Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Stemplus · Post by **Stemplus** » 2013-08-10 14:20

Kerryburgerking wrote:I havent flown the EF2000 in 1.0 but in 0.98 it had the wrong cannon (M61 instead of BK27)

I heared that only the RAF one didn't have cannon, Luftwaffe one has it. Also, there are no RAF jets in PR anymore

Post by **Rudd** » 2013-08-10 14:21

Stemplus wrote:I heared that only the RAF one didn't have cannon, Luftwaffe one has it. Also, there are no RAF jets in PR anymore

I'm hoping to rectify that

will be a dev blog in the next couple of weeks

Post by **camo** » 2013-08-10 14:31

[R-DEV]Rudd wrote:I'm hoping to rectify that will be a dev blog in the next couple of weeks

YES! Best news, always love a new map.

Stemplus · Post by **Stemplus** » 2013-08-10 14:33

Always love new CAS

Post by **camo** » 2013-08-10 14:39

While we are on the subject on maps, hows sangin going?
(honestly how are you guys not sick of me asking this? I kind of expect to be told to shut up soon.)

spirit03 · Post by **spirit03** » 2013-08-10 14:41

Guys, don't you think closing Audio improvement thread was a bit childish move?

I mean, really. You DEVs did a great job, some people here really need to work on taking criticism, especially if it is constructive one. I mean, this guy Mega really wants to help and make experience even better. Why just ignore him and close his thread?

He obviously has talent like many of you have here, and most importantly he is mostly right. Sounds by quality are awesome at the moment, but they need more setting so hearing them feels awesome.

Exactly what this guy wanted. Really childish move, no offense.

Rock on!

Prevtzer · Post by **Prevtzer** » 2013-08-10 14:48

spirit03 wrote:Guys, don't you think closing Audio improvement thread was a bit childish move?

I mean, really. You DEVs did a great job, some people here really need to work on taking criticism. I mean, this guy Mega really wants to help and make experience even better. Why just ignore him and close his thread?

He obviously has talent like many of you have here, and most importantly he is mostly right. Sounds by quality are awesome at the moment, but they need more setting so hearing them feels awesome.

Exactly what this guy wanted. Really childish move, no offense.

Rock on!

+1

It was a serious discussion about the sound aspect of PR and other games. The guy gave great input and demonstrated how some things could be done differently. Everybody is acknowledging that Anders did a great job and it wasn't a criticism at all, it was just a good discussion.

Quobble · Post by **Quobble** » 2013-08-10 14:49

Many DEVs and players told me that it is not possible to add certain things due to the engine limitation. But...when DICE used the Refraction 2 engine, they probably worked on it too.

So why isnt it possible to rework the engine and get those limitations away?
Is it illegal, or just not possible?

Greetings

Post by **Adriaan** » 2013-08-10 14:51

@spirit03, Prevtzer

It was closed because there's no point in it being open here. Ofcourse Megagoth's knowledge and criticism is appreciated, Anders said that himself, but the thread has no use if they're already communicating via PM and/or Megagoth has no time to work and correct stuff himself.

BroCop · Post by **BroCop** » 2013-08-10 14:52

You can get rid of limitations by editing the .exe which is a violation of the EULA, thus illegal.

Post by **Rudd** » 2013-08-10 14:54

he also has an open thread to use to do his work https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f388-p ... dding.html

wasn't much more the other thread can offer

Is it illegal, or just not possible?

illegal iirc

Post by **BloodyDeed** » 2013-08-10 15:11

CroCop wrote:You can get rid of limitations by editing the .exe which is a violation of the EULA, thus illegal.

It's not that you can just go ahead and tweak a few settings in there.
We don't have access to the BF2 engine source code, so everything would have need to be done through reverse engineering which is difficult and not the skillset of a usual bf2 modder.
So not even considering the fact if it's illegal or not it's very difficult to do.

On another note, the soundthread got reopened in the feedback forum.

Lugi · Post by **Lugi** » 2013-08-10 15:43

[R-DEV]BloodyDeed wrote:We don't have access to the BF2 engine source code, so everything would have need to be done through reverse engineering which is difficult and not the skillset of a usual bf2 modder.
So not even considering the fact if it's illegal or not it's very difficult to do.

Is this possible that DICE ever releases BF2 source code? Or has anything like that ever happened to an AAA game (releasing the source code to the public or to a group of modders)?

Megagoth1702 · Post by **Megagoth1702** » 2013-08-10 15:51

Probably in 10 years. Or never.

AnA10Warthog · Post by **AnA10Warthog** » 2013-08-10 16:22

Lugi wrote:Is this possible that DICE ever releases BF2 source code? Or has anything like that ever happened to an AAA game (releasing the source code to the public or to a group of modders)?

Well, their copy right expires in about 60 years, we can expect the code then.

X-Alt · Post by **X-Alt** » 2013-08-10 16:36

AnA10Warthog wrote:Well, their copy right expires in about 60 years, we can expect the code then.

PR 4.0 based on CryBite 6 will be out by then

redman0123 · Post by **redman0123** » 2013-08-11 02:58

Now that 1.0 is out will there still be additional content off in the distant future? Not including Falklands and Normandy?

PricelineNegotiator · Post by **PricelineNegotiator** » 2013-08-11 03:05

Yes, I heard a dev say something about fastropes being in 1.1 release.

Post by **Jafar Ironclad** » 2013-08-11 03:13

We've got more content coming. Don't you worry.

NO FUN ALLOWED · Post by **NO FUN ALLOWED** » 2013-08-11 04:47

Does any dev think that Sunset City could see a re-release back into the map pool? I loved it for the spectacular infantry combat, and with 1.0's deviation I could really see it becoming re emerging as a great map.

Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)