ LTHunter
That's probably because most, if not ALL of those "criticism" posts are nothing but whines and bitching, durh! And we still don't have enough info on ArmA to base ANY ground on, negative or positive.
@ Him and everyone else
And I would think it would be quite difficult to release information en masse without a publisher.... (How many times have I f-ing said this?) What I recommend is that we wait until information is solidly avaliable before passing judgement. I pity-teh-foo that does so without having any credible evidence, again be it negative OR positive.
Calm down, all of ye!
Caz
-
Those comments are so shallow minded.... ugh. I still don't understand the hate.... I mean I got bf2 and hated it, got hl2.... hated it.... why the hell does graphics = good game in their minds? Rediculous... It's like dating a blonde dumb slut and expecting to get more than sex. Good luck with that theory. I mean, I like good graphics, but when you sacrafice other things for it, it just ain't really worth it!
It may all just be "fanboy love" talking, but I still play operation flashpoint more than everything else when it comes to shooters. It simply is a superior game in that sense (of course, that's MYopinion). I just wish others were a little more open minded instead of just ignorantly following the "popular" (and quite mediocre) games.
*sigh* At least I have you guys Â
 
Caz
Interiors?
in ARMA - GENERAL
Posted
I'm not and I don't really care if they aren't included. Â In ofp the interiors were purely aesthetic and served no actual purpose. They did absolutely NOTHING. Why waste development time and CPU resources over something that is pointlessly visual-only?
Sure, if they were to update those interiors to perform and react as they would in reality, then yes, I would want them. But I would take a more solid, stable FPS rate anyday over pointless visual garbage.
- dRb