Jump to content

Thoughts for GR2 - GR1 grudges


Jex

Recommended Posts

- .:Nightmare:.,Feb 12 2003, 19:39 ] The graphics of Ravenshield eh? You do realise that Raven Shield uses the Unreal 2 engine. Nobody wants Redstorm/Ubi to use the Unreal 2 engine for GR2 for some reason. I dunno why - I would prefer it if they did use the Unreal2 enigine.

Then it would not have that RSE feel. IMO Ubi messed up the R6 franchise when they used the Unreal 2 graphics engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How d'ya mean? I've never played RS (yet) but do you mean the 'traditional' look n' feel the old R6 was messed up? Imo, if the trditional overall set-up is still there ie; selecting soldiers/weps/method of mission execution etc then better graphics and animation can only improve it, it's still R6 essentially, you're still kitted-up guys in masks doing hot extractions in a realistic setting etc. As w' GR; as above (not that I have too many gripes w' GR anyway)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RVS feels like R6 to me.... im happy they used the engine, and I would be happy if RSE used it for GR2 also, but thats me.

Anyway, back on the subject. Havent read the first page of this topic, but has anyone thought of iron sights yet? I feel since being a long range fighting game, iron sights would add to the realism of the game instead of just seeing a reticule get larger and the screen zoom in for aiming. Felt great in AA, adds a bit of challange to aiming also. Although it might take time to "adapt" from a reticule to it. :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was very impressed by the graphics and draw distance in AA. If Unreal2 can bring that to GR then I would be very happy. As for the arcade feel, that surely depends on the coding and scripting,. the damage model and the quality of the enemy and friendly AI. If Ubi can take as much time, using the unreal engine to model, skin and create accurate set pieces as they did with GR, then the end result could be very successful. I also hear the physics qualities are top notch in Unreal 2 (I sure like weapon recoil in AA and the ability to jump over small obstacles). I don't like the blocky feel of the GR engine, the arbitrary barriers such as boarded up doors and windows, and the limited draw distance. The only thing I do like is the pretty sunsets. Perhaps they should consider using the engine Bethesda pulled out in Morrowind - now there's weather!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RSE has a habit of building their own engines for games and not using a 3rd party engine for their work.

That's as it may be WK, but money talks, and if they can use someone elses engine and just add their colourings to it then UBI will. Pity, as I'd have liked to of seen GR with it's own engine, it will give the game a sense of independance from RS, otherwise they will just end up ebing io, almost the same game, just with different sceneries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@moakes2783

ok... probably a misunderstanding on my site...

if I were patrolling through the woods and my buddy just dropped to the floor with his face in a thousand pieces, my first reaction would not be to stand up and take single, amazingly accurate shots...

i totally agree with that... i thought u ment that u didn't like those guys were able to shoot from the same distance and circumstances (?!) as u can do... sorry for the misunderstanding...

These are just play-balance issues I have. Maybe if my team members weren't so bloody useless, it woudn't frustrate me so much.

:D LOL... that's for sure.... ;)

Edited by the-dutchman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's as it may be WK, but money talks, and if they can use someone elses engine and just add their colourings to it then UBI will. Pity, as I'd have liked to of seen GR with it's own engine, it will give the game a sense of independance from RS, otherwise they will just end up ebing io, almost the same game, just with different sceneries.

RSE has always used an engine that they built for their games. Not once when the released a new game (as in from R6 to RS) did they use a 3rd party engine. Remember that RSE will develop GR2 and not Ubi. IMO if Raven Shield was being developed and built by RSE they would be using an engine of their own design and not the Unreal 2 engine. Ubi bought RSE so they could have the R6 franchise and have access to the popularuty of the Tom Clancy name. Ubi is develping Raven Shield and not RSE. To me when a game uses a 3rd party engine, and this is my opinion, it becomes a clone of all the games that use that engine whether of not a developer puts their own spin on it.

You state that you would like to see GR2 with it's own engine and not a 3rd party engine, what I am saying is it will be most likely have it's own due to RSE's track record in the past when making games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

don't think I agree with the clone thing there WK...

Half Life/CounterStrike/Day of Defeat/Natural Selection

All using the same engine, yet all with distinct differences. I also think you'd be hard pressed to find enough similarities between the latest version of UT and RVS to warrant true "clonedom"

Again, just an opinion :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may not agree Joe, but just look at the amount of games that use the same engine, they may be different games in theory, but they may as well just be a large add-on/mod to the original.

As I said, IMO I'd love to see GR have it's own identity regards to the engine it uses, as this helps a lot with regards to the feel of how the game operates.

Maybe GR.net could start up some kind of campaign to stop this dirt talk like JoeSchmoe has just subjected us all too! ;) Free GR2 from the grasp of the Unreal engine!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay if RSE can come up with a better engine than Unreal, with its own look, then I'll be happy. But at the moment Unreal2 is king of the hill in first person shooters.

Even if RSE goes ahead with its own engine it will be among the last of a dying breed. More and more games that involve fully 3d worlds and first person views are turning to licensed engines (Quake3, Unreal2, Lithtech and soon, Doom3). IMO there is still a lot of variety betrween say RTCW, MOH, Star Trek Elite Force and Quake3 Team Arena, even though all are built on the same building blocks.

Better get used to it - the economy of licensed engines is upon us. There will be a time - in only a couple more years if Kim Jong Il hasn't consigned us all to oblivion - when all first person games are split between half a dozen or so brand-name engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate that WK, but even still, I reckon money will talk. Less time making up a new engine = less wages needed and quicker turn out of games = more money!! :( Pity but I think this is the sad world we live in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a sample of what I would like to see in GR2:

1- Grenade sights that let you hit things the first time.

2- An urban/entry soldier class (shotguns, breaching rounds, and lots of frags)

3- More realistic constraints on snipers (range adjustments, sniper/spotter pairs)

4- More realistic penetration for projectiles

5- Longer visible range

6- Scalable kit selection, e.g. a demo can take an m136 and 10 m4 mags, or 3 m136's and 4 mags; a rifleman can take 10 mags and 5 m203 frags, or 5 mags and 10 frags (or some point in between).

And a gripe about GR: Is it just me, or do your team-mates have an invisible aura around them that deflects grenades back into your face even when noone's in front of you? Seems to happen a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice idea! :)

I'd like to have a training scenario, similar to FBI training camps, where enemy cardboard men appear out of the blue from houses/bushes etc - we could also have friendly cardboard men to test our ability to not committing too many TK's. Again nice idea! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well for online play it would help with trial purposes if all the team could watch your ability at this training scenario. And for single player purposes it would help with reactions and would make a good conclusion to the end of the training section in GR as it is at the moment.

But yes, cardboard men probably would be better than the enemy AI in GR at the moment! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a training range to test weapons would be a great idea. It does take too long to see them all in the way it is now.

Another thing would be making your own kits, within reason. Choosing your primary and secondary separately would make for some interesting combos.

Maybe a primary catagory, and a CQB category. Grenades, Claymores, and the like should be a third category, depending on the soldier class. A save feature for custom kits would be ideal.

A sniper with his primary, a M60 back up, and 4 claymores is an example of too much...

But, a sniper, with his primary, a MP-5 SD, and a couple claymores could do some damage....

Just my opinion...

Game on, with terminal intensity!!!! :o=:o=:o=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanna see airstrikes in GR2. Maybe they could have a certain class that can call in airstrikes, like the engineer in the Vietcong game.

- I want to see them use an engine that can support fire effects. Then we could mod a flamethrower into the game....w00t!!

- Another thing I wanna see is a first person view. Also the ability to swim would be a good idea.

- The ability to swim, climb obsticles etc.

- I want it so if the enemy AI can't see you, they won't shoot.

- As I mentioned before, paradrops would be nice as an insertation.

- I wanna see the ability to select camos before doing the mission, like on the R6 series games.

- Soldiers who get scared and run away(!) would be cool

- I wanna also see new soldier classes like Medic, Engineer, Scout, Spotter, Mercenary etc. Also there could be a guy who carries the ammo for .50 Cal. MG's. SO u have one person shooting the MG and the other loading it and feeding the ammo into it.

- Thermal vision goggles is a must have for GR2.

- The ability to choose a primary weapon and a secondary weapon individually.

- Friendly AI's swearing!! Like in Vietcong!

- (a) The ability to take enemies hostage (b)then torture and mutilate them....("b" was a joke by the way!)

- Friendly AI's who think for themselves.

The list is endless....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I think enemy AI needs to be changed a bit. I cannot stomach being killed because I snipe one tango from 150 meters and his other buddies just stand up (like their buddy didnt just get shot in the head by somebody they shouldnt be able to see) and shoot single, precision shots (like I'm an old soup can on their picket fence). If this tactic is accurate, I expect this sort of discipline from trained SF groups, but not from locally recruited rebels living off a loaf of bread.

I agree 100% with this. The enemy AI MUST be addressed.

Perhpas one way to approach this issue is by setting response time and accuracy based on ranges and skill.

For instance, GR2 could have militia/rebels with professional advisors or mercenaries. Imagine a mission in Central America in the 80s and you go to take aout a rebel camp where you can find local guerrillas with soviet or cuban advisors and other international mercenaries. Each one would have a different skill level covering alertness, firing accuracy, etc.

I know some of you are not in favor of air stirkes, but how about you having to "paint" with a laser a target and then request either artillery/gunship attack or a jet fighter or bomber drop a smart bomb? Try to do this under fire, that would be tough to pull off.

I wonder if it could also be possible to have to use a metal detector to go though a mined field.

Also, imagine to have to supress enemy air support like shooting and repelling low-flying choppers.

The rest of the suggestions placed so far, they are all great!

My 2 cents.

G-Man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...