DAZZA Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 For PC users, MP must be the main priority, decent SP is a bonus. If we have urban maps in GRAW2 can we have some house clearences going on with the classic Ravenshield style of opening doors, either slightly ajar (enough for the flashbang or nade) or straight open all guns blazin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROCO*AFZ* Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 I miss in GR1 the training map. going through all the doors and shutting them behind you so peeps would not know which direction you went. (covering the breadcrumbs) and then hearing on comms... GRRR ROCO quit shutting those doors... as the other peeps had to re-open them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papa6 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 @ Dazza AND Roco. There's going to have to be a balance of SP and MP gameplay. IF SP peeps can't enjoy the game, then you alienate them and vise versa. Grin needs to just focus, see just what aggravated us with GRAW and use that as a template to give us a game that will be champion. For me, the netcode and service is heavy on my mind with all the gamespy disconnects. Gamespy has to be the worst service to use. I really enjoy Xfire as it's clean and dependable. I've NEVER had a disconnect with it. We need urban maps. But along with that we need bushes for concealment. BDA had to use the tree foliage to make those HUGE assed bushes and I applaud them for having imagination. another thing i noticed, you and another bloke face each other, you pull the trigger before he does, but he kills you. this has to be arbitrary as the first guy to pull the trigger would win. I've had this happen all the time. I shot a sniperrifle at a guys head, he still lives, i reload, shoot again, then he turns and kills me..######? I think that's another factor as to why alot of people are disgusted with GRAW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROCO*AFZ* Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 @ Dazza AND Roco. There's going to have to be a balance of SP and MP gameplay. IF SP peeps can't enjoy the game, then you alienate them and vise versa. Grin needs to just focus, see just what aggravated us with GRAW and use that as a template to give us a game that will be champion. For me, the netcode and service is heavy on my mind with all the gamespy disconnects. Gamespy has to be the worst service to use. I really enjoy Xfire as it's clean and dependable. I've NEVER had a disconnect with it. We need urban maps. But along with that we need bushes for concealment. BDA had to use the tree foliage to make those HUGE assed bushes and I applaud them for having imagination. another thing i noticed, you and another bloke face each other, you pull the trigger before he does, but he kills you. this has to be arbitrary as the first guy to pull the trigger would win. I've had this happen all the time. I shot a sniperrifle at a guys head, he still lives, i reload, shoot again, then he turns and kills me..######? I think that's another factor as to why alot of people are disgusted with GRAW. I haven't had gamespy disconnects ever (except that one time i couldn't see any servers but my favorites) but i think this topic is more on the thoughts of interaction in the next game, rather single player, co-op or MP Less trash would be good. Post effects more like the 1.35 version of hollow would be great. For the trigger pull i agree... if you are both hitting each other with same caliber gun. Who ever has the most ammo or pulls 1st wins. Also animations vs netcode needs re-worked so peeps always show you pull up the gun before they shoot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sui317 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Also animations vs netcode needs re-worked so peeps always show you pull up the gun before they shoot. i often now see a sorta run and gun situation. you bumb in to a running tango and you see and hear him running, and BANG just some kinda flash like thing and your dead.... mostly CQB situations, as distance shots are better handled i think it would be nice / fair to see the animation, nice for the eye fair to the mind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pritzl Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 For PC users, MP must be the main priority, decent SP is a bonus. I am of the exact opposite opinion. @ Dazza AND Roco. There's going to have to be a balance of SP and MP gameplay. IF SP peeps can't enjoy the game, then you alienate them and vise versa. Exactly. Some players play offline only, others online only and some both, but there can be no doubt about who is the bigger "chunk". Offline play is where the money comes from. Online play and moddability contribute to longevity. If GRiN focus on online only, you'll get your wish and have a small niche community playing GRAW2 for years but you can forget about any patches or further development because the bean-counters will scrap them based on poor sales. I can tell you right now that I would not buy GRAW2 if SP was only an afterthought and I'm not even an exclusive offline player. PS: A simple confirmation of just how much sales are based on the SP component is the online-only games. How many of them use a pay-to-play scheme? Why do you think that is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost9 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 (edited) Exactly. Some players play offline only, others online only and some both, but there can be no doubt about who is the bigger "chunk". Offline play is where the money comes from. Online play and moddability contribute to longevity. If GRiN focus on online only, you'll get your wish and have a small niche community playing GRAW2 for years but you can forget about any patches or further development because the bean-counters will scrap them based on poor sales. Hahahahahah. bs. Look at BF2. It's pretty much online only and it's still selling. yes there is an SP but pretty generic. the main thought was MP and there are still thousands of people playing. is that a small niche? Games like Quake, UT, other such MP games all made tons of money and still do with a massive following of players. People are still playing Quake 3 for god sake. You think anyone still plays the old single player quake? SP is not the only driving factor in a game nor is it necessarily the biggest money maker. PS: A simple confirmation of just how much sales are based on the SP component is the online-only games. How many of them use a pay-to-play scheme? Why do you think that is? The only online games with the pay-to-play are MMORPGs, and that is because they have to have servers keeping track of all the stats and worlds etc that a huge mass of people need to stay consistent. I'd still never pay it, but others feel it's worth it. There aren't any FPS games out there that charge to play online, and if there are you are a fool to pay it. So you don't have much of a point in your statement. I think the fact that xbox live costs a monthly fee is just retarded and one of the main reasons i'm still a pc gamer. Edited December 13, 2006 by Ghost9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j-man Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 @Ghost9- all those games may have huge online only followings, but they are a different type of game. They are all very arcade-ish, not at all what we want for GRAW. More tactical games will never have a huge multiplayer community just because they way they are set up. They can have large multiplayer communities, but the single player aspect of tactical games will always be larger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost9 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 More tactical games will never have a huge multiplayer community just because they way they are set up. They can have large multiplayer communities, but the single player aspect of tactical games will always be larger. perhaps if the multiplayer was more thought out, this would not be the case. you could script missions and objectives that real people play out tactically. there's always the randomness of what a real person would do, but if they took a SP mission from the game and made it into an MP mission with both sides being real people, I'm betting it would make for some fun, interesting, and tactical gameplay. As it is, MP is just throwing a bunch of people into a relatively small open area, which can detract from the "tactical". That's why putting a focus on MP would significantly improve the game. "never" is a strong word. Just because it hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it can't. There's just noone out there who has yet put thought into making the MP work tactically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PwntUpRage Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 (edited) More tactical games will never have a huge multiplayer community just because they way they are set up. Like americas army? Edited December 13, 2006 by PwntUpRage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j-man Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 (edited) AA? Perhaps, but the main reason for its large following is that its free to download. Doesnt really count in the equation as people are far more willing to try something thats free. Perhaps I did speak too early when I said "never," you are right in that a properly set up tactical multiplayer could make it more important than SP, Im just saying it hasnt really happened yet, and will be very hard to do. People dont like following orders, but like giving them (like giving them to the AI in SP. yes they can be dumb, but they listen most times). As AA was brought up, look at the teamwork used there. Its been a while since I played it, but how often do you see people actually work in squads as squads? Yes it happens in clans or the occasional good group of people, but most times everyone kind of works as an individual, just towards a goal the whole team is working for. The whole point I was getting at though was that yes, MP can be a huge factor, but in almost all tactical games ,SP will almost always be more important in terms of how many people play it and how often. Even in those other games you listed, (BF, UK2004 etc) have a SP community much larger than what you would expect. I imagine if AA were more of a "normal" game and had a single player (ie you didnt have to download it from the internet but had to buy it from a store) the single player aspect would be larger than the MP. MP is important in terms of longevity, as anyone who decides to play a game for a long time will probably try playing it online at some point, but most gamers do just play games for a few months then discard them. They tend to be drawn towards SP too. Just remember, even on these boards there are a lot of people that prefer SP to MP - and just by posting on these boards would make one more susceptible to playing online. Just a thought to keep in mind. Edited December 13, 2006 by j-man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteKnight77 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 you could script missions and objectives that real people play out tactically. there's always the randomness of what a real person would do, but if they took a SP mission from the game and made it into an MP mission with both sides being real people, I'm betting it would make for some fun, interesting, and tactical gameplay. As it is, MP is just throwing a bunch of people into a relatively small open area, which can detract from the "tactical"....There's just noone out there who has yet put thought into making the MP work tactically. What you are talking about at first is good old Coop. For that, you need a solid SP experience to produce that for MP. As far as TvT goes (the second part of your statements), GRIN tried that with Domination and the community revolted as they wanted regular TvT where all you do is shoot the other person/team. For the third part I quoted, GRIN did as I already stated. It's a shame that no one liked it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pritzl Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 What you are talking about at first is good old Coop. For that, you need a solid SP experience to produce that for MP. Bingo! As for only MMORPGs being the only pay-to-play games, think again. I know of at least 3 simulation titles that are online only and pay-to-play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chainbreaker Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 What you are talking about at first is good old Coop. For that, you need a solid SP experience to produce that for MP. As far as TvT goes (the second part of your statements), GRIN tried that with Domination and the community revolted as they wanted regular TvT where all you do is shoot the other person/team. For the third part I quoted, GRIN did as I already stated. It's a shame that no one liked it. All we want is gr back and that is not a shame Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sup Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 There are ways to force 'tactical' play in a small deathmatch, actually. They're just things you all hate, like third person cover use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockeystick Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Why do this "sticky" cover thing have to be in 3rd person? Why can't it be in first person? As in GRAW 360 you should be "sticked" to the wall when you walk in to it. Then when you want to get loose again you press space or something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAZZA Posted December 21, 2006 Author Share Posted December 21, 2006 (edited) I'm not saying SP should be an after thought, I said it's a bonus - it should have maximum impact but not bore you out of your mind. MP should be the main focus purely because of the continuity. Look at how many peeps love say Pro Evolution Soccer, it's great but you get to learn the computers moves. Same with [GR] in SP. Give them PES online where there is a human behind the opposition (real intelligence countering your intelligence) and how is the game going to sell, better still who is going to promote the game? It won't be the computer that's for sure. [GR] anyone! And stop giving us console like games for PC, terribly dissapointed with R6V Edited December 21, 2006 by DAZZA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.