Glass half-empty?

[Pritzl]

I really don't get it. GRAW isn't that bad so as to write off GRAW2 before we even know any of the details. There seems to be a hardcore clique of pessimists out there who feel that GRiN have stepped on their cake or something. Of course the irony is that if they're so disappointed with GRAW and a possible sequel, WTH are they doing hanging around a forum dedicated to discussing them? You don't like the game, GRiN, Ubi or whatever else. We got the point. Time to move on, no?

You want to see what a real let-down looks like? Try picking up Microsoft's CFS3. Just don't forget your puke bags. I remember trying to get it to run on my roommie's machine and even though he matched the recommended (not minimum) specs it was a slideshow. Anything more than a quick furball was unplayable and that was a stomach-turning experience; crappy 'porridge' textures, tinny sounds, ridiculous damage modeling and a FM that, to use my rommate's words, "felt like you were stationary and the world was moving rather than being in a plane." It turned him off simming for good.

I'm not a pessimist. (nor an optimist really but rather a realist) GRAW wasn't the complete failure some seem to think it was and we really don't know enough about GRAW2 to make any sort of judgement right now. I'll extend GRiN the benefit of the doubt and hope that I am pleasantly surprised.

If it doesn't pan out, then so be it. It's just a game, not the end of the world.

PS: It was not my intention to be so harsh in my last post, but I almost didn't install GRAW going by the incredible amount of moaning on this and other GRAW forums. (esp. the official one, boy what a gripefest!) I'm glad I went ahead anyway.

[Rocky]

You don't like the game, GRiN, Ubi or whatever else. We got the point. Time to move on, no?

Yes, exactly. The thing is, most of them have moved on, you have arrived during the relatively quiet period!

People did have a right to complain, GRAW fell short on many fronts, but the complaints turned to incessant moaning which got repetitve to the point of being destructive rather than constructive.

Underneath all the missed opportunites there is an enjoyable game though, as you have found out.

If GRAW 2 PC solves the issues (major AND minor) that ruined GRAW for so many fans, there's no reason it can't once again rise to its once giddy hieghts. Although with the downward spiral of the GR2/GRAW issues people could be forgiven for being pessamistic, we try and maintain a positive attitude around here, much to the disgust of some!

[Pritzl]

Yes, exactly. The thing is, most of them have moved on, you have arrived during the relatively quiet period!

It was worse?!

People did have a right to complain, GRAW fell short on many fronts, but the complaints turned to incessant moaning which got repetitve to the point of being destructive rather than constructive.

Definitely. I complain too. All the time in fact. But I make sure to be both:

1. Objective: I have not encountered any show-stopping bugs thus far in GRAW. (e.g. constant CTD's, broken missions, etc...)
   
2. Constructive: There are ways to make your point without being asinine. In addition to just being rude, the latter rarely achieves anything. Keywords: flies, honey, vinegar.
   

Underneath all the missed opportunites there is an enjoyable game though, as you have found out.

Precisely! Would I have loved to see ghosts able to clamber up small obstacles? Certainly. Would more weapons have been nice? Definitely. Could there have been a quicksave option? Perhaps. But even in their absence the game is simply not a write-off. It's just less than what it could have been... but what game isn't? Afterall, if there was such a thing as the perfect game, we would all be playing it and there would be no improvements or future versions.

[Kurtz]

As far as I'm concerned my glass of GRAW is pretty well full. I have some minor issues with SP, the save game feature being one. I have had great fun playing MP, I only miss mission coop, which no one wants to play, but, was a lot of fun. The GRAW servers have a lot of good people on them, as opposed to America's Army, which I recently uninstalled because of the rude behaviour of people on their servers. The GRAW players are much nicer and more mature.

The biggest mark against GRAW is the lack of mission and weapon mods, but, most games now do not support this kind of user mods like GR did. I will definitely buy GRAW 2 regardless who develops it, Grin or RSE or whoever. I play GRAW more than anything else and it is the best since GR.

[Kingkat]

Just keep reading Rocky's post. He says a lot.

Perhaps it was OUR (too) high of expextations, or maybe that simple things that made [GR] so good were ignored by UBI (and thereby GRiN), or the fact that it has been a long time since the LAST installment of the game. (remember GR2 was cancelled)

Or the fact that the CONSOLE's seem to be getting ALL the attention lately, just hurts our feelings a little.

Afterall, the game, the tac-sim fps STARTEd on the PC. THEN it went to consoles.

All of this addeed up has had a kind of "negative effect" on the community that loves the GR games so much.

We have been patient and I think very supportive. We are waiting for more content, another patch and NOW, another edition of the game.

Its a wait and see attitude. Let me state, that the views expressed here are MINE and mine alone. I certainly do not want to assume to speak for everyone.

The galss is NOT half empty.................it hasn't even begun to reach the half way stage yet.

kingkat

[Rocky]

We are waiting for ..., another patch ....

Not long now....

[Pritzl]

Or the fact that the CONSOLE's seem to be getting ALL the attention lately, just hurts our feelings a little.

Well that's actually even more reason to be less confrontationally critical of any games that do make it to the PC. I don't see how lambasting either Ubi/GRiN is helping our cause. (more quality PC games)

Of course I'm not saying that we erect statues in their honour and worship the ground at their feet. However, a little tact, rationality and understanding could go a long way; much farther than constant sniping that's for sure.

[Papa6]

I think to be honest and not negative is that, the game was released totally incomplete. it had issues and still does. i want to be an optimist but I'm too pessimistic(sp?) as a person.

but what strikes me as odd is, the game isn't but 6 months old(about) and it's sequel is on the horizon.

so in actuality, why buy GRAW2 if people STILL want to play GRAW provided it's fixed?

my wife went to Target today shopping an dcame across the Sims2 for example. they have a new pack named holiday pack 2006 edition. what is amounts to is all the same crap from the first one plus one new outfit and a few items but new package. my wife has the old version so why should she buy the new? It truly is about the almighty dollar or pound or euro, depending where you live. not to mention that, it is getting confusing for her to install the game anymore. the old holiday edition is actually the SIMS2 original with the actual holiday stuff. I had to call tech support because i got an error message trying to install SIMS2, then the holiday pack before tech support tells me i have two of the games now .

so the software companies are running things to fulfill Quarterly earnings and the bottom line.

Edited November 25, 2006 by Papa6

[calius]

My glass would not render correctly at a playable FPS and with no AA I couldnt tell if it was half empty or even half full, too many jaggiez blurring the line ... plus a few drips, I assume that's some bugs that need to be cleared up.

Also the cup itself was in a 3rd person view, which I wasnt happy with.

[RAbbi_74]

It's not half empty, nor is it half full. It's just half a glass. Give or take a few milliliters.

GRAW itself isn't BAD. It's GOOD, but nor GREAT. YEAH, we had HIGH expectations of it. It fell SHORT of said expectations. And once the bugs are worked out, it'll be a 90% solution in my opinion.

My complaint is that what little we HAVE heard about GRAW2 points to a decline in what the PC gamer wants out of GRAW in favor if what the CONSOLE gamer wants, at least according to what we read here.

But make no mistake, GRAW is a BIG leap forward on the overall. It just lost a couple things in flight...

And looks to lose some more in the coming sequel...

[Pritzl]

Rabbi, could you please point out where you read that info regarding the 'dumbing down' of GRAW2? I haven't seen it - or anything else on GRAW2 aside from that it is planned for PC, XBox360 and PSP.

[Papa6]

I don't think that "dumbing down" thing is in the article rather a personal comment based on how the game GRAW plays. just from my point of view, it isn't tactical and feels like a console game(not a port).

aiming is all off on the weapons no one shot one kill anymore in this franchise except via the sniperrifle. the weaponry fires kinda corny.

I think if GRIN/UBI had kept the GR1 fighting style, command map with grid lines for orientation and added the updated GRAW stuff and had it been complete on release with little or no bugs, I'd be a GRAW fanboi really.

had GRIN/UBI thought about modding GRAW in a reasonable way, GRAW would've been a saviour from GR2.

But with the UBISOFT franchises being simplified and declared "tactical" when they are not, well as a former soldier that i was, makes me laugh. i guess if you're not or never were a soldier or police officer, then who's to say you'd know what tactical feels like? they can sell a can of soda bcz it says, "the soda of the navy seals"

But I'm going to play the demo and suggest we all play the demo BEFORE we plunk down any money on GRAW2. this way, even though we won't have all the features of the retail game, we can still stress test the game, gameplay, graphics and test if the game will be buggy. kinda beta test the game and give results here in these forums so we can shed some light on this game.

@Rocky, can we assemble a a forum area for reporting GRAW2 bugs and issues of the demo so all can refer to them to read and decide before they decide to buy the game?

Edited November 25, 2006 by Papa6

[MVTalon]

We have some folks here that Like GR:AW and some that don't .We have some folks that can't make up there minds from one day to the next and some that have made Bad mouthing GR:AW and Grin there lifes work (As sad as that sounds) and some that suffer from all of the above. As for me I like the game and have gotten a great deal of enjoyment for my $49 and see GR:AW as being well worth the money spent. HOWEVER I will not give GR:AW 2 a look unless those bugs that exist in GR:AW 1 are fixed which may make me a stuborn old S.O.B but thats life

[Pritzl]

I know I'm going to regret this, but it has to be said. Papa, you are definitely entitled to your opinion. What I don't get is why you deemed it necessary to establish your credentials as a former soldier in order to make it? I don't know about anyone else, but your opinion would carry just as much weight with me without doing so. The only ones I discount are the baseless rants/raves on both sides of the aisle that look like they've been written by infants.

For the record, I'm not disparaging or doubting your soldiering but I think leveraging it in an argument about a simple game is inappropriate. The same goes for those elitists who make it a point to announce their previous gaming history as validation for their arguments. I hope you don't misinterpret that but if you (or anyone else) do, feel free to flame away. I have a leathery hide.

Back on topic though. I am well aware that GRAW is not as tough/realistic a game as [GR] was. It doesn't make it any less enjoyable imo though.

There is also a plus to making the game more accessible, evil as that word has become. It allows for a wider audience and hence more potential for future projects. Let's face it, if the bean-counters aren't happy, you could make the greatest game ever and you still wouldn't be able to sell it.

When it comes to realism, no game will ever be truly realistic. The best we can hope for is plausibility and good gameplay. GRAW scores well on both accounts. Not high enough to make it the nirvana of tactical sims we seek, sure, but certainly not low enough to be ridiculed and its successor dismissed either.

[Papa6]

I know I'm going to regret this, but it has to be said. Papa, you are definitely entitled to your opinion. What I don't get is why you deemed it necessary to establish your credentials as a former soldier in order to make it? I don't know about anyone else, but your opinion would carry just as much weight with me without doing so. The only ones I discount are the baseless rants/raves on both sides of the aisle that look like they've been written by infants.

For the record, I'm not disparaging or doubting your soldiering but I think leveraging it in an argument about a simple game is inappropriate. The same goes for those elitists who make it a point to announce their previous gaming history as validation for their arguments. I hope you don't misinterpret that but if you (or anyone else) do, feel free to flame away. I have a leathery hide.

Back on topic though. I am well aware that GRAW is not as tough/realistic a game as [GR] was. It doesn't make it any less enjoyable imo though.

There is also a plus to making the game more accessible, evil as that word has become. It allows for a wider audience and hence more potential for future projects. Let's face it, if the bean-counters aren't happy, you could make the greatest game ever and you still wouldn't be able to sell it.

When it comes to realism, no game will ever be truly realistic. The best we can hope for is plausibility and good gameplay. GRAW scores well on both accounts. Not high enough to make it the nirvana of tactical sims we seek, sure, but certainly not low enough to be ridiculed and its successor dismissed either.

Well considering that i mentioned I was a soldier is very important. to establish i know what I'm talking about in the realm of tactical. you don't know me from Adam. but those who DO know me, know that I'm not Full of ######.

that being said, that does qualify me in saying GRAW is no where near tactical. [GR] was. we had a tactical map that we could make with grid coordinates to move or tell our comrades where we were or the enemy. in this day and age of "prove it", i should think that was what i intended to use to base my statement.

As for the gamer part of your comment, I too was a member of the [GR] community. WE got reamed with GR2 PC, then finally got word of GRAW sometime later, hoping this would continue the matches and clans. GRAW has actually torn apart clans. alot of people have come on here to state for the record that their team never would purchase GRAW or dropped playing GRAW because of the waste of time.

But i felt the need to answer your question so you can know me better. so no flaming, just friendly conversation

Added: as for the realism GRAW isn't even close. the sounds were designed for run n gun kiddies. how do i know? when i was training in FT Benning GA, they had a huge urban training area for CQB and when i was up on a third floor, i could NEVER hear anyone outside on a backside of a building like in GRAW. so much for the element of surprise. that's how i knew GRAW blew chunks. got tired of hearing those i shouldn't be able to and being heard when i so much as move up a stair.

Edited November 25, 2006 by Papa6

[Pritzl]

But i felt the need to answer your question so you can know me better. so no flaming, just friendly conversation

I'm really glad to hear that. As they say, opinions are like A-holes, we all have one and they all stink.

Added: as for the realism GRAW isn't even close. the sounds were designed for run n gun kiddies. how do i know? when i was training in FT Benning GA, they had a huge urban training area for CQB and when i was up on a third floor, i could NEVER hear anyone outside on a backside of a building like in GRAW. so much for the element of surprise. that's how i knew GRAW blew chunks. got tired of hearing those i shouldn't be able to and being heard when i so much as move up a stair.

Granted, but what about the weapons sounds themselves? I find they're great though I have no impression of how realistic they really are.

WRT the 'debris' sounds I think it's a nice touch, for gameplay's sake. The first time I actually detected an AI sentry by the sound as he kicked a can, turned around saw the can rolling around the corner and was able to set up the sweetest ambush... well, what can I say? It made my gaming day.

I do hate the stupid shuffling noises though, especially when they emanate from a 'stuck' unit that seems intent on drilling a hole in the wall with his head!

[RAbbi_74]

Rabbi, could you please point out where you read that info regarding the 'dumbing down' of GRAW2? I haven't seen it - or anything else on GRAW2 aside from that it is planned for PC, XBox360 and PSP.

Try this excerpt from another post in reference to Game Informer's information on the X360 version...

New character type - the medic. "The medic can heal people an unlimited number of times. He's also the only character that can heal the player's character, Scott Mitchell"

And then take UbiShaft's insistence that (3rd person notwithstanding) all the console features be used in PC GRAW as well (stupid sound bytes and CrossCom video bytes). It's the effort to compete with the insane popularity of BF2. Then note also the conversations about the forthcoming solutions to Console-to-PC ports.

Truly, does anyone expect a potential GRAW-PC to be anything other than an over-the-shoulder fragfest aimed at dethroning EA's flagship shooter?

And yeah, to jump in a different flavor of Kool Aid here, ACCESSIBLE is a BIG problem with GRAW-PC, and will likely be even bigger with GRAW2-PC. As if the hardware requirements for GRAW didn't rule out a lot of GR fans, imagine when GRAW2 comes along with slightly higher requirements AND a Vista-ONLY system requirements label. How accessible will THAT be?

[Pritzl]

I've heard the medic rumours, and I grieved. But... there's still no guarantee that Ubi's 'one version for them all' rhetoric is anything more than just that, rhetoric.

I join you in loathing the BF1942 franchise, just not my kind of game. But we must admit that it is a great game nonetheless: innovative, strong MP, varied gameplay and great moddability.

And therein lies my point: GRAW is a sound game that unfortunately failed to meet some of our expectations. We cannot lambast GRiN (or Ubi) for not making exactly the game we wanted. Instead, I suggest we cajole, implore and sweet-talk our way to tactical nirvana. Makes more sense than throwing a tantrum no? (not you personally, but an all too common response I've seen while browsing this and other forums)

If any GRiN employees are reading, please ignore that last paragraph, we are not just sweet-talking you to get our way...

[KRP 56]

My glass broke before it even got to the half full mark. Unless GRAW2 fixes the multiple bug issues etc. that GRAW has and turns it into a game that's fun to play we really don't have a whole lot to look foward to. Seems to me most people are put off about GRAW2 already because GRAW still isn't fixed.

[EricJ]

In a way I'd have to agree with KRP 56. The real lack of SP modification just left me feeling like even drinking isn't worth it. The missions I liked somewhat, fairly unrealistic (Strykers scared of .50s? come on, even the token RPG gunner wasn't much) but hey, it's the level of force vs. what's defending it I guess. I liked the overall feel for it, but the lack of flexibility in adding or removing soldiers was another sore spot started from [GR]. It felt better in some ways to manage it in teams than overall four soldiers (then again they knew what to do rather than having to micro-manage four people - including myself) which unmodified, seemed less skilled than some of the soldiers I've been with in Iraq. I would say the general lack of modding ability besides becoming a Code Warrior turned me down too. But the environments themselves were great, nice CQB (more rooms maybe for better angles?) stuff and the enemies could be slightly toned down to better reflect that if your team has superior skills, why are they better? Grunts regardless of military know what to do, but the point of SF is to be better rather than sometimes rooting for the enemy or wondering why gunfire that missed induces shell shock? Sure it's scary when getting shot at but the more you get shot at, the more used to it you get, least in my World View. Heck I was at a range Wed. and was fairly close and behind people doing reflex drills and just didn't bother me. Of course I was standing behind them, so I'm not Macho Man by a long shot. I liked the long missions sometimes, as wham-bam-thank-you ma'am missions are nice, but the longer you play, the more you have to think about conserving ammo and of course not getting killed. And on that point, why does your teammates have 24 points of armor, while you have 7?

So rant out, I would say GRAW was good, but as Rabbi_74 pointed out, I think I had the same high expectations, but fell short on alot of stuff, so it's good for just mucking around, but as a tactical shooter it's not totally there.

[RAbbi_74]

Eric, you got an older sister? LOL

[EricJ]

Lol a younger one yes

[ROCO*AFZ*]

I know I'm going to regret this, but it has to be said. Papa, you are definitely entitled to your opinion. What I don't get is why you deemed it necessary to establish your credentials as a former soldier in order to make it? I don't know about anyone else, but your opinion would carry just as much weight with me without doing so. The only ones I discount are the baseless rants/raves on both sides of the aisle that look like they've been written by infants.

For the record, I'm not disparaging or doubting your soldiering but I think leveraging it in an argument about a simple game is inappropriate. The same goes for those elitists who make it a point to announce their previous gaming history as validation for their arguments. I hope you don't misinterpret that but if you (or anyone else) do, feel free to flame away. I have a leathery hide.

Back on topic though. I am well aware that GRAW is not as tough/realistic a game as [GR] was. It doesn't make it any less enjoyable imo though.

There is also a plus to making the game more accessible, evil as that word has become. It allows for a wider audience and hence more potential for future projects. Let's face it, if the bean-counters aren't happy, you could make the greatest game ever and you still wouldn't be able to sell it.

When it comes to realism, no game will ever be truly realistic. The best we can hope for is plausibility and good gameplay. GRAW scores well on both accounts. Not high enough to make it the nirvana of tactical sims we seek, sure, but certainly not low enough to be ridiculed and its successor dismissed either.

Well considering that i mentioned I was a soldier is very important. to establish i know what I'm talking about in the realm of tactical. you don't know me from Adam. but those who DO know me, know that I'm not Full of ######.

that being said, that does qualify me in saying GRAW is no where near tactical. [GR] was. we had a tactical map that we could make with grid coordinates to move or tell our comrades where we were or the enemy. in this day and age of "prove it", i should think that was what i intended to use to base my statement.

As for the gamer part of your comment, I too was a member of the [GR] community. WE got reamed with GR2 PC, then finally got word of GRAW sometime later, hoping this would continue the matches and clans. GRAW has actually torn apart clans. alot of people have come on here to state for the record that their team never would purchase GRAW or dropped playing GRAW because of the waste of time.

But i felt the need to answer your question so you can know me better. so no flaming, just friendly conversation

Added: as for the realism GRAW isn't even close. the sounds were designed for run n gun kiddies. how do i know? when i was training in FT Benning GA, they had a huge urban training area for CQB and when i was up on a third floor, i could NEVER hear anyone outside on a backside of a building like in GRAW. so much for the element of surprise. that's how i knew GRAW blew chunks. got tired of hearing those i shouldn't be able to and being heard when i so much as move up a stair.

I hate to kick the old dead GR1 horse again, but GR1 never had coordinates. It was made by map overlays made by modders... and can be done in GRAW also. (aka Supergrids and a few others in Gr1.)

People need to get a grip and realize what GR1 was and was made into by the community. There is a BIG difference.

The ret also was not realistic. when you shoot a gun do you see a a ret that closes in as you steady yourself?

Realism GR1 had not, although fun it did until it wasn't supported. (and then some by modders)

GRAW is a blast too. it's just so many people are stuck on what there ideas of what GR1 WAS (not realizing it took almost 5 years to get there and still had crater glitching bugs and walls you could climb into + no anticheat.

GRAW 2 really needs to build upon GRAW1 minus the hero charater (or made as an option) and released with all gametypes ... fixed bugs and a new terrain + backward compatibility with the GRAW 1 maps. (or bring them into it spruced up) Add weather effects and some stock night maps and you got yourself a hit.

Edited November 25, 2006 by ROCOAFZ

[RAbbi_74]

Already been more or less stated that we're stuck with CPT Mitchell for HERO again. UbiShaft doesn't listen to US, so who DO they listen to?

[Tortfeaser]

I know I'm going to regret this, but it has to be said. Papa, you are definitely entitled to your opinion. What I don't get is why you deemed it necessary to establish your credentials as a former soldier in order to make it?

the opinion of a soldier means a lot to me. I assume there are many who would agree. Doesn't mean their opinion trumps all others, just that it carries a little more weight on certain issues.