Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by spm1138

  1. What about a pre-emptive edit/lock? I think it's warranted. Pay attention. Anything related to unofficial media released in violation of the NDA will not accessible through GR.NET. Ah yes. That little known fansite, Gamespot. Truly I thought I was the only one who read it.
  2. Presumably making it the C would push it into the same category as the XM8 compact. Dunno if that's a "for" or "against" tbh. It could also be the "K" to fit into the new class system. One of them has carbines.
  3. Seen in screenshots so far: The Beretta storm (A pistol, a SMG a carbine) series; an M14 of some sort.
  4. If a developer isn't going to do it right, I couldn't really care less whether they repeat their failure or not.
  5. If we've got a 5.56mm LMG why is that taking down the helos so quickly when the rifles won't? :S
  6. They had all this stuff for GRAW the first. Named Ghosts from GR2. You never actually got to command any of them. They're just incidental characters. If we do have a second AI squad I bet they're generic again like your first squad.
  7. Yes according to the site it dosent say so though, and we had the same within Graw1 site. Looking at the names on the screens we are getting more than four for choices. No. You are not. That's 360 stuff. Check the 360 media and articles. Classed soldiers are a 360 feature as are medics, MGLs and different uniforms. You can see all that stuff in the 360 preview videos. Stupid Ubi PR department
  8. Hmmm. See, there's another 3 months to go before release assuming it doesn't slip. When did they start with the GRAW2/360 PR effort?
  9. Windward Mark are making Alliance. ArmA doesn't go quite that far but it's sky technology is sexeh none the less.
  10. I guess I am saying that I regard R6 as being it's own particular brand of unrealistic FPS game as opposed to an attempt to simulate reality. I dunno. Perhaps I am being too harsh but I much, much preferred SWAT3 with it's psychology, more complex AI and more detailed ballistics model. It made R6 seem /very/ dry and shallow by comparison what with all the things it wasn't doing. The planning phase really didn't make up for that stuff.
  11. R6 was not NORG as far as I could tell. The entire experience was built around sneaky elbow hunting rather than dynamic entry. I'd have said The Regiment made much more of an effort.
  12. That's correct, but to be precise it's my SG551LB, which I keep around the office so I can look at my coworkers through crosshairs once in a while. It beats those silly motivational posters I guess
  13. Never heard of it But thank you for looking that up Well, it's (obviously) Swiss. The 551 is the carbine version and is used by German and French special forces. Probably some Swiss unit or other too and some American units (think that's more on the Policing side of things than the military side of things). The long barrel is for launching rifle grenades. I think it's that rather than the 550 (the full length version) because I think I see three holes in the foregrip rather than 5. And thank you for posting the information
  14. Is it a SIG 551 long barrel with cheek piece and scope? http://swissarms2.ath.cx/uploads/pics/SG-551_rechts_03.jpg
  15. It's not a con. It's just how the weapons work in GRAW on 360.
  16. To be fair to the OP, lots of sites are getting the two confused and I'd say that was intentionally so on Ubi's part. You'd only know the difference if you'd made a real effort to actively seek information which says it all for Ubi's PC marketing.
  17. It's probably Ubi wanting to encourage sales of the console versions. Could somebody take one for the team and buy a PS3? :|
  18. Yeah. And then there's that whole "Sirlin" mentality. The entire game becomes about finding that last 2% of performance and hammering away at it and you end up with everyone crouch-proned in corners or bunnyhopping or exploiting map bugs and trying to break the netcode. You end up with this weird gaming experience totally unlike the SP game and it can be quite an unpleasant atmosphere. Co-op is much more laid-back and easy-going. There's also the complexity of the map and of the objectives you can expect the player to do. Stuff like uneven teams, MGS type stealth missions and other similar things that don't really work in a TVT context. I do like adversarial MP, just not all the time. I'd probably like TVT a lot more of the time if game-modes including slightly more complex objectives and maps were more popular. Titan in 2142 is a sort of step in the right direction, but still. As to AI. My ideal AI would probably include a lot of features from other games. I get quite frustrated when I see bad AI in games because it seems like several games have done one thing or another right already. 1) Enemy working as a unit. I liked in SOCOM on PS2 how they'd chat on walkie talkie to each other. I liked in Vegas how they had NCOs who made them advance and you could stymie that by shooting them. I liked reading about the fantastic chain of command stuff the AI in GRAW would do. ArmA seemed pretty good at making them flank you and that allegedly has an enemy CoC. Some incentive to not just sit in the middle of a hail of fire calmly picking off the enemy because their back-up is on the way would be nice. 2) Squad working as a unit. I liked in First to Fight how they didn't need telling to cover a 360 degree arc. I really liked how they talked to each other and tried to not be reloading at the same time. If you told a bunch of them to move and there were enemy they'd fire and manouvre. Why didn't GRAW do any of this? I also appreciate games where the squad splits up into pairs naturally so you don't have to do this manually. SWAT3, for example. 3) MOUT AI vs open terrain AI. First to Fight had different formations for different terrain so in tight terrain your squad would close up. In SWAT3 they knew about doors and windows. Make them switch to a different set of commands when you're around buildings. Trying to handle both things with the one set is just frikking stupid. 4) Supression, psychology etc. SWAT3 had a ROE that basically meant you were supposed to get the enemy to surrender. Consequently the AI had stuff in there to keep track of how likely they were to shoot back or to surrender. Sneak up them and be in their face with a shotgun and they pish themselves and give up. Vegas as I say had NCOs (remove them and the squad hunkers down). I don't find the enemy fighting to the last man every time hugely convincing. Brothers In Arms had a reasonable line in supression. 5) Accuracy. AI either conefire like crazy or they headshot you from 150m away with pistols. A happy medium would be nice. Perhaps some differentiation between panic fire and aimed shots too depending on how threatened the AI felt?
  19. Sorry to digress, but I love "The Unit". It's one of my favourite shows at the minute. I'm sure I've seen Delta referred to as "The Unit" elsewhere and lots of details of The Unit are pretty much consistent with Delta. I assume he called it "The Unit" so he could get away with stuff like that storyline about being sent to kill that former Delta guy working for the CIA (more or less from the book) and could make comments about the politics of this or that situation without looking like he was badmouthing Delta or the government specifically because y'know, it's a fictional unit. It's a good show overall. It covers interesting ground and manages to not have utterly predictable storylines every week (it's nice that it doesn't just always boil down to "There are terrorists and The Unit shoot them" because that has pretty limited appeal for a TV show). The fact that the wives are in there and you occasionally see Colonel Ryan politiking or dealing with higher authority means that each episode has at least two strands happening. It also covers stuff I really couldn't see the likes of 24 doing in a script, with the family stuff and the political stuff written in a much more convincing fashion than one would expect. Also love the dialogue. Mamet writes some characters (Jonas especially) as speaking in what sound a lot like tough-guy haikus. It's really stylised. I guess that could get irritating but Dennis Haysbert is really good at delivering lines like that. There isn't any huge political bias or agenda in the show. They very specifically haven't set an episode in Iraq, for example and the government are definitely not always portrayed in the best light (in fact The Unit having to dedicate as much time to foiling their higher ups as to the problem at hand is a definite theme in some episodes). I think 2x13 was one of the best episodes I can remember recently (the one with the sub and psychologist in ) if anyone fancies watching one although 2x14 was slightly more gung ho. And now back to your scheduled thread...
  20. If HatchetForce is working/consulting on this I am upgrading myself to "Eagerly Awaiting" from plain old "Awaiting".
  21. Conefire is just a terrrrible solution. Model what the gun is actually doing. Where the muzzle is pointing, the bullet should go. The muzzle should point where it should point. Conefire gives you too good a chance of scoring a hit around the centre of the crosshair for my money. The bullet should also do what it is supposed to be doing. Why do the guns have to be "balanced"? :| Breathing systems a la AA and Infiltration are also good bets because then it takes a moment to set up an accurate shot at range from a sprint or a jog whilst not making it too problematic to shoot quickly at close range. Sight alignment worked fairly well for that and gave you a real choice between scopes and reflex sights. From what I have seen, players learn what works. If they're running and gunning it's because they are used to games that let you do that. There's no reason why that stuff should be the way it works. Why not give them a different challenge to learn? Game type design also plays a fairly big part. TDM seems to favour splitting up and progressively clearing the level as quickly as possible (on a public server anyway) :|
  • Create New...