DetCord

Donator
  • Content count

    2,721
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DetCord

  • Rank
    Sapper
  • Birthday 08/28/1983

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Fort Leonard Wood, MO.

Profile Fields

  • Platform
    PC and Console gamer

Recent Profile Visitors

11,437 profile views
  1. The visuals are nice, but the one-dimensional characterization of soldiers is pretty played out. It’s about time that COD gets some personality beyond that of "grizzled warrior". It’s the same one-note tune that Activision has been playing for over 10 years. Still, seeing as how I served with the BRO in Iraq and Afghanistan, I might take a chance on it.
  2. PCG just nominated me for mod of the year.
  3. Now this is funny! Even at modicum distances, thanks to engine limitations, the inability to see a player somehow or its offshoot makes the game better? It's just utterly ridiculous to read or hear things like that IMHO. The engine is incapable of rendering players outside a certain distance that even the Human eye can distinguish. But no, that's not a fault or concern for improvement, its somehow a huge advantageous and or component of the existing gameplay. How's the Koolaid down there, good?
  4. That's the least of their concerns. Almost every game still turns into a ######ty pixel hunt, especially on the large open Afghan maps. Out past 500m its really bad. You think you saw something, you're not sure, but you might have. That's the reaction every time. The the blurry pixelated characters on the opposing team, even at medium distances, merge back into the terrain like they melted into it. The rampant server latency at said distances doesn't help either and given the UE hard-coded limitations at present, likely never will. The engine choice just doesn't support those engagement ranges and is a bit like A3, only worse.
  5. Three months in the making. Original image: My version:
  6. Buh... While I occasionally like the Marvel flicks, its gone past f$%kin' overload at this point. Spinoff after spinoff, origin story after origin story, one unnecessary interim movie after another. The only Ragnar-rocks movie I want has King Lothbrok in it.
  7. DCS has a plus from me though. No matter how great the campaigns or online features or visuals or flight dynamics or MP are in IL-2, they're still dealing with a niche within a niche. That being the Eastern Front. While the Barbarossa/Eastern Front is a favorite of mine from a history standpoint, its aerial battles were certainly nothing like those waged by the Americans and British over Germany from 44-45. That's the real meat and potatoes as it were, the one addition most people want to see. That being 190's and 109's vs B-17's and P-51's, strategic bombing aspects and so on. But they're (IL-2) not doing that. They're moving to the Pacific following Kuban with plans for Midway and Okinawa. DCS on the other hand is doing all of that, Reichsverteidigung, which everyone wants.
  8. Ouch.
  9. The flight dynamics on the DCS WWII birds are hit an miss at best. The Dora for example is really spot on for takeoff and landing, but it floats a lot in the air. It does some things it shouldn't with regards to performance standards, both exceeding and regressing its potential. Even doing off the wall ###### outside its whitepaper specs. The same goes for the 109K. The devs on that one have really pumped its numbers up big time. Not to say it wasn't a hell of a bird, it was. It's just that they tweaked the performance to such an extent that its more a spaceship than anything else. An in-depth mission editor for the BoS series exists, yes. To include a dynamic campaign as well. There is also a lot more community content for BoS/BoM/BoK. I've done a bunch of textures for it myself.
  10. Excellent. More converts. Now, go forth and spread the Emperors vision for a united galaxy. Whether they like it or not!
  11. Kinda pumped about that! http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=878598475&searchtext=
  12. People just need to judge it on its own merits. Is it a terrible game? No, not in my opinion. Is it a great or even a good game? Absolutely not. Is it the epitome of mediocre? Very, very mediocre after having played it (free copy from Ubi). The issues I bulleted in my previous post jumped out immediately. They're all very, very, veeeeeery prevalent. And that's kinda a shame. Ubisoft obviously spent a lot of time building this absolutely stunning world. I mean if you haven't taken the time to just sit/stand there and look at it, you're missing out. Really. The vistas in this game are truly a sight to behold, especially as alternating weather rolls in. Just f%#&ing wow. Still, its a shame that the gameplay is so hollow and so disjointed from said world. While yes, it can be a great deal of fun in COOP and that is where it really shines IMHO, it doesn't negate the fact that it just isn't a good game. It's just, like ya know, kinda there? It's that game you know you should uninstall because it isn't good but just can't quite do it. You just kinda know one of your mates has it, and he'll want to do a raid or something and you'll wanna do it as well because nothing else like it exists? That's kinda how I feel about it, and that's the sad part. It's the only option that exists. This is very reminiscent of my invitation to play the Mass Effect: Andromeda closed beta a month ago. I was super impressed with the combat, the scenery/level design, the characters, all of it. Then I sat back and thought about it. I thought about what I had seen and done, and what I saw and played was just really sub-par. It wasn't good. Point being, I think people should always take a step back and objectively judge what they're emotional about. You might come to a different conclusion.
  13. No s$%t, right? I dumped DCS in favor of the new IL-2 series a few months ago. Granted, you can't click all the button in the cockpit, but the flight dynamics blow DCS WWII birds out of the water. No. Third-Party developers develop content for it. Ya know, like FSX/P3D/XP with Aerosoft or Flight Factor or Carenado or....
  14. I don't look at it as a GR game. It's just a game to me, one I was considering picking up at one point. That said, I've heard and seen some very disparaging things about it as a game. Craptastic AI. Awful voice acting. Odd to poor animations. The physics are apparently ######. Generic characters and a pretty awful (writing) story. It really runs out of steam after the first eight or so hours and becomes obnoxiously repetitive. What really did convinced me not to buy it was the AI CoV. The AI can only see the player, they can't see your team. Your team is always invisible unless you are seen. I spose' that makes sense from a, uh, kinda gameplay aspect? However, I just chalk it up to lazy devs who didn't want to write any sort of in-depth spotting code. Might pick it up on sale but I'll never pay full price for it.
  15. Filmed entirely in-game using the Cinematic Tools on the PC version.