Forgotten Hope Public Forum

Forgotten Hope 2 => Suggestions => Topic started by: gr770 on 01-08-2010, 05:08:29

Title: realism?
Post by: gr770 on 01-08-2010, 05:08:29
Yeah my suggestions if forgotten hope is going down the realism way and in general.
NO HUD- just a compass or someway of actually saying where the krauts are
More classes- it promotes better team work
Mumble support- inter fire team play
binocular can show distance- Helps with the no hud thing (Brit north 100m, etc.)
Get a TG server online- I only see at most 20 people in 1 server. TG brings tons of people.
I never seen something that can revive people. What is the point of incapacitated?
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: gr770 on 01-08-2010, 05:08:46
Er... minimap instead of hud. The hud is good. (except minimap)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Yronno on 01-08-2010, 06:08:58
You're saying you don't want to get rid of the HUD. just the minimap? It's been suggested before. Most people just say, '"That's Project Reality's business, we'll stick to our pseudo/quasi-realism".
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: FatJoe on 01-08-2010, 06:08:12
Forgotten Hope 2 is not pushing the limit on the realism side but staying right between the fun and serious bit.

However we do provide the ability to each player to play without a hud with a simple editing of a txt file within FH2 (I forget how exactly it was done.. and no idea if it's still 100% working :S )
How do you mean: more classes promotes better teamplay?
Mumble support, cool idea but no idea how that's implemented into FH2. I could ask the rest of the team on that bit..
I am pretty sure they did not have a Range Finder in the binoculars 70 some years ago, thus being kinda unrealistic suggestion :)
What is TG?
You indeed can't revive players, and the standard FH2 server preference setup has incapacitated time at 0 if I remember correctly, so normally you don't get to experience that incap time one PURE FH2 servers..
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Chariot on 01-08-2010, 06:08:35
I must admit, i would love to have PR realism in FH2. But gotta make do with what ya got.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: gr770 on 01-08-2010, 07:08:05
No HUD-still sticking with it
More classes- if you spread out duties you'll have to depend on someone. Or like vehicle classes like some mods do. (which those I don't really like).  It is possible to have more than 6 in a squad so all members can specialize.
Mumble- I agree
BICs- Hmm they did zoom so you could figure out what zoom is what distance
TG- tactical gamer HUGE BATTLEFIELD CLAN. They set up servers. Mods that have their support have more players online.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Chariot on 01-08-2010, 07:08:32
Well there is a pilot kit but i dont know what happened to the tankercommander kit that was in FH1.
as for your other suggestions i'll leave it to a dev.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: [130.Pz]S.Lainer on 01-08-2010, 07:08:56
  Mumble would be great! PR touched on this with its last release but it would be awesome if FH2 could take it one step farther.  Mumble is open source and seems very adaptable to about anything you could want to do with it.  We already have an FH2.exe so launching that could launch the mumble front end when you launched FH2.   
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: sn00x on 01-08-2010, 08:08:51
exactly what is this mumble thing? O.o
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Toddel on 01-08-2010, 08:08:53
its a Teamspeakclone . you guys ever heared from ingame Voip?
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: ajappat on 01-08-2010, 09:08:28
its a Teamspeakclone . you guys ever heared from ingame Voip?
I see you haven't tried it.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: VonMudra on 01-08-2010, 09:08:23
Yeah my suggestions if forgotten hope is going down the realism way and in general.
NO HUD- just a compass or someway of actually saying where the krauts are
More classes- it promotes better team work
Mumble support- inter fire team play
binocular can show distance- Helps with the no hud thing (Brit north 100m, etc.)
Get a TG server online- I only see at most 20 people in 1 server. TG brings tons of people.
I never seen something that can revive people. What is the point of incapacitated?


1)  If you want no HUD, there is a way to do it (I'm sure someone here can enlighten you to it).

2) There's no need for more classes if you consider the pick up kits.

3)  I thought there was mumble support?  Either way, teamspeak and vent work fine, plus squadspeak ingame.

4)  You don't need to judge distance as there is no actual sight adjustment for distance.

5)  Donno about the server thing

6)  There is no point to incapacitated.  Most servers have that turned off for that reason.  You cannot be revived, and it will stay that way.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: ajappat on 01-08-2010, 10:08:04
Btw, why all realism whores always want to revive half dead people? I don't see how it is realistic to patch up guy with adrenaline shot or shock paddles from certain death to full fighting condition again.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Laffey on 01-08-2010, 10:08:11
The incapacitated stop you flying across half the map when you get shot by a k98 or something
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: THeTA0123 on 01-08-2010, 11:08:31
I must admit, i would love to have PR realism in FH2. But gotta make do with what ya got.
you would

we wont
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Flippy Warbear on 01-08-2010, 11:08:52
If you want to get rid of the HUD, I suggest you play the mod in Immersive Mode (http://fhwiki.warumdarum.de/w/Immersive_Mode).
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: FatJoe on 01-08-2010, 12:08:26
No HUD-still sticking with it
More classes- if you spread out duties you'll have to depend on someone. Or like vehicle classes like some mods do. (which those I don't really like).  It is possible to have more than 6 in a squad so all members can specialize.
Mumble- I agree
BICs- Hmm they did zoom so you could figure out what zoom is what distance
TG- tactical gamer HUGE BATTLEFIELD CLAN. They set up servers. Mods that have their support have more players online.

You can play No HUD by doing what the guide tells you in Flippy's link above, or Immersive Mode (http://fhwiki.warumdarum.de/w/Immersive_Mode)

I fail to see how we do not have enough classes to provide specialization. We have Rifleman and SMG class for infantry fighting, we have MG class for support and defence. We've got engineers for vehicle support and Anti Tank for vehicle fighting. We have ammo kits for stationary defences support, NCO kit for squad leaders, Scout and sniper kits for Artillery support. We have Pilot kits that provide parachute for flying and the list goes on.

I don't really see the need to squeeze in a range finder for the binocs, You have nothing to do with the range, if you spot an enemy you can actually just put a "spot" on him and it'll show on the minimap, which isn't going anywhere in default mode.

Mumble and TG I'll look into, thanks for that :)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Sgt.Radman on 01-08-2010, 13:08:16
Me too, don't see the need for more classes. I would for xmp. bring in an ammo bag for the rifleman class since we DO have ammo boxes but most of the pubbies don't know where they are and it would be easier IMO.  Idea, put Ammo crate/box icons on the minimap?

Call me stupid but I fail 2 see the zoom option/button/wheel on my 1980 binoculars. I only have a wheel for sharpening related to distance. but that isn't ZOOMING.

TG-never heard

Mumble - it's a special type of Teamspeak (but it's not TeamSpeak) that links you to nearby squads and people if they are also running Mumble so you can talk to them, and you can normally speak with your squad if I'm not mistaken circumventing the ingame "BUGGY",if you ask me, VOIP system.[didn't quite use all it's functions]
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Thorondor123 on 01-08-2010, 13:08:43

Get a TG server online- I only see at most 20 people in 1 server. TG brings tons of people.

At what time? There are like 100-200 players during evenings/nights (GMT). Even as I write this there are 82 players online.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Flippy Warbear on 01-08-2010, 13:08:48
I tried Mumble with few devs & testers back then when testing 2.2 and we loved it. However, how would one implemend it into a mod...? Isnt that an impossibility?
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Sgt.Radman on 01-08-2010, 13:08:18
Well I don't think they implemented it into PR. They just "endorse" it for best gameplay. If I get it right it uses servers that server-holders bought so it's the same server IP that connects Mumble to the game server. I think.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: gr770 on 01-08-2010, 16:08:42
Mumble is a voip that allows you to talk to people up to 100m away. (PR is 70 but they edited mumble.) Mumble can edited to fit around the mod. No it can't be in the mod, just you can make one for the mod.

Thorondor I just never see any almost full server. Tactical gamer will still (even if your right) bring a almost server since they advertise their servers. Which is good since the TG community has only (for battlefield) BF2 BF2142, BFBC2, and PR servers. 1 mod. If can show them that this can beat pr in any way (not by making it pr for ww2.).

For classes there are so many utilities that haven't been touched by FH2. If they do put these in classes will have too much stuff.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ts4EVER on 01-08-2010, 16:08:15
There is one full server and one with over 40 people on it right now...
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Flippy Warbear on 01-08-2010, 17:08:43
I think we had TG server back then when 2.0 came out and in times of 2.1 but the servers died out then and disappeared.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Captain Pyjama Shark on 01-08-2010, 17:08:07
If we didn't have the minimap in this game I don't think I would ever play it.  I'd be spending the whole time lost, and inevitably if I ever found anything important I'd be shot immediately.  Come to think of it that sounds exactly like Project Reality  ;D.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: DLFReporter on 01-08-2010, 18:08:53
gr770 why don't you try to set up a server with TG?
Everyone s free to host a FH2 server. :)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: hankypanky on 02-08-2010, 06:08:27
Dude it's not like the devs are stopping TG from setting up a server for FH2.... They can set one up if they please. Take that request to their forms.

Mumble is used primarily in PR to talk to everyone including those outside your squad. So you can run up to a guy in another squad and talk to him. However wtf is the point of mumble in FH2 if most people don't even use mics..... In PR communication using VOIP is important to success in that game. However in FH2 it is not really  important since PR level of communication is not essential in FH2! Most people use text and it works just fine.

FH2 is just fine with it's mini-map
Ask TG to host a server for FH2, they can host one if they please.
Mumble is not needed in FH2 since a lot of people don't speak English, and also don't even have mics. Perhaps some of the tournaments can look into mumble but then again TS works fine.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: [130.Pz]S.Lainer on 02-08-2010, 06:08:07
  Mumble would be the shit in FH2 if a code god wants to take the time.  Mumble allows you to do a direct communication to those in your squad as well as a relative communication to any and all those around you (not in squad and enemies).  Like I said before it is possible if anyone wants the work.  We already know that BF2 can communicate a great deal of stuff to 3rd party software.  So how would this all work....

1. You launch FH2.exe
2. FH2.exe launches an FH customized mumble.
3. You log in and join a server in FH2
4. A master server is consulted on what server you have joined and if it has a mumble server to join.
5. You join the server and the mumble server in the unassigned (lets say axis) channel.
6.  You can talk to everyone in said channel as well as people close to you through mumbles ability to track who is within your radius and adjust the volume.
7. You make a squad in FH2 and mumble makes a channel and joins you to it.  Now using the "All talk" button you can communicate with all those in the area.  You can also just communicate with those in your squad using squad chat regardless of how far away from you they are in game.
8. If you empty a squad or make a new one in FH2 the mumble server acts accordingly.

Damn sure this is all possible.  Just would take a man to make it happen.

Played with this a bit in PR and I can say it is awesome.  So much fun being separated from your squad and still being able to talk with others.  MAG for the PS3 also has this and I had a great deal of lols talking with enemies during a firefight.  If this was tackled it would be better then a Maus.    ;D
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: hankypanky on 02-08-2010, 07:08:52
  Mumble would be the shit in FH2 if a code god wants to take the time.  Mumble allows you to do a direct communication to those in your squad as well as a relative communication to any and all those around you (not in squad and enemies).  Like I said before it is possible if anyone wants the work.  We already know that BF2 can communicate a great deal of stuff to 3rd party software.  So how would this all work....

1. You launch FH2.exe
2. FH2.exe launches an FH customized mumble.
3. You log in and join a server in FH2
4. A master server is consulted on what server you have joined and if it has a mumble server to join.
5. You join the server and the mumble server in the unassigned (lets say axis) channel.
6.  You can talk to everyone in said channel as well as people close to you through mumbles ability to track who is within your radius and adjust the volume.
7. You make a squad in FH2 and mumble makes a channel and joins you to it.  Now using the "All talk" button you can communicate with all those in the area.  You can also just communicate with those in your squad using squad chat regardless of how far away from you they are in game.
8. If you empty a squad or make a new one in FH2 the mumble server acts accordingly.

Damn sure this is all possible.  Just would take a man to make it happen.

Played with this a bit in PR and I can say it is awesome.  So much fun being separated from your squad and still being able to talk with others.  MAG for the PS3 also has this and I had a great deal of lols talking with enemies during a firefight.  If this was tackled it would be better then a Maus.    ;D

IMO It would take too much dev time. It doesn't seem worth it in my opinion. A lot of work for a small amount of people.

Think about it... to be a FH2 mumbler you would need:
1. MIC
2. Time and energy to download program and to learn it.
3. Some sort of teamwork attitude. 

Out of the small FH2 community, you would probably just have like 20 nerds playing together every night. 
Perhaps the tournaments should look into this.. But I doubt they would spend the time and effort to move away from TS.

You don't have to talk smack to those you own, you can always t-bag their bodies :D Or my fav fix bayonet and stab away XD

In the end Mumble is a good edition, but I would prefer game content... or even a new menu :D
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: [130.Pz]S.Lainer on 02-08-2010, 07:08:17
1. I was talking about it being interrogated into the next patch. 
2. You would not have to download anything.  You might have to set a couple keys to what you want for the talking bits if you have a mic. 
3. Pretty sure that although devs have tasks set before them by a slave master they can do whatever the fuck they feel like working on if they choose.   And if a guy that loves code wants to do this and wants the work they can make it come true. 

Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ekalbs on 02-08-2010, 07:08:20
1. I was talking about it being interrogated into the next patch. 
2. You would not have to download anything.  You might have to set a couple keys to what you want for the talking bits if you have a mic. 
3. Pretty sure that although devs have tasks set before them by a slave master they can do whatever the fuck they feel like working on if they choose.   And if a guy that loves code wants to do this and wants the work they can make it come true. 



Any Idea What Language It Be In?
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: DLFReporter on 02-08-2010, 09:08:40
2. You would not have to download anything.  You might have to set a couple keys to what you want for the talking bits if you have a mic. 

QFT! That's called VOIP. Has been a great feature since 2005. ^^
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: hankypanky on 02-08-2010, 17:08:35
2. You would not have to download anything.  You might have to set a couple keys to what you want for the talking bits if you have a mic. 

QFT! That's called VOIP. Has been a great feature since 2005. ^^
YUP and that's all FH2 really needs tbh.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: djinn on 03-08-2010, 00:08:43
With people like you, you'd still be grinning about having invented the wheel

Think about it! Mumble! Sound that actually works according to where you stand on the battlefield! Shout versus radio over! How can you compare VOIP and that. I've always considered it and text subterfuge to the concept of voice over versus radio over as the commo-rose would have it... Restrict that and get mumble working, and we're really talking
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Chimples on 03-08-2010, 04:08:15
I value my life, please do not make it realistic. The idea of wearing the same clothes for 8 weeks in -20C weather with little food is horrendous. Its is great the way it is.......

more realism > means steeper learning curve > means less new players > shrinking community > no game future
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: [130.Pz]S.Lainer on 03-08-2010, 05:08:03
more realism > means steeper learning curve > means less new players > shrinking community > no game future

Devils advocate here but you mean like that BF2 mod Project Reality?   ;)

And really guys....Have you never used mumble?  It is great fun.  Not a huge PR fan but I did give it a go when it was last patched with mumble included.  It was really fun.  As anyone who has every played PR knows when you are the sole survivor of an ambush you can spend a great deal of time mucking about before you see your squad mates again.  This happened to me the first game I played so I started wandering towards this block of houses when all of a sudden I started hearing faint voices coming from one of the buildings I walked inside and found another friendly squad.  Asked them if I could tag along and we all worked together until I had a bad experience with a bunch of AK rounds.  It also was kinda fun being able to hear my enemies after I wacked a guy while hiding out in a shed I could hear them looking for me as they was running around my hiding spot just meters away.  Like I said I am not a huge fan of that mod but mumble made it really fun and I think would do the same for FH.  It is not really a replacement for the in game VOIP it is a whole new experience.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: DLFReporter on 03-08-2010, 07:08:01
With people like you, you'd still be grinning about having invented the wheel

Think about it! Mumble! Sound that actually works according to where you stand on the battlefield! Shout versus radio over! How can you compare VOIP and that. I've always considered it and text subterfuge to the concept of voice over versus radio over as the commo-rose would have it... Restrict that and get mumble working, and we're really talking

Now now djin no need to get personal, you have quite a temper as I now know from meeting you on 762...
Yes mumbel has nice features, but in 50% of the cases where I used it the fact that I wasn't close enough to tell a squadmate what to look out for was more than a nuisance. I was just referring to the 'easy setup'. Which isn't so easy in mumble. ;)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Excavus on 03-08-2010, 07:08:40
Forget about mumble in FH2. Teamwork in FH2 is next to non-existant, so it'll be a useless program that nobody will use because most of the pubbers don't even have mics. Mumble is a great program, I agree. I use it in PR a lot where the teamwork and player numbers are 10x as many as FH2. It will work good in the teamwork-orientated environment of PR, but not in the arcadey, fast-paced environment of FH2.

You'll be shot dead by a dolphin diver before you have a chance to warn your teammates, if they are even using the program.

more realism > means steeper learning curve > means less new players > shrinking community > no game future

I lol'd. There is a reason why PR, the most realistic Battlefield 2 mod out there, has the largest community out of all the mods created for BF2.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: DLFReporter on 03-08-2010, 08:08:31
So we are back to the need to make an PRFH2 mod?
I believe there is quite a different reason why PR is successful, it is because it took the modern scenario and first of all concentrated on the important players. The Americans. Everything else like restricting gameplay and enforcing teamplay just helped to keep the numbers. FH didn't and now we have to live with it. I hope that including more maps with US forces will bring back a few people from across the pond.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Excavus on 03-08-2010, 08:08:20
So we are back to the need to make an PRFH2 mod?
I believe there is quite a different reason why PR is successful, it is because it took the modern scenario and first of all concentrated on the important players. The Americans. Everything else like restricting gameplay and enforcing teamplay just helped to keep the numbers. FH didn't and now we have to live with it. I hope that including more maps with US forces will bring back a few people from across the pond.
I never said to make a PRFH2 mod. If I wanted one, I wouldn't ask the FH2 team, I would ask the PR team. But I did anyways, and they said no, so it's not gonna happen.

PR is popular because of it's variety. The amount of factions and maps it has, along with the vehicles and weapons they use. But we didn't have that back in the day, but it still attracted players because it focused on one thing the most. Teamwork. Good old fashioned teamwork. It attracts the military guys a lot, so you'll see them roaming around the forums and in game.

People came to it because it offered new gameplay as well, something that they could not get in vBF2 or other mods. It is the reason why mods like POE2 and the like collapsed, because they stuck with the vBF2 gameplay and now it is lost effort. Look how many players they have, and compare it to FH2. Honestly the only reason why FH2 has gone this far is because of it's dedicated playerbase and it deviates from the standard vBF2 gameplay slightly.

Once again, I am not suggesting the FH2 team go for the PR gameplay style. In fact that is what I do not want them to do. If FH2 did that, it would be seen as a PR clone in WW2. It would collapse quickly because it doesn't offer anything better than PR. This is why the FH2 team should try and make different, more radical changes, and not limit themselves to the gameplay they have currently, which only goes so far from the vBF2 gameplay. Try a different path, do not go the vBF2 way or the PR way. Shiny new PzIII and Sherman variants can only please someone for so long.

I'm sorry if some of this might not make sense. I tend to ramble when I get a train of thought going, combined with the current time only makes it worse. Hopefully you understood most of it.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: DLFReporter on 03-08-2010, 09:08:36
What to do then.
Any ideas?
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Excavus on 03-08-2010, 10:08:56
What were we talking about again? I don't remember the original point of this thread. :P
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: djinn on 03-08-2010, 10:08:22
Aspects of the first post that we can dissect, desseminate, character assasinate or consider....

@N24
It was more sarcasm than anger (Or being rude). Yer, I do have a bit of a temper lately. Sorry for that.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: DLFReporter on 03-08-2010, 10:08:54
Aspects of the first post that we can dissect, desseminate, character assasinate or consider....

Let us focus on the consider part. What can be changed to enhance teamwork without going all restrictive on the players. making maps that need teamwork to win was tried, but seem to have failed.

@N24
It was more sarcasm than anger (Or being rude). Yer, I do have a bit of a temper lately. Sorry for that.

No worries it's that time of year. :)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: kettcar on 03-08-2010, 11:08:43
Quote
I never said to make a PRFH2 mod. If I wanted one, I wouldn't ask the FH2 team, I would ask the PR team.

pls do this, and give me the link to the forumtoppic  ;D ;D
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Excavus on 03-08-2010, 12:08:10
Quote
I never said to make a PRFH2 mod. If I wanted one, I wouldn't ask the FH2 team, I would ask the PR team.

pls do this, and give me the link to the forumtoppic  ;D ;D
By PRFH2, I mean PR WW2. It's already been discussed on the PR forums, and I believe they have rejected the proposition. It was thought of by WW2 enthusiasts on the PR forums after PR Vietnam was announced.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: kettcar on 03-08-2010, 13:08:57
so much things are not finished. and imo, they will not have the manpower for a complete other szenario. eod is include, cause gunnie gives all the stuff. stay realistic^^
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Kubador on 03-08-2010, 14:08:55
Gunnie is like a Godfather of all BF2 mods.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: SiCaRiO on 03-08-2010, 14:08:29


Let us focus on the consider part. What can be changed to enhance teamwork without going all restrictive on the players. making maps that need teamwork to win was tried, but seem to have failed.



depends of what do you mean by restrictive. lets face something: teamwork is harder than lonewolfing, if random player has to chose, he will chose the easy way. so, to make him chose teamwork, lonewolfing should be harder than teamwork. how to do this?? one example could be that players without squads cant have special kits (at, sniper, smgs, etc), that way we have more players taking the first step to teamwork, join a squad. of course, they will be some players that join just for the cool shiny weapon, but they can be kicked, and since they WILL lonewolf, they are gonna die quickly and the weapon again will be free to someone who will use give it a better use.

I, for one, dont find restrictive to onley be able to drive tanks with a crewman kit, or fly with a pilot kit. flags shouldnt be able to be capture for one guy, always requiring a minimun of 2, etc, etc. ther are many ways to archive teamwork, without needed to be a WW2 PR  clone.

*Deleted million spaces before punctuation marks. Sorry, but that was just painful to read*
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: FatJoe on 03-08-2010, 15:08:55

depends of what do you mean by restrictive. lets face something: teamwork is harder than lonewolfing, if random player has to chose, he will chose the easy way. so, to make him chose teamwork, lonewolfing should be harder than teamwork. how to do this?? one example could be that players without squads cant have special kits (at, sniper, smgs, etc), that way we have more players taking the first step to teamwork, join a squad. of course, they will be some players that join just for the cool shiny weapon, but they can be kicked, and since they WILL lonewolf, they are gonna die quickly and the weapon again will be free to someone who will use give it a better use.

I, for one, dont find restrictive to onley be able to drive tanks with a crewman kit, or fly with a pilot kit. flags shouldnt be able to be capture for one guy, always requiring a minimun of 2, etc, etc. ther are many ways to archive teamwork, without needed to be a WW2 PR  clone.

Yet, that is restrictive, disallowing people to jump into their tanks without a crewman kit or not being able to be a sniper without being in a team, and that would be actually kinda PR clone-ish :)

We, I atleast, want players to be able to do pretty much what ever they want to from the start, like it already is, but encourage teamwork more, I'll agree this can be made better, no doubt. More 2 manned flags is one idea I like atleast somewhat better.. and I'm totally open for more ideas :)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: SiCaRiO on 03-08-2010, 16:08:29
clone-ish , not clone xD.

its simple as that , if players are allowed to do what they want ,they will not chose teamplay simple because that needs more thinking and is harder to acomplish than lonewolfing .
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ts4EVER on 03-08-2010, 16:08:32
Yeah but it is also less effective. I know that if I am in a squad I have higher scores at the end of the round.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: djinn on 03-08-2010, 17:08:56
I think you are arguing philosophy: would people play as a team given a good team-based architecture? Or does the architecture have to based on the fact that they wouldn't?

The noble savage versus the Leviathan. I say we should give pubbies credit for wanting to experience teamplay. Most just need good leadership, like any social group.

And a good, solid, yet flexible architecture certainly helps... Like mumble.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ekalbs on 03-08-2010, 17:08:07
And a good, solid, yet flexible architecture certainly helps... Like mumble.

I Have Been Going Through Mumbles Code, It Is A Very "Poorly" Coded Program, That Has Much More To Be Desired. Course I Could Be From A Different School Of Thought Of Coding
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ts4EVER on 03-08-2010, 17:08:12
And a good, solid, yet flexible architecture certainly helps... Like mumble.

I Have Been Going Through Mumbles Code, It Is A Very "Poorly" Coded Program, That Has Much More To Be Desired. Course I Could Be From A Different School Of Thought Of Coding

And Spelling
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ekalbs on 03-08-2010, 17:08:07
And a good, solid, yet flexible architecture certainly helps... Like mumble.

I Have Been Going Through Mumbles Code, It Is A Very "Poorly" Coded Program, That Has Much More To Be Desired. Course I Could Be From A Different School Of Thought Of Coding

And Spelling

My Spelling? If So I Am Aware Something Is Spelling Incorrectly But I Have No Idea What?
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ts4EVER on 03-08-2010, 17:08:38
The capital letter in front of every word.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ekalbs on 03-08-2010, 17:08:41
The capital letter in front of every word.

Leave My Capital Letters Alone :/
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Flippy Warbear on 03-08-2010, 17:08:35
It's bloody annoying.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: SiCaRiO on 03-08-2010, 18:08:50
Yeah but it is also less effective. I know that if I am in a squad I have higher scores at the end of the round.

never notice it , i dont play for the points.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Kev4000 on 03-08-2010, 21:08:13
My opinion on minimap:
While the idea of removing it is realistic, the result would be unrealistic. You know where your squad mates are in real life generally. Ingame you don't always. It would result in many team kills.
Also, your coordination would be as if you were born when you spawn. In real life, you'd be briefed over the area you're going, the strategy, and where your team mates are attacking etc.
We strive for historical accuracy, not realism. Keeping the minimap IMO is the best way to present the area awareness which soldiers would have in real life.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Excavus on 03-08-2010, 23:08:55
My opinion on minimap:
While the idea of removing it is realistic, the result would be unrealistic. You know where your squad mates are in real life generally. Ingame you don't always. It would result in many team kills.
Also, your coordination would be as if you were born when you spawn. In real life, you'd be briefed over the area you're going, the strategy, and where your team mates are attacking etc.
We strive for historical accuracy, not realism. Keeping the minimap IMO is the best way to present the area awareness which soldiers would have in real life.
Did you know that there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life? This would force people to learn the uniforms. People still teamkill even with the minimap because they don't know the uniforms. Also, what's the point of knowing where your "squad" mates are when all of them are lonewolfing on the other side of the map? Don't take away our "M" key, give us a more readable compass, and take away the minimap.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Thorondor123 on 04-08-2010, 00:08:24
My opinion on minimap:
While the idea of removing it is realistic, the result would be unrealistic. You know where your squad mates are in real life generally. Ingame you don't always. It would result in many team kills.
Also, your coordination would be as if you were born when you spawn. In real life, you'd be briefed over the area you're going, the strategy, and where your team mates are attacking etc.
We strive for historical accuracy, not realism. Keeping the minimap IMO is the best way to present the area awareness which soldiers would have in real life.
Did you know that there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life?
Bullshit.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: hankypanky on 04-08-2010, 00:08:54
Aspects of the first post that we can dissect, desseminate, character assasinate or consider....

@N24
It was more sarcasm than anger (Or being rude). Yer, I do have a bit of a temper lately. Sorry for that.

you hurt my feelings  :-[ 
jk djinn look at the facts not many FH2 players own a mic. So what would be the point of mumble?
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: hankypanky on 04-08-2010, 00:08:40
The capital letter in front of every word.

Leave My Capital Letters Alone :/
Dude do you always type like that? lol it's funny because you can't stop XD
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: [130.Pz]S.Lainer on 04-08-2010, 00:08:03
Aspects of the first post that we can dissect, desseminate, character assasinate or consider....

@N24
It was more sarcasm than anger (Or being rude). Yer, I do have a bit of a temper lately. Sorry for that.

you hurt my feelings  :-[ 
jk djinn look at the facts not many FH2 players own a mic. So what would be the point of mumble?

I only know a couple that don't have a mic.  If you own a computer that can play FH2 there is no reason not to own a shitty $7 mic.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Excavus on 04-08-2010, 00:08:14
My opinion on minimap:
While the idea of removing it is realistic, the result would be unrealistic. You know where your squad mates are in real life generally. Ingame you don't always. It would result in many team kills.
Also, your coordination would be as if you were born when you spawn. In real life, you'd be briefed over the area you're going, the strategy, and where your team mates are attacking etc.
We strive for historical accuracy, not realism. Keeping the minimap IMO is the best way to present the area awareness which soldiers would have in real life.
Did you know that there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life?
Bullshit.
During the First Gulf War, the majority of coalition tank forces that were killed was due to friendly fire. Look it up yourself.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ts4EVER on 04-08-2010, 00:08:22
My opinion on minimap:
While the idea of removing it is realistic, the result would be unrealistic. You know where your squad mates are in real life generally. Ingame you don't always. It would result in many team kills.
Also, your coordination would be as if you were born when you spawn. In real life, you'd be briefed over the area you're going, the strategy, and where your team mates are attacking etc.
We strive for historical accuracy, not realism. Keeping the minimap IMO is the best way to present the area awareness which soldiers would have in real life.
Did you know that there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life?
Bullshit.
During the First Gulf War, the majority of coalition tank forces that were killed was due to friendly fire. Look it up yourself.

Yeah, because the Iraquis had nothing to destroy coalition tanks with *facepalm*
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: VonMudra on 04-08-2010, 00:08:29
My opinion on minimap:
While the idea of removing it is realistic, the result would be unrealistic. You know where your squad mates are in real life generally. Ingame you don't always. It would result in many team kills.
Also, your coordination would be as if you were born when you spawn. In real life, you'd be briefed over the area you're going, the strategy, and where your team mates are attacking etc.
We strive for historical accuracy, not realism. Keeping the minimap IMO is the best way to present the area awareness which soldiers would have in real life.
Did you know that there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life?

I call bullshit.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Excavus on 04-08-2010, 00:08:36
My opinion on minimap:
While the idea of removing it is realistic, the result would be unrealistic. You know where your squad mates are in real life generally. Ingame you don't always. It would result in many team kills.
Also, your coordination would be as if you were born when you spawn. In real life, you'd be briefed over the area you're going, the strategy, and where your team mates are attacking etc.
We strive for historical accuracy, not realism. Keeping the minimap IMO is the best way to present the area awareness which soldiers would have in real life.
Did you know that there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life?
Bullshit.
During the First Gulf War, the majority of coalition tank forces that were killed was due to friendly fire. Look it up yourself.

Yeah, because the Iraquis had nothing to destroy coalition tanks with *facepalm*
Some were due to enemy fire, but not as much as friendly fire. Iraqi tanks were shit, exported models T-55s and T-72s from the Soviet Union. They were poorly trained.

My opinion on minimap:
While the idea of removing it is realistic, the result would be unrealistic. You know where your squad mates are in real life generally. Ingame you don't always. It would result in many team kills.
Also, your coordination would be as if you were born when you spawn. In real life, you'd be briefed over the area you're going, the strategy, and where your team mates are attacking etc.
We strive for historical accuracy, not realism. Keeping the minimap IMO is the best way to present the area awareness which soldiers would have in real life.
Did you know that there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life?

I call bullshit.
Let the Zone take me if I am lying.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Thorondor123 on 04-08-2010, 01:08:46
My opinion on minimap:
While the idea of removing it is realistic, the result would be unrealistic. You know where your squad mates are in real life generally. Ingame you don't always. It would result in many team kills.
Also, your coordination would be as if you were born when you spawn. In real life, you'd be briefed over the area you're going, the strategy, and where your team mates are attacking etc.
We strive for historical accuracy, not realism. Keeping the minimap IMO is the best way to present the area awareness which soldiers would have in real life.
Did you know that there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life?
Bullshit.
During the First Gulf War, the majority of coalition tank forces that were killed was due to friendly fire. Look it up yourself.
During the first world war ~5 % of French casualties were due friendly fire. Your useless statistics from situation where friendly fire was actually the only way to inflict casualties.

Saying that "there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life" based on one example about tank losses proves nothing about combat in general. It's bullshit.
Try to prove that out of 25 million deaths in WWII over half was caused by friendly fire. ::)

Look it up yourself.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Excavus on 04-08-2010, 01:08:41
My opinion on minimap:
While the idea of removing it is realistic, the result would be unrealistic. You know where your squad mates are in real life generally. Ingame you don't always. It would result in many team kills.
Also, your coordination would be as if you were born when you spawn. In real life, you'd be briefed over the area you're going, the strategy, and where your team mates are attacking etc.
We strive for historical accuracy, not realism. Keeping the minimap IMO is the best way to present the area awareness which soldiers would have in real life.
Did you know that there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life?
Bullshit.
During the First Gulf War, the majority of coalition tank forces that were killed was due to friendly fire. Look it up yourself.
During the first world war ~5 % of French casualties were due friendly fire. Your useless statistics from situation where friendly fire was actually the only way to inflict casualties.

Saying that "there are more deaths to friendly fire than actual enemy fire in real life" based on one example about tank losses proves nothing about combat in general. It's bullshit.
Try to prove that out of 25 million deaths in WWII over half was caused by friendly fire. ::)

Look it up yourself.
Don't care about the 25 million people that died during WW2. The Gulf War was more important. :)

Now get back on topic.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Sgt.Radman on 04-08-2010, 09:08:14
7$ mic? You can get it for 3$.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: DLFReporter on 04-08-2010, 10:08:34
You forget that not everyone is as apt at speaking English and most (alone at least 30% of the betatesters) won't speak up because of that, or are too shy to use it in that case.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: THeTA0123 on 04-08-2010, 14:08:00
or they are french and german and refuse to speak english  ;D
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: [130.Pz]S.Lainer on 04-08-2010, 14:08:58
You forget that not everyone is as apt at speaking English and most (alone at least 30% of the betatesters) won't speak up because of that, or are too shy to use it in that case.

  I don't mind playing in a squad with people that speak broken English.  Hell I don't even mind if they all just speak German.  Though nothing sucks worse then a squad of Finnish or Estonian speakers.  I don't even understand how that passes for human communication.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: DLFReporter on 04-08-2010, 14:08:06
or they are french and german and refuse to speak english  ;D

Don't you go stereotyping on us. tsk ;)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Aggroman on 04-08-2010, 15:08:30
or they are french and german and refuse to speak english  ;D

Nah, not really. ;D
And you also had a talk with me and Bang0o already. ;)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: THeTA0123 on 04-08-2010, 15:08:37
or they are french and german and refuse to speak english  ;D

Nah, not really. ;D
And you also had a talk with me and Bang0o already. ;)
hehehe  ;D
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Kelmola on 04-08-2010, 16:08:52
Though nothing sucks worse then a squad of Finnish or Estonian speakers.  I don't even understand how that passes for human communication.
Finnish is pronounced as written. Therefore, if you hear a Finnish word spoken but have never seen it written you know how to write it, and vice versa. As a result, any literate Finn would get 100% in a native-language "spelling contest" - that's why we don't have such nonsense unlike those stupid Americans. ;D Naturally, this produces an accent of its own - however, native Latin speakers would find it very familiar. In addition, schools here try to teach British English & Received Pronouciation instead of American English which is more prevalent in the media, so the end result tends to be something inbetween, but with Finnish accent.

However, what makes situation worse is that Finnish does not have intonation as such: intonation in the Finnish language is normally associated with stage acting, or flat-out comedy, it does not exist in normal speech at all. Thus, including that as part of a foreign language is usually last on any Finn's list after vocabulary and grammar since it is not natural, it is something that requires conscious effort and quite a lot of pretending. So "naturally occurring" Finglish tends to sound quite monotonous.

Although an ex-coworker once told me that I sound like Borat (it's the pot calling the kettle black: she was Belgian French and her English was barely understood by anyone, even the Belgians), and in a recent FHGN I was told that I sound like a robot ;) I still keep using the mic in FHGN's. Maybe I'll some night scare you all by joining in a VOIP ONLY squad :P
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: NTH on 04-08-2010, 16:08:17
Though nothing sucks worse then a squad of Finnish or Estonian speakers.  I don't even understand how that passes for human communication.
Finnish is pronounced as written. Therefore, if you hear a Finnish word spoken but have never seen it written you know how to write it, and vice versa. As a result, any literate Finn would get 100% in a native-language "spelling contest" - that's why we don't have such nonsense unlike those stupid Americans. ;D Naturally, this produces an accent of its own - however, native Latin speakers would find it very familiar. In addition, schools here try to teach British English & Received Pronouciation instead of American English which is more prevalent in the media, so the end result tends to be something inbetween, but with Finnish accent.

However, what makes situation worse is that Finnish does not have intonation as such: intonation in the Finnish language is normally associated with stage acting, or flat-out comedy, it does not exist in normal speech at all. Thus, including that as part of a foreign language is usually last on any Finn's list after vocabulary and grammar since it is not natural, it is something that requires conscious effort and quite a lot of pretending. So "naturally occurring" Finglish tends to sound quite monotonous.

Although an ex-coworker once told me that I sound like Borat (it's the pot calling the kettle black: she was Belgian French and her English was barely understood by anyone, even the Belgians), and in a recent FHGN I was told that I sound like a robot ;) I still keep using the mic in FHGN's. Maybe I'll some night scare you all by joining in a VOIP ONLY squad :P
Is Flippy also Finnish ? I know he sounds like the Terminator  ;D
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Flippy Warbear on 04-08-2010, 16:08:36
Ja, I am finnish and what goes to me sounding like Terminator... well...

RUUUUUN GET TO TEH TOPIIIC, NAOUW!
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ciupita on 04-08-2010, 16:08:10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NMX3zxEa6E that's what english sounds when pronounced like finnish
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: kettcar on 04-08-2010, 17:08:42
ah noo, the bavarians are coming

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocx2CuNjXrc
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Paavopesusieni on 04-08-2010, 19:08:05
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NMX3zxEa6E that's what english sounds when pronounced like finnish

ROFL, I love that one.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ekalbs on 04-08-2010, 20:08:08
Or they're like me and are borderline illiterate and just don't like to talk.  
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: hankypanky on 04-08-2010, 20:08:08
*American is very confused with all this European bs*
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: THeTA0123 on 04-08-2010, 20:08:33
*American is very confused with all this European bs*
im european and i dont get it either
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: NTH on 04-08-2010, 22:08:30
*American is very confused with all this European bs*
im european and i dont get it either

That's ok, you are Belgian and therefore exempted  ;)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: hankypanky on 05-08-2010, 05:08:21
*American is very confused with all this European bs*
im european and i dont get it either

That's ok, you are Belgian and therefore exempted  ;)

BURN he is kicking you out of the elite FH2 Euro club.
TA0 must now move to America and start a new life.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Cadyshack on 05-08-2010, 08:08:01
Sorry to get this nice thread back on track (sort of), but just a quick statement here:

Quote
Don't care about the 25 million people that died during WW2. The Gulf War was more important.

I know, feelings getting in the way, but that is some poorly placed joking. I apologize, but I'm just not approving.


Anyways, if the populous doesn't want more materiel in the mod, doing almost anything that resembles a force in gameplay makes it too much of a PR clone, and not changing anything makes us too much of a BF2 copy, then we're in a bind, aren't we?

I know I'm going all Pessimist Mode here, but woes us. The mod will survive, but we might not fill more servers than in FH1's waning days. Then we could be boned for the next generation of BF as BF2 slowly dies out.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: DLFReporter on 05-08-2010, 08:08:00
I know I'm going all Pessimist Mode here, but woes us. The mod will survive, but we might not fill more servers than in FH1's waning days. Then we could be boned for the next generation of BF as BF2 slowly dies out.

We are boned, since all next gen BF titles won't be modable.
This is it folks.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ekalbs on 05-08-2010, 15:08:44
I know I'm going all Pessimist Mode here, but woes us. The mod will survive, but we might not fill more servers than in FH1's waning days. Then we could be boned for the next generation of BF as BF2 slowly dies out.

We are boned, since all next gen BF titles won't be modable.
This is it folks.
So True T.T
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: ottozeimer on 05-08-2010, 16:08:44
arma2  ::)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: THeTA0123 on 05-08-2010, 16:08:08
arma2  ::)
Non i think not
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Cory the Otter on 05-08-2010, 17:08:53
I know I'm going all Pessimist Mode here, but woes us. The mod will survive, but we might not fill more servers than in FH1's waning days. Then we could be boned for the next generation of BF as BF2 slowly dies out.

We are boned, since all next gen BF titles won't be modable.
This is it folks.

So, either BF2 is the end of Forgotten Hope, or we all pool our money and buy a new engine, or we go to another (still living and moddable) game engine.

I hope for the middle one, myself, but I know that ain't happening.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ekalbs on 05-08-2010, 17:08:34
I know I'm going all Pessimist Mode here, but woes us. The mod will survive, but we might not fill more servers than in FH1's waning days. Then we could be boned for the next generation of BF as BF2 slowly dies out.

We are boned, since all next gen BF titles won't be modable.
This is it folks.

So, either BF2 is the end of Forgotten Hope, or we all pool our money and buy a new engine, or we go to another (still living and moddable) game engine.

I hope for the middle one, myself, but I know that ain't happening.

Or I finish my engine in time

Title: Re: realism?
Post by: hankypanky on 05-08-2010, 17:08:54
Aren't there free engines that modders use? Or at least like really cheap ones? This community is way too tight and devoted to give up FH.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Flippy Warbear on 05-08-2010, 17:08:44
Talking like we are shutting down tomorrow.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Captain Pyjama Shark on 05-08-2010, 18:08:12
Speaking of languages, does Dutch have much intonation in it?  Cause Fuchs has a really monotone voice. 
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: [130.Pz]S.Lainer on 05-08-2010, 18:08:21
Speaking of languages, does Dutch have much intonation in it?  Cause Fuchs has a really monotone voice.  

Yes they do.

Fuchs is just a boring fuck......That reminds me.  Has he posted as of late?  I am getting worried.


Edit:  Last active July 30th.   :(  Anyone know of his whereabouts?
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: THeTA0123 on 05-08-2010, 18:08:29
G_Drew on TS>all


And angrybeaver ftw also
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Cory the Otter on 05-08-2010, 18:08:38
Talking like we are shutting down tomorrow.

2 years in real life is a billion years online.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Kev4000 on 05-08-2010, 19:08:56
Thing with Finnish is its not even an indo-european language. English is more similar to Iranian or Hindi then it is to Finnish. Finnish is like Chinese, can't understand a word (except for modern terms they've adopted).

Game technology has slowed down quite the bit the last few years. Compare 2000 to 2005 and 2005 to 2010. BF2 still has over 10k players, while this far into BF1942's life it had 2000. BF2 will live on for a very long time to come, especially since the industry has left the niche.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: hankypanky on 05-08-2010, 21:08:48
Thanks to the bad company games BF2 is going to have a long life
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Captain Pyjama Shark on 05-08-2010, 22:08:28
Speaking of languages, does Dutch have much intonation in it?  Cause Fuchs has a really monotone voice.  

Yes they do.

Fuchs is just a boring fuck......That reminds me.  Has he posted as of late?  I am getting worried.


Edit:  Last active July 30th.   :(  Anyone know of his whereabouts?

Either he is dead, or he is ashamed because of how regularly I beat him in Left 4 Dead 2 and in Total War games.  
Though I hope he comes back because me, him and Tedacious are like the Three Musketeers.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: AdamPA1006 on 06-08-2010, 00:08:00
well mumble sounds awesome too me, and we need to start a campaign to get more people using mics. the game is 100% more fun when in a mic squad
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: gr770 on 06-08-2010, 06:08:32
All of them are.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: DLFReporter on 06-08-2010, 07:08:03
And angrybeaver ftw also

 hehehe

Quote from: angrybeaver
Get fucked... just get focked.

 ;D ;D
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: NTH on 06-08-2010, 11:08:55
Dutch is pretty much guttural, i.e speaking from the gut. We share that with Arabic people who als speak from the gut. That's why for most people they only hear our hard G's.

I wouldn't call it monotome, could be that Fuchs is just very boring in TS  ;)

I like Rusty_Steel's accent, sounds very nice in VIOP and Ezy's one. It's an advantage to be a native English speaker.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Penchesz on 08-08-2010, 03:08:15
Hi! Regarding to subject of this topic I've got a question. Before I posted here, I did some quick forum search, but I didn't find anything that would fit at 100% as answer. So... is it possible to impement a weather-change system in BF2? I mean... does the game engine allow that kind of things?

Oh, and weather-change in my opinion = in ex. sometimes its raining, sometimes not, maybe "moving" clouds on the sky, etc.. I found some posts about day/night cycle (PRmod) but naaah. It wouldn't fit to FH2 + those problems with lightmaps.

I've got some programming skills, and modding experience (unfortunately NOT with BF2), so I'm just asking is it possible with that engine? If yes, well... I could try to do that :) ... but what the FH2 community think 'bout it? Or maybe there is something like that already implemented? (I'm now downloading the newest version - my last game was on v2.1  :-X). Cheers!

Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ts4EVER on 08-08-2010, 03:08:37
I'd say it is theoretically possible to have moving rain clouds and rain effects (although I don't think it would be good for performance). However what is impossible is changing lightmaps, so it is very hard to change lightsettings in a dynamic way.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Kelmola on 08-08-2010, 04:08:51
Anctoville does this client side (lightnings), amirite?
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Sgt. Powderhound on 08-08-2010, 10:08:55
There was a demo a while ago of a moving sun in PR, but the opinion here seemed to be that it was more trouble than it was worth.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Ts4EVER on 08-08-2010, 10:08:49
Yes because it can't change the lightmaps. And on Anctoville only the sky picture flashes, terrain remains dark.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: TigerAce on 08-08-2010, 11:08:42
I think I heard somewhere that BF3 (EA is still deciding whether or not to make it) is going to be moddable or something cause there getting spammed by all those angry modders out there  ;)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Excavus on 08-08-2010, 13:08:46
I think I heard somewhere that BF3 (EA is still deciding whether or not to make it) is going to be moddable or something cause there getting spammed by all those angry modders out there  ;)
BF3 is being made. (http://www.facepunch.com/fp/emoot/downs.gif)
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: kettcar on 08-08-2010, 14:08:08
EA dont care about angry modders
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Sgt.Radman on 08-08-2010, 19:08:09
Sad but true. They only care about money. Especially if they come out with something that's "Free 2 play".
Unlike Ubisoft, Codemasters, Relic, etc. etc. EA doesn't care about fan base cause they have a vast games university. From Moh to Battlefield to NFS to I don't know what....
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: flamedexter on 08-08-2010, 22:08:39
my 2cents.
The game does not need graphical eye candy improvement it will just make the server lag much worse, right now, what it needs is more game play features(eastern and pacific campaign ftw) and stuff that will encourage and improve teamwork.

I don't care if a medic would resurrect or heal a soldier unrealistically in game but if that would bring people to a squad then so be it, just as long it isn't exactly like in vanilla bf2
I don't mind if a tank needs two people to operate, if those two crewmen communicate and work together, then they deserved the fun of kill streaks
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: djinn on 08-08-2010, 23:08:30
my 2cents.
The game does not need graphical eye candy improvement it will just make the server lag much worse, right now, what it needs is more game play features(eastern and pacific campaign ftw) and stuff that will encourage and improve teamwork.

Completely agree here.... Only 'ear-candy' I really care for is sound improvements... Other than that, the rest should be gameplay improvements and more content
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Excavus on 09-08-2010, 01:08:34
my 2cents.
The game does not need graphical eye candy improvement it will just make the server lag much worse, right now, what it needs is more game play features(eastern and pacific campaign ftw) and stuff that will encourage and improve teamwork.

Completely agree here.... Only 'ear-candy' I really care for is sound improvements... Other than that, the rest should be gameplay improvements and more content
Yeah, I agree too. FH2 team really needs to focus on fixing the gameplay right now and not adding new eye candy.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: AdamPA1006 on 09-08-2010, 03:08:44
my 2cents.
The game does not need graphical eye candy improvement it will just make the server lag much worse, right now, what it needs is more game play features(eastern and pacific campaign ftw) and stuff that will encourage and improve teamwork.

Completely agree here.... Only 'ear-candy' I really care for is sound improvements... Other than that, the rest should be gameplay improvements and more content
Yeah, I agree too. FH2 team really needs to focus on fixing the gameplay right now and not adding new eye candy.

Agreed, FH2 looks very nice most of the time
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: Paavopesusieni on 09-08-2010, 10:08:05
Though sounds need improvement, thats an aspect where FH2 lacks big time when compared to other things. Also third person animation could need some work for some guns like Germans MG:s and rocket AT weapons.

About FH gameplay I would like tanks to have more hitpoints, kinda like in FH1. Especially after WOT it feels so odd to tank in FH2 when I just get oneshotted by Cromwell in Panther when he grazed my side track wheel.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: djinn on 09-08-2010, 12:08:16
Though sounds need improvement, thats an aspect where FH2 lacks big time when compared to other things. Also third person animation could need some work for some guns like Germans MG:s and rocket AT weapons.

About FH gameplay I would like tanks to have more hitpoints, kinda like in FH1. Especially after WOT it feels so odd to tank in FH2 when I just get oneshotted by Cromwell in Panther when he grazed my side track wheel.

Agree totally... Scale it all up, equal measure for all tanks. Now this is a gameplay factor that would make things more interesting. Assume its what happens when a high calibre, high velocity shell hits a thin armored vehicle, it may go right in, doesn't mean it will kill all inside immediately or hit HE shells. So it can make sense why all but the Tiger II should be more than one hit kills
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: kettcar on 10-08-2010, 12:08:41
Quote
About FH gameplay I would like tanks to have more hitpoints

ok, think about

what will happend, when u have one or two engineers behind you and they still repairing? whats about at canons, mines, at rifles etc. whats about the balanced defense lines in the maps? explain how do you make it well balanced when you raise the hitpoints.
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: djinn on 10-08-2010, 13:08:27
AT guns get more hit point too... Repairing a tank takes longer... Balance restored :-)

only change will be damage versus vehicle
Title: Re: realism?
Post by: kettcar on 10-08-2010, 14:08:43
you resolve the lowest stone of the pyramid  ;D