Jump to content

Ubisoft announce officially the incoming Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon


Recommended Posts

Just because these games evolve into things some fans don't like does not mean they are bad games.

You do know that this completely sane and common sens-ish statement is totally alien to those who often use the title "we, the community" when bashing the game? <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 228
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

GR1 was nice.

Many mods. Many maps. Being outside in nature with sun raising or going down.

Hearing birds in a calm forest while watching enemies and the storm of fire which is

going to rain on them... was nice.

Graw is ok. It is not that stable for me (the previous Ghost Recon server also had its problems especially the Ubisoft gaming service around online multiplayer play) but it has eye candy and some tactical value.

Now, more than the game itself, it's its support which is going to make the difference in either I keep putting $$$ on this franchise or not. The mp2 and the mp3 especially are cool. We got [GR] and Firefight/Recon and we can be more than 4 players. 6-8 is OK for me, 12 is perfect (if you got the bandwidth). Graw is not a bad base to build upon with mods and maps I feel. But if we don't get a few others patches that fix stability issues... it would make me feel like the current state of affairs between BF2 and 2142. Why the hell would you buy Graw2 to see Graw keep its bugs that you will perhaps find in Graw2 ? Telling us they will be "fixed" in Graw2 for people to move there won't work. BF2 people are not moving to 2142 because bugs are still in BF2 and some since the very first installement of the game franchise itself.

They push deadlines to make games go out sooner, and then we have to try to play with incomplete, unfinished games and when we get something that doesn't fall like a deck card castle, we ask them to fix the bugs _that should never have been out if they had designed it properly_ and they move to the next issue of the franchise ? Thanks but NO, thanks.

Either you put the game out with everything that works properly like SWAT 4 for example, or you put it out unfinished and you fix everything later but you fix it. SWAT 4 has been a surprise to me honestly. I bought it, and it worked nicely. They did an add-on later and it mainly fixed some bugs in maps ! I was so deserate with PC games that I was starting to believe you could not get a game on the market without bugs and full of problems. SWAT 4 developers showed me that it can be done. A game that doesn't spend its time crashing nor the server itself and without major bugs that you find after 1 or 2 hours of multiplayer with friends the very same day you install it.

Fix Graw and _finish_ it before moving to Graw 2. We paid for a product, give us what we paid for.

If the game is unfinished or doesn't work as intended, it's your fault because you make it go out before it

was ready.

If you do something wrong, fix it and stop complaining about people that buy your games and are not happy to be BETA testers for full paid price.

I'm happy with Grin work. They made it right and the mp3 was what I expected from them. Good stuff.

Please just fix the bugs around and hell yes I will get Graw2 if it's Grin, the same engine and new content.

Hell I will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I thought they evolved quite nicely. GR2 was a decent game and was middle ground between the two for sure. I know it never got to the PC, but it was a good game none the less I thought. As far as Vegas goes... It sounds like you havent played the game. R6:Vegas is NOTHING AT ALL like Splinter Cell. It is very much a R6 game. Just because these games evolve into things some fans don't like does not mean they are bad games.

Can you tell me how Vegas is like an R6 game even? Where is the planning phase? Where is the ability to choose which team members you wanted to take on the mission? Where are the open ended maps with multiple routes to chose from?

Games should advance and not back up. Game sequels should keep core gameplay and features and add new features that do advance the series. Removing features does not make a game fresh and does turn off fans even if not all of them.

Ubi could learn a lesson from Microsoft of all people. The longest selling franchise of any game is Flight Simulator. Each iteration adds something new and not just aircraft. FS 2004 added ATC to the game to help make it feel more like actually flying under ATC control instead of just flying from one airport to another. This year they added the ability for the player to be an ATC controller if he/she so chooses. This is a prime example of keeping core gameplay and advancing the game. They also added "missions" where you can fly the RedBull Racing Circuit to name one mission. There are others to go with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ubi could learn a lesson from Microsoft of all people. The longest selling franchise of any game is Flight Simulator. Each iteration adds something new and not just aircraft. FS 2004 added ATC to the game to help make it feel more like actually flying under ATC control instead of just flying from one airport to another. This year they added the ability for the player to be an ATC controller if he/she so chooses. This is a prime example of keeping core gameplay and advancing the game. They also added "missions" where you can fly the RedBull Racing Circuit to name one mission. There are others to go with it.

Which is a game that I have found myself nearly addicted to since I picked it up this last weekend...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes you must have a sound card.I just upgraded to a xfi from a audigy 2 ..world of differance

It really is so? I ask as I only used X-fi for GRAW myself, but I got friends with audigy 2. Sometimes when you Ghost them they don't seem to respond to sounds the way I hold right. It can be lag, my bad (don't got the whole picture by ghosting or just being a lousy player) or their bad (lousy player), but perhaps it could be the sound card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as Vegas, my hopes are NOT up but I wont give up on it,,, yet. With it being a 100% confirmed port and Third person view(ie no lean and peek) wow things look wishy washy in that camp.

nevermind...iread further along the thread and found out it was not going to be 3rd person. Rant retracted. 8)

Edited by Cell*AFZ*
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the 80's a product that billions enjoyed followed the hype. They believed that if like thier competition, they were to have a fresh new image that caterered to the young hip generation, they would stomp out the competion and take a strangle hold on thier industry while hoping no one would notice that it was a lame attempt with a lamer mascot possesing a horrendous aftertaste. That flop was known as "New Coke", and it F'n tanked. The uproar caused it to be abandoned and back to "Classic Coke" they went.

End of lack of sleep induced demented rant.

Edited by Cell*AFZ*
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Games should advance and not back up. Game sequels should keep core gameplay and features and add new features that do advance the series. Removing features does not make a game fresh and does turn off fans even if not all of them.

If all game developers thought like you do WK77 we wouldn't have anything to worry about. ;) Unfortunately some companys screw game sequels up so bad it's like a completely different game,only 10X worse. :wall:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last month, Ubisoft revealed in its quarterly financial report that it was prepping Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 for release early next year, but it didn't announce platforms for the title. Interestingly enough, online retailer GameStop is now taking pre-orders for the generally expected Xbox 360, PC, and PlayStation 3 versions of the game, as well as an edition for the PlayStation Portable. Beyond a shipping date of March 1, 2007 (likely a placeholder), and price tags of $59.99 (Xbox 360, PS3), $49.99 (PC), and $39.99 (PSP), the product listings contain no information on the game.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6161034.html?...estnews;title;0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the 80's a product that billions enjoyed followed the hype. They believed that if like thier competition, they were to have a fresh new image that caterered to the young hip generation, they would stomp out the competion and take a strangle hold on thier industry while hoping no one would notice that it was a lame attempt with a lamer mascot possesing a horrendous aftertaste. That flop was known as "New Coke", and it F'n tanked. The uproar caused it to be abandoned and back to "Classic Coke" they went.

End of lack of sleep induced demented rant.

completely off-topic, but 'new coke' tanked in North America. The sweeter coke flavor actually appealed to tastes in many 3rd world countries that Coke was trying to market in. I believe now they have many different flavors tailored to regional tastes and all are marketed under the label 'coke classic'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the 80's a product that billions enjoyed followed the hype. They believed that if like thier competition, they were to have a fresh new image that caterered to the young hip generation, they would stomp out the competion and take a strangle hold on thier industry while hoping no one would notice that it was a lame attempt with a lamer mascot possesing a horrendous aftertaste. That flop was known as "New Coke", and it F'n tanked. The uproar caused it to be abandoned and back to "Classic Coke" they went.

End of lack of sleep induced demented rant.

Cough, cough GR2 for PC and GR3 for PC and New Coke, Rocky Will Like This ;)cough, cough.

Games should advance and not back up. Game sequels should keep core gameplay and features and add new features that do advance the series. Removing features does not make a game fresh and does turn off fans even if not all of them.

If all game developers thought like you do WK77 we wouldn't have anything to worry about. ;) Unfortunately some companys screw game sequels up so bad it's like a completely different game,only 10X worse. :wall:

I have faith that there will be a company that will fill our needs. They will listen to the fans and not the "marketing" gurus who don't know jack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I thought they evolved quite nicely. GR2 was a decent game and was middle ground between the two for sure. I know it never got to the PC, but it was a good game none the less I thought. As far as Vegas goes... It sounds like you havent played the game. R6:Vegas is NOTHING AT ALL like Splinter Cell. It is very much a R6 game. Just because these games evolve into things some fans don't like does not mean they are bad games.

Can you tell me how Vegas is like an R6 game even? Where is the planning phase? Where is the ability to choose which team members you wanted to take on the mission? Where are the open ended maps with multiple routes to chose from?

Games should advance and not back up. Game sequels should keep core gameplay and features and add new features that do advance the series. Removing features does not make a game fresh and does turn off fans even if not all of them.

Ubi could learn a lesson from Microsoft of all people. The longest selling franchise of any game is Flight Simulator. Each iteration adds something new and not just aircraft. FS 2004 added ATC to the game to help make it feel more like actually flying under ATC control instead of just flying from one airport to another. This year they added the ability for the player to be an ATC controller if he/she so chooses. This is a prime example of keeping core gameplay and advancing the game. They also added "missions" where you can fly the RedBull Racing Circuit to name one mission. There are others to go with it.

Alright. As for the planning phase... I must admit that even at my peak R6 adiction, I was never all that into the planning phase of the game aside from the gear. Part of me misses being able to control multiple teammembers, but really they were jused just as bonus lives anyways. I really liked the all other aspects of the game. So for me... The ommision of the planning phase is not an issue, and actually a plus seeing as though I don't have to go through the screen every time.

I like the way you control your team on the fly now for sure. So to me, not only is it like a R6 game, but it is better in some aspects. As far as the open ended maps go... I have only played one demo level, so I have no idea what the maps are going to be like in the full game. The bread and butter of these games was always the multiplayer aspect anyways, and that remains seemingly undamaged.

This is the point I have kind of been trying to make through this entire thread. Just because a few people dont like a change, dosent mean others won't. In fact, the GR series is selling better than ever, and I Would imagine R6:Vegas is going to have similar results. So saying that the changes drive people away is kind of silly when their fan base is higher than it has ever been in the past.

GRAW was a huge sucess on almost every level. I would not expect any drastic changes moving from GRAW 1 to GRAW 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would rather a 360 graw 2 port for pc than it being made by grin.

You sure you're a GR fan?

Man, I can't stand 3rd person games on the PC. Especially when it's tactical and Tom Clancy. No, I think GRIN made a great job with GRAW and I think they would make an even better job with GRAW 2 now when they already got the basics like graphics, characters and animations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would rather a 360 graw 2 port for pc than it being made by grin.

You sure you're a GR fan?

Man, I can't stand 3rd person games on the PC. Especially when it's tactical and Tom Clancy. No, I think GRIN made a great job with GRAW and I think they would make an even better job with GRAW 2 now when they already got the basics like graphics, characters and animations.

and a huge bag of comments on graw from the community

don't think they will ignore what we gave/give as feedback

grin did a great job on the feel of the game, (for me atleast)

if they are smart, graw2 will be graw with a little more...

come on grin, give us GR:iN.bundle of joy :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would rather a 360 graw 2 port for pc than it being made by grin.

You sure you're a GR fan?

Man, I can't stand 3rd person games on the PC. Especially when it's tactical and Tom Clancy. No, I think GRIN made a great job with GRAW and I think they would make an even better job with GRAW 2 now when they already got the basics like graphics, characters and animations.

Since I paid $50 to beta test their development process, can I get GRAW 2 for free?

Sorry... saying GRiN will do an awesome GRAW 2 because they suckered us into buying a jacked-up GRAW 1 sounds a bit fishy to me.

Simply put: If GRiN is attached to GRAW 2 PC then I won't be buying GRAW 2 PC.

Of course, with EA completely jacking the BattleField gaming world, this might mean I have to buy GRAW 2 for the XBox360 or PS3 (again, assuming GRiN has nothing to do with it), just to have something to play.

And yes, this is just my opinion of GRAW and GRiN and I make no attempt to say I speak for any audience larger than that.

-JK

Callsign 3Point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sun shines on even a dogs ass some days. Just because of one bad experience that doesn't mean the next in the series will be the same.

Some people have written off RSE because of LD, and continue to use that as a reason to have RSE never do a PC title again. Its only fair that others say the same things about GRIN and GR:AW. Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sun shines on even a dogs ass some days. Just because of one bad experience that doesn't mean the next in the series will be the same.

Some people have written off RSE because of LD, and continue to use that as a reason to have RSE never do a PC title again. Its only fair that others say the same things about GRIN and GR:AW. Just my opinion.

agree with you there NYR, one thing RSE have in their favour though is even with lockdown they have a history of good tom clancy games behind them to counter the odd flop. So IMO red storm in their previous work have proven them selves to me at least to be more than capable given the right situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

after LD and GR2 and what i 've read about vegas

it is a first see and then cheer for me with rse

grin who got the difficult task and did good work on graw

have my vote as they have produced something in the likes of gr,

but it is like going from an american car manufacturer

to a swedish one and askes for the same thing, they will never do the same thing,

swedish people don't have the same roads as americans, nor the same vision on gameplay

i don't get it, some of you look at what could or what should have been, and ignore what is,

you are hitting nails in your woodenshoes trying to get more comfort

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...