An analogy of GRAW,UBI & Grin

[Cuchillo*]

Ya rossiski by to GR:AWfull o bugs LMAO.

and Zulater you are right there.

Demo was crap = final product

PERIOD .

cheers

Edited August 14, 2006 by Cuchillo*

[Nutlink]

No matter how screwed you may feel, that was still the 360 version shown zulater. As for the demo....Doom 3 didnt' have a demo until AFTER it was released, same as Half-Life 2. BF2 had a demo before release with almost every feature except maps and the ability to switch the demo map size. Oblivion never had a demo. All four of those are extremely popular and well-selling games. If you've noticed, usually a demo is released no more than a month before the release date of game. This is so as soon as you finish the demo, you know the release is right around the corner and are anxious to get the game immediately instead of eventually forgetting the game.

And like Rabbi said, the game DID have MP, but only LAN (which using certain programs is still playable over the net). I DID have a chance to try Coop and Domination before buying the game because I had a chance to LAN up, and I liked it. GRAW's problems in regards to demos, delays, and play on words (what some seem to think of as false advertising) can be related to almost any other game out there.

[Fonzarelli TAW]

Oh that Rabbi. He's one sharp kat.

[Papa6]

Let me think...oh yeah it DID have MP but for LAN. and the only way you could play THAT with anyone was with that tool so you could connect via the internet. so the user had to perform surgery on a demo that really wasn't MP...unless i got all of you to come here and hook up to my router.

Alot of games come out as SP Demo, MP Demo respectively. but GRAW's Demo was really a SP Demo with a "just play it in your backyard with friends MP mode."

I'll admit Rabbi was right about the MP mode...but it wasn't really MP mode when users have to doctor the game just to play over the internet. I feel like that back to the future3 movie, whereby the tracks ended over the ravine(the MP feature in the demo). also, with the fact that you needed to hit 88MPH to get the jump into time....and the fact that people were having trouble running the game, over the ravine we gooooooooo!

Graw wasn't what we wanted..

We felt betrayed after the years of waiting..

most probably got alienated bcz they saw NO reason to upgrade thier PC's for what they saw of GRAW..

I don't think any amount of extra time given to finish would've changed anything.

From experience alot of people who have been faithful to the GR series felt this game doesn't deserve the "GR" moniker probably "AW" would've fit it best.

and to remind some that the last three years, UBISOFT has ruined so many title series..RvS to name one, that UBISOFT's believeability is at or near zero.

these things are healthy to be brought out so that GRIN can read them, and make choices for THIER future. Grin doesn't need UBI biting at thier ankles anymore...

added: @ Rabbi74, you're right man..thier was an MP mode albeit not really MP unless you doctor the thing which is silly. but as a gentleman, you ARE right Rabbi74 good catch mate!

Edited August 14, 2006 by Papa6

[}PW{ Postal]

Papa, What happened man?

When you were beta testing this last patch you were all praises about how this game had turned around and then a week or two later i read a post that you said you were uninstalling GRAW. What happened to turn you back to the dark side?

As of the original topic. I came to GRAW having never played [GR] so i guess i see things different from most on here. I dont see it as something i wanted it to be because i had no expectation of it being anything really. I was hoping the Graphics were good...and they are. I was hoping the gameplay would be good..and it is. I was hoping my computer would run it and it did. So yeah i guess i had expectations but not of it being like another game.

I might be misunderstanding something here but if all the [GR] fans wanted it to be just like [GR] then what would the point be in buying GRAW if it was just like [GR]. I dont know. If [GR] was so great then why would you be looking for something new?

Also...if [GR] was as good as you say...how could you possibly expect someone to make it better.

Being that i never played [GR] these are serious questions i have.

[Deosl]

I'm trying to grasp the 'theory' of it's the fans fault for the faulty game in question.

Let's say GR4 is announced. If thousands of fans scream and whine constantly for a period that they want the game NOW, would they release it not 100% complete? NO.

It's also about the €€€, will this release fit in this quarter where we can rake in "xxx" money?

If the SP is near complete they won't bother much with MP, since they can always patch it up later, right?

But who buys a game that's not 100% done, eager fans that have been waiting for ages.

The time when it's the fans fault is when they buy a product that isn't good, yet the publisher see's ++ signs on the sales and think their doing a great job and use the same model for the next game.

Looking back I can laugh at the release date in 2005. What if the game came out then...It went beta during the fall of 2005...yet Ubi claimed we're still on board for 2005.The past is the past, right?

Why is it the fans fault anyways. We give them feedback on what we want and they try to please us. They fail to deliver a 100% perfect product and get flamed, that’s normal I think.

When they give us sneak peaks of the game of course it will generate fans that want it ASAP, it's normal.

Did we get replays, no. If I'm not mistaken Ubisoft denied this request. So I don't support that Ubisoft said:"Do what ever it takes". Now most of GRIN have moved on to other projects, witch is understandable and a new publisher.

Like I said before, it's much harder to please the PC crowd then consoles. We demand a world class product, and when GRIN is given limited time and resources to do it with it won't turn out to be a world class product at the deadline.

Personally I mostly blame Ubisoft's marketing & the "cross-multiplatform" release.

Ubi Marketing:

1. Showing off/promising stuff isn't 100% confirmed will be in final product.

2. Focus on big bro 360

3. Building up hype and not delivering.

4. Hardly honest (?)

"cross-multiplatform" release:

1. Restricted to a certain story/art style

2. Need similar features

3. Has to be released (almost) same time

4. Mix of versions by fans(getting high hopes)

All in all, I hope Ubisoft, GRIN & GR-fans learned allot from the good & bad sides of GRAW. For me GRAW feels a bit "old", with promising fps titles coming(as usual). Probly allot of BS to some of you here, but that's just what’s on my mind.

[zulater]

No matter how screwed you may feel, that was still the 360 version shown zulater. As for the demo....Doom 3 didnt' have a demo until AFTER it was released, same as Half-Life 2. BF2 had a demo before release with almost every feature except maps and the ability to switch the demo map size. Oblivion never had a demo. All four of those are extremely popular and well-selling games. If you've noticed, usually a demo is released no more than a month before the release date of game. This is so as soon as you finish the demo, you know the release is right around the corner and are anxious to get the game immediately instead of eventually forgetting the game.

And like Rabbi said, the game DID have MP, but only LAN (which using certain programs is still playable over the net). I DID have a chance to try Coop and Domination before buying the game because I had a chance to LAN up, and I liked it. GRAW's problems in regards to demos, delays, and play on words (what some seem to think of as false advertising) can be related to almost any other game out there.

No matter how far you stick your head in the sand you were lied to. It is not a play on words it was an expectation that the pc version would be just like the xbox version (which i showed in screenshots to show you what we don't have) but it was not. Doom3/hl2 don't need a demo because they have proven in their previous games that they produce a complete product that isn't buggy as hell. All the games you mentioned are popular and well selling because they are completed, work well, and run on most any recent pc.

The game had local play. You cannot rate how the game will play online by playing it on a LAN where you have unlimited bandwidth.

I'm trying to grasp the 'theory' of it's the fans fault for the faulty game in question.

Well said.

[RAbbi_74]

Good points by Papa6 and Deosl.

Playing a demo via LAN is difficult at best, as it requires (as stated previously) either one of those net-to-LAN utilities or a physical relocation of some really expensive hardware. I wonder if anyone actually PLAYED the demo MP??? Let's call that a DRAW, shall we?

Deosl- you hit the nail directly upon its head. Except one little thing. Some of our expectations we were let to believe would be met with GRAW and weren't. At least not yet. I am one of the hopeless GRAW lovers who believes that GRiN has a few tricks up the proverbial sleeve yet, but beyond the COOP fixes and SADS stuff, I see it being labelled a finished product by Ubisoft. As Papa6 pointed out, they've managed to really screw-up another sure thing with the Rainbow Six series' last update. LOCKDOWN has exactly THREE fans worldwide, two of whom are mental patients. So while GRAW's initial sales were predictably high, they've almost certainly fallen-off sharply since. (I'd honestly like to see the numbers) Knowing that Lockdown was a suck job, the initial response to GRAW's shortcomings was magnified by paranoia of a GR:Lockdown. The only thing keeping GRAW afloat right now, graciously, is GRiN's dedication to the fans. I RARELY see any Ubi folks around these forums, much less any attempt at an explanation by them as to their side of why this game has managed thus far to disappoint so MANY of the loyal fans who bought this game on faith alone.

AGREED on the doubt of the 'do whatever it takes' statement. In business speak, that translates to: "Do whatever you can manage within the terms of our contract which won't get us sued and will at least make US, the publisher, a little richer, if even at risk of your development company's very existence."

Ubisoft, regardless of GRAW's eventual fate, has done all it conceivably can to shatter the faith of the PC FPS gamer, if only by its silence. Fair or not. Fair doesn't pay the bills.

And I am willing to mortgage my first-born to help GRiN buy the rights to the Ghost Recon name, so long as they promise to NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER develop a console title...

[TacTiXs]

I personally do not own the game yet and won't buy it untill it's entirely done which i believe wont take long anymore before GRIN/UBI say so. I would be surprised if anything else but a bugfixing patch comes out for graw pc.

Only then i'll buy it and will be able to form my opinion on what is supposed to be the sequel for [GR].

From what i have read and the info i collected about graw at it's official release, i was pretty surprised that the main game mode for MP was a domination mode which has nothing in common with [GR] but more of BF2 and other games alike. When i found out about that it was clear to me that i was wrong (like many of GR fans) to think that UBI would actually pay a lot of attention to please a certain community being us, the GR addicts.

UBI is a game publisher with profit in mind, nothing more nothing less and which is logical and most obvious regardless what our expectations may be.

GR:AW will finally contain the gamemodes we expected (deathmatch, TDM and HH) but this was clearly not the foundation of the game.

When GR2 was announced and first came out on the xbox console, the PC community was almost litterally ready to lynch UBI as they thought they would get the same game on PC.

The fact that UBI then decided not to release GR2 even though they claimed that the pc version was totally different from the console version and that today again the biggest part if not almost all the true GR fans are very dissapointed with this release, is proof enough for me that once again money rules and UBI did not hear us.

To me it seems that graw is the result of a marketing research based on popularity of other games of the moment and in which GRIN/UBI tend to implement (not as good as it can get) a GR feel in it.

That game isn't developed for GR fans but just for any fps gamer out there and based on todays tendence in gaming and what currently sells. I'm pretty sure you wont find the same feeling of realism and immersion in graw that we had in [GR]. To me, regardless of graw being a sequel to [GR] or not, a number of critical details are left out in GRAW such as vitality, soldier behaviour should be affected in specific ways according his wounds, and other things which could have make graw acceptable for [GR] fans.

Add all the current technical problems and features it still lacks (you need a monster machine, too many connection drops, decent AC, gaming lobby support, dedicated server file etc..), it's not a wonder that many of us are profoundly deceived.

Let's face it, GR:AW is not a sequell but a marketing product. None the less it's a game and some will like it others wont, it will generate a community of it's own, it will work for a time and some [GR] fans will adopt it, others wont.

Our best shot to get closer to a [GR] feeling is the support of talented modders and map makers for graw i guess...

Again, i haven't played the game yet and i'm only voicing my opinion based on what i have read, i may be wrong on many aspects but that's how i see the picture...

[Nutlink]

No matter how far you stick your head in the sand you were lied to. It is not a play on words it was an expectation that the pc version would be just like the xbox version (which i showed in screenshots to show you what we don't have) but it was not. Doom3/hl2 don't need a demo because they have proven in their previous games that they produce a complete product that isn't buggy as hell. All the games you mentioned are popular and well selling because they are completed, work well, and run on most any recent pc.

The game had local play. You cannot rate how the game will play online by playing it on a LAN where you have unlimited bandwidth.

Expectations are formed by individuals and nobody can be held liable for those expectations except the individual who came up with them.

It's no more than a play on words, I've provided examples of why it is such. Mind you it's a heavy play on words, but it's still not a flat out lie nor is it false advertising. Anyone who had expectations that the PC game would be like the 360 game made a foolish assumption. We were told it wouldn't be a port, and we knew that there were two different teams working on two different versions. If you consider it false advertising, see your lawyer and try to do something about it.

And you know how people found out those games were completed and work well (but you are mistaken about running on almost any modern PC at release)? Because people bought them and played them, same as GRAW. It just so happens that those games WERE complted and DID work well for the most part, while GRAW is not completed. D3/HL2 had problems running on almost all mainstream PCs at the time of release. To say that they didn't need a demo because of previous history is folly. Doom 3 came a LONG way from Ultimate Doom/DoomII and had a lot of different guys working on it that were not involved with the original.

Edited August 14, 2006 by Nutlink

[zulater]

When D3/HL came out I ran those games on moderate settings with a video card that was 2 generations old. Try even running graw with a video card that was 2 generations old at release, oh yeah you couldn't.

And it's not folly to say they didn't need a demo. D3 and HL2 both had alpha's leaked that ran better than graw. That's not the point though. The point is that Id Software and Valve have proven that they stand by their products and (Id for sure, valve not as much) do not release them until they are polished and will run well.

Expectations are built based on what is given out by the publisher. I expected a different AND BETTER game than what was released on the xbox since the PC has more power. We got different but not better. We got a wireframe cross-com, fewer game modes, fewer maps, and fewer weapons.

[Nutlink]

And GRiN hasn't been supporting GRAW? So far it seems to me that they're standing by their game, even with so many disliking the game and letting down a good chunk of the [GR] players. GRiN hasn't been around long enough long enough to establish themselves as a name like Valve and id Software have. The console vs PC debate is something probably better left in another thread though.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

Use that with BF2... FX5200 or above... card wasn't that old when it released.

Why.? shader 2.0 that sadly my TI4600 did not have. But it wasn't a very well done version and the 6 and 7000 series nvidia were required for FULL shader 2.0 (i think that is correct as i understand it but don't quote me)

If you scale back though to far, cards that use a very low texture will have an advantage over newer things ... GR1 was an example of this. Most people that matched matched in low settings. (textures for trees and such) Why was this you ask? Because the bushes looked like paper and you could easily pick the enemy out. Also you could see through bushy branches better as small holes through the leaves became bigger, and it was easier to see at night with.

I will say this. GRAW does put everyone at a more even playing field, although bigger cards do see a little better (with less jaggys) at bigger resolutions.

[zulater]

And GRiN hasn't been supporting GRAW? So far it seems to me that they're standing by their game, even with so many disliking the game and letting down a good chunk of the [GR] players. GRiN hasn't been around long enough long enough to establish themselves as a name like Valve and id Software have. The console vs PC debate is something probably better left in another thread though.

supporting a game and finishing the game are 2 different things in my opinion. They have yet to give us SADS, Direct IP Connect, any server control, switch maps in game, kick, ban, then we can get into the coop side of things no FF etc..

The only thing they have done at a request of the community was add the fake AA and I believe you can skip the intro movies in coop now. Everything else that they have done should have been included in the retail release.

[RAbbi_74]

I am SO sorry I ever brought up DooM3 in this forum...

Sorry, but the system I had a month before the game's release wasn't able to run D3 at all. I ran out to buy a new (to me anyhow, though thoroughly abused in South Korea) computer and double its RAM so as to be able to run D3. And support? DooM3? Has anyone here ever tried D3 MP? NO ONE is stoopid enough to support THAT piece of crap. SP in D3 was (and I feel still IS, at least for the comedy factor) awesome, but it was completely crap for MP. There's no comparing.

Like it or not, GRAW isn't quite poised to fall flat on its face just yet. It's entirely possible it may pull out of the slump. I sure hope it does. Bugs or no bugs, TDM is here and I'm lovin' it. DOM grew on me. And GRiN dudes around here type their replies with that evil little smirk (not a smile, John Creasy) that reminds us, "Something wicked this way comes."

Oh, and if we MUST compare to the likes of D3, then remember that Id had 3-4 years to develop that game. 2-3 times what GRiN was given, even AFTER the delays. Substantially more time than has been used by GRiN to date. And we already have significantly better MultiPlayer than D3.

[zulater]

D3 was to show off the new Id engine which it did very well. the mp was there to tide you over till quake 4

q4 is the multiplayer, it's rock solid.

quakewars is going to blow you away.

[RAbbi_74]

True, the engine was killer. VERY true...

Man, think of the hybrid DooM vs. Ghost Recon thing....

Kinda like DooM anyhow, though, but with TACTICS! Wonder if there's a psychotic crackhead modder out there willing...

[zulater]

True, the engine was killer. VERY true...

Man, think of the hybrid DooM vs. Ghost Recon thing....

Kinda like DooM anyhow, though, but with TACTICS! Wonder if there's a psychotic crackhead modder out there willing...

I would love to see Id do Ghost Recon. At least it would be finished on release.

I can't wait for their new IP. they are being hush hush about it.

[Hacksaww]

I really appreciate that they do come to the forums and talk. Its the reason Im still keeping tabs on the game. I just hope its an awesome game someday.

Couldn't've said it better.

[NOX]

I think it is more like the movie "Money Pit" with Tom Hanks.

Will the marriage survive?

Keep up your efforts GRIN, No one is ever happy with the Dentist, IT guy, Tax Collector, or Software Developer-but all are needed!

Edited August 15, 2006 by NOX

[Kingkat]

I have been thinking about this "home-building-analogy". It is a sound argument, but let me offer this one.

Remember that 1968 Camaro...? How it looked, how it rode, what it felt like..? Yea, man THAT was way cool.

So..........just today GM announced that THEY will begin to manufacture and re-issue the name CAMARO in the near future.(2008 Model Year)

Now, this car may have the same name....and have a few styling features that may resemble the original.....but due to manufacturing improvements and Gov't Safety requirements...........(and other "stuff".).....it will not, nor can it ever be the same as it was in 1968!!!!!!!!!!!

The only way to EVER own that original, classic, one-of-a-kind Camaro is to find one and have it restored!!!!!!!!

or............................own the "new and improved" version..........its your choice!

perhaps this is what we have been wanting, but have been afraid to ask?

kingkat

[Papa6]

interesting analogy kingkat. i do like muscle cars

[RAbbi_74]

Cars...

Fast, beautiful, non-fuel-efficient cars...

Race gas and slicks...

GAWD I love that analogy... Good thinkin'....

[NOX]

I have been thinking about this "home-building-analogy". It is a sound argument, but let me offer this one.

Remember that 1968 Camaro...? How it looked, how it rode, what it felt like..? Yea, man THAT was way cool.

So..........just today GM announced that THEY will begin to manufacture and re-issue the name CAMARO in the near future.(2008 Model Year)

Now, this car may have the same name....and have a few styling features that may resemble the original.....but due to manufacturing improvements and Gov't Safety requirements...........(and other "stuff".).....it will not, nor can it ever be the same as it was in 1968!!!!!!!!!!!

The only way to EVER own that original, classic, one-of-a-kind Camaro is to find one and have it restored!!!!!!!!

or............................own the "new and improved" version..........its your choice!

perhaps this is what we have been wanting, but have been afraid to ask?

kingkat

OH OH OH! I am a Camaro driver. For all you europeans let me expalin to you. CAMAROS eat Mustangs, I do not wnat to heat my FORD whiners you know it..MOre HP better handling and a MUSTANG is a chick car---ha ha!

I have owned 2 stangs one 390 and a 84 302, good car high dollar per mile, they break. also owned a 71 Cuda 340 4 barrel and Cuda Blue. A Mercur and a couple of trucks.

My current Camaro has 187,000+ miles on it, brakes, tune up, and a PCV-oil and stuff but that is it. Still do not burn oil and get 33mph. I drive Florida 90+ and at times 100+, if you have driven florida I am in your rear view-rubbin is racing, For all of you Europe folk the Autobahn is a day cruise-I have been, seen and done that. Even our surface streets are 75 and the cops do not care as long as you are not endangering other peeps.

NOW 2009 Camaro is announced. What V8 can you buy for $35,000us can do 135mph everyday any day and you can take three friends with you? 325hp and 300ft lbs of torque. MAN OH MAN 2009 they will have a ZL9 limited edition 400+hp and 400+ft lbs pf torque.

Add some NOx and you got a rocket, I like to rat race so cornering is my game and an American short block ride is the best.

Line up the imports baby NOX got a whole lot of rubbin to do! I am totally stoked for the next gen Camaro-hey and I am 43...

NOX

[RAbbi_74]

NOW 2009 Camaro is announced. What V8 can you buy for $35,000us can do 135mph everyday any day and you can take three friends with you?

NOX

I know a Ford 4-cyl that can. SVT Focus got ~28MPG highway (I meansured on my former '02), topped at 141 (I chickened out after 136 with pedal to go), and had room for 4 adults (or 2 adults and 3 teenage kids and suitcases, still pulling over 26MPG) and could out-corner any V8 that goes for under $40k (I smoked HOW many Lightnings, Cobras, Bullitts, Mach I's, and even a Tbird turbo coupe to win SCSVTOA autocross in Feb '04?). Started at $17,450.00 plus destination, etc. GM never made anything that could come close...

Kudos to GM for doing what looks to be a better job with the new Camaro than what Ford did with the Mustang's recent update. I don't know where Ford's mind has been lately, but it has NOT been on cars. They've turned me against them and into a Lincoln owner (2002 LS V8, goes over 140 and gets 26-28MPG highway in mucho luxury...).

DAMN THEM!

The new Challenger will PWN all anyhow, so who cares?

Shall we return to topic, gentlemen?