Yeah, I also miss that. On that page spread I actuall prtscn’d the 4 zoomed in areas and rotated it on photoshop so I could read it!
Sick boy: yes. Kinda. It gets more obvious what’s not done and what’s still being decided upon (some of the Strogg classes, vehicles, etc). It’s a bit more in-depth than the pcg one. That I can remember:
. Objetives are structured kinda like ET, ie, have to deploy stuff, raid somewhere, etc
. Average outdoor map is one square mile - designed for 24-32, can have up to 64 players
. Skills involved in controlling stuff (like driving, et al); not persistent, ET-like, player has to ‘relearn’
. Maps at night - sounds as if there’s no day/night cycle but actually it’s a per map setting, so maps that are set at night have specific night objectives
. Lots of map geometry usage (routes etc)
. Teams use command centers
. Newbie-driven in-game tutorials with clearer objectives
. “Experience is rewarded with more complexity”
. No squad-based stuff like BF2, but players must assume offensive/midfield/defensive positions; sounds a lot like TF. Fireteams are still mentioned
. Wedgwood doesn’t like football WTF!
. Teamplay is important on vehicles; one player drives and has limited shoting view, second player shoots around, third player spots enemies
. Players classes looks like a mix of ET and BF42
. Strogg classes are a bit different but not that much
. Stroggs uses ‘stroyant’ (has been mentioned before)
. Vehicles are “easy to learn, difficult to master”
. Players can shoot vehicles tires, not clear what that means/causes
. No mention of tapirs
. Model details through the ‘stuff system’: you can see how many mines an engineer have by looking at his model (has been mentioned before)
. John Carmack said doing stuff like what SD has (outdoor areas, 24-32 players) was ‘impossible’
. Controllable HDR-ish effects
. It’s no RTS
. Rock-paper-scissors gameplay, there are advantages to being on foot