Jump to content

Cameroon

Members
  • Posts

    889
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Cameroon

  1. Originally posted by metalbrew:

    I griped about not being able to switch between tabs with keys in another thread. It seems I was wrong.

    It's ponderous that to switch to the movement tab (marked in the game with an M) you hit 't'. Sigh.

    Well, but what if you don't speak English and the word for Move doesn't start with an M? smile.gif

    I understand why they went the way that they did, but the keys to go directly to a particular tab (as noted above) are not convenient.

  2. Is this an instance of the victory being triggered because the other forces give up? If so, maybe it should say something to that effect. Either way, the results screen has conflicting information.

    Pictures to illustrate below:

    odd.jpg

    odd2.JPG

    To explain, in the 1st image you can see I'm not near phase line Beta or Charlie. In the second, however, it says that I secured them.

    Also, for the Syrians it says that they did NOT lose control of PL Beta and Charlie.

  3. Originally posted by molotov_billy:

    I just updated my drivers, got the windows patch for dual core (which did fix flickering shadows.) Running version 1.01.

    Core 2 Duo 2.6 ghz

    NVIDIA 7950 GTX 512 megs vram,

    2 gibs of RAM

    At my native resolutions with settings towards the middle, I was literally gettings seconds per frame. With everything turned down/off, and my resolution at 1024x768, I get around 10-15 FPS. Completely unplayable.

    Furthermore, the camera is extremely laggy. When I use right click to rotate, it continues to rotate a full 1-2 seconds longer after I've stopped moving the mouse.

    What the hell? :|

    There's something else at work on your system then, because I have almost literally that same system (2.1 Ghz and GT instead of GTX) and it plays smoothly even at the "Better" detail level at 1280x1024.
  4. Gotta say, kinda with Toleran on this. Even the west coast of the US has been awake for a bit now, so it isn't just "let them sleep normal hours" or something.

    There's no much point to purchasing straight from BF since they seem to not get the digital versions up until much later in the day than their partners. *shrug* Ah well.

  5. Originally posted by gibsonm:

    I suspect you’ll find that BFC/BTS will activate;

    1. Their download URL for the full game;

    2. Their download URL for the patch; and

    3. Their download URL for the demo.

    At the same time.

    It isn’t their fault that Paradox appears to have jumped the gun - again.

    Paradox didn't jump anything here.

    Actually, I think BFC should have put the 1.01 patch up sometime yesterday simply because Paradox box owners were going to have their game hours before BFC even got up this morning ;)

  6. Originally posted by The DesertFox:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Well, it would have been equally avoided if Paradox hadn't sent out 1.0 copies for review.

    I take it the responsibility to release a game for going to the DVD presses of the publisher is with the developer no ? And if the reviewer gets exactly the same version the customer gets out of his box the reviewer is in the position to write a fair review no ?

    cheers [/QB]</font>

  7. Originally posted by The DesertFox:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Moon:

    The Desert Fox, that is not quite correct. Battlefront and Paradox/Gamersgate are going to launch v1.01. v1.0 will only be on the shelf in some European countries (with the v1.01 available right away for those customers).

    martin

    Still you will see a lot of complaints about this 1.0 version. Something that should have been avoided in the first place.

    1 month more work into the game and you most likely would have avoided all these negative waves from reviews already out.

    cheers </font>

  8. Originally posted by The DesertFox:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Razer:

    Now, it also seems to be that the wrong version got out to the reviewers. From my knowledge, that 1.01 was crucial.

    Actually the version which went out to the revievers was the 1.0 version. Exactly that version went out to the publisher for global release too.

    Exactly that version you will find on the shelves in stores and exactly that version will be the one most people on the world base their judgement on.

    Now tell me what went wrong here ?

    cheers </font>

  9. Originally posted by TheVulture:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Flanker15:

    The strat AI would be as good as the designer wants it for senarios but in this new QB mode(I thought they were giving QB a miss this time when was it announced?!) the strat AI is randomly generated for map and parameters (something like: defend this point or attack this point) so it's not going to be very complex. This is just a guess though.

    Also since this is about AI is the tac AI better than the article says?

    As I understood it there is no randomly generated strat AI (I may have missed something). The map designer has to create some kind of very general plan that should work tolerably for more or less any force mix for each of attack, defense, ME. </font>
  10. dalem, I can't say that I've heard anything that implies that from BFC. There are plenty of "my way or the highway" comments from forum members, but then, there always are smile.gif

    Really the difference for QBs are these:

    1. No random map generation

    2. Due to #1, QBs must be played on maps that have been created by you or the community.

    3. Because there aren't "victory flags", QBs will need a little direction.

    So instead of generating a Allied Defense map, you'd pick a map set up for an Allied defense. You still purchase your units and the AI purchases its.

    Just because I understand why there aren't any auto-generated maps doesn't mean I wouldn't like to have them ;)

×
×
  • Create New...