News from the Crosshairs interview

[hockeywarrior]

There where models of the PPSh that did not include the fire selector, there was also a rare model that could not accept drum mags.

However, i'm quite certain thease models only came into existance in late 1944, as a result of demand for the weapon skyrocketing, since they where arming whole regiments with the papasha at that time.

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

Anyway, great cast guys, it was a joy to watch, lots of new info given

OK well as long as there WERE PPSH's out there that didn't have a fire select, I see it as no problem as an unlockable.

And besides, you never had a fire selector in RO1, so I would almost see it as a cool way to add in more weapon functionality in RO2, even if it is a tad historically inaccurate.

 

[Darrosquall]

my english is poor. Is there a post with ALL news from crosshairs interview?Thanks.

 

[Tiger2]

I kinda missed this pod cast and cannot understand why Ramm got disappointed and what is all the fuss about? There are always going to be nay sayers. The game is looking great but this is why I and many others want it to suit our personal ideals. I will not criticise for realism again is I can see the game is sharing up well. For twi it is best to do what they are good at without listening to us.

 

[Zetsumei]

As said before personally I would really like directional 3d voice talk. As for some types of chat it is only interesting for those in your close vicinity ("watch out grenade!", "I'm reloading", "watchout there is an enemy around the corner", "wait! i'm throwing a grenade", "can you give me suppressive fire while i run to the other side of the street?").

I wouldn't want the team and public voice chat removed, but in RO1 I'm simply missing the ability to communicate well with those directly around me. Forcing me to use the team chat with information that is only interesting to a few people. Which in the end makes me not warn people of incoming danger.

For structural tactics like the enemy is aiming at attacking capzone X or Y, or need support at capzone X, the enemy seems to move towards the left flank. Regular team voicechat is still the way to go.

But some times you want to talk and coordinate mini tactics with people right next to you, without cluttering the overall chat. And in close range talks it is important to hear how far someone is away from you and from what direction he is talking.

The thing why a lot of anger came from people is not so much that its not making it ingame (people could easily accept that implementing certain features takes time and that time is limited). Its from the saying that 3d voip is useless anyway due to 3rd party voice applications, which makes us assume that the reason why we want 3d voice in the first place is not understood (as removing the team/public chat has nothing to do with having local 3d voice chat)

For me personally a good 3d local voip would actually be the reason even in competitive matches to use a local voip next to teamspeak or skype. As with 8v8 a global chat can easily get cluttered already.

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

Summary:

People do not want 3d voice, so people cannot talk to the entire team at one go (although some would prefer that ability as a server option). Personally I would not want to see team and public voip removed, but I'm a big supporter for local 3d voice chat.

The reason why people like 3d voice primarily is that it makes communication with friendlies close to you easier, and makes teamwork with those close to you more accessible, resulting in a bigger utilization of teamwork.

- when people know they only talk to people close to them, they are less shy to speak. As they are less likely to clog up the channel.
- when you only talk to people close to you, you can use simpler language to communicate, like: "watchout there is an enemy behind that truck". Wheras for other people the information A wouldn't matter, and B would be too vague due to the map having 30 trucks to begin with.
- Even competitive players that will never use an ingame voip system for team based chat, would benefit from 3d voip. As unless rohos would support the mumble and ts3 plugins for 3d audio, then the ingame voip would be able to have some benefits over the default implemented program. (Again its not about taking away the good points of team and public based voip, its about adding the benefits of 3d chat.

The only trouble to pass is that people generally do not like to switch voice channels all the time that they are speaking in, which led to the under usage of the local chat in roost. However there are countless methods to make channel switching intuitive and user friendly, and without a doubt TWI would be able to figure something out there.

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

Conclusion:
So personally I think the hatery came from a misunderstanding between TWI and the 3d voip supporters in the reasoning why we want 3d voice chat in the first place.

There are some great benefits with public and team based voip, and the wants for 3d voice chat got absolutly nothing to do with removing those channels(thats a whole different suggestion), It got all to do with adding additional benefits of having both a local channel (reduce clutter) and being able to use audio to create a spatial image of where people talking close to you are (benefits that do not exist exist without plugin support in external chat programs).

 

[Flogger23m]

Could be that it's been taken down until the edited version is available.

Hopefully it will be up soon.

Don't like the talk of the unlocks in this thread. I'll have to listen to it myself, but it seems like the unlocks are more indepth than I thought initially. One of the things I don't like about BFBC2. Playing to unlock weapons/gadgets just sucks the immersion from the game.

Again, not sure if it is true, but the "heroes reduce the suppression effect" for teammates is not an idea I really like. I was hoping heroes would have menial and mostly cosmetic enhancements to make them stand out, rather than super abilities. I just don't find it to be fitting in a game like RO.

 

[Snuffeldjuret]

But... doesn't people "get more brave" if they have "heroes" around them? I haven't been to war myself, but to me that sounds realistic.

About that, what specific role and place in a squad will the hero have? Will it be set or just whatever the player being the hero chooses?

(I haven't listened to the whole show, so I cannot comment on much more than voice thingy ^^)

 

[wahoo4]

The 3D voice things sounds like a good idea, but I have to agree with TWI (John) on this one. I can do without it period. Why spend all that time making it when people will take 2 seconds to get around it. Makes perfect sense. Time to lay off the 3d stuff. I would rather see the effort go into graphics and small things like what I've mentioned.

 

[Flogger23m]

But... doesn't people "get more brave" if they have "heroes" around them? I haven't been to war myself, but to me that sounds realistic.

About that, what specific role and place in a squad will the hero have? Will it be set or just whatever the player being the hero chooses?

Never been in war either... but I doubt a high ranking soldier will always make their fellow soldiers flinchless warriors. Flinching and whatnot must vary a lot though. It is just something impossible to implement fully into a game. However, a high ranking soldier that always, without fail, is able to reduce the suppression effect on those friendly soldiers that are close by just seems cliche or illogical.


Good question about the specific role for the hero. I would guess they act like normal riflemen or assault troopers considering their weapon choices (MKB, AVT ect.).

 

[timur]

well, no matter how a real life hero would effect real life flinching and such, I personally prefer the idea of morale-based heroes over the idea of heroes as invincible super-warrior armed with mega death-weapons and ninja abilities.

 

[Frostedfire]

Unfortunately, it is an Evil Lie. Yoshiro isn't allowed to shoot me. Ever again. Or I'll make him go to GDC and man the recruitment booth all through the Expo. Oh, wait... I already did that...

make him have to hand back the beta bribes along with their keys

 

[Floyd]

Sam was just getting a little confused - so long as you have a squad leader (i.e. there is someone in the role, he is alive etc) and you aren't a squad leader yourself - then you'll get the choice of whichever spawns are active, plsu "spawn on SL".

Thanks for clearing that up.

"...choice ofwhichever spawns are active, plus 'spawn on SL' " gives us a lot more information about the spawn system. I presume this is in the campaign mode. The campaign mode sounds absolutely awesome, btw!


Floyd

 

[Forssen]

The 3D voice things sounds like a good idea, but I have to agree with TWI (John) on this one. I can do without it period. Why spend all that time making it when people will take 2 seconds to get around it. Makes perfect sense. Time to lay off the 3d stuff. I would rather see the effort go into graphics and small things like what I've mentioned.

Normal voice chat should still be in the game. The point with 3d voice is not to restrict the player, but so those close to you understand that it's them you are talking to and can take appropriate action. Even more important, it would make more people use their microphones.

Zetsumei explains it nicely above.

 

[Zetsumei]

OK well as long as there WERE PPSH's out there that didn't have a fire select, I see it as no problem as an unlockable.

The first batch of ppsh's got select fire, to save money on production later ones didn't have that feature. (I think its not really a usefull feature to have select fire on a ppsh, but perhaps it makes someone happy).

 

[Wili]

I would like to know better about the bullet penetration system. I'll will depend on the wide of the object as well as the type of material or the bullet will just pass trought / don't pass?; (Maybe the bullet pass trought 5 cm of wood but not 20 cm)

Will the bullet loose speed regards of the deep being penetrated?

 

[Frostedfire]

I would like to know better about the bullet penetration system. Will it depend on the width of the object as well as the type of material, or will the bullet just pass through / not pass?; (Maybe the bullet passes through 5 cm of wood but not 20 cm)

Will the bullet lose speed with regards to the width of the stuff being penetrated?

*grammar-nazi'd. I wasn't in such a great mood before he spelt lose wrong


wouldn't "less speed" be more easily reflected as "less damage"? unless you want to shoot someone the wrong way with the wooden wall right in front of you and not them

on-topic, I would assume they take into account the width of the material to an extent, they're doing it on the tanks so I don't see why not

 

[Unterscharfuhrer]

my english is poor. Is there a post with ALL news from crosshairs interview?Thanks.

Check out the "fact thread", all news go right there!

 

[heady89]

I see people still haven't given up the 3d voice discussion *sigh*..
Excellent show anyways Sam,TWI and the rest involved.

 

[Frontoviki]

I would like to know better about the bullet penetration system. I'll will depend on the wide of the object as well as the type of material or the bullet will just pass trought / don't pass?; (Maybe the bullet pass trought 5 cm of wood but not 20 cm)

Will the bullet loose speed regards of the deep being penetrated?

I, myself, wonder if bodies (corpses) can act as some form of cover, will they have weaker or no penetration values as long they have not disappeared?

 

[MagicSnake]

wouldn't "less speed" be more easily reflected as "less damage"?

If the target is ducking directly behind the wall, then it's pretty equivalent, but if the target is (far) away from the penetrated material, a decreased velocity would be the best way to do it (the bullet would travel less distance, too). Of course, they don't have to simulate a continuous spectrum of different velocities: a few steps (ex.: 100% of original speed, 75%, 50%, 25%, no penetration) would the the job marvelously. Same thing with damage, they can approximate: the 'speed-of-bullet' to 'damage' ratio doesn't have to be a complicated equation. But then again, I'm not programming the game and my programming knowledge is very (very) limited, so whatever suits TWI's boat

on-topic, I would assume they take into account the width of the material to an extent, they're doing it on the tanks so I don't see why not

Yes!

Penetration depends on the type of round, velocity, material type impacted and depth of material. Yes, they leave exit marks...

(source: http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showpost.php?p=695712&postcount=6)
I'm actually very exited about the penetration system!

 

[Mormegil]

My connection kept crapping out on me, so all I've heard from the podcast and replies about it are:

A) The game is awesome
B) Cover system rocks
C) Cam footage gives no justice to the image quality
D) No 3D VoIP


Was there any mention of how the voice coms will work? Specifically, will there be a Squad channel? That would really fix the whole "grenade" yelling issue on pub servers, since 3D VoIP isn't in, and shut us up.

I'd previously envisioned / guessed the default for regular grunts would be a squad channel, and the squad leader could talk to the platoon leader. That might be too "organized" for a pub match though, if your squad leader doesn't speak the same language as the platoon leader, you'll be in trouble.


BTW: I'm ecstatic about the new news. I'd like more.