Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Cheesus Krighst

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
Modding / Re: Sound Modding Tutorial?
« on: 16-04-2014, 07:04:19 »
Nvm i figured it out myself. I'll post up directions on how to do it later. Here's a little bit i've made in "just" 3-4 hours. I've changed the Browning 30 Cal with a custom sound i've made myself.

Lewis MG mod

Modding / Sound Modding Tutorial?
« on: 15-04-2014, 20:04:58 »
Is there an up to date sound modding tutorial for FH2 laying about? It's been nearly 2-3 years since i've played FH2 and would like to get back to my sound modding projects again. On top of that, the BF2 modding forum is down i believe.

Suggestions / Re: Sdkfz-251/22
« on: 28-02-2013, 23:02:34 »
I still wouldn't mind seeing an Sdkfz-251/21 half track in the mod :p Necro.

Suggestions / Re: Better Medic- class?
« on: 14-11-2012, 09:11:42 »
Medic only works when there's a health bar visible to the player. Return the health bar and the medic will surely flourish in the battlefield.

Gaming / Re: Battlefield 4
« on: 14-11-2012, 09:11:44 »
Valve: How should we attract more players to the fold?
Valve Employee: Lets do a 75% off (Insert Game Name Here) for a week! Throw in a free play weekend to that also!
Valve: Great idea!

EA: How should we attract more players to the fold?
EA Employee: Lets make players pay 15 bucks for a few maps and weapon skins!
EA:Great Idea, but lets keep how much content players get in the single digit number category please.

Nice Tin-foil hat party we're having today (Put's tin-foil hat on)
EA is not good at attracting players, Valve is. Don't see why Natty views Valve's marketing prowess as a Evil Genius Plot to monopolize the gaming distribution industry.

General Discussion / Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« on: 13-11-2012, 03:11:25 »
Anyone know if the Pixel Fighters are going to get the 128 player servers up for FH1 or BF42?

Gaming / Re: Battlefield 4
« on: 13-11-2012, 03:11:48 »
very elaborate trolling there, my tin-foil hat's off to you  8)

In 5 paragraphs you didn't really manage to say anything substantial of that of value to this conversation at all. It also contains pure lies  ;D "scripted destruction" grab your shame-pillow folks, the guy just started tech-talking about things he does not understand, hilarious!

I think the so-called "computer whizzes" you talk about should spend 6-8 years making their own engine, dont you think? Or aren't they whizzy enough to do that? is it in fact so, that they can't really do anyhing except "tweak" already done games, games done by professional "whizzes"?


I don't need technical prowess to understand that all the destruction can be replicated in small scale in the BF2, it'd look pretty ugly and laggy, but it is do-able. I believe i saw a youtube video of someone trying to replicate the Frostbite Engine destruction in the BF2 engine a few years back. Sadly the closest he got was buildings disappearing after being destroyed and walls disappearing in a plume of rock and dust (Oh look, Frostbite Engine -1.0)

Why are people so attracted to talking about the Frostbite engine not being able to do any type of modding? The frostbite engine isn't moddable, period. When people argue about it; it gives me the gist of someone's actually thinking that EA, out of it's utmost charitable kindness, would magically put up a modding kit out for the community for modding just because they argued about the boring subject on a forum which they probably don't know exists.

Any battlefield game after the Refractor engines are dead through the eyes of people who wants mods. EA is not going to make modding tools for Frostbite. It's too unfriendly to modders, which is a major fault in that engine's design, because it destroys any type of community participation or contribution (Other than throwing money at EA for stupidly small content releases that give you a brief moment of satisfaction).

Stop this madness about the Frostbite engine's modding abilities (which is par to none) before Natty (Respectfully known as The Intellectually Advanced Overlord of FH2) comes in once more and begins another assault on our poor minds (Respectfully known as a slap fight). The Oogity mush i call my brain cannot withstand such a distraughtful subject that relates to the Frostbite Engine. :(

As for BF4, I just have the gist of it being a BF3 expansion. A very expensive expansion.

Gaming / Re: Battlefield 4
« on: 12-11-2012, 10:11:19 »
Anyone ready to lock this one up and label it "TL:DR Useless argument about Overrated Engine"?

Please stop wasting your lives and keystrokes on proving how the engine just plainly sucks eggs in the modding department and use d'em fingers to make some FH2 magic.

For the people who did not read the freakishly huge novel above. Any engine that is past BF2's Refractor engine= no mods = no community content = no FH3 on the future BF engines = Most likely not in your best interest to use 60+ dollars to buy a new BF3/4 game. Tadah.

Just wait for about 6-8 years until EA get's tired of milking BF3/FB engine and some computer whizzes conjure up an unofficial modding kit.

I blame DICE and EA for creating such a "pretty" looking engine with obviously scripted destructibles... dynamic destruction, puhlease. You'd imagine with all of that advanced technology we'd be playing 200 vs 200 player battles by 2014, but nope. Just pretty Eye candy and CoD perk gameplay. :( They just need to fallback on the original plan on their most original game. BF1942. Balance, fun, lots of players (200), and hopefully add more realism.

General Discussion / Re: Battlefield 1942 - Now Free
« on: 06-11-2012, 08:11:58 »
Still trying to figure it out, still no dice. Anyone have any luck installing FH1?

General Discussion / BF1942 is now Free
« on: 06-11-2012, 04:11:03 »
As the title says:

The granddaddy of class based mass online first person shooter is now free to play. yay~

Also im not sure if this goes into general discussion or off-topic, moderators do as you wish.

Suggestions / Re: Weapons iron sight zoom
« on: 29-10-2012, 13:10:29 »
Removing zoom in all weapons except sniper rifles (and other weapons with optic sights obviously) would be great, aiming would become harder so it would reduce long range kills a little.

Also it will make kills much more rewarding in terms of your ability to shoot, like shooting at an enemy from far range with no zoom capabilities and actually hitting the enemy. I'd be like "I did that" with a large grin on my face.

Suggestions / Re: "Fun" Weapons
« on: 28-10-2012, 20:10:32 »
I'd love for a scottish battalion on at least 1 map. And there'd be a pickupable bagpipe and pistol.

Suggestions / Re: Weapons iron sight zoom
« on: 28-10-2012, 20:10:38 »
I dont really like the zoom for the guns, especially the rifles. If you wanted a zoom for the rifle, go look for a sniper rifle. The infantry rifles are  already accurate as they are, the rifle zoom just makes them a poor man's sniper rifle.

Developer Blogs / Re: MG34 WIP Animation
« on: 28-10-2012, 20:10:39 »
I hope the MG gunner's will be forced to be stationary while ironsighting and standing up. Just like stepping 1 step to the left will throw off your accuracy. Because i don't want MG gunners strafing left to right in a window sill and blasting away.

Suggestions / Re: AA trailer statics
« on: 26-10-2012, 04:10:00 »

Flak 88mm guns could move on such carriages and be stabilized for firing, but I've no idea if they ever came off.

That 88 is most likely fixed onto that trailer. I can't see a way to properly stabilize that gun without bolting it down onto the trailer or creating heavy duty,complex latches to keep it secure and not flying off the trailer from recoil or rough terrain while in transit.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13