Ostboll

Member
  • Content count

    254
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ostboll

  • Rank
    Platoon Leader
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. What I also like is that this would be the first of my suggestions that are easily doable. However now that I think about it, if there's any way into an apartment from the outside, you'd have to add closed windows so people don't rope up and start camping. And if you do that, then you might as well throw my whole concept out and just make an empty closed window and door apartment module that randomly loads instead of the regular apartment. Still worth it imo. Given how the few buildings like this in PR became the central points in all maps (TV tower on Marlin for instance), loads of fully open blocks would be a gameplay breaker unless we get fully destructible buildings. And apart from that, storming a building not knowing which doors are open, where the enemy is hiding etc. would be a great improvement over "okay get to A-block two they'll be on second floor second apartment cause that's where the campers always are", something that always happened in PR - same firefight in the same rooms every time.
  2. Just a minor idea: The east European apartment blocks look like they could really be a gameplay breaker if someone decides to FOB them up too well. Essentially you'd reach that point, and then that's where the front line will be and the game reaches a stalemate. In real life, you bomb the s out of these until they collapse, but in Squad... What about random apartments are closed with the east european super burglar proof doors, and it's random which apartments are closed each round? So each map load apartment doors are randomly assigned open or closed. That way you won't know what windows to watch out for, the blocks can't be over-fortified, and you can still have maps with authentic soviet projects that you can fight in.
  3. critique

    First of all, great reply this should be front page FAQ cause I can't count the squad comms flooded by these worries. But anyway the point with the head bob is the view point in real 1st person is based on where the soldiers head actually is down to the cm, meaning that if you want an alive looking soldier in 3rd person with a moving head you'd have to get a bit wobbly cam in 1st person. Obviously Squad and ArmA have some pretty stiff necked funny moving soldiers because watching a camera on a real head without the balance and eyeball compensation of your brain to compensate, the view would be all over the place, but to disable headbob all together the 3rd p perspective would look pretty hilarious
  4. critique

    But then the issue still persists that you're claiming things to make more customers while doing something else because 'you know more than the community'... Shouldn't you guys have said "vehicles might take a long time cause UE is a clusterfudge atm", and "UE and AMD don't match atm, don't buy this game yet if you're running AMD", and "we might not make the 100p combined arms goals but maybe we will, we're working on it..."? Pre-alpha implies lack of features and glitches, not major core engine issues and the risk of never making the said end product as advertised... If there's the risk of these things involved... Then maybe let the community now, instead of having some youtuber who talked to you spread rumours about it? I mean, I won't blame you for not being brutally honest, you do have bills to pay and no sane marketing would try to sell their product with the bad parts highlighted, but if the community is so ignorant of game development, why not enlighten them a bit rather than just bashing common community complaints and telling people to just shush it and go away? Just a thought...
  5. critique

    Indeed, but the dynamic foliage at least is server side AFAIK? And a further point was that clientside visual effects are maybe not the focus to be had when the base game is very unoptimized as is and lacking GFX shaders and the likes which will probably force a total re-work of certain effects like smoke anyway. I agree with this personally, but since I tried to bring up some general concerns (I don't even run AMD), many community members would like to see a notice/disclaimer for this before purchasing the product, and some (albeit unrealistically), demand that Offworld create their own quick fix (...yeah). Regarding the PR comparison, sure, it might be an exaggeration but the game is much closer to PR than any modern titles, and with this in mind, it is worth noting that if a project currently relatively similar to a game run on an engine from 2005 can't produce FPS rates that are playable on modern hardware, then maybe that should be priority #1... I know some people like the controls and some don't, but a large portion of the community (myself included of course), have been complaining primarily about the camera wobble (a difficult to avoid result of real 1st person unless you want the soldier to look like he's a robot). To me and many others, it is an annoying detachment between me and my in-game character, compared to the PR responsiveness. And the squad flagging is a good idea, but mixing casual and mic only squads on the same server will still drastically mess with gameplay experience for everyone involved.
  6. critique

    I agree UE4 updates will always generate more work to be done should the updates be incorporated but realistically we should have to expect continuously accounting this well after full release, no? The only improvements I'd call superfluous would be ones that we know will be implemented down the line by UE, and talking out my unknowing behinds, I'd guess a lot of the optimization issues are Squad-specific, and thus not something we can expect an UE patch to fix... Again from my very limited experience, I was under the impression most non-third party engine games are developed first to have a stable platform in which to incorporate more features through alpha. And in this specific case, said specific features can be expected to be community generated to a large extent due to the engine and community type, meaning, should the devs focus on a platform stable for 100p combined arms, they could then pick rather quickly from a candy land of community content to incorporate into the base game as they please...
  7. I apologize if this topic is too negative - But I hope the Offworld team appreciates criticism by the community. Some brief questions to the devs about common concerns in the Squad community: - Why focus on performance heavy (but neat) things like dynamic foliage, barrel smoke etc. when the server-player sync is sweating at 70p, inf only, low detail maps? Will the server-player sync handle such things on a 100p vehicle map? Can you afford spending resources on this when there's sync issues already? - Some insiders have hinted you may have to abandon the 100p combined arms goal and stick with a smaller scale/fewer vehicles maps due to resource restrictions. Why are you adding more high resource features instead of abandoning these if they risk costing so much you must give up the 100p C.A. goal? - The current v. is poorly optimized for all, and worse still for AMD users. Current early alpha graphics are p. much on par with PR:BF2, and I can run these maxed at ~20FPS, when I can run the gorgeous Battlefront reboot at ~100fps, (64p with vehicles). Shouldn't optimizing/improving graphics be a #1 priority, rather than adding more content? - The design of the maps leaves a lot to be desired. Yes, the Russian maps+TrueSky look better, but still. What we've seen from the community artists/modders is gorgeous. What priority vs. adding more content is given to releasing mod tools atm? Will you, once mod tools are released, focus on working on the much needed polish of gameplay aspects like controls, optimizations, streamlining, and engine features, and let the community create most of the art and content like maps/new vehicles, with an efficient incorporation of the best of this to the base game? - What many people liked about the PR inf controls vs. those of, say, ArmA was the quicker, more responsive and direct, 'arcade-ish' feel since it felt like you were the soldier, whereas the hyper-realistic ArmA controls with delays, wobbly camera (which is 'realistic' - your head moves around IRL - but put on screen, you can't use the part of your brain that compensates for this to give a steady perception), and exaggerated endurance effects makes it feel like your soldier has brain damage from sniffing glue. If Squad is the spiritual successor to PR, and is "a balance of arcade, teamwork, and realism", why add hyper-realistic features that make controls less responsive and direct, like momentum while sprinting, excessive camera wobble, stamina effects on camera movement, breath hold for short range weps (which ruins suppressive fire), too much recoil climb vs. recoil spread, delayed animation start for switching weapons and reloading, etc., which makes it feel like someone else is controlling your character? - With the explosion of new players in a game where a good gameplay experience relies mostly on playing with like minded people, why not add things like automatic mic check to join certain servers and such tools to filter servers by desired play style? In Squad, you all too often have a bad time by only finding casual no mic players when you want teamwork, or only serious mic users getting annoyed at you for wanting to play casual without voice chat. I hope you have time to answer some of this. Sincerely, Bollz and the community
  8. Yeah but go-pros have terrible audio and noise reduction features. From far away where the sounds are lower, you can count on poor quality audio devices to give a fairly accurate report (like in the vid the far a way shots sound fairly accurate), but if you want to record something very loud very close (like an AK from a metre or so) you can't do it with a gopro mic...
  9. I'm gonna have to agree. The Squad guns sounds like banging two pieces of wood against each other, or maybe very loud confetti poppers. Real guns sound like this: WARNING REAL WAR, NO BLOOD OR ANYTHING BUT STILL, DON'T WATCH IF YOU'RE SENSITIVE EDIT I posted the American way, posting first reading after... Looks like you guys are going to change the sounds. Still, that vid has the most realistic and terrifying effects of taking heavy fire I've ever heard. Just the sound is enough to make you shit your pants, and that's without trees getting cut down by bullets all around.
  10. I agree, but google some pictures of Afghan deserts. It is practically the worst looking climate on earth. An eye sore by nature. Also, as more assets are added, maps are already starting to look better and more detailed, and if mod tools/map maker tools are released, some real artsy fellows are bound to add maps similar to those cry-engine works of art people used to do.
  11. It would greatly reduce the number of people who don't use mics on the server, and would greatly reduce the admins workload in the case the server admins want to kick people who don't use mics. Sure a few people may still make noise but are too scared to speak in game, but those will be a lot fewer (a by admins manageable number), and they won't have any excuses for not using the mic anyway. If the server rules are "MIC REQUIRED!" and this feature is on, banning people who use a work around won't be hard, because there will be very few of them. Yeah but then you'd have to do it all in-game and stuff. It's nicer if it's only upon joining, before you enter, so it doesn't add any hindrance to gameplay... Only on servers that want to have the feature on. Of course there would still be servers that don't have mandatory mic checks. There were many PR servers that had rules for mics, and this would just be a way of making those servers' admins jobs a LOT easier.
  12. I agree. Hopefully it will be a classic market economy supply and demand case where servers with this ticked "on" will reach a natural equilibrium where they're about enough to capture all players that want this, and not more than that. If there's too many servers with the feature on, then few people will play on them, and then the hosters will turn the feature off until there's just enough of these servers. You know? There won't be more such servers than people will want to play on them, if squad server hosters think anything like old school market capitalists ;)
  13. Y N O T T H O ? I mean, a voluntary option for the server host to decide ofc.