I wonder if there's secondary firing mode on the weapons in the game?

------------------

Btw, How do you guys get the picture underneath your nick?

------------------

hello Ruthless_B

go to your profile and you can choose the pic you want

Testing testing

Cool thanks Polaris, sorry for the spam and all that =)

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ruthless_B:
I wonder if there's secondary firing mode on the weapons in the game?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If there wasn't a secondary firing mode in a weapon that is in the game in real life, then there probably wont be a secondary firing mode. If the M1 doesn't have a secondary firing mode in real life, there probably wont be one in the game. But I don't really know. It depends on how realistic the developers want the game to be.

[This message has been edited by Recycled Spooge (edited June 12, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Recycled Spooge (edited June 12, 2001).]

"It depends on how realistic the developers want the game to be."

Well, lets see. No blood, no gore, no bullet holes on objects. I'd say not very...

[This message has been edited by -DJK- (edited June 12, 2001).]

damit . DJK , you just happen to pop up everytime the word "realistic" gets mentioned , huh ?


j/k

Theres no bullet holes? what the hell? thats like one of the most important aspects of a first person shooter.

No Bullet holes on objects? Who says?

Hmm... hell that would really suck, anybody can verify that?

if there's highly destructible environments then there's got to be bullet holes in walls and objects and stuff

I believe that they said that bullet holes ruin the performance of the game or something...

[This message has been edited by Recycled Spooge (edited June 12, 2001).]

no its just bullet holes that are real wich chuncks out im pretty sure

Posted by Coriolis in the "Another hit location/crosshairs question" thread-

"Unfortunately, dynamically putting small holes in walls in a realistic fashion without destroying frame rates would take more time than we have for the game, and may not even be possible without making the normal game play look ugly."

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -DJK-:
Posted by Coriolis in the "Another hit location/crosshairs question" thread-

"Unfortunately, dynamically putting small holes in walls in a realistic fashion without destroying frame rates would take more time than we have for the game, and may not even be possible without making the normal game play look ugly." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you, kind sir.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -DJK-:
Posted by Coriolis in the "Another hit location/crosshairs question" thread-

"Unfortunately, dynamically putting small holes in walls in a realistic fashion without destroying frame rates would take more time than we have for the game, and may not even be possible without making the normal game play look ugly." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I believe that means that putting actual 3D "holes" in the wall is not possible (atleast that's how it sounds). They will probably just have little black marks like most FPSs, which is not unrealistic seeing as it still shows the bullet marks.

He also said-

"We believe that having detailed environments and high-quality models contributes more to the experience than punching tiny holes into walls with your pistol."

That doesn't sound to me like there will be ANYTHING.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -DJK-:
He also said-

"We believe that having detailed environments and high-quality models contributes more to the experience than punching tiny holes into walls with your pistol."

That doesn't sound to me like there will be ANYTHING.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you would have un-detailed environments and poor models just so you can put little holes in walls?

"So you would have un-detailed environments and poor models just so you can put little holes in walls?"

There are games w/good environments and models that still allow bullet holes in objects.




[This message has been edited by -DJK- (edited June 12, 2001).]

Okay...I have all the MoH games. There are only two out there, but I still have them! They don't have blood in it, the holes are just black marks...sometimes they don't show up. But you know what I still think MoH is one of the best FPS out there. I can't wait for the PC. All I need is clean graphics, (They have that) and the beach scene...(and they have that!) I don't care if there is no blood or gore. If it has good game play and a great enviroment then I'm sold.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -DJK-:
"So you would have un-detailed environments and poor models just so you can put little holes in walls?"

There are games w/good environments and models that still allow bullet holes in objects.

[This message has been edited by -DJK- (edited June 12, 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but do any of them include every leaf on every tree being rendered in 3-D? That's probably why MOH can't handle bullet holes. I'm looking forward more to seeing the amazingly realistic environments then seeing bullet holes (not like we haven't seen them before).

I'd rather see some realistic combat action w/blood and bullet holes then every leaf on some tree. Do you really need to see every leaf on a tree?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -DJK-:
I'd rather see some realistic combat action w/blood and bullet holes then every leaf on some tree. Do you really need to see every leaf on a tree? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought you wanted realism, what kind of battlefield has no camo? How do you hide behind a leafless tree? Scripted events like a half-track flying out of the bushes (hidden in the leaves) and a Mg squad jumping out and opening fire would be a lot better then some red mist.

yea but . realism to DJK is blood , blood , and more blood . if you search his record posts , you will see that THAT IS ALL HE TALKS ABOUT ....lol

Hans, if I had to give up something, it'd be seeing every leaf on a tree, not the blood and bullet holes.

"yea but . realism to DJK is blood , blood , and more blood ."

Well in war, that IS realism.

True it is. But you know what..I'm still getting the game. It makes no difference to me. If I want to blow someone's head off, I can go play SOF. What I look for in this game is gameplay and Nice Historical info..

So instead of getting something new and inovating you would rather have more blood just like any other FPS(Ex. Mortr wich was a mediocre game and now can be bought for $20, blood didn't make this game any better)? In a war game blood is only part of the realism, there is also vehicles, weapons, levels design, music, setting, weather, AI, uniforms, explosions, voices, objectives, etc.

You want realism then shoot yourself whenever it happens in the game, you'll get the ultimate realism, and real blood!!

Every topic seems to turn into a blood topic.

"So instead of getting something new and inovating you would rather have more blood just like any other FPS"

Then why don't you tell all the poor people that get shot to stop bleeding, cuz EVERYBODY does that and it's getting old, LMAO. Last time I checked, people still bleed, so I don't see why this feature should suddenly be left out.

"In a war game blood is only part of the realism"

Yes, you're right. Thats why they shouldn't leave it out, because it's part of the realism.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -DJK-:
"So instead of getting something new and inovating you would rather have more blood just like any other FPS"

Then why don't you tell all the poor people that get shot to stop bleeding, cuz EVERYBODY does that and it's getting old, LMAO. Last time I checked, people still bleed, so I don't see why this feature should suddenly be left out.

"In a war game blood is only part of the realism"

Yes, you're right. Thats why they shouldn't leave it out, because it's part of the realism.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So we should take out all the new things just to add blood? Last time I checked all those poor bleeding people weren't made out of pixels and included in a game. The feature isn't suddenly left out, it was never there, and if it was excluded to make room for new and inovating features then that's a good thing, games aren't going to get any better if they all stick to the same plan. Well, they also leave out real pain, are you going to bitch about that being excluded next.

If there will be no blood, I wonder if we can light people on fire.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Recycled Spooge:
If there will be no blood, I wonder if we can light people on fire.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I believe I heard about a flame-thrower some where (think it was PC-Gamer Mag.).

sorry, double post

[This message has been edited by -DJK- (edited June 12, 2001).]

"The feature isn't suddenly left out, it was never there"

Uh, what first person shooters have YOU been playing??

"and if it was excluded to make room for new and inovating features then that's a good thing"

Not really. You act as if blood was just some stupid fad that is out of style or something. Just because blood has been in other games, doesn't mean it's not STILL a vital part of games that portray combat. Adding new things is great, but removing some of the things that continue to add to realism, such as blood, gore and bullet holes is just plain stupid.

"games aren't going to get any better if they all stick to the same plan."

As I said, people still bleed when shot, and so games should keep including blood, ESPECIALLY games that claim to be realistic.



[This message has been edited by -DJK- (edited June 12, 2001).]

"Uh, what first person shooters have YOU been playing??"

What FPSs are YOU talking about, MOH never had blood.

"Not really. You act as if blood was just some stupid fad that is out of style or something. Just because blood has been in other games, doesn't mean it's not a vital part of games that portray combat. Adding new things is great, but they shouldn't remove the old stand bys like blood, gore and bullet holes."

And you act as if your about to have a heart attack if you don't get blood in you games. Just because blood is in other games does not mean it has to be in them all. In case you haven't noticed no one else here is really concerened with the blood, just you, so maybe it's not as important and you think.
Sure it looks cool, but red mist is not more important the gameplay features like the ones I've mentioned. I'm not here to say that blood is bad, just that I don't want to play through another SOF -- "Wow, I shot him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, oh my god I shot him too. Sure there is blood, but they put so much effort into the blood (even built an engine around it) that other things sufferd, (ex. AI) the enemy just stood there in the middle of the hall and shot at you intill you blew his face into a fine red mist and looked at the inner-workings of his throat. It was boody & gorey, but damn was it repetive.

"As I said, people still bleed when shot, and so games should keep including blood, ESPECIALLY games that claim to be realistic."

So every realisic feature should be in this one game, if need to have this one you need them all.

Well, we need photo realistic terrain, fully destructable terrain (red faction style) every weapon ever featured in a WW2 game, we need to include a flight simulater section, we need to be able to play as every different nation in WW2, and loads of other great features.

I mean all of these have been included before, we must do it again.



[This message has been edited by Hans (edited June 12, 2001).]

"What FPSs are YOU talking about, MOH never had blood."

I'm talking about realistic FPS's in general, all of which seem to have blood.

"Just because blood is in other games does not mean it has to be in them all."

Well, it should be in anything that is called "realistic" by the developers. I simply can't take a game seriously that has people getting shot w/out blood.

"In case you haven't noticed no one else here is really concerened with the blood, just you, so maybe it's not as important and you think."

Or maybe I'm just not as willing to except less than most here are.

"Or maybe I'm just not as willing to except less than most here are."

Or maybe you just Bitch alot more then anyone here.

"I'm talking about realistic FPS's in general, all of which seem to have blood."

And what FPSs would they be, Quake?

"Well, it should be in anything that is called "realistic" by the developers. I simply can't take a game seriously that has people getting shot w/out blood."

And I can't take anyone who gets so upset over the lack of red pixels seriously.

"So every realisic feature should be in this one game, if need to have this one you need them all."

Well it couldn't hurt, but if something HAS to be left out, it certianly shouldn't be blood. I think most people would just expect it in something that claims to be a realistic WWII game inspired my Saving Private Ryan. I can just imagine how many posts there are gonna be on here when this game is released, saying, "Wheres the blood!? Every other FPS has it!".

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -DJK-:
"So every realisic feature should be in this one game, if need to have this one you need them all."

Well it couldn't hurt, but if something HAS to be left out, it certianly shouldn't be blood. I think most people would just expect it in something that claims to be a realistic WWII game inspired my Saving Private Ryan. I can just imagine how many posts there are gonna be on here when this game is released, saying, "Wheres the blood!? Every other FPS has it!".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I don't recall that happening with PSX MOH. Why shouldn't it be blood that is excluded? You seem quite ready to dump other features (the leaves), you expecting 2015 to go "Oh no, -DJK- wants blood, we better add it real quick!" Just because you like blood doesn't make it the MOST important think in an FPS.

"Or maybe you just Bitch alot more then anyone here."

Well, that too http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/smile.gif

"And what FPSs would they be"

Rogue Spear, SOF, Operation Flashpoint, Swat3, Project IGI... need any more?

"And I can't take anyone who gets so upset over the lack of red pixels seriously."

The whole game is just pixels.