nervousquirrel

We have updated the website with a new "Works In Progress" Media section (here). We have already posted model renders of the current M4A1, AK-101, M249 SAW, and RPK for you to take a look at. On that subject, we have updated the M4A1 rather significantly, and produced a Updated Version of the Old M4A1 Promo Render. Generally speaking it is the same model, but still, it is quite improved. ( Updated M4A1 Promo Render )

Here you go, renders of the M4A1 and the M18 Smoke Grenade.

I can't believe I never encountered this project before. I think your perception of INS is a little off from what it really is (which I don't blame you since we don't pitch everything), but what I have always thought about 'realistic gameplay' are firefights. It's one thing to have iron sights, realistic damage, etc. but that still doesn't make a game (in my view) 'realistic' necessarily. I encounter a lot of people in the INS community who seem to think that having an accurate ballistics physics system is what realism is, but to me it's not about that. Reading on your website, I kind of find it bizarre that you have pretty much the exact same philosophy as I do when it comes to the gameplay. INS may look good, which is a very big pull factor for people, but the mechanics that we're trying to deliver at the core gameplay are realistic firefights. I apologize if I jumped to conclusions about your project then. I'm glad to hear that you agree with me, and I'm excited to see what you guys will put out.

All hail, an updated site, and some media: www.ProjectFF.com

Alrighty guys, I've updated the Summary for Prospective Talent to include some more basic design points. It may be something you expected, or not, it's still rather vague. But maybe now some more of your questions will be answered. Check it out at our site below, and post on the forums if you like. http://www.projectff.com/

Thanks alot. One major challege, if not the main challenge, is not depending on people "playing the game the way it was meant to be played". Testing will tell. About competition with Insurgency. Those guys have an incredible team with a crazy art dept. It seems however, they are going for a standard (not to say bad) realism design, where we are going for something quite different, although in the same setting. I imagine they'll be our competition since we have the same setting, but I don't see, thus far, why people couldn't play both, or for that matter, why my project wouldn't "win out" so to speak. But time will tell, and the design doc needs to be tested. One step at a time... and they are many steps ahead of us.

No worries. Frankly, I don't expect you guys to totally get what I mean untill we release the details and get a working alpha out. I'm going to be developing a site in the next few weeks detailing more about the project. I just need to think about how im going to do it. It's one thing to explain, and it's another to do it. Infact, that's why im calling this a "gameplay experiment". Consider the goal of a firefight game to be the problem, the current untested design to be a hypothesis, and the rest to be the experiment itself. This really is how I'm handling this. I just have faith in the concepts. Thing is, the core of this game lies in the small details (significant details, not superflous gimmicks), and since we are not established, I'm worried about releasing said details for fear of influencing other projects further in production than our own. I realize that I'm probably silly or even arrogant to think so, but I would rather err on the side of caution. All of our team members have full access to the design doc, and they have stayed. Consider that proof, if only for now, of how solid our ideas are. I am incredibly critical of myself and this project, and I assure you that I have done everything I can to make sure the ideas fall in line with what i've learned from other games that I've played (I crit them too... I'm a heavy game connoisseur in that respect), and that the project is original. If i've come off as too sure of myself, know now that I am not some starry eyed noob. I'm sure because, pre-alpha, I'm very proud of the game design. I expect I'll have to change it to whatever extent once experimenting begins, but I know there is a successful way of doing what we're setting out to do, and I intend to find it.

ok, forget the words "modern combat" and focus on the firefight aspect of it. im glad you noticed how pivotal map design will be, but i assure you game elements written in code are pivotal in the whole equation. DoD does at times have nice firefights, but just the same, the game is based off of a setting more than it is based off of gameplay goals (although teamplay could be considered one of those goals, and that's valid enough). Moreover, im sure that DoD isn't focused on firefights so much... you can tell by their level design. Everything in our project is geared towards that one goal and all that it entails.

:roll:

lol, hey curman.

Yeah, I knew it would draw comparisons. Firstly, I think it's importaint to mention that our project is multiplayer. Not sure if that was understood. Assuming it was, the example regarding stalemates was just one example. Your example about picking people off when their heads showed up is what I meant by that. It was very annoying to me, didnt like it at all. By the way, I also think it's importaint to note that I've never played BiA Multiplayer, only Single Player. The similarities in both BiA and our project lie in that we share the concepts of suppression and flanking. That is where it ends, as we are handling this game differently, and it will not limit you to doing only those two tactics. What else is possible is up to the player. We've simply designed a framework that is conducive to firefights and the afore mentioned tactics. Consider this example: Tomb Raider was a great game. It was a very popular game for it's jumping puzzles and the like. Then came Prince of Persia: Sand of Time. Famous also, to an extent, for similar gameplay, but a completely different game. It was similar to Tomb Raider (BiA), but surpassed it and was essentially different from it (http://www.ProjectFF.com). It did what Tomb Raider did better, and did so in totally different ways. If you're that interested, hit me up. I'd love to discuss details with you. Btw, do you mod at all?

You're right. Very good point. I've been thinking about putting together a "Portfolio" of sorts to explain the points of our project. The only problem is deciding how to do that without making too much information available, and likewise by not making a site that is to vague. We'll figure that out, but thanks, you made an excellent point.

We have a very detailed, strong design document in place. Moreover, we have a progressive system setup for making builds based off of the design document and testing the concepts therein. Currently we are working on an Alpha build that will test the core concepts of the project. As for describing the mod in detail, I cannot do so for the time being. The details exist, but I want to release details when we have a full site to support and establish our ideas, and we are not going to put up a site untill we have adequate content. This puts us in a spot since a site attracts people to help produce content, however this is why if someone approaches me with an interest in joining the project, I am willing to answer any questions they have. AIM: Nervousquirrel Email: fconcepcion@gmail.com

Bah, I'm sorry if I've confused you. Our game is like BiA in that things like suppression and flanking will be effective and useful. However, unlike BiA, our model for doing so is VERY different.

Well like I said, we aren't trying to fix BiA. We are making our game with origninal ideas, completely independent of BiA or any other game. The only way that other games have influenced this project, naturally, is by showing us things that don't work. I dont know how to answer your question, I don't have a list of things that need to be fixed in BiA. Again, don't make the mistake of associating us with BiA, I only said that it vaguely parallels our project, not that we are another type of BiA game. I want to stress that we are a different project altogether.