Seven7h_Column

Operator
  • Content count

    128
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Seven7h_Column

  • Rank
    Ranger School Dropout
  • Birthday 06/29/1988

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Ohio

Profile Fields

  • Platform
    PC and Console gamer
  1. I was a fool and got suckered in by the commercials about the special forces consultants on this game. I cannot speak for the single player but the xbox 360 multiplayer is pretty bad. All the good things DICE had going for them in the battlefield games like bullet flight time and gravity drop, clear game objectives, and teamwork are gone. This is mediocre multiplayer experience at best. "Hardcore Mode" requires an absurd amount of bullets to kill an enemy and the maps are a cluster with no real thoughtful layout. Peek and lean did not make it into multiplayer. DICE has been doing this for long enough now, you would think they could at least get the reloads right. When you reload without running the gun dry you should have the total in the mag PLUS the one in the chamber. In Medal of Honor land that extra bullet disappears. Just before I had seen enough, I unlocked a range finder for my M24... how useful in a game where the sight lines don't go over 150 yds and the bullets strike the target the instant I pull the trigger. There were plenty of instance where I would like to have been able to go prone to keep from getting my head lopped off by enemy fire, but since that is not an option and most the cover in the game is conveniently shoulder height when crouching, I died frequently feeling like I could have avoided it. I will give the single player a go before I take my copy back tomorrow, but I have seen enough to know this game was not worth $60. So now I stand before you sad and ashamed that I bought into the commercial hype. I should really have known better by now. If you can get it cheap it may be worth a quick play but I would definitely advise renting it to be sure you know what you are getting.
  2. I had high hopes for this game when they mentioned things like a new gritty feel and interactive hand to hand combat that was supposed to make for a more brutally realistic game. Because as much as i loved Chaos Theory it did always seem just a little bit sterile and tamed down because of the teen ESRB restrictions. For instance when grabbing characters or palm striking them in the face the characters would either give up or be knocked out cold. I always though it would have been interesting to have them fight back and create a struggle or for incapacitated enemies to eventually wake up. Which would make you really think twice about how you stored bodies or if you should kill enemies more often. However, all that really happened is we got an action movie with button press prompts and a way for the hero to lose occasionally. Everything is so scripted, and the movement is awful. From what i can remember, the demo did not have variable speed movement when crouched. You got full speed no matter how much you moved the left stick. Any bit of realism has been rejected for over the top brutality and stylization. This is evident by the excessive amount of off hand shooting and the crooked angle Fisher now shoots his magic, silent, and infinite ammo-ed pistol. If you use the move to next cover mechanic even on the highest difficulty it is possible to baseball slide and dive into cover right next to what should be alert enemies. Even once you have been spotted, as soon as you retreat to a semi shadowed area you leave behind a ghost figure that the AI treats as if it is really the player and blasts away at the silhouette confused as to why its not dying. I have heard of the use of abstractions for the sake video game interpretations, but what the hell is that supposed to be? If I am honest, the whole game is completely absurd. So once again Ubi has taken a great initial idea, forgotten about what made the series great and created a semi interactive comic book. I really shouldn't be surprised, yet somehow I am.
  3. Well regardless as how it is solved, unlimited ammo for the AI causes not only unrealistic situations, but annoyances as well. For instance I was playing OGR in the Vilinus tank escort mission where I encountered an enemy in a courtyard who proceeded to fire a rocket every 6 seconds into the trees trying to hit my tank. I found his behavior strange and amusing so I watched for awhile to see how long he would carry on like this. After firing 8 to 10 rockets I had seen enough and I shot him. Oddly enough when I inspected his body there was not a stockpile of rocket launchers at his feet. NORG says no unlimited ammo for anyone, as all game characters should be bound by the rules of scarcity.
  4. Instead of having a delay for the rifle to catch up, why not just have the sights be a little off center and the rifle swaying a bit till it steadies, or the player makes some fine adjustments. The direction in which the barrel is pointing off center would be essentially random after a turn, but would eventually settle to the center (where the center of the reticule would be is there was one). It has a similar effect of reticule bloom, but in the off chance the target passes in front of your sights while you are steadying you, can fire with a bit of confidence that you may hit the target, unlike the completely random reticule bloom mechanic. Then again, as far along as things are I would assume BFS has a pretty decent pool of thoughts and possible solutions for NORG rife mechanics.
  5. a nice change indeed.
  6. here is a recent update of a weapon model i made that frequents the background on my computer.
  7. By water do you mean somthing like this?
  8. AI target identification and alertness The link to this thread has several suggestions realting to "fair" and realistic AI behavior if you would like to add your own ideas there.
  9. That is exactly what i want to see changed for future realistic tactical shooters. Make the game challenging by making the AI characters smarter and do clever things, not act superhuman and with no sense of fear or self preservation.
  10. thank you, and i did that with more or less a steel toothpick in a pencil handle. I have since discovered fiberglass brushes and other tools that have drastically improved my work and made it a whole lot easier too. Perhaps if the desire ever comes about i will do another military inspired scratchboard, but i have a wildlife landscape a couple years old to finish first though.
  11. here is a scratchboard i did a few years ago in high school. It would fit nicely within the GB fan art section though
  12. It would seem that in just about all current games the single player is a twitch gunfight style because the enemy AI characters immediately fire at you as soon as they have spotted your shoelace in a doorway, instead of identifying you as a threat and then firing. I would very much like to see levels of alertness for each mission that would allow you as a player to move slowly and survey things instead of shooting as fast as possible and hoping to be faster than the AI. At the most relaxed level if you were to open a door/pop out from the woods/turn a corner/etc the AI enemy should probably not even raise his weapon for a few seconds until he has recognized that you are not a friendly to him. This creates a much more realistic feel to the AI, because if they were real people they would definitely not be keen on shooting their friends by accident, so a little identification goes a long way. At the most extreme level of alertness the AI would be perfectly expected to shoot on site anything out of the ordinary. Of course varying levels of alertness in between could be easily transitioned to if the player makes a bunch of noise shooting, leaves a body in plain sight, or is identified by a group of soldiers and raises an alarm. The amount of time to identify the player as friend or foe should vary directly to the readiness level, training, optical equipment available, distance between the AI soldier and the player, and the player’s amount of camouflage/concealment. ex: a sniper in a ghillie should take much longer to find than a team of riflemen crouched by a tree. A similar effect could be achieved for surprise. At the lowest level of alertness if your team were to breach a room or rush a camp, I would expect the AI to fall back off balance, perhaps fall down and scurry for cover out of fear and perhaps shoot randomly up towards the sky, but most certainly not be poised and make a great shot in your face. Unless of course they were expecting you and were at a very high level of alertness Visual cues to try to spot how alert the enemy is would be great as well. Groups of AI soldiers standing/sitting around talking, smoking, target shooting, (blatantly not paying attention to anything). Or standing with planted feet staring intently at an entryway with their weapon raised. These cues would allow the player to make tactical decisions as how to approach a situation. It would be nice to see enemies unarmed too (gun across the room on a table, taken apart being cleaned, can’t get it over their shoulder stuck in the sling), because nobody carries a rifle all the time, especially if you are a bum mercenary. Lastly, this might be pushing it a bit far, but if environmental sounds and distractions like thunder, gusts of wind, etc could be used as a cover for your shots and you should be much harder to find. example: you as a sniper a good distance from the enemy encampment see a lightening flash, you count the seconds and fire at the start of the thunder roll and the enemy goes down for what seems to be an unknown reason because no one heard the shot. Even if the AI can’t be programmed to not hear that shot, it would be nice if for multiplayer there was no shot indicator and then the weather would be an audible cover. It is very likely this has been discussed within the development team, but if not here is a reminder/ thought provoker. I did some searching for topics involving AI target acquisition and got nothing so my apologies if this is a repeat topic.. Any thoughts, or additions?
  13. basically you want the AI and human controlled characters to act and react in a human manner as opposed to mowning down small armies of human shaped drones in each mission? I couldnt agree more, and this is something that plagues a lot of new "realistic" shooters. as much as I dislike vegas i play it ocassionally co-op with a friend and if the AI had just a touch of human emotion and reacted to being shot it would make it 10 times more enjoyable. nothing is worse than having the jump on a tango, shooting him in the chest and getting killed by his immediate shot right in your face becase the first round had no effect on him. I am pretty sure health and reactions to wounds has been disussed in great length elsewhereand it should be handled quite well by the BFS team.
  14. I had a similar problem with Call of Duty 2 and PGR 3 when the Xbox 360 first launched. I didn’t particularly care for either game, but I found myself watching others play a lot and just picking it up for 20 min at a time before I got terrible headaches and completely lost the desire to play. I don’t know if I personally hadn't adapted to the new graphics and motion blurs or what the problem was. I now play COD 4 and Forza Motorsport as well as many other games that have motion blur and high res graphics for great lengths with no problem. So perhaps for me it was just an adjustment period that was required. I have yet to return to the games that caused me such headaches so maybe it was just something unique about those two games, but i would wager a guess that i would have no problem playing them now. (not sure why i would bother though being that I found myself a $5 copy of OGR Island Thunder and can play it with a downloadable patch on my 360. Shame there is no multiplayer anymore without direct linkup. But i have noticed that i have to strain more to see a target in my OGR games than i do in COD 4, so perhaps its a brain training kind of thing and i had forgotten my lower res OGR spotting skills. Also to comment on the COD 4 discussion going on in here, I would say that while the game is balanced a bit towards the run and gun, and the campaign is a pop up target fest, when playing hardcore multiplayer modes the game is really the best thing we console gamers have for tactical multiplayer experience. I blame most of the style of play on the map design, mainly that they are far too small. Even on the largest maps, it would be possible to fire from corner to corner if the lines of sight would permit. This means that there is hardly any need for long range weapons and the places to which enemies could be located is drastically limited to only a few important spots. Once a player has learned the map they have the confidence to sprint around in most places because they know they are protected from all but what is in front of them and on a few occasions what is behind them. There is no real incentive to scower the landscape for threats when it is quite certain that the enemy will only be in a few choke points on the map. At where it them becomes a twitch reflex gunfight and whoever wins continues to sprint down the next corridor. So many of the things in the game are on the right track though. Requiring the use of actual sights on the weapons as opposed to a magic reticule, bullet penetration, sprinting makes you an easy target most of the time but is a quick way to get around, and the freedom to climb and jump terrain are all positive aspects. I could go on, but it would be pointless to beat the NORG horse anymore, you guys know whats up around here. Hope you guys experiencing the headaches and nausea can find a way to get over it before GB comes out.