Jump to content

BFS Banner


Member Since 10 Mar 2007
Offline Last Active Feb 20 2016 04:14 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Breaching questions for you guys..

20 February 2016 - 02:41 AM

Haha, the SWAT3 / SWAT4 comparison post I made here years ago is in Burner's SWAT 3 video description Posted Image

My rambling thoughts on the topic:

* The Regiment game had a basic but interesting room clearing system with its three friendly AI operatives: if the player was on the right side of the door and entered first, the operative following them in would move and clear left, then the last two guys in would respectively clear both sides. If the player was stacked on the left, the second guy in clears right etc.

Perhaps a similar system could be used for the AI in Ground Branch?

* Have a toggle between dynamic and limited entry (Israeli method) for friendly AI. Regardless of whatever method you select, your position in the stack, and also which side of the door you're on (as discussed above) dictates the area of responsibility.

* As much as I don't like having a lot of HUD elements in realistic games, not to mention that this may be very difficult to code, maybe an optional little numerical indicator of your rough position (e.g. 1, 2, 3 ) when you and your team stack up on a doorway? That way you'd know what side to go when entering a room. You could also maybe have the indicator be solid when you're roughly in a breaching position and transparent when you're not in position.

* Could we have a few preset options such as "Clear to contact" or "Clear to breach point (stairwell/locked door/doorway" ? You could additionally tie it into an overall assault/covert toggle like SWAT 3 so that if you're on assault mode, your guys move faster but louder, shout/loudly order civilians/bad guys to surrender, whereas covert mode they move slower but quietly and whisper/speak softish for compliance

In Topic: Should BFS Restart the GB Kickstarter Campaign?

10 July 2012 - 08:48 PM

I think the main problems were timing and the lack of other players/actual combat in the Kickstarter videos. The presentation was good, especially towards the end but I feel that if there'd been a voice over commentary for the first 11 minute video (like Jon C did later) and some extra text overlays explaining things in more detail, it would have helped people realise the differences between Ground Branch and CoD earlier on.

I know that John wanted to ride the E3 hype by launching the KS a week before, but all the major gaming sites were focusing too much on E3 and upcoming titles. Perhaps if it'd been launched a week or two after E3, especially considering the lack of any real tactical games at the event except for Arma 3, there would have been more success with tactical gaming fans and other news outlets.

John's said here that he's in a Catch-22 with the problems of player animation and movement; he wanted to put it into the videos, but it isn't working properly and would take too long to be fixed without extra support and funding. I was quite pleased with the video, but I definitely felt that had there been some actual combat, even say 1 minute in total, more people on the fence could have been converted. Plus player combat is the best way to really show off how weapon collision, player movement, free aim etc work in Ground Branch and why it's unique. Hell, even if it was two separate 30 seconds worth of player versus player combat, it would a) be a good tease and B) further reassure people that there is an actual playable game right now that needs more funding to be finished.

How stable is Ground Branch right now? I mean, could you get say 30 seconds of player animations/what-not working fine before everything goes to hell, or is it a case of "we can't get any consistency whatsoever when recording PvP right now"?

Oh, and whilst you said that there'd be no DRM and how you'd provide full mod support in the KS campaign and videos, I reckon you should keep repeating those points over and over again, especially in press interviews/releases. Mention how rare it is that you can properly mod PC games now. It's a selling point of Ground Branch, but with the audience you're aiming for, hit them over the head repeatedly with it until when whenever says Ground Branch , everyone's first response is to shout "No DRM and full mod support for PC!"

In Topic: Get with the times.

05 June 2012 - 07:16 AM

I've been following the Infiltration mod since 2000 (I've been on their forums since then Posted Image ).

That was basically my first real taste of a tactical shooter. Beforehand, I'd played Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, Quake 1/2, Half-Life and a few PSX shooters like Medal of Honour and Lifeforce Tenka.

I asked a LOT of stupid, dumb questions about Infiltration and other realism mods/games when I first joined the forums, and I used the word clip instead of magazine (the horror!) People on the Inf board were fairly tolerant and pleasant of my questions and also towards newbies who genuinely wanted to know more about Infiltration or firearms and whatnot. It was a small close knit community, but as long as you didn't throw tantrums and , it was a great place to hang out.

My point is, we were all n00bs to the tactical scene at one point, we all asked questions that in hindsight seemed silly or painfully obvious and if we'd been constantly treated like rubbish or ridiculed for asking honest questions when we wanted to learn, would we still have been part of the Ghost Recon/Rainbow Six/Inf/etc scene? Would we have decided to play those games religiously and actively participate in the community? Not bloody likely.

Yes, there will be no stats in Ground Branch. Ground Branch is offering a different focus that might seem a bit old fashioned or strange for younger or non-tactical gamers. The lack of stats and unlocks will definitely be unique compared to other shooters and will seem quite refreshing. That's all we had to say to him.

Murdoc raised a valid point of newbies and the steep learning curve. I don't think match-making is the answer at all, but this should be addressed though. Perhaps having official Training Servers for the first few months after it's released? Video guides like this for newbies? Other suggestions?

Regarding unlocks, surely the fact that you can MOD Ground Branch and add in your own maps, weapons, models to your heart's delight is FAR better than unlocks, no? Why not use that as a valid response to criticisms about no unlockables?

"Battlefield 3 has unlocks, but Ground Branch doesn't! Bah, I'm not interested!"
"Can you make your own levels or custom weapons in Battlefield 3? Can you make your own skins?"
"Uhhh, no."
"You can mod Ground Branch and change anything you want. Levels, weapons, player skins, you can mod them all. Hell you can start making mods right now with the Unreal Development Kit! EA and DICE won't ever let you do that with Battlefield 3."
"Oh, that sounds pretty neat...tell me more"

In Topic: Kickstarter video feedback

05 June 2012 - 06:49 AM

Regarding the "low ready to aim" motion, I don't have a problem with the speed, but it did seem like it could be a tad smoother animation wise, the carbine seemed to "jump" a bit robotically. Of course, if the Kickstarter is successful, then some of the money will go to improving the animations even more ;)

I enjoyed the video, I was very excited by the low ready, side-arm transition and by John's honesty and by speaking plainly to us. That was fantastic. However, some player versus player, or player versus AI (scripted for demonstration purposes if necessary) would have helped a lot for people on the fence about realistic tactical shooters. I'm talking about people who haven't seen any real tactical shooters, who might go "oh, those features look nice, but what does the actual gameplay look like when playing against other people? I'll pass on donating for now." Ground Branch needs a LOT of money to be funded. If the targets aren't met, no Ground Branch. I'm sure none of us want that, but we need to attract a LOT of other people outside this forum, and not every one may have heard of or has played the original Ghost Recon or Infiltration or older Rainbow Six games. They may not be the primary audience, but some of those guys do want something that FEELS different to CoD or Battlefield.

Take weapon collision as an example. I would have liked to have seen it in action in a way that might show tactical newbies why it's a nice feature and how it shakes things up.

* Show the weapon collision as it is in the video. Then show the following;
* Have the player lean around a doorway in an open courtyard (player has the high ground) with their M4A1 aimed.
* One enemy (another player or scripted AI) runs across player's field of vision. They're about 20m away or so.
* The player fires a few rounds and misses, and as the enemy runs past, they try to swivel against the doorway, but their barrel collides with the doorway, forcing them to lower their weapon.
* The player then steps out further to clear their muzzle and thus get a better shot, but is pinned down by the enemy, who found a good piece of cover and starts shooting
* Player steps back into doorway, transitions to their side-arm and leans out just as another enemy runs across their field of vision
* Player is able to get better turn/swivel against the doorway, since they have more range of motion and vision and shoots the second bad guy before they reach their piece of cover.
* Have John talk about how weapon size will affect choices in CQB but then stress that the player won't be completely disadvantaged if they have bulkier weapons, but they'll need to adjust how they employ them and use better team-work to overcome their deficiencies in CQB
* Show the same scenario as before, but this time, the player slices the pie more adequately (stepping back from the doorway to get more range of motion), or the player goes prone and eases around the corner with their M4A1 (so that their profile is barely exposed) and they kill the first bad guy from cover.


03 June 2012 - 05:51 AM

Pledged $50. I really hope you guys meet your goal, I'm quite worried that people are "kickstartered out" and are over first person shooters in general Posted Image
Regarding payment, if you have an Amazon account, you "should" be okay with just a debit card. I have a debit card and I've used that to buy many things from Amazon over the years with no worries, and I'm from a technologically backwards country called Australia.

If not, then use a pre-paid credit card as below;