FenderHSS

I started this thing, and I picked "E" - both "B" and "C". The Infatry does need some work, but not as much as the choppers and not nearly as much as the armor. The choppers are an intrical part of combat, especially in Vietnam, and as much realism as possible is needed. Flight model is as good as you can expect for an infantry-based sim, but weapons and missions could use some work. I never did like the way the armored combat was. Here the weapons were good enough for me. The way the tanks drive is close, but no cigar. They need to handle slopes better. Tanks aren't slowed much at all by rough terrain. The missions are more or less believable and realistic, though a little more connection to infantry movement is needed, especially if we're going to be in the time period in which OFP 2 is set. To make fixed-wing modelling good, would require a LOT of work. But I didn't vote that it needed improvement because I don't think it really could be too useful in an infantry-based sim. If you made the fixed-wing part better, you'd have to lose a little on the infantry end, which I wouldn't be willing to do if I was a developer. Let me know what you think, and if you vote,particularly for a combo answer, please reply explaining your choice. (You'd definately need to explain a vote for "H","I", or "J" though I really hope you didn't choose "I") Thanks going to this poll and not my previous screw-up. (Give me a break, it was done at 2:40 A.M. - It took a second try, completed at just around 3:00 A.M. to get it right)

This is what I think the most practical solution is: Okay, in Deltaforce 1 trough 3, its just the same terrain repeated over and over. BUT, in Black hawk down, yes, the same system is in place, but in the center of the map, the terrain is unique. This allows a practically endless map, but there is detailed terrain in the center. In OFP 2, the center terrain could be similar to the island terrain in the original, but the outlying "tiles" of terrain could be low-res, lacking vegetation (at least individual trees, but I guess you could still have "forest" tiles) The terrain would have to be much more simplistic as well, or there would be a huge problem with performance. Personally, I'd rather have Islands again. I didn't have a problem with that. I have a BIG problem with repeating terrain tiles, or just endless flat low-res terrain, or invisible walls, (though out of those 3 I dislike the invisible walls the least) I'm just saying the DF: Black Hawk Down - style terrain would be the next best thing after Islands. I just can't understand how they're going to do it though. Africa would be easy, outside the center of the map it'd be okay to have limitless flat desert, but in central Europe? Come on! I guess there invisible walls would work the best. Outside the center of the map I'd like to see non-repeating terrain, but maybe less detailed, running for a considerable stretch before hitting the invisible wall. This should give planes enough room to fly. In Vietnam, you'd need much of the same, although eventually you'd get to the ocean.

Oh yeah, and I'd like to see more aircraft-mounted weapons for you to use while your transporting from place to place. Remember the scene in Full Metal Jacket? They're in the chopper and there's a guy in there with an mounted M60. And he's shooting the workers in the rice patties? Machine gunner - "Any one who runs if a VC. Any one who stands still is a well-disciplined VC... ... I got me a score of 157 dead gooks killed." Joker - "Any women or children?" Machine Gunner - "Sometimes." Joker - "How can you shoot women, and children?" Machine Gunner "Easy, you just don't lead 'em as much!" Mini guns on UH1s would be nice too.

We need silenced sidearms for black ops missions. Colt .45 supressed Supressed .22 (almost completely silent, you only hear a small click. Used for VERY close range takedowns, a bit messy outside 75m) I'm not sure if one was in service, but a slienced 9mm would be nice. And powerful weapons too... (African militia would have aquired theese, even if they weren't in standard military service) - .357 (standard and magnum) - .38 (horribly inaccurate, but that makes it fun) - .32 (probably for para-military) Oh, and Russian spetz natz agents, (though maybe not the battlefield opratives, I'm talking the KGB intelligence guys) The Russian semi-auto .54 pistol. That has quite a bit of stopping power, enough to knock anybody on their ass, though it's not as powerful as the Desert Eagle (.50 version, not the .357) Oh, can we have that too? Just for fun? And probably an assortment of civilian arms - .40 pistol - .44 pistol - .36 pistol - .303 hunting rifle (actually I think there were several military rifles of this calliber in service) - .410 shotguns (slugs and buckshot) - Elephant guns (African game hunters had them) Also, improvised weapons. - Molotov cocktails (We need dynamic fire effects, like Postal 2) - Bricks, bottles, and the such - Grenades made from coconuts! (Gilligan's Island type stuff. No? Just an idea.) We need pungi sticks too, even if they are very aggrivating when you fall into one.

I think you sould be able to adjust all settings. Â Physics modelling, ragdolls, bullets, graphics options. Â Adaptable to most machines from 800 MHz to 2.4 GHz

My wishlist: M16A1 XM177E1 M1 Thompson SKS PPK-52 M40 (no thats not M4, its M40, a Vietnam-to-present day Remmington-based 7.62mm 5-round clip sniper rifle, used extensively by spec. ops and marine snipers in Vietnam) M-14 7.62mm FMJ (so I can have a major malfunction like Privat Pyle) I'm sure I'll think of more...

The problem here is, because the way the engine works, even if a complex graphics scheme like this is not occuring in the field of view of the player, it still takes a lot of memory to keep track of everything. Just because it's not being rendered at huge distances, doesn't mean you're not losing a lot of RAM so the game engine can keep track. With Islands as big as the ones in OFP, this could be a huge problem, especially if terrain type affected the way the unit moves.

Exactly. Though I'm going to give everybody a little physics lesson... When a stock car hits a wall at 200 mph, the forces are different from when you crash your Porsche (996) 911 Carerra 4 into a telephone pole at 200 mph. In the wreck with the Porsche, all of the energy obtained from the velocity you were travelling (your body mass times speed) is exerted on your body when you suddenly come to a dead stop. When you go into the wall on a race track, there's deflection. Not all of the force of impact in the opposite direction of your vector (direction/speed). The same is true in the Apache. You hit the ground at even a sharp 45-degree angle, you only experience half of the force (I think) of if you were to nose-dive into the ground at the same speed. Now, what makes the Apache so special is, in other helicopters, even if your body could survive the force of the impact, the chopper would smash to bits and blow up, killing you. Since the Apache has such great structural strength, the nose of the aircraft doesn't end up in your lap. So, if the force of impact doesn't press your organs so hard against the inside of your chest that they turn to mush, or the shockwave doesn't break your back, you can survive even a pretty hard crash. All because you don't stop dead. The helicopter could bounce, or slide along the ground for a while and then bury itself, and you'd be fine. I know this was very off-topic, but forgive me, it's relevant to a post that was relevant to a post that was relevant to this topic.

Yes, of course its true. You're only sitting in a multi-million dollar machine with a cockpit that's essentially a titanium bathtub! If the Apache's not shot out of the sky but hits the ground out of pilot error, even at modest speeds, it can survive and even still be flyable.

This is a great idea, I can't believe nobody hit on this sooner. I think all models should be the same size for MP, though. But in SP, it's an excellent idea. Oh, can we have distended bellies for the starving people in Africa? That'd be good. That's not with a smart-ass tone either, but all the civilians were malnourished, and some of the soldiers too. But yeah, different height and stature would be great. There would need to be 2 diff. forms, male and female, male for most soldier (except for female VC, if implemented) and female for the female VC and civilian women. In each form, you would scale proportions differently. I don't know about the different physical abilities thingy though, sounds a little overboard. Knowing me, I'd end up shooting the chunky guy in the squad because he'd be slowing me down. Also, in an AI vs. AI battle, you'd just see all the plump ones lying dead on the ground There is one part of the abilities thing that I'd like to see though, and that is diff. strengths that you can assign a player, though their speeds need to be the same, so I don't shoot the slow ones. Where you would use the slider to change the physical appearance of your soldier, you should also have checkboxes for ablilites. You could choose Scout, Support Weapons, Sniper, Spec. Ops.... But your height and stature should be limited by what class you choose. A sniper the size of Shaq wouldn't exactly be inconspicuous, and I don't think somebody of Woody Allen's stature would handle an M60 to well... But snipers should have no scope drift, heavy weapons guys should have less problem with recoil, scouts should have balanced ablilites, and spec. ops. should be a better version of the scout, but with the abilty to go unnoticed. It might be a good idea to block that class for MP. And women VC (again, if implemented, and I hope it is) should only be snipers and scouts. I don't think there were any 6'5" 300 lb. Asian women that could bench 450 lbs. , so as a support weapons specialist, I think women would be out of the question. This was, again, another long post for me. I don't know how to type just a short reply....

I voted Eastern Europe. Â The reason is, it'll be harder to dissappoint the gamers with this one. Â I'll explain... Â (1) Vietnam has been done to death by all tactical shooters lately. Â LOS, Vietcong, Spec. Ops.... on and on. Â It would be great to see what BIS could do with it, because I think OFP could bring a level of realism to it (large numbers of civilians, Female VC Soldiers) that no other shooters did. The problem is, we expect nothing but the upmost in realism (as far as combat scenarios) from OFP, and Vietnam was a VERY dynamic war. Â Also, it really happened so we have something to measure the game against for realism. Â By the way, I hope the Vietnam turns out like Full Metal Jacket... That was the REAL Vietnam, plus the jungle combat. Â We need all three: urban, villages, Â and the jungle. Â I hope BIS doesn't just focus on the jungle like all the other developers did... (2) Africa - Not a lot of games have touched Africa at all. Â I think the first one I played that did was Delta Force 2. Â DFLW did some Africa, but suspiciously, THERE WERE NO AFRICANS! Â DFBHD did Somalia, but did a really crappy job. Â Other than that, there aren't any serious examples. Â This could be fun ("fun" means interesting, because genocide and war are not fun) because there were a lot of combat scenarios in the timeframe (but not too much western involvment as I remember) Â To do a good job here, it would be mainly village combat, with more civilians with bad guys, and having a tough time deciding who to shoot. Â That is unless, of course, the campaign turns out to be a fictional battle that is West vs. CCCP (USSR) fighting for control of Africa. Â Well, the problem here is, this also really happened, so we have something to make a comparison with for realism, but it will most likely be a fictionalized East vs. West scenario. (I hope not) (3) Central Europe: Â This one, while maybe tying with Vietnam for potential, would be easier to do in a way that will satisfy everyone. Â With Vietnam, to meet the standard of realism that everybody expects from OFP, BIS would REALLY have to work hard, due to the dynamic range of that war. Â Central Europe is really open-ended. Â It's the same setting as the original OFP, so they have no excuse not to do a good job, plus, no major military action occured, so we have nothing to hold to for realism. Â Of course its going to be fictional, and that'll be okay. (By the way, I hope the other two campaigns aren't) Â They can make it as climactic as they want. Â The war can escalate to whatever scale they want! Â It'll be great. Â From infatry battles in the rolling hills, to urban warfare in Prague, to rolling your M60 Patton down the autobahn highway towards East Berlin. Â It's a win, win project. (I hope they make Vietnam very true to the actual war, and make it just as good as Central Europe. Â It can be, but it wouldn't be easy to do) Â Now that I build CE up like this, they'd better do a good job, or I'm going really dissappointed, as I'm sure anybody who took the time to read this enormously long post will be too. Well there are my reasons, and I believe them to be fairly sound. Â I wonder if any other game forum in history has ever had this much activity and posting about a game that is more than a year away from release?

Accidental second post, text deleted

This topic really hasn't had any new posts recently, so.... Okay, Delta Force didn't exactly have a massive outdoor environment. It was just the same 2km x 2km terrain tile that was fitted together over and over and over and over and over... you get the point Balistics: I think wind is an excelent idea. Not many games simulate that really. Of course, I'd like to be able to turn it off, because I'm not too great of a sniper. One aspect of ballistics i'd like to see is bullet mass combined with ragdolls. Also, bullets should be able to pass through the materials they would in real life. 9mm wouldn't go through much, maybe really flimsy crates, .45 through most interior walls, 5.56 and 7.62mm through decent cover (thin metal, oil barrels, unarmored vehicles), and .50 and 20+mm going through just about everything, with the exception of thick concrete barricades. (actually a 25mm + round would) I loved shooting bad guys through walls, doors, and metal containers in IGI 2.

Yeah, you do need to drop faster. You go high at all and eject, you've gota 10 min. ride to the ground, with full time compression on. My big gripe though is, YOU CAN'T EJECT, LET ALONE PARACHUTE FROM A CHOPPER! Those 4 or 5 titanium-composite rotor blades swirling 400 mph will end you up rather quickly. Presently there are only two helicopters in the world with ejection seats: The KA-50 Hokum and the KA-52 Hokum B. Rather than ejecting from a damaged helo, the game should model autorotate and the actual structural survivabilty. You can crash an Apache 150 mph into the ground and live, and usually even walk away from impacts under 90 mph

We need dynamic fire effects, like in Postal 2! Gasoline should catch fire, people should burn. When vehicles blow up, the don't just crumple all over and turn all charred and spew smoke. They buckle where they were hit and where secondary explosions occured. They only get charred where the fire is. Tank turrets should get separated from the chassis. Thats what happens when a tank suffers a hard hit and the ammuntion goes up. Also, tanks should blow treads when hit with a LAW and get stuck. Trees catching fire and fire effects where large explosions happen should be included. I'm not saying simulate a fire growing into a massive inferno that devours the forests of Vietnam, but fire should be on a timer and it should spread a little untill the timer runs out and it slowly goes out. Besides, wouldn't Molotov coctails and Napalm be fun? Come on, we need napalm if we're going to be in Vietnam, just like the VC needs to have women soldiers.

Great idea: (not sure it falls strictly under animations) Dynamic fire effects! Like in postal 2, where gasoline caught fire and people burned. Molotov cocktails! Also, exploding vehicles should burn a while. The turrets of tanks should blow 50 ft. into the air when hit with a hellfire. Now the tanks just crumple and turn a charred color. There should be crumpling only where the tank was hit or where any secondary explosions occured. Also, charring should only occur where the tank is on fire. (Engine, turret, fuel tank)

Of course you don't want cheats in MP. Â Why the hell would anybody even bring it up? Â Okay, the challenge of playing without cheats in SP is what makes the game exciting. Â Yeah, the first 5,000 times you replay a mission. Â You need cheats to use after you've beat the game to add some novelty to it. Â Wacky cheats too, like an SKS that shoots cow pies, or change officer models to Hitler wearing a French maid's costume. Â How about "Godzilla mode" where your soldier grows to be 80 feet tall and you breathe fire. Â You need stuff like this to make the game retain novelty.

OFP 2 definately needs a LOT more animations. Â For the first-person part of it, I'd like to see all the abilites you had in Vietcong. Â Peek above, lean left/right. Â The only thing Vietcong didn't have was roll left/right. (when prone) And yes, I agree wounds should be modeled better. Â I'd really like to see disemberment. Â You catch a frag grenade close and you're gonna lose an arm/leg or be ripped apart at the torso. Â Also, when you get hit with large rounds (20mm or 30mm) your body parts and head go flying. Â (Remember Saving Private Ryan?) Â If you take a .50 BMG to the face, you don't just get a blodied up head. Â You head goes sailing across the battlefield, usually in about a thousand pieces. Â Not exactly an animation matter, but realistic blood would be nice. Â Splattering on walls and forming pools on the ground and such. There's a simple rule in gaming. THE MORE ANIMATIONS, THE BETTER THE GAME. Â The running animation need to be better and there need to be more of them. Â It's really awkward to run sideway or diagnally and shoot. Â Makes it really hard to move tactically. Â Also, you need to be able to interrupt actions. Â Like if your reloading a magazine and you come under fire, you have to wait until you finish reloading before you can run, duck, or even turn to face the enemy. Â You should be able to reload while running, or duck while reloading. Â Hope this stuff makes it into the game. Â OPF was loved because of its accurate portrayal of combat. Â This would make it so much better still...

I just hope for LOMAC they do a better job simulating ECM and missile tracking. In Flanker 2.5, BVR missiles were REALLY hard to evade, and short range missiles were nearly impossible to lose. Okay, American AMRAAMS and such are going to be tough to evade in a Su-33, with crappy Russian jammers and ECMs, but there is no way an R-27 should be able to track like that!

You know what I think about all this?  Bush is an imbacile.  Clinton was a much better president.  Just look at the economy!  Economic Stimulus package my ass! He's going to ruin us all! Clinton built up the economy!  So what if he was a ladies' man, every president (almost) has had a little play on the side!  Now Bush is going to start up another war!  Just so he can gain support for the next election! Was going back to Iraq a good idea? The YES side:  Saddam was dangerous to world peace.  We know Iraq had a bio-chemical weapons program.  They offered no hard evidence that they had destroyed their caches of biological warheads.  We removed a vicious dictator and gave the Iraqi people liberty to choose their own government. (at least that's what's planned) The NO side: The entire Islamic world is extremely distrustful of the U.S.  All eyes are on the Bush administration.  If they screw this up it would be a international political nightmare!  The whole of the Middle-East would hate the U.S. even more!  And you know what, Bush is screwing up worse as the days go by.  This was our chance to show the Arabs that we're not after their oil, their land, we're not trying to make a "puppet state" of Iraq, and provide them with a model (Rebuilt Iraq) of how good Democracy and Capitalism can be for a nation.  Well, the Islamic world isn't exactly seeing our best foot forward. Now, we're going after another dictator while Iraq still lies in shambles?  They must think we're really true to our word... Part II: A conspiracy! When Bush took office, I was very upset.  Most people say Gore wouldn't have been any better, but you know what?  He would have still had Clinton's cabinet, the financial wizards that helped our economy grow 1992-2000.  International relations were also better under Clinton.  Bush should have slapped Israel on the wrist and told them to back off when they started military action in Palestine.  The whole situation did nothing but strain Muslim and Western relations.  Israel way overstepped their bounds on several ocasions.  On to the conspiracy part of this post...  I have noticed the Bush administration is moving towards constriction some of natural rights.  Ashcroft and his "Homeland Security" are reaching the point of not being unconstitutional.  Freedom of speech is being restricted.  There are less personal freedoms now, especially for Middle-Eastern minorities.  There's much more to complain about, but I don't have the room in this post.  I have a great interest in government and international politics, including history (especially the rise of republic government, and governments throughout history) and I am noticing some very scary parallels between the Bush admin. and another political party that existed in the 20th century.  Their name: The Third Reich, beter know to most as the Nazi party.  (By the way NAZI in German is an acronym for Socialist Laborors' something-or-the-other-party)  Both the Nazis and the Bush administration are invasion happy.  Even Bush's cabinet resembles the heirarchy of the Nazi party.  Bush is Hitler.  The same, incompeten man, with no military or political wit.  John Ashcroft is Joseph Goebbles, Hitler's propaganda cheif.  Goebbles had a "Homeland Security" too.  You know what it was?  "Shut the hell up, after all, you do love the Fuhrer, don't you?"  Now , it's just, "What are you complaining about?  You shouldn't mind if we monitor all comunications and invade your privacy.  After all, you're not a terrorist, are you?" Oh, and good 'ol vice president Dick?  His character bears remarkable resemblance to that of Martin Bormann.  For those of you who haven't studied the Nazi party and the Holocaust, Martin Bormann was Hitler's right hand man.  Recently, I was watching a CNN special on Cheney.  They discribed him as a backseat political figure, but one with great influence and power.  Always eager to help the president with no ambitions of glory for himself.  Bormann was a backseat figure, but in many ways, he ran the Nazi party.  He would do anything to please the Fuhrer, much as Dick Cheney is so eager to assist our president.  Okay, we're not purpotrating genocide, but give us a massive economic depression (we're not that far off) remove all Bush's opposition in Congress, throw out the constitution, add a dash of ambitious nationalism, and we're there.  Doesn't this sound like the America we all dream of:  "Heil to the Cheif!" or "Ein volk, Ein Reich, Ein Bush!"  Do you know what Hitler did to gain support when the great depression struck Germany?  He blamed the Jews!  Now, let's see.  Who would be an easy target to pin our current economical crisis on?  Gee, let me think a moment...  Hmmm.  everything really  went down hill when the terrorists attacked...  Couldn't have been the Economic Stimulus thingy before that, because, after all, Bush is the savior of America....  I know, it's the Arabs!  They're a threat to our way of life!  Let's go on a worldwide conquest to eradicate them and round up all the ones at home and send them off to death camps.  Oops, did I say death camps?  I meant "Concentration Centers" where we will temporarily relocate them for their benefit.  What scares me is, I think bush would do it to create a surge of blind nationalis to get himself re-elected.  But that's just my opinion.  ---------------------- Comments?  I really want to hear them.  Politics is my favorite thing to talk about.  Thanks for reading.

Okay, there's a big thing about not putting women soldiers in the game. Â One thing NO vietnam-era shooter has touched at all is that women fought for the VC. Â Ever seen Full Metal Jacket? Â The sniper was like a 12 year-old girl. Â No, it would be completely inaccurate to have female soldiers for the West, but you can't leave out female VC in Vietnam. Â They were infantry, snipers, saboteurs, and they manned anti-aircraft guns. Â Women would stroll into U.S. bases with 20 pounds of dynamite tucked into their dresses. Â In any third-world combat zone there are going to be TONS of civilians. Â Most tactical shooters seem to forget this. Â In Europe, people lock themselves in their basements, or flee the country. Â But, when you live in a staw hut with a dirt floor, where are you going to go? Wisconsin? NO, you're in harm's way and you just pray you don't get caught in the cross fire. Â In Vietnam, villages got shelled all the time. Â True in the cities that fell to the U.S., everybody packed up and left town. Â But, you know what that means? I'll tell you. MORE CIVILIANS IN THE VILLAGES AND COUNTRYSIDE! Â Where were they going to go? They just moved out into rural places or to Hanoi. They were everywhere. Â Okay, not in the middle of the jungle, just walking around for the heck of it, but combat inevitably came to cities and villages. Â In Africa, heck, war was nothing out of the ordinary. Â They just tried to live life as normally as possible. Â Actually, the fact that civilians were massacred by militia and rival tribes should be included. Â Ever heard of the African Holocaust? Â It was going on back then too. Want to argue with me? Go right ahead. Â Agree? Â Let's hear what you have to say. Â Â

Come on! I think I had a good idea about putting civilians in combat zones (for Africa and Vietnam only) and about female Vietcong soldiers. If you like these ideas, please say so. Even if you don't, please tell me I'm wrong. Otherwise, this topic will slip to the back of the forums and be overlooked for the mostpart. One thing everybody loved about OFP is how realistically it modelled what combat would be like for standard GIs c.a. 1985. You have to throw civilians into Africa and Vietnam, as well as female VC to the latter to get an accurate portrayal of what combat was like in these theaters!

My God, another post? Well, the gears keep turning... Human models- Â RAGDOLLS RAGDOLLS RAGDOLLS. Â Really cool though they suck up performance. I want to see guys fly back 6 ft. and roll when they take 20 .45 bullets from a rapid fire SMG, or do a summersault when you shoot them in the back of the head with a 12-gauge shotgun. Â Okay, now an even more graphic and gruesome suggestion: Â Disemberment/decapitation. Â When you take a .50 BMG round in the face, your head doesn't exactly stay in one peice. Â What if you get hit with a 20mm cannon shell? Â Those things blow arms, heads, and just about any appendage right off. Â Remember Saving Private Ryan? Â And then there's other stuff, like grenades. And what about 30mm cannon and explosives, like satchels, and HEAT shells? Â People are blown to smithereens when hit with these things. Â Depending on range from the center of the explosion, people could be ripped apart at the torso, have arms blown off, be burnt and horribly disfigured. Â Of course, you could turn this off. Â Might not be the best thing for a 11 year old to see.... Â Jedi Knight 2: Jedi Outcast had a disemberment mode that was kind of cool. Â But the severances would have to be a little messy. Â They got away with cutting off arms and and hands cleanly at the joints, which saved them a lot of complex modelling, Â because that's how a lightsaber does things. Â But frag. grenades, don't exactly carve people up neatly. Â There are no clean cuts. Â It gets kinda messy. TERRAIN- Â Um, I've noticed hills in OFP aren't exactly hills. Â Hills are rounded. Â The "hills" in OFP are just several planes fitted together to make a faceted assymetrical geometric object that resembles a mound of earth. Â When you run up a "hill" as you step from one plane to the next, you viewpoint elevation changes dramatically. Â I know round hills aren't easilly possible when you have to have vehicles drive on them, but maybe you could do something for a smoother transition between these interlocking planes, maybe make it less noticable....

OF COURSE WE NEED FEMALE SOLDIERS. In the campaign definately not for the West. Women couldn't be anything but nurses and doctors. Usually not even chefs. Female soldiers for the West would probably be appreciated in Multiplayer. VIETNAM: The vietcong not only drafted 10 year old boys, but girls of all ages as well. Ever seen Full Metal Jacket? The Sniper? Girls were infantry, saboteurs, and they manned anti-aircraft guns. That's just something you can't leave out for the Vietnam campaign.

Umm, reading through some of these ideas, I've come to worry about one thing in particular. Everybody wants detailed, area-specific damage on vehicles, houses that burn down, and some very complex physics. This is all fine and dandy, but this could take a HUGE toll on performance. Everthing should have an option to turn it off. I'd rather have a super-smooth running game than vehicles whose windsheilds shatter, tires pop, houses with realistic structural simulation, so on and so forth.... Oh and one thing that would be really cool (and I would want to be able to turn this off because potentially it could take up a lot of RAM) is bullet holes in soft targets, like plaster walls and unarmored vehicles, maybe even helmets. And for bullet physics: One game that has a feature I really like is IGI 2. I love how bullets can go through materials that they could in real life. Like crates, residential walls, and (depending on the calliber of round) some metal. Against a guy with .300 or .50 sniper rifle, a wood crate or an empty barrel really wouldn't afford much protection. I would love to see this modelled, because presently, you can take cover behind haystacks, crates, oil drums, and thin walls. I defy you to find a competent soldier who would take cover from a 7.62mm Machine gun behind a wood fence. Of course, bullet speed and defraction should be taken to account when they pass through these materials. And oh yeah, bullet DEFLECTION! Some shooters model how bullets bounce of solid metal surfaces when striking them at shallow angles. With tracers enabled, this could prove to be a very cool visual effect, even if it is annoying when you get hit by bullets that weren't even remotely intended for you.