• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Batwing

  • Rank
  1. Jumping or not jumping

    I am for NO JUMP. I am totally with Shub. Jumping is unreal. Have u ever seen a Marine jumping around on the battlefield with 50 pounds backpack on ? What i like tho is the ability to crawl small obstacles. I am talking about the ability u can find on CoD4 when an arrow allow you to interact in a realistic way with close obstacles. A reasonable realistic movement which involves also total vulnerability. I want to have a choice if i wanna crawl a window and get into a building (with a chance to get killed during the action) or just walking around for a better solution. I play GRAW a lot and althoughh I love that game because jumping is not allowed, on the other hand is really annoying when u cant just crawl a minimal obstacle. That is unreal to the other opposite.
  2. Thank you all guys annd special thx to Jsonedecker. Your answer r quite straight to the point and I see u are aware about this kind of situation. also is nice to see how you intyeract with EPIC to keep your work ongoing. Goood luck for everything, i will definetely be there whenn this release will be ready By any chance are u also planning to release a demo sometime bbefore the final release?
  3. Hello, I am very excited about your project. I am an avid player of GRAW and understanding someone finally is working on a simulative realistic military shooter fill my heart of happiness! I have just a question for you guys, because when i saw you are going to use the Unreal Engine 3, my heart stopped beating. I had recently a very bad experience with a brand new project called "Frontlines - Fuel of War" from KAOS Studios. Althoughh those guys had a very Good reference being the developers of "Desert Combat", one of the most famous MOD for BF2, they started their fiirst time in-home project with Frontlines and after 6 months from the retail version, that game is DEAD. It has been plagued by several bugs and limits that many people redirected to Unreal Engine limits and bugs. They are still trying to patch that game to adjust major stuff, but is a real mess. Physics in that game are horrible. Flying or driving vehicle is just a nightmare and there is nothing close to real world physics. Although graphic and foliage and several other visual effects are very nice, there is nothing that bring that game to a "simulative" experience. It is just a very quick "run and shoot" arcade style game, with just a very light taste of military action. After released, that game was not even able to run on VISTA based machines. It has been so far away from a decent experience, I am very sad about it. Again, many people blamed EU 3 for limits and bugs. Then I was reading this interview that I will copy here: _____________ Epic's Capps Defends Unreal Engine 3's Flexibility At last week's Gamefest in Seattle, Epic Games president Mike Capps led a presentation on Unreal Engine 3 development, opening with comments that appeared aligned to deflect criticism that the engine is not as flexible or as usable as has been implied in the past. While Capps maintained that Unreal Engine 3 is "made to be modified and extensible", he suggested that it is "really a game engine that's been made for a specific purpose... I like to say that it's ready to go to make a game, if you're making our game." Here, Capps is referring to Epic's Gears of War and Unreal Tournament III. Advice for UE3 Developers Capps' advice for developers who have licensed or are contemplating licensing the engine is to not attempt to change the engine too drastically. "One of the big things about licensing tech is not about reinventing the wheel, it's about catching up with your competitors. Focus on what you're good at and work on that and ignore everything else." Rather than fixing bugs in the engine, Capps suggested that "if you find a bug in the engine or the middleware it's great if you submit it," while "going in and changing the code for the perceived value of cleaning it up is really, really bad." However, Capps did say that in the most serious cases, "if you've got critical path problems it makes sense to fix it yourself." When it comes to increasing performance of Unreal Engine 3, Capps said that the best tactic is to work on reducing the load generated by optimizing game content, rather than trying to enhance the code performance of the engine: "Most of the low hanging fruit is pretty much gone from the engine after shipping 50 or 60 games on multiple platforms already." If you're not sure how to best utilize the engine, as a developer, Capps said that "asking [Epic] for advice before you start a project makes sense." Capps noted that the tech team, including Tim Sweeney, is available for consultation on technical issues prior to licensing and the inception of development of a game title. Regarding the tools that ship with the product, Capps added, "I've seen five projects skip the Unreal Editor and go back to Max or Maya - and they all went back to the Editor in the end." Later in the presentation, Gearbox Software president Randy Pitchford noted that "Some other studios that licensed UE3 got a little mixed up, in that they were dependent, in that they needed to rely on the code Epic had generated, but could not be dependent based on their promises to their publisher and the marketplace." Pitchford noted that Gearbox was aware of its dependencies on Epic's progress with the engine and always planned to ship games during this period in the lifespan of the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, rather than earlier in the generation. These comments and Capps' words seem at least partially designed to deflect criticism of the engine as leveled by Silicon Knights president Denis Dyack, and other developers, against the robustness and flexibility of the package, though no specific issues were named. ___________ reading this, if you read between the lines, looks like their suggestion is to keep the engine working on very light content too enhance the overall experience and, although you can consider the engine "flexible" enough, you do not have to "reinvent the wheel". You project sounds a quite ambitious project when I read your Newsletter and the "simulative" direction you are going toward. Are you sure EU 3 will allow you to get at your objective and can you consider to be able to override problems similar to those KAOS studio got in ? In your opinion is correct to blame EU 3 for its limitations or is possible the other studio was simply not able to program IT correctly? Thank you very much for your time and patience to read a such long post, Ii am very concerned about it and I would love your project to success.