Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

[Rabbit]

I have to say I am looking forward to the next PN release.

[Rhino]

Are we going to have updates do WW2/ Vietnam/ Falklands? havent heard anything about them? 1.0? or a patch later?

I might be wrong, but I think he means content. We haven't heard much about new content of the mini-mods.

I suggest you keep an eye on community modding, just taking recent work from PR:F that's in there:

L4A4 Bren LMG


Tigercat SAM


FMK-1 & FMK-3 Mines


+ lots more and also lots of tasks that are up for grabs here: https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f388-p ... tasks.html

But as stated before, PR:F and PR:N won't be in the initial v1.0 release, but for PR:F at least, we hope to include it into the core PR again at some point after the main release via the updater

[smgunsftw]

Why can't the Devs periodically release small updates via the 1.0 Beta launcher until the final product for 1.0 is finished? It's a much simpler and efficient idea instead of having us re-download the 1.0 release again. Are you guys avoiding this due to technical issues, or do you guys want to release 1.0 as a big surprise instead of tiny little surprises?

[Rudd]

Why can't the Devs periodically release small updates via the 1.0 Beta launcher until the final product for 1.0 is finished? It's a much simpler and efficient idea instead of having us re-download the 1.0 release again. Are you guys avoiding this due to technical issues, or do you guys want to release 1.0 as a big surprise instead of tiny little surprises?

I think it gets pretty complicated to do that as we're still working on 1.0 while the BETA was running live; not all our additions/fixes/updates were put into the BETA because they were for assets/maps that were not included. (I guess, Ancientman will probs give a much more accurate and technical explanation)

But I think the TLDR version is, the way we've done it is the best way of avoiding bugs.

[Rhino]

Why can't the Devs periodically release small updates via the 1.0 Beta launcher until the final product for 1.0 is finished? It's a much simpler and efficient idea instead of having us re-download the 1.0 release again. Are you guys avoiding this due to technical issues, or do you guys want to release 1.0 as a big surprise instead of tiny little surprises?

One of the biggest reasons is simply server load. We only have so many servers that we can provides updates from, though the updater and we can only get enough to do small to moderate updates to loads of people in one go. Asking them to upload over 6GBs worth of data to thousands of people all at once and no one is going to get anything and we would end up in the same sort of situation EA had on the launch of the new Sim City, although instead of people not being able to play they simply wouldn't be able to get the game and the entire release would be a disaster, putting off many of our potential new and returning players, possibly even putting off some hard core current players from trying to get the build.

Its far better to have it sourced though multiple providers and a torrent as our main source than even attempting this which can only end badly for everyone....

[BloodyDeed]

I wouldn't say server load is the issue here.
It's just that we prefer being able to provide a full package. Everybody has been waiting for 1.0 for months/years, it shouldn't disappoint you with only a fraction of what we could offer.

Apart from that it's not that we would have been able to release the beta a lot earlier if we would have focused on some maps / some factions. It was mainly things like the updater/launcher, 100p and mumble that took most of the development time.
Putting the finishing touch on all the maps/factions won't take too long now, no worries.

There is also a lot of media, newsposts, word of mouth happening around 1.0. If we would stick to several small releases the effect would get weakened.

[Spec]

Besides, during the updating process, a lot of potentially gamebreaking bugs may happen if the changes haven't been properly tested. The Beta you guys were playing was based on something that already worked quite well in closed tests, and we still had like 10 patches for it to be fully functional.

Imagine that every new change would be implemented instantly - you'd end up being beta testers the entire time. A new weapon gets put in but then you find out that it has no recoil and reload animation. Or a new map with flags that can't be capped.

We need to test stuff before we can release it, and it's much easier to test one big version than lots of small ones. Even if we'd test the new weapon that is being put in, we might later find out that it causes crashes on some map we didn't test, or something.

It's better to test 100 changes at once than 1 at a time. We want you guys to have a playable, balanced and quality product and not some "let's see if this works" stuff every few days.

[camo]

Unfortunately Bao made that model and he vanished some time ago with all his work
And even if he hadn't, just because we have a model doesn't mean we have been able to get it ingame yet

Damn thats a real shame because that model looked amazing.

[smgunsftw]

Thank you for your swift and accurate answers!

[Wheres_my_chili]

So are we going to get bullet drop in 1.0?

[xambone]

*face palm* I think it drops after 600m

[Wheres_my_chili]

*face palm* I think it drops after 600m

Sniper rifles are accurate up to 600 meters, at which point you need to aim high in order to score a hit. Rifles and machine guns don't employ bullet drop due to there being a bug with the tracer code that causes them to behave differently than non tracer rounds. Word on the street is that somebody found a workaround for that bug.

Though I don't think that they're going to have time to implement it due to the amount of testing it'll probably have to go through. Still, we can dream...

[Rhino]

So are we going to get bullet drop in 1.0?

Simple answer to that is no not straight away, other than weapons that had it in the Beta.

The new feature and gameplay changes cut off point was quite some time ago now and if we where to ignore it and keep on adding all these new features and gameplay changes, we would just keep on constantly pushing back the release as they will inevitably crate more testing work, then on top of that more bugs to fix, then more builds to test the fixes work and the cycle repeats until all the bugs are gone, which if you keep adding new features the entire time that process never ends

But if we can fully prove that it works on a server with multiple players and it has no issues etc then hopefully its something we can get ingame in the future yes

[Wheres_my_chili]

YAYYYYYY!!!!!!!!

[SShadowFox]

With PR Mumble now being integrated, do you guys plan on removing the commo-rose function of the GLTDs, so in order to call CAS or Mortar support you must talk with their leader via Mumble?

[KaB]

What about the useful icons added on the map when you request something ? Do you really want them to be removed ?

[Rudd]

With PR Mumble now being integrated, do you guys plan on removing the commo-rose function of the GLTDs, so in order to call CAS or Mortar support you must talk with their leader via Mumble?

I think it's safe to say that the commo-rose functions will be kept in order to facilitate teamwork, particularly between players who speak different languages

[Pvt.LHeureux]

Moszeusz6Pl, he developping now.

[=-=kittykiller]

dear Devs

i am writing to you to ask "is there a manifesto of sorts to help guide future development of PR maps?"

i was struck by the way some maps age so badly and its not just cuz of the learning process i.e. maps today being that much more complex.

Instead it often seems more down to game mechanics, changing.
regards
KK

p.s. please kill karbala off. Save korengal INF only. Keep ure sense of humour.

[KaB]

I won't hide that sometimes, when I go out for a walk in a random place, I think "this place gotta be a map in PR". But then, when I come back at home and open BF2 editor, I feel like a dog in front of my computer, and I cry.