Jump to content
Ghost Recon.net Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by 101459

  1. I believe that there was an amazing confluence of opportunity, timing, talent, and game design that has not only made the 'original' Ghost Recon an exceptional high water mark in tactical realism game design, I think it may never happen again, actually be something we should value, and a good thing!

    Ghost Recon was developed during and set in the height of the Cold War, where covert warfare peaked in terms of skill based tactical operator intervention. Not that this still isn't a thing today; but contemporary warfare, weapon systems and intervention are designed to obviate operator skill and the skill of his/her intended target, even avoid have him or her in proximity of an intended target, or, remove human operators from the theater entirely.

    The theaters of operation, kinds of missions and actions performed by elite special operations have in many cases been automated, supplanted and even obviated -- and those that are still in motion are so highly classified we lack an author with the background, imagination, motivation, research skill and writing talent of a Thomas Clacy to reveal at any depth what might be going on in a compelling way.

    Tom Clancy played an important role in what made Ghost Recon outstanding, both monetarily, his knowledge, insight and inspiring writing. While there are many great military writers (fiction and non), none have surpassed Tom Clancy in the breadth of what he was able to convey; some may be better writers, have more in-depth, or even hands-on knowledge and experience -- but I would argue none have brought as much to the genre as Tom Clancy, and at time in military history that was making history, very advantageous to his success and the level of attention a game like Ghost Recon received.

    Gaming was also just hitting its stride; very polished, professional talent and standards of quality in 3D game design were in many regards peaking, with many 'firsts' established setting a high watermark for execution. Of course, if you compare the absolute aesthetics of the original Ghost Recon to a contemporary tactical realism game it's obvious the bar has been raised considerably (more on this to follow) but critical immersive levels of game design, and interactive features beyond having a simplistic shooting gallery with moving targets had been achieved.

    This was also a time where game developers didn't even have to 'think outside the box', as the box of big publishing and its puppy mill approach was only getting started, not as limiting and restricting a factor of what a developer could accomplish as it has become today -- and market saturation was not yet a thing. Limitations were more a function of time, money, and what you could do with technology, game feature concepts, and art assets on a particular budget -- and RSE delivered a lot.

    Realism fans were hungry for more realistic games with higher fidelity, that (importantly) allowed for or even required more realistic tactics than the typical run-&-gun FPS, games that were thematically realistic, offered scenarios that were germane and convincing, and design approaches that were successful in actually accomplishing these things. With Ghost Recon, like Tom Clancy, RSE did them all, and did them in spades. Ghost Recon also light a fire under genre fans with mod support, game fan and mod development sites were going gangbusters as well -- fueling the fire.

    Without deep-diving Ghost Recon's game design, and features -- the entire heft of GRN should clue as how much is there, and to that end does a fantastic job, but to the uninitiated the Original Ghost Recon offers a tactical realism gaming experience with features, concepts, design, game modes, fidelity, net-code, military professionalism and even art assets that remain unsurpassed. This last is sure to bewilder some; how can generations old, low poly, low texture resolution assets possibly be 'unsurpassed'? And the answer I believe is key to Ghost Recon's greatness.

    'Uncanny Valley' and 'Theater Of The Mind' are two concepts in game development and literature respectively that don't get enough attention, aren't appreciated for what they accomplish or obviate. In literature some of the best writers only describe their characters and settings in terms of concepts, piquing and allowing the reader's imagination or 'Theater Of Mind' to paint a vastly more detailed and immersive picture. Raymond Chandler, Ayn Rand, and to some extent even Tom Clancy are examples of modern authors that use this technique that's highly regarded for immersive writing when done right. 

    Writers that over amplify and laboriously describe detail and aren't exceptionally good at it can create the disconnect, cognitive dissonance, or 'Uncanny Valley' of how you think something should look, and what's being described and can wreck otherwise good storytelling and immersion. The same applies to games. While modern high-resolution 3D game art assets may allow for more immersiveness, they certainly don't guarantee it, many create the same Uncanny Valley bump in dissonance that while it looks great for ad copy just doesn't draw you into a game or even distracts from it, more so if the game design just isn't there or an over articulated ridiculously stupid narrative underpins everything as is all to common now.

    Ghost Recon, perhaps by some dint of luck and talent offers just the right amount or at least a compelling level of presentation, narrative and continuity in art assets that like good literature and radio theater allows for an experience that's actually more immersive that many games that offer higher resolution art assets. Minimal narrative, the soundtrack, military professionalism conveyed in the narrative, foley and character interactions just takes this to higher level, and the game design itself takes everything to a higher level.

    Ghost Recon's approach to mods and art assets have also made for a, while not easy, I would say more approachable game to mod and add content to, and that's easy to see from the profound amount of content here on GRN, with many of these mods even surpassing the original game in regards that keep Ghost Recon current and engaging.  Add more game modes than all the other Ghost Recon games combined, solid net code that will work on even the rattiest connection, a game engine that runs on anything (even Linux on WINE), and people steadily discovering or rediscovering how great Ghost Recon is and you have a recipe for at the very least -- longevity.

    But when I consider all that is the original Ghost Recon; I think it will never be surpassed, and is not merely a 'Classic' but Evergreen!

    • Like 2
    • Tier 1 Post 2
  2. Not a fan of the WAPO, but I think they were actually generous in their rating of Ghost Recon Breakpoint. Ubisoft had EVERYTHING going their way, again; Wildlands wasn't 'all that' or even Ghost Recon really, but it had the right attraction, and a game design that was good enough.  Ubisoft literally ignored all the most supported and vetted complaints and discussion on their forums, in fact did the opposite. In what other market or in what other company could you do that, even get away with it no less expect anything even remotely resembling a good result? I know of no company that treats its customers as poorly as Ubisoft does.

    • Like 1

  3. Glad to see mod talent is still here keeping the fire going. I think dropping mod support for the franchise was the biggest and most unrecoverable mistakes Ubisoft made; GRN is a great site, but there used to be thousands, in many languages, some were even GRNs equal -- surpassed it in some regards not as good in others... 

    The lack of a current gen mod-able Ghost Recon game, the long term continuity that offered is something Tactical Realism fans value (look at ARMA) and is an enormous loss here to fans of the genre, as well as all the free marketing which is an enormous, and very well earned loss for Ubisoft. 

    All these OGR sites (fan sites, mod sites, tactical study and software sites), the mod talent they attracted and promoted, fans that would discuss and nit-pick everything is a level of fan/fan/developer interaction that while still alive, was definitely kicked in the crotch by Ubisoft as hard as possible, then lied about, then beaten to a pulp, and finally thrown from speeding car and left to bleed to death.

    But OGR, it's fans, mods and mod talent have survived, and even thrived as a reminder of what was. That so many games actually have taken an enormous design inspiration from the original Ghost Recon (and the developers admit as much) --  make it noteworthy that no Ghost Recon game that has followed under Ubisoft's direction has inspired any such thing. Just a few that come to mind where it was interesting to see things like the squad features of OGR explored and developed:

    · Full Spectrum Warrior & 10 Hammers
    · U.S. Navy SEALs Tactical Strike (another ICT game based on FSW)
    · The nFusion Engine Games (Line Of Sight Vietnam, Elite Warriors: Vietnam, Deadly Dozen)
    · The Conflict Games (Global Terror, Desert Storm, Vietnam)
    · The SWAT Games
    · Close Combat: First to Fight

    While not given to squad features games like Red Orchestra, Insurgency, Squad, Ground Branch carry on a lot of the realism, military professionalism, and atmosphere that was a Ghost Recon exclusive. Original Ghost Recon's influence even extended to Ghost Recon mods for the nFusion, Unreal, SWAT, and ARMA games, but just like commercial games, there are no mods taking any inspiration from any Ubisoft directed Ghost Recon bowel movement "product"...

    As everyone has reflected here; it would appear that a Ghost Recon game that even remotely resembles the original, no less something with mod support is somewhere between never happening and impossible due to the company's absurd level of paranoia, dysfunctional design and corporate culture that goes all the way to the top (he who shall remain unnamed steers the ship)… But you'd think (or hope) as a token 'good will' marketing gesture Ubisoft would see the wisdom other publishers and developers have in such a move, and with a game as old as OGR offer the source under some kind of open license.

    Knowing the principles though, the good will is just not there, and even if this did make it up the chain from someone in marketing as a good promotional move, it would no doubt be finagled into something more resembling a ploy -- where even if it could make it past legal, there would be onerous legal boiler plate in the license that was not particularly open -- kind of like Rockefeller giving dimes to kids for news or photo opportunities, then having his lackeys take them back after the press left.


    • Like 3
  4. Great article link and post ApexMods! I especially liked Jeremy Peel's reference to what used to be called Ghost Recon's 'Ghost Perspective', that this isn't and is not intended to be a first person perspective, and was something I wrote about decades ago in the context of 'there is no "I" in team' and the limitations of realistic scale view distance in realism games -- great to see someone else pick this up and ❤️ it from another well articulated perspective.

    Everyone here is obviously a fan of OGR has made this a great thread, even though we're 'not allowed' to talk about what's really going on. Being French there's a lot I could add that doesn't put Ubisoft in a favorable light, but I'll say summarily, it's virtually impossible for Ubisoft to make, remake, reimagine or remaster the original Ghost Recon.

    Consider: Ubisoft had zero involvement in the creation of the original Ghost Recon, they functioned as a publisher for RSE back then, shortly thereafter bought RSE, and nothing they've added to the 'franchise' since (which is a franchise in name only) beyond talented artists has been original or even brings tactical realism game design forward.

    Is anyone here aware of any games designed by Ubisoft internally (not by some bought company that's now a fragmented team fighting for game design concepts) of any genre that have even a fraction of the depth of play, or thought given to design poured into the original Ghost Recon? I sure don't see it...

    In fact everything Ubisoft looks like a neck down, dystopian product nightmare headed toward over-simplification for Eloi where the company's ultimate game design destination will be putting shaped pegs in holes with exploding banners running up political slogans, commercial advertising, and the game's primary mechanic will be paying  money for new shapes and colored pegs... Thank you, no...

    Just as the original Ghost Recon didn't come from an 'AAA' publisher with a seven figure budget, a management committee the size of a small government, and a team of wage slave developers numbering in the hundreds, it seems unlikely it's spiritual successor will either.  In fact virtually every game with compelling game design is coming from independent developers.

    I'd love to be wrong, and would even pay for that privilege.

    • Like 1
  5. On 10/12/2018 at 17:16, 5timechamp said:

    It almost feels like the majority of the team moved on..

    On 26/11/2018 at 13:50, Rocky said:

    Yeh I kind of feel the same, there needs to be a significant update to pull people back.

    The numbers rather suggest a lot of them were never here to begin with; many Ghost Recon fans saw what the game lacked, and never bought it. The numbers on the GRN forums show this too and are in decline with each iteration of the Ghost Recon franchise, and mirrors play share. None of this is surprising with Ubisoft continued heralding a return to the roots of Ghost Recon and tactical realism sounding more and more like little boy that cried "Wolf!", only now it's other publishers and even indie developers eating Ubisoft's lunch.

    On 20/10/2018 at 18:50, Lightspeed said:

    It's inevitable BZ in any game particularly games without modding tools. 

    I agree, but look at what else has disappeared from the game that tactical realism fans have long regarded as essential; some of them things Ghost Recon was first to deliver when it inaugurated the genre:

    ·  nav maps
    ·  a text mode communication system 
    ·  mission based load out system
    ·  sever browser
    ·  high resolution net code
    ·  realistic missions based game modes  
    ·  realistic weapons and equipment

    And look what these have been supplanted with:

    ·  magic radar
    ·  Barbie's Mystical Adventure weapon grind system
    ·  horrible Quazal net code
    ·  match making that's been terrible for a decade built on same
    ·  action/arcade fictional game modes
    ·  casino clown content system
    ·  a communication system that only communicates taunts and insults

    The last is a poster child for the kind of cognitive dissonance Ubisoft has created with tactical realism fans. With their 'inclusive virtue signaling' and Ubisoft as 'Your New Gamer Mommy' approach, making sure everything in virtual military game that includes killing is 'safe' and offers a 'safe space' against every kind of 'ism' -- except those Ubisoft doesn't care about, yet...

    So...the game's voice over and is loaded with swearing, hostility, psychosis, and 'isms' galore that are ban hammer content for fans texting and is so far beyond military professionalism it would be humorous if it weren't so denigrating and ridiculous.

    And the only alternative now to VOIP is a radial menu that only offers taunts and insults that you have to grind or buy in a virtual kiddie casino where you get to bet real money to win a taunt or insult. This is so sick, and below the basement it's now illegal to include in games in some countries -- that it sacrifices an important game interface makes it even uglier and more ridiculous (and worthy of ridicule).

    All of this is just...sad, because at it's base Wildlands is an impressive achievement, sullied by too many over ambitious attempts to monetize everything with the lowest common denominator in click and scam bait for naive and vulnerable minds just short of 'Do you know where mommy's wallet is?'...  There are better more honest ways to make just as much money with games.

    For tactical realism fans to jump back on the Ghost Recon franchise wouldn't require a Herculean effort on Ubisoft's part; Wildlands offers an excellent platform for expansion, but it would require real and honest effort in showing rather then marketing, baiting and promising...

    • Like 1
    • Tier 1 Post 1
  6. Looks like Void Interactive is still hard at it; their latest Devblog 03 was just posted:



    It's a relief to see serious Tactical Realism on the event horizon that's not a 'dress up combat Ken & Barbie ' RPG game to monetize naïve kids with toddler pajama pattern 'skins' and prono cos-play costumes on game design so abaft of realism, anything tactical or even to do with reality it makes you wonder why so many titles even use the word and moniker.

    Tiny ambitious team to be sure; but their talent, progress, content quality and prduciton volume looks like they're up to it, and they've chosen a project and sub-genre that at least looks well suited for a small team and a revisit with a modern engine, art assets, and design. Sure are a lot of enthusiastic GR fans, and interesting discussion on Twitter and Reddit.


    • Like 1
  7. On 9/2/2017 at 12:12, Burner said:

    Wow....unbelievable. Modders have always gone above and beyond because they truly care about enhancing the game. Ones publishers make their money and release a new product....its detrimental to sales and profit to keep improving a former product.

    Not sure what you're referring to in the context of this game. While it's obvious many publishers believe that allowing free mod content, or improving what they regard as 'commodity product'  intended to self-obsolesce (some even by developer admission incorporate design and flaws with this explicit intention)  -- there's a lot to argue that this is not the most stable business model and certainly not the most healthy. 

    Markets are replete with obvious examples in this and many other industries where self-obsolescence, finite life-cycle and pay to continue or expand what was already paid for appears to be the most successful business model, but in fact this is not always the case when long term and total cost of what is little more then shrewd asset stripping of customers is weighed in the long term cost of ill will, lost business, legal redress, and heightened consumer cynicism.

    In the gaming industry you don't have to look any further then Valve, BI, RockStar, or StarBreeze to see enormously successful and profitable Publishers that have eschewed shrewd ghetto asset stripping packaged as paid content or DLC, self-obsolescence, and not only lack of mod support but deliberate impediments to it.  I hope Void Interactive's new Backer is as aware of what can be accomplished with a more customer-centric business model that the Developers clearly value.

  8. On 21/08/2017 at 16:35, nyleken said:

    Devs mentioned that they're leaning towards SWAT 3's team AI rather than SWAT 4's. This is great, especially considering how clunky the team AI in SWAT 4 was.

    Burner will be pleased.

    That their giving AI any attention at all is a relief in a realism market where FPS game AI hasn't made any significant advances in over a decade (sadly).  While there may be nothing ground-breaking here the UE4 AI subsystem is very powerful, and if given enough time and attention can beat the snot out of the zerging zombie carnival targets that are marketed in 'realism' games as 'realistic' and 'tactical' and *cringe* 'authentic'... I like that that Void Interactive is focusing on explicit feature and design targets -- not vague hype, ridiculous prose, and hideous content they can sell you (Liberache costumes)... I'm weary of eye sore FPS realism games 'content ' that looks more like a gay pride parade or creepy pr0n cos play event costumes then anything related to combat realism..

  9. Void Interactive has posted their second dev blog -- lots of impressive attention to detail that some will love and others won't. They have a very nice HLS sight system:

    And very nice FF sound capture and render that's quite realistic in to small acoustic steridians:

    They're promising some actual game-play footage in their next dev blog.  While CQC is not my or gonna be everyone's favorite realism sub-genre; it's definitely serious tactical realism, no Liberachie DLC, and it looks like they're seriously committed, making steady progress and fully intend to deliver.

    It's interesting that Bohemia Interactive, New World Interactive, and now Void Interactive all have 'interactive' in their monikers; it appears they've all recognized the casual/passive grindy/salesy direction the big publishing has taken, and what that has cost...  

    BI and NWI have and continue to deliver enormous payloads of value, truly interactive games, that are incredibly features deep, with deep mod support, and strong long term communities just like Ghost Recon.

    Anyone remember Ghost Recon? :ph34r:

  10. 1 hour ago, Rocky said:

    Oh my word.

    101, do you ever reflect on your posts and perhaps consider why your posts create more bad feeling than any other poster in this forums history (okay maybe there one or two other guys).

    Sorry Rocky, I won't accept responsibility for other people's 'bad feelings'...  People's feelings and emotions are their responsibility not other people's... Do you or does Ubisoft accept responsibility for the ill will and disdain instigated by their dissembling, bad marketing, and lack of technical support? Not from what I've seen; it's a consenting arrangement -- no one is being forced to buy Ubisoft's games, just as no one is being forced to read my posts.


    1 hour ago, Rocky said:

    I mean, did you post to ###### all over Ubisoft (again), or to promote a new title you've spotted? Because you could have done the later without the former and it would have been so much more pleasant...

    Again? I've never posted anything on Ubisoft's forums to promote anything, they don't have a forum for posting about other tactical realism game, GRN does...

    Rather than the 'me too ' reaction -- how about weighing in on what I've actually said: Ubisoft has not been producing tactical realism games in quite a while, they keep misleading and dissembling, leading would be fans to believe this next game will be, and that's has not been the case.

    Ready Or Not looks a game that might be, as yet no one from Void Interactive has told any lies or abrogated any commitments to warrant doubt beyond 'haven't delivered a game yet '... 


    1 hour ago, Rocky said:

    As for the "reveal trailer", it was extremely poor. It did not reveal anything about the game that people want to know, I Googled it for further info not because of the trailer but to see what you were getting all excited for - and I still came up with more concerns than excitement. Good luck to those guys, prove me wrong.

    Now who's a 'Negative Nelly '? A small self-funded indie developer with only two people working on the game, and not wanting to take much time away from that; a teaser in the context it was presented; as part of a blog, that's not being advertised anywhere (and they didn't put it on YouTube someone else did) I don't see how you get to  it's 'extremely poor' -- I think you're evaluation is, and unfair.

    Considering they have a budget of "O", no history of lying to customers, and they at least intend to try and offer features that engage tactical realism fans, I'd at least give them an "A" for effort. While I don't think it's cause for excitement and never said it was (your assumption not mine) I do think it's more cause for optimism then anything Ubisoft has been doing for tactical realism.

    For reference -- the context of the teaser was offered in was their very first blog post:

    Ready Or Not – Devblog 01 – “Teaser and beyond”




    Ready or Not is a tactical first person shooter which places you in the boots of an elite SWAT team, tasked with diffusing hostile situations in intense, claustrophobic environments. It’s set in a nondescript modern America, where an income disparity between the classes have become unsustainable and the country has been plunged into havoc. Bring order to chaos with up to 8 players in cooperative play, battle enemy squads in a close player-vs-player environment, or command AI in a striking single-player mode.

    Ready Or Not has been in development since June 2016, and includes an array of unique features. Today, we’re going to run through some of the already included features we’re most excited about.

    Current features include:

    Incremental lean system
    Our most prominent feature involves the players ability to maneuver around obstacles, opening up infinite possibilities regarding tactical positions. Players can duck under low cover to avoid oncoming fire, or peak above high cover in order to spot and return fire upon the enemy. The assigned keys can be tapped in any order to “peek”. On top of this, we have also included a classic quick-lean system seen in many shooters.

    Incremental Door control system
    This gameplay feature allows for doors of multiple types such as sliding, swinging, and revolving doors, to be manipulated by the mouse wheel at any time. Provided the door is unlocked, players can interact and incrementally move them.

    Modular speed control
    Our final mouse-wheel-based feature involves the control of the player’s speed by scrolling up or down. This allows for precise movement in a close-quarters environment, which may mean the difference between life and death in a hostile situation. This, of course, can be re-bound to suit our users needs.

    Simulated and detailed third person inventory
    In a real life situation, each item has its place in a loadout. We wanted to ensure this level of replication, so we included detailed animations and systems which show your teammates exactly what you’re doing. Magazines, grenades, and items are retrieved and returned to their specific pouches, with the pouch flaps opening and closing in synchronicity with the players reload or draw, respectively.

    Convex collision armour, allowing for precise protection
    Armour collision in Ready or Not is calculated based on the mesh coverage on the player, allowing for accurate levels of realistic ballistic protection.

    Projectile dynamics, bullets penetrate, ricochet, and deteriorate
    Rounds have realistic range, drag, and tumble velocity. Calibers and ammunition types affect how far and how well a projectiles penetrate and exit. All rounds have the ability to ricochet based on surface materials and angle of impact, and deflection has recently been included as a feature. Less-than-lethal rounds will be unlikely to penetrate, but can sometimes still kill depending on proximity and impact area.

    Responsive damage system and effects
    If a player is shot in the legs, movement is slowed down based on the level of damage. Arm damage will decrease accuracy and increase draw times. Head damage, provided it is survived, can intermittently “haze” the players vision. This is all shown via a passive (read: hidden unless needed) indicator at the bottom of the screen.

    Visceral gore
    Deaths need to be impactful to the end user and we’re committed to providing an experience like no other. If characters in the game are hit, parallax bullet holes spawn on flesh, and blood will then seep out into surrounding fabrics. A gory bullet hole also becomes an emitter, as individuals who knock their wounds onto objects create a small splatter, based on bone velocity. In the future, we plan to implement an entire bodily destruction system.

    Highly detailed weapons, characters and environments
    As seen in our gallery and teaser, Ready or Not’s assets aren’t camera-shy. A realistic and high-detail representation of all assets is necessary in immersing the player in our world. Weapon edges are smooth and seamless, environmental detail is minute.

    Massive selection of items
    As of pre-alpha, we currently have over 30+ items in total, with plans to greatly expand this selection monthly. Concerns may arise over balance issues, but each item will have its place and value considered in order to avoid having duplicate functioning (but visually different) gear. These items include weapons, devices, grenades, and deployable items (read: items that can be selected in our planning phase)

    Fully supported competitive servers based on Amazon Gamelift API
    Ready or Not features a fully competitive set of gamemodes to test your mettle against other squads in PvP. However, players can still host listen servers and play with custom game rules.

    Plans to support squad competitive play
    Create a squad with up to ten friends for PvP and Coop. Work as small groups to reap squad rewards, and compete in yearly leader-board competitions to earn unique skins. A passive pointscore system allows players to work together to level and earn more squad points, opening up options in a mission’s planning phase.

    Tactical Analysis
    All missions begin with a tactical analysis and planning phase, currently allowing teams to shut off power grids, blockade entrances, create or choose new entry points, and spawn unique devices including ballistic shields, heavy rams, and telescopic ladders.

    We hope you stick with us through our journey in making a true-to-life tactical shooter that can be held up to the greats. We’re excited to share our work over the course of this year.

    For those who haven’t seen it, here’s our reveal.And apparently I'm not alone in that perspective... But hey, I get it now, GRN is a intended to be a 'Safe Space ' where no one however irrational their reactions might be should ever be uncomfortable. I promise I'll never post here again.


    Apparently I'm not alone in this perspective, but I misunderstand the intention of these forums and did not realize that GRN was intended to be a 'Safe Space' for Ubisoft, it's apologists, and irrational people that are hypersensitive and easily offended.

    For reference I did a word count on my posts, and less then 0.1% are in sentences criticizing Ubisoft or their games -- but rest assured I won't ever, under any circumstances risk the prospect of offending anyone here again...

    Happy Trails!

  11. 9 minutes ago, NightCrawler said:

    Nope didn't say that just that most of the posts that you've posted for quite some time have been mostly negative about GR. To the point of redundancy.

    You're so far off the mark, and obviously have not read 'most' of my posts. I don't like Wildlands or Siege -- two games of how many that wear the 'Ghost Recon' moniker? I've even been very complementary of Siege's game design, which is quite good, but...

    I'm a Tactical Realism fan, I wouln't think I'd have to be an apologist for it here... There's literally nothing to like in terms of tactical realism in Wildlands, it's not a tactical realism game, and Siege runs on deplorable infrastructure -- that's not being negative those are facts.

  12. 4 minutes ago, NightCrawler said:

    There's no argument Zee. My only problem with 101459 is the negativity in his writing, he may be right and accurate but some things just don't need to be stated.

    I'm not anyone's enemy and I'm friends of many here at GR.net and have been since the earliest of days.

    Ahh, I see and you're the final authority and abiter of what 'needs ' to be stated... Ok, have fun with your new moderation job... Just what is it pray tell EXACTLY that you object to so strenuously? Not the vague assertions of negativity -- what are you so hostile to?

  13. 16 minutes ago, Zeealex said:

    fine, balls to it, I tried... have your petty ass arguments then, i'm out!

    Petty? I don't know... Maybe, gaming is really pretty trivial stuff in the larger context of what's going on... But don't you find it a little ironic that on THE website that was THE locus of Tactical Realism Gaming, that discussion of Tactical Realism Gaming discussion is now only happening in the original Ghost Recon and other PC game forums? :help:

  14. 5 hours ago, AlexKimov said:

    Xbox GhostRecon 2 is on the way... but it's look like this right now. It's nice looking, isn't it?


    It's promising looking that's for sure; GR2 content on GR would be... An IMPORTANT scientific investigation that will require... Peer review... Lots of peer review! :zorro:

  15. 11 hours ago, NightCrawler said:

    Still don't appreciate your venom for anything other then what you think is good. You still speak as if you are the only opinion that matters, you're not.

    Your 'appreciation ' is not my concern; no where have I ever on any occasion -- said, suggested, or implied that 'my opinion is all that matters', ever, in my entire life, in text or words spoken; the assumption here is all yours. Own it...

    Those opinions I have expressed are opinions concerning the importance of facts, based on facts, and are mine alone, though with respect to Ubisoft's last decade of 'Clancy' games I'm far from alone in holding them, and am entitled to them -- maybe not in expressing them here, but that remains to be seen...

    I'm not sure how you define 'opinion ' but I prefer the direction most dictionaries, rational, and literate people choose: 'a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge' making most of what I've said, not an opinion, but an appraisal.

    To wit:

    When there are twelve year old games like SWAT 4 that require players to go through a lot of hoops just to set the game up to play and find servers, and the game has more servers on PC then Siege has PC players; it should point something out, and ring some bells -- it obviously did for the guys at Void Interactive... 

    These forums, even with Rocky 'rocking it ' and making every effort to make it one the best LZ's in realism gaming, which it is; the forum post decline since Ghost Recon is dramatic with each new 'Clancy' game -- it's incremental, it's sad, and in my 'opinion ' has nothing to do with Rocky and everything to do with Ubisoft's abnegation of tactical realism games in a market saturated with arcade shooters.


  16. Fortunately tactical realism fans disappointed wtih Wildlands, Siege and other cartoon arcade games that promised more may not have too long wait -- there are Developers that understand the genre; Ready Or Not looks poised to fill the void -- check out their impressive Reveal Trailer...

    With none of the middle-ware limitations of Ubisoft games like their horrible mutant console derivative renderer, Quazal net-code that's literally the worst in FPS gaming in the last decade and only gets worse, match making systems also built on Quazal that put you in join for an asinine amount of time -- making the last three Clancy games literally unplayable for a preposterous number of people that bought them (thank Gabe Newell for the Steam return policy).

    This isn't 'hating on ' Ubisoft, it's a heads-up: Ubisoft had it all and squandered it; an audience more patient than any other, yet Ubisoft continues to pump out arcade dreck, dissemble and call it 'Tactical Realism ', slap the Clancy moniker on it, rinse and repeat for a decade of disappointing output. They've dropped the ball way too many times for way too long, and had the tactical realism genre wholesale in their tied up with bows and; they screwed the proverbial pooch repeatedly what comes next will probably surprise them. 

    Fortunately there are others that get the genre, and looks like Void Interactive intends to fill the...void... SOTA renderer and net code built for PC, a server browser instead of the console abortion match making system, weapons that are a reflection of their real counterparts not something that came out of a magic unicorn's ass, or that  you have to buy in the arcade Casino, and finally a game that will eschew Liberache fantasy DLC costumes and other kiddie dreck to separate children of marginal means and intelligence from their money.

    Yeah, I guess I'm more then a little disgusted with Ubisoft...

  17. I'd like to see a tactical realism mode with:

    · no RPG skill and load-out building or magic/fantasy Easter egg hunts for same
    · no respawn but add AI squad backup support for COOP & soul switching
    · flesh out some tactical node behavior in the bots so they're challenging
    · make the bots sound and light aware
    · play once vo and then off, or text mode narrative only option (it's truly horrible)

    That would take the game in a 'from the neck up ' direction where there's some play-ability beyond RPG for magic prize rewards for murder sprees and grind Easter egg hunts -- like the cringe trip of T1 Operators crossing country to get the proper furniture on their rifle out of the basement of a drug cartel crack house... Please!

    I'm well aware some people love the, ah, low level of participation and focus vanilla GTA\RPG games require... I'm representing the contrarian view that there are tactical realism fans, tens of millions of them in point of fact that could like this game too were more offered then a false promises.



    • Like 5
  18. My disappointment with Wildlands is that it doesn't even offer token recognition of the tactical realism -- the popular genre the Tom Clancy and Ghost Recon monikers inaugurated. Wildlands is not in any way shape for form realistic or authentic; in fact if flies in the face of realism in just about every respect of game design. This isn't a value judgement, again it's a fact, just a few examples to illustrate this:

    · you have to grind and find magic pickups just to get a marginally realistic load-out
    · first gen fidelity night vision with a ghetto digital affectation -- pseudo fifty year old technology
    · you acquire magical skills through magical pickups obviating native player skill
    · bots have no noise detection you can over in with a helicopter and they don't see you till you shoot
    · bots have no light detection you can stealth up to them brightly illuminated, shooting out lights has no effect
    · use of cover and concealment offers no advantages you can Rambo more effectively and rape/grind faster

    Again these are just a few examples; I've done every objective and side mission in the beta/demo multiple times -- summarily not only are realistic tactics not a requirement in this game, they're less effective and make you feel ridiculous 'pretending' this is an immersive realistic operation. With a creepy psychotic yelling the obvious at you, and the most challenging contact is an explosion of retrograde Serious Sam zerging zombie bots that all look like robot clones where charging is their primary tactic with erratic and infrequent use of cover (just like Serious Sam) -- it's cartoon, it's occasionally good fun, it's not realistic in any way shape or form other then as an advertising vehicle.

    All that and more; like taking a really pretty and smart actress giving her bad direction and a terrible script for the vo lead that makes her sound more psychotic scary freak then the cartoon drug robots our recon team is going after (I hope this helps and doesn't hurt her career), a depiction of drug crime in Peru that not only would offend many Peruvians; it isn't remotely accurate or authentic with respect to anything that's actually happening in Peru -- I could go on but there's so much wrong with this game that are in as many ways as offensive as they are disappointing it's really sad to see Ubisoft go this direction with what was a fairly adult game 'franchise' that apparently isn't a franchise.

    I do still find Wildlands likable; anything that people put a lot of time and effort into reveals this as well -- for all its flaws and warts Wildlands is no exception, and Ubisoft will get the ultimate complement from me as I will probably buy the game. But I hope they hear and most importantly listen what tactical realism fans are saying, and add not another idiot action/arcade 'hardcore' mode, but actually put some effort into a tactical realism game mode for this game that raises the bar of its limited and very shallow neck down game play...

    • Like 2
  19. I'm glad you enjoyed the game but my take is different... I agree Wildlands can be fun... There I said it... But I do not feel it warrants the moniker 'Ghost Recon' -- perhaps just Wildlands, as is this is not Ghost Recon in any way, shape of form, and not a tactical realism game what so ever.

    A Tactical Realism is game design by definition and design requires realistic tactics to prevail, Wildlands does not under any circumstances require you to use any realistic tactics -- you may choose to, but that won't improve your chances of prevailing, in fact it will in many occasions slow you down or even get you killed, and make the game less fun -- not a value judgement, it's a fact that many corroborate.

    A little summery of realism genre is in order because there's a lot of miss use on this forum referencing this game and what constitutes an action realism game, tactical realism game, a milsim, and the 'Tom Clancy' and 'Ghost Recon' monikers used to indicate you were going to get a tactical realism game, not an an action realism game, not a milsim, and not an role playing game:


    Action/Arcade/Fantasy Realism 

    Are games where the only realism is aesthetic affectation, you prevail or win by mastering game mechanics that typically will have nothing to do with reality other then someone 'really' saw them in a movie or a comic book In fact in many of these games if you actually try to use realistic tactics you will not prevail because the mechanics of the game obviate realistic tactics. Action realism games allow for tactics but they are fantasy tactics like (and certainly not limited to): circle strafing, slide shooting, diving, run & gun. Games in this genre include but certainly aren't limited to: Counter Strike, Medal of Honor, Call of Duty, Max Payne, and now Wildlands.

    Tactical Realism

    Tactical Realism games are games where realistic tactics prevail and an unrealistic approach like 'circle strafing'  or run & gun will not only not allow you to prevail; you will fail.  Tactical realism games can try to enforce a wide range of realistic tactical behaviors from weapon handling and fire control (supported fire, suppression, reconnaissance by fire, indirect fire) to tactical squad maneuver and maneuver fire (bounding, cover fire, intersecting fire lanes, enfilade) -- and this only scratches the surface.  Tactical realism games are not simulators the game may not be to scale in terms of time, range of engagement, damage etc. and the game may use unrealistic means (interfaces and features most typically) to encourage or even enforce the use realistic tactics. Tactical realism games include: the Rogue Spear, Ghost Recon, Raven Shield, Sum Of All Fears, Full Spectrum Warrior, SOCOM Tactical Strike.

    Military Simulation

    Military Simulation are designed to simulate specific small or large context aspects of military operations including but not limited to combat with the greatest fidelity and accuracy to scale practical. 'MilSims' are not games or game like, rewarding, or in many cases even winnable; they are training tools intended to educate and inform regarding many aspects of military operations from logistics and planning, strategy, tactics, positioning, and putting these individually or collectively under a microscope to see how they may interact in practice. Military simulations incude but are not limited to: VBS, TitanIM, and DARWARS Ambush.

  20. I'm not sorry, but this approach to argument is a non sequitur. Constructive criticism is not hatred of people. Hard work and passion don't make a thing good, what it's promised to be, or even adequate. Lots of people work hard, I work hard; but telling my clients I worked hard and am passionate wouldn't be adequate if I didn't deliver. Pick your least favorite politician; is the fact they worked hard and are passionate adequate to your forgiving them and liking the fruits of their efforts? Would you pay Bunny Wishful to do your brain surgery because he's 'passionate and works hard' even though he has no medical degree and everyone he has operated on has died?

    These people, 'the devs' get paid for their hard work and passion, it's not a gift. Most of 'the devs' likely had very little input in the game's design, and Ubisoft is not paying you or me (to my knowledge) to play Wildlands. I've said it before, and I'll say it again because it's epistemologically important: what and who do you reward, what and who do you punish by soft pedaling valid criticism and inappropriate heaping of praise?  Apologism does no one any good, and egos so fragile they can't take criticism should not be producing anything that enters the public domain, especially as a commercial product. Without criticism nothing improves.


    • Like 3
  21. 18 minutes ago, nyleken said:

    Don't really think that Ubisoft is going to delay it. At this point it's probably going to be patched extensively post-launch and so the best time to pick it up is probably going to be a year after launch. That's also assuming the game is still alive at that point.

    Apparently the game has been in development for four years. I'm not exactly keen on the development process but I genuinely do wonder what they've been doing for the past four years.

    I think you are right. I also find it amazing that with Ubisoft owning rights to no less then four LSS game engines capable of this kind of scale; thousands of petabytes of repurposable content they can decorate maps in a game like this with, development and production teams the size they have to put to task, and the budgets they roll -- that this took four years, looks and plays the way it does.

    It is what it is, I just wish Ubsift would disabuse themselves of using the Tom Clancy, Ghost Recon and R6 monikers and calling it a 'franchise' (it's not) and similarly learn the meaning of the word 'tactical' and how it has been applied to gaming and got started with ip they bought. Maybe this is all just an English literacy issue and a huge misunderstanding at Ubisoft or they don't even remember Red Storm and what they did...

    I also agree with Alex, friends make all the difference:


  22. 35 minutes ago, Burner said:

    They already have redefined it. Ubisoft owns the tactical shooter genre by owning the Tom Clancys Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six IP. They have defined what a tactical shooter is with Vegas, Future Solider, Siege, Splinter Cell series, etc....

    If a modern player has never played the classics, then they dont really know what a tactical shooter is. People ask me on my channel why I still play OGR and I tell them because its one of the only real tactical shooters available. I am now using the term Realistic Tactical Shooter for games like GR classic, Delta Force, and ARMA 3.

    One thing they did make clear.....is that they are NOT making a simulation. I guess "tactical" to them is recon and having glowing red markers over enemies heads.

    You missed my point entirely:  Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon defined tactical realism, was designed and developed by Red Storm, which was bought by Ubisoft. Wildlands doesn't even give a token nod to any of the features that these games offered that defined the genera.

  23. 37 minutes ago, Burner said:

    Totally not a realistic tactical shooter but...........it fun strangely. Its immersive and addicting at least for now. Theres lots of freedom and maybe thats its appeal. According to the GRW Lead & Tech director Laurent Fischer, "We chose to put aside some realism (but not everything), and focus on the tactical aspects of being a Ghost. We’re not doing a simulation."

    Well different strokes... But what exactly are the 'tactical aspects of being a Ghost' that Laurent Fisher and company 'focused on '? All I see here is replication of GTA open world action realism with grind reward leveling for action/arcade/fantasy shooting sprees. There doesn't appear to be even a token nod to anything remotely 'tactical ' unless Ubisoft is redefining the word along with the franchise...

    • Like 1
  • Create New...