zeealice Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) seeing as this is series based i placed it here, i hope you dont mind any. Good morning/afternoon/evening/night Guys and gals hope we are all having a good morn- yeah you get the point recently i've been looking around the ghost recon facebook page and the ubi page and here. and people seem quite negative or dull about Ghost recon future soldier and to an extent, the advanced warfighter series seemed a bit of a sham too in some cases. yes okay to some extent i agree with the negatives but lets look at the POSITIVES of the franchise eh? Ghost Recon 1: Moddable to almost all extents replayable beyond replayable. tactical, no cross com fantasy stuff. avatar switching made life a little easier. the scenario was believable, not hollywood or any of that ###### Ghost recon 2 and summit strike: good graphics some great firefights the ragdoll physics were hilariously amusing. orders system was a me likey. and the ability to switch from first to 3rd person (Xbox) GR:AW graphics seemed rather ahead of it's time. massive playable environments. the PhysX usage was desired. the engine was quite good. the inclusion of UAV's and realtime insertions were great. the tactical map brings a SLIGHT Ghost recon 1 feel back to the game. GR:AW 2 the use of open environments was great. some amazing firefights. generally the same good things about GRAW. GRFS (visual) the new version seems special forces-ey the reintroduction of civilians! unique setting, not in the usual iraq, russia or afghanistan like other games well i say russia, it's still based there but you arent fighting overstrong accented english speaking russians with eyepatches Graphics look very nice. the story seems interesting they seem more like a "just get on with the job" lot rather than the AW serie's overdramatic characters. the soldiers seem like they are equals no "kozak is a big hero" lark. the characters are somewhat mysterious (we havent seen an ingame render of kozak's face yet as far as i know) it makes me want to see more. the models of the characters are precise. i think over the past few weeks, all these delays seem to be a good thing, as ubi actually seem to be trying hard with Ghost recon, despite the future crap. so there is really no point in getting impatient if the game is much better than what it would have been. it's more than what activision/treyarch are doing... anyway lets not get onto that. if you have anything to add or lightly dispute, feel free, a discussion is a discussion Edited July 6, 2011 by zeealice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROCO*AFZ* Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 You forgot after OGR For all After OGR No injury model No 4 placed random spawn zones for team vs team multiplayer No real server GUI no Igor for scripting Limited 4 person Co-ops Ghost Recon 2 - Console only! Ghost Recon 3 delayed until they finally admitted it would never release Graw 1 Physics lagged Server bugs in GRAW1 and 2 Ghost Recon future soldier released only on WII - look how bad it is (Looks like duck hunt) Delayed for everyone else + side above OGR Sounds were amazing Physics were cool once our pc's caught up GRIN were very helpful until disbanded Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeealice Posted July 6, 2011 Author Share Posted July 6, 2011 i am highly aware of these issues roco, and yes they are terrible problems, but positivity is good, hence why this thread was put up, FS on the wii looks terrible because the WII is terrible it's not going to secure the other console's (or PC) fate. delays arent always bad roco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
belvucker Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Zeealice, I know what you are feeling. There were numerous times where I try to love each and every Ghost Recon game equally, but I always ending up loving my true love the Original Ghost Recon . BUT I must say GRAW 1 would be my second choice after Ghost Recon, guess I am not so faithful after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petsfed Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 I have to navigate carefully, lest I be misunderstood: I think if you took the OGR mission designs, married it to the cross com ordering system (not the narcom, not the diamonds (although I'm rather fond of them for finding friendlies), not the panicked "You're leaving the mission area"), and gave it the breadth of movement options and graphical abilities of GRAW2, while maintaining the damage model and some of the ballistic model, you'd have the perfect Ghost Recon game. I've never cared for soul switching, and always thought it was an admission of lousy friendly AI, so for me, the second mission of GRAW was the very best in Ghost Recon, followed by the Dam mission in GRAW2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twcrash Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 I like em all for different reasons. They are all their own games in their own rights. I think I would call them by the last names Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter Future Soldier I think if you look at the games in that perspective and not get hung up and the fact they are trying to sell more units by tacking on the Ghost Recon name you wouldn't worry about it as much. I said the same for Dragon Rising. Shoulda dropped the OFP sur name. It could have and can stand on its own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RileyFletcher_01 Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 If you want my opinion (most people don't ) I ######ing hate every Ghost game except the original Ghost Recon 1, cause they jacked all of the others up. If GRAW1 & 2 had held the IGOR editor and the extremely quick loading proccess, they would've been great, but they screwed up every angle of scripting with their incredibly advanced scripting program; not to mention the loss of scripting inside the editor. I mean c'mon, they down-graded it, the first one had an in-game advanced scripting tool, and for GRAW you gotta do it in notepad? Gimme a break! Secondly, the AI are extremely idiotic in all other Ghost games other than OGR. Now, if we could get RSE to make a game with GRAW2's graphics and realism and OGR's great gameplay and modding tools, we'd have ourselves a winner, don't you agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petsfed Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 If you want my opinion (most people don't ) I ######ing hate every Ghost game except the original Ghost Recon 1, cause they jacked all of the others up. If GRAW1 & 2 had held the IGOR editor and the extremely quick loading proccess, they would've been great, but they screwed up every angle of scripting with their incredibly advanced scripting program; not to mention the loss of scripting inside the editor. I mean c'mon, they down-graded it, the first one had an in-game advanced scripting tool, and for GRAW you gotta do it in notepad? Gimme a break! Secondly, the AI are extremely idiotic in all other Ghost games other than OGR. Now, if we could get RSE to make a game with GRAW2's graphics and realism and OGR's great gameplay and modding tools, we'd have ourselves a winner, don't you agree? No. I think that the gameplay of Ghost Recon, while revolutionary at the time, is maddeningly over simplified considering what can be done today in addition without removing any of the old gameplay elements. I can't really comment on IGOR, since I've never edited with it. However, if any game runs on scripts that can be edited in notepad (or VIM, or emacs, if you want to start that fight), its a pretty robust scripting language, and we don't have a lot to complain about. At worst, that implies that GR operated on an interpreted language while GRAW used a compiled language, but if you really want to tell me that compiled is worse than interpreted for anybody but the developer, then you clearly don't run enough processor-intensive shell scripts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RileyFletcher_01 Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Okay, you've got a point, petsfed. Notwithstanding, I think we need a game like this: Ghost Recon 1's Ease of Scripting and Great Gameplay Battlefield Bad Company 2's superb engine GRAW's Graphics (including the fact that you can see your own character by looking down {no playing as a floating head and gun!} A game like that would definitely be one of my favorites, agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petsfed Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Okay, you've got a point, petsfed. Notwithstanding, I think we need a game like this: Ghost Recon 1's Ease of Scripting and Great Gameplay Battlefield Bad Company 2's superb engine GRAW's Graphics (including the fact that you can see your own character by looking down {no playing as a floating head and gun!} A game like that would definitely be one of my favorites, agree? I think that would be pretty great. I would add in that the dialogue writer for BC2 is a lot better than whoever wrote either of the GRAWs. So, have the story writer from GR (and its expansions) work with the dialogue writer for BC2, and throw in good enough friendly AI so that soul switching would be unnecessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RileyFletcher_01 Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Too bad they don't get smart enough to do that...sigh...oh well, we can always dream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.