Poita

Wow, for a thread that was started in 2003, this really needs some activity. Insurgency feels like CS 2 to me. I like it but i think it's too focused on intense fire fights allll the time. If feels more frantic than even cs to me. I guess thats what it's like in Iraq now but im sure there is some skanking around and quiet times. I do like the mod but i cant see me playing it for a long peried of time. The mouse control is unwieldly but at least you can go prone and set up the tripod on the support guns which i like. Not bad at all for a first release. Wish it had some more open spaces though.

You know that side of RR Bridge, the other end from the cabin, where there is a small forest on the hill rise on one side of the road and scattered trees on the other side? Man I used to love times in [GR] in places like that in TDM, just finding a good shaded and concealed spot where i could chill and chat with my team mates and scan the forest across from me for enemy activity. Some say GR was a slow game and condusive to camping, well we didnt need constant run and gun action to feel tense and excited. The beauty of the game and the constant flow of adrenaline rather than an adrenaline rush is what i miss so much. No matter how many games try to capture the GR like tactics and movement etc, none have come even close to providing that deadly picknick of a game You'd thinka game like Armed Assault would with it's countrysidish feel but it doesnt come anywhere near. GR1 was something truly special. I hope blackfoot can capture what has been missing in modern games for a long time.

Yeah i should calm down. I know, but now and again I get all riled up. If he hand't mentioned hardcore i wouldnt have gone off like that ha ha. I gues when he mentioned no HUD and 1 shot is a kill I got jacked off cause it felt like he was masquerading it as a GR like game, getting the cred for part of it being like that while revealing that it was just another patornisingly forced and 'managed' experience. Well it's been half a decade since GR1, i guess something will come along that captures that feel some day. I just hope it's not too long.

One interesting point in the latest COD4 interview vid on gametrailers is that there will be a 'hardcore' mode where there will be no HUD, just a gun view and one bullet will result in a kill. I like the idea of that but at the same time i hate Alllllllll the COD interviews. Every damn thing that comes out of their mouth pretty much shows that they are not at all interested in createing a combat scenario in a world and just seeing what happens. Every thing is calculated, every tiny feature is implemented so get some very specific gameplay effect. I feel like vomiting when i hear the way they proudly anounce this as if it's a great thing. For example "oh how great it is that you can choose from the three modes of upgrades, one of them being that your bullets have more stopping power than normal bullets" W. . . T . . . F is that all about?????? I can understand if they let you be a faster reloader at the expense of running speed or such but things like the sopping power of a certiain calubur of round or the acuracy of your aim should not vary with the player. I feel like retching every time i hear a dev talk about 'unlockables' too. It shows how the game industry thinks of gamers. That they are all just a bunch of babies who need artificialy created rewards to give them a sense of accomplishment. Hey devs, how about you let me access all the gunsi paid for when bought the game and i get my sense of accomplishment from blowing the face off of the first guy i meet in an MP match eh? how would that be? OK, so started my rant with a positive. I like the idea of a hardcore mode but event he wayhe 'emphasised' one bullet one kill sounded like something being forced on the player. In GR1 it was 'usually' one round is a kill but i've been hit up to five times before i died in mp matches. God the patronising grin on that guys face made me sick. The game does look awesome and i hope the hardcore mode pushes a GR like experience but Hardcore shouild be a way of playing and not a forced gimick. here's hoping.

I guess the real reason it's being produced only on the 360 is that it targets the er target demography more acurately. Many PC gamers are a bit older then the idea 18-21 year olds that the army is interested in but a bigger percentage of console gamer are either that age or will be in a few years.

er, that'll work.

Nothing wrong with the console GRAW2 engine. It was always the 'implementation' and colour scheme of it that I didnt like as far asthe 360 goes. I find the PC GRAW enjine to be dull and a little cumbersome but the console one looks nice. If they used it and added GR like sensibilities it then it could be used to great effect. Them being Red Storm and the US Army probably wanting to go more realistic than the typical UBI game, it might be quite good, er, if it were on a PC that is.

I think GRAW and GRAW2 have a lot of good qualities (i'm more impressed with the sound than on any other game I've ever played) but, as good as GRAWAGE is I think most of us real GR lovers see it as GR in an alternate universe. Kind of something we can enjoy but never feel for as we feel/felt for GR. So in a way we are enjoying GRAW while deep down wishing still for a true sucessor to GR. There have been many hopeful but ultimatly dissapointing shooters that have come and gone. I"m alway hopeing that something will come along though that will grab me as GR did and though I do like GRAW 1 and (based on the demo) probably 2, they arn't it. I've just downloaded and watched a game preview from gametrailers.com and to my surprise it got my blood racing a bit. The reason I say surprise is because A: it's a sexbox 360 game (so unless it's made also for PC I'm out cause I refuse to play shooters with a controller) and B: it's 'Americas Army' called, 'Americans Army: TS' the 'TS' standing for 'True soldier'. Now, i've played AA before and though I like it, it falls into the category of one of those games that had promise as far as an 'as good or better than GR1 experience' yet failed to deliver. So why am I so excited by this game? First of all it's made by Red Storm and secondly it clearly doesn't use the same engine as the PC AA game. it looks really solid. Damn, there is even an opening scene that is very remniscient of 'Desert Siege: Oil Refinery' and even better, one of the last scenes is a dead ringer for the GR1 map 'Bridge' with the APC/tank rolling over the rickety old wooden bridge with forest behind it (although this one has a river below instead of a road). Ok, I know this isn't a GRAW2 specific post and not really even GR but in my opinion the trailer for this game looks more like a true Ghost Recon game than any I've since, well, Ghost Recon. Damn I hope they convert it for the PC. Be nice if someone could post some screen grabs of the shots that cunjure up the spirit of GR. You can find the trailer here: http://www.gametrailers.com/search.php?s=Americas+army%3A+TS [Moved to the existing 360:AA discussion thread]

The demo feels good so far. Some constructive critisism if it's ok. I have to say though that i'm not too keen the the maze like and claustrophibic style of this Ghosttown like map. I liked Ghost town in GR1, it had a few really nice open spaces. I feel like this map is designed to make almost every fire fight sudden and up close so as to force a feeling of action. I really, really want to experience some open ranges. A map like Stronghold in GR1 had some tight stuff around the compound and in the thick areas of trees and dry riverbed but it also had some really nice, hugely wide open spaces. Do all the maps in Graw 2 come down to tight, compact firefights or are there some that have a few wide open areas? Also, can i say, i find the change position functions a littel frustrating, as with GRAW1. You have to come to a total stop then wait a nanosecond to make sure you have stopped, then press crouch. You don't have to do that for dive or backslide as you know and sometimes you want to coordinate the stop/crouch but I end up just pressing crouch, half the time realising that it hasn't taken then haveing to press it again. Also, when prone on a slight incline, where and at what angle you can aim your gun is arbitrary. somtimes if you are too close to a wall or fence etc it de activates your gun view/use. These things are just little annoyances but impact the gameplay alot. Also, what is that red dot/circle that appears over the enemy when i put my iron sites on them? I don't want to be told when i'm aiming right. An anyone comment on these points. Looking forwad to getting the full game. And having some countryside TDM.

How come we can't set number of players when we host a server.

Let's get one confused point clear. People don't 'actually' want realism in their serious tac shooter games. True realism would bore them to death. What they want is a serious, yet still fun, version of realism. There is'nt a case of realism or not in this issue. It's more of an issue of how 'consequential' you want the game to be. Basically serious tac shooter fans like us [GR] crowd want a game that has a game world version of reality. But seeing as we are staring at a screen we aint gonna get actual reality so we need a game that takes into account that it's a game and we still wanna have fun yet we are adults and not even the childish adults that most game makers assume we are. We want cause and effect, action and consequence, reward and penalty etc. When i press the NV key for GRAW1 for example the nv is instantly on. In reality i would have to take a bit of time to lower the goggles and get them right and my eyes would need a bit of time to adjust. Most hardcore [GR] types would appreciate this time penalty before we had the effect of the NV. On the other hand an icon showing what your rounds remaing were and stance etc is not realistic as some other things arn't but we arn't anal about it so can accept some compromises. Switching characters is no less realistic than respawning is. When it comes to things like this i dont think we whould be demanding one or the other from the devs. We should be asking for a choice that can be set by the server host. If you demand one only then what you are basically doing is saying you want to be able to dictate how others 'should' be playing the game on their own server. Choice is the key here, let people themselves decide how they want to play.

I don't mind if they totally consoleise GRAW2 . . . . as long as they give us a second gameplay/graphics option. [GR] had an alternative mode called 'Arcade' and as far as i know no one choose to use it on the PC. Why do we have to rely on modders to get the version of the game we want? Even then there are somethings they don' have access to fix. Is it really so much extra work for GRIN to have a 'hardcore' gameplay/graphics option for us [GR] guys. The GRAW 1 ladders would be totally buzzing by now if GRAW1 had just a few differences that suited us [GR] guys. Instead what we got was a great looking game that made a quick kill in sales then dropped off quickly enough for GRAW2 to be a viable sales option just a year later. I've finally been playng GRAW1 and i'm extremely impressed by many features and it blows [GR] away in so many ways. I just doesnt nag at me to come back and have another play every day. I can leave it for many days without 'needing' to play it. As i said, it is great and considering it was GRIN's first big PC shooter they did an amazing job but a handful of things here and there have prevented it from being the adictive multi year ladder fest that [GR] was. The sad thing is that it's not like other shooters that fell wide of the mark in replacing [GR], it is only a few minor to medium things that could have been different for it to have been a true classic. Much work is lost for the want of a little more.

Rather than inventing new stuff such as stealth-o-meter (which i hope can be modded out as soon as possible) or weird new MP game types i hope they will focus on fixing things from GRAW1. The lack of responsive keys is the first thing to fix. The none sticky lean is great now but the fact that you have to come to a 100% stop before the game will 'allow' you to crouch is a big problem. It won't even let you press crouch and then do it when you stop so you have to press it then realise that you pressed it an instant too soon then press it again after you have stopped walking. Perfect the basics first GRIN. GRAW1 PC has reallly impressed me recently. GRAW 2 vids on the console look totally gorgious (apart from the onscreen info blizard crap). With nice rural maps and a smoother control system (lean while in prone please) GRAW2 could be great.

The more i play GRAW the more i appreciate it. At the same time though i'm often hit by the consolitus effects on it. The 'whooosh' sound as the bring the scope up. The very look of the sniper rifle and it's scope interface (what reason is there to give the distance in miles '&' KM except as an excuse to have more seemingly flashy date rippling on the screen). The soldier and team mates is even cartoonised a bit to lookk more like a console version of a soldier than a real one as seen in games such as GR1 & OpFlash. Lot's of other consolish details that annoy but the effects and look of the levels are very nice and the general game play is quite good. GRAW1 has the bones and even some of the flesh of a great serious shooter, all it needs is more freedom to get serious and I think GRIN could make GRAW2 ace . i just doubt they will have that freedom. If anything i think they will be under more pressure to consolise it even more.

Colin thank's for your answer and also for your patience and tollerance. I'm impressed by your civility. Ok i understand where you are coming from. I guess it's just so rare to come across someone with such an optimistic and positive attitude so i hope you understand why i wondered. I agree that there is some talent in GRIN. I hope they have enough freedom to de consolise GRAW2 down from GRAW1 PC and certainly the ever more console looking (though great looking) GRAW2.

Colin, you always seem to go into super positive MR enthusiasm mode when they are in the pre launch phase. You seem to partly promote good will about the UBI game and partly act as a dampener for any negative projections anyone has. Sorry, i don't mean to be slanderous or anything but i get a very strong feeling that you have professional ties to UBI in some way. It could be just taht you are a loyal supporter fan but your approach is way too consistent and although you have 'acknoledged' less than ideal aspects to the game at times the general flow and direction of all your input seems to amount to stealth promotion as it reads to me. Dude, are you one of those people who are contracted to engratiate yourself with product communities and build up good will from 'seemingly' the outside? If you are not then please don't get upset with my question but i often get the feeling we are being 'managed' by your approach to everything GRAW1 and GRAW2.

yea i read people ripping on steam sometimes but it's usually just a fashionable thing to rip on a huge company. At least with UBI people here give good reasons why they don't like them, same with microsoft. I was wary of steam at first but didn't want to wait for the boxed version of HL2 (i should have, it was boring). I'm glad i got steam though in the end, great value for money and it's performed flawlessly. I mean if someone like GRIN saved up some money and broke away from UBI then did a tac shooter of their own, dump the GR name and make their own IP then published it on steam. As long as it was what the hard core realism-yet-fun gamer wanted then i think it would sell well.

No matter what you think of ArmA there is one truly, fantastic and awe inspiring thing about it. and that is . . . . . . . The devs obviously don't give a flying poop bag what any publisher things, hopes, demands or or expects. BIS are gonna make the game they wanna make and publishers can kiss their butt as far as they are concerned. You got to respect them for that.

I believe Steam is a publisher of sorts and as far as i know they have zero input on what a game should be. They just look at the finished product and whack it on Steam if the dev and they can come to an arrangement that both are happy with. All that needs is for the devs to survive without an upfront payday until the game is finished and to somehow launch the game on Steam then use the first month revenue for marketing. Not the best launch strategy but at least it gives the dev total freedom from scum like UBI. Colin i don't mean to be rude but your totally concilliatory tone really makes me wonder if you are a paid UBI plant sometimes. Either that or such a fan of GRIN you see it as your job to mitigate any negativity at all. You seem to have a sophisticated way of recognising how much negativity there is and how far you can sway it back without goiong over breaking point and loosing cred. Sorry to sound accusing, i don't mean to but if you are not a plant then my question is 'don't you 'ever' just wanna rail on things rather than always tell everyong 'it's really not that bad'? Sure GRIN have talent. But that's not the same as judgement. I find it hard to trust that they will do they right thing with GRAW2 when they just decided one day 'hey, how about realeasing GRAW without TDM'. How much can they know or care what we want then they could come up with that gem. It's almost like, in response to the ghost recon classic campaign they decided to come up with a gaffe that was equal in imensity to the coke cola company cancelling coke for new coke.

Nice post. I think it sums up the [GR] players feelings exactly. I am finally playing GRAW and in a shoot em up kind of way am getting some fun out of it. I Even though it's a PC game it feels like a console game in some ways. The fat look of the soldiers and the weapons just not having that real, precision feel. Also I feel in open TDM serves though like i'm playing CS but on huge maps. At least CS has no respawns so despte being run and gun you have to be extremely careful. I don't know anything about the Blackfoot game or the other you mentioned but until something comes out that serves us [GR] lot i guess we will continue to try to extract as much fun as possible from the likes of GRAW. I must admit that even though i'm trying to 'get into' GRAW and have been at it for a week, when i heard about the Centcom mod yesterday i was ready to put GRAW aside for a month or so without too much pain. I think that if a bang up to date GR1 like game were to be released it would do very well, if they had a steady flow of expansion packs then they could continue to make money too. These days they do well protecting from piracy for online games so I think they might be pleasantly surprised at how much they can make without compromising to the conlole mentality. The games market is much bigger now than it was five years aso and can support both types. It''s only a matter of time until something comes out that will once again draw a clear line between console and PC type players.

Rocoafz you can just edit your post instead of reproducing the whole thing then adding number 11. I'd like to see a game type such as Counter Strike's 'bomb' or 'hostage rescue. . . . Here's the problem, no one wants to make them because they don't want to be accused of ripping CS off but so what as long as the game types theyselves are great and they are. Those game times are very very very good. They focus the play in a certain area instead of everyone running around all over at random. This causes more strategy and has a defininte objective. I also want more variety of weap0ns. I've only been playing a week and i'm surprised that there is only one sniper rifle. I'd like a surpressed SR25 and an M98. Also some other machine guns.

Basically i see GRAW as being far better than AA when it comes to urban combat and also desert gulch type places. AA is obviously gonna be the bushmaster. I find the AA demo very slugish, nice looking but feels just like OpFlash, not a bad thing. The gun view feels like struggling with a barge in water to move. I'll be playing them both but AA won't shine until over a year later when i have a much faster system.

I think a great strategy for them would be to cut GRAW up into two parts. Make the MP part seperate from the campaign and give it away for free like with FEAR or Return to Castle Wolfenstien (and in a way the way they gave away Hidden & Dangerous 1 just prior to its sequel). Then what they could do is have a huge amount of the PC playing community download it and have it for free with the option of buying, via download, the campaign for like $4.99. Also there would be a huge number of online players who could join in on the GRAW2 PC online games which would be good for the GRAW2 customers and many of the free users of GRAW1 might be inspired to buy GRAW2 when they maybe wouldn't have been otherwise. Not going to happen but I bet it would be cool.

Aborting participation or hosting an MP game should take you back to the server list and not the front end. I find the play movement mechanic a bit annoying. I don't like it that when i press crouch or prone nothing happens if i'm moving slowly. If i'm running i dive and if i'm standing still i'll lay down but if i'm creeping or walking just nothing happens. I have to first stop, give it a moment to register that i've stopped then press crouch or prone. I'm constantly pressing it and nothing happens. It's really annoying when the game judicates whether it wants to let me do something or not. Same for fireing. Once i'm weapons free i want to be able to fire no matter what motion, or position im in. Even if it results in my shooting myself in the foot or just spraying wildly with no hope of hitting anything. Again, it feels really annoying knowing that the game is adjudicating. The game knows i'm running so i shouldn't fire or i'm diving onto my belly so i should wait unti i'm settled etc . No, i want the freedom to fire even when i should'nt fire. I want the freedom to make that mistake, waste ammo, give my position away, injure myself even. It just really, really takes away from the imersion that i'm constantly being reminded that the game is being a nanny to me and only 'activating' its self when it decides thats the right time to be able to do such an action. Also, if i'm a soldier standing or whatever and i spot an enemy i think i could get down on my belly pretty darn quick even if i am holding a heavy weapon and wearinga heavy pack, gravity will do most of the work for me a lot quicker than the game allows. Getting back up i grant can be a bit slow. I miss the prone lean from GR1 and i'd like a double tap on the left/right key to roll away from danger. Finally for now, the hand grenade tossing action is strangely unstable. I've played paint ball and had to toss pain nades while under heavy fire and i admit it's very hard to get a good aim in such a hot zone but i don't think the arbitrary way the hand nade view waves all over is very well done. Let's just assume the trained soldier is skilled and cool under fire and let's just have it steady. ** oh and note to GRIN, i've only been playing GRAW for about a week and despite the few niggles above and a few others, don't think i'm negative in total ont he game. I'm really quite impressed with the graphics, some nice dx9 surfaces. I'd say the gameplay in SP is really awesome sometimes. I've had some totally intense moment with ai enemies coming at me and me taking them out while trying to manage my ammo cause they are comming through doorways just a few feet away from me and i can't afford the time to reload. Some really well done game design.

Yea i guess i haven't got around to considering it since i got my GRAW just today but the weapons list is pretty slim, although there seems to be just about every type i'd need. I don't see the hundreds of millions of options that was touted in the early days.