Flogger23m

Christian is doing scripting and other development tasks, such as implementing bullet penetration, testing it, adding recoil properties and bullet decals. I think it is fair to say he is doing some of the work himself. ;) WIP does indeed mean work in progress, and some of the content shown months ago is entirely being remade. Some will get improved. Only thing I know for sure is the M4 3D model will get replaced, but it is safe to assume other things can get changed. Apparently the ArmA 3 beta will feature BF3 style scopes rather than the 2D textures of the Alpha which is a large change. I can expect similar things to happen for Takedown. What else is in poor condition aside from the art style? I was not a fan of the loadout UI screen shots (also very WIP as you can see from a quick glance) as it suffers the same issue that SWAT 4's did but hopefully that will change as well. Whenever the Alpha gets released perhaps I will get a better idea of how it will turn out. Lets hope it gets better. IMO, I have some decent hopes for this title. Hopefully by release it will be enough to please the both of us.

I would like the following: 1) Modern theme. 2000-2013, or from the 80s until now. No fictional junk. 2) Drop the controllable vehicles aside from small cars, hummers and trucks. The armor and aircraft modeling is a joke in ArmA games and is just a waste of everyone's time. 3) Refocus efforts on the core game; infantry. 4) Improve the editor. Put more GUI in to bring it up to par with editors from late 90s-early 2000s flight sim era. 5) Improve AI. Being able to walk or drive in a straight line is a must. 6) Make the AI command menu useful. As it stands in ArmA 2/3 Alpha it is nearly worthless as it is so slow and imprecise that the friendly AI essentially become respawn options for when the player (who does 90% of the work) dies. 7) Some proper damage modeling on vehicles. Dump the hit point based system. 8) 3D to 2D mode in the editor that can be switched between on the fly as seen in Jane's USAF from 1999. To me, these are examples of a quantum leap. New units merely reskinned as they have been throughout the series is not appealing to me. And my final hope: 9) Drop the "military sim" marketing title. The only thing it does somewhat well is infantry. Come to the realization that ArmA is an infantry simulator and nothing more. Everything else is horrid. Entire simulators, DCS and Steel Beasts, focus on a certain aspect of combat and still have short comings. ArmA's attempt to do anything under the false moniker of being an "everything military simulator" just lowers the bar on everything. Quality over quantity.

It reminds me too much of games like Rainbow 6 Vegas (terms they use). Unless they back up their concept with specific feature lists (multiple randomized insertion points, body armor modeling ect.) it is hard for me to gauge if this is indeed a proper tactical shooter or a Vegas type game. Perhaps I will have to look through the forums more but from what I have read I just can not seem to discern what kind of game it will be. I have played SOCOM I, single player only, and it was a rather decent tactical shooter experience. Perhaps not as good as R6 or SWAT, but good nonetheless. The MP portion of the SOCOM series seems more like Counter Strike: 3rd Person from what SOCOM fans seem to claim. And if that is how H Hour will end up I may just not have the interest for it.

I tried to back this project but could not bring myself to do it. A lot of marketing words and fluff that can be interchangeably used with an R6 Vegas type game. 3rd person and a reticule only 1st person mode reminiscent of 1990 quality shooters was another nail in the coffin for me. Likewise, there is a number of medicore player VS player tactical (or attempted) shooters on the market. The lack of proper missions, which is a centric component of a tactical shooter is not a good sign. Overall it seems like the project is trying to find a good balance of "realism and fun", while not pushing any boundaries in any way while using sorely dated view point styles that should not be feature in any post 2013 tactical/realism shooter. I also dislike how they do not state the engine they are using even though development has begun. I am fine with their model of getting enough funding to convince a venture capitalist or publisher to fund the rest of the project, but unlike Serellan they do not seem to have any lined up. I wish them luck but I am saving my money for when (or if) Ground Branch starts another Kickstarter or other donation running.

Will this have better quality and post release support than Take On Helicopters? The previous Take On game seemed dead of arrival and still seems to be rather sub par to date.

Claim what you want, but the point still stands. ArmA 3 is merely playing catch up and is doing little to nothing innovative for the genre. Knocking the developers because you think they're lying (without even listening to the audio) and knocking previous projects they have worked on is avoiding the topic more than anything. I am not referring to you personally Max, but rather some of the other posts in the thread. The legitimate criticism is great. I do the same for Takedown as I do for ArmA and I realize that both may not be revolutionary for the genre. But I can enjoy what they do (or seem to) improve. I'm done with this side discussion and will continue to post updates for Takedown unless you feel like locking the thread.

AI has been stated as a big development focus so I hope it will be as good or better than SWAT 4. That remains to be seen however. I never mentioned anything about ArmA's engine, rather about its lack of focus and progress throughout the series. The infantry in ArmA 3 and the editor is lagging so far behind in many aspects yet they shoehorned in a laughable under water combat element in ArmA 3 which is reminiscent of Call of Duty level realism. What has ArmA 1/2 and now 3 brought that is unique to the genre? Nothing; they're playing catch up with basic shooter mechanics and editor UI yet continuing to buy the games while claiming each release is worthy of buying due to the implied "innovation" is what I found ironic. Nothing wrong with buying/playing them, but not buying a similar genre title for lack of innovation while buying ArmA 1/2/3 is contradictory. But buy/play what makes you happy. Rogue Spear, Ghost Recon 1 and SWAT were not impressive? :p Those games basically shaped the genre. I may not like many of the titles they have worked on (IMO) but some of them have worked on some successful and technically sound games. Red herring? Will it succeed? May, maybe not. That is to be seen. Art wise it looks fine IMO, save for the incomplete aspects. Muddy character textures (and odd coloration of them) as well as the animations. Some of it is WIP and will be replaced. How much of it all I am not sure. Graphics are not a focus though and the technology is dated so don't get your hopes up for ground breaking visuals. In all honesty it reminds me of SWAT 4 graphically, though perhaps you dislike the art style of that as well. I agreed with you on the videos. Not too impressive yet gameplay wise, mainly due to lack of grenade usage IMO. But I should point out that this is an alpha; actually I believe it is a pre-alpha. Lots of work to be done and many features are not implemented, lots of place holders, and lots of bugs. I think it will get better. Already the bullet penetration and body armor system appears to put games like SWAT and ArmA to shame. Will the final game be revolutionary? I am not so sure. I have high hopes that it will take what R6/SWAT was and improve upon it from a realism (weapons, movement, collision) and technical stand point (AI). To me that is good enough; I am looking for a realistic tactical shooter. If it pushes above what previous games have done in the past I will be satisfied. Maybe that is not enough for the rest of you but that is your decision. I'll just suggest to look into the final game. Better look at the UI: http://i995.photobucket.com/albums/af73/Flogger23m/TDwpnswp_zps04533053.jpg Not a fan of the weapon in the corner (redundant) and an ammo counter is worthless. But we will have the option to turn it off. All we need is an RO type "feels heavy/light" icon when reloading and a magazine count when reloading. It should appear only briefly. Fire mode can stay there though as there is no way to realistically check the selector switch in game. http://i995.photobucket.com/albums/af73/Flogger23m/TDAR_zpsf5975138.jpg http://i995.photobucket.com/albums/af73/Flogger23m/TDAR2_zps2b8ea663.jpg

Perhaps, but it is the contradictory thought process which I find humorous. Nothing has advanced in tactical shooters since SWAT 4 (and even then, maybe not much as I have not tried SWAT 3) and therefore it would be illogical for Thromp to purchase any realism shooter from that time period until now. And there seems to be nothing in sight as a replacement for Flashpoint/Raven Shield/SWAT 4 (or even 3). Regardless I found it humorous. Art wise, some assets will be getting a work over. What will and won't I can not say for sure, but I know the weapon 3D models are being redone from scratch. Or at least some of them. Animations on the characters certainly do look odd in this more clear video: Still, the lack of grenade usage annoys me. Probably they are not implemented properly at the moment, at least at disorienting AI. Flash bangs have been confirmed and they are of the R6/SWAT style (selectable) and are not like CoD/ArmA "instant" throw method.

Actually it is. So far the ArmA titles have not introduced much of anything new since the original title in the late 90s, and in many ways ArmA 3's Alpha is still lagging behind in terms of editor GUI compared to flight sims of the late 90s and early 2000s. The majority of the changes have been graphics. I don't care what you buy or don't (or play), I just find it humorous to knock one game because the advancements for the genre are not a significant leap while also being an active member on a forum for a game in a similar genre which also makes minimal improvements with each release. Though, IMO, Takedown seems to be bringing larger improvements over RvS and SWAT 4 compared to ArmA 3 over ArmA 2 (based off the Alpha). But it is hard to say as neither ArmA 3 nor Takedown are out and not buying them based on their alpha state feature set is a bit premature. Though I still feel like getting the ArmA 3 Alpha... but that is all I will say about ArmA in this thread.

Agreed about the animations. Others have complained to. It looks like animations may be one of the things to be cut short with only one set for weapons (like ArmA 3). Hopefully, if there is only one set of reload animations, the quality will look better than what was seen in the video by release. Characters looked like they needed a bit of work to.

UE3, so don't expect the latest graphics. My biggest concern is texture pop in, which seems to plague most UE3 games even if you can max them out at 60 frame rates with plenty of VRAM to spare. He didn't look or sound nervous to me (Christian). He did walk in on a live stream (and didn't know it was live stream). If you're talking about the black guy in the beginning (505 guy) then it was rather clear he did not know what a proper tactical shooter was. He was just regurgitating bullet points... and not doing very good at it. IMO. A proper gameplay video has been delayed until sometime this week. I assume this means the alpha might get pushed back as well. My only hope is that the initial alpha has commandable AI and orders implemented. Because I will spend 95% of my time in the SP I would prefer to test that first. IMO, tactical shooters are their strongest in SP.

Would have preferred if it was an addon for either ArmA 3 (contemporary military/weapons) or improvements on Take On Helicopters.

Skip to about 6:52. IMO rather rough and not that great looking (no grenade use?) but I assume that is because it is pre-alpha. The map layouts and weapon collision (needs polishing) are nice. Hard to tell much else from a low end video camera video though. And did you do the same with ArmA 1, 2, and Arrowhead and all of the DLCs? Because they were honestly not much more than graphical updates of the original game. Not trying to knock ArmA here, but even small updates to AI, sound, movement ect. is better than sticking with the older games. IMO.

I'll disagree then. Only thing I find odd is that the weapons seem to be higher in texture detail and have a more realistic look than the characters. My issues were on XP Pro and Vista 64bit. Same issues, random crashing. Ran with SWAT 4 Gold with the latest patches since I bought it. Switched to the SSF mod, also gives the same issues. I have not tried it on Win 7 though I doubt that will cure it as XP/Vista and various hardware changes have not. :p I come close to reinstalling it every now and then but then I remember the crashing and don't bother with it. I will probably re-install it soon simply for suggestions for Takedown.

I think you're being far too picky about the graphics and are pulling apart things that really look fine. Coloration is based off of real world locations that are similar settings. Look up arctic facilities or towns and you'll quickly find they have odd, abnormally bright yellow, red, orange and blue colors all over the place. Just one example. Other odd things, such as the abnormally bright helipad circle are engine bugs. It does not look right at that zoomed out angle which you never see in game. The screen shot was taken at a zoomed out distance to show an overhead view of the map. On the ground, in gameplay, such an issue as that does not exist. And are you referring to this screen shot?: http://mediang.gameswelt.net/public/images/201306/cf0f80afa173cdd40086428600750129.jpg Shadows are likely an engine bug, or incomplete. The second operators legs are behind the firsts. He looks small because of the distance. He is taller because #1 is crouching. He may look smaller overall because he is further back but still appears taller at that angle. Its rather simple and can be replicated in real life if you really feel like doing it. No sense of movement? Hard to tell from a still screen shot. And yes, they are screen shots. But alpha games tend to look rather incomplete. One of the level designers was an architect before he became a video game developer, so the layouts are probably going to be more sensible than most games. Skip to ~5:50 - 12:00 to see some poorly camera recorded gameplay: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9Z9pv6guMg&feature=player_embedded Looks a bit basic at the moment, but it is an alpha. AI looks somewhat competent but it is hard to tell. No use of grenades (not implemented yet?), maps are rather open. Weapons are certainly lethal. 28 round magazine is because it is a 6.8 SPC rifle. Reload animation for the AR does look a bit off, but maybe that will change to. The buggy shadow affects prop up in the video as well. WIP menu: http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/gmw/docs/603/638/05.jpg Would prefer a drop down menu like Raven Shield, but maybe it will change. Again, WIP. Not the greatest media, but hopefully a properly recorded gameplay video will be uploaded soon.

Only part the looks odd to me are the character textures. Though obviously it is in alpha. If you look closely, the enemy AI's weapons are clipping through their wrist and their hand is grabbing on air. Kind of like the SVD in ArmA 2. :p Some shots of the WIP menu: http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/gmw/docs/603/638/05.jpg http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/img/gmw/docs/603/638/03.jpg

Well here is something to consider. What kind of a map has not been done before? We've had parked planes, offshore oil rigs, houses, gas stations, corporate buildings, casinos, run down burnt out houses and just about anything we can think of in R6/SWAT alone. They were considering a cruise ship or a private yacht, but I don't think that one will make it as apparently it requires too much unique props for one map (limited time/budget). Though I have a feeling even that might have been done in one of the older R6 games. Lighting wise, it might just be WIP. Or just goes to show how dated UE3 is when not using the overly stylized look. It gets the job done, but it certainly is behind more modern engines.

No airport maps confirmed. So far we have a radar installation, a "bio lab", this corporate HQ and a nuclear rod storage facility. That is already a big range, IMO. The game takes place with a more military styled force, so I am going to assume to expect higher profile missions like in Raven Shield compared to lower level missions found in the SWAT series. Though, for all we know, we might find a gas station or other similar setting. As for the lighting, I am going to assume it is WIP. Likewise, they aren't going for an overdone atmospheric look. More media to follow later. Here is a quick interview. Weapon collision confirmed: http://www.battlechatteronline.com/2013/06/takedown-christian-allen-interview/

New screen shots: http://mediang.gameswelt.net/public/images/201306/53c5ef4a09c62a124ecb6b6d963b2a16.jpg http://mediang.gameswelt.net/public/images/201306/1687f9293b7daabba6b0f2e75291d114.jpg

SWAT 4 has always been like that for me, though it was always CTDs. I've been thinking of playing it, though I realized I have not installed it since I installed Windows 7 nearly 2 years ago. I do want to play it, but always remember the crashes and I always load up another game instead. Now that Takedown is coming out I should get it installed, go through the AI command menus ect. and see what I would like to see taken from SWAT and put into Takedown.

Agree with the scope choices listed by RobertHammer. Keep up the good work.

Exactly why I am looking forward to Takedown. SWAT 4's AI had flaws to, and I'd like to see it further improved in Takedown. As mentioned, AI has not seen much improvement since 2005 or so.

The game certainly isn't a clone. It is inspired by SWAT/R6. If a map looks similar to SWAT or SOCOM maybe the map designer who worked on those games took inspiration from his previous work. I agree, Raven Shield was/is a great game, but the AI is poor. Great for its time perhaps, but they have some serious flaws. I hope Takedown's AI pushes ahead of SWAT 4's even. AI makes or breaks a tactical shooter and it is one area that has been stagnating in gaming in general. Back to Raven Shield quickly, I had played it for the first time about 4 years ago. I have been playing it on/off since, and recently tried to play it again. The AI has certainly aged. I tried setting up good plans (it is possible) but often times the AI can do some really stupid things. For example, I had them move to a corner with the intentions of tossing a flash bang from behind cover. In actual gameplay they moved out into the open and threw the flash bang at their feet, stunning themselves. Had there been an enemy there they would have all been shot. Great game, still fun, but it has aged. Same with SWAT 4. I really hope Takedown can take those games and really improve upon them with modern technology and AI. At least, for the time being, we know body armor will be done much better than either of those games.

I agree. Just because one of the maps might look similar (I can't recall which one; assuming you are talking about Raven Shield) does not mean the entire game will be the same. None of the devs worked on the R6 games anyways (just mods for Rogue Spear, development on GR1, GRAW, SWAT and SOCOM). As for the bullet penetration all it took was reading on the forums/listening to Q/A videos. Body armor and penetration will be a big focus and so far is more detailed than any of the GR/R6/SWAT or even ArmA games in history. I think that is some nice progression for the genre. Now, I do have some more access to extra information as well (Kickstarter) but I can say this feature alone is implemented in some way as of now. All that being said even if it does just turn out to be SWAT 4: Modern Graphics, AI, Sound & Technology I would be pleased. I liked those older games and still play them but there is no denying that the AI, graphics and other features can use a big overhaul. Also, it is not an oil rig. It is a radar station.

I'll disagree. IMO it seems to be a blend of SWAT 4 (briefing style) and R6 (ROE). With more realistic weapons, body armor and penetration. One of the level designers did work on SWAT and SOCOM so you might see some influence from those games.