Frizbee

If they are like the cameras on the trains here in Brisbane, Australia, what happens is that the driver can monitor the footage at any time, and they can broadcast it to a monitoring station when needed. it is also recorded for later playback if there is an incident onboard. So it might not allow for instant response to a crime, but the criminals will be photographed for later retrieval. Also, with cameras installed along the streets those criminals could be tracked right back to their homes. Good stuff in my opinion.

I have to agree. Vietcong was the worst thing I have seen in a long time. But then I have another reason for not wanting OP2 to take after Vietcong. Bugs. In Vietcong I encountered a large number of problems on two seperate systems (and no, it wasn't an illegal copy before anyone asks) The first of these was a "blinking" gun, which meant that you could hit nothing except in a fluke, even at point blank range. Another was enemy and friendly people falling through the ground so they couldn't be hit, but they could still shoot you. And the last, was a bug that meant you could only run backwards. Not very good imo.

As the air pressure inside the aircraft is higher than that outside, technically all of those people were blown out of the aircraft, not sucked out. So it sort of ruins all those sucking jokes you all made However it is a terrible accident, however, police officers and their families were the victims... how long do you think it will be before someone asks if it could possibly have been a terrorist attack?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ April 22 2003,16:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I guess most of you just don't like the learning curve of picking up the complex controls of flying.<span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">...the complex controls of flying<span id='postcolor'> Â Hilarious! Complex? Â Such hilarity...<span id='postcolor'> Yes, complex. I've logged hundreds of hours in Flight simulators. I'm not saying that the Desert Combat mod has realistic flight models or controls for their helicopters, but they are complex and challenging to pick up. Out of the people I was playing with, only one other person could pick up those controls successfully. Even the AI bots can only fly for a few minutes before spinning out of control and crashing. Having said that, I prefer it having this complexity, it stops ever Tom Dick and Harry from jumping into aircraft and flying around and doing stupid things like crashing into you deliberately (ala Operation Flashpoint) If you actually spend the time learning how to fly the helicopters, it makes Battlefield 1942 so much more fun to play. And it is good for those times when you can't find serious players capable of the thought required to play Operation Flashpoint properly.

It's an Alpha version. Do you really expect them to have every single model exactly as it will appear in the finished version of the game? I didn't like Battlefield 1942, but the Desert Combat mod made it fun to have a few games with my friends. Besides, you can't beat having a spawn point in a C-130 Hercules that is actually airborne and circling over the area of operations so that you can parachute down behind enemy lines. The hardest thing to pick up is Helicopter flight, but once that is done the mod is fun to play around with. I guess most of you just don't like the learning curve of picking up the complex controls of flying.

The Desert Combat mod for Battlefield 1942 is simply awesome. The tanks reload alot faster, and so even with 350% of the normal tickets, you still have a game that is over faster than a standard Battlfefield mission. The Helicopters aren't impossible to fly, you just have to work out the balance needed. Strafe keys and the Mouse are needed to stay level, while holding forward makes you go up. Releasing forward makes you sink back towards the ground. It DOES take a bit of getting used to certainly, but it's not impossible. Download it, you'll have fun.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ April 08 2003,03:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes indeed. Soldier of Fortune was even a step beyond that. If you killed civilians in the NYC subway you failed the game while killing Arab and African civilians was ok. <span id='postcolor'> Quite, many UK magazines picked up on that and the developers just shrugged! As for this game, I wouldn't mind sampling it. A computer game from a terroist organisation is going to arouse curiosity. Shame they didn't make it compatible with America's Army!<span id='postcolor'> Yeah, but that's just like in real life. If a covert ops team, or Intelligence Operative killed terrorists in NYC, the government could say it was the police. If you killed a civilian in a NYC subway, the news would jump all over it, and it's likely the truth would come out and reveal that it wasn't a police officer doing the rescue. If however, the same covert ops unit went to Africa or the Middle east and shot a civilian, who is going to start investigating? Certainly not the western world, and it's unlikely any of those African or Middle Eastern governments would investigate for any reason other than to see if you posed a threat to them.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (crewcutkid @ Mar. 30 2003,23:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And im just curious about how militias helped in Veet-Nam? -from a toothless, slackjawed, utterly stupid, young, football -liking, muscle car driving American<span id='postcolor'> In Vietnam the VietCong were technically a militia, and though just how successful their operations were could be debated, they did operate against the "enemy" in that case the United States and ANZAC forces that were stationed in Vietnam. There were also south vietnamese people who were trained by U.S. Special Forces to take over guarding areas when the U.S. Forces were forced to move on or elsewhere. They could also be considered Militia.

The news report I saw stated that a few minutes after the crash landing a second AH-64, and a UH-60 attempted a rescue, but were driven back by heavy small arms and anti-aircraft fire. Also, in that photo, the left FFAR pod looks as though it was jettisoned by the pilot before the landing. (I mean, why would the Iraqi's only remove ONE pod) They only jettison weapons like that if something is really wrong, so perhaps it had something to do with why it landed?

As a point of note, how often have "Militia" helped win a war. The American war for independance... the Vietnam war... those are just two. Certainly it is unlikely that ANY country would be stupid enough to try an invasion of United States soil, but the Constitution does allow for such groups and in fact encourages them. What is it that the second ammendment states? "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State , the right of 'the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Mar. 25 2003,19:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am going to start back up on the reviews very soon. <span id='postcolor'> Christ! The end is nigh! I can't wait to see his review of Raven Shield. 'u can't use a knife.. wtf!! I was in a ctteam, and iused my knife allthe time!'<span id='postcolor'> Just because he's living in his own little fantasy world where he's a CT Operative, a Knight in Shining Armor, Ruler of an Empire, and a Jedi knight... its no reason to start knocking him. Wait, what am I talking about, it's every reason to knock him. Anyone who prefers Counter-strike to OFP or in fact almost ANY first person shooter has a few screws loose somewhere.

No, the Iraqi forces SAY that they will fight every step of the way, but in reality, it's just Saddam's empty words. With vastly superior, and (it's nearly guaranteed after the first few days of the war after the Wild Weasels go in) unchallenged airpower, the Coallition forces can simply pound any and all Iraqi resistance into dust with their precision guided munitions. Iraqi forces will surrender en masse as they did in the first gulf-war, and the coalition will once again emerge victorious. Only this time, Saddam Hussein will more than likely no longer be in control of the country. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote (crewcutkid @ Mar. 18 2003,02:48) Let's face it folks, if Saddam wasn't going to attack us here in the U.S., he would have used them on jordan, or syria, or saud, or wherever else. <span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Umm... Why? <span id='postcolor'> Saddam used chemical and biological weapons on the Kurdish people. He attacked Kuwait in an unprovoked assault. And he's attacked Iran in the past. He isn't a rational man. He is probably on the border of being a sane man... and that is why he would use the weapons. He'd use them as a show of his strength, as part of another attack, or just simply because he has no little voice that tells him "Turning your car into oncoming traffic is.. counterproductive" It's a simple fact Saddam has to be removed from power. And THAT is why the UN should all be voting Yes to resolution 1441. The time for diplomacy passed when Iraq first flaunted UN resolutions years ago by firing at aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones. Now it is time for action.

Are you saying System Shock isn't real? That Shodan doesn't exist? *Sniff* Noooooo....... L-l-l-look at you hacker. A P-p-p-pathetic creature of meat and bone. P-p-panting and sweating as you run through my corridors. Ho-how-how can you challenge, a P-perfect, Immortal machine.

Exactly, physical torture doesn't work as the person will admit to anything to stop the pain. Using Mental interogation methods, sleep deprivation etc. (Those methods that don't cause physical pain) ARE effective however. A person in severe pain will often retreat to a single memory (like the Life flashing before the eyes stereotype of dying) in order to shut out the pain. That gives you no information as they won't listen to anything else. A person who is extremely tired or confused will tend to reveal information in small doses, with everything they say. A word here, a name there... Occassionally they will spill everything they know too.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> I have read the rainbow six novel and i still think the terrorist with all their funding that bush keeps going on about could get a helicopter together and extract while shotting hostages etc. A new type of terrorism, one that ends up eith the CTs pissed off and the terrorists alive! I doubt that even American CT teams would carry a portable AA laucher with them. <span id='postcolor'> No, of course they wouldn't, but think about it logically. Terrorists board the chopper, take off, go to fly away. CT team contacts Airforce. Airforce jets intercept, blow the helicopter out of the sky before the terrorists can get away. Plus, small arms fire can still take out any helicopter a terrorist faction could get a hold of while it was sitting on the roof. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> I can't believe UBI still don't let the player pick up weapons from dead terrorists. One time I heard they excused themselves by saying "The operatives only use the weapons they are familiar with etc..." That's BS. If you know how to use a G3, how hard can it be to operate a Mac or a Skorpion etc? hehe and considering allmost all terrorist-weapons are available to the operatives <span id='postcolor'> Familiar with... I think they mean familiar as in "Know that the gun isn't going to Jam on them, and that the sights are actually accurate." Besides, when you have a MP5 which you have trained with repeatedly, and have it zeroed in to a tight grouping at 75 yards, why would you want to pick up a weapon that is "Spray and pray"? You'd be likely to take out hostages. Also, you can't guarantee that the terrorists haven't booby-trapped their weapons. When a CT operative carries enough ammunition on them to complete the mission, why do you need to pick up guns, which would also be evidence afterwards during the mission. And Tex... that guy in the pic is lucky he's dead... it looks like that would hurt otherwise