New GR 3 movie

[Kurtz]

http://www.3dgamers.com/games/ghostrecon3/downloads/

[walnut]

http://www.3dgamers.com/games/ghostrecon3/downloads/

←

Unimpressed. Engine looks fantastic... implementation of the license, on the other hand, doesn't look promising at all.

That's just my $0.02.

Enjoying the hell out of BF2, however....

[Chems]

Id rather eat glass.

[Poita]

eh,

enjoying BF2. Are you 5 years old?

Take out the red and green halos from GR3 and it could be as classic a game as GR1 was.

But what a piece of crap BF2 is.

I'm sure the devs thought 'airstrikes/artillery strikes' would be a 'cool feature' for the commanders but being taken out by shells from the sky every few minutes loses the wow factor real soon.

The games self professed 'Rock/paper/scissors' gameplay is just simplistic. But worst of all is the level design and game play style that 'ensures' that you will constantly be dying. Even when i got a 'top player' mention all that means is that i killed more times than i died. there is just no skill factor in the game and there is certainly no strategy or any other kind of intelligence factor.

I'm not even that graphically impressed with BF2. I think Joint ops was as good looking and as good gameplay and that lasted only a month or so too.

[pz3]

you can take out thoe arty and uavs and supplies drops with demo packs.

but its almost worthless as they can be repaired pretty quick

[walnut]

eh,

enjoying BF2. Are you 5 years old?

That's really not necessary, but I'll challenge your comment with a response:

I'm 40, and I don't feel like I'm getting stroked when I play Battlefield 2, because it's unsurprisingly similar to the original game. Go figure. I knew full well what I was getting into when I picked it up, and it plays as advertised.

GR3 on the otherhand isn't looking to be the tac-sim game one might expect, having been a loyal fan for going on 4 years now.

Take out the red and green halos from GR3 and it could be as classic a game as GR1 was.

I find this to be untrue, but it's simply my opinion. GR3 is looking a little too Buck Rogers for my liking, and honestly, "the dramatic effect" of the talking heads, the over-the-top warrior of the future stuff, and the fact that the game will most probably be limited to playing one character, have all really killed it for me.

But what a piece of crap BF2 is.

I'm sure the devs thought 'airstrikes/artillery strikes' would be a 'cool feature' for the commanders but being taken out by shells from the sky every few minutes loses the wow factor real soon.

  The games self professed 'Rock/paper/scissors' gameplay is just simplistic. But worst of all is the level design and game play style that 'ensures' that you will constantly be dying. Even when i got a 'top player' mention all that means is that i killed more times than i died. there is just no skill factor in the game and there is certainly no strategy or any other kind of intelligence factor.

  I'm not even that graphically impressed with BF2. I think Joint ops was as good looking and as good gameplay and that lasted only a month or so too.

I disagree. It's fun. It's a game, and it's a fun game, no matter how "simplistic" it is.

For the size of the maps, and the draw distance, the game engine is a thing of wonder. I think they've done an amazing job with the graphics, and the maps are very richly detailed... it's not as easy as one might think to develop a capable, modern game engine these days. I applaud Dice... and I really like how they're balanced "realism" with gameplay.

But no, it's no replacement for a GR1 sequel, that's for sure. But I already said I was unhopeful from the start.

Edited June 28, 2005 by walnut

[jpp]

http://www.justpressplay.net/viewdownload.php?id=40

mirror of the movie for those interested

[Zantar45]

Graphics still look good... too bad nothing really new was shown.

[GRT]

This should be over at GR3 console section. Since it looks like theres 3rd person and ubi said pc wont have 3rd person.

[Poita]

Walnut,

i applaud your reply.

I admit my first comment was a bit chilish.

Even though we dissagree about BF2 it's very nice to see someone who can post a lucid and reasoned response to a challenge. I wish all forums had posters of your calibur.

He he on side note, i'm 40 also.

I really think that if BF2 could have a mod that simply removed the medics, art strikes, vehicles and comander feature it could be a fantastic Gr like game. I love the 203 on single shot. It's balanced perfectly. (the the nades seems to be almost totally ineffective)

[Chems]

In a game, simplicity is often best, with BF2 you know what your getting, I persoanlly reallly enjoy Americas Army a good cross between a GR and BF2 type game. Sometimes you just fancy some fast pasted action.

[Kurtz]

I think the movie is a 360 movie, not a pc movie. Movies do not demonstrate depth of gameplay, which may or may not be there, they are really only good at showing the graphical elements. Movies always show furious firefights, which are an essential element of any shooter. You rarely see vids of the stealthy aspect of shooters.

To guage the depth of the game, you need to read hands on articles or wait for a demo. I would also be wise to heed my own advice, hence I would never have bought BIA.

[walnut]

Walnut,

i applaud your reply.

I admit my first comment was a bit chilish. 

Even though we dissagree about BF2 it's very nice to see someone who can post a lucid and reasoned response to a challenge. I wish all forums had posters of your calibur.

  He he on side note, i'm 40 also.

  I really think that if BF2 could have a mod that simply removed the medics, art strikes, vehicles and comander feature it could be a fantastic Gr like game. I love the 203 on single shot. It's balanced perfectly. (the the nades seems to be almost totally ineffective)

You also have to understand that my gaming conquests for the past six months have inolved long hours of galloping around Azeroth, questing for the secret recipe to make Resplendant Spandex Leggings of the Wombat. While I was leveling the most dashing restoration spec'd druid in the kingdom, I gave little thought to realism or IP integrity, so BF2 is a nice segway for me back to the FPS genre.

On another topic, there's two new Q & A's on the game,

here at ubi uk and here at computer and video games.

There's such divergent messages they're putting out. The trailers say "great looking action game for 10 year olds" while the developers say something completely different in their interviews. For instance, it'd be nice if they showed us this tactical map in the trailers.... maybe they could finally banish the marketing machine that ate my copy of GR2 for PC.

[Militiaman]

The Ghost Recon III movie has great graphics, but why don't the game makers study real military tactics? The Ghosts hang far too close together and they don't use their sights on their carbines. The acting is also quite cheesy. Bottomline, they just don't act like Special Forces soldiers.

I really also don't think that all the equipment they have in the movie will be in the field by 2013 (I know they wouldn't be using the XM-8 with the pathetic 12.5 inch barrels).

They do look like soldiers from a Buck Rogers television show.

Ghost Recon III doesn't impress me.

Edited June 29, 2005 by Militiaman

[Militiaman]

I personally reallly enjoy Americas Army a good cross between a Ghost Recon and BattleField 2 type game. Sometimes you just fancy some fast pasted action.

←

America's Army is a pretty good video game. I don't play it anymore because I like single player and multiplayer co-op missions more than player versus player. There are four things that could use improvement on America's Army:

1) Single Player Missions

2) More zoom when using the rifles with iron sights

3) Soldiers move too fast at a walking pace. Slow them down to about half speed when walking

4) M-16 and AK-74 Rifles don't do enough damage. 5.56 x 45 and 5.45 x 39 rounds are quite deadly and will generally kill with one shot on a torso hit within 150 meters.