Jump to content
Ghost Recon.net Forums

Recommended Posts

Better looking in some regards, a lot uglier in others; GRAW feels an awful lot like Close Combat: First To Fight to me (though perhaps less inspired), and even has some similar aesthetic treatments...

I don't have anything but the GRAW demo to go on, but there seems to be nearly unanimous frustration and agreement that GRAW lacks the depth, sophistocation, and options Ghost Recon still offers.

GRAW is a nice, but feels like it might well be a very disposable game, lacking in depth and replayability; the game-play just is just too arcade and deathmath centric compared to the stealthy, atmospheric, nonlinear, varied, tactical and epic play of Ghost Recon.

Mods could easily be the answer; Ghost Recon had a slew of mods and people still purchased the expansions, and would probably still buy a retro expansion in mass for the old engine if Ubi made one.

Ghost Recon still stands unsurpassed; I hope GRIN will favor the Ghost Recon audience and weigh who's priorities really sell and sustain their game when it comes time to deciding what to offer in the way patches, expansions, and especially Mod support for GRAW...

:o

Edited by Waika
Link to post
Share on other sites

Close Combat: FTF is uglier in EVERY way. I think that your squad on FTF works much better than on GR:AW though: They stay close and do that 360 cover thing nicely when you're moving. The only thing FTF does better than GR:AW is squad movement, but GR:AW does everything else better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, well if you crank Close Combat with 16x AA and ASF it looks petty crisp... But I was speaking more to the 'feel' of the game, i.e. GRAW feels more like FTF then Ghost Recon (to me)...

But if you want to pick nits; I think you can match FTF and GRAW wart for wart in both aesthetic eye sores and game-play turds -- some won't bother one player as much as anoter, but there are plenty stinkey stuf in both games to go around the house at least twice. I'm not saying FTF is a better game, just that I'm surprised how unoriginal GRAW is.

To be fair I really have to see the full game -- but taking the word of those that have, and what I see in the demo; what I said in the topic post seems true for a lot of Ghost Recon Fans...

:unsure:

Edited by Waika
Link to post
Share on other sites
...but there seems to be nearly unanimous frustration and agreement that GRAW lacks the depth, sophistocation, and options Ghost Recon still offers.

.... lacking in depth and replayability; the game-play just is just too arcade and deathmath centric compared to the stealthy, atmospheric, nonlinear, varied, tactical and epic play of Ghost Recon.

I'm obviously playing a different version of GRAW to you then.... for SP anyway, GRAW offers far more depth, more replayability and better tactical squad play than GR1. This is just my opinion, of course.

I guess I'm just lucky that GRAW delivers exactly the kind of gameplay I was hoping for. Others seem to be have hoping for something different... and I'm sorry that they didn't get what they wanted. Me, I'm delighted with what GRAW offers :)

Edit: I've not tried the MP side of things yet, so my comments are only about the SP campaign. Many people these days don't appear bothered with SP at all, so it wouldn't matter how good a job GRIN did with that they will be disappointed until the MP side is fixed up.

Edited by Trident-za
Link to post
Share on other sites
Better looking in some regards, a lot uglier in others; GRAW feels an awful lot like Close Combat: First To Fight to me (though perhaps less inspired), and even has some similar aesthetic treatments...

I don't have anything but the GRAW demo to go on, but there seems to be nearly unanimous frustration and agreement that GRAW lacks the depth, sophistocation, and options Ghost Recon still offers.

GRAW is a nice, but feels like it might well be a very disposable game, lacking in depth and replayability; the game-play just is just too arcade and deathmath centric compared to the stealthy, atmospheric, nonlinear, varied, tactical and epic play of Ghost Recon.

Mods could easily be the answer; Ghost Recon had a slew of mods and people still purchased the expansions, and would probably still buy a retro expansion in mass for the old engine if Ubi made one.

Ghost Recon still stands unsurpassed; I hope GRIN will favor the Ghost Recon audience and weigh who's priorities really sell and sustain their game when it comes time to deciding what to offer in the way patches, expansions, and especially Mod support for GRAW...

:o

I'm sorry but I disagree with you on just about anything, first of all, first to fight was so much more run'n'gun than GR:AW will ever be, it was linear, run'n'gun'ish and it (but that is personal preferrence) looked like sh** (even with 1600x1200 4xFSAA and the works), GR:AW looks better and has way more mood in 800x600 with trilinear filtering :)

The tactical aspect of GR:AW is like, the mother of tactical games, when compared to FTF, and the comparison somewhat offends me :)

With that said, [GR] wasn't as tactical as GR:AW is, the fact that you could actually run'n'gun a lot more, and that you was playing a demi-god capable of soul switching with your teammates somewhat made it less "real" and the amazing recoil-less guns of [GR] was also had a big hand in making it run'n'gun.

But then again, it is all a matter of personal preference, to me GR:AW is everything I've been wanting for freggin years, it just needs some work on MP, which we all are pretty sure they're doing..

But I'm interested in what makes it "arcady" for you? and what makes it DM centric, we don't even have DM?

-Zor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Trident-za and Zorianarki, I feel that GRAW fulfilled all my dreams concerning tactical squad management and is truly a masterpiece. Close combat FtF felt nothing like this baby...But I really dont know about MP side of the game..because I only play SP and occasionally some LAN COOP.

me so happy :D:D:D:D:D

Edited by Boltic
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm embarrassed to say that I actually own CC:FTF. When I first cranked it up, I was shocked. I hadn't played such an amateurish, cartoonish, arcade-game in years. I didn't know whether to laugh or be offended.

I blew ~$35 on it. If you must see what the game is like, wait till goes into the bargain bin - which it probably already has. Consider yourself warned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Better looking in some regards, a lot uglier in others; GRAW feels an awful lot like Close Combat: First To Fight to me (though perhaps less inspired), and even has some similar aesthetic treatments...

I don't have anything but the GRAW demo to go on, but there seems to be nearly unanimous frustration and agreement that GRAW lacks the depth, sophistocation, and options Ghost Recon still offers.

GRAW is a nice, but feels like it might well be a very disposable game, lacking in depth and replayability; the game-play just is just too arcade and deathmath centric compared to the stealthy, atmospheric, nonlinear, varied, tactical and epic play of Ghost Recon.

Mods could easily be the answer; Ghost Recon had a slew of mods and people still purchased the expansions, and would probably still buy a retro expansion in mass for the old engine if Ubi made one.

Ghost Recon still stands unsurpassed; I hope GRIN will favor the Ghost Recon audience and weigh who's priorities really sell and sustain their game when it comes time to deciding what to offer in the way patches, expansions, and especially Mod support for GRAW...

:o

I've played through GR1 and CCFTF, I already have several hours of GRAW SP under my belt and I have to say as respectfully as possible that The Force is not with Waika here.

CCFTF is a decent tac-shooter which got some form of official endorsement from the U.S. Marines but which was a little too tactical for run and gun gamers and not polished enough to break out of its small niche in the marketplace. I enjoyed both its SP and MP but gameplay-wise it is much narrower than either version of GR and its tactics were limited to linear squad maneuver and fire along prescribed routes versus multiple routes and approaches to targets on large maps with dense features and adaptable enemy and friendly AI. Let me give you an example, Waika: In the GRAW demo, there are two routes out of the courtyard in which your squad is dropped. One choice confronts you with a frontal assault on a bunch of rebels behind good cover. It's great fun and very winnable but dangerous and tactically unsound. The other allows the player to flank the same enemy position and not be so exposed to additional rebel patrols en route. In CCFTF you'd have one possibility or the other to make the best of but never, ever both.

CCFTF is a decent attempt at tactics but nothing can obscure the fact that it's on rails, just like FULL SPECTRUM WARRIOR. The most valid comparison between games should be between FSW (which I quite liked within its limitations) and CCFTF rather than GRAW and CCFTF, which is a bit like comparing a BMW with a Volkswagen. In my opinion, GRAW is not just ten times the game that CCFTF is, GRAW is also better than GR1, no mean feat. No other game, including GR1, has such amazingly adaptive friendly AI, squadmates who can look after themselves under fire and not be babysat. You cannot get the best out of GRAW without understanding the squad AI and how it works; this requires a certain adjustment in playing style for which a lot of GR1's fans were unprepared. Graphically, GRAW looks better on 400 x800 than CCFTF looks at 1200 x 1600, they are two different generations of technlogy; GRAW is a much more expensively produced game and it shows.

I'm sorry about the long reply, but in my opinion, the best tac-shooters of the last couple of years have been GRAW and BROTHERS IN ARMS - EARNED IN BLOOD. To compare GRAW to CCFTF, which I'm not bashing, I liked it, is like putting a good high school baseball team up against a major league team and expecting it to stand some chance.

Edited by Bahger
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever started this thread has got it wrong.

This version of GR is twice as good as Original GR for gameplay tactics and realism.

The SP Team AI are good, but it takes a little time to work out how to place them properly, they dont stay tight like FSW and I think Close Combat works the same way - as a tight 4 man unit. But this is GR, and personally I want to be able to break my squad up and send them off to flank a position. Thats how it was in [GR], and thats how I want it now.

Once I tried COOP mission in the demo with 3 or 4 others I was hooked.

Again, this is way better then GR ever was, and a lot more realistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This game is far tactical and has a much more impressive single player campaign than GR 1. The graphics in GRAW are def one of the best I've seen yet on the PC.

Check some of these screens from other maps:

Make sure you maximize them to their proper resolution!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v141/who...18-26-37-45.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v141/who...19-19-54-50.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v141/who...01-42-47-21.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v141/who...21-32-23-48.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v141/who...18-51-24-82.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v141/who...03-20-24-25.jpg

The outdoor lighting to me looks far more better than what I have seen from other games so far.

Edited by whoa182
Link to post
Share on other sites
there seems to be nearly unanimous frustration and agreement that GRAW lacks the depth, sophistocation, and options Ghost Recon still offers.

Good God, people. A lot of people bitching doesn't = consensus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

GR:AW may not offer a true robust CO-OP or a Modding Tool yet. Sure it may be flawed and perhaps it was rushed out by UBI in the end. With that said at least what I mentioned was even discussed by Bo, in some of his GR:AW posts.

But to compare GR:AW to First to Flop is just out right insulting! Unlike First to Flop, GR:AW will actually be patched and has a development team that is in this for the long haul.

What's next, is someone going to compare GR:AW to the dreaded UBI flop? The one that starts with "L"?

I hope not :g_guns:

silent_op

Link to post
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.

×
×
  • Create New...