My comparison between GRAW and GR1

[buddhiraja73]

I will give my comparison between Graw and GR1 ( some gameplay and some SP/Co-op specific points as I don't play much TvT ). As the multiplayer part of the game is not finished yet, I think it would be better to compare that aspect after a couple of months if we want a fair comparison. I have found quite a few similarities, some improvements and some negatives. With so many negative comparisons being made between GR1 and Graw, I found it necessary to enumerate the points and make a balanced comparison.

SIMILARITIES

- Both these games have a certain tension about them. You don't know when the enemies are going to attack as they are quite sneaky and there are periods of tension-filled non-action. This is a very important gameplay aspect which makes this series so different from a COD or even a Lockdown.

- We can sneak up in both games and the enemies do not have super senses and do not know where we are automatically. The stealth element is present in both.

- The movement speeds and movement types are very similarly realistic in both games and this is a very important gameplay aspect even in PvP. This has been well done.

- The overhead tactical map gives a rare quality to both these games and makes both of them a "thinking man's shooter". Graw has succeeded in keeping this aspect true to GR1.

- The enemies can be killed with one shot.

- The maps are large and non-linear in both games.

- The sound is good in both games. I would say the weapon and bullet_ hit sounds are better in Graw and the environment sounds were better in GR1.

IMPROVEMENTS

- Effects and physics - Introduction of effects ( mainly bullet effects ) and physics has added a lot of realism and immersion to the firefights and explosions. This is perhaps one of the biggest factors that has created a difference of 'feel' between the two games and this difference is definitely for the better. This is one of the reasons why we will never have another GR1 again even if an exact remake is made using moden technology. The 'feel' will vary and the game will become more messy compared to GR1.

- The AI can be actually suppressed and they are self preserving. This is a quality that is very essential for a true tactical shooter and was something that GR1 lacked.

- Quick commands using cross-com - This is another feature that is very essential if we want a true tactical shooter and GR1 did not have.

- Firefights - They are much more realistic and immersive than GR1 and last longer, as they should.

- AI - GR1 had a good AI compared to other games at that time, but it was not the best. Graw has the best AI I have seen compared to its contemporary games -- so it is an improvement over GR1.

- Aiming using optical/iron sights, first person weapon view and body awareness - According to me this aspect is a huge improvement over GR1 and have been wonderfully done.

- Weapons customization - We really wanted this feature in GR1. How are we ignoring this feature, now that we have got it ?

- The animations are better in Graw and the added movements like diving/sliding for cover are realistic and helpful.

- We cannot switch charecters - I know that many GR1 fans will strongly disagree with me on this but my thinking is - in real life we cannot change from one person to another, so it is more realistic. Also, as we cannot do everything ourselves by switching charecters, so we have to actually make more tactical decisions and issue orders to our team. It has increased the tactical element.

- Graphics - The visual in Graw are better than GR1 when compared to the standard graphics at the time of release of each game. ( I am not making a straight comparison here as graphics are bound to improve with time ).

NEGATIVES

- 4 man co-op and only one team in SP - This is most probably an UBI decision and Grin perhaps has little to do with this but I don't like this aspect. Multiple teams and more players in Co-op make the game more tactical.

- TvT was more complete when GR1 came out and I feel for the 'TvT mainly' players who have to wait 3 months for their favourite game.

- GR1 also had more game modes at the time of release -- which adds to replability. I miss the 'firefight' mode.

- Linear mission structure- The objectives are given one by one and the missions feel linear - with too many triggering events. This cuts down on replayability and I was expecting an improvement in this department. The wonderful maps are underutilized as a result of this.

- Lack of rural maps - Rural maps gave a certain 'feel' to GR1 and I believe we would have heard less complaints about 'Graw is not GR1' if we had a nice mix of urban and rural maps.

- GR1 had better atmosphere and weather effects than Graw. This element is missing and Graw is not always very atmospheric. I hope this aspect improves.

UNDECIDED

- No limping/ affected aim - the reason why I don't know whether this is worse or not is because limping/ affected aim are not the only injury induced behavior. So, having only these two are perhaps as unrealistic as no injury. When someone is shot in the foot he may limp or maybe he will be unable to walk at all but still can shoot. Maybe he will be in pain and will just shout and call for his teammates ar call for backup. Similarly, someone shot in the arm might have a bad aim or he might not be able to shoot at all. Maybe he will be able to lift only a pistol r maybe he will just run away if he can. Unless we can have a completely realistic injury related behavior, just limping is also unrealistic and we might as well have no injury at all.

- The cross-com chatter - I don't know whether it is good or bad compared to GR1 but it definitely creates a difference in 'feel' between Graw and GR1.

- The Player/Ghosts do not die with one bullet. As this is a result of a better suit to be used in the future, I can't call it unrealistic and can't say whether it is good or bad.

I will add other points if I find any more. Please add your observations on this topic.

Edited June 30, 2006 by buddhiraja73

[BoGRIN]

Best post I've read in months.

This gives us a much better understanding on the way forward then the less informative comparisions of earlier.

Thanks

Bo

[Hockeystick]

Haha BO! Welcome back!

[buddhiraja73]

Best post I've read in months.

This gives us a much better understanding on the way forward then the less informative comparisions of earlier.

Thanks

Bo

Thanks Bo. Good to see you back in the forum. Most of us here missed your participation.

[yttocs1966]

Best post I've read in months.

This gives us a much better understanding on the way forward then the less informative comparisions of earlier.

Thanks

Bo

He's alive!!! Nice to see you back.

[Deosl]

Yeah, Bo posted, but let's stay on topic seeing as this is a good post by buddhiraja73.

Personally I tend to disagree with the switching of players. It does make it realistic that you're only one guy, but tacticly it makes you more static but you make more decisions as you only have 1 squad to controll 99% of the time.

I dunno, but the squad based system in yeh olden days with R6 & GR forced the maps to be non-linear since you had to have multiple routes for the teams. Maps in GRAW is good like you said, non-linear.

The "soul-jumping" gave you certain advantages like:

-more then 1 life

-change to another operative with different weapons

-change team to execute the other route

-You have to think for two teams & cordinate.

However both R6 & GR have moved away from the squad based system to the hero guy. It's a fact and I accept it, if I want squads I'll be yeh olden games. Basicly I prefer the squads over the hero, but I can't do much about it.

[buddhiraja73]

Personally I tend to disagree with the switching of players. It does make it realistic that you're only one guy, but tacticly it makes you more static but you make more decisions as you only have 1 squad to controll 99% of the time.

I dunno, but the squad based system in yeh olden days with R6 & GR forced the maps to be non-linear since you had to have multiple routes for the teams. Maps in GRAW is good like you said, non-linear.

The "soul-jumping" gave you certain advantages like:

-more then 1 life

-change to another operative with different weapons

-change team to execute the other route

-You have to think for two teams & cordinate.

However both R6 & GR have moved away from the squad based system to the hero guy. It's a fact and I accept it, if I want squads I'll be yeh olden games. Basicly I prefer the squads over the hero, but I can't do much about it.

Hi Deosl, if you read the list of negatives, the first point is about a single team of Ghosts and '4 man only' co-op, which I dislike ( So, we agree on that point ). I would personally like to control multiple teams but not switch charecters and I have explained the reasons why I prefer that, in my initial post. Regarding the point that you raised about using different weapons, I would much rather have an option of switching the primary weapon between me and another ghost, say the Sniper, by going near him and pressing a key. I personally don't like multiple lives as it reduces the tension.

Edited June 30, 2006 by buddhiraja73

[ROCO*AFZ*]

Very good post

[DisgruntledArchitect]

I agree with the OP for the most part, although I think the 'undecided' components would mostly fall into the negative category for me.

(-) The bullet hit reaction issue has major implications in PvP play, much more so than in Co-op or SP, and as someone else mentioned, to tout body awareness and then neglect any kind of mechanics for non-lethal damage is inconsistent.

(-) I find the AI much less useful, but not necessarily because of the AI itself, but because of the context it's within; the AI does not navigate corners very well, and because there is no ROE and the Ghosts cannot rely on stealth (nearly as much as in [GR]), the AI is often engaging enemies from uncovered positions. This exacerbates the issue of no "soul-switching" greatly. I can't rely on the AI to preserve itself, and I can't take over to use certain weapon systems for their intended purpose without directing the "less than I" AI into places it will likely get mowed down.

(+) I'd take GRAW's weapon system over [GR]'s any day of the week, and I also enjoy the iron sights and first-person weapon immensely. I do miss [GR]'s variety, however.

(?) I liked [GR]'s damage model, but I understand how GRAW's contributes to its gameplay. However, see the first item; shooting someone while running and having them kill you . . . thumbs down. And a twitch in your scope view doesn't rectify anything.

(+) Maps - I liked the variety of [GR], and I'd love to see some remade, but the enviroments in GRAW are truly impressive. Different game, different environment, which I'm OK with. Still, I will probably tire of Mexico city and yellow fairly quickly. I have faith in the modders on this one, however. Whether or not the modding community will be able to match the spatical complexity of the included maps remains to be seen, and it may not be necessary for other gamemodes.

(-) Story . . . God, please no. The webcams, the gruff commander, people calling Mitchell "son" and asking him to do "one last thing," the villain twirling his moustache and taunting you. Make it all go away. Please. [GR] had it right--a plausible scenario, replaceable characters, no fluff. The overarching storyline in GRAW is fluff; the game would not suffer one iota if you removed all the video feeds, conversations, and made it just about a squad of elite American soldiers defusing a crisis in Mexico city. The door of the Stryker opens, you get a quick brief on where you're going, what you're doing, the fireworks begin. The end of "fierce resistance" made me cringe, and not for the reasons probably intended.

(+) corners/sliding/movement bob - all sound improvements and well-implemented. Some people may not like them, but I did feel like [GR] moved smooth, perhaps a bit too much so. While it vexes me ingame, I like that a crouched walk is not perfectly level, etc.

(?) MP - Jury is out until the end of the summer, but I'll say this: If the United States can only provide its soldiers 9mm pistols, I think it's time to start trimming some Federal programs. Sorry Senators, we're going to have to sell some of the Nautilus machines in the Capitol building health club, Johnny needs a real gun.

[Hockeystick]

(-) Story . . . God, please no. The webcams, the gruff commander, people calling Mitchell "son" and asking him to do "one last thing," the villain twirling his moustache and taunting you. Make it all go away. Please. [GR] had it right--a plausible scenario, replaceable characters, no fluff. The overarching storyline in GRAW is fluff; the game would not suffer one iota if you removed all the video feeds, conversations, and made it just about a squad of elite American soldiers defusing a crisis in Mexico city. The door of the Stryker opens, you get a quick brief on where you're going, what you're doing, the fireworks begin. The end of "fierce resistance" made me cringe, and not for the reasons probably intended.

You are so right.

To bad GRIN didn't got free hans on the story. UBI's 'rescue the president... bla bla' is not the greatest story Maybe some modder can remove the video message's so that you can make up your own story.

[Enos Pork]

VERY good posting! I agree with most of it

- Both these games have a certain tension about them. You don't know when the enemies are going to attack as they are quite sneaky and there are periods of tension-filled non-action.

This me likey

Personally I'll wait until the coop patches comes out before I do my comparison.

Can't compare the two since the coop part isn't finished with necessary different game modes and server settings. (Tangohunt, Firefight, Respawn, modes for map change, Mitchel-dies-game-over etc etc.)

And welcome back Bo

[BarmyArmy]

good comparison between GR1 and GRAW.

Again this pretty much matches my opinion on the current differences.

Nice work buddiharja and architect, and nice to see that Grin at least still read the sensible posts.

(?) MP - Jury is out until the end of the summer, but I'll say this: If the United States can only provide its soldiers 9mm pistols, I think it's time to start trimming some Federal programs. Sorry Senators, we're going to have to sell some of the Nautilus machines in the Capitol building health club, Johnny needs a real gun.

Lool

BA

Current still playing lots of Dom and a bit of COOP, haven't gotten the hang of DM yet.

Looking forward to siege and hamburger, when they arrive.

Edited June 30, 2006 by BarmyArmy

[Hockeystick]

Mmm... hamburger

[Nemesis*]

Why not create a multi-poll asking pertainent questions & get the results rathr than reding over & over many of the same responses.

Example:

Comparing GR1 with GRAW please answer the following

Question 1 GR1 GRAW

Question 2 GR1 GRAW

Question 3 GR1 GRAW

etc etc etc

Then ther are constructive results that assist the developers & captures in a single topic all views, restrictive of ctiticism.

PS:0 Good analysis buddhiraja73

Edited June 30, 2006 by TRT_Nemesis

[FA sear]

This is a good thread. I would have put my last post in here if I had read this thread first.

Personally I'm not a big fan of ironsights. With optics that now offer 1.1X-4X magnification, ironsights are quickly becoming obsolete.

[pz3]

lol... im just reading the posts and im lik Grin logo... must be willie again.

oh snap its bo!

Back on topic thoe...

good post, it hits some of the major diffrences on the head.

Not like looters with the national gaurd during hurricanes thoe.

Edited June 30, 2006 by Prozac360

[IrishStout]

Very good thread and nice to see your back Bo.

I love GRAW and I find each time I play it I fiind new things I like about it that I like more and more. I am starting to get the "IT" back.

Tension ("IT") - GRAW vs GR1 - Almost a tie now, edget o GR1 (once more game modes are availble I truely think GRAW will have the edge)

The tension is there for sure in GRAW. Not so much in the CO-OP mode but in MP. Especially, if you do not run and gun and take things slow. There is nothing like being in a small zone in domination and knowing there is one other person there.. then you see the number increase to 2 or 3 more opponents. Knowing the number of baddies in the same area is a good thing.

CO-OP - GRAW vs GR1 - GR1 wins

I find the CO-OP mode is more of a trial and error type game play in GRAW. I hope they can change this in expansion packs or patches to come. Knowing where the enemy is going to be each time makes it feel very scripted and leaves no surprise and no "shock". I would like to see GRIN have the enemy take different routes or have different number of AI enemies in different of the map. Random spots. I also find there are large gaps of no enemy's. GR seemed to have more AI enemies.. once the BOOM mission came out in GR1 "WOW". Felt like a war.

Replays and learning tools - GRAW vs GR1 - GR1

I would like some sort of reply funtionality for no other reason then to see how I died and learn from my mistakes. See where others hide and what tatics they use.

Graphics Graw vs GR1 - GRAW

I use to play GR1 at 800X600 on purpose so teh jaggies don't both me one bit - hardly notice them actually. But the shadows, the lighting, the distruction of vehicles and what not look fantastic. I think this is just the tip of the iceberg.. look at what the modders did graphic wise for GR1 .. wait until they get a hold of GRAW.

Realism - GRAW vs GR1 - GRAW edges out GR1

Althought there are sometimes where I hit an enemy AI three or four times and he gets up. I find this to not be the case in MP. Maybe my aim is just better in MP but usually when I hit a guy in MP I do not look for him to be getting back up.

For some reason I never hear a nade hit the ground near me therefore I can never run from them. Not sure why but I find this frustrating.

The gun and aiming system seems to be better. I also like the fact that you can pick your kits.

MAPS - GRAW vs GR1 - Tie

The maps in GRAW look better and feel better (no glitching big bonus) but we just need more map types. Once this happens GRAW will have the win by a landslide.

Anyway, once again thanks and I hope I added a little bit more to the thread?

Don't lose focus or faith GRIN... build it and they will come..

[Judge_Recluse]

I think the OP about summed it up. Great post.

And, welcome back Bo.

[DiGiTALY -TC-]

- The sound is good in both games. I would say the weapon and bullet_ hit sounds are better in Graw and the environment sounds were better in GR1.

I agree with you on a lot of things but not on this.. environment sounds in GRAW are so far the best I've ever heard...

[Hockeystick]

Yep the sound's is great, but:

Des, I think you forgot the 'echo' sound in the tunnel in 'Ready for beer' I mean bear.

But anyway, the rest is still great!

[Vth_F_Smith]

I agree with you on a lot of things but not on this.. environment sounds in GRAW are so far the best I've ever heard...

I hold that and double it!

@Bo

Mr. Andersson, welcome back! We missed you!

(Hey, what kind of welcome speech did you expect from a Smith?)

Edited June 30, 2006 by Vth_F_Smith

[capteenix]

I agree with you on a lot of things but not on this.. environment sounds in GRAW are so far the best I've ever heard...

I hold that and double it!

@Bo

Mr. Andersson, welcome back! We missed you!

(Hey, what kind of welcome speech did you expect from a Smith?)

Tell me, Mr. Andersson... what good is a phone call... if you're unable to speak? *the matrix *

Edited June 30, 2006 by capteenix

[sui317]

budhjahidara, GREAT POST ! (again......)

[Hockeystick]

Tell me, Mr. Andersson... what good is a phone call... if you're unable to speak? *the matrix *

Naaaaaaaaaa, realy?!

Edited June 30, 2006 by Hockeystick

[Fletch]

- We cannot switch charecters.

I like not being able to switch characters but would like an option to borrow from them. Not their primary weapons but items like handgrenade and rocket launchers.

- 4 man co-op - Multiple teams and more players in Co-op make the game more tactical.

Co-Op is why I bought this game, and why many members in our gaming group are not buying it until it gets fixed

- Linear mission structure- The objectives are given one by one and the missions feel linear - with too many triggering events. This cuts down on replayability and I was expecting an improvement in this department. The wonderful maps are underutilized as a result of this.

I'm not sure what you mean but I don't like not being able to use the entire map to flank an enemy. Being told your leaving the mission area is Plain Stupid.

- Lack of rural maps - Rural maps gave a certain 'feel' to GR1 and I believe we would have heard less complaints about 'Graw is not GR1' if we had a nice mix of urban and rural maps.

I like the maps but any mew maps would be very nice.

- GR1 had better atmosphere and weather effects than Graw. This element is missing and Graw is not always very atmospheric. I hope this aspect improves.

Rain was a nice touch in GR1, but does it rain in Mexico?

- No limping/ affected aim

Totally agree.

- The Player/Ghosts do not die with one bullet. As this is a result of a better suit to be used in the future, I can't call it unrealistic and can't say whether it is good or bad.

It bugs me to shoot someone in the head and see them get up but as to hitting them in the body, if we assume they are wearing body armor like us then mulitple hit is normal. The only time you should get a 1 shot kill is a head shot or on a tango scripted to have no body armor. Edited June 30, 2006 by Fletch