Jump to content
Ghost Recon.net Forums

Give Me Back My Old Ghost Recon, Rejuvenated! That's All!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 297
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Six years later. Time for another bump. 🙂

Challenge accepted... I've played FPS for as long as there has been a PC (never been a total fan of consoles, especially in a FPS)... Loved Return to Castle Wolfenstein "3D", DOOM (I and II), and

Maybe you could change your sig to a slightly less negative tone, then? It is of course your own choice, but if you look back at the years and years of fun Ghost Recon and this community have given y

^

Yeah well, all evidence to the contrary and with all due respect...Missouri.

Ubi is on record as having deemed it necessary these days that for mass appeal (as well as financial viability) any release must employ an Action First/Action Always/ Cut Out All That Boring Stuff design philosophy. See :AW*/HAWX

Their recent titles to date bear those statements out so -short of any revisions or retractions- why would anyone expect them to change course now, regardless of who develops it?

____

I don't think anyone should get their hopes up for -or alternately worry about- the inclusion to the series of interactive infils/exfils, conducting a long-winded Passage of Lines to the Mission Area, or, heaven forbid, the addition of TOE vehicle operation.

Keep your expectations low kids...such as a proper M4 Charging Handle animation, a return of binos to the inventory, etc., etc.

Edited by NoQuarter
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ubi is on record as having deemed it necessary these days that for mass appeal (as well as financial viability) any release must employ an Action First/Action Always/ Cut Out All That Boring Stuff design philosophy. See :AW*/HAWX

Their recent titles to date bear those statements out so -short of any revisions or retractions- why would anyone expect them to change course now, regardless of who develops it?

I think we discussed the elsewhere after the news about Ubisoft delaying certain titles in light of poor revenues. So, far from going for mass appeal, IMHO, they are now going for ALL appeal. The quote that keeps resurfacing about Ubi ignoring hardcore to an extent, is getting too long in the tooth to hold any validity in todays economic climate IMO.

I also think there is a big difference about who the developer is. Take GRIN, who had never produced a tactical FPS when Ubi awarded them the GR3 contract, then look at RSE, who produced the game that arguable started the whole Tactical shooter genre and still stands tall all these years later. You'd say Ubi treats both houses the same? I think not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Rocky, I see this in a very similar way. While my overall respect for Ubisoft is wearing extremely thin these days, I still hold a deep sympathy for Red Storm Entertainment, the company founded by Tom Clancy and his friend, Royal Navy Captain Doug Littlejohns, the company that created the tactical shooter genre with Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six, the company that turned the concept of first-person-shooters on its head by emphasizing brain over trigger finger, tactics over reflexes, realism over special effects.

Although Red Storm was purchased by Ubisoft, and Tom Clancy sold the rights to his name as a game brand to them, I cannot help but wonder how he feels about his own name being raped for mindless mass-approval shovelware, not to mention Captain Littlejohns, who probably wouldn't want to see the fruits of his labor being dragged through the mud of cheap action shoot'em-ups, either. And while I don't know how many and who exactly of the Ghost Recon development team is still working at RSE, I am pretty sure the new crew is very much aware of the enormous legacy they inherited when the GR4 contract fell in their lap.

Sadly, Red Storm's communication with fans here at GR.net is somewhat lacking, to say the least. But maybe they are listening closely, and secretly prepare a giant - and this time positive - surprise for us. As long as there is time for it, I intend to voice constructive thoughts about the future of Ghost Recon and maintain some optimism. Should 'they' fail us once again, there will be plenty of opportunity to unleash our never-ending wrath upon them.

Oh, did this sound like a threat? Well, it is!

Link to post
Share on other sites
...The quote that keeps resurfacing about Ubi ignoring hardcore to an extent, is getting too long in the tooth to hold any validity in todays economic climate IMO...
IMHO, given the current & forecasted economic conditions, Theriens tacit admission holds more weight -and makes more sense- now then it ever did at the time he made it.

I will admit though that I'm out of my depth here -I don't follow this industry anymore closely than from the pages of this very site-, that I'll gladly accept the crow if/when Ubi changes tact and provides realism over flash, and will be happily standing in line with wallet in hand if they do...I'm just not counting on it based solely on wishful thinking.

...I also think there is a big difference about who the developer is...
What PC-centric FPS development has RSE been involved with in the last decade (GR excluded) and...just who's left there from the old crew? Edited by NoQuarter
Link to post
Share on other sites

Give Me Back My Old Ghost Recon, Rejuvenated! That's All!, If you share this sentiment, come in and shout it out!
A valiant as well as repetitive effort, to be sure, but in vain -and all for naught.

Ubisoft owns the rights, is calling the shots, and could care less what this bunch of holdouts wants.

I was merely pointing out we were getting off topic again, and posted the topic title.

:thumbsup:

Does it really matter? I for 1, will not go running off in the corner for a cry, if the game is not what I want. Until we see any kind of info, or have even played the game, can we not carry on and discuss what we would like?

Edited by Tinker
Link to post
Share on other sites
I also think there is a big difference about who the developer is...What PC-centric FPS development has RSE been involved with in the last decade (GR excluded) and...just who's left there from the old crew?

I think you do a dis-service to the team at RSE with that question, and I'd answer it with an analogy/rhetorical question. What BMW engineers are still around that were involved in the design and construction of the first BMW engine?

We are kinda going right in circles now anyway, you're not about to come round to my way of thinking and vice versa, so on that particular debate I think we're done.

I'm just not counting on it based solely on wishful thinking.

Me neither.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just gonna throw something out here. Tonight, after playing some excellent missions through a dozen of the GRPA maps. (First time through.)

I realized something. The worst thing that ever happened to GR and the community here, were it's sequels. Not only because GR 2 was never to be seen on pc or the failures of the GRAWs.

It's because GR is so unique..created to have some sort of magic in all of the woven balances that make up it's qualities, that a true sequel could never be made.

I think the number of mods, number of people still playing, and the size of the community would have lasted even longer (at larger numbers). If it weren't for the attempts to cash in on a success.

It's just like what you see in the movies, the only sequel that was better than the original movie that I can think of, was Terminator 2. That says something right there.

Different times, market, companies, expectations from corporations, and the the number of PC games were far less.

I also wonder about the technology, if you look at the amount of potential in investing creative energy in graphics. Isn't it true that back in 2001, they only had so far to go in comparison with now, there's so many possibilities for creative force to be ###### away in the visual quality of the game?

Honestly, I enjoyed the other games with GR in the title (for a little while), but GR can't be touched. The GRPA maps just reminded me of the excellent qualities of the game and the loss of what might have been many more mods. So many people expected sequels and left the community because of their anger at false promises.

IMO those promises of a GR sequel can't be met. I have to agree with those who've called GR a fluke, and what an excellent fluke it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a counter-argument to that claim: Blizzard Entertainment.

One of the absolute best and most successful game developers (and publishers!) of all time - and btw - multi-platform for Mac and PC from the start. Strictly speaking, Blizzard could even be called an 'Indy' developer, because from their humble beginnings (founded by three UCLA graduates in 1991) they remained independent from the big publishers and kept doing almost everything in-house. Sure, they too were 'acquired' by some financial conglomerate early on, had their share of stormy merger & acquisition times and been changing hands a lot before finally ending up as 'Activision Blizzard' under the French Vivendi umbrella - but nonetheless they stayed true to their course.

Blizzard offer several examples of excellent (and extremly successful) sequel policy. Here's one: From 'Warcraft: Orcs and Humans' over 'Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness' and its expansion 'Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal' up to 'Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos' and 'Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne' - Blizzard took their brilliant game concept and kept expanding upon its core idea, refining it, modernizing it as new and better technologies became available, but never changing the underlying philosophy of the game. And they did this with an almost stoic patience and pace, taking more than enough time for each and every expansion and reiteration of the game to guarantee far above industry-average quality.

But they don't stop there. Once a game is released, it seems they poor even more efforts into supporting it, e.g. with continuous updates - not to fix bugs (there rarely are any in Blizzard releases), but to actually enhance the game even further as customer feedback comes in. Yes, Blizzard actually listen to their customers very carefully and their paying attention to customers' wishes is reflected in each and every update patch they release. And those patches just keep on coming - just look at their 'Starcraft' title. A science-fiction spin-off of the medieval Warcraft series, released in 1998 and continuously (and frequently!) updated and refined to this very day.

Which brings me to another important point. It's OK to do spin-offs - but maintain the core concept, philosophy, and quality of the original! Don't just milk a brand name with some half-hearted shovelware which is completely besides the point of the original. Stick to what is good and make it even better - that sums up a good sequel policy. This is neither impossible nor doomed to be financially non-viable, as Blizzard keep demonstrating to this very day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I'll sign this petition. I want a new tactical shooter that is realistic. For the record, I haven't bought any GR game since the first. I won't unless I hear glowing reviews from the community.

Oh, and hi...I'm new here. Never made it over here, went to thePlatoon instead, and never really left there. Poor site is on a feeding tube now. Anyone here an old member from there who remembers me?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

but only if I will be able to see the unmistakably bright eyes of the father in the son's face, only if there can be no doubt about the child's ancestry!

Well said. With RSE in the driving seat, there can be no reason why Ubisoft cannot deliver a successor true to its roots; squad based, tactical, and moddable. There has never been a time for Ghost Recon fans to be more excited. :D

I too am looking forward to GR produced by RSE, this should be exciting. I just hope that this is not going to be a console port. If so then i just don't see this game turning out the way we want it. I think if we get a game specifically made for the PC, then there is reason to anticipate a really good title of GR 4. Nothing against console players, it is just that these are two seprate monsters. Does anyone know if we are going to get a game made just for the PC?

Respectfully Bill.

Edited by wildbill
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK guys - I know I am opening my self up to some intense flaming here but...

Yesterday I received my copy of Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising . Last night I had my first few games of the campaign and I have to say I found myself thinking: 'OMG! This *is* the old Ghost Recon we wanted - rejuvenated!'

It's hard to put my finger on why I think this --- it's something to do with the pace of the missions, the atmosphere of the environment and the squad ordering system to mention but a few things. Even though the game is based in a fictional island off Japan the whole story-line just *felt* as if it was something Tom Clancy would have wrote as a mission for the Ghosts!

--- I genuinely felt that the whole GRAW/GRAW2 episodes wrong turn had been washed away and that here was Ghost Recon 2! (Done the way we wanted.)

I would love to get feed back from anyone else who has just bought the game to see whether I am just being fanciful in my take on [OFP: DR] (and by the way - this game is a whole lot better than ArmA2, believe me - it actually works!)...

4008984315_7dd6034ba0.jpg

All the best - Ranger

Fixed name to the correct one (its not called II)

Edited by Pave Low
Link to post
Share on other sites

but only if I will be able to see the unmistakably bright eyes of the father in the son's face, only if there can be no doubt about the child's ancestry!

Well said. With RSE in the driving seat, there can be no reason why Ubisoft cannot deliver a successor true to its roots; squad based, tactical, and moddable. There has never been a time for Ghost Recon fans to be more excited. :D

I too am looking forward to GR produced by RSE, this should be exciting. I just hope that this is not going to be a console port. If so then i just don't see this game turning out the way we want it. I think if we get a game specifically made for the PC, then there is reason to anticipate a really good title of GR 4. Nothing against console players, it is just that these are two seprate monsters. Does anyone know if we are going to get a game made just for the PC?

Respectfully Bill.

Would be great to get a real PC game for once. Recent games have been a let down for me, hope they can put some time into GR4 in this area.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ghost Recon was a horribly done. no first person gun view,horrible landscape steaming pile of poop. Now stop posting so I can go play Heroes Unleashed....

:nono:

Many would disagree with you. Many enjoyed the lack of a weapon view in GR. All games I have seen a weapon view in do not have it right and project a weapon from the hip area or at most, under you armpit. Many also find the landscapes to be unique and great. There were a few things one could not do with it, but that is/was due to engine restrictions. Also, many would rather have gameplay over pretty graphics any day.

If you want to play Heros Unleashed, do not let someone posting stop you, after all, it is a GR mod.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will venture crash was being a little sarcastic. :)

Sarcastic? moi? I am just following thru on a death bed wish made by my cocker spaniel that I would in his memory test every mod and mission that is released by the community and you guys KEEP releasing them so I gotta keep playing.Ok off to play GRPA 5.0 and see if I can channel "sparky" during the game for some coop play.....

He may have been, but lack of emoticons/smilies does not give that impression. I had thought of that. :ph34r:

ok let me get this straight... we have become so dependent on goofy icons that for me to crack a joke I have to have a happy face at the end of it rolling around like an epileptic with the hiccups? Here's Your Sign.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

He may have been, but lack of emoticons/smilies does not give that impression. I had thought of that. :ph34r:

ok let me get this straight... we have become so dependent on goofy icons that for me to crack a joke I have to have a happy face at the end of it rolling around like an epileptic with the hiccups? Here's Your Sign.....

Unfortunately, yes. Due to the written word lacking any sort of emotion, those little signs mean a lot. Granted, some are very proficient with them (Ledanek) while others are not (there are a few around here). If you wish to convey something, they really help.

:thumbsup:

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...