Jump to content

Just going back through an old interview


Recommended Posts

I was amused at this interview with Bo. This interview was done in Sept 05.

Basically just some noteable things obviously missing from the release that were supposed to be in the game. ie the camera gun (to shoot around corners). Direct IP connect support, Kick/Ban options and interesting enough a medic. Also a promise of a non linear game "Mitchel get back here you're leaving the mission area"

http://www.ghostrecon.net/html/interview-grin-2.htm

All questions are by me, shown in green. Unless otherwise noted, all responses are from Bo Andersson, CEO of GRIN.

Is the gun camera from GR2 in the game? Is it in MP? Are there restrictions on its use?

We will have the gun camera in the game. Gun cam will be in first person and never as in GR2 where you saw it in 3rd person at times. Using the gun cam will be a bit like sniper zoom but with more intel attached to it.

What will happen with tracer ammunition? Will the NATO sides be using RED and the OPFOR using GREEN this time? Yellow tracers are no longer acceptable.

We aren’t sure at this time. We are trying to avoid the “Star Wars” feel with different colors for friendly and enemy fire. We want to give assault rifles a yellow/white color while heavy weapons get a different color altogether. Remember, tracers only have the phosphorescence on the end of the round so the shooter can see where it goes. Basically it’s to show the shooter where the round actually goes.

While I can handle new weapons and new uniforms, what, if anything will make GRAW for PC a non-linear, thinking mans game like the first one was?

It will be non-linear. We wanted to expand the maps and let the player decide how to complete the missions as in the [Ghost Recon].

Will the pc version use an in game server browser instead of UGS? Will it support direct IP and ASE, Firefox?

There will be an in game browser and GRAW will have direct IP support.

What are the kick/ban options for MP?

It’s no problem to create it. We are looking at it as a way to keep out cheaters.

Is there a medic feature in MP?

This is a tricky feature to include in a game. We will have a medic feature, but only to stop the bleeding, but not revive someone. There will be an increase in the stress level for an injured player and that will stay even after being patched back up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

That's the price dev teams pay for bringing the fans news that they crave for ahead of time, it's easy for anyone to go thorugh archives and pick out the stuff that never made it in for one reason or another.

Maybe they shouldn't release any information until publication. </sarcasm>

Before any levels the "linear" stick at GRAW they should try other titles, such as HL2 perhaps. :whistle: To me linear means only one way to achieve an objective, in GR:AW there are many ways to achieve objectives, some (a lot) harder than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the price dev teams pay for bringing the fans news that they crave for ahead of time, it's easy for anyone to go thorugh archives and pick out the stuff that never made it in for one reason or another.

Maybe they shouldn't release any information until publication. </sarcasm>

Before any levels the "linear" stick at GRAW they should try other titles, such as HL2 perhaps. :whistle: To me linear means only one way to achieve an objective, in GR:AW there are many ways to achieve objectives, some (a lot) harder than others.

in GR1 you had multiple objectives and could do them in whatever order you wanted. In GRAW you have multiple objectives and can do them in 1 order. There are different routes to take but stray too far to get a good flank and you get yelled at.

maybe the information released before publication should be information that is for certain to be in the game. if it's not for certain then it shouldn't be released. or at least say 'might be' instead of 'will be'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree about the many avenues you can take to finish the current objective. In GR1 however, you could complete the objectives in any order. But for the story to fold out correctly in GRAW you need to complete objectives one at a time in the order. GRAW is however no where near COD or HL2 ... so it's hard to label GRAW as non linear per objective but hard not to label it as linear per mission.

I must admit however... I don't mind the secure the car where you think the presedent is before he gets taken to another location.. would not make much sense... okay go save the presedent.. then umm secure where his car is... when you think he should still be in the car.. type thing... not sure if that make sense..

Edited by IrishStout
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in GR1 you had multiple objectives and could do them in whatever order you wanted. In GRAW you have multiple objectives and can do them in 1 order.

True, in GR1 you could do them in any order, I don't think that makes GRAW linear though. Linear means one way to achieve an objective (viz HL2 and many more), clearly this does not apply to GRAW where how you complete a campaign objective is up to your own individual strategy and tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in GR1 you had multiple objectives and could do them in whatever order you wanted. In GRAW you have multiple objectives and can do them in 1 order.

True, in GR1 you could do them in any order, I don't think that makes GRAW linear though. Linear means one way to achieve an objective (viz HL2 and many more), clearly this does not apply to GRAW where how you complete a campaign objective is up to your own individual strategy and tactics.

Take strongpoint for example. It is linear since I noticed that once you completed one objective, you moved on to the next, besides, the cross com commander tells you what is next. I also noticed that in some maps in SP mode, that the enemy weren't in thier place or showed up until you got to a certain point on a map. as if there's a trigger point then they appeared. one prime example is the part of SP mode when you get extracted from the top of that big wharehouse in the 3rd part at the beginning, you have the mexicans on the top of the buildings at the sandbag emplacements. I see them EVERY time drop about 3 feet into thier position when i got to a certain point. I think the objectives for the most part are linear in that regard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some objectives were linear most were not. The missions thoe were pretty much linear.

Any mission based game is going to have linear progression through the missions, the important distinction is in how the objectives are achieved. If the objectives are purely linear that's a whole different ball game from non-linear missions that GRAW offers.

Not that there is anything wrong with linear, some games depend on it, are very enjoyable and do very well. Personally I prefer non-linear objectives like [GR]/GRAW, where the satisfactory completion of an objective is down to the strategy the player decided to adopt.

Take strongpoint for example. It is linear since I noticed that once you completed one objective, you moved on to the next,

.. like in any mission based game you mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some objectives were linear most were not. The missions thoe were pretty much linear.

Any mission based game is going to have linear progression through the missions, the important distinction is in how the objectives are achieved. If the objectives are purely linear that's a whole different ball game from non-linear missions that GRAW offers.

Not that there is anything wrong with linear, some games depend on it, are very enjoyable and do very well. Personally I prefer non-linear objectives like [GR]/GRAW, where the satisfactory completion of an objective is down to the strategy the player decided to adopt.

Take strongpoint for example. It is linear since I noticed that once you completed one objective, you moved on to the next,

.. like in any mission based game you mean?

I venture to say yes as all SP and MP coop games are missions. would've been cool to have COOP firefight

Edited by Papa6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

we're dealing with symantics here. You think because there is more than 1 way to get to the objective that it is not linear. I'm saying that it's linear because you can only complete one objective at a time.

It will be non-linear. We wanted to expand the maps and let the player decide how to complete the missions as in the [Ghost Recon].

We have no way to decide how to complete the mission. we are told what to do in a step by step procedure, thus linear. if we were given all the objectives and could plan out how to handle them and in what order then I would then say that is is not linear. Sure there are parts that must proceede in a certain order to remain coheisive. Alpha Squad took non linear to the next level. You could complete some objectives in different orders however there were certain objectives you had to complete before proceeding where depending on how you completed the objective your new objectives would be different. That's non linear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The game was and wasnt linear.

Personally I would like a roleplaying game of sorts. Accomplish certain tasks, fail others... or find hidden tasks (not intended to be found)

and then the whole campaign can change directions.

Edited by Prozac360
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand things change in the course of developing a game and all. I see a few things there that didnt make it in. Is this stuff confirmed to never be implemented now or might we see it later on? Has there been anything said that this stuff wont be added at all....like the gun cam and direct ip connect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we're dealing with symantics here. You think because there is more than 1 way to get to the objective that it is not linear. I'm saying that it's linear because you can only complete one objective at a time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_gameplay

Linear levels are described as...

...there is only one route that the player must take through the level ie. to get from point A to point B,

In GRAW you can take which ever route you like.

Non linear levels are described as....

Project IGI, on the other hand, had notably non-linear levels. You were given an objective within each level (usually a small mountain military base), but the route through each level was deliberately left open. There were very few obstacles preventing players from taking whichever route they found to be successful.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was amused at this interview with Bo. This interview was done in Sept 05.

Basically just some noteable things obviously missing from the release that were supposed to be in the game. ie the camera gun (to shoot around corners). Direct IP connect support, Kick/Ban options and interesting enough a medic. Also a promise of a non linear game "Mitchel get back here you're leaving the mission area"

I don't get it, which part is amusing? Perhaps you could elaborate which parts you find amusing.

I would be slightly more amused, if the game got a kick/ban feature, than I am because of the lack of the named features.

I for my part I am not even concerned or surprised when I compare the game with the interview. Things changes during development of a game/a plan/a thesis/whatever, I really can't see any amusing or extraordinary about it, nothing; it is simply the way things work in this world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we're dealing with symantics here. You think because there is more than 1 way to get to the objective that it is not linear. I'm saying that it's linear because you can only complete one objective at a time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_gameplay

Linear levels are described as...

...there is only one route that the player must take through the level ie. to get from point A to point B,

In GRAW you can take which ever route you like.

Non linear levels are described as....

Project IGI, on the other hand, had notably non-linear levels. You were given an objective within each level (usually a small mountain military base), but the route through each level was deliberately left open. There were very few obstacles preventing players from taking whichever route they found to be successful.

You're quoting wikipedia as a difinitive source for what defines linear gameplay....

while a good concept wikipedia is far from a difinitive source. Nice try though.

It will be non-linear. We wanted to expand the maps and let the player decide how to complete the missions as in the [Ghost Recon].

I'll quote Bo again since you seem to gloss over it. To complete the mission you must complete all the objectives. To be able to "decide how to complete the missions" we would have to be allowed to decide which objectives to complete in what order "as in the [Ghost Recon]." We are not allowed to do that thus our objectives are linear making the mission linear espeically when compared to [GR]. Insert-A-B-C-D-Extract

You also can't "take which ever route you like." There are routes that would get you to your objective that are defined as being out of the mission area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we're dealing with symantics here. You think because there is more than 1 way to get to the objective that it is not linear. I'm saying that it's linear because you can only complete one objective at a time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_gameplay

Linear levels are described as...

...there is only one route that the player must take through the level ie. to get from point A to point B,

In GRAW you can take which ever route you like.

Non linear levels are described as....

Project IGI, on the other hand, had notably non-linear levels. You were given an objective within each level (usually a small mountain military base), but the route through each level was deliberately left open. There were very few obstacles preventing players from taking whichever route they found to be successful.

You're quoting wikipedia as a difinitive source for what defines linear gameplay....

while a good concept wikipedia is far from a difinitive source. Nice try though.

It will be non-linear. We wanted to expand the maps and let the player decide how to complete the missions as in the [Ghost Recon].

I'll quote Bo again since you seem to gloss over it. To complete the mission you must complete all the objectives. To be able to "decide how to complete the missions" we would have to be allowed to decide which objectives to complete in what order "as in the [Ghost Recon]." We are not allowed to do that thus our objectives are linear making the mission linear espeically when compared to [GR]. Insert-A-B-C-D-Extract

You also can't "take which ever route you like." There are routes that would get you to your objective that are defined as being out of the mission area.

I find myself agreeing with Zu here... [GR] was completely open, Quake and Doom are completely linear, but GRAW isn't as open as [GR]. Forget the labels for a moment... no one can say that GRAW is as "free" as [GR].

I think GRAW having a scripted feel and GRAW not having a Quick-Save feature are connected. The story line in GRAW is gated, and so are the save points. I also wonder if this will keep GRAW from having a true "firefight" mode. If the story in GRAW is gated, how do you have a "free for all Firefight" mode for SP? The save-points won't work because, by nature, you aren't running a gated (scripted) mission anymore. This is a unique situation since you can't obviously save in an MP game so the entire issue is moot.

Could this be why we haven't (and in my opinion, will never) see Firefight in GRAW? Hmm.....

-JK

Callsign 3Point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're quoting wikipedia as a difinitive source for what defines linear gameplay....

while a good concept wikipedia is far from a difinitive source.

I'm not calling it definitive anywhere - it's just the No.1 result that came up in Google for the phrase "definition of linear gameplay".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be able to "decide how to complete the missions" we would have to be allowed to decide which objectives to complete in what order "as in the [Ghost Recon]." We are not allowed to do that thus our objectives are linear making the mission linear espeically when compared to [GR]. Insert-A-B-C-D-Extract

You also can't "take which ever route you like." There are routes that would get you to your objective that are defined as being out of the mission area.

Dude, you had to know I'd chime in on this one...

You can't take WHICHEVER route you like in any game I've ever seen. [GR]- I wanna go around 10 miles to the north. Uh, NO! But take your example mission, StrongPoint. From Checkpoint #1 (the supply drop at the Stryker APC) you have at least THREE different options for routes to proceed from there, and three more from the road at the sight distance limit of the far bunker to whichever one you choose to neutralize first. Wait, I DO NOT have to neutralize Bunker A BEFORE Bunker B?! You're kidding, right? You MUST be! ZULATER SAID THIS GAME WAS LINEAR!!!!!

</crash>

So yeah, it's semi-linear. Can we all compromise to accept that term, decide what this has to do with making the game better, focus on THAT, and move on? Please? I think too highly of you guys and gals (yes, even those I disagree consistently with) to appreciate the constant bashing of the game for bashing's sake...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess some would regard the game less linear if the "You are leaving the mission area" voice were left out. That is why [GR] was sooo non-linear.

I mean we have to wait until we get a game were we can stroll away from the scene of the setting at will, take a plane to Paris and watch the city life instead of killing boots in MC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...we are told what to do in a step by step procedure...

Yep. That sounds suspiciously like the military alright.

I personally find it difficult to believe that there has ever been a situation where a squad was given a list of vastly different objectives and were told "Just... complete them however you feel like."

People want realism... they scream for it, cry for it, whine for it, then when they get it somewhere they weren't expecting, they complain that it's boring.

I guess some would regard the game less linear if the "You are leaving the mission area" voice were left out. That is why [GR] was sooo non-linear.

So invisible or worse - fake looking/feeling boundaries around where you can go in a map is better than someone just telling you that you can't go there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...we are told what to do in a step by step procedure...

Yep. That sounds suspiciously like the military alright.

I personally find it difficult to believe that there has ever been a situation where a squad was given a list of vastly different objectives and were told "Just... complete them however you feel like."

People want realism... they scream for it, cry for it, whine for it, then when they get it somewhere they weren't expecting, they complain that it's boring.

So invisible or worse - fake looking/feeling boundaries around where you can go in a map is better than someone just telling you that you can't go there?

Unless your SpecOps. My girlfriend's brother is stationed in Baghdad and he's a member of one of those teams that you never knew (or what to know) existed.

They are routinely told "You have 12 hours to go take out this house or to go supress this neighborood because of a transport going thru tomorrow"... and that's it. The nature of a SpecOp is that the team has to prepare for a multitude of potentials so they have experts in various areas and they prepare for anything. When they arrive they analyze the situation and they work out their plan on the spot. Period. His superiors simply want to know he met the objective in the timeframe (and he keeps civilian casualties down, etc, etc).

When he was on his two-week leave from Iraq he got a chance to play GRAW and he said the same thing many of us do... wow", too "star wars" for me", but he's a huge fan of [GR] because it more resembles the freedom (and tech / equipment level) he sees on a daily basis.

I'm not trying to speak on the behalf of all SpeOps / SEAL / PJ / Delta out there.. I am saying I know one instance where this guy is given nothing more than what we used to get in [GR]... "here's an objective and a timeline... the rest is up to you but failure isn't an option".

-jk

Callsign 3Point

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...