Izuno

Interestingly, I recall in many war movies where medics or other infantrymen attend to a fallen comrade in situations where you'd think "wtf is he doing? that guy is gonna get shot!" But still you often see medics doing this in various situations and you start to think, "well that's the risk a medic runs?" ....fapplze... We could debate if the specific instance in the BiA video is realistic or accurate or authentic or correct or whatever, but the sense I got was the game as a whole is meant to fit in with the consumer's already existing perception of how soldiers should behave in combat situations and bring that level of authenticity to a video game that's never been done that way before. That means you get down to the details of how the characters talk and behave in non combat situations, small talk, etc. Gives it more of a real Band of Brother's feal than any existing WW2 game. Based on the presentation I saw at E3, that was how I interpreted Gearbox's design "philosophy." I leave it to Zilla etc to correct my interpretation.

Randy's voice over (and the other guy) is exactly as I remember when I saw it live at E3. Still good, though. It shows how well rehearsed it was. Kick ass.

...they stoles the i.d.e.a. froms us... Did they say what F.E.A.R. stand for already? I saw all that stuff at E3 but i forgot if they went into details on the acronym. m.e.h. to acronyms

bit of both actually i can play shooters righty but am better left. at E3 i had to demo stalker right handed cause we didn't have time to reconfig controls in the middle of deathmatches.

yeah...like they are all scared 16 year old kids about to get shot....which may have been realistic sometimes given the germans were spread pretty thin by the end of the war. Get more variety in faces. those faces make me crie in phear.

i play left handed...so i used the numpad. numpad5 = forward numpad4 = strafe left numpad6 = strafe right numpad7 = jump numpad1 = crouch numpadDEL = reload etc. if you play lefty it's the only way to go.

but if the game is good/fun whatever and it's USA v Germans, I'll still check it out at least.

mojo wins!

I'd love to see WW2 shooter gamplay that has you interacting with (or playing as) Canadiens and other allied forces besides the main American and Brit forces...just to see some variety. Anyway...looks interesting so far.

mazzle winnuth

dingdingdingding! Fletch gets gold star! i like mapcore as IRC and Forums only. takes the pressure off us to deliver something, as well avoids the power struggle laziness.

meh. still, i'm sure i'll get it the day it comes out and play it straight through till i beat it. maybe these screens don't really do the graphics and the gameplay justice. dunno. i can certainly say there are PC games that have better textures than what's shown here. like i said, a few screens that don't impress everyone aren't gonna deter me from getting this one.

welcome nate. gg there on that BiA thing there. can't wait to play it. my comment: yep them graphics sure are purty...but the graphics don't have me interested as much as what I know about the gameplay and the "feel" of the game. really hope this one blows people away at E3.

Battlefield: Modern Combat just announced last night for PS2. http://www.eagames.com/news/bf_mc_041504.jsp Obviously it's no big deal cause it's a PS2 game, but EA's claiming it will have 24 person online with vehicles and headset voicechat. If they can pull it off it should be a lot of fun for PS2 gamers. Credit to they guys for fitting all that data over the PS2 broadband pipe.

It will be interesting to see if they can legally keep "Brothers in Arms" as the title.

http://www.khaaan.com gg

http://www.cliffyb.com/ gg

yes i noticed that the first time i saw stalker at the office, which was over a year ago. you have to realize that (1) the GSC doods are all hardcore CS/UTk2/UT2k4/DoD/Wolf:ET etc players, so they paid homage to one of their all time favorites by ripping the sounds for placeholders in their game and (2) in Ukraine, they don't pay attention to copyright until Americans get involved. gg

This is the core of the debate...can the designers acheive what they want without having player character dialogue. A compromise may be 3rd person cutscene dialogue like in Halo. Another idea we are discussing with the developer: Perhaps, on occassion in game, we freeze the player's movements but still allow him free-look. This keeps him in the game while he has his dialogue, or listens to NPC dialogue. Whether he has his own dialogue or not, the notion is the same: deliver some story/dramatic dialogue to keep it more than just a constant action, mindless run/gun shooter. Not sure how much of these we'd use in the game yet...sigh. Still debating.

Excellent post, Zazi. And to everyone, great feedback so far. Yes, if we end up doing player dialogue in first person, then it would have to be excellent. The studio has hired a pro writer, a veteran of other big video games and even some movies. I met him on Thursday, he knows his stuff. And all the voice actors, while not big name hollywood stars, will be top quality. As for the writing, picture the "no bullshit" yet still dramatic dialogue the Delta operators had in the movie Black Hawk Down. Then picture Jack Bauer's dialogue (especially his high drama, yet no bullshit dialogue when he talks with Tony at CTU or the President) in 24. This is the kind of dialogue that I envision the main character having if he ends up having some. Any further thoughts? My take is that the gaming community generally thinks BHD and 24 are "good" and not bullshit-cheesy garbage entertainment. I really appreciate your input.

Good feedback on FarCry. everyone says that. duly noted for sure by our developer anyway. Also, this is not for STALKER. It's for another game in the early design phase. It's basically an action oriented shooter game. But the developer wants to make you feel like the character you are playing has more than zero personality (meaning more than Gordon Freeman or the dude you play in MoH...neither has much personality.) I'd say he is the "Master Chief" of the modern military/Delta Force/black ops kind of guy, skewed closer to military as opposed to black ops.

Let me clarify...that is not the dialogue...just the GIST of the dialogue...like "I need a tank" basically. picture good dialogue instead of the shit i wrote.

So the main project I am on right now is a new first person shooter with drivable vehicles (in single and multiplayer), rag doll, some version of havok or whatever physics, yada yada standard fare. The premise is modern military in the spirit of the terrorist hunt/war in Afghanistan and sort of Iraq. It is not based on those wars, however it is set in "the near future" where super elite military commandos, like Delta Force operators, go into a hostile environment and do whatever it takes to find the bad guys and kill or capture them. A great reference book is The Hunt for Bin Laden: Task Force Dagger. These elite commandos go beyond Special Forces operators in that they also gather intelligence and work with their support organizations via radio/other communication to make decisions on they fly rather than go through the immense military beuracracy that the Rangers and other Army organizations have to plod through. The result is that data is gathered and analysed in a matter of minutes or hours rather than days or weeks and appropriate actions get done. In effect, these elite commandos have "full battlefield authority" to do whatever it takes. Real example of using "full battlefield authority to go beyond Special Forces" from The Hunt for Bin Laden: In the war in Afghanistan, teams of 12 made up of Delta Force or Navy Seal operators had to work with Northern Alliance warlords to fight the the Taliban and al-Queda fighters. However, the warlords would not offer up their 1000 to 3000 fighters unless they (meaning the warlords) got paid big amounts of cash. So one of these elite battlefield commander doods (probably a CIA trained Detal Operator) would drive around with briefcase(s) of up to millions of dollars in US currency in attempt to "rent" the warlords' fighters. Often this meant negotiating "by the seat of your pants" like in a Hollywood movie. This action was not planned for back in the Pentagon when the Mr. Bush said to invade. The guys on the ground realized that a conventional war would never work in Afghanistan, so they literally said "shit let's just rent these fighters to help us" on the fly and the practice became modus operandi for the war. Example from the TV show 24 that futher illustrates the flavor of fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants action: In season 2, episode 1 (i think) Jack interviews this criminal (currently surving a sentence for some crime) who is an enemy of terrorist sort of group that Jack must infultrate. Spontaneously during the interview Jack pulls out his gun and kills the criminal. The head dood at CTU freaks out, but Jack says something to the effect of: "You want to stop this nuclear bomb? The get me a hacksaw and stop asking fucking questions." He then takes of the guy's head as proof he killed him to get "in" with the terrorist group. This is the spirit of the action we are going for in the game. The "elite commandos" are typically Navy Seals or Delta Operators who have additional CIA/NSA training, hence they are "beyond Special Forces" as mentioned above. From the evil marketing point of view these guys are like "military versions of Jack Bauer operating oversees to fight terrorism." So what's this mean for the game: The developer came up with this idea and we think it has huge potential. The issue is: how do you deliver that feeling to the player that he is this Jack Bauer inspired military/CIA/NSA commando type of character? He'll be able to drive vehicles, call in airstrikes, tell his handler he needs a tank and then get a tank, order the Army Rangers to secure a perimeter, give a "Viking Funeral" to fallen comrades being desecrated in the streets of some foreign city, etc. (Viking Funueral: your enemy captured and killed some of your commrades. In disgust for your side, the enemy has mutilated your commrades' bodies and hung them from bridges and had children and civilians around the bodies and cheering like in Iraq earlier this week. You are hidden atop a hill not too far away observing. You laser spot the crowd and high above some napalm bombs drop and wipe out the entire fucking crowd. Controversial, but that is a Viking Funeral.) FINALLY I GET TO THE FUCKING QUESTION: The developer is debating whether the player character should have voice over or not. They are deeply devided: One side says: "Look, all great first person shooters don't have the main character speak while in the first person mode. Halo, Half-Life, Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, etc...none of them speak. Master Chief has some dialogue but only in third person cutscenes. Conversely, in third person games like Max Payne or Splinter Cell, the main characters speaks...maybe not a HUGE amount, but sure shit Max Payne spoke a lot, even if the Max Payne 2 was a bit more meh than Max Payne 1 for some people. Anyway: the law of gaming says you can NEVER have the player character speak in the first person perspecitive. He should only speak in 3rd person cutscenes. Take Far Cry. Player character speaks from 1st person perspective and his dialogue and acting sucked! It ruined the story despite the interesting environments and other shit. Then there is the bigger issue that speaking from the first person takes you out of moment and make it less believable. See? We're right you dickheads." The other side says: "Eat shit you asshats. Just because those games sold well and generally are considered 'good' doesn't mean it's law. Far Cry had a bad voice actor and bad writing. But if you get good writing and acting, that can totally be reversed. In this game, you are this commando dood who is the fucking boss and tells his handler what he needs. In a linear story driven game, at some point he'll need a tank and at that moment, he should say: "Yo! Mr. Handler: I need a fucking tank. Get me one now, bitches." Otherwise, he would just be spoonfed around if he never gets dialogue to show the's the badass with full battlefield authority. How can you deliver that fanatasy to the gamer if the player character never speaks? And don't give me that "breaking the moment" shit or "we don't know how to do the flow of the level if he speaks" either. If you guys had ACTUAL LEVEL DESIGN SKILLZ you could do it....pussies." So this is a very hostile debate at the developer now and it is threatening to derail the project. MAPCORE: what do you think?

the little cardboard models reference tingled my spidey sense this was a joke. still, gold star for zaphod.