Jump to content
Official BF Editor Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

10,537 profile views

PiratePlunder's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)

  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare
  • Posting Machine Rare
  • Week One Done Rare
  • One Month Later Rare

Recent Badges



  1. I can't stand origin. Just reminds me of the awful EA Download Manager. Personally I love Steam and would have been much happier if EA had just maintained their relationship with them. However, I thought that EA had backtracked on their EULA - this was an issue from about a month or more ago although not sure how far they backtracked. And as you say, they can change the T&C any time. More of a concern to me is the inability to choose or change your squad. Even if you join with friends you can't choose to be in the same squad. Just stupid.
  2. Probably an IP ban - I can't access from home but can from work (or through a proxy).
  3. Graphics certainly look awesome but can't see how you can tell if the maps awesome from some short, heavily cut video.
  4. That advert is just a copy/paste from their previous community manager job descriptions - I wouldn't read anything into it.
  5. Beex, you put into words exactly what I feel. I did speak to some DICE guys about releasing the old engine and they didn't completely dismiss the idea. If there was a position somewhere between where we are now and releasing the engine openly then they may well be up for it. Might give them some positive PR when then officially announce no mod tools for BF3. No harm is asking. CB, I know what you are saying about BF2 but I disagree. It wasn't luck that BF1942, BFV, BF2 and BF2142 were all successful - they had a winning formula which could have gone on and on. The reality is they're trying to compete with other games that really don't bring the battlefield experience - COD for example. Because COD is inherently tighter they can have better graphics, better lighting etc so then DICE try to follow that and even better it but in doing so they have to also loose that big, expansive battlefield experience. Obviously the SP is the clearest example of this, but the MP is heading in the same direction to. DICE should have had faith and confidence in their formula - a formula that made DICE what it is. Sure it can't stand still but improve on that formula don't just rip it up and copy something else. It may well sell well, very well, might be a COD killer until the next COD comes along, then the next BF comes along then the next COD etc. The losers in all of this are the games players because the BF experience has gone and we're left with two franchises that could almost be clones of each other.
  6. Or are we more annoyed/disappointed about the seeming demise of a once innovative/exciting/different games company into just another of a whole bunch of game companies that throw out the very similar products at a rate that means quality and more noticeably ingenuity has to suffer? I couldn't really give a toss if the game looks 10% better than the last instalment of COD, I'm not that fussed about how amazing the lighting is, destruction is lovely if it enhances gameplay - my experience of BFBC2 is that at first it does then it does the opposite. Having some building destructible and not others makes little sense, having them all destructible would kill gameplay so my personal view is that DICE are going down a dead end with that one but its kind of beside the point. What I want is not a COD killer, but something different, as BF1942, BFV and to an extent BF2 was. If a game as open, expansive and exciting as BF2 isn't yet possible with the graphics and lighting of the latest SP game, then fine, give me what it can be. Give me BF2 with lighting on a par with Crysis, some of the extra bells and whistles of BFBC2. Give me something that does something different to COD, something that does it better, so much better that it stands on it own. The trouble is I'm not like most of the gamers you'll find, especially those on the battlefield forums etc. But I suspect that I am much more in line with what the majority here think, closer at least. My guess is that's why there's not so much excitement about BF3 here - there is plenty elsewhere. Was BFBC2 a better game than BF2? It looked better, the lighting was better, it had destruction, the sound was much better. Was it better? No, and history will show it to be far inferior. The drive by the games companies for better graphics, better graphics, better graphics is killing invention and lets be honest is fuelled more by Nvidia and ATI than games players. Portal and even WOW tells us that much. Will BF3 be a better game than BF2? Perhaps, but I don't think I'll like it half as much.
  7. Don't think anyones arguing that the game won't look good, but that's not quite the same as the game looking good. I still put gameplay as 100 times more important than graphics/lighting etc but unquestionably that puts me in the minority for gameplayers, although perhaps not here - so yes I wish they'ld spend some of that time put into 'the best ever lighting' into 'the best ever gameplay'. I actually like BC2, but am bored of it now - have been for a while - won't even buy Vietnam as it will be more of the same, unlocked all the guns and toys, they all do roughly the same and the balance is so bad that everyone ends up playing the same thing. Played the campaign once, no point playing it twice like Clivewil says. Things like dragging fallen comrades, and explosions throwing you to the ground sound great, but really are they any use in a game like this? Perhaps in PR but here its likely to suck - badly. Whats the bet that once being dragged you're unable to do anything - can't wait for the annoying pricks in MP to start dragging you around the battlefield ad infinitum. DICE will love their 'explosion force throw effect' so wait until they add unrealistic forces to hand grenades, then wait for the grenade spam as you and your team mates get thrown around the streets of Paris, barely standing up and lumbering a few steps before being blown over again like some piss stinking drunk. Seriously, the dragging wounded comrades sounds crazy - in what way is it better than just dropping a med pack or quickly shocking someone back to life. It's a game - you either want to die quickly or be healed quickly - whatever it is just do it quickly. Don't drag my ass someplace and then heal me. Most likely outcome is that you're much more likely to die trying to help someone - so people help each other less, or it's optional so people just heal in place. Actually most likely outcome is a badge for dragging 100 comrades so watch 1001 noobs getting killed as they drag people in the heart of a battle just so they can get their pin. Its likely to be a gimick, worse than that a gimick that gets in the way of gameplay that is less appropriate than the system they already had. /rant
  8. Make as much $$$ as possible. Which is fair enough they are a business and they have to pay their staff etc. But it is just a comment on the change in the game developers mindset over the last 15-10 years. It used to be about more than just money, there was pride, adventurousness (is that even a word?) and competition beyond sales figures and profit. Pride is the big one thats gone, how can you have pride when you're made to release the same shit, for more money with ever increasing levels of bugs. Perhaps its inevitable, its definitely sad.
  9. Off the top of my head (its a long time since i did any modelling) this seems correct. You've certainly got the idea by changing the __PlayerControlObject bit to __SimpleObject.
  10. I posted this a long time ago... So in the above, the hull is the main PCO, the masts, rigging, sails, flags and cannon carriages and cannon barrels are all individual SimpleObjects that are coded onto the PCO. All have Geom 0,1 and 2 although some are just a single tri as they either don't need to be seen in 1P or are missing from the wreck. We had to do that because of the poly count limitations on the exporter. It is important that they use the same shader as the main PCO because otherwise they will look very different in game with shaders and light applied. In answer to your other question, yes the geom0, 1 and 2 can be made up of a number (is it 8 max?) different component models be them jsut part of the model, moving parts, firing parts. One other thing, high poly models are fine now, computers have progressed enough that most can handle them and vis meshes aren't even loaded on the server so no worries there - just make sure you simplify the cols. But do make sure you have the full complement of lods and be ruthless, by lod2 the object will be a little blip on most screens so pull those polycounts right down!
  11. Agreed, didn't buy 2142, did buy BC2 but have long since stopped playing. Its a shame though, because IMO at its heart BC2 is actually quite good - it has potential which DICE have failed to exploit and I'm sure the same will be true of BF3. If we'd been given the same level of mod support as we got with BF2 (i.e. very little) then we could have done a lot with it - even if we couldn't change the 32 player limit we could have lived with it and modified our expectations to fit. Mod support might not have drastically improved their sales, but it would have kept people playing BC2, would have kept people positive and hyped and kicked COD into touch. I don't think it would have impacted on sales of expansions etc - given how long it took for mods like FH2, EoD and BFP2 to come out (and no doubt it would be even longer with FB) the engine would be towards the end of its life cycle by then anyway. Smaller simpler mods might come out sooner as PoE but they wouldn't hinder sales of official releases - I doubt they did with XPack or the boosters (the boosters did that for themselves). I would love to know why DICE have moved away from MOD support, is it the cost to develop the tools to release standard (if you can call BF2 editor that!), hassle, risk or greed? I know they claim FB is too hard to mod, I say bullshit and the move happened at 2142 anyway (we were also hearing until quite late that mod tools would be available from a fairly reliable source). Guess we'll never know why.
  12. Yep and in general I think thats got to be a bad thing. If somethings great you want to be telling people and if it makes a 2011 release, presumably end November then that doesn't leave a whole lot of time for it to be hyped - especially given the exclusive BETA will effectively become the release date for building the hype up to. It will be interesting to see what happens, but my gut is telling me 32 players max and no mod support. The whole feeling with the BF series for a while is that DICE think they know what is best and will give us what they want. Fair enough (our mod team was constantly criticised for the same thing!), I get the feeling that a whole load of Bad Company players will lap it up whatever it is but I think a lot of us will be left disappointed.
  13. EA have confirmed to the media that they will host an unveil event at the 2011 Game Developers Conference on the 1st March. They've also confirmed that BF3 is due for a 2011 release. Theres still more questions than answers with regard to BF3 but with just over a month and a half until its unveiled I'ld expect to see some of those answers leak out between now and then.
  14. Rhysm, can you put the images somewhere else, they take a huge length of time to come. Basically, they never do!
  15. Thats some great work on the model, skinning and animation there. Keep it up! There aren't many modders left in bf2 who can do that.
  • Create New...