Phleep

An alternative to rendering long range grass would be to possibly make soldiers and other objects semi transparent when viewed from a distance where the grass would have provided some concealment. Maybe it would depend on the angle also, i.e. from above they would be opaque but at a tangent to the ground they are lying prone on they would be invisible. Other options: - The "forest block" style sheet a foot above the terrain which would be semitransparent so that the soldier is still slightly visible; - The soldier could be "sunk" into the terrain (or terrain raised) a small amount so only the parts above the grass show. Then BIS just needs to develop "fuzzy edged horizons" to simulate the grassiness.

For fiction mods like the C&C one it would probably be appropriate for only one person to be required to control the tanks. It would be nice for the basic concept to be developed a little further. The cost to a team when the tank is destroyed would be reduced when you don't lose two or three players in one go. Also it may become possible to only count it as 1 squad member AI and that would mean a squad could have twelve tanks.

October 2001 Bought a PC and thought I'd better get a game for it and, as per most others, saw it had lots of different vehicles and options available and so purchased it. Plodded throught the first few levels and then played, and failed, After Montignac many many times. Many, MANY times. My claim to fame is that I have been team killed by Maruk when testing the 1.60 patch on GamePlanet (NZ).

Regarding map detail though, it will be much more effective now to use objects for smaller map details than previously. Shadows are cast upon them which would help create the illusion of continuity. Before, shadows would not be cast on objects making them stand out more. I still hope the facility for more detailed maps is provided.

That idea has been around since the days of Falcon 3.0. Eventually we were supposed to be able to pilot choppers and tanks in falcon, it was way too ambitious, and even more so now, since flight sims seem to be more of a niche market than they were before. Was the same idea not the kiss of death for Janes simulators? I wouldn't wish that on BIS. While OFP's vehicles could use improvements, BIS should maintain their focus on the grunts, my 2 cents. But to avoid being trapped in a niche they can still have their main focus on the infantry which is a far more popular aspect. Â The other parts don't have to compete with flight sims they merely have to be in the ball park. I know that many people regard the original OFP as one of the best helicopter sims, not because of the physics, but because helicopters are meant to have quite intimate contact with what happens on the ground and only OFP achieves that. Â There is no better experience for a support heli pilot to receive a request for pickup from people he knows who are under fire in a hotzone. It wouldn't take too much improvement to make the game more well rounded. Â When it is released we'll just have to ignore the Il-2 style criticisms regarding the exact flight dynamics or tank armour distributions. edit- I was referring to "out-of-the-box". If they can add modules (relevent campaigns incl.) with improved dynamics that would be excellent. They could base what to focus on from community feed back from the initial release.

You could have coops where you have a squad or two of real people against AI with a couple of real commanders giving orders according to intel (sightings, satellite views, spies).

Voice Over IP would be good. It would take some of the hassle out of sorting out Team Speak or the like. It was there before so it can be there again.

Voice Over IP would be good. It would take some of the hassle out of sorting out Team Speak or the like. It was there before so it can be there again.

Yeah, I reckon that would have been the case too. Surprised they did not just make Armed Assault the sequel to keep them happy. I can picture BIS stubbonly refusing to get pushed around like other developers you read about that EA exploit. That would wrangle the publisher no end (especially if EA has a thumb in the pie).

Adding VOIP to sockets MP would be nice. Much more practical than Team Speak, etc.

Are you unaware of the information given in the last few days. They have been making a more efficient and more functional engine to use with the Xbox and people have been begging them to release a version of OFP with them included and so they have. It is not OFPII engine just the OFP engine with less of the problems. I for one look forward to it as it will give a fresh chance to sell the game properly without a buggy first release since they cannot sell a game on the XBox without it being virtually bug free and this should make the PC version of the engine more well rounded and in line with the features of other games (bar the insanely large scenarios, huge numbers of units, massive flexibility in mission structure, rolling landscapes, circadian time, MODability, etc.).

Maybe something with the words: - Intervention; - pre-emptive; - reaction; - Red; or - Blue; Maybe Blue Reaction - The Cold War just got hotter. Red Boiling Point Pre-emptive Reaction (US does a lot of this) Cold War, Red Fields All crap I know just trying to keep the thought ball rolling.

Yeah, it looks a bit like Doom III in the shadow department. I would like to see varying degrees of sharpness in the shadows depending on the weather. This isn't as arduous as it first sounds since we already have the most difficult shadows - the sharp projected ones. On very overcast days there would only be a blurred shadow directly underneath an object when it was close to the ground. On stormy days you wouldn't even need to bother. It would be great to see a shadow dynamically blur as a cloud moves in front of the sun. I am also concerned that the bumpmap lighting on the leaves (another pic) is pointing in the wrong direction. I worry about this since it took them a very long time to correct the landscape shading in the first game.

Yeah, but Zayfod has been drunk before whilst on that server.

If you have been in intense fighting and haven't had a chance to reload, or you have your rifle out and cannot bring it to bear due to cramped space, having the opportunity to whack them in the face to keep the enemy subdued wouldn't go amiss.

BIS has not been shy in the past of hiring highly skilled modders for its VBS development. I don't think too many of the revolutionary modders would be offended if BIS took their ideas so as to save time developing that aspect. I would look forward to the inevitable features which modders cannot provide: bumpmapping larger view distance esp. in aircraft terrain LOD more intricate localised terrain details (ie. not just a blatant grid when you view from a hilltop) pixel shader shadows able to be projected on objects, units and terrain weather affecting terrain (ie. rain making it muddy) wind patterns (possibly visible as cloud, flag and tree motion) underground/water improved vehicle simulation (not just gimmicks) flowing water (not just visually) AI CQB ability and more natural reactions improved collision detection and destruction Some of these are implemented on the XBox version so a super computer shouldn't be necessary, just lots of hard work and time - which is what they have. BIS is very mathematically inclined as shown by their night skies and the motion of heavenly bodies. Many solutions to the above problems are certainly not beyond them, in fact are unlikely to be properly implemented by other companies. I don't expect all of the above but trust BIS enough that most will exist in the sequel.

I was just thinking the same thing. Although I was visualising small waves around the character generated in a similar way to the old grass script. Could maybe make it face and move in the wind direction (ie. the direction the flags point.)

Depends how it is done. If it is done the way Red Faction attempted then it will be a pointless waste of processing power. It could be done in segments where you select what type of hole you are digging or want AI to dig and then take the allotted amount of time to dig it. The types could be: - shallow foxhole; - deep foxhole; - trench segment; - tunnel entrance; - downwards tunnel segment; - horizontal tunnel segment; - cavern. These would mostly be inpractical to be completed during gameplay but could be constructed in the map editor if used for permanent island features or in the mission editor for prebuilt tunnels for certain missions. Easier said than done but it would be a significant feature of the terrain building side of the engine.

Maybe you could set it as a trailer and have it pulled by its string.

Thanks for the reply, I forwarded it on to the guy who asked. Want to give it a blat but my international cap is only 1gb/month so I save it for MP.

Someone on another forum raised the issue that when using y2k3 the ammo boxes in the Resistance campaign don't include ammo for the new weapons. Also the guns don't seem to get passed from one mission to the next (might just be game bug though). If you could have an additional patch including some updated ammo boxes to replace the original ones so those playing the Resistance campaign can play it properly it would be much appreciated. Apologies if this has already been mentioned - it is a long thread and I am doing this on someone elses behalf (so it works when I get around to using it).

Problem with actually adding it to the building is that it would go into the ground if on uneven ground. Â I think a separate ground texture (like a crater) would probably work better. Maybe a bit fiddly but a good old copy and paste when Island making should make alignment easier. Just looking for the last things in the modders' attempts to achieve close realism. If the ground is set above surface, or on surface (shift + e when object is selected in O2) the new ground should follow the terrain. So I am right that it would not be able to be the same object as the building (due to building needing to be not following terrain). Â Can you think of anyway of binding the texture to the building so when the building is placed the texture follows? I'm sure it could be part of the same builing object is you follow my suggestion. Best thing is to experimant. cheers. Was thinking that even if it can be incorporated into buildings it may be worth keeping it separate so it could be used with existing buildings. I am only thinking of some transparent mottled grey and green or similar.

I have been surprised not to see any ground textures supplied with buildings. Many times I have felt that the buildings did not appear connected to the ground as the ground texture did not vary around the building. even a slight darkening of the ground would make it appear more "there". Possibly some extra weeds and lichen matching the bottom of the outside walls. It would probably have to be a different addon to the building and be placed around the building. I am tempted to have a fiddle as I miraculously seem to have more time at the moment. Anyone else have an opinion?

Problem with actually adding it to the building is that it would go into the ground if on uneven ground. Â I think a separate ground texture (like a crater) would probably work better. Maybe a bit fiddly but a good old copy and paste when Island making should make alignment easier. Just looking for the last things in the modders' attempts to achieve close realism. If the ground is set above surface, or on surface (shift + e when object is selected in O2) the new ground should follow the terrain. So I am right that it would not be able to be the same object as the building (due to building needing to be not following terrain). Can you think of anyway of binding the texture to the building so when the building is placed the texture follows?

Problem with actually adding it to the building is that it would go into the ground if on uneven ground. I think a separate ground texture (like a crater) would probably work better. Maybe a bit fiddly but a good old copy and paste when Island making should make alignment easier. Just looking for the last things in the modders' attempts to achieve close realism.