molotov_billy Posted July 22, 2007 Share Posted July 22, 2007 So it looks like paradox posted a video a couple of days ago, and I haven't seen it anywhere else, so I'll post it here. It was kind of buried. Hit the "download video" link on this page. http://www.paradoxplaza.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=207&Itemid=129 Anyway, I did a search and couldn't find an answer to this question - is unit scaling being used in all of these videos? Is it in shock force? I ask because the scaling in this video seems slightly off - the size of the bradley compared to the streets, and the size of the infantry compared to the trees. They also seem to be clumped really tightly together, which could also be a scale issue. The run animation seems to kind-of sort-of match the scale, since they're not really sliding around. Anyway, can any beta testers or whoever else enlighten us? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yardstick Posted July 22, 2007 Share Posted July 22, 2007 How the hell do you fit 9 guys into the back of a Brad? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted July 22, 2007 Share Posted July 22, 2007 Scale looks fine to me. The trees in the middle east are mostly fairly small and scrubby compared to the towering trees of Europe and the United States, and the roads aren't always multiple lane highways, so I don't see any problem with the Bradley and the road, either. But the 9 man dismount squad, hmm...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted July 22, 2007 Share Posted July 22, 2007 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flanker15 Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 9 guys hmmmm, well it could be the 6 dismounts and the 3 crew? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 I hope Steve doesn't mind if I quote his words... The M2A3 redesigned the interior and added room for one more passenger. This gives the crew capacity of 3 plus 7 passengers. This allows for a total of 28 dismounts for a platoon of 4 Bradleys. You have 3x 9men squads with 1x 1man HQ, which is 28. In real life this means splitting units up in very strange ways to fit. Each Bradley contains a full Fire Team from each Squad and roughly 1/2 of another Fire Team. When they dismount there is a little bit of rushing around so everybody is reunited.That of course would be extremely hard (let alone annoying!) to arrange in the game, so there is a little bit of "flexibility" so that teams don't have to be split. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stikkypixie Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 What I don't get from these videos is that somehow there is always a soldier standing, whilst all the others are lying down. Does this happen to improve spotting or something? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalbrew Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 Originally posted by stikkypixie: What I don't get from these videos is that somehow there is always a soldier standing, whilst all the others are lying down.The guy standing is the FNG. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yardstick Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 Originally posted by Sergei: I hope Steve doesn't mind if I quote his words... </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The M2A3 redesigned the interior and added room for one more passenger. This gives the crew capacity of 3 plus 7 passengers. This allows for a total of 28 dismounts for a platoon of 4 Bradleys. You have 3x 9men squads with 1x 1man HQ, which is 28. In real life this means splitting units up in very strange ways to fit. Each Bradley contains a full Fire Team from each Squad and roughly 1/2 of another Fire Team. When they dismount there is a little bit of rushing around so everybody is reunited.That of course would be extremely hard (let alone annoying!) to arrange in the game, so there is a little bit of "flexibility" so that teams don't have to be split. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 IIRC, a while back Steve stated that they were planning on doing something like hitting a Bradley infantry platoon with a C&C and/or morale penalty er sumfink for a short amount of time after they debark, to abstractly represent the soldiers having to look for their swim buddies, before they can get in proper combat formation. I never heard definitively whether this as implemented or not, but it makes sense. Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParaBellum Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 Originally posted by metalbrew: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by stikkypixie: What I don't get from these videos is that somehow there is always a soldier standing, whilst all the others are lying down.The guy standing is the FNG. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardy1 Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 But they run as if they are in water =( I could try to overcome that nasty anim by imagining a strong wind, in every direction. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrNoobie Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 ^^ lol at least the animation is fluid 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molotov_billy Posted July 23, 2007 Author Share Posted July 23, 2007 Originally posted by MrNoobie: ^^ lol at least the animation is fluid Wow really? Compared to CMBB, sure. To me, it looks like the whole run cycle is about 5 frames of animation. I dunno. Even my wife mentioned how choppy the little guys looked. But honestly - whoever authored that animtion should get some feedback about it and sort things out. It's arguably the most important animation in the game, and could really use some more work. It's bad enough to be a bit distracting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hev Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 Errr people, did you actualy look at the video. Look at the scenery, the telegraph poles. The video capture is obviously set to 25fps or below because the WHOLE vid is choppy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molotov_billy Posted July 23, 2007 Author Share Posted July 23, 2007 Originally posted by Hev: Errr people, did you actualy look at the video. Look at the scenery, the telegraph poles. The video capture is obviously set to 25fps or below because the WHOLE vid is choppy. I'm saying that a specifc animation looks choppier than everything else. It has nothing to do with the video capture - most people will probably play around 25 fps, anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hev Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 From experience anything below 30 frames is bodering on chopsville, and i would also think that anything animated for games would be done with at least 30fps as the minimal viewing speed. Anycase, it doesnt matter how smooth the animations are, the video you are watching does NOT contain everything you would see on your monitor, so it will NEVER look smooth. Ps. as a side note, due to how the brain works in interpreting images, at a certain frame rate surely theres a chance that one person may see choppyness whilst another see's it smoothly. Just curious tho 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 I believe 24 fps is classic theater movie projector speed. Moon (I think) has stated a couple times that the mere act of capturing the video off the game gives a BIG hit to the framerate. Plus they're no doubt running a Beta build with the debug software slowing it a tad. So the game's pretty much guaranteed to run smoother than the video. - Okay, I just got the video downloaded (finally) Whoa! GIANT framerate hit! Take my word for it, the game actually runs FIFTY times better than that vid! :eek: [ July 23, 2007, 11:45 AM: Message edited by: MikeyD ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molotov_billy Posted July 23, 2007 Author Share Posted July 23, 2007 Originally posted by Hev: Anycase, it doesnt matter how smooth the animations are, the video you are watching does NOT contain everything you would see on your monitor, so it will NEVER look smooth.Make as many excuses as you want. It isn't the video, or the framerate, or my specific monitor, or any other of a thousand reasons that fans will make up in order to justify their purchase. I can look at a specific animation, compare it to others in the same video, and see that it's authored with too few frames, and authored badly at that. It doesn't ruin the game. I'm still buying it. Doesn't mean that specific parts couldn't be improved a great deal with minimal effort. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 Molotov-billy, please believe me there's something really off about that particular video. Just viewing BFC's earlier videos will show that. if I hadn't layed hands on the game myself I would've suspected the same. But the game is poetry-in-motion (even running at low framerate) compared to that choppy vid. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 Paradox's competence can be deduced from certain other threads on this board, of the many issues to worry about this one is not it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 Originally posted by Angryson: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />That of course would be extremely hard (let alone annoying!) to arrange in the game, so there is a little bit of "flexibility" so that teams don't have to be split. That "flexibility" is very unrealistic right?</font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHertogh Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 Originally posted by MikeyD: I believe 24 fps is classic theater movie projector speed. True... but movies have natural motion blurring that does not occure when sampling a video image from the frame buffer. In order to simulate this effect the capture device/program would actually need to capture all frames and then average the extra frames together. This would approximate the blur of a movie. If not, video captured this way will look very choppy even if the source is smooth as silk. Marc 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.