Jump to content

GRAW ...


Recommended Posts

One simple question(s) :

1. How much money do you think will be spent on GRAW via hardware alone?

2. Is GRAW a calculated product to match XB360 for sales, if not units sold but hardware units sold?

3. Is this a case that if PC sales are low (the age old console pc debate) and its built to an extent that hardware will fly of the shelves to work with it, this proves the above question?

4. What exactly was GRINS contract? Was it actualy to make the "next gen" GR or was it to capitalise on GR1 and make what they think is the next GR (not knocking that at all BTW maybe even GRIN team were not aware) and was there a clause in the contract to make sure the engine was tweaked in such a way that it bends people to upgrade (hence still refering to question 2)?

5. Is GRAW being used as a tool to revitalise the PC industry finacialy by hardware sales if nothig else?

6. Is "Next Gen" just a generalised term to basicly get the whole gamer crowed into putting money back into the industry and the last 5 questions are simply paranoia?

To Rocky and the rest of the mod crew, ive never realy posted anything in this manner before but I cant help myself but ask these questions ... feel free to lock it and ban me, but .... somethings "fishy" :yes: .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well all I hear is that this game is NOT next generation, but people should know that one of the main things that make it next generation is more demanding hardware!!! You can not have next generation and still make a game compatible with 5 year old hardware. I just don't understand what people think next generation means??? But the advanced physics, graphics, sound, animation, and interaction of GRAW is the very meaning of the word next generation to me!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ROFL, I don't see any of that.  Next gen is the Crysis engine.  The issue for better hardware comes from the game engine being unoptimized.  GRAW looks like RvS, but with much worse framerates.

You have'nt even seen the Crysis engine in real time so don't start comparing ANY game with it. And I grant you one thing right now you will eat your words about the problem being unoptimized hardware when you try and run Crysis!!! And GRAW might look outdated on your machine, but it looks like state of the art graphics on mine.

Edited by Squiggy_187
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ROFL, I don't see any of that.  Next gen is the Crysis engine.  The issue for better hardware comes from the game engine being unoptimized.  GRAW looks like RvS, but with much worse framerates.

It does look like RvS! but with better AI :shifty:

It could really use some more optimization I think, even thoe I can run the game pretty decently. This will probably come in a patch, or expansion. What I really don't like is the orange look of the Ghosts. And if you look at them real fast, they look like Halo characters :ph34r:

My 2 cents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wonder why people only post the bad things about graw... i guess there are very pesimistic people here.

prooved that when yall scared bo off...

i think graw is next-gen, it is just awesome, i like every aspect about it, if you are trying to play graw on the same pc you played gr with i suggest you build a new pc, i get really good framerates, i have an ati x1900xtx, everything on high, widescreen res 16:9, no jagged edges, everything is nice and well done, finally a game with amazing eye candy that has the game play and AI to go with it... stop complaining, if you dont like the game dont buy it, just go play some other game and stop wasting bandwidth on grnet

ps; this isnt directed @ threadstarter but more to the people comparing graw to rvs, i mean come on... thats like comparing a john deere tractor to a ferarri...

-tom

Edited by aCid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wonder why people only post the bad things about graw... i guess there are very pesimistic people here.

prooved that when yall scared bo off...

i think graw is next-gen, it is just awesome, i like every aspect about it, if you are trying to play graw on the same pc you played gr with i suggest you build a new pc, i get really good framerates, i have an ati x1900xtx, everything on high, widescreen res 16:9, no jagged edges, everything is nice and well done, finally a game with amazing eye candy that has the game play and AI to go with it... stop complaining, if you dont like the game dont buy it, just go play some other game and stop wasting bandwidth on grnet

ps; this isnt directed @ threadstarter but more to the people comparing graw to rvs, i mean come on... thats like comparing a john deere tracktor to a ferarri...

-tom

^^^AGREED^^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The term nextgen shouldn't really apply to any game currently released or slated for release that can run on currently avaliable hardware. The 360 is current generation technology as of the time it was avaliable on store shelves. Using the word and applying it to current games or hardware just makes you sound like a tosser IMHO.

The term 'nextgen' was born when people were referring to the 'next generation' of consoles and the sorts of game titles they would be capable of. Since then it appears to have *stuck* like so many bad terms and is casually tossed aorund by people who have no clue what they're actually talking about.

Live in the now - stop talking in the past tense.

Sorry for the rant, that term just grates on me because the way most people use it, it doesn't really *mean* anything.

Edited by Spike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consumer Demand is what drives the market.

In the months/years preceding GRAW people made massive posts here on what they want.More Realism is the main driving request from most people, graphics that are almost film like.

It's what we want to see, we want smarter itelligent AI, Reslistic Physics, lifelike graphics.

To get this requires massively superior hardware and bigger and bigger code to drive that hardware.Requiring more and more money to develop.

It's the escalting cycle of capitalism.

The real question is Why do we want it so much??

Is it because of the advertising and marketing that tells us we want it or are they just tapping into the desires of the consumer.A bit of both if you ask me ;)

Companies need money in order to progress their technologies/products, the consumer is the one with the money.They have to get you to part with your cash so that they can improve and grow themselves.To do that they need to produce something that You Want and convince you that You Want it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One simple question(s) :

1. How much money do you think will be spent on GRAW via hardware alone?

2. Is GRAW a calculated product to match XB360 for sales, if not units sold but hardware units sold?

3. Is this a case that if PC sales are low (the age old console pc debate) and its built to an extent that hardware will fly of the shelves to work with it,  this proves the above question?

4. What exactly was GRINS contract? Was it actualy to make the "next gen" GR or was it to capitalise on GR1 and make what they think is the next GR (not knocking that at all BTW maybe even GRIN team were not aware) and was there a clause in the contract to make sure the engine was tweaked in such a way that it bends people to upgrade (hence still refering to question 2)?

5. Is GRAW being used as a tool to revitalise the PC industry finacialy by hardware sales if nothig else?

6. Is "Next Gen" just a generalised term to basicly get the whole gamer crowed into putting money back into the industry and the last 5 questions are simply paranoia?

To Rocky and the rest of the mod crew, ive never realy posted anything in this manner before but I cant help myself but ask these questions ... feel free to lock it and ban me, but .... somethings "fishy"  :yes: .

No offense, but I think you are a bit paranoid. :ph34r:

THere are very few games/companies that can literally effect the hardware market in such a way. Epic, Valve and id are about the only ones... possibly Crytek as well. Don't look too much into it. :thumbsup:

Next-Gen is great and all, but to something that truely drives hardware sales does so becuase there is a tangible and visual reason to do so. A game/engine that looks good but in all reality looks like anything else put out in the last 12 months doesn't drive HW sales because it runs "slow". People that buy new HW must have a justification for it.

-John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wonder why people only post the bad things about graw... i guess there are very pesimistic people here.

prooved that when yall scared bo off...

i think graw is next-gen, it is just awesome, i like every aspect about it, if you are trying to play graw on the same pc you played gr with i suggest you build a new pc, i get really good framerates, i have an ati x1900xtx, everything on high, widescreen res 16:9, no jagged edges, everything is nice and well done, finally a game with amazing eye candy that has the game play and AI to go with it... stop complaining, if you dont like the game dont buy it, just go play some other game and stop wasting bandwidth on grnet

ps; this isnt directed @ threadstarter but more to the people comparing graw to rvs, i mean come on... thats like comparing a john deere tractor to a ferarri...

-tom

I agree :thumbsup: I run the demo game without a problem and I have been saying the same thing to all my friends that cant play it... amazing eyecandy.All setting in GRAW demo are MAXed screen res set to 1280 x 1024 game is smooth and loads wonderfully.

Here is my setup in my sig.

That's not a very expensive computer to game :o= on.

Edited by Ikillintel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it very interesting that in the 3 years + there's been forum discussion about GR2 and GR:AW here, so many people said they'd be happy with a remake of the original GR with improved graphics and mod support. What we are getting is a richly detailed, and from what I've played so far in the demo, very good game that to me feels EXACTLY like the [Ghost Recon], with better control and better enemy AI than the original ever provided. Notice I said many people wanted "improved" graphics. Nobody, to my knowledge or memory, ever said it had to be photo-realistic or filmlike. Yet, now so many forum posters are complaining that the graphics aren't as pretty as the were expecting. To all of you, I say "Why?" Why, after years of begging and pleading for a realistic combat model and saying the most import aspect of the game is getting the gameplay "right", are you now choosing to focus on a lack of anti-aliasing and some jaggy edges to complain about how the developers got it wrong.

The graphics engine is on-par with Half-Life 2 and any other current game you choose to name, and better than many. It's not perfect, I'll grant you that, and probably in certain ways not as good as some of them. But since when has Ghost Recon been about state of the art graphics?

To everyone who is now upset over the graphics, keep this in mind: Every major game to come out in a while, from F.E.A.R. to Half-Life 2 to World of Warcraft required fixes in the video drivers to run optimally. These fixes have to come from the video hardware manufacturers, and always come about after the release of the game and the performance of the final code has been evaluated. This isn't a Grin issue, or a Ubisoft one. It's Nvidia and Ati, and I have no doubt they will be making adjustments to their drivers once the game is out. If you can't wait for that, and you choose to take the stance that some less-than-gorgeous graphics are going to ruin the game experience for you, then shame on you...where were your sensiblities back when GR2 PC got canned because we, WE, made it known we demanded gameplay over eye-candy?

To the forum admins, I apologize if this rant has gotten off topic. It's been burning me up since the complaints about the graphics started yesterday and I looked for suitable thread to post in. This one seemed best suited to it.

Edited by QB-Paladin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like the fact that my relatively brand new (Christmas '05) high-end PC runs this game like crap. I hope this changes because I had high hopes that this game is the next big thing in my gaming life. I hope those dreams aren't dashed. As for the hardware purchasing conspiracy, I can see the logic behind it, but I'm not sure if its exactly true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it very interesting that in the 3 years + there's been forum discussion about GR2 and GR:AW here, so many people said they'd be happy with a remake of the original GR with improved graphics and mod support. What we are getting is a richly detailed, and from what I've played so far in the demo, very good game that to me feels EXACTLY like the [Ghost Recon], with better control and better enemy AI than the original ever provided. Notice I said many people wanted "improved" graphics. Nobody, to my knowledge or memory, ever said it had to be photo-realistic or filmlike. Yet, now so many forum posters are complaining that the graphics aren't as pretty as the were expecting. To all of you, I say "Why?" Why, after years of begging and pleading for a realistic combat model and saying the most import aspect of the game is getting the gameplay "right", are you now choosing to focus on a lack of anti-aliasing and some jaggy edges to complain about how the developers got it wrong.

The graphics engine is on-par with Half-Life 2 and any other current game you choose to name, and better than many. It's not perfect, I'll grant you that, and probably in certain ways not as good as some of them. But since when has Ghost Recon been about state of the art graphics?

To everyone who is now upset over the graphics, keep this in mind: Every major game to come out in a while, from F.E.A.R. to Half-Life 2 to World of Warcraft required fixes in the video drivers to run optimally. These fixes have to come from the video hardware manufacturers, and always come about after the release of the game and the performance of the final code has been evaluated. This isn't a Grin issue, or a Ubisoft one. It's Nvidia and Ati, and I have no doubt they will be making adjustments to their drivers once the game is out. If you can't wait for that, and you choose to take the stance that some less-than-gorgeous graphics are going to ruin the game experience for you, then shame on you...where were your sensiblities back when GR2 PC got canned because we, WE, made it known we demanded gameplay over eye-candy?

To the forum admins, I apologize if this rant has gotten off topic. It's been burning me up since the complaints about the graphics started yesterday and I looked for suitable thread to post in. This one seemed best suited to it.

Good post. I agree with you :grin1:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No offense, but I think you are a bit paranoid. 

:D - Its certainly reads that way doesnt it.

Its all good on the GRAW front, I for one if you read other posts love it and its something im dying to get into more once I can sort out the eye candy side of my system (see im not saying im any different with needing to upgrade).

But .. no one realy looked at my questions and tried to answer any, most looked at it as "this doesnt look like it says good things so its bad" ... no, I post good things and the whole graphical level -> system required ratio didnt fully tally to me. So I was wondering about how this will help the industry, no one can say it wont effect it as it clearly does with all manner of games.

If patches come out and it was a tad / wee bit more scalable with the big jump of frame rate differences then good. I was suprised by some of the other cards that others have which to me are far better than mine and they run on 1024x768 etc which was very suprising indeed.

I think we are all entitled to have a say on something that means people will require to purchase more kit and lets face it new mobo's etc.

Also DO NOT have me down as a GRIN basher (if you thought that reading this) or aything remotely related to Bo's situation on here as that isnt where im coming from at all.

I guess my question that clearly wont get answered was - is it the fact that its 2006 so get a new system ... or is it that things do get capped/made to be less scalable to fit a certain range? Some stated GR1 was very happy to run on many varying systems, the power of things now and what people have better than my system and what you get visualy was my moment of - " :huh: ".

I dont have many "moments" on this forum, love the place ... but this was my "moment" .. dont wory I wont have any other ones :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it very interesting that in the 3 years + there's been forum discussion about GR2 and GR:AW here, so many people said they'd be happy with a remake of the original GR with improved graphics and mod support. What we are getting is a richly detailed, and from what I've played so far in the demo, very good game that to me feels EXACTLY like the [Ghost Recon], with better control and better enemy AI than the original ever provided. Notice I said many people wanted "improved" graphics. Nobody, to my knowledge or memory, ever said it had to be photo-realistic or filmlike. Yet, now so many forum posters are complaining that the graphics aren't as pretty as the were expecting. To all of you, I say "Why?" Why, after years of begging and pleading for a realistic combat model and saying the most import aspect of the game is getting the gameplay "right", are you now choosing to focus on a lack of anti-aliasing and some jaggy edges to complain about how the developers got it wrong.

The graphics engine is on-par with Half-Life 2 and any other current game you choose to name, and better than many. It's not perfect, I'll grant you that, and probably in certain ways not as good as some of them. But since when has Ghost Recon been about state of the art graphics?

To everyone who is now upset over the graphics, keep this in mind: Every major game to come out in a while, from F.E.A.R. to Half-Life 2 to World of Warcraft required fixes in the video drivers to run optimally. These fixes have to come from the video hardware manufacturers, and always come about after the release of the game and the performance of the final code has been evaluated. This isn't a Grin issue, or a Ubisoft one. It's Nvidia and Ati, and I have no doubt they will be making adjustments to their drivers once the game is out. If you can't wait for that, and you choose to take the stance that some less-than-gorgeous graphics are going to ruin the game experience for you, then shame on you...where were your sensiblities back when GR2 PC got canned because we, WE, made it known we demanded gameplay over eye-candy?

To the forum admins, I apologize if this rant has gotten off topic. It's been burning me up since the complaints about the graphics started yesterday and I looked for suitable thread to post in. This one seemed best suited to it.

:thumbsup: good post :)

I look that there're a lot of people just signed that 're talking only bad of GR:AW.

People never seen before, people who probably plays BF2...

That's all.

what wrong with bf2? i love play it all the time but i sitll love the demo and the gr series. people dont have to be locked into one series or another (To all peopole comeplaing about bf2 palyers :nono: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how anyone can say this is like RvS. This game rocks. The graphics are awesome and the game runs smoother than BF2. I think the deal is that most people have not upgraded their PC. Everyone wants a realistic game with this and that. Well a game like that takes up system resources.

My Specs:

FX-55

2 gigs OCZ 2-2-2-5

X850 XT PE

JMO,

RicRogue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well all I hear is that this game is NOT next generation, but people should know that one of the main things that make it next generation is more demanding hardware!!! You can not have next generation and still make a game compatible with 5 year old hardware. I just don't understand what people think next generation means??? But the advanced physics, graphics, sound, animation, and interaction of GRAW is the very meaning of the word next generation to me!!!

This is what is confusing to me. The game is certainly not "next generation". The diesel engine they are using is obviously dated and shows its age. But yet it is highly customized including adding the HDR effects and whatnot. But besides the HDR I can't understand why its demanding so much from the hardware. Visually there are already titles out there that look way better and are using brand new engines but don't drag down modern rigs the way this demo is doing.

Although the new nvidia drivers seem to have helped with the low framerates a bit.

And, has anyone gotten the HDR effect to really work? Its not for me I haven't seen any lens flare or stuff you might see in the HL2 loast coast demo. All I see is the orange and brown colored textures everywhere. Whats high tech about that? :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...