Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

Mr. Clark

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,032

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Mr. Clark

    WWII online!

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Pillar, see the Star Trek episode where 2 planets are at war. To avoid the destruction of cities and resources, computers now calculate the attacks, and casualties. Anyone "hit" then has so and so time to report to a disintegration chamber.

    Because war has become so clean and neat, it has continued for generations...

    Hate to sound like a Trekkie, it's just the only example I could think of.

    0

    WWII online!

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Hmm... Didn't consider "clans".

    I guess that's because I've never had the sort of time committment clan membership requires.

    I usually just sign on to an online game and look for other "regulars." Occasionally a group of these regulars can come together and form a decent team for a couple hours play... but it's rare.

    HOWEVER, being in the middle of the book "Band of Brothers", I guess you could say that even the chaos of normal online play just might accurately represent some WWII battles.

    I remember many nights playing TRIBES, forging into enemy territory, holding a position outside of the enemy base and giving covering fire while screaming for the newbies to "Get your arses in there and grab the flag!"

    As long as WWII online works as described, I'm sure it will give a fine play experience... just don't expect miracles. You're always going to occasionally run across the 12 year old "team killer", standing in your HQ blowing it apart while supposedly playing on your side.

    DISCLAIMER: Mr. Clark does not necessarily believe that ALL "Team-Killers" are 12 years old... some act more like pre-schoolers. Mr. Clark's opinions do not necessarily reflect those of BTS or other forum goers.

    [This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 11-18-2000).]

    0

    WWII online!

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    It really seems fun, but don't get your hopes too high.

    I honestly believe there is no way the command structure will ever hold. Many of the online games I play are team based (Tribes, Team Fortress, UT cap the flag, etc) and I have NEVER encountered anything resembling teamwork from a random group of individuals.

    Also, remember that the game will have all the standard online problems...

    You're the tank commander, leading a squad of tigers when you encounter an enemy company. You would have taken them by surprise except that all of your first shots miss due to bad ping. Meanwhile the High Ping Bastard on the enemy team gets 490 mortar rounds into the air while your gunner is trying to pick out a target that's not "warping" all over the battlefield. Somehow your tank survives the mortar barrage and incoming bazooka rounds and you spot the enemy HQ and call out a target to your gunner... but he's gone because his ISP disconnected him.

    On the positive side, I do like the non-respawning feature of the game. Rogue Spear is one of my favorites online for this reason, and it sometimes works reasonably well as a team game, but then you're only really depending on 3 or 4 other people there.

    Being an online, multiplayer only sim... I don't think it can really be compared to CM.

    [This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 11-17-2000).]

    0

    Speaking of Polygon Counts in Game systems

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    hmmmmm... was it in EGM?

    I did not actually BUY the mag smile.gif

    I wish I had so I could scan the article in question (not that it matters, really) but I'm 90% sure it was the recent EGM. It compared all 3 (PS2, PC, Dreamcast) versions, and it mentioned lowering some detail in the rooms (for better control with a gamepad/joystick) but that the character poly's and detail were heightened to take advantage of the PS2 ability. It showed side by side character pics, and having owned the PC version, I can say that the character shown definately had more and better facial details.

    Not to sound like TOO much of a fanboy, I will mention that the PS2 has some ALIASING issues... basically the built in system for smoothing textures apparently slows games down immensely when turned on so far. Fortunately, developers and SONY have come up with a lot of different work arounds. The upcoming FPS called Red Faction has smoothed graphics, and apparently runs at 60 frames per second, so the "problem" is definately being completely worked out on next gen (post launch) titles.

    I can say that TIMESPLITTERS, a very fun FPS, runs at 60 frames right now, even in two player split screen, and looks very sharp. There is some flicker/wavering texture stuff though, that is a left over from the Aliasing work at the time.

    I'm not trying to persuade anyone to run out and nab a PS2, just saying I'm VERY happy with my own purchase. I think it's a GREAT buy for gamers that cannot afford a $3,000 PC.

    EDITED FOR HORRIBLE SPELLING.

    [This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 11-09-2000).]

    0

    Speaking of Polygon Counts in Game systems

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    They dropped the character poly-count for the Dreamcast, but upped it for the PS2 (for UT).

    See the latest issue of EGM for details.

    Here is the link tto the WWII game: http://ps2.ign.com/previews/14417.html

    I also posted it in another thread, which I now cannot find...

    The game itself is biiiiizaaaarre (although kinda fun sounding), however, take a look at the screenshots and tell me the PS2 can't do textures and graphics... They are incredible! And it's not even considered one of the "prettier" titles for the system.

    Also, have a look at this FPS game: http://ps2.ign.com/previews/15003.html

    ....and finally we have Metal Gear Solid 2: http://ps2.ign.com/previews/14538.html

    Here's a quote:

    "the ambient weather effects and general lighting in the game are so amazing that they'll give you goose bumps when you see it. The rain, for instance, is the most realistic looking rain that has ever been included in a videogame. In this one particular scene towards the end of the video where, you get to see some rain falling and splattering off Solid Snake. This effect was so stirring that there was a collective "Oh my God" from the viewing audience. This was just one of a plethora of highly cinematic scenes that got strong emotional reactions from the audience. "

    0

    Speaking of Polygon Counts in Game systems

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Heh Heh... Carmack's such a dork.

    He's a big dreamcast supporter. (see QIII on Dreamcast)

    Unreal Tournament had to flatten the character models for translation to the Dreamcast version. For translation to PS2, they actually up'ed the polycount in the character animation.

    Here are some more words on the PS2's supposed limitations:

    "In other words, the bus is so zippy at streaming graphics data into the Graphics Synthesizer's VRAM that it's almost like the GS is jacked directly into the main memory. And some developers agree. "We certainly thrash textures in and out of VRAM more often than we would like," LucasArts' Corry says, "but keep in mind there are some pretty big 'pipes' connecting the major components of the PS2 together. That data bandwidth translates into fast texture loads into VRAM, so we're not really complaining."

    Volition's Hague adds, "That huge pipe is key. We're uploading an obscene amount of textures per frame in Summoner. We're not holding back. You're going to see a huge variety of texturing within a single Summoner level." - EGM website

    The Sony quote is kinda silly too, with PC's breaking new barriers every day, no technology is going to stay ahead for long.

    I'm rather impressed with the way the PS2 stacks up to the 1.4 ghz chips! Especially since I'm not sure some of those numbers are accurate. The PS2's specs came out higher in the release version than they were in the pre-release listings. http://www.scea.com/news/press_example.asp?ps2=ps2&ReleaseID=9

    There is a very Bizarre WWII game in dev for the PS2... I'll try to find a link to it tommorrow. Right now, I'm off to work...

    0

    Tactic to quell "gamey" play.

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Hmmmm... I can see both sides to the new scenario.

    First, if a VF changes to neutral because of a small skirmish near it, it would be rather annoying to the defender in the last turn.

    However, you could also argue that if there was still skirmishing going on near the VF at games end... commander has not succeeded in securing the objective in said amount of time.

    Also, from what BTS said in that quote, it seems that the troops getting chopped up during that charge will count harder against the attacker/rusher than the flag change will count against the defender.

    Kind of a fun argument. smile.gif

    0

    Speaking of Polygon Counts in Game systems

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    RMC... it's funny that Computer Gaming World, a magazine that makes it's living on PC games, would find (sketchy) statistics to "prove" a PC better than a PS2. Wait, no it's not...

    However, if you look at the link I posted in my first post, you'll see that the resolution is variable: 256X224 to 1280 X 1024

    Also, you'll see that the 66 million is a bottleneck on the processor side, and the graphics synthesizer is actually capable of 75 million. Thus, 66 million isn't "theoretical" at all.

    As I already stated... Kessen 2 hopes to have 500 polygon characters on screen at one time.

    As for the upgrades... in next year or so there will be a 50 gig HD and a cable modem network for the PS2.

    I'm not trying to flame, just stating facts. I happen to be one of the people who would rather buy a sweet game machine for $300 that will be good for the next 5 years, than upgrade my pc every 2.9 seconds. Also, as someone stated, the compatibility issue (games are naturally specifically designed to run on PS2) is a huge bonus.

    I play war/strategy games on my PC. Anything else... I prefer a console.

    [This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 11-06-2000).]

    0

    Tactic to quell "gamey" play.

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    The "counterattack next turn" argument just doesn't work in this situation! OK, you're opponent rushes the flags and actually makes it there (what kind of a defense did you have???) and scores some last minute points.

    HOW is this worse than some of my games where I KNOW I would have lost the flag as the defender within one or two more turns, but the game ended and saved me? It's not!

    What I don't think people are seeing here is that the flag is the objective! It represents a piece of property that your forces need to hold by game end. Perhaps, after that last minute flag rush on turn 20 where you somehow manage to capture the VL, the cavalry shows up and pulls your butt out of the fire and secures the location. so see, you can't really make up imaginary post battle stories that if you had 2 more turns you would win, because that ALSO can be turned against you.

    I like my games to be as realistic as I can make them... and yet I just see no argument that a last minute flag rush is "gamey."

    It's not something I think you should always do (it may cost you a much larger defeat), however, if you honestly think you can do it, then why not?

    0

    Tactic to quell "gamey" play.

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    I agree with using jeeps for scouting Maximus. Especially to carry a split squad quickly to an advance location.

    I think there is some spotting/speed or something issue with jeeps that needs repairing, but otherwise, I see no other real use for em.

    Mark, I really like the last turn idea! They would not even have to run for THAT MUCH over... perhaps a surprise two extra turns... that's all it would take to repel a weak last minute rush.

    But then again, a weak last minute rush really should not be enough troops to swing the victory too much one way. I've found that rushing against a strong flag defense usually only gets troops ground to meat piles.

    Is it still possible to gain a victory even if the flags end nuetral?

    0

    Tactic to quell "gamey" play.

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Victory Flags should not REALLY be considered "gamey", as they represent an objective.

    Taking Objectives is sometimes more important than number of enemy killed (winning by attrition).

    So, in a quick battle of 20 turns with a single victory flag in the center... wouldn't the "combat mission" be to take the area (represented by the flag) in 20 minutes or less with the forces available? And if you succeeded in doing so, no matter HOW or WHEN you succeeded, are you not then the victor?

    I'm only posting this opinion of mine because to me it seems that there is a "gamey" tactics WITCH HUNT on right now... where anything that allows you to win is being called "gamey."

    Soon it will be believed that the only way to "really" win is to rush blind, headlong into the enemy, never once allowing your forces to halt their movement, except jeeps, which cannot move at all because that would be considered "scouting".

    0

    Speaking of Polygon Counts in Game systems

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Lord General... I uh... hate to tell you how wrong you are!

    Good points you brought up though! Uh, yeah...

    Anyhoo, I waited in a 7 hour line in a spur of the moment type thing, and ended up w/ a PS2. All I can say is that this thing hums like no PC I have ever seen... and that's only the 1st generation launch games.

    I can certainly imagine CM running on a PS2 with all 12 men represented per squad.

    (EDIT: a title in the works... KESSEN 2... hopes to achieve over 500 "men" on the screen at one time, in massive shogun battles)

    At first programmers complained about the 4 mb vram of the PS2, until they found out it can pass through over 3 gb per second.

    Also... if you check out the official "floating point" specs, it's incredible!

    The processor, at 300 mhz, is incredibly fast. As stated, it can't be compared to a PC processor... plus, if I remember right, there are 1 or 2 co-processors.

    http://www.scea.com/news/press_example.asp?ps2=ps2&ReleaseID=9

    Yeah, it sucks all right... sucks all my time away while I'm playing it.

    I'm 99% sure you can hook it up to a monitor too (just like a DVD player) so the resolution is also an invalid complaint.

    I realize most people are pro PC anti-console... but no one can honestly say the PS2 isn't sweet.

    Ok, must go play...

    [This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 11-05-2000).]

    0
×
×
  • Create New...