Jump to content
Ghost Recon.net Forums

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

ArmA = quality... What? You are kidden us, aren't you? If there is one truth then that: Arma is n o t quality.

ArmA AI goes through walls, for ArmA-AI the gras does not exist, ArmA-AI looks through smoke from smoke-grenades, the audiblities of running persons (foot-steps, etc) are imbalanced (you can hear footsteps of running persons in the wood not before the person is 10 - 15 meters near you = absolutly unrealistic).

I can go on and go on with this list but this is not the place to speak about ArmA.

For me ArmA is one of the most bugged and glitchy game and so beyond doubt i will not give money for ArmA-2.

Apropos ArmA-slowness: thats one of the better ArmA-things because its realistic.

For me its simple like that: if a shooter is childish like COD4,Crysis, rainbow-6 vegas or other #### like that, i will not spend my money for this.

Get a team to program good pathfinding and sensory AI for an open world like arma on BIS's budget. Come on, man -- it's easy! :DDD

Anyway, all of the problems you described have since been fixed, anyway. BIS does exactly what you've all been clamouring for from ubi -- supports their game. It's been patched a hundred ###### times. More importantly, i can play a two hour co-op mission with 65 people; i'll deal with a few minor glitches.

wildbill: No idea, but people seem to like it. Honestly, my assumption is that it was out of respect for the franchise. Ubisoft saw the Ghost Recon name being tactical, modern, military, and an exciting franchise. So they adjusted some (okay, a lot) of the gameplay, to create a game a wider audience would enjoy with the same themes. Say what you will about whether it was a good choice or not (i think it's an excellent game, but would rather it have not be named GR) but it sold incredibly, so unless you completely distort facts and refuse to accept reality, for ubisoft's purposes it was clearly a good move. It's probably here to stay, for better or for worse. (on the one hand, it popularizes tactical gameplay and themes, raising the likelyhood we'll get a big budget 'real' tactical shooter. On the other, it dilutes the general diversity of games on the market...)

Last final note, something I said already -- Action games aren't 'kiddy'. They sell just as well to the older crowd as they do youth. They're not even simpler, tbh, but that's another argument. Anyway, not everything you personally dislike is enjoyed only by children and autism sufferers. Some people just -- this'll blow your mind -- enjoy different things than you.

I swear, guys, this rage against the presumed 'young' crowd is ridiculous. You're going to wake up one morning and realize you're chasing 45 yearolds off your lawn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, I also think the reason GRAW/GRAW2 isn't so popular within the tactical shooter community or the larger market (CoD4, Counter Strike, etc) is because it, in my opinion stands a middle ground between the two genres, leaning more to the tac side.

Bingo! :thumbsup: Well, it was really too constricted and linear to work as a tactical shooter.

Also, GRAW/GRAW2 is harder than the [Ghost Recon] to play in some aspects, notably the last mission in the GRAW2 campaign where there are rebels with machine gun nests that have sharpshooter accuracy, and the lack of an effective friendly AI.

Don't know about harder but definately more frustrating. GRAW is very much a game of remembering where the heavy machinegun is hidden around the corner and less (than GR) about trying different tactical approaches.

But then again, I don't think we would get a true GR or R6 game from RSE these days. Just look at GRAW/GRAW2 for the consoles...Those things play like HALO IMO, more emphasis on action then tactics.

Bingo again! :thumbsup: Undoubtedly excellent games, but not the GR games of old.

BTW, Kudos to the GRIN team who still are users on the forums here :thumbsup:

BTW...I know GRIN learned a lot these past 2 years devloping GR for us :) ....If GRIN/Ubi decide to make another GR, I think they would be willing to listen instead of having Ubi control everything, and that they would have a much better idea of what we want.

I second the kudo's. There were definately lots of lessons learned implemented from GRAW1 to GRAW2. However, I don't think we'll get another PC-specific GR game. And I'm not sure they could make a hardcore tactical shooter even if they had to. A good or great game yes, but not a tactical shooter. It requires a very different way of thinking about game design than usual and I really didn't see much evidence of that with GRAW. This has nothing to do with skill or quality as such, so I'm not saying GRIN can't make good games (obviously they can), just not this very specific genre.

Respectfully

krise madsen

Link to post
Share on other sites

I second the kudo's. There were definately lots of lessons learned implemented from GRAW1 to GRAW2. However, I don't think we'll get another PC-specific GR game. And I'm not sure they could make a hardcore tactical shooter even if they had to. A good or great game yes, but not a tactical shooter. It requires a very different way of thinking about game design than usual and I really didn't see much evidence of that with GRAW. This has nothing to do with skill or quality as such, so I'm not saying GRIN can't make good games (obviously they can), just not this very specific genre.

Respectfully

krise madsen

I've now put my sights on Blackfoot Studios and am waiting for Ground Branch. That studio has a lot more potential to make something decent than does UBI Soft. I'm not blaming GRIN. It's ALL UBI's fault.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I second the kudo's. There were definately lots of lessons learned implemented from GRAW1 to GRAW2. However, I don't think we'll get another PC-specific GR game. And I'm not sure they could make a hardcore tactical shooter even if they had to. A good or great game yes, but not a tactical shooter. It requires a very different way of thinking about game design than usual and I really didn't see much evidence of that with GRAW. This has nothing to do with skill or quality as such, so I'm not saying GRIN can't make good games (obviously they can), just not this very specific genre.

Respectfully

krise madsen

I've now put my sights on Blackfoot Studios and am waiting for Ground Branch. That studio has a lot more potential to make something decent than does UBI Soft. I'm not blaming GRIN. It's ALL UBI's fault.

Agreed! :)

It's obvious that Ubi wants to take control of every publication it makes. At the least Ubisoft could of at least given GRIN a short list of what the tac shooter community wants instead of letting GRIN on its own.

Edited by jonathan.li
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's obvious that Ubi wants to take control of every publication it makes. At the least Ubisoft could of at least given GRIN a short list of what the tac shooter community wants instead of letting GRIN on its own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...