Jump to content

dago

Members
  • Posts

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dago

  1. yeah there is no TELLing how many R6 mods I got off of that site....
  2. A couple of things I see that are immediate fixes beyond moding tools and performance issues, some of which if not all have been mentioned. Direct IP support. ASE support. Lamespy .. er gamespy as the ONLY option is going to turn folks off. Some server options. We all know new gametypes are comming, but the ability to control respawns. Control the time it takes to respwan, or the number of respawns ala [GR], or to simply turn them off. Many games that have objective based gameplay still have no respawns, the first that comes to mind is AA. You may like the game or not like it, but without a doubt objective based gameplay without respawns works. Kit restrictions ect...... These would seemingly be simple and quick fixes ( I know NOTHING about programing so I may be totaly wrong ) I've only played MP and so far the game doesn't have that classic gr feel.
  3. I have some questions/thoughts on the MP, I haven't played it much, and I haven't tried the MP at all. But as a guy that played GR from the day the demo came out there were some glaring differences, in gameplay. I looked at the domination mode with an open mind. I actually like objective based mp, and gaining control of and holding parts of a map are objectives. But what happened to no respawns? To me, one of the things that seperated GR's mp was the no respawn. Folks simply played with a little more care. You knew that if you died you were waiting. Obviously thats not what happens in this version. It doesnt even look like its an option. It's great if folks want to have 23 respawns, but shouldn't there be the option to not have them ala "Classic GR?" In the short time I was playing folks were just running all over the place. Again who am I to knock anyone's style, I am speaking strictly on gameplay. It makes a difference. It's what drew many of us to the game. I have read that lms types of games are comming and I think thats great will the no respawn option be there? And with it will the "buying" of weapons and such become an option thats server based as well? Maybe this isn't the place to ask the questions. I can't honestly give too much feedback on the game, tbh I was more blown away but being able to respawn in the middle of a round. (several times if I must add cause all I was doing was dying) If I had to say anything it doesn't, at least in adverserial play, seem to have the same tactical feeling that the original GR had. At least not yet.
  4. Well................. After 30 minutes of conversation with the gamespy help folk, I have come to a couple of conclusions. 1. I want ASE 2. Ghost Recon AW is NOT supported by gamespy its powered by gamespy, 2 totaly different animals 3. GRAW is not released untill the 4th so there is NO WAY the copy installed on my computer is a legal copy. (nevermind that you can d2d it even from thier site) 4. GRAW is new 5. GRAW is new and we dont know anything about it. 6. The folks in gamespy help are sorry but they cant help me ( or for that matter you either the games new) I would LOVE to be able to comment on the game's MP I would love to be able to say GRIN has done a great job. Can't even get Lamespy to let me log in though ..... seems a bit more planning was needed on the mp part. DAGO
  5. Does it bug anyone besides me that to play MP you HAVE to use gamespy?
  6. Crytek as in FAR CRY.... YUCK!!! Personally I hope they dont use anyone's engine but thier own. They have done pretty good in the past with thier own engines and games. ( I can remember one or two games RSE did that were OK to play ) Far Cry is way way way too .. I dont know seems to me that it was made for 12 year olds ... Anyways I hope that its just a continuation of the game that won so many of us over
  7. You're giving ubi too much credit. They might be on GR 10 by then. Thats hillarious... Sad but hillarious
  8. Heck the story was posted on the official GR as well .. The mods there were all over the thread as excited about it as we are. It wasn't deleted. Of course it could be now cause thier forums are down AGAIN and I can't check!
  9. So has anyone seen any official word from "developers" yet? I am really excited about this but I am trying hard not to get too carried away till I see something official.
  10. I would say haveing played CoD that headquarters is much like siege. Just my personal opinion. The more and more I play some of these other games, I am starting to really really like the objective based adverserial games. AA (i know I know) is starting to grow on me ... each side has something they HAVE to do to win the map.
  11. If you could drive and fly would that be GR .. I think 90% of the people that liked GR did so because of its feel and its realistic premise. I dont want another game where I can jump in my jet fly to point A bail out ... hop in a tank shoot some people, jump on a jeep and then dirve to point b and do it all over again. Think about how much effort would have to be put in to create a game that would let you do all those things, and still have that realisic feel that GR has. Yeah you can do it in BF and some other games ... but why take all that time in creating movement models, phyics and what not like they have allready done with GR now and then throw in a couple of arcady vehicles? No offense I dont want my GR like that I think most fans would agree. Yes its just a game and no its not that realistic,, its a game but it does have that feel and adding all that stuff would IMO ruin that feel. These guys are supposed to be a light infantry group.... the whole Rambo idea that a SF infantry man can drive a tank, fly a helo or an aircraft is .. um to say the least a little far fetched. If I want to fly I look to a couple of modern jet fighter flight sims .. I sure .. sure dont want the flight models of BF or something like that in my GR
  12. Yeah I dont care that much for graphics anymore either ... they have reached a point that is all pretty good to me I am more concerned with gameplay. Raven Shield is a wonderfull LOOKING game.. graphics in it are truly awsome. It plays like a warped violin in the hands of a two year old though. I would take a lil less in the world of graphics if the game played good. You know i just watched a game be released with basicly no bugs .. there is some community outcry about a feature or two but bugs... I haven't see one yet. That more than anything is what I want to see from Ubi and GR@ a bug free game or as nearly as they can make it so.
  13. I dont have the figures but was GR THAT big of a seller on Xbox? In comparison to other games? Just curious?
  14. I dont think that the Unreal engine can do GR I agree that it looks great, but I think the scale of the game is just too big. The rumblings I have heard about Far Cry .. the maps and things are huge .. maybe thats an option .. I think we just all have to be patient and wait.
  15. Anytime Trust me I am looking forward to this one as much as anyone. I subscribe to 3 gamming mags well 2 currently and should be getting my third one with my new Alienware that should be here next week. As soon as I hear something else I will let ya know.
  16. Well I was going to post a pic of the entire article, but well ...... by the time I got it big enough so that you could clearly make out what it says the file was so huge, that I couldn't host it. The mention of GR2 is on page 3 in the "Letter from the Editor" He is speaking of the games that should have been in thier top 10 list but due to a lack of information or delays were not in it. The relevant portion of the article: "...Follow-up and franchise extensions play a significant part in our list, with new properties increasingly difficult to sell to publishers trying to find a profit in every release. We expect to soon have news of a sequel to our former Game of the Year, Ghost Recon..." I danged sure hope that means what I think it does .. I know it's not much .. but in a community that is as starving as badly as we are for information its a three course meal. Keep your fingers crossed. EDIT: Edited for puncuation TWICE
  17. Save your money I will post the article later tonight ... its a really really quick mention of the game on page one or two
  18. Um guys ......... Ghost Recon 2 is actually mentioned in passing again this month in PC Gammer in an editorial about thier article on the upcomming top 10 games of 2004. In it the editor makes a very brief statement about the game. In so many words (cause I am to lazy rignt now to get up and go get the mag to quote it) They are expecting information from Ubi on Ghost Recon 2, the follow up to thier former game of the year, shortly. I dont know if its my eagerness to get my hands on this game but that is only good news to me.
  19. Oh I dont disagree that it would be usefull ........ but I havent heard anyone say (other than myself) on what thier opinion is on how such items would effect gameplay .. especially in the Adverserial games. Now its my understanding that many here are Coop players and thats cool if I am wrong .. well wont be the first time .. nothing wrong either way .. Coop is just not MY cup of tea. But honestly don't you think that kit items such as these would greatly increase camping .. and I dont mean the advance into the map and set an ambush at a crossing .. ect... thats not what I am talking about I am talking about the move 3 feet from the spawn and camp. those kinds of things would only encourage that type of stuff. And discourage players from activly "patroling" a map simply because there are mines everywhere. What skill would there be in a game in getting kills with mines? Cant you see tons of teams just setting out mines and hiding behind them? Immagine the Adverserial game and the inclusion of mines ... how long would you play it. Do they have them in real life .. yes. That goes without saying. Could you make good use of them again I agree, but like I said at some point you have to decide what exactly is the best thing for the game, and mines I dont think are it.
  20. Wow .. your version and my version are totaly and completly different .. interesting
  21. Dude whats up with all this noob stuff? What cause someone has a problem with something that you like all of a sudden they are a noob? Give me a break. Lighten up a lil bit. . I have not said anywhere that sensors were a bad thing, everything is good in moderation Like I said IMO anytype of sensor actived or rather proximity mines is a bad idea and would greatly effect gameplay. Now thats just my opinion kind of like needing things from metal gear solid is your opinion. Both are different ... no biggie .. no need in name calling. As I said earlier I have logged quite a bit of time playing this game. From the time the demo came out untill sortly after I.T. was in full swing. Its about all I or for that matter anyone in my clan did. I would like to think we were pretty decent. Now I dont tell ya all that to rub you calling me a noob ( or anyone else for that matter )in your face ... its to show you that I have had some little bit of experiance in the game. Prior to Island thunder there was a definate sacrifice that had to be made by a team or a player to take sensors. Instead of using an OICW and sensors you had that "all powerfull" "uber weapon" the MP5. It, again IMO forced team play on people. Now I dont know about you but seeing 3 guys on your sensor and all you have to shoot is an MP5 ALWAYS brought to mind the sacrifice that you had to make taking sensors. I.T. changed that. It encouraged guys to set out a couple of sensors and set. I have never been a fan of the ###### rush but at the same time I have had a huge disdain for someone hiding in an area surrounded by sensors. Once the inclusion of that many sensor kits was out there that was all we saw. Again different strokes for different folks, but I think everyone will say that it changed the way the game was played. I always found it interesting that seemingly that was about the time that the numbers of players started to drop ... ladders started to fold ect... seems to me that the two were conected, now they may not have been but surely the appearance is there. Now I went over all of that again to show what a simple change can do to gameplay. The addition of all the sensors changed the way the game was played and IS played still by some diehard fans still. Like I said earlier I have heard the kit restriction thing .. sensors were never a bad thing, not at all but thier lack of balance after IT was. Now honestly what happens if you add sensor activated mines to this game? Does it encourage the guy setting in a closet waiting for you to walk by his mine? Exactly how much skill does it take to get that kill? You know honestly I can see where it might be funny the first time or two .. but it would quickly lose its luster very quickly IMO. Yes IRL there are absolutly TONS of mines activated in all kinds of ways but at some point you have to decide that yes these things are in existance but will they add to the fun and gameplay. Now my opinion is that they will take away from it. Obviously yours is a different one. Thats OK ... no need for all the hositlity... IMHO sensor mines are a really really bad idea and would encourage teams and players to camp behind thier wall of mines and that more than anything is what worries me about the inclusion of those kinds of things.
  22. Have you played RvS .. specially in its first release .. with the ret bloom and recoil? It was horrible.... (still is but that is another matter )
  23. You may have a valid point, just wasnt my experiance. Again I dont and didnt play Coop, muchless the single player campaign. Just not my favorite thing to do. And who said that we did the same thing all the time? and could not adapt? In honstey our maps were more ... I dont know labeled more than anything else, if that makes sense? And things games and tactics were adjusted on the fly. But when for example I said X and Y you guys deny them the road and deadmans hill, they knew EXACTLY what I was talking about. Again we pretty much only played only on ladders spent tons of time going over maps to familiarize ourselves with them. Playing with new guys ... well that came in practice sessions and were with guys that in reality had been playing on our server quite some time before they were put on comms with us. In Coop I always got the impression that the AI enemy was almost always in the same position anyways... play the map one time successfully and your pretty well done.
  24. I wouldn't like that. It takes some of teh surprize out of the game and can reveal some teams stratigies. Espcially in match play. If there was a way you could see what the guys on your team only, I would like that ... and I think no one would have a problem with that. As for the sand table, guys that are playing together should have the maps and ideas of what they are going to be doing anyways. At least we always did. Some of them are posted on our private forums still. Some things I would like to see, the ability for the host to "lock" a team. The ability of a host to assign people to teams. Ubi has "moved" the server interface from a game where the Host is playing as well to dedicated servers, but they need IMO to add some of the options that were available in some of thier past games. R6 RS UO had what was to me a wonderfull server interface. GR's was a step back from that somewhat. RvS is a total pain .. I would like to see them give us back some options as people are logged into servers as admins.
×
×
  • Create New...