FA sear Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Hey all, just wanted to see if I could give my perspective on all of this. For starters I loved [GR]. Despite all of the faults and issues, it was a good game in its time. I liked GRIT, but really wished that they would have addressed some of the problems of [GR] (which they did not) and to add insult to injury they didn't give Xobx owners Jungle Storm. I'm still bitter about that one. I ran JS on my friend's PS2, and the maps and missions were nothing short of awesome! Although GRIT is no worse than [GR], it was disappointing to me because of these issues. GR2 was the pits. The two issues that killed it for me was the linear maps, and enemy AI that "pop up" right before your eyes, it seems that all the NK's have trained at the David Copperfield's school of magic.. Witnessing a tank spawn on the Dam map really killed this game for me. Squad was shrunk to 4, you couldn't split them up, no buildings to enter, etc..... Summit Strike was almost everything that GR2 should have been. It addressed the two major issues that I had with GR2, being the linear maps, and the AI that pop up out of nowhere. Nice game, now only if it would stop corrupting my [GR] campaign. Never could figure out that one, so I reluctantly sold it. Either way SS was a hugh step in the right direction, and objectively speaking in terms of quality it exceeds [GR], as the night vision has been finally improved, lateral motion is finally addressed, etc... However, I still like [GR] the most. Can't get over the two separate squads, more friendly AI, buildings to enter, etc... If GRAW for the Xbox 360 continues in this direction, it should be a huge GR success story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoolabs Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 speaking in terms of multiplayer, according to few hundred people that I play with on a ladder site, GR2 and SS were huge dissapointments in terms of gameplay. The bullet lag, the bad hit detection and spraying that goes on in GR2, the interjection of OTS and generally faster paced more arcadey feel. Pretty much everyone I have played with and talked to who loved the first games([GR] and GRIT) feels let down by the direction the series has gone, and has been aching for a return to the original feel of the first game. The 1 shot kills, the slower pace, the much better ballistics modeling and hit detection. FP view without the OTS seeing around and over objects problems and controversy. Even the maps were better(Farm, Night Docks, Airbase, Embassy, Vilnius, Day Docks, Night and Day castle). SS was slightly better than GR2, but the bullet lag was still there as well as OTS unbalanced play and so much spraying and strafing back and forth getting lucky kills. You could never do this in [GR] or GRIT, cause the ballistcs/reticlue/hit detection system was light years better. Graphically ? of course the newer games look great, but even if a turd comes out looking like a rose, it still smells like poop. In terms of Animations, I actually loved the death animations and other animations of [GR] and GRIT. All in all, I feel like they really had a very unique, and addictive thing going with the original [GR] engine. If only they could have simply built on that and refined it, instead of moving to a whole new engine and feel, they would have won the hearts and minds of fans both new and old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the.ronin Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 No squads = lameness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FA sear Posted January 19, 2006 Author Share Posted January 19, 2006 Even the maps were better(Farm, Night Docks, Airbase, Embassy, Vilnius, Day Docks, Night and Day castle). ← I did like the maps of [GR] too. Ironically, the PS2 version got the best maps. I have an Xbox, but the only other person I know that games has a PS2. In the PS2 version you can go into the tower on airbase and the building next to it. The interiors are pretty complex with multiple rooms with fully furnished offices, and you can go all the way up the control tower. In the night docks map the building in the middle of the map does not just consist of hallways like the Xbox version. There are multiple offices that are again fully furnished. Of course there is also the Jungle Storm campaign which had some of the best maps and missions in the entire GR series, and the PS2 version also allows you to run coop on all of the maps that seem to be online only in the Xbox version. The JS series has one mission in an abandoned harbor that would have been really nice on the Xbox. It also has missions in a railway station, a railroad junction going through a jungle, a river winding through a canyon, an archeological dig site, one with high mountain cliffs, a prison, and one real sweet one that takes place in a village that has a mansion overlooking the village on a high cliff, with crop fields further down, and numerous caves that go through the clif walls. I would have much rather had these maps than the Desert Siege missions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janie42 Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 @jchung & Zoolabs, Good commentaries... helpful... Video clips/trailers aside, I've never seen any GR game on a RL console, so I'd no idea of these differences you discuss, or even that all platforms did not include basically the same maps (with consolers getting more maps whereas PC'ers got mod tools - yahoo!). All I knew before was that it seems many feel console gameplay is more arcadish, so your posts are really informative! Tks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiolab Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 the pc version of [GR] was far superior to the console versions but and this is a big but the xbox was greatly playable on xboxlive and still is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FA sear Posted January 26, 2006 Author Share Posted January 26, 2006 I heard from others that have both versions that they are pretty much the same, except that the PC version has more destructible environments, and you can split your squad up into three, with any configuration you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the.ronin Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 I heard from others that have both versions that they are pretty much the same, except that the PC version has more destructible environments, and you can split your squad up into three, with any configuration you want. ← Pretty much the same? Squad control makes all the difference in the world, in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FA sear Posted January 26, 2006 Author Share Posted January 26, 2006 I heard from others that have both versions that they are pretty much the same, except that the PC version has more destructible environments, and you can split your squad up into three, with any configuration you want. ← Pretty much the same? Squad control makes all the difference in the world, in my opinion. ← I won't disagree with that one. What about the rest of the game? Are the AI better? Are the graphics superior? Are the maps different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.