v0.6 low budget teaser

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-04-06 03:04

'[R-DEV wrote:eggman']

wtf is that supposed to mean ? random whining about one of the coolest things that could be brought to a combined arms mod on top of BF2 ?

in my limited Knowledge looking at a empy place its diferent that looking at a 6 tanks shooting at the same time and choopers flying arround make a lot of smoke .

but maybe im wrong

Post by **eggman** » 2007-04-06 03:06

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:in my limited Knowledge looking at a empy place its diferent that looking at a 6 tanks shooting at the same time and choopers flying arround make a lot of smoke .

but maybe im wrong

In my farily extensive knowledge it's quite a significant achievement on the BF2 engine to have a 17sq km map with 1km engagement ranges running at 99FPS on medium / high end gaming hardware.

I am REALLY fucking sick of people who whine about anything and everything.

Brood · Post by **Brood** » 2007-04-06 03:12

S'alright eggy.

Nice work guys, don't worry too much about the whiners. If they can't play this then they need to upgrade, no question. The PR team wouldn't release something that gave people with a higher end PC a huge advantage.

Can't you trust that perhaps they know a little more than you and that perhaps these features are in fact tested before release :\.

Guerra norte · Post by **Guerra norte** » 2007-04-06 03:15

NavalLord wrote:I have to play PR on the lowest possible settings, and I still lag. Looks like I won't be able to play this, as I refuse to lower my distance.

Maybe you should consider an uppgrade if you want to continue gaming (I am, and I'm certainly not rich), games will only become more and more hardware demanding as time goes by.
Remember, this is a mod and it's purpose is to make the best out of the bf2 engine, and that often requires more PC power.

Also, as far as I know, EA/DICE never said that mods were constricted to stay within the hardware requirements that is needed for bf2, either upgrade or leave.

NavalLord · Post by **NavalLord** » 2007-04-06 03:20

I'm not upgrading because I don't want to spend $1000 on something I'm only going to use for a few more months. I'll stick with my crappy settings and horrible frame rates. It adds a touch of realism, that realism is doing every drug known to man while trying to fight a war

vanity · Post by **vanity** » 2007-04-06 03:21

awesome. keep up the amazing work!

Post by **Falkun** » 2007-04-06 03:24

Very secksi

ErusF · Post by **ErusF** » 2007-04-06 03:26

Eggman,
Does this map has more statics than Al Burj? Like Buildings and facilitys. And will it have places for infantary close quarter combat like small towns? Really looking foward for 0.6, especialy to see an end to all GL whores.

Dr. Litch · Post by **Dr. Litch** » 2007-04-06 03:30

Excuse me if this is obvious but what's the difference between the two numbers on the screenshot? (#/#)

causticbeat · Post by **causticbeat** » 2007-04-06 03:36

I dont think you fellows really understand what this is... currently in bf2 vehicles stop drawing at around 400m, this is showing them in at 800. These will be some amazing tank battles, and will benefit gameplay almost more than anything else in any mod.

zeroburrito · Post by **zeroburrito** » 2007-04-06 03:53

I was referring to the 99 fps that you can get..a 9200se would get the same thing with the ss you provided. I wasnt bashing the ability to have no fog and long range battles.

Post by **eggman** » 2007-04-06 04:03

zeroburrito wrote:I was referring to the 99 fps that you can get..a 9200se would get the same thing with the ss you provided. I wasnt bashing the ability to have no fog and long range battles.

No .. what you were referring to is some sort of need within yourself to make a pedantic and annoying comment about a game you play for free that people work on for free.

Regardless .. isn't that fucking great then? That would make PR the only combined arms shooter with 1km engagement ranges and 17sq km maps that folks with a 9200 se can play.

Do you really think I am stupid enough to call out the frame rate and view range, but when you drive / fly around on the map you get a slideshow?

Dr. Litch wrote:Excuse me if this is obvious but what's the difference between the two numbers on the screenshot? (#/#)

frame rate / time in milliseconds between frames

ErusF wrote:Eggman,
Does this map has more statics than Al Burj? Like Buildings and facilitys. And will it have places for infantary close quarter combat like small towns? Really looking foward for 0.6, especialy to see an end to all GL whores.

there is a *large* military complex at the center of the map .. about the size of an average BF2 map .. that is inaccessible to vehicles. Most of the buildings on the map are destroyable, but there are very few of them in order to keep frame rates and engagement ranges as high as possible.

Clypp · Post by **Clypp** » 2007-04-06 04:05

This looks great. Long range tank battles? Count me in!

BTW, eggman, you just got sigged.

zeroburrito · Post by **zeroburrito** » 2007-04-06 04:08

i think i would know what i was referring to...rofl

Dr. Litch · Post by **Dr. Litch** » 2007-04-06 04:12

OUCH. So I guess my '20/48' numbers aint so hot.

zeroburrito · Post by **zeroburrito** » 2007-04-06 04:13

i sit around 50 =)