Page 10 of 11
Posted: 2007-03-30 22:05
by Desertfox
'[R-DEV wrote:eggman']I am not at all opposed to having maps that as much 50% of the player population can't enjoy (without an upgrade). Hate to say that .. but to restrict what we can do on a 2 year old engine because 30 to 50% of the player base won't be able to appreciate *SOME* of the maps in the mod is really restrictive to what we can do.
Playing PR on 17 sq km of terrain with 800m view distance and 1km travel distance between CPs is like a completely different game. And that is a lot more like the game we want than insta-fragging on Karkand sized maps.
And btw it is NOT 2x Al Basrah.. these maps have 4x the square area as Basrah.
Some people will want a more instant action style of play... that's not really PR's forte .. and the larger maps will have heavier system requirements. But for combined arms maps .. I strongly believe that these maps need to be as large as possible. For infantry actions we can keep some smaller maps and folks will be able to play those.
But 2 years ago 1gb ram was a gaming rig standard an today 2gb of ram is pretty much the norm for a "current" gaming rig. btw I think RAM appears to be the most imporant factor in frame rates (both dram and vram) because you have so monay more objects (and textures) loaded with longer view distances that you start to get HDD activity with <2gb of RAM and very long view ranges.
Anyways .. testing will bear it out, but yeah we DEFINITELY want longer engagement ranges. And where there are assets heavier than jeeps we'd like to see that into the 600 to 800m range. Flying a helicopter with 400m view range just feels completely wrong.
Having a for instance 300M view distance on a map 4x the size of Al Basrah is like playing on a 300x300 map
Glad to see you guys are getting into the longer view distances/want to get into it.
Posted: 2007-03-30 22:18
by $kelet0r
A 4km squared Helmand province would be the most immersive game environment ever made imo. Securing village after village tactically, securing compounds without the gameyness of having to die 5 times to capture a flag, calling in mortars to physically destroy firebases and buildings, engaging targets 1000m away with Warriors, observing targets through your SUSAT but being unable to engage them because they are more than 500m away, being granted the opportunity to engage in an hour long firefight without dying at all and where scoring a single confirmed kill would be the greatest success. That would be infantry combat at it's most epic.
Posted: 2007-03-30 22:21
by Shining Arcanine
'[R-DEV wrote:eggman']I am not at all opposed to having maps that as much 50% of the player population can't enjoy (without an upgrade). Hate to say that .. but to restrict what we can do on a 2 year old engine because 30 to 50% of the player base won't be able to appreciate *SOME* of the maps in the mod is really restrictive to what we can do.
Playing PR on 17 sq km of terrain with 800m view distance and 1km travel distance between CPs is like a completely different game. And that is a lot more like the game we want than insta-fragging on Karkand sized maps.
And btw it is NOT 2x Al Basrah.. these maps have 4x the square area as Basrah.
Some people will want a more instant action style of play... that's not really PR's forte .. and the larger maps will have heavier system requirements. But for combined arms maps .. I strongly believe that these maps need to be as large as possible. For infantry actions we can keep some smaller maps and folks will be able to play those.
But 2 years ago 1gb ram was a gaming rig standard an today 2gb of ram is pretty much the norm for a "current" gaming rig. btw I think RAM appears to be the most imporant factor in frame rates (both dram and vram) because you have so monay more objects (and textures) loaded with longer view distances that you start to get HDD activity with <2gb of RAM and very long view ranges.
Anyways .. testing will bear it out, but yeah we DEFINITELY want longer engagement ranges. And where there are assets heavier than jeeps we'd like to see that into the 600 to 800m range. Flying a helicopter with 400m view range just feels completely wrong.
Thankyou.
Posted: 2007-03-31 00:19
by Desertfox
$kelet0r wrote:A 4km squared Helmand province would be the most immersive game environment ever made imo. Securing village after village tactically, securing compounds without the gameyness of having to die 5 times to capture a flag, calling in mortars to physically destroy firebases and buildings, engaging targets 1000m away with Warriors, observing targets through your SUSAT but being unable to engage them because they are more than 500m away, being granted the opportunity to engage in an hour long firefight without dying at all and where scoring a single confirmed kill would be the greatest success. That would be infantry combat at it's most epic.
Dammit, now I have to go change my pants. Thanks alot man
Posted: 2007-03-31 01:09
by DirtyHarry88
Just don't wear any.
Posted: 2007-03-31 02:04
by [-=IDSF=-]SykloAG
'[R-DEV wrote:eggman']Flying a helicopter with 400m view range just feels completely wrong.
So damn true! Really looking forward to seeing this in action as official settings. Hopefully by the time it comes out I'll have 4GB of RAM, so things will stay smooth like they should - Windows 2003 Server R2 SP2 64bit makes 2GB work like 1.25GB on Windows XP 32bit
Dammit that'll be ~$375... Oh well.
Posted: 2007-03-31 02:47
by vanity
I know a lot of the upgrade talk sounds like; "HA HA, you're system can't do it and mine can!!" but that's really not the purpose of what at least I was trying to get across. I think everyone will see how much more engaging and entertaining the game becomes with this added view...so it's important to push people out of their current norm and force everyone to change. I believe a huge reason PR was so successful was because developers had ideas and pushed themselves to accomplish those. There's plenty of other mods that just replace weapons or characters but why bother? This has become almost an entirely different game. Lets keep that creativity going and get out of the mindset that "This is just BF2. It should keep the same system requirements". That type of thought doesn't progress the game anywhere. It becomes a hindrance.
Anyway, I didn't want people to think I was being elitist or a prick b/c I'm pushing upgrades. That wasn't my goal. I want people to progress their machines with the game.
Posted: 2007-03-31 03:14
by QUINT
OK,
I'm all for it, & if I have to upgrade, well then I'll just have to upgrade...
The look of
'reality' in those screenshots is amazing!
A couple of questions:
1. What distance will players pop up at...or...How long/far will they be in sight?
(For example: With the 1000 view distance, If they started running away from you across open terrain, how long would you be able to see them?)
2. Right now, I get players, at a certain distance, that dont have their guns in their hand...or dont have the red turban on, until they get to a certain distance...then it pops up on their heads. Same thing with some other uniforms, from afar, they're the default Iraqi guy, then all of a sudden he has all of his stuff.
(I have my view distance currently set at 100%.)
Is that my texture filtering setting, or some other setting too low?
...is that just the engine itself, or what????
...& would that still happen with this higher view distance that you guys are toying with?
~Q~
Posted: 2007-03-31 05:25
by Maistros
QUINT wrote:OK,
I'm all for it, & if I have to upgrade, well then I'll just have to upgrade...
The look of
'reality' in those screenshots is amazing!
A couple of questions:
1. What distance will players pop up at...or...How long/far will they be in sight?
(For example: With the 1000 view distance, If they started running away from you across open terrain, how long would you be able to see them?)
2. Right now, I get players, at a certain distance, that dont have their guns in their hand...or dont have the red turban on, until they get to a certain distance...then it pops up on their heads. Same thing with some other uniforms, from afar, they're the default Iraqi guy, then all of a sudden he has all of his stuff.
(I have my view distance currently set at 100%.)
Is that my texture filtering setting, or some other setting too low?
...is that just the engine itself, or what????
...& would that still happen with this higher view distance that you guys are toying with?
~Q~
1) 1000m. People will show up at full distance now, and their weapons/suits. Although at 1000m they'll be too small to see without binos and a good eye.
2) It was the engine itself, but we fixed it.
Posted: 2007-03-31 06:08
by Katarn
Wait....we? You mean me.
Posted: 2007-03-31 06:14
by Maistros
Who figured out the trees? mmmmmmhmmmmm.
Posted: 2007-03-31 06:15
by Katarn
Who figured everything else!
Posted: 2007-03-31 06:40
by Desertfox
Like the guy who made me change my pants said, fighting at distances greater then 600+M would just be amazing. To get a confirmed kill itself would be a show of skill, not luck.
Posted: 2007-03-31 06:56
by QUINT
Freakin' Sweet.
~Q~
Posted: 2007-03-31 07:01
by Determined
I can see all the guys tking for the .50 cal on Al Basrah now.
Posted: 2007-03-31 14:26
by El_Vikingo
This will make people think twice before sprinting into the desert when theres a .50 sniper hanging around. I hope they learn quick so it can be challenging.
Posted: 2007-03-31 16:05
by WNxKenwayy
'[R-DEV wrote:Katarn']Who figured everything else!
Who convinced you to put in the effort to actually get it done?
WNxJaymnz
Posted: 2007-03-31 19:38
by Maistros
Kenwayy is really Jack Bauer, by the way. Don't argue with that.
Posted: 2007-03-31 19:43
by danthemanbuddy
If the view distance is at 1000m, did you guys change the distance at which people render. Battleship mod, people and small rowboats don't draw until 300-350 M, is there a way to increase this>?
Posted: 2007-03-31 19:45
by Maistros
Yes, this has been fixed. We're merely arguing over who was the sole "solver" of the problem when really it was a "team effort" however, some people CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!