1. #301
    Originally Posted by Yungh6 Go to original post
    No just your headgear @xhostileman
    ****
    Share this post

  2. #302
    Hortey's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    I like only headgear honestly. Personalization through headgear/face and weapons while having your class determine what your armor looks like. Making it easily recognizable if a scout, rifleman, or engineer is peering at you from a vantage point.
    Share this post

  3. #303
    6v6 does this mean the maps have been scaled down too to enhance graphics and stability
    or are the maps as big as some of the maps in graw1/2
    Share this post

  4. #304
    P2W.Blood's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    The Wall
    Posts
    106
    If it means that the game runs smoother, then to hell with character customization. Doesn't really belong in a military shooter anyway if you think about it.
    Share this post

  5. #305
    Hortey's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    The games is not 6v6 it's 8v8

    There are panaramic views of some of the maps in the picture section, about 10 or so pages deep (it might take a couple minutes but they are there) and they look rather open.

    As for size, no above view maps have been seen
    Originally Posted by Rufeezo Go to original post
    If it means that the game runs smoother, then to hell with character customization. Doesn't really belong in a military shooter anyway if you think about it.
    I don't think it has anything to do with running smoother, the character customization has always been like that I think. And I do agree that uniform and color customization does not belong in any military shooter, it completely negates the purpose of the uniform in the first place.
    Share this post

  6. #306
    Hortey's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    O wow nevermind about that 8v8 thing, I guess it IS 6v6 now. Disappointing.
    Share this post

  7. #307
    4 man squads is disappointing, i think i would rather 6v6 as long as you can enter matchmaking with 5 other friends.
    Share this post

  8. #308
    Bassie52's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Holland,Amsterdam
    Posts
    1,838
    who trew the Q&A in the sea?....she's drifting of!...
    Share this post

  9. #309
    Insistor's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    161

    Future Soldier's Multiplayer Backend

    Here are more questions which certainly won't be answered, but maybe we can hypothesise together:

    I'm wondering about the quality of the infrastructure for GRFS Multiplayer. I've seen many an FPS die within a blink for not including now standard streamlining to a smooth Multiplayer experience, because it mimicked too closely an unguided PC experience. Just too much clicking for console.

    So, will GRFS have? ..
    1. Host-Migration - or will our tense simulations have their atmosphere untimely ripped from them by rage quitters?
    2. Join-in-Progress - can be contentious this, as players do not want to be surprised mid match. The way I see it, it's the only way to ensure balanced matches. With small parties essential, more players will be in them, and so what happens to our 6 v 6 match when a party of two quits immediately after launch. No fun for anybody. Which leads me on to..
    3. Parties - we know we have them, and the interface can be seen on the latest Network video from Antoine (Challenges sound cool huh?). But I'm wondering if they glue like in Halo. If party host quits will players leave with him, and most of all, between matches will the party stick together. Some Ubi games have broken your party after each match - this is cardinal. Which leads to..
    4. Match Cycles / Playlists - Do game types cycle on and provide a rolling and changing competition? Will it pick or suggest a new map, and have you keep playing? Or do you get dumped after each match? This gets old fast.

    Thoughts anyone, answers Antoine?
    Share this post

  10. #310
    Hortey's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    Honestly having hosts in MP games is old school now. Any company worth it's salt should be able to muster up dedicated servers for ranked matches.

    Some of the best tactical games have been plagued by this, the one that most recently made me angry was OFP dragon rising. You would be in a no respawn coop or a limited respawn adversarial mode and the host might die with 30 minutes left on the game. They would just leave, disconnecting everyone else from the game and dropping them back at the menu's. This was a HUGE issue, although since coop is 1 death = restart it doesn't bother me there. But what about ragequitting hosts in MP? If ranked matches being fair are going to rely on the host not being a ragequitter, well that's the opposite of fair.
    Share this post