Jump to content

molotovb

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

About molotovb

  • Rank
    Founder

Recent Profile Visitors

418 profile views
  1. I believe you set the IPD in software for the Rift-S? It doesn't have a wide range of settings, though.
  2. Eh, I'm following your tone. I get that their answer is "no, make your own game" - yes, that info is out there and no, I wasn't asking a question. Hundred more threads and it'll still be what people want out of late war western front. Game engines are chunks of code. Change some code, or don't, or yell at customers on the forums, whatever. Heh.
  3. Correct, making turret gunner AI "extremely complex" is a big mistake on some level - in terms of game design or programming efficiency/decision making. As big of a hardass as you'd like to be about the topic, it's still a step backwards. I don't doubt you when you say that someone else will be along shortly with a flippant response. Shrug. Still not wrong.
  4. Well, no. You don't multiply any of that by the number of gunners, because the idea that a simple turret AI requires the same CPU processing time as an AI pilot is absolutely ridiculous. That's just broken, and absolutely unprecedented in flight sims for at least 15 years. Why would you multiply any AI by every other AI in the map constantly, anyway? If the CPU is cross checking every high level and low level AI in the game every second, there's something terribly absurdly sloppy with the way that your AI is being programmed.
  5. If gunner AI’s are taking even a tiny fraction of CPU power required for pilots, then there’s something terribly wrong going on.
  6. Not necessarily, only that he's a founder and a customer - he's spent at least $250, right? His opinion is certainly worth something, even if it wasn't worded very politely. If his sentiment is shared by a bunch of customers, then that's useful information to consider with future product decisions. If the comment bothers you as a dev with limited time, why bother engaging with him? Why not reply to some of the many other questions that customers have? (in a positive way) Anyway, my comment was more about the response to it. Personally, I'd be a little upset if a person I worked with spoke to our customers in that way, when my livelihood depends on those customers being happy. He's doing a huge disservice to the team he works with by the way he officially represents them here.
  7. Nah, its an inappropriate little abusive relationship where an individual developer is hyper sensitive to feedback and angrily lashes out at customers that don't thank him personally, as if what he's doing is charity and not a business. If someone says they're unhappy with the pace of development or unhappy with a feature, that's 100% true and noteworthy. If Jason prefers to disregard it and take it as a personal insult, then the error in perspective is entirely on his side. I've seen nothing but professionalism from the other guys on the dev team, though.
  8. Their perspective as a potential customer of those products is incredibly valuable, and it's both sad and strange that you ignore customer feedback based entirely on your incredulity that everyone isn't kissing your feet in adoration. To me, the way you engage with people on the forums is honestly the only blemish on the team and the product.
  9. Which 37mm ammo is generally better against boats? HE or AP? I haven’t had much success with either.
  10. Sorry if it was posted already and I missed it - Does anyone have a set of values for color adjustment that give the game slightly more contrast and slightly more color than default? I've been messing with the values, I seem to only be able to make everything brighter and washed out (Using Vive, if that matters).
  11. Looks great! Is there any sort of devilish hackery that can convert these into a series of 2 player co-op missions?
  12. That's a really strange characterization - I've never seen any sort of 'refusal' to turn down settings, that doesn't even make sense. People went to great lengths trying to determine which graphics settings were bottle necked by what hardware, which settings were the biggest visual sacrifices, which settings affected spotting, etc. It seems like you're just looking at everything through a very pessimistic lens. People are happy that VR performance is getting better.
  13. I don't know if that's really the case, given the focus of so many topics and discussions in the VR forum about achieving acceptable performance, even on high level hardware. The fixes to VR performance in this update are certainly welcome.
×
×
  • Create New...