neilthecellist

I 50% like and 50% hate Mitchell's new helmet. It reminds me of 38's helmet from Star Wars: Republic Commando, only it's set to our universe (er, Jack Ryan universe) but nevertheless, it's taking away the realism of today's.... well, era of war.

*snip* Settings - All maxed out, 1680x1050 System - Athlon X2 6400+, 2GB DDR2 800 RAM, 8800GTS 640MB, Ageia Physx Card Map - Mission 9, Player and 3 Bots, LAN Campaign Either your system is bottlenecked somewhere, some of your system settings are reducing performance (like VSync both in the game and your driver control panel), or you're one of the unfortunate people that has some sort of performance bug. My vSync is off. Both in-game and in my driver control panel. If it is in fact a performance bug, I'll be very surprised. I mean, I don't have a "non-standard video card". I've got a 7900GTX on one machine, 8800GS on the other (which I don't use much), but in either case, I still get crap-performance relative to other games.

No no no no no, you guys are still missing what I'm getting at. Although I appreciate some effort on behalf of the forum for stating fog values, that's not where I'm getting at, in lieu of map optimization in general. What I'm shooting for in particular in this thread is how even when you're in a tight, enclosed space, where an antiportal-like sheet could've been placed, there isn't one (yes I know GRIN doesn't use Unreal Engine 3, thank-you-very-much, but good game engines should always have some sort of optimization parameters). Let me reiterate: When you are NOT looking at a wide, open environment, there should be no excuse for the game to be rendering the wide, open, environment that you clearly can't see (until of course you move yourself so that you are able to see the wide, open environment). For example, in Get Me Rosen, when you're in the room rescuing Rosen himself, there should be no reason that the frames-per-second inside Rosen's room should be exactly the same as it is outside of the room. When you're inside the room, clearly looking at the walls, antiportals (or however they're called in the GRIN engine, if there is even any) should be set up on the walls so that your graphics card isn't working its bum off trying to render something that you can't even see. Come on, you guys, this Video Game Design 101. No, actually, I learned this in high school, not just in college. ... Even when I'm looking at the GROUND, I'm still getting poor performance relative to other games. Papa6 mentioned that his "personal belief as [he's] mentioned before is that this game engine isn't suited for FPS games." Is this true? Just want a clarification on that point.

I just couldn't be bothered to be honest. Respectfully krise madsen And the above probably illustrates why it hasn't already been done. With well ovber 10,000 registered members here at GRnet (last I heard) and dozens of developers, and hundreds of modders, and so on, if no one's taken up the relatively miniscule task of updating Wikipedia already, then it's likely indicative of something. Well, I got rid of the game and I'm completely unwilling to reinstall BUT if someone wants to post highly opinionated synopses, I can "edit" it out and make it "Wiki-appropriate". Credit will go to you too.

Uh, yeah, I know that. I SAID that already. Here: S.T.A.L.K.E.R. had to do the same thing. Ran a helluva lot better. Also, just because you have large areas doesn't mean they have to be rendered even when you're not looking at them. Ever tried making a map using Unreal Editor? (YES I KNOW GRAW2 DIDN'T USE THE UNREAL ENGINE BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT) If you have to map a huge area, you set up these invisible sheets on the area called "antiportals", which is the same as (in pseudo code) "IF player isn't looking at antiportal area, THEN antiportal area = render status = 0" As a map designer myself, I just can't see why GRAW 2 has to run at terrible performance, even when I'm looking at the freakin' ground, or in a tight space. It's called MAP OPTIMIZATION. And if you've never built a map or at least seen someone apply optimization parameters in map design, then don't say anything, because you won't know what you're talking about. Also, if Ubi says "I don't like this, make it this way instead," GRIN still has the right to optimize a map. I highly doubt Ubisoft would say, "Damnit GRIN, you're optimizing the map too much. Take out those optimizing parameters! I only want customers with super super high-end video cards to be able to play my games. Muhahahahaha (evil laugh)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRAW2 There's only a plot synposis written down for the XBOX360 and PS3 version. I haven't had time to reinstall the game (I've been busy with college applications) and was wondering if anyone would be willing to create a new section on the wiki page specifically for the PC version of GRAW2. Anyone?

Is that the reason for the mediocre performance, though?

Wait, what do you mean? I have AGEIA turned off. I can't even turn it on. At minimum details, sure, I'll get 100-200 FPS even. But the minute I turn on shadows and lighting, I'm getting 10-20 fps. In a game like Call of Duty 4, there is also dynamic lighting and shadows, but I get around 60 fps in that game, texture resolution is higher too, along with specular/normal mapping. My question is directed at GRIN, specifically with WHY it's so inefficient in GRAW 2 PC.

I'm a fan of most Ubisoft/GRIN games, but honestly: GRAW 2 PC seriously needs optimization. Then again, most Tom Clancy games do. Have you noticed that Rainbow Six: Vegas looks like it's running on Unreal Engine 2.5X but is actually running on Unreal Engine 3? I mean, what UE3 specific features are in R6: Vegas that you wouldn't be able to get through Unreal Engine 2.5X? On top of that, Rainbow Six: Vegas performs at lower FPS than other UE3 titles, like Gears of War, Bioshock, and UT3, all of which are available for the PC? Can someone from GRIN explain to me why GRIN and Ubisoft games tend to run at lower performance than other game titles than run off of the same respective engines? I know GRAW 2 was developed off of a proprietary GRIN engine, but I'm also wondering if someone from GRIN could speak for GRIN/Ubisoft games in general, particularly with GRAW 2 PC, as far as optimization goes.

I ran GRAw 2 at 1024 x 768 resolution, and I was already getting lag. Here are my specs: AMD 64 4200+ (overclocked to about 4500) 2 gigs of RAM, 800 mhz DDR2 7900 GTX 256 mb 16x pci-e SATA I HD 80 GB (not rich enough for SATA II... yet) And the game won't let me enable AGEIA.... Probably because my card doesn't support it?

Perhaps I should clarify. In the 360 version, such dialogue would've been appropriate (well, SOME dialogue at least, I still think the sexually-seductive sounding way of saying, "Way to go, Captain" should be taking out of both PC and 360) because the game on the 360 is more action-oriented. Nevertheless, porting sounds from the 360 to the PC makes it look as if the PC version was meant to have those kind of sounds/voices to the gamer. After all, if GRIN (do you really work at GRIN? I wouldn't know, sort of new to these forums, I suppose you do) is going to invest in the effort of making GRAW2 on PC like a more tactical shooter, why keep in arcade-y sounds? I mean, why not just cut down on some of the sounds and add new ones that are more appropriate for a more tactical shooter! People die easily and there are no medics in GRAW2 PC, which would imply to the gamer consciously/subconsciouly that the stakes are higher, so why not include voices that don't make people seem as if they don't care if they die? (Again, "Way to go, Captain!" in a sexually provocative sounding way) Ok, while the above paragraph had a bunch of double negatives, I think you understand where I'm getting at by now. <B>Honestly, I'm not a GRAW hater</B> (I only uninstalled it because I think my hard drive deserves other games), I think it's just that the PC version isn't getting enough attention as it deserves.

I have a 7900GTX, and GRAW 2 runs like crap on my computer. Ironic, cause Rainbow Six Vegas, another Tom Clancy game, runs better on my computer AND looks better. Call of Duty 4 also runs better on my computer AND looks better. Anyway, as far as your questions go, here's my 2 cents: 1) Mission length I don't run and gun, and I still thought that GRAW 2 campaign was short, along with each individual mission. There's one mission where you just have to walk from start to finish, fire an RPG, and the mission was over. Strange developing. Even UT2004 mods had better design. 2) Difficulty Easy? Well, if you mean easy as in not using your teammates at all, then yes, you're right. Other than that, it seems that the AI in GRAW 2 is worse, if not the same. 3) Respawns User-specified. 4) Patches Already answered: just bug fixes. 5) Overall Ha. No. Are you kidding? It's gotten the worst reviews, and frankly, I have to agree. It's not the greatest game ever. And frankly, it's not even an average game. Just look at Armed Assault or SWAT 4. Those games were tactical, and didn't suck. Seriously, GRAW 2 on PC plays and feels like a game that was made 2 years ago. I have GRAW 2 on the XBOX360 and frankly, I have to say the 360 version is better. After all... How can a game designer make Mexico City look like a ###### 3rd world country? Gosh... They stereotyped Mexico. Have you been to Mexico in real life? It's a lively place, even in places like Tijuana. It ain't third world. 360 version of GRAW 2 = better investment. Less frustration.

Dude, you had my hopes up, and the minute I see you talking about EndWar, not only am I thinking "Damn, my hopes are down now", I'm also thinking "What a waste of webspace. And my time." Not to be rude, but you really should've done your research by at LEAST reading that article before drawing a conclusion about a sequel to GRAW2.

Yeah, I gotta agree with you there. It's gotten to a point where I've just uninstalled GRAW 2 from my computer. While the old Ghost Recons may not have the most aggressive storylines, at least they were tactical to a point where you can make your whole team go prone. And not walk onto Main St (like you mentioned) and get killed when you tell them to hide behind a corner, or "STOP".

I'm really disappointed in this game. My brother told me that this game would be tactical, and it is, but it's so limited. GRAW 2 seems like a lazy job on behalf of GRIN. Bad voiceovers, bad lines, bad videos, bad AI, smudgy graphics... But of course, the worst are the lines. If GRAW 2 for PC was meant to be tactical, why have kid-factor lines like "Talk to me, sir!" UM I'M NOT TALKING TO YOU BECAUSE I'M BUSY DESIGNATING TARGETS FOR YOU. But noooo, even if I designate, my teammates are STILL going to die for some odd reason.